It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Why does it even matter if Obama was born in Kenya?

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on May, 30 2012 @ 01:21 PM

Originally posted by Bodhi7
reply to post by DeReK DaRkLy

I get why the law was put in place in the first place, but in the 21st century, it sort of seems like our power as voters is being restricted a bit by it. Shouldn't we be able to vote for whoever we want?

Even if someone from Chinese gov. ideals were to run, they wouldn't be elected without lying. And if they were elected, none of their bills would be passed once their intent was known.

Your damn right you are being restricted by it. Obviously you are the very reason it was written into the constitution. Somehow you are not able to see the real implications of what could potentially happen if someone not born in the US was holding the highest office. Its not like anyone is saying they cant hold other posts or head up a fortune 500 company. But being president is sacred and should be respected and someone not born here sitting in that chair is a disgrace and an embarrassment to every US citizen and as was stated before. If that person cannot even respect the law enough to disclose their true origins then what else are they doing? And where do their true allegiances lay? We are talking about one of the most basic parts of the constitution. It is not open for discussion and it never will be. Love it or leave it.

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 01:22 PM
Because it was a law set in place during the foundation of the United States. If that section of the constitution can be broken and disregarded then what's next? When we stop taking the constitution seriously, and start to alter and reform things we lose our foundation. Aside from that a leader who is a natural born American is more likely to have his/her heart in it. Evil schemes and hidden agendas or not, a leader who isn't a citizen just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Would it make sense for a white man to be a primary advocate in some instance for a minority group?

edit on 30-5-2012 by RightInTwo because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 01:25 PM
""Because it was a law set in place during the foundation of the United States. If that section of the constitution can be broken and disregarded then what's next?""

Because the constitution isnt amended and crapped on on a regular basis?

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 01:26 PM
reply to post by RightInTwo

The constitution is barely followed already, and the parts we don't like, we just amend. (which is the legal way of saying we changed the constitution countless times.)

I don't know how people can't see that the constitution that was written, and the constitution we use now are barely comparable.

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 01:28 PM

Originally posted by Bodhi7
reply to post by ecoparity

Democracy IS mob rule. Which is why we aren't one, we are a democratic republic.

Jeez, don't they teach anything in schools anymore?

Um, no.

We are a representative republic.

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 01:32 PM
reply to post by Bodhi7

i think the intent of the law is for a Natural born Americans only to hold the office of President.. just for the 'showcasing' element

i think his mother gave up her citizenship and chose to be an ex-patriot thus making Øbama a natural born Kenyan
and able to eventually be a Senator if he would choose to run for office

its an antiquated idea.... that a natural born citizen would be 100% committed and loyal to the country & constitution
i personally would vote Schwartzenegger for president if he could legally run for the office

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 01:32 PM

Originally posted by FuturePeace

Because the constitution isnt amended and crapped on on a regular basis?

Ok.. I am not a Civics student or anything but a quick search on Google tells me that this is total BS. Do you know when the last constitutional amendment was? Do you know what it was? It was 1992 and it was actually a amendment written in 1789 but not enacted. It said that if congress voted itself a raise it didnt take affect until the next term. So in essence they were not just voting themselves a pay raise. At least it was only if they were re elected. The on before that was 1971 and established the voting age of 18 years old. So two amendments in the last 41 years. I dont exactly think we amend the constitution on a daily basis to suit our needs. Obama has tried to have it amended a couple of times or at least has mentioned wanting to amend it and said it should be a work in progress. Says it is out of date and should be updated for our times. That scares the crap out of me personally.

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 02:01 PM

Originally posted by Bodhi7
Also, nobody has addressed the second part of my original post, why are people not concerned that immigrants can be elected to congress? They essentially control what the president even does.

People aren't concerned because

A) they most likely don't understand how the US government was SUPPOSED to work and the power in congress so they think immigrants in those positions aren't of concern


B) They realize and understand how the US government IS working and congress doesn't mean crap...the President can go to war without congress and can do pretty much anything without congress, congress has become a very small speed bump if anything to presidential power. Knowing this, they aren't concerned with the powers congress DOESN'T have...being in the hands of immigrants.

I would be more concerned with immigrants in congress if it had the powers it is SUPPOSED to have, which in the last decade, it has not.

The dual citizenship in our government is a huge issue imho, it shows a severe conflict of interest and lack of loyalty.
edit on 30-5-2012 by Sly1one because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-5-2012 by Sly1one because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 07:36 PM

Originally posted by 200Plus
Doesn't seem like many understand the question.

I would have to say the law was written in a different age. It was a time when our nation was young and the founders wanted to ensure loyalty was to the new nation first. Someone born outside of the US (or to a foreign parent) could have a deep seeded loyalty to something other than the country.

That being said, it really no longer applies. All loyalty is for money in the modern era. When was the last time a president cared about this country, let alone had any loyalty to it. I don't care if President Obama is from the US, Kenya, Mars, or middle earth.

We need a president that puts the nation first, simple.

Agreed that it was put into place early on to make sure nobody became president who had loyal ties to England.
I believe it matters as much today as it did then because a country could be corrupted by someone who had another nations well being ahead of the USA.
This country was founded on certain principles and although we have gotten far away from them we don't need someone with a completely different set of principles trying to turn this country into something it is not meant to be or try to bring it down on purpose.
Do we want someone who is 110% for the U.N. running this country and selling us out or do we want someone who will follow our founding principles and fight for the US. Republic?

I agree we need someone who will put this country first in their decision making and I hope we get one someday because we sure don't have one running things now......nor have for a long time.

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 07:52 PM
I read the title of this thread and my first thought was how can anyone be so ignorant.

Someone born in this country generally has its best interests at heart and is loyal to its principles and people.

Those not born here have a different agenda and this is reflected in political circles daily. The best example of non-resident politicians stabbing Americans in the back is the immigration issue with Mexico. They fight for the right of Mexican immigrants to collect SSI and obtain health care, etc., without them being compelled to citizenship.

This is undermining our economy and our quality of life. We shouldn't be paying benefits to people who are not citizens. We should not be educating their children for free.

O has not been good for the country. He is an emotionless puppet who clearly has no respect for the office he occupies. His presidency begs the question is he really a citizen.

I don't think he is. He's a little too chilly.
edit on 5/30/2012 by disgustingfatbody because: PUNCTUATION

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 08:26 PM
I am surprised that no one brought up the reason it is a huge deal!

Because it is the law (why or how is not the issue):
violating the law makes the office holder ineligible
if the office holder is ineligible
THEN ALL DOCUMENTS SIGNED BY THE PERSON (in this case the President of the US)

Every law he signed, every treaty he signed, every presidential edit he made all of it, every single bit
becomes null and void.

If a person is not eligible to sign a contract; then the contract becomes null and void.

If a person is not eligible to be a president of the US; they can not sign legally sign any document that requires the presidents signature; therefore upon discovery of the ineligibility; everything signed by the faux-president automatically becomes null and void.

That's the huge deal.

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 08:29 PM
reply to post by grandmakdw

Good post. I meant to make that point and got sidetracked.

It's the law.

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 08:32 PM
reply to post by disgustingfatbody

That would automatically make Obamacare null and void.
It would have to go through congress again and be signed by a person duly elected and eligible to be president.

That would undo every bit of legislation over the past 4 years, making it null and void.

Even the spending bills would become null and void and the money spent in the stimulus bills, would have been illegally spent.

Can you imagine the havoc that would result?

Every soldier who retired from the army whose retirement document was signed by Obama (all of them) would technically still be on active duty and due back pay for the time between the retirement date and the time a new president could re-sign the retirement paperwork.

Actually, it might do the country good if it were true, to undo all the damage that has been done the past 3-4 years in my opinion. But I'm not sure about where he was born, but I am sure he misrepresented himself in the past as born in Kenya, it is most likely why he won't release his college transcripts. If he was born in Hawaii and the birth certificate was forged, it was probably because Mr. Obama wasn't his father.

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 09:45 PM
Because it's only fair if someone is elected president and gets to reap the benefits, he should have at least paid taxes like the rest of us our entire lives.

On a serious note,

Originally posted by Bodhi7
but why does that law exist? Someone being born elsewhere doesn't automatically change their ability to lead a country, and it certainly doesn't mean they're going to have some evil plan.

Because the founding fathers were far more intelligent and wise than you and me.

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 09:54 PM
I've asked myself the same question...would the fact that he's Kenyan make him any worse of a president?

The problem arises with the in it must lead into lead into a larger conspiracy, ahem the NWO.

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 10:02 PM

Originally posted by AdaptationNation
...would the fact that he's Kenyan make him any worse of a president?

He would still be a # president even if he were American.

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 10:14 PM
reply to post by LeoStarchild

Worse or better is a moot point.
The point is:

if he was born in Kenya:



Read my previous posts.

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 10:16 PM
reply to post by AdaptationNation

Doesn't matter if it makes him worse or better:

It makes him illegal to sign contracts and bills and treaties for the US

Everything he signed would automatically be null and void - absolutely everything he signed as POTUS.

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 10:34 PM
reply to post by jude11

The law doesn't apply to democrats, didn't you get the memo?

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 10:41 PM
reply to post by AwakeinNM

I give up.

You guys are a bunch of airheads.

Talking about totally irrelevant issues when if it were true it would cause such a huge mess it could be generations before we could recover.

Just think - all budgets would have to be resubmitted and signed by a legitimate president.

Would people who received stimulus money have to give it back since the bills that created the stimulus would automatically be void.

It would create the biggest political and fiscal mess the country has ever seen.

Now go ahead and discuss your little airhead comments about weather the law is good or not, because in this particular case, it doesn't matter at all.

Also, go ahead and discuss if not being an American makes him worse or better. What?????

It would mean a huge financial mess, a huge international mess, a huge political mess.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in