Posted on 03/05/2009 4:03:57 PM PST by AJ in NYC
A federal judge on Thursday threw out a lawsuit questioning President Barack Obama's citizenship, lambasting the case as a waste of the court's time and suggesting the plaintiff's attorney may have to compensate the president's lawyer. In an argument popular on the Internet and taken seriously practically nowhere else, Obama's critics argue he is ineligible to be president because he is not a "natural-born citizen" as the Constitution requires. In response last summer, Obama's campaign posted his Hawaiian birth certificate on its Web site. But the lawsuit argues it is a fake and that Obama was actually born in his father's homeland of Kenya, even though Hawaiian officials have said the document is authentic. "This case, if it were allowed to proceed, would deserve mention in one of those books that seek to prove that the law is foolish or that America has too many lawyers with not enough to do," U.S. District Judge James Robertson said in his written opinion. The lawsuit didn't even use Obama's legal name but called him "Barry Soetoro," the name he went by while attending elementary school in Indonesia. It's one of many that has been filed claiming Obama is ineligible to serve as president. Robertson ordered plaintiff's attorney John Hemenway of Colorado Springs, Colo., to show why he hasn't violated court rules barring frivolous and harassing cases and shouldn't have to pay Obama's attorney, Bob Bauer, for his time arguing that the case should be thrown out.
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
Unless I'm totally missing something, you are making the point that zer0 is no a "natural born citizen" and is therefore ineligible
Non-Sequitur trolls these threads claiming that the Constitution doesn’t mean exactly what it does mean.
Last time I checked the OED was not the basis for all our laws, the Constitution is. So what is the Constitutional definition of natural born citizen?
I'm not. If Obama was born in Hawaii then he's a natural born citizen. Nobody's presented any solid evidence he wasn't.
Heh heh, I couldn’t resist this time...he posted an article that contradicted his own opinion.
And you're claiming the Constituion means what the OED means. How lame is that?
The judge is right—we need to drop this and spend our money on something productive—but he should just keep his mouth shut anyway. There’s no need for grandstanding—just do your freaking job and do it impartially and quietly.
As for the BC...as suspicious as things look, when it comes down to it we don’t have any positive proof that his full BC says anything but what he claims it says. One could argue that the COLB on his website is a forgery, but it would just be our computer expert going up against the word of another computer expert that Obummer would drag out of his closet just to “cancel out” his testimony. The case would probably die right there.
All the other evidence is hearsay (except for what’s-her-face’s testimony that she was at Obummer’s birth, but she’d probably change her testimony on the stand anyway) or stuff that just isn’t strong enough to make a case.
We have enough to make Barry look suspicious, but not enough to convict him of anything, and not enough to force him to produce his BC. (i.e., not enough to push a subpoena through court)
Just drop it, people. Go to your local government; appeal to your senator and the federal government; tell them you want to pass a law forcing candidates to produce their BC. Rally behind it. But don’t waste time on this fool’s errand. That’s probably exactly what Obummer wants; I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s withholding it just to distract us, or to spite us—or both.
The link you provided that stated by your own words was "your opinion" completely contradicts the argument you are now making. And now you're attempting to change the direction of your argument.
NS by his own admission tyrolls the threads for amusement, not the truth. One of the favorite tactics is to turn the issue around and claim no one has proved the kenyan klown is not eligible ... it is up to him to prove he is eligible for the job. Another tactic is to refuse to grasp the essence of the issue by continuously demanding ‘proof of this and proof of that’ ... obamanoids, some of them, are not uneducated, just dead of soul.
Article 2, section 1 of the Constitution states, "No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of president; neither shall any person be eligible who shall not attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States."
The pertinent part is underlined. The Founders wrote themselves a "grandfather clause" so that they would be eligible to run for President since their parents were foreign born.
Lawyers use an OED. It gives definitions at different periods of time. You don’t seem to know that. How lame is that?
And no one has presented solid evidence that he was.
That's what we question here on these threads.
Also, the article you posted a link to says he's not eligible because his daddy was a Kenyan, an article which you backed up as your opinion
“Just drop it, people.” Um, what handle did you use at FR before becoming the n00b, ‘Being-And-Time?
we need to drop this and spend our money on something productive
We? How much has this cost you?
Must be the masochist in me :)
Not as the basis for law they don't.
Right. Now where does it define 'natural born citizen'?
O joy, another newbe troll.
They use it to define the meanings of words during the time period that laws were written.
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.