If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
African press International is supposed to support Africans and African-American view" -"it is strange that API has chosen to support the racists against my husband. There is no shame in being adopted by a step father. All dirt has been thrown onto my husband's face and yet he loves this country. My husband and I know that there is no law that will stop him from becoming the president, just because some American white racists are bringing up the issue of my husband's adoption by His step father. The important thing here is where my husband's heart is at the moment. I can tell the American people that My husband loves this country and his adoption never changed his love for this country. He was born in Hawaii, yes, and that gives him all the right to be an American citizen even though he was adopted by a foreigner; says Michelle Obama on telefon to API."
First, I seriously question whether Michelle Obama wrote this….
Second, if Obama is not a U.S. citizen then I think someone creditable would have unearthed that fact by now.
Second, if Obama is not a U.S. citizen then I think someone creditable would have unearthed that fact by now.
I think any presidential candidate, even if they speak with a thick Jersey accent, should have to provide the necessary documentation to satisfy the Constitutional requirements for the office. And it should be done prior to their official party nomination.
Second, if Obama is not a U.S. citizen then I think someone creditable would have unearthed that fact by now.
I think any presidential candidate, even if they speak with a thick Jersey accent, should have to provide the necessary documentation to satisfy the Constitutional requirements for the office. And it should be done prior to their official party nomination.
Funny – But seriously do you think there is merit to this?
Sorry to rehash this 3+ year old thread, but I am wanting someone to clarify something for me. Birthers don't believe Obama was born here and therefore is not a citizen, yada, yada, yada.
I believe he was born here (even if he can't prove it, I am not sure it matters). I also know he was born to an African citizen (father) and a U.S. citizen (his mother). That makes him a citizen. No question so far.
It does not however make him a "natural-born citizen" as the constitution requires. "natural-born citizen" clearly describes a child born of two parents that are U.S. citizens with no exceptions. That was well known at the time of the constitution and the exact intent. That a president could never be the son of a father who had allegiance to another country. Further, if the framers only wanted the president to be a "citizen" and not a "natural-born citizen" they would have used the phrase "native citizen" to be exactly that .. a person born in the US with parents' allegiances being irrelevant. Their language was NOT accidental.
So .... we know by his own proof that his father was not a U.S. citizen. How is it constitutional that Obama is the US President?
Kung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!
Nope. It doesn't address the issue. It only claims that Obama is a "citizen" and avoids the issue of whether Obama was a "natural-born citizen" which are two completely different things. I agree with the snopes article that he is a citizen. Never was an argument.
Kung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!
The last three sentences of the first paragraph under the Obama section:
In two other lawsuits, the plaintiffs argued that it was irrelevant whether he was born in Hawaii,[78] but argued instead that he was nevertheless not a natural-born citizen because his citizenship status at birth was governed by the British Nationality Act 1948.[79] The relevant courts have either denied all applications or declined to render a judgment due to lack of jurisdiction. Some of the cases have been dismissed because of the plaintiff's lack of standing.
At least one of those courts was the very pro-Obama 9th Circuit. They realize he has a serious problem and don't want to take these cases. They used "jurisdiction" and "lack of standing". There is a big problem here.
Kung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!
I don't see any reasonable defense for Obama's team, if the plaintiff uses the Supreme Court decision of 1875. But some higher court judge will toss it arbitrarily.
Kung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!
Same deal in 1960. False ballots in Cook county gave Illinois to Kennedy rather than to Nixon. All involved agreed to let election stand, rather than suffer the consequences. Yes, there could be something to this, but.......
Nobody is suggesting to do anything retrospective.
These lawsuits are to keep Obama off the ballots for the next election because he isn't qualified (at least that's the assertion). If one state pulls it off it could cause an avalanche. The federal courts, because they know there is a serious problem here, will not let it see the light of day.
Kung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!
Comment