On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 20:38:15 -0500, Strabo
wrote:

On 12/20/2010 9:59 PM, Edward A. Falk wrote:
In ,
wrote:

I want to give him the benefit of the doubt. But I find it very
curious that he could release it an put and end to a lot of
speculation and debate.

Because he *did* release his birth certificate and the birthers just
started ranting about how they wanted to see the *other* birth certificate
too. And he released his passport and the birthers started ranting about
how that wasn't good enough either, and now they want to see his *other*
passport. Not to mention the college records and so on and so forth.

He's even had the Republican governor of Hawaii herself go public and
say that yes, she's seen the records and can attest that he was born
there and they're *still* not letting it go.

Anybody with half a brain can see that the birthers will *never* be
satisfied and will *never* give it a rest. So eventually you just have
to throw up your hands and give up on them. Why should he give them
any more of his attention when it will clearly accomplish nothing.
He's got a country to run and has better things to do than appease a
bunch of foaming nut-jobs who can't be appeased anyway.

I had a theory -- sadly not yet borne out -- that Obama was sitting on
the "other" birth certificate in order to see how many Republican
congresspeople he could get to jump on the birther bandwagon, in order
to maximize the humiliation factor when he finally released it. Well,
I can dream.


None of which matters since by all admissions Obama was born to
a British subject of Kenya and an American female just turned
adult. Therefore whether he was born in Hawaii or on the Moon
he doesn't qualify according to the Constitution.

Pardon??????
His mother was a US Citizen. If he was born in Hawaii of a US Citizen
mother of ANY age, and the father was ANYBODY AT ALL, he is a citizen
by birth, and qualifies according to your constitution.

Of course anyone with half a brain saw these problems years ago
so the issue goes beyond Obamas fraud and involves a nest of
conspirators.

Most of the Congress, members of the Democratic party and many
judges and bureaucrats are ripe for charges of treason.



Just for the record, they COULD have "a 48 year old birth certificate
for someone who wasn't born there".

Are you saying this is what happened? Are you truly not satisfied
that he was born in Hawaii, even after the governor herself has
vouched for it?

On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 13:49:50 -0500, wrote:

None of which matters since by all admissions Obama was born to
a British subject of Kenya and an American female just turned
adult. Therefore whether he was born in Hawaii or on the Moon
he doesn't qualify according to the Constitution.

Pardon??????
His mother was a US Citizen. If he was born in Hawaii of a US Citizen
mother of ANY age, and the father was ANYBODY AT ALL, he is a citizen
by birth, and qualifies according to your constitution.


No..not true before 1986
..

Sorry. But you may wish to look that up.

Here..this may be of some help....

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html

If you're going to be involved in government in the United States,
citizenship is a must. To be a Senator or Representative, you must be a
citizen of the United States. To be President, not only must you be a
citizen, but you must also be natural-born. Aside from participation in
government, citizenship is an honor bestowed upon people by the
citizenry of the United States when a non-citizen passes the required
tests and submits to an oath.

Natural-born citizen

Who is a natural-born citizen? Who, in other words, is a citizen at
birth, such that that person can be a President someday?

The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: "All persons born or
naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they
reside." But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the
Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that
fills in the gaps. The Constitution authorizes the Congress to do create
clarifying legislation in Section 5 of the 14th Amendment; the
Constitution, in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4, also allows the
Congress to create law regarding naturalization, which includes
citizenship.

Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the
Constitution. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are
"citizens of the United States at birth:"

* Anyone born inside the United States *
* Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a
citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of
the tribe
* Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are
citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
* Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen
and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a
U.S. national
* Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and
lived in the U.S. for at least one year
* Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage
cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not
provided by age 21
* Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien
and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in
the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service
included in this time)
* A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of
an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

* There is an exception in the law — the person must be "subject to the
jurisdiction" of the United States. This would exempt the child of a
diplomat, for example, from this provision.

From another site....

"
"Prior to 14 November 1986, the physical presence requirement in this
case was ten years (instead of five) -- including five years (instead of
two) spent after the parent's 14th birthday. The requirement was reduced
in 1986, but the change did not retroactively make US citizenship
available to people born previously who did not meet the old
requirement. (Congress's intent not to make this change retroactive was
affirmed in 1988 with the passage of Public Law 100-525, § 8(d), 102
Stat. 2619). " same source as above

--- So, when Obama was born in 1961, in order for him to be born a US
citizen his mom would have had to be 19yrs at his birth (14yrs plus the
five years required to be old enough to pass on citizenship at birth).
Thus, he would have naturalized his citizenship, making him not natural
born. I believe it was Ted Kennedy who sponsored the law change that
reduced these requirements, but for some reason it was not put in there
to cover those before the law went into effect, including Obama.

Gunner

Top 10 Democrat Party Slogans

10. Bitterly clinging to aborton and taxes
9. We didnt destroy your freedoms, you can
visit them at the Smithstonian
8. If you want us to listen to your opinion, move to Europ
7. Someday none of this will be yours
6. We can't tax terrorism, so who cares?
5. Please don't vote us out!! None of us can hold a real job!
4. Why the Founding Fathers limited Government:
Racism!
3. Reducing America's carbon footprint, one job at a time.
2. America: We just cant wait to see how it ends!!
1. Making everything in this country free, except you.

On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 11:20:44 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:


"
"Prior to 14 November 1986, the physical presence requirement in this
case was ten years (instead of five) -- including five years (instead of
two) spent after the parent's 14th birthday. The requirement was reduced
in 1986, but the change did not retroactively make US citizenship
available to people born previously who did not meet the old
requirement. (Congress's intent not to make this change retroactive was
affirmed in 1988 with the passage of Public Law 100-525, § 8(d), 102
Stat. 2619). " same source as above

--- So, when Obama was born in 1961, in order for him to be born a US
citizen his mom would have had to be 19yrs at his birth (14yrs plus the
five years required to be old enough to pass on citizenship at birth).
Thus, he would have naturalized his citizenship, making him not natural
born. I believe it was Ted Kennedy who sponsored the law change that
reduced these requirements, but for some reason it was not put in there
to cover those before the law went into effect, including Obama.

Gunner

I'm not sure I understand your logic.
His mother was an american citizen. She was a citizen before she was
14. If she lived in the USA previous to her 14th birthday, those years
would count towards her 5 years. Where does it specify she must be any
specific age to pass on citizenship?

IF he was born outside of the USA or it's protectorates of a minor US
citizen, perhaps there might be the possibility of an issue - but the
evidence points quite strongly to his birth having occurred in Hawaii.
Is there any record of Stanley Anne Dunham having lived outside the
USA before her 19th birthday? Particularly in Kenya????
She became pregnant with Barak while a student at the U of H, while
Barak Sr was also a student there.

This whole question of his natural born American status is just a
bunch of hogwash.

Top 10 Democrat Party Slogans

10. Bitterly clinging to aborton and taxes
9. We didnt destroy your freedoms, you can
visit them at the Smithstonian
8. If you want us to listen to your opinion, move to Europ
7. Someday none of this will be yours
6. We can't tax terrorism, so who cares?
5. Please don't vote us out!! None of us can hold a real job!
4. Why the Founding Fathers limited Government:
Racism!
3. Reducing America's carbon footprint, one job at a time.
2. America: We just cant wait to see how it ends!!
1. Making everything in this country free, except you.

On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 15:48:52 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 11:20:44 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:


"
"Prior to 14 November 1986, the physical presence requirement in this
case was ten years (instead of five) -- including five years (instead of
two) spent after the parent's 14th birthday. The requirement was reduced
in 1986, but the change did not retroactively make US citizenship
available to people born previously who did not meet the old
requirement. (Congress's intent not to make this change retroactive was
affirmed in 1988 with the passage of Public Law 100-525, § 8(d), 102
Stat. 2619). " same source as above

--- So, when Obama was born in 1961, in order for him to be born a US
citizen his mom would have had to be 19yrs at his birth (14yrs plus the
five years required to be old enough to pass on citizenship at birth).
Thus, he would have naturalized his citizenship, making him not natural
born. I believe it was Ted Kennedy who sponsored the law change that
reduced these requirements, but for some reason it was not put in there
to cover those before the law went into effect, including Obama.

Gunner

I'm not sure I understand your logic.
His mother was an american citizen. She was a citizen before she was
14. If she lived in the USA previous to her 14th birthday, those years
would count towards her 5 years. Where does it specify she must be any
specific age to pass on citizenship?

IF he was born outside of the USA or it's protectorates of a minor US
citizen, perhaps there might be the possibility of an issue - but the
evidence points quite strongly to his birth having occurred in Hawaii.
Is there any record of Stanley Anne Dunham having lived outside the
USA before her 19th birthday? Particularly in Kenya????
She became pregnant with Barak while a student at the U of H, while
Barak Sr was also a student there.

This whole question of his natural born American status is just a
bunch of hogwash.

Your inability to read simple documents is found to be pathetic. But
then...Canadians do have the slow among them, unfortunately.

Those cold nights and close..close families tend to make some of the
new children a bit inbred and slow.

Shrug

Gunner

"I'm a lifelong devout atheist, and I'm very tolerant of other beliefs..."
Pete C.

On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 18:18:42 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 15:48:52 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 11:20:44 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:


"
"Prior to 14 November 1986, the physical presence requirement in this
case was ten years (instead of five) -- including five years (instead of
two) spent after the parent's 14th birthday. The requirement was reduced
in 1986, but the change did not retroactively make US citizenship
available to people born previously who did not meet the old
requirement. (Congress's intent not to make this change retroactive was
affirmed in 1988 with the passage of Public Law 100-525, § 8(d), 102
Stat. 2619). " same source as above

--- So, when Obama was born in 1961, in order for him to be born a US
citizen his mom would have had to be 19yrs at his birth (14yrs plus the
five years required to be old enough to pass on citizenship at birth).
Thus, he would have naturalized his citizenship, making him not natural
born. I believe it was Ted Kennedy who sponsored the law change that
reduced these requirements, but for some reason it was not put in there
to cover those before the law went into effect, including Obama.

Gunner

I'm not sure I understand your logic.
His mother was an american citizen. She was a citizen before she was
14. If she lived in the USA previous to her 14th birthday, those years
would count towards her 5 years. Where does it specify she must be any
specific age to pass on citizenship?

IF he was born outside of the USA or it's protectorates of a minor US
citizen, perhaps there might be the possibility of an issue - but the
evidence points quite strongly to his birth having occurred in Hawaii.
Is there any record of Stanley Anne Dunham having lived outside the
USA before her 19th birthday? Particularly in Kenya????
She became pregnant with Barak while a student at the U of H, while
Barak Sr was also a student there.

This whole question of his natural born American status is just a
bunch of hogwash.

Your inability to read simple documents is found to be pathetic. But
then...Canadians do have the slow among them, unfortunately.

Those cold nights and close..close families tend to make some of the
new children a bit inbred and slow.

Shrug

Gunner

"I'm a lifelong devout atheist, and I'm very tolerant of other beliefs..."
Pete C.


I read it a bit differently.
I read it that in the case of someone who is a citizen, but not a
natural born citizen or lifelong resident of the USA they must have
spent 5 years after their 14th birthday in order for their citizenship
to be automatically passed on to their offspring, and in any case did
not apply to a birth on american soil.

I may be reading it wrong, but I'm about 90+% sure you are too.

IF he was not born in the USA, it might have bearing, but you, or
anyone else, have not been able to PROVE he was not born in Hawaii as
his record of live birth states, nor can you provide any evidence his
american born, american citizen mother EVER lived outside of the USA
prior to his birth.
She was born in the mid-west, then moved to the west coast, and from
their to Hawaii - all with her parents.
After her short marriage to Obama and Barak's birth she moved around,
sometimes with, and sometimes without, her son.

On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 01:25:50 -0500, wrote:


IF he was not born in the USA, it might have bearing, but you, or
anyone else, have not been able to PROVE he was not born in Hawaii as
his record of live birth states, nor can you provide any evidence his
american born, american citizen mother EVER lived outside of the USA
prior to his birth.
She was born in the mid-west, then moved to the west coast, and from
their to Hawaii - all with her parents.
After her short marriage to Obama and Barak's birth she moved around,
sometimes with, and sometimes without, her son.

But since all of his records are hidden and sealed..you will never know
if you or I are correct, will you?

This is a serious question, since his eligibility to actually be
President depends on his being born in the US.

And the Cert of Live Birth that has been offered is the same one that
illegal immigrants get, and those who show up at the hospital, kid in
arms..being born on a boat outside the US waters etc etc.

And then we have other questions....

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=78931

So go ahead and post your citations to confirm that he was actually
legally allowed to be President and we will all pack up our tents and go
on about our business.

I and all the other readers are still waiting with interest.

Double dog dare you.

Gunner





"I'm a lifelong devout atheist, and I'm very tolerant of other beliefs..."
Pete C.

On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 03:13:35 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 01:25:50 -0500, wrote:


IF he was not born in the USA, it might have bearing, but you, or
anyone else, have not been able to PROVE he was not born in Hawaii as
his record of live birth states, nor can you provide any evidence his
american born, american citizen mother EVER lived outside of the USA
prior to his birth.
She was born in the mid-west, then moved to the west coast, and from
their to Hawaii - all with her parents.
After her short marriage to Obama and Barak's birth she moved around,
sometimes with, and sometimes without, her son.

But since all of his records are hidden and sealed..you will never know
if you or I are correct, will you?

This is a serious question, since his eligibility to actually be
President depends on his being born in the US.

And the Cert of Live Birth that has been offered is the same one that
illegal immigrants get, and those who show up at the hospital, kid in
arms..being born on a boat outside the US waters etc etc.

And then we have other questions....

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=78931

So go ahead and post your citations to confirm that he was actually
legally allowed to be President and we will all pack up our tents and go
on about our business.

I and all the other readers are still waiting with interest.

Double dog dare you.

Gunner


I don't live there any more but as I remember it used to worked like
this in the U.S. You believe something is wrong; your bring suit
charging the wrongness; you prove that the wrongness. The other guy
doesn't to take any action as he is deemed innocent until proven
guilty.

Has it changed?

Cheers,

John D. Slocomb
(jdslocombatgmail)

On Mon, 27 Dec 2010 08:43:10 +0700, J. D. Slocomb
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 03:13:35 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 01:25:50 -0500, wrote:


IF he was not born in the USA, it might have bearing, but you, or
anyone else, have not been able to PROVE he was not born in Hawaii as
his record of live birth states, nor can you provide any evidence his
american born, american citizen mother EVER lived outside of the USA
prior to his birth.
She was born in the mid-west, then moved to the west coast, and from
their to Hawaii - all with her parents.
After her short marriage to Obama and Barak's birth she moved around,
sometimes with, and sometimes without, her son.

But since all of his records are hidden and sealed..you will never know
if you or I are correct, will you?

This is a serious question, since his eligibility to actually be
President depends on his being born in the US.

And the Cert of Live Birth that has been offered is the same one that
illegal immigrants get, and those who show up at the hospital, kid in
arms..being born on a boat outside the US waters etc etc.

And then we have other questions....

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=78931

So go ahead and post your citations to confirm that he was actually
legally allowed to be President and we will all pack up our tents and go
on about our business.

I and all the other readers are still waiting with interest.

Double dog dare you.

Gunner


I don't live there any more but as I remember it used to worked like
this in the U.S. You believe something is wrong; your bring suit
charging the wrongness; you prove that the wrongness. The other guy
doesn't to take any action as he is deemed innocent until proven
guilty.

Has it changed?

Cheers,

John D. Slocomb
(jdslocombatgmail)

If the playing field was open and fair...that works. But each and every
law suit asking the Obammassiah has been Dropped by Liberal judges.

Sucks to be anyone looking for Truth, doesnt it?

Which of course simply points out additional individuals who will be
Culled shortly.

Gunner

"I'm a lifelong devout atheist, and I'm very tolerant of other beliefs..."
Pete C.

On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 18:02:05 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Mon, 27 Dec 2010 08:43:10 +0700, J. D. Slocomb
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 03:13:35 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 01:25:50 -0500, wrote:


IF he was not born in the USA, it might have bearing, but you, or
anyone else, have not been able to PROVE he was not born in Hawaii as
his record of live birth states, nor can you provide any evidence his
american born, american citizen mother EVER lived outside of the USA
prior to his birth.
She was born in the mid-west, then moved to the west coast, and from
their to Hawaii - all with her parents.
After her short marriage to Obama and Barak's birth she moved around,
sometimes with, and sometimes without, her son.

But since all of his records are hidden and sealed..you will never know
if you or I are correct, will you?

This is a serious question, since his eligibility to actually be
President depends on his being born in the US.

And the Cert of Live Birth that has been offered is the same one that
illegal immigrants get, and those who show up at the hospital, kid in
arms..being born on a boat outside the US waters etc etc.

And then we have other questions....

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=78931

So go ahead and post your citations to confirm that he was actually
legally allowed to be President and we will all pack up our tents and go
on about our business.

I and all the other readers are still waiting with interest.

Double dog dare you.

Gunner


I don't live there any more but as I remember it used to worked like
this in the U.S. You believe something is wrong; your bring suit
charging the wrongness; you prove that the wrongness. The other guy
doesn't to take any action as he is deemed innocent until proven
guilty.

Has it changed?

Cheers,

John D. Slocomb
(jdslocombatgmail)

If the playing field was open and fair...that works. But each and every
law suit asking the Obammassiah has been Dropped by Liberal judges.

Sucks to be anyone looking for Truth, doesnt it?

Which of course simply points out additional individuals who will be
Culled shortly.

Gunner

I have little real interest in the matter but I did read the results
of the several lawsuits brought about the subject. I seem to recall
that the general reason was that the cases were without merit - from a
quick the reason was that shorn of legalese the complaint was
basically " I don't believe he's a US Citizen" which is not sufficient
reason for the court to take action as no evidence was presented that
he wasn't native born.

Cheers,

John D. Slocomb
(jdslocombatgmail)