Submitted to a Candid World

Tim – the fault is in her focus on African ancestry as something undesirable.

Obama is just one in a long line of constitutional thieves. While the initial investigation of Soetoro-Obama’s birth certificate alerted us to his illegitimacy as POTUS, it is and never was about the birth certificate, it was and still is about allegiance at birth and the citizenship of his parents, particularly his father. And the birth certificate became the way to ‘dumb down’ the concept and meaning of ‘natural born citizen’—because if you understand the concept of natural born citizen, the actual birth certificate doesn’t matter. He has already admitted his ineligibility at birth. Anyone have a stick?

You people are something, sp;outing off on legal issues of which you virtually know nothing.

Following is a quote from the opinion of the Supreme Court in the case of US v Wong Kim Ark 169 US 649 (1898)

“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.” 124 U.S. 478
“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.”
“The (14th) amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born within the territory of the United States of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States. Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory, is yet, in the words of Lord Coke in Calvin’s Case, 7 Coke, 6a, ’strong enough to make a natural subject, for, if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural-born subject-”

@Cymraeg: By the way, the author of the blog is in law school, I am guessing you are not a lawyer or been in law school.

I bet you pulled that clip off some “Obama is not a natural born citizen” website.

I’m not saying that his views are valid and yours are not, just trying to see about that “spouting off on legal issues you don’t understand” comment, and seeing if it can be applied to you.

Let me know if I’m wrong. And let me know how you more knowledgeable than the majority of every other real lawyer and judge.

A different definition has never been ruled through the courts and Obama fits in fact everything the constitution says. And fits current law (link below). You commenters just don’t like him and want to kick him out on some produced technicality. And as it is with conpiracy theorists, everyone who disagrees with you is part of the conspiracy or is just wrong… so this will be of no use.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001401—-000-.html

Current as of Jan. 3, 2007.

If even says someone who at least has one parent in the US even if they’re born elsewhere, is a citizen. Since Obama was born in the US, that would make him doubly a citizen. Making him uber naturalized.

Every notable/important/influential government official agrees. Why keep dragging this on?

Find a people affecting constitutional issue to fight for that actually affects people. As for amendments, I personally fight for the 4th, some people are fans of the 2nd though, especially conservatives.

In my opinion, that is fighting to “uphold the supreme law of the land”. Not finding some obscure line and interpreting it for your own reasons to get someone kicked out of office. But go ahead, call people names (ignorant) if they don’t agree with your random unfounded assertions.

For those of you that may not realize it, in Africa there are two kinds of black-skinned people: One is referred to as “Africans” and the other as “Arabs”. Barack Hussein Obama is of Arab decent and is therefore not an “African-American”, but an “Arab-American”. That is of course provided he really was born in Hawaii. We do not know that yet because he has sealed all of his documents, including his original vault copy birth certificate, his school records in Indonesia and at the various universities in the US, his complete past employment records, and his health records, to name a few.

If you truly want to stay current and informed, read up on Islam and Slavery in Africa, and then come back to a discussion on racism in the US. The only ones throwing the race card around are Obama and his cabinet members.

The people of America are just now waking up to a nightmare of a scam that makes Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme look like a girl scout selling cookies.

To Oneiroi: My one liner was referring to Taitz’s comment at the top of the blog.

As to my legal experience; I am a retired lawyer with 40 years experience in corporations, taxation, employee benefit plans and private banking.

I was thinking of tinkerthinker when I made my comments.

We seem to be on the same page. Anyone born on US soil is a natural-born citizen; the parents’ nationality is irrelevant. This is the holding of US v Wonk Kim Ark. There are exceptions for children born here of foreigh diplomats, and children born of members of a foreign occupying military power; neither of which apply to the instant situation.

The woman is completely insane. Why do we even read what she says, most of it lies. Taking perhaps a small point, are we really to believe that a Supreme Court justice (even Scalia) would have this kind of conversation about what goes on at the Court? Publicity is her oxygen. Don’t give her any

I like the theory about her incompetence being partly an act to get attention, but there’re too many shocking grammar/spelling/understanding errors in so many of her papers for it to be 100% contrived. For God’s sake, she used “arguendo” to mean “arguing”! As in, “Plaintiffs arguendo.” EPIC LATIN FAIL.