Posted on 10/13/2010 6:22:14 PM PDT by Retired Intelligence Officer
Perhaps she recalls Chief Justice Morrison Waite's clarification in Minor v. Happersett:
“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”
Obama was not born of "parents who were its citizens". McCain was not born "in the country." There has been a tacit agreement by both political parties to ignore article II Section 1 because they both had ineligible candidates. There may come a time when they decide to ignore the 1st or 2nd Amendment. They have already turned the Commerce Clause into a Lego set for legislation related to trade reaching intrusively into unimagined domains of civil control.
Obama never told us he was a natural born citizen. He counted on the media and complicit Republicans, complicit because they gave McCain, also not a natural born citizen either, a pass. They weighed the risks and covered for both of them. If Palin gets drawn into both party's necessary cover-ups she can only lose. If we turn the government toward respecting the Constitution, every legislator in every party, except for Nathan Deal, who asked and paid with his job and political assassination, has lots to answer for.
You are on a roll tonight! She wouldn’t last longer than a fart in the wind.
BTTT
So’s Rush.
And anyone in the US can go to court over a law signed by him that affects them and the court will, eventually, determine if he is a natural born citizen.
I suggest one have a few bucks for lawyers to do this.
BTW, wait untill she announces she's actually running for something before you let your ears ring and your mind go numb again.
You’re new around here, aren’t you...
What does that have to do with anything
I came out a little harsh but as an example Rick Scott will lose to Sink in the Gubernatorial race in Fl., ever after his 50 mil in expenditures. Trust, faith. and LACK of change makes people content. Sink has pulled out every republican group, sheriff, PBA, and prosecutors to get her philosophy in line with a level of contentment. Saying you are you going to cut state govt(here in Tallahassee) will lose thousands of votes and “drug testing” welfare recipients(a 30%) expense to the the benefit they are receiving is retarded.
Why spend $30 for a drug test every month when someone is receiving $158 cash assistance per month? Real money saver.. LOL!!
“BTW, wait untill she announces she’s actually running for something before you let your ears ring and your mind go numb again”
You have no idea how much I wish it works for her... I like her attitide. And that’s about it. I have a good attitude. Will ya vote me in? I could use a $400,000 year job.(But I don’t hunt moose) :o)
I am an amateur historian and public school teacher. Their law also allows for a person such as myself to request verification of birth data for historical or educational purposes.
I wrote to them, providing my employee # and employer name, requesting verification of Kapiolani Hospital as the place of birth. I received no reply of any kind.
I know what you mean. Yeah thats a total waste if money, especially on people who are buying drugs with their cash assistance!
The reason it is not defined is because it is not necessary to define someone who is naturally born as a citizen.
Anyone who requires a law, an amendment, or even an argument cannot be natural born. It requires nothing beyond birth by blood of citizen parents.
Jude, I think we agree that natural born citizenship cannot be affected by statute, but you did not state the full definition cited by Waite, or Gray, or Marshall, or Hughes, or Bingham, or Ramsay, or Jefferson, or Vattel, the one I quoted in the earlier note which included “born in a country of parents who were its citizens.” You repeated the jus sanguinis (from the blood) component but not the jus soli (from the soil).
The legal history explaining the citizenship requirements of different nations is a lens revealing philosophies of governance. The citizenship laws of nations (Law of Nations) differed between nations, and changed often within some nations, and for a variety of reasons. Because the U.S. was the first nation not based upon jus sanguines, not a monarchy,(there was a merit-based Dynasty in China about which I know too little to expand upon) which was its elected “king” needed special scrutiny. Our “king” was also commander in chief of the military. Allegiance to a set of ideas rather than an inherited ruling class is hard to guarantee, and the set of ideas needed to be very stable to insure the continued protection of individual freedoms. Otherwise, anyone with the political capital to see an advantage in changing a provision of The Constitution, as Obama and cadre have done, would do just that. Having had parents who passed on allegiance to the Constitution, who passed on the immutability of its protections, and thus were citizens, is what our framers decided upon, and not without considering other stratagems.
The jus soli requirement, sometimes called the feudal citizenship helps establish that a president have a connection to our land. Usually, it means there are family and relatives who also inspire allegiance to the nation. It is about allegiance.
I have dozens of sources, mostly books, discussing the history of citizenship. There are probably hundreds. It is a remarkable time in our history that we have a Ruling Class so afraid of the truth that only a few will openly discuss it. It is probably not unlike The Reformation where some untoward mention of religious doctrine could get you to the inquisition, or China during the Cultural Revolution, except that our Ruling Class is censoring itself voluntarily.
The technique is probably older than Alinsky, whose great admirer Hillary called criticism of Bill “The Great Right Wing Conspiracy.” Since she was addressing a left wing press which was, and still is, largely in control of mass media, her slogan stuck. Today, mention of Article II Section 1 is “A great Right Wing Conspiracy.”
We can fix the ignorance by learning and teaching, but it will not be instantaneous. Limbaugh is repeatedly raising the core issue, as today, referring to “Imam Obama” as a paid agent of China. He is pointing out with humor that Obama does not have allegiance to our Constitution. Since so many clearly don't, one can only guess that he knows he can't contend with the ignorance around what our Constitution says. But he can help by hammering the reasons our framers attempted to insure that we elect a president with a history which strongly suggests his allegiance to our nation of law, and not men. That is clearly why Obama has taken such elaborate measures to hide his legal documents while writing two autobiographies to fill the void.
As Limbaugh refers to them, the little cabal of socialists, progressives, Marxists, and Communists can intentionally ignore the Constitution they don't respect, but they can't seem to overcome the reality that our citizens have come to expect those protections guaranteed by that Constitution. If they don't completely control the voting mechanisms - and they are close with Acorn, denying overseas military their votes, not permitting purging of the dead or moved, and not permitting a requirement for voter ID - don't completely control the military, can't continue without some private sector revenue, they can't complete their revolution. Then we must cleanse the legislature of every representative who failed to ascertain the eligibility of this man in the White House.
I replied as I did because I believe natural born (by blood especially through the father, through nature, of citizen parents of our sovereign nation)does not require birth on US soil. Birth of the soil is a foreign idea which they rejected for our new country as they should have.
The founders discussed and placed the natural born wording in the Constitution for our protection. Just a few short years later in 1790, (probably after much discussion like we are having) through the Naturalization Act, they explicitly stated that children born of US citizen parents were natural born regardless of birth location. This makes perfect sense to me because location should have no bearing on national heritage unless the parents didn’t intend to return as citizens. Provisions were made in the event that this was the case. US citizens were traveling back and forth across he seas from the instant we became a nation and so it was very likely that children might be born while on these trips.
It is unthinkable to me that John McCain would not be a natural born citizen. He was born to parents stationed out of country by the military. His parents, grandparents, etc. have long established military history serving our country.
Obama’s alien, British citizen, father keeps him from being a natural born citizen of the US regardless of his birth location.
Now that we know from zerohedge that the property sold by obama in chicago has a tainted title (thanks to forclosure-gate and MERS) it seems that the person who bought the property (or anyone in the future wishing to buy the property) could use their property title ‘dispute’ to justify requesting the Hawaiian ID documents of Obama?
I think property rights or property disputes are an allowed exception to the ‘privacy’ rule HRS 338
And if Obama used his CONNECTICUT S.S. number in those loans now tainting the title, they could verify his connecticut SSN is legit?
The trouble with all this is that Hawaii is not following any of their laws at this point. Anybody who asks for it is entitled to see a non-certified copy of Obama’s abbreviated birth certificate - which would be complete with the certificate number (not matching the Factcheck BC#, probably from 2006) and note of the amendment he made in 2006. The Ombudsman has basically confirmed that this is so. But the HDOH refuses to obey the law, the OIP refuses to make them obey the law, and nobody wants to throw money away by asking a Hawaii judge to make them obey the law.
What we’ve got right now is blatant lawlessness in Hawaii. The after-birthers keep saying we would get the documentation if only the stars lined up perfectly and we had exactly the *right* person asking. But the fact of the matter is that Hawaii law says ANYBODY is the “right” person to get the non-certified COLB. The problem is that Hawaii is not obeying any of their laws.
And that is why this is about far, far more than just Obama. This is about the rule of law, which has been suspended ever since Obama began his presidential run.
You’ve got some fantastic information. You’re doing a great job. If we had the rule of law this - and what I and so many other researchers are doing - could be a slam dunk. But the demise we’re in is that we’re all still trying to play by the rules when the refs, coaches, and score-keeper have long since thrown out the rules and are playing a totally different game according to their own whims.
That’s why this matters. If the total lawlessness we’re seeing right now doesn’t matter then none of our laws or infrastructure matter and we should all just submit to anarchy. What happens in the next couple years will depend on whether this nation has the will to live, or whether it commits suicide by saying nothing matters. If we say the rule of law doesn’t matter we’re already there, and that is why I CANNOT buy into the so-called “conservatives” saying none of this lawlessness matters or is worth fighting for.
I think they now say that it’s just parents and siblings. Don’t quote me on that because I haven’t double-checked it, but I’m pretty sure that’s what they’re saying now.
The “rules” mentioned in HRS 338-18a include a rule that anybody who asks for it can get a non-certified copy of someone’s abbreviated BC (COLB).
That’s probably why Fukino illegally hid those rules until about a year after the election was over. She only finally posted the rules - or even allowed anybody to know whether “Public Health Regulations” Chapter 8b was still in effect - after a lot of pressure by people and I believe Lt Gov Duke Aiona eventually forced her to obey the law.
This whole big “privacy interest” stuff is literal rot. The HDOH is REQUIRED to give a genuine (though non-certified) copy of Obama’s COLB to anybody who asks for it.
The fact that all this was hidden and that EVEN NOW the media will never call out Fukino on her deception regarding this is absolutely stunning to anybody who cares about either the rule of law or the integrity of our media.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.