BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting Obama's citizen...

There are 219286 comments on the Chicago Tribune story from Jan 8, 2009, titled BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting Obama's citizen.... In it, Chicago Tribune reports that:

The U.S. Supreme Court will consider Friday whether to take up a lawsuit challenging President-elect Barack Obama 's U.S. citizenship, a continuation of a New Jersey case embraced by some opponents of Obama's ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chicago Tribune.

LRS

Shreveport, LA

#97837 Aug 7, 2012
wojar wrote:
P.A. Madison provides us with a prime example of a birfoon going off on a tangent.[1]
He equates “subject of a foreign power” with “subject to a foreign power,” thereby conflating citizenship and jurisdiction, and trashing the notion of sovereignty of an independent nation.
“Subject of”: A “subject”(noun) of a foreign power. Here,“subject” refers to an individual with certain political status [2], the meaning rooted in common law. In contrast, subject to:“Subject”(adjective) as in “subject to” refers to being under the rule of a sovereign, i.e.“under the jurisdiction thereof”. Subject:“being under the dominion, rule, or authority, as of a sovereign, state, or some governing power.”[3]
The birfoon then improperly substituted his naïve conflation into the Civil Rights Act of 1866, illogically concluding that persons born in the US, who are citizens of a foreign country by operation of foreign law, laws which have no force or effect in this country, are aliens. His fallacious logic turns the principle of sovereignty and the jurisdiction of a sovereign nation within its dominions on its head.
Continuing on his irrational tangent, he then sophomorically inserted his naïve conflation into the 14th Amendment, in violation of the principles of statutory construction, despite the fact that “subject to a foreign power” was deliberately omitted from the amendment. Needless to say, the 14th Amendment is neither subservient to nor controlled by the Civil Rights Act.
Nevertheless, birfoons indiscriminately slurp up the slop. However, persons born of aliens in this country are recognized as citizens by birthright “without reference to the political status or condition of its parents”[4], and that there has never been “warrant for the opinion that this great principle of the common law has ever been changed in the United States.”[5]. The Supreme Court in US v. Ark, and Perkins v. Elg, affirmed the jus soli principle as it is applied to persons born in this country, citing numerous learned authorities.[6] It is the law of the land.
Birfoons: Please grow up!
__________
[1] http://www.federalistblog.us/2007/09/revisiti...
[2]“The law of England … ascribes to each individual at his birth two distinct legal states or conditions: one, by virtue of which he becomes the subject of some particular country, binding him by the tie of natural allegiance, and which may be called his political status; another by virtue of which he has ascribed to him the character of a citizen of some particular country, and as such is possessed of certain municipal rights, and subject to certain obligations, which latter character is the civil status or condition of the individual, and may be quite different from his political status”
[3] Webster’s Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language 1415 (New Revised ed. 1994).
[4] Ex parte Chin King 13 Sawyer 333,(Oregon District June 25, 1888)(C.C. D. Oregon 1888.
[5] United States v. Rhodes, 27 F Cas 785, 789 (C.C.D.Ky. 1866).
[6]“In the Wong Kim Ark Case, supra, the whole question of citizenship is traced from its source and the subject is so elaborately considered as to make unnecessary any further reference to this phase of the question.”
Perkins v. Elg, 99 F.2d 408, 411 410 (App.D.C. 1938) modified and affirmed, 307 U.S. 325 (1939).
BTW, nice pics! LMAO
American Lady

Danville, KY

#97838 Aug 7, 2012
Including results for birth records are filler for newspapers
Show only Birth notices are FILLER for newspapers
==========

Ex-Hawaii official denounces 'ludicrous' birther claims ...
The newspapers consider vital records as "filler" and publish it ONLY when they have room in the ... "Show me your birth certificates, give me details on your life growing up ...
politics.newsvine.com/.../10/6445614...birthe... - Cached

http://politics.newsvine.com/_news/2011/04/10...
----------

Index to Entire Newspaper Section-OTHER FAMILIES-WHO'S WHO ...
... from Little Washington, Washington County PA with newspaper articles, birth, death, marriage, notices ... classifieds were towards the last page unless used as **filler ...
freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~fl... ...- Cached
----------

Richland Republican and Observer Index - RootsWeb: Freepages
Quite often newspaper reporters poke and prod for **filler material such as ... may also be an ad), Legal notice, Birth, Marriage and Death. The legal notices ...
freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~dj... ...- Cached
American Lady

Danville, KY

#97839 Aug 7, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
That would include the former Republican governor of Hawaii, a friend of Sarah Palin, who said that Obama was born in Hawaii. And that would include the clerk, an unnamed bureaucrat, who looked into the files to make out Obama's short-form birth certificate back in 2007 or 2008, before Obama was even a candidate of the Democrats, and saw a document in the files and filled out the form based on what she or he saw, and the short form that resulted said "born in Honolulu" on it. Was he or she threatened too?
And how do you account for the Index Data:
http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/201...
And how do you account for the birth notices that appeared in the 1961 Hawaii newspapers in a section called "Health Bureau Statistics"---that as the name indicates was sent to the papers only by the DOH, and at the time the DOH sent out the notices only for births in Hawaii. Was the DOH of Hawaii "threatened" too?
I have NEVER.....
Repeat...
NEVER
said he was NOT born in Hawaii.......

I have SAID....
just BECAUSE
he was BORN in Hawaii...
does NOT
Repeat
does NOT.....
make him a "natural BORN" citizen!!!!!!!!!!

*wink**wink*
American Lady

Danville, KY

#97840 Aug 7, 2012
IF his father IS who "he" says his father IS, he IS a Kenyan, therefore a British citizen!

IF he's a Brit....
He's not legit!

Got iT!?!???????

No "dual citizen" ALLOWED to be a "president" of these United States!

(smile)
Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#97841 Aug 7, 2012
American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
Listen to the Sheriff Arpaio "News Conferences" before commenting ANYMORE to me about this! They EXPLAIN "all" of THAT!
Actually, I have seen the news conferences, and not one of them claims to have found any information in Kenya showing that Obama was born there, or showed how Obama's mother could have gone to Kenya in 1961 when KENYA said that they have no record of her being there.

As for Sheriff Joe's allegations about Obama's birth certificate, they are pretty stupid too.

In fact, It has been more than two weeks since Sheriff Joe’s press conference, and nothing has happened. NOTHING. Nothing at all.

No member of Congress (and there are 535 of them) has called for an investigation. Not even Rush Limbaugh wants to discuss it.

John McCain, who is one of the Senators of Arizona (Sheriff Joe’s state) as well as being the former Republican candidate for president, has recently called the Sheriff crazy. The CONSERVATIVE secretary of state of Arizona, who accepted Hawaii’s confirmation of the birth certificate and put Obama on the ballot has not reversed himself and taken Obama off of the ballot. Indeed, he has recently said that he intends to leave Obama’s name on the ballot in Arizona.

Could the explanation for all this be that the whole world is part of the plot? Or, more likely, is it that they believe the birth certificate, and the officials in Hawaii, and the Index Data, and the birth notices in the Health Bureau Statistics section of the newspapers——and they do not believe the sheriff.

They have good reason not to believe the sheriff:

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/07/indict...
1 post removed
Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#97843 Aug 7, 2012
American Lady wrote:
IF his father IS who "he" says his father IS, he IS a Kenyan, therefore a British citizen!
IF he's a Brit....
He's not legit!
Got iT!?!???????
No "dual citizen" ALLOWED to be a "president" of these United States!
(smile)
There have been four US presidents, at least, who have been dual citizens either while they were president (Jefferson, Madison) or at birth (Wilson, Eisenhower). Only the place of birth applies to Natural Born Citizenship, and Obama was born in Hawaii.

“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are "natural born citizens" eligible to serve as President ..."---- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005)[Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#97844 Aug 7, 2012
American Lady wrote:
IF his father IS who "he" says his father IS, he IS a Kenyan, therefore a British citizen!
IF he's a Brit....
He's not legit!
Got iT!?!???????
No "dual citizen" ALLOWED to be a "president" of these United States!
(smile)
"Unlike Alice in Wonderland, simply saying something is so doesn't make it so." Judge Clay D. Land.

“All persons born in the allegiance of the King are natural-born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country, as well as of England.… We find no warrant for the opinion that this great principle of the common law has ever been changed in the United States.”
United States v. Rhodes, 27 F Cas 785, 789 (C.C.D.Ky. 1866)(cited in majority opinion in Ark)

“By the common law, a child born within the allegiance—the jurisdiction—of the United States, is born a subject or citizen thereof, without reference to the political status or condition of its parents. McKay v. Campbell, 2 Sawy. 118; In re Look Tin Sing, 10 Sawy. 353, 21 Fed. Rep. 900; Lynch v. Clarke, 1 Sandf. eh. 583.” Ex parte Chin King, 35 Fed. Rep. 354, 355 (C.C. D. Oregon 1888).

“The only standard which then existed, of a natural born citizen, was the rule of the common law, and no different standard has been adopted since. Suppose a person should be elected President who was native born, but of alien parents, could there be any reasonable doubt that he was eligible under the constitution? I think not.” v. Clarke, 3 NY Leg. Obs. 236, 246 (N.Y. Ch. 1844)
“There is, however, one clear exception to the statement that there is no national common law. The interpretation of the Constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law, and are to be read in the light of its history. The code of constitutional and statutory construction which therefore is gradually formed by the judgments of this Court, in the application of the Constitution and the laws.” Smith v. Alabama, 124 U.S. 465, 478 (1888)

“He is not within any of the classes of persons excepted from citizenship, and the jurisdiction of the United States over him at the time of his birth was exclusive of that of any other country.” In re Look Tin Sing, 21 Fed. Rep. 905, 909 (C.C. Cal. 1884).

In finding Elg a natural born citizen because she was born in the US, without regard to parentage:
“In the Wong Kim Ark Case, supra, the whole question of citizenship is traced from its source and the subject is so elaborately considered as to make unnecessary any further reference to this phase of the question.”

Dream on, BirfoonLady.
Perkins v. Elg, 99 F.2d 408, 411 410 (App.D.C. 1938)
modified and affirmed, 307 U.S. 325 (1939).

“WestieLover”

Since: Apr 12

The city that I reside

#97845 Aug 7, 2012
Terri Tanna wrote:
Terri Tanna wrote:
"SADLY, you ignore that the United States Supreme Court has ADDRESSED and RESOLVED forever the Obama eligibility matter by its action in Kerchner v. Obama, 669 F. Supp. 2d 477 (D.N.J. 2009) aff'd, 612 F.3d 204 (3d Cir. 2010), cert. denied, 131 S. Ct. 663 (2010), upholding the President’s eligibility as a natural-born American citizen and rejecting as insubstantial your tired and constitutionally incorrect nonsense. RES JUDICATA.
"Why is it that you have failed so ignominiously to address that case?"
====
ABSOLUTELY WRONG.
How many years did you clerk and for whom?
Do you know anything about the internal rules of the Supreme Court that REQUIRES (no discretion) the Justices to take any case that has been decided contrary to the United States Constitution?
The appellee's case considered carefully each and every fantasy contention of the "birthers" and rejected each and every one as totally without merit.
Tell the Class the learned constitutional treatise that in YOUR opinion merits study. Thank you.
====
<quoted text>
Note that I am a lifelong, multi-generational ultra-conservative Republican with a highly regarded and widely published statement of "American Conservative Principles" -- none of which you can claim.
====
There was no default judgment before Judge Mahili (if that is the correct spelling). Please cite the Order declaring a default JUDGMENT. You embarrass yourself by your TOTAL IGNORANCE OF THE LAW.
DARE YOU TO STATE ANY ASPECT OF YOUR EDUCATION IN LAW. If you cannot, you must be dismissed as another ignorant and uneducated "birther." If you can, your credentials will be evaluated impartially by the Class. Thank you.
I dare say you are full of it. Citing your American Conservative Principles, lady you are not a Conservative.
Admit that you are just a spine-less Progressive twit who's only acheivement is bullying folks by referring to them as your "Class" and talking down to them with some imaginary authoritive stance....what a feeble dismissive pompous ass who spews venumous attacks at anyone who doubts your false prince.
As to Judge Michael Malihi and the Georgia case, go google it yourself, I am sure you'll find some ignorant justification for his decision citing Kim Ark, 169, 1898. When the case had to do with Article II section 1 eligibility clause.
Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#97846 Aug 7, 2012
American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
I have NEVER.....
Repeat...
NEVER
said he was NOT born in Hawaii.......
I have SAID....
just BECAUSE
he was BORN in Hawaii...
does NOT
Repeat
does NOT.....
make him a "natural BORN" citizen!!!!!!!!!!
*wink**wink*
You were apparently claiming that Lucas D. Smith, who said that he got a birth certificate for Obama when he visited Mombasa Kenya, and who never has proved that he even went to Kenya, was telling the truth. Since Obama was indeed born in Hawaii, as we both now agree, Lucas D. Smith had to be lying.

Let us now rely on your statement that Obama was indeed born in Hawaii, and turn to your claim that Natural Born Citizen status has nothing to do with Obama's place of birth but instead refers to the citizenship of the parents.

That is false. The Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court decision (which was after Minor vs Happersett and hence would overturn it if Minor vs Happersett was really a ruling on the matter, which it wasn't) said that the meaning of Natural Born came from the common law and that it referred to the PLACE of birth.

That is why Edwin Meese, Ronald Reagan's attorney general, had this in his book:

“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are "natural born citizens" eligible to serve as President ..."---- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005)[Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

And there is also:

http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_eviden...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_born_cit...

And:

http://www.redstate.com/ironchapman/2012/05/2...

And:

http://naturalborncitizenshipresearch.blogspo...

And:

http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:/www.obama...

And, for those who think that this is only recent conclusions and hence revisionist, there is this from 1829:

“Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity.”—William Rawle, A VIEW OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 2d ed.(1829)

“WestieLover”

Since: Apr 12

The city that I reside

#97847 Aug 7, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
There have been four US presidents, at least, who have been dual citizens either while they were president (Jefferson, Madison) or at birth (Wilson, Eisenhower). Only the place of birth applies to Natural Born Citizenship, and Obama was born in Hawaii.
“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are "natural born citizens" eligible to serve as President ..."---- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005)[Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]
Madison and Jefferson eligibility status was governed under the grandfather clause. I believe the only dual citizen issue regarding eligibility questioned was Arthur and Obama.
Children born to U.S. military, Ambassadors etc... while serving abroad are natural born Americans citizens eligible to become President/VP. In some cases depending on the country they may have dual citizenship and can own property, serve in that countries army. It all depends on the countries citizenship laws.
I know that Italy is one country. Which if a military man is reassigned to their taking a child with them born in Italy, and who later attains the age to serve in the Italian army; Italy can and will seek that out come.
I saw it happen at Aviano AFB, Italy, as a fellow service member's son was forced to serve in the Italian army. They had a hell of a time getting him out of it, and sent him state side immediately.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#97848 Aug 7, 2012
American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
I have NEVER.....
Repeat...
NEVER
said he was NOT born in Hawaii.......
I have SAID....
just BECAUSE
he was BORN in Hawaii...
does NOT
Repeat
does NOT.....
make him a "natural BORN" citizen!!!!!!!!!!
*wink**wink*
Get Real BirfoonLady. You believe he was born in Kenya and slurp up Sheriff Clueless Joe's slop, and that Hawaii DOH is lying about his Hawaiian birth.

BirfoonLady: "EVEN Hawaii DoH can LIE for the DNC"

BTW, just because he was born in Hawaii he was born a natural born citizen. Same was true for Elg. Her parentage was irrelevant. See Perkins v. Elg, 99 F.2d 408, 411 410 (App.D.C. 1938)
modified and affirmed, 307 U.S. 325 (1939).
American Lady wrote:

<quoted text>
ANYbody, EVEN Hawaii DoH can LIE for the DNC, especially IF it consists of $$$$$.....;-)
a
n
d
/
O
R
THREATS against your LIFE........
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
That would include the former Republican governor of Hawaii, a friend of Sarah Palin, who said that Obama was born in Hawaii. And that would include the clerk, an unnamed bureaucrat, who looked into the files to make out Obama's short-form birth certificate back in 2007 or 2008, before Obama was even a candidate of the Democrats, and saw a document in the files and filled out the form based on what she or he saw, and the short form that resulted said "born in Honolulu" on it. Was he or she threatened too?
And how do you account for the Index Data:
http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/201 ...
And how do you account for the birth notices that appeared in the 1961 Hawaii newspapers in a section called "Health Bureau Statistics"---that as the name indicates was sent to the papers only by the DOH, and at the time the DOH sent out the notices only for births in Hawaii. Was the DOH of Hawaii "threatened" too?

“WestieLover”

Since: Apr 12

The city that I reside

#97849 Aug 7, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, I have seen the news conferences, and not one of them claims to have found any information in Kenya showing that Obama was born there, or showed how Obama's mother could have gone to Kenya in 1961 when KENYA said that they have no record of her being there.
As for Sheriff Joe's allegations about Obama's birth certificate, they are pretty stupid too.
In fact, It has been more than two weeks since Sheriff Joe’s press conference, and nothing has happened. NOTHING. Nothing at all.
No member of Congress (and there are 535 of them) has called for an investigation. Not even Rush Limbaugh wants to discuss it.
John McCain, who is one of the Senators of Arizona (Sheriff Joe’s state) as well as being the former Republican candidate for president, has recently called the Sheriff crazy. The CONSERVATIVE secretary of state of Arizona, who accepted Hawaii’s confirmation of the birth certificate and put Obama on the ballot has not reversed himself and taken Obama off of the ballot. Indeed, he has recently said that he intends to leave Obama’s name on the ballot in Arizona.
Could the explanation for all this be that the whole world is part of the plot? Or, more likely, is it that they believe the birth certificate, and the officials in Hawaii, and the Index Data, and the birth notices in the Health Bureau Statistics section of the newspapers——and they do not believe the sheriff.
They have good reason not to believe the sheriff:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/07/indict...
The whole world in on a conspiracy? No just people afraid and protecting their jobs from the "powers that be"

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#97850 Aug 7, 2012
What flaming hypocrites you Libtards are. You wrap yourselves around the Second Amendment but if anyone says anything you disagree with, you attack him. Death treats, that's okay 'cause he asked for it!

Jon Lovitz spent much of George W. Bush’s presidency doing what nearly all of his peers did – making fun of the Commander in Chief.
And no one said a peep.
When the “Saturday Night Live” alum chided President Barack Obama for saying the rich don't pay their fair share earlier this year, he ended up letting a security escort walk him to his car.
Lovitz tells Big Hollywood that his now infamous podcast rant against Obama’s class warfare rhetoric led to death threats left on the voice mail of his Universal City-based comedy club.
“I know where you eat,” one message warned.
The comedian, who owns the Jon Lovitz Comedy Club and Podcast Theatre, says he isn’t concerned about his safety. He is riled up, however, about the media, his fellow Democrats and why questioning the president’s policies means complete strangers now accuse him of being a racist.
The wide-ranging discussion with Big Hollywood also touched on his evolving views on business and the public's reaction to his Obama critiques.
The real story, as Lovitz sees it, is how the press is going after comedians. He praised two conservative media outlets for their coverage of his Obama comments.
“Your site and Twitchy.com , they get the humor. The Huffington Post … their comedy guys have no sense of humor and their headlines are lying,” he says. The latter referenced Lovitz’s guest hosting gig for fellow “SNL” star Dennis Miller on the latter’s weekday radio program.
We never said we wished more comedians would mock Obama, but that’s the way The Huffington Post’s headline read, he explains.
Lovitz also got called a racist for critiquing the president, even though he’s never been associated publicly with any racially insensitive comments. It particularly galls him since one of his next projects is co-starring on “Mr. Box Office,” a new television series with a mostly black cast.
“I don’t see the president as black or white. He’ a man,” Lovitz says, adding he's frustrated by his own party rushing to slap a racist label on him.
"What I find bizarre is how the quote liberals are bringing up race ... saying,'shut the fuck up.' I find them so close minded. I thought you were liberal," he says. "You should be tolerant of everybody whether they agree with you or not."

Lovitz also takes issue with organizations like GLAAD which pounce on comedians for saying politically incorrect material on stage.
“They don’t understand irony and sarcasm. They take what [comedians] say literally … it’s ridiculous,” he says.
Lovitz hasn’t received any specific feedback, good or bad, from his fellow comedians after the fallout from his Obama comments.
“They’re not not supportive,” he says. The everyday people he meets had a more vocal reaction.
“I can’t tell you how many people came up and thanked me,” he says.
Lovitz isn’t wanting for work these days, and he says his recent publicity hasn't hurt that. His current projects include the upcoming “Grown Ups 2,” the aforementioned sitcom, his comedy club and frequent stand-up appearances (he will appear Aug. 11 along with fellow "SNL" co-star Tim Meadows at the SRC Arena in Syracuse).
It's his chores as a comedy club owner which have given him insight into the current economic situation. He routinely asks fellow business owners how they're managing to make ends meet in this economy, and he usually gets a negative report back.
“I don’t think I really understood what the economy meant to the degree that I do now,” he says.
He’s not blaming Obama for that situation. He’s a registered Democrat, and his beef with the President doesn’t mirror what Miller says on his nationally syndicated radio show. Lovitz is more outraged by Obama's soak the rich rhetoric, which he thinks is a cheap distraction from bigger issues.

“WestieLover”

Since: Apr 12

The city that I reside

#97851 Aug 7, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
That would include the former Republican governor of Hawaii, a friend of Sarah Palin, who said that Obama was born in Hawaii. And that would include the clerk, an unnamed bureaucrat, who looked into the files to make out Obama's short-form birth certificate back in 2007 or 2008, before Obama was even a candidate of the Democrats, and saw a document in the files and filled out the form based on what she or he saw, and the short form that resulted said "born in Honolulu" on it. Was he or she threatened too?
And how do you account for the Index Data:
http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/201...
And how do you account for the birth notices that appeared in the 1961 Hawaii newspapers in a section called "Health Bureau Statistics"---that as the name indicates was sent to the papers only by the DOH, and at the time the DOH sent out the notices only for births in Hawaii. Was the DOH of Hawaii "threatened" too?
THe index data could have been planted their by whoever made the forged birth certificates. The former governor Abercrombie looked for the B.C. never could find one. And he was a family friend he said.
And the Hawaii health bureau statistics sent to the newspapers, could very likely had been information generated from a interested party parent who paid taxes in Hawaii, wanted the foreign child to be listed as born in Hawaii, and obtain a short form birth certificate upon request.
Hawaii will issue one based on the party showing proof of tax payment, and will not question the word of the applicant that the child was born in Hawaii. The child could be of foreign birth, and Hawaii takes the applicants word the child was born on Hawaiian soil. Obama's grandmother worked in the Probate Department in Hawaii, she would know all the ends and outs on this process. Too bad she is sucking dirt, and cannot answer some questions.
In any event Obama, his political machine, lawyers, Nancy Pelosi, and willing officials in Hawaii are covering for him, and will continue to do so until the puzzle pieces come together so well they cannot refute the truth.
Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#97852 Aug 7, 2012
Conservative girl wrote:
<quoted text>Madison and Jefferson eligibility status was governed under the grandfather clause. I believe the only dual citizen issue regarding eligibility questioned was Arthur and Obama.
Children born to U.S. military, Ambassadors etc... while serving abroad are natural born Americans citizens eligible to become President/VP. In some cases depending on the country they may have dual citizenship and can own property, serve in that countries army. It all depends on the countries citizenship laws.
I know that Italy is one country. Which if a military man is reassigned to their taking a child with them born in Italy, and who later attains the age to serve in the Italian army; Italy can and will seek that out come.
I saw it happen at Aviano AFB, Italy, as a fellow service member's son was forced to serve in the Italian army. They had a hell of a time getting him out of it, and sent him state side immediately.
To be sure since Jefferson and Madison were under the grandfather clause, the fact that they were dual citizens can be discounted for legal purposes. The fact cannot be discounted for logical purposes, however. And the fact is that at least two presidents were dual citizens when they were presidents, and that fact did not make them disloyal. So with Andrew Jackson. He also was under the grandfather clause, so the fact that both of his parents were not citizens can be discounted for legal purposes. The fact cannot be discounted for logical purposes, however. And the fact is that while Andrew Jackson did have two foreign parents, he was as loyal as loyal could be.

Where this is going is this logical question: If we have no evidence to make us believe that the children of foreign parents or dual citizens will be disloyal, then what makes you believe that the writers of the US Constitution did either? If they said that they did, then of course they did, but they didn't say it.

In addition to Arthur (for whom BTW there is absolutely NO evidence that he hid the fact that his father was not a citizen), there is also James Buchanan, for whose father no evidence can be found that he was naturalized before Buchanan was born, or ever.

The mothers of Wilson and Hoover were only US citizens due to a special marriage law that made them automatically US citizens when they married the fathers. But that is not by any means the same thing as being a Naturalized citizen, in which you have to swear an oath of allegiance and renounce foreign citizenship. Apparently neither of them did that, and the voters at the time certainly did not care.

In any case, the meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law and refers to the PLACE of birth without any mention of dual citizen status in it.

Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#97853 Aug 7, 2012
Conservative girl wrote:
<quoted text>The whole world in on a conspiracy? No just people afraid and protecting their jobs from the "powers that be"
Sure, sure. Dream on. If one single member of Congress had really believed Sheriff Joe, she or he would have said it. BTW, I asked the campaign of Ron Paul where Rep Ron Paul thought that Obama was born. The answer was: "In Hawaii, OF COURSE. Do you think that he is stupid birther?"
3 posts removed

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#97857 Aug 7, 2012
Conservative girl wrote:
<quoted text>Madison and Jefferson eligibility status was governed under the grandfather clause. I believe the only dual citizen issue regarding eligibility questioned was Arthur and Obama.
Sorry. BirfoonLady, the grandfather clause clearly established that dual citizens (per foreign law) are not prohibited from eligibility for the office of President. Meanwhile, the birfoon fantasy that operation of foreign law trumps the jus soli principle of natural born citizenship is without legs. It is US law that governs who is a natural born citizen, not foreign law. The US is a sovereign nation and its JURISDICTION is absolute within its dominions (except for foreign diplomats). Persons born in the US (without diplomatic status) are natural born citizens. Foreign law has no force or effect in this country. The US is not a colony of any foreign power.(At least not after July 4, 1776.)

“He is not within any of the classes of persons excepted from citizenship, and the jurisdiction of the United States over him at the time of his birth was exclusive of that of any other country.” In re Look Tin Sing, 21 Fed. Rep. 905, 909 (C.C. Cal. 1884).
Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#97858 Aug 7, 2012
Conservative girl wrote:
<quoted text>THe index data could have been planted their by whoever made the forged birth certificates. The former governor Abercrombie looked for the B.C. never could find one. And he was a family friend he said.
And the Hawaii health bureau statistics sent to the newspapers, could very likely had been information generated from a interested party parent who paid taxes in Hawaii, wanted the foreign child to be listed as born in Hawaii, and obtain a short form birth certificate upon request.
Hawaii will issue one based on the party showing proof of tax payment, and will not question the word of the applicant that the child was born in Hawaii. The child could be of foreign birth, and Hawaii takes the applicants word the child was born on Hawaiian soil. Obama's grandmother worked in the Probate Department in Hawaii, she would know all the ends and outs on this process. Too bad she is sucking dirt, and cannot answer some questions.
In any event Obama, his political machine, lawyers, Nancy Pelosi, and willing officials in Hawaii are covering for him, and will continue to do so until the puzzle pieces come together so well they cannot refute the truth.
Answer: At the time Obama's grandmother was a low-level employee in a bank.

Re: THe index data could have been planted their by whoever made the forged birth certificates. The former governor Abercrombie looked for the B.C. never could find one. And he was a family friend he said."

Yes this is possible, though the Index Data has been a public record for YEARS, so they had to do it years ago. In other words, the forgery cannot be recent. But Hawaii only sent Obama the long-form birth certificate early last year.

The birth notices appeared in a section of the papers called "Health Bureau Statistics"----and as the name shows (and as the DOH and the newspapers both have confirmed), the notices in that section only came from the DOH of Hawaii. And at the time the DOH did not send out such notices except for children born in Hawaii. So your claim that the birth notices could have come from the family is wrong.

Re: "The former governor Abercrombie looked for the B.C. never could find one."

That, like so much that is posted by birthers, is a simple lie.

Abercrombie never said any such thing. Apparently what he said was that he was looking to find something IN ADDITION to the birth certificates to prove Obama's birth and could not find it. But it is certain that he never said that he could not find the birth certificate. In fact, two Republican officials and the current director of Health of Hawaii stated that they had seen Obama's original birth certificate either in the files or in the process of being copied. And there is a fourth, the clerk who took the information from the document in the files to fill out the form that generated the short-form birth certificate. She or he got that information from the original birth certificate in the files.

Re: "Hawaii will issue one based on the party showing proof of tax payment, and will not question the word of the applicant that the child was born in Hawaii."

Total baloney. You are dreaming. None of the above is true. In 1961 Hawaii would only issue a birth certificate listing a Hawaii place of birth on it if there was actual proof that the child was born at that place. In Obama's case it was a hospital, Kapiolani. If a child was born outside of a hospital, Hawaii insisted on a witness statement.

BTW, have you seen this:

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/04/kapiol...

Besides the legal proof and confirmations that Obama was born in Hawaii, there is absolutely no proof that Obama was born in any foreign country. The notion that his mother traveled to Kenya (or to any other country for that matter) ALONE in 1961 is nutty.
2 posts removed
American Lady

Danville, KY

#97861 Aug 7, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure, sure. Dream on. If one single member of Congress had really believed Sheriff Joe, she or he would have said it. BTW, I asked the campaign of Ron Paul where Rep Ron Paul thought that Obama was born. The answer was: "In Hawaii, OF COURSE. Do you think that he is stupid birther?"
July 31, 2009
Categories:

Obama

58 percent of GOP not sure/doubt Obama born in US

Shocker poll from Kos/Research2000 today.

A whopping 58 percent of Republicans either think Barack Obama wasn't born in the US (28 percent) or aren't sure (30 percent). A mere 42 percent think he was.

That means a majority of Republicans polled either don't know about -- or don't believe the seemingly incontrovertible evidence Obama's camp has presented over and over and over that he was born in Hawaii in '61.

It also explains why Republicans, including Roy Blunt, are playing footsie with the Birther fringe.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/070...

==========

Obama urges citizen rebellion against Congress

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theov...
American Lady

Danville, KY

#97862 Aug 7, 2012
Obama a US Citizen? Some in Congress Still Doubt

So you thought the right wing crazies who questioned President Obama’s citizenship during last year’s campaign folded their tents and went home? Guess again.

And to make matters worse, some of these people actually walk around Congress as elected officials!

Consider Rep. Bill Posey, Republican of Florida. He’s introduced a bill that would require candidates for president to supply their birth certificates to the Federal Elections Commission in order to be eligible to run.

http://markrileymedia.wordpress.com/2009/06/2...

THIS waaaay back in '09.....

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News RNC Day 3: Cruz booed, Pence nominated 2 min make Donald Drump... 214
News Hillary Clinton picks Tim Kaine as vice preside... 3 min WeTheSheeple 132
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min Grey Ghost 1,403,051
News Despite her many roles, Hillary Clinton still h... 5 min gwww 93
News Hacked emails show Democratic party hostility t... 5 min Ralph from Michigan 21
News Christie on Trumpa s plan to fire feds faster a... 6 min Le Jimbo 49
News A spurned Christie commands the spotlight 6 min WeTheSheeple 124
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 15 min Sharrp Shooter 390,993
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 16 min Skylar 232,753
More from around the web