It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

My personal Vetting Of Barack Obama: I am now a birther

page: 5
80
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by dbarnhart
 


Thanks...now I'll have nightmares and won't get any sleep.....OMG...

didn't even think of that one.




posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Masterjaden
 


Kagen...... in th SCOTUS....... Now that is a horrifying thought. I never even thought of that



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by TheJaberwocke
 


Not born in the US but become citizens while they are a child or before they are born. They have to vested in THIS country. It is only logical. It is based on the writings of John Jay.


edit on 29-5-2012 by timetothink because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by VforVendettea
 





I heard a palmist on the radio state from the lines on Obamas hands he was definatly born in Kenya.


Well, that clinches it then!



Originally posted by DCPatriot

Originally posted by Anon007
*snip*


Barack's mother did not spend one moment in the hospital having to do with his birth.


Neither did I. I had a home delivery, with a mid-wife. A birth certificate was filed through a hospital, via the "legal" midwife. We received our copy of her birth certificate by requesting it through Public Records. just like everyone else. we got a short form!

EDIT TO ADD: I bet Ron Paul was born at home too!
edit on 30-5-2012 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by TheJaberwocke
 


I am kinda hoping their two private jets collide in mid air. I know it is horrible, I just can't help it sometimes



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:42 PM
link   


read a horrible racist book


Hm, I bet it can't compare to what we've witnessed here and everywhere else against Obama the last four years.

I will definitely be voting for Obama again as he does not want to eliminate all government programs that help people, empower evil corporations (well not all of them), and bomb the planet.
edit on 29-5-2012 by CB328 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by rainbowbear
reply to post by beezzer
 


is this the book where he opens using a quote about Lucifer?


That's Saul Alinski's book, "Rules For Radicals".


Oh, you mean the book that the TEA party was passing around, going by, using, worshipping? That rules for radicals? Let me guess, it was good for the TEA party but bad for Obama and I am betting Obama never actually passed that book around or bragged about following like that TEA party did.



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:43 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


In 90% of writings on citizenship countries throughout the world confer citizenship thru the father...was that canadian law you cited?

See what people seem to forget is that other countries have citizenship laws also...they can lay claim to the child not just the US....the US is not all powerful when it comes to citizenship other countries have rights

According to British then Kenyan law when they got independence the child was confered citizenship from his father unless he formally went to the government and renounced it' did O ever do that?? Don't think so.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by timetothink
 


That was American citizenship law I cited, and those were the statutes enforced when Obama was born. It doesn't matter what other countries do, or what their laws are, American law deems him a natural American citizen even IF he was born abroad.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 12:15 AM
link   
reply to post by windword
[more


I never said he wasn't a citizen...clearly if his mother was then he is...but Natural born for the standard of being president no....and that is what all the birther nonsense is actually distracting from.....while everyone is fighting over BC and Kenya...they are missing the fact that he is not natural born and the left ahs been brainwashed to believe the 14th amendment gave anchor babies the right to natural birth citizenship which it did not....the bottom line is....a big hoax was played on the US and noone cares....so now we can literally vote just about anyone in....hope they can find some really bad America hating Columbian cartel anchor baby to put in office just to prove a point.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by timetothink
 


From the same link.


An April 2000 CRS report by the Congressional Research Service, asserts that most constitutional scholars interpret the phrase "natural born citizen" as including citizens born outside the United States to parents who are U.S. citizens under the “natural born” requirement.[21]

Chester Arthur (born of an American mother and Irish father, purported birthplace of Canada) was sworn in as President, however his status as a "Natural born citizen" was challenged because he was born with British citizenship[22] (therefore not jus sanguinis) and it is contended, on foreign soil (therefore not jus soli). Some argue that those born abroad to U.S. citizens are not eligible to ascend to the Presidency (not jus soli), since an act of the United States Congress such as the Naturalization Act may not overrule the Constitution (see "Natural born citizen" as presidential qualification).[23]


I especially like the part about Mitt Romney's dad, being born in Mexico, yet ran for President of the United States unchallenged. Can you say ironic?



Presidential candidates George W. Romney (born in Mexico), Barry Goldwater and John McCain (born in U.S. territories), were never seriously challenged on the basis of their "natural born" citizenship, but no candidate falling under this classification has ever actually become President.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by CB328
 





I will definitely be voting for Obama again as he does not want to eliminate all government programs that help people, empower evil corporations (well not all of them), and bomb the planet.


Are you voting for Obuma because of his new campain poster you seen.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Your posts are not helping your argument...Aurthurs parents became citizens before he ran for vice and Romney's grandparents were citizens even though Romney's dad was born in Mexico...the point being both parents need to be US citizens no matter where you are born


O's father was NEVER a US citizen. His British citizenship confered to O
edit on 30-5-2012 by timetothink because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 12:44 AM
link   
Smells like heterosexual christian white males in this thread.

Try opening those minds that you all claim are so open and look at the world from someone else's perspective.

Just sayin'



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 12:45 AM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 

I hear you. Never read his book, it is at best a contrivance anyway. But the one thing that keeps bothering me. And nobody seems to get this, from senators to the lowly man on the street. It doesn't freaking matter where he was born!!! According to his own birth certificate ( released by him) his father was a Kenyan national. Which means at that time his father was a British subject. That alone disqualifies him. He is NOT a "natural born citizen" period. Yes, I know, it is not defined in the constitution itself. But our founding fathers had no way to know how low IQ's would drop over the years. Natural born citizen is defined in the Congressional statutes leading up to the constitution. They have the force of law, as that is truly what they are. A "natural born" citizen is a much higher standard. To be "natural born" you MUST be born of TWO parents that are citizens at the time of your birth. He is not "natural born". Therefore he is NOT eligible to the office of President, as defined by the constitution (article 1 section 8) and as defined by our founders in the congressional statutes.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 12:50 AM
link   
reply to post by timetothink
 





.the point being both parents need to be US citizens no matter where you are born


Wrong! That's total BS! Please show me documentation stating that both parents have to be citizens. I cited you the law that proves the contrary.

My daughter's father is a Columbian citizen. She is a natural born citizen and she didn't have to be naturalized. She is eligible to run for president, if she so chooses.

Her father's immigration status has nothing to do with her citizenship!



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by windword

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by RedGoneWILD
 


IMO and according the founders and many legal authorities, not if his father is not a citizen.....


Really? So you think American citizenship depends on the birth father? WOW!

What about a single American woman who gives birth while visiting Canada. Are officials going to say that child isn't an American citizen because it was born across the border? Are they going to withhold citizenship until the mom reveals an American father?

en.wikipedia.org...

Birth abroad to one United States citizen

For persons born between December 24, 1952 and November 14, 1986, a person is a U.S. citizen if all of the following are true (except if born out-of-wedlock)[8]:
The person's parents were married at the time of birth
One of the person's parents was a U.S. citizen when the person was born
The citizen parent lived at least ten years in the United States before the child's birth;
A minimum of 5 of these 10 years in the United States were after the citizen parent's 14th birthday.

For persons born out-of-wedlock (mother) if all the following apply:
the mother was a U.S. citizen at the time of the person’s birth and
the mother was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the person’s birth.[9] (See link for those born to a U.S. father out-of-wedlock)[8]



edit on 29-5-2012 by windword because: (no reason given)


Not citizenship moron, natural born citizenship. There is a reason there is a distinction and it has NOTHING to do with the physical place you are born.

Prior to the 14th amendment being born in the US did NOT confer citizenship automatically. Afterwards, it STILL did not confer natural born citizenship even though it has been interpreted to confer standard citizenship.

Do NOT confuse the two. One is meant to determine eligibility to vote, the other is to ensure that no one reaches the highest office with multiple allegiances and YES you DO have an allegiance to another country if your parent is a citizen of that country.

Jaden



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by windword
 


Your posts are not helping your argument...Aurthurs parents became


When? There is no evidence to demonstrate that Arthurs father was an American citizen. He was an Irish born man with Canadian citizenship, no references to whether his father was an American citizen:

Chester Arthurs parents moved from Quebec, Canada to Vermont in 1828 and Chester Arthur was born 1 year later (1829)
www.loc.gov...

You'd need to rationalize how his father got American citizenship within a year let alone provide a source proving they did indeed have citizenship.

Birthers work so hard to scrutinize every single aspect of Obama's life, but spend very little time applying their analysis to the histories of other presidents and presidential candidates. I call that hypocrisy.


O's father was NEVER a US citizen. His British citizenship confered to O


And you think that by repeating the same false claim, it will magically become true. There are no supreme court rulings or sections of the constitution refering to dual citizenship as a disqualifier towards natural born citizenship. The Wong Kim Ark case made it clear, it's irrelevant.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by timetothink
 





.the point being both parents need to be US citizens no matter where you are born


Wrong! That's total BS! Please show me documentation stating that both parents have to be citizens. I cited you the law that proves the contrary.

My daughter's father is a Columbian citizen. She is a natural born citizen and she didn't have to be naturalized. She is eligible to run for president, if she so chooses.

Her father's immigration status has nothing to do with her citizenship!


I'm sorry but your daughter may be a citizen, but she is NOT a natural born citizen.

The documentation is the constitution. Quit being spoon fed by leftists and study some history.

It would make ZERO sense to make a distinction of natural born versus standard citizen at a time when being born in the country doesn't even make you a citizen automatically.

Jaden



new topics

top topics



 
80
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join