Posted on 04/28/2012 7:40:56 AM PDT by IbJensen
I realize that many Tea Party folks have fallen for leftist tricks aimed at keeping the current Article II constitutional crisis off the campaign table, but just how far are they willing to fall in the name of political agendas?
Real “constitutionalists” are as concerned about Article II as they are any other constitutional text, maybe even more so since the current Muslim-n-Chief is a one-man constitutional crisis of monumental proportions. Faux “constitutionalists” are those who cherry-pick which parts of the founding document to take issue with, or make up new meanings for old words, all based on their individual political agenda.
Many Tea Party folks seem to not care whether or not we uphold Article II constitutional requirements for the offices of President and Vice President. Others seem perfectly happy to accept fraudulent definitions of the term “Natural Born Citizen” so long as it suits their political agenda. In both cases, our founding principles and values take a back seat to political expedience.
However, there is a reason why members of congress tried to alter the Natural Born Citizen requirement at least eight times in the run-up to Obama’s fraudulent election in 2008 – why leftists insist that the founders meant “anchor baby” when they required that only Natural Born Citizens of the United States could hold the highest offices in our land – and that Marco Rubio would make the perfect VP selection for Mitt Romney in 2012….
In short, the reason is -- kill the constitution and AMNESTY by any means.
Barack Hussein Obama Jr. is without any reasonable doubt, a total fraud, and ineligible for the office he currently holds. Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen of the United States and neither is Marco Rubio.
So, to keep Obama in office, leftists must eliminate the true meaning of the term Natural Born Citizen and the best way to do that is to get Republicans to put their own ineligible candidate on the GOP ticket with Romney… enter Marco Rubio, who otherwise has a very weak résumé.
Simply stated, a Natural Born Citizen is a citizen via the bloodline of the natural birth father. Obama’s natural birth father was never a legal citizen of the United States. He was at all times a legal citizen of Kenya and as such, he could only pass Kenyan citizenship to his offspring, Barack Hussein Obama II.
Likewise, Marco Rubio’s father was a legal citizen of Cuba at the time of Marco’s birth, and he could only pass Cuban citizenship to Marco. Marco Rubio was therefore, born a Natural Born Citizen of Cuba, living abroad in exile in the United States. Rubio’s parents did not become U.S. citizens for several years after Marco’s birth.
In contrast, Mitt Romney was born in Detroit a Natural Born Citizen of the United States as the son of a natural birth father (Gov. George Romney) who was at the time of Mitt’s birth, a legal citizen of the United States able to transfer Natural Born Citizenship via the Laws of Nature.
Even as confirmed by the U.S. Senate in a 99-0 unanimous vote, John McCain is also a Natural Born Citizen of the United States, born abroad in Panama to a legal U.S. Citizen father. This proves that all Senators know the true definition of Natural Born Citizen and that they knowingly and willingly refuse to apply that standard to Barack Hussein Obama or Marco Rubio.
We know why leftists who have tried to alter or abolish the Article II Natural Born Citizen requirement for years would want Marco Rubio, RNC leader for illegal amnesty, to appear on the GOP ticket in 2012 --- but why do many Tea Party and GOP voters want Rubio on the ticket?
First, placing Rubio on the GOP ticket would galvanize the fraud of 2008 when America seated its first non-Natural Born Citizen in the Oval Office. Second, Hispanic immigrant Rubio is leading the charge for illegal amnesty in the GOP -- a position allegedly opposed by Tea Party and patriotic type voters.
How is Rubio being shoved down the throat of pro-American voters? --- The “why” is obvious, once you understand our current dilemma…Who is voting this November?
USA Demographics White Anglo-American – 64.9% Hispanic – 15.1% African-American – 12.9% Asian – 4.4% Other – 3%
Now pay close attention….
“The longstanding gap between blacks and whites in voter participation evaporated in the presidential election last year, according to an analysis released Thursday. Black, Hispanic and Asian voters made up nearly a quarter of the electorate, setting a record.” – The New York Times reported in April 2009.
If 50% of white Anglo-American voters stay home or vote a 3rd option of any sort in protest, guess who has a voting majority in America today? These folks seldom pass up an opportunity to vote themselves gifts from your wallet…
People forever seeking to vote themselves gifts from the treasury, and “change” America into something it was never intended to be, are showing up to VOTE in increasing numbers -- just as frustrated White Anglo-American voters stay home in increasing numbers. Their “conscience” will allow the re-election of the first anti-American and illegal White House resident. What kind of conscience is that?
African-Americans are no longer the second largest voting bloc in America. They have been replaced by Hispanics over the last several years, over half of which are in the Unites States illegally. Now they are able to vote thanks to insane moto-voter and “no ID required” voting laws put in place to make fraudulent illegal alien votes “legal” throughout most of the U.S. – It’s unconstitutional, immoral, unethical and even treasonous… but they found a way to make it “defacto-legal.”
In many states, lawmakers foolishly passed laws to give drivers licenses to illegal aliens, and then passed laws requiring only a photo ID, such as a driver’s license, in order to vote in U.S. elections. The illegal alien vote is now equal to the legal citizen vote, even before formal amnesty is a reality. Dead people can vote, why not illegal aliens?
And since the Hispanic community is growing by leaps and bounds, pouring across our southern border like a stampede of young peaceniks headed to the next Woodstock, politicians feel obligated to pander for that vote even if they have to offend every legal citizen doing it.
The DNC wants Marco Rubio on the 2012 GOP ticket to forever eliminate the Natural Born Citizen requirement for high office. But the RNC wants him on the ticket too, in order to pander for the 15.1% Hispanic Amnesty vote that will otherwise go to Barack Hussein Obama in November.
If Americans allow Rubio to appear on the GOP ticket, Article II requirements for high office are forever gone and amnesty is a sure deal.
I get why RNC and DNC inside the beltway scumbags want this, but why are Tea Party folks foolish enough to go along with it?
Maybe it’s time to ask who these Tea Party folks really are?
As impossible as it might sound, they didn't know any better. You say “ah c’mon”. Oh, like a guy born in Kenya could become president?
Early on a group of patriots went to Washington and interviewed Orin Hatch in his office and questioned him about Obama and Natural Born eligibility. Hatch was CLUELESS! The chairman of or ranking member of the judiciary committee since forever, didn't understand the Constitution.
Before this issue came up about Obama, how many of you were aware of this requirement? 35 years old and resident for 14 years, was all I ever knew. “Natural Born Citizen? What the hell is that?
And you're, understandably, really cynical as well, but I won't bother posting links to those comments.
Come to think of it. Did Thomas Jefferson meet the 14 years residency requirement? He lived in Paris for a time didn’t he?
I subscribe to one of the definitions of Occam’s Razor which is when you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better. Regarding NBC, it is much more prudent to believe that the framers took the common understanding (or English) version rather than Vattel’s version which the common populace was unaware of. Just makes sense. Of the two types of citizens; natural born and naturalized only the natural born could be President. It is so simple in its concept that people just want to make it difficult.
What makes Obama's situation unique is the demand to show the documentation. This is also what drives people to lay the claim of racism on those who ask Obama to provide proof. They say that showing the documentation is a standard that no other president was forced to comply with, and so it's racism because doubters are only doing it because Obama is black.
That's how attempts to get to the bottom of this begin its path to failure. It gets the taint of racism from the start, and then nobody wants to touch it after that.
The truth is that the reason Obama's situation is unique is that he is the first president to have no other birth witnesses and long-time close family friends to attest to his lineage. All previous presidents were from families that were well-known in American history such that the qualifaction to be president was never in doubt.
Obama has hidden his past, locked up the records, and only offered his own self-serving sources as qualification to be president.
So, the last resort of redress is the Constitution itself and the bodies it establishes. And we've come to the point of searching for shadows from the penumbras of emanations in defense.
We shouldn't have to be here when the common sense obvious is plainly before us.
And now we get to do it all over again with Marco Rubio. Rubio's birth narrative is known. This one is eyes-wide-open.
-PJ
hatch amendment site:freerepublic.com Arnold Schwarzenegger potus
Early on a group of patriots went to Washington and interviewed Orin Hatch in his office and questioned him about Obama and Natural Born eligibility. Hatch was CLUELESS!
Hatch played ignorant when he obviously wasn't.
Founder and Historian David Ramsay Defined Natural Born Citizen in 1789.
DemoRATS are praying that Rubio is the choice in order to take the heat off OBastard. I have no doubt that his BC is a forgery. This is the most secretative man in our presidential history. He is not American (soil or parental wise) and he should be imprisoned along with that mooch of a wife who goes along with his lies. I feel sorry for his kids.
In fact it can be quite complicated and most of us were never taught it in school. I spent a lot of time researching this issue, including citizenship minutia about islands I never heard of.
How many people think if you are born in a foreign country and your mother runs into the American embassy there and gives birth, that you, by being born in that embassy, (American soil) you are a citizen?
You might be a citizen of that foreign country, but you are NOT a U.S. citizen just for being born there. (status of parents comes into play here) IT IS NOT U.S. SOIL!
As I have written before, the only completely safe place to be born to insure the jus soli (right of the soil) half of the Natural Born requirement, is to be born in the Continental United States.
As we have seen with Obama Hawaii has some crazy rules, and was a territory until 1959. Still recently enough for someone born before that to run for president. Same for Alaska 1959.
Being born in U.S. territories and possessions likely will make you ineligible for president. In the very least, there will be questions. It may depend on which side of an Island you are born on. It may depend on the date you were born in that territory (Puerto Rico for instance). Most territories or possessions are acquired by statute, making people there and future citizens “citizens by statute”, NATURALIZED citizens, ineligible for president.
It is NOT cut & dried as most people think.
Too bad he didn’t post his thoughts IN the Constitution where it would carry weight.
“A person who is a citizen of the United States, who has been for 20 years a citizen of the United States, and who is otherwise eligible to the Office of President, is not ineligible to that Office by reason of not being a native born citizen of the United States.”
I don't see “Natural” in there anywhere? I think everyone knew that you had to be born here to be president. That is a given. That the framers made additional special provisions applying only to the office of president. If the status of your parents made no difference, then what would be the need of a special condition of citizenship? What, they made a mistake and meant to say “native”? A TYPO?
Using your Ockham’s Razor thinking, the framers wanted to be sure that the Command and Chief of the army (the president), would not have ANY foreign allegiances (FACT).
So isn't it just simple that the framers meant to prevent anyone from becoming president who had parents who were foreign citizens? That would be the most obvious foreign allegiance.
I don't see “Natural” in there anywhere?
Exactly! It was to be removed!
Is your sudden angst against me because I've shown that the issue was known about as early as 2003?
If they said "natural," it would be construed to mean a direct reference to "natural born citizen," making it an attempt to amend the Constitution. Amendments to the Constitution require 3/4ths of the states to ratify.
They tried to be cute about it and substitute the word "native" in place of "natural" with a wink and a nod, intending it to mean one thing while wording it like another.
-PJ
I apologize a zillion + times and much, much more for my rudeness to you.
I just get so frustrated with folks who still think Panama Juan was not born in Colon, Republic of Panama. The truth has been out concerning where he was actually born for about the last 3 years. Like any congresscrook, he lied in his book.
The Kenyan bastard and Marco Rubio are not natural born citizens…the bastard’s father was not a U.S. citizen and Rubio because his Cuban parents were not U.S. citizens at the time of Rubio’s birth.
I know nothing about Rick Santorum’s family history other than his father, Aldo Santorum (1923–2011), a clinical psychologist who immigrated to the United States at age seven from Riva del Garda, Italy, and Catherine (Dughi) Santorum (b. 1918), an administrative nurse of Italian American and Irish American descent. In other words, I don’t know when Aldo got his U.S. citizenship papers.
I am more concern about Mitt Romney. His father, George, was born in Mexico and therefore a Mexican citizen. Questions that need to be asked and answered: When did George get his U.S. citizenship? Before Mitt was born? After Mitt was born? Or not at all and lived a lie throughout his life?
Since I live in Panama, I don’t have accesses to the research I need to answer those questions about George Romney, which would lead to the truth about Mitt’s eligibility status.
Again, my sincerest apologies to you.
This was the Hatch attempt to make it okay for Schwarzenegger to become president.
The reason the Democrats supported it was that they thought Jennifer Granholm would beat Schwarzenegger to it.
Hatch picked two losers with one bill.
-PJ
Apology gladly accepted. We have heated passionate discussions here on Free Republic, and that’s a good thing. The free exchange of ideas is worth a few raised emotions, in my opinion.
“Apology gladly accepted. We have heated passionate discussions here on Free Republic, and that’s a good thing. The free exchange of ideas is worth a few raised emotions, in my opinion.”
You are an extremely kind person. But I am not letting myself off easy. My conduct toward you was inexcusable...ever.
Sitting here, I think I came up with a solution about George (Mitt’s father)...when he became a U.S. citizen or not. But loose lips sink ships; therefore, more later.
My very best to you. We will talk later.
My apologies again.
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.