Orly Taitz Smacked Down: Birther Lawsuit Dismissed

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by Fired Up! Missouri: This is the @timwjones and @cynthialdavis case. RT @twi_news: Orly Taitz Smacked Down: Birther Lawsuit Dismissed http://bit.ly/Ky9DQ #nutz…

[...] v. Obama, the last birther case filed by Orly Taitz that hasn’t been dismissed has, well, been dismissed: U.S. District Judge David O. Carter has dismissed Barnett et al v. Obama et al, Orly Taitz’s most [...]

Taitz is off her rocker to be sure. But David Weigel is wrong when he dismisses the “natural born citizen” status of President Obama. The historical definition of a “natural born citizen” goes back to the Law of Nations. The 69 million that voted for Obama mostly assumed that Secretaries of State and the Democratic Party did their due diligence in vetting out Obama’s Constitutional qualification, others simply didn’t care what the Constitution states as qualification. The truth is, by Obama’s own admission, that he was born with dual-citizenship. And a dual citizen cannot be considered a “natural born citizen” because that person is born with citizenship to more than one country. This is explicitly defined by Vattel in Book 1, Chapter 19, SubSection 212 in “Law of Nations” where it states:

“The Natives, or natural born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. . . . it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only his place of birth, and not his country.”

Why is Vattel’s definition relevant? Because when the Framer’s were drafting the Constitution, Vattel’s “Law of Nations” was the single most influential text on the subject of government, specifically democracy. It is well known that the Framer’s relied heavily upon it to settle disputes as the Constitution went from draft to revision to ratification and amendment.

Again Obama has openly admitted that he was a dual citizen at birth. And dual citizens at birth ARE NOT natural born citizens as defined in the Constitution and intended by the Framer’s I think he, Michelle, Axelrod and the lot are still amazed by the lack of protest. Essentially they have taken the American public for suckers, mainstream media and all.

I have a strong feeling that America, even Democrats, wouldn’t have been as laisse-faire on this issue if a candidate for President had been born to one American citizen and one Iranian citizen. Just something to think about.

Have to say it, birthtards: We told you so.

The grounds for the dismissal are exactly what I, and many other sane people posting at WI, said they would be.

You have been spouting off for weeks about “going to trial” on January 26. When we said, “It isn't going to happen,” you mocked us.

Can you simply admit that you were wrong?

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/21/obama.oa…

The story

updated 10:01 a.m. EST, Thu January 22, 2009

Obama retakes oath of office after Roberts' mistake

President Obama retook his oath of office Wednesday after Chief Justice John Roberts flubbed while delivering it at Tuesday's inauguration.

The second oath — also administered by Roberts — took place at 7:35 p.m.

Wednesday in the White House's Map Room. Roberts asked Obama whether he was ready.

“I am, and we're going to do it very slowly,” Obama replied……

20090120 Stamped at 3:26 PST (6:26 PM EST) Tuesday January 20, 2009
Keyes – Complaint (#01, January 20, 2009)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/16443502/Keyes-Compla…

DISMISSED ! ! !

Birfoons are delusional, treasonous, pathological liars who can't distinguish right from wrong.

Quite the OMG moment for the birthers…..

You lost. You lost the election. You have lost every lawsuit. Do you get it? The federal courts are not going to overturn the will of over 69 million voters.

Won't. Ever. Happen.

Wait for the appeal.

2009-10-28 RHODES V. MACDONALD et al Appealed

2009-10-26
BERG v OBAMA (ORIGINAL CASE) – Letter Re: Hearing Scheduling – Transport Room
http://www.scribd.com/doc/20177067/BERG-v-OBAMA…

But wait, there's more!

Donofrio dropped off his blog to litigate possibly a quo warranto.

[...] reported by David Weigel at the Washington Independent, the judge stated he had "received several sworn [...]

Those are very harsh words from the judge. He's clearly setting her up for discipline by the California bar.

He should have sanctioned her under Rule 11.

Appeal what, Orly's incompetence? You cannot get relief through the courts, only through congress. In fact, the Judge went out of his way to explain how badly her incompetence cost you your chance. So, send her more money, those long lunches are expensive for a lawyer that doesn't know or understand our constitution and laws.

Irrelevant. Read the Constitution.

Orly screwed up the Notice of Appeal, you think the rest will get any better?

Donofrio is a stooge too. If you're pinning your hopes on that loser, you're in for even more head explosions.

If you want to see what the lying hack Dave Weigel will never tell you about the ruling, click here.

We will remove the filth from the WH!

They’re certainly more logical than your poorly disguised bigotry.

WARNING: Feel free to argue with the blowers…I promise you it will be entertaining. However, I would encourage you NOT to click on their links, they are only forgeries and wild theories anyway. Besides, it has been reported that virus attacks have happened when visiting some of these sites, so if you click, make sure your antivirus software is up-to-date. Also, before you click, consider that these sites are paid by advertisers by the click, so if you choose not to go you will be cutting off a source of their income. Now that this case has been dismissed, you will see the blowers no longer debating, but just trying to get you to click on their links.

There is right, wrong and unchallenged. SCOTUS has not decided a POTUS NBC case.

The cases thus far seemed to be interpreted by anti-birthers as attacks on Obama's political party, or race. This is not about the man. This is about the US Constitution and if it is valid. This needs focus.

No court has ruled on the merits of any of these cases, only ruling
on subject matter jurisdiction and standing.

The opportunity to share views, investigate issues, and debate is welcome. I'm reminded of the old movies about a Navy officer called Mr. Roberts, if I tremember correctly, about a ship's Captain who had the crew focused on hating him, while they united to serve the ship. Well, the USA is like a ship, in that it needs constant attention.
Complacency is a ship's worst enemy.

Here is a SF 86 FORM 13 Pages Questionnaire for National Security Positions. Do one on yourself and start one on your kids and keep it up in a file, so they can get at security clearance.
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/theorderlyroom/l…
http://usmilitary.about.com/library/pdf/sf86.pdf

Look at 32CFR147– PART 147_ADJUDICATIVE GUIDELINES FOR
DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY FOR ACCESS TO CLASSIFIED
INFORMATION.pdf

It's a sad day in birtherville. Now maybe the nutjobs will crawl back under their rocks where they came from.

Do you run a cleaning service? If so, I hear that they’re looking for a pooper-scooper to clean up after the First Dog….

Your point? He was legally President as of noon on January 20, 2009, whether he took the oath of office or not. That isn't going to change.

Give it up. You were wrong. Now go admit it like a nice little fanatic and do something useful.

British law doesn’t apply here or to the natural born status of U.S. citizens. We even fought a couple of wars to prove this point. British common law has set precedence in court but more importantly, the Supreme Court has never ruled directly on the question of what “natural born citizen” means.

And in 1898, in the case of U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court looked into the meaning of “natural born” in the common law and concluded that a non-citizen’s mere presence in the U.S. is enough to make their child, if born here, a natural-born citizen.

There’s your sign.

Hay Cornhole! (and the rest of you birthtards) Are you out there? Awwwwhahah, Told you so!!!

If you truly think that this nonsense is going before the Supreme Court, you are even more delusional than you appear.

Also, please stop smearing the memory of a great old Henry Fonda movie by associating it with your ridiculous excuse for a movement.

Taitz is off her rocker to be sure. But David Weigel is wrong when he dismisses the “natural born citizen” status of President Obama.

The historical definition of a “natural born citizen” goes back to the Law of Nations. The 69 million that voted for Obama mostly assumed that Secretaries of State and the Democratic Party did their due diligence in vetting out Obama's Constitutional qualification, others simply didn't care what the Constitution states as qualification. The truth is, by Obama's own admission, that he was born with dual-citizenship. And a dual citizen cannot be considered a “natural born citizen” because that person is born with citizenship to more than one country. This is explicitly defined by Vattel in Book 1, Chapter 19, SubSection 212 in “Law of Nations” where it states:

“The Natives, or natural born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. . . . it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only his place of birth, and not his country.”

Why is Vattel's definition relevant? Because when the Framer's were drafting the Constitution, Vattel's “Law of Nations” was the single most influential text on the subject of government, specifically democracy. It is well known that the Framer's relied heavily upon it to settle disputes as the Constitution went from draft to revision to ratification and amendment.

Again Obama has openly admitted that he was a dual citizen at birth. And dual citizens at birth ARE NOT natural born citizens as defined in the Constitution and intended by the Framer's I think he, Michelle, Axelrod and the lot are still amazed by the lack of protest. Essentially they have taken the American public for suckers, mainstream media and all.

I have a strong feeling that America, even Democrats, wouldn't have been as laisse-faire on this issue if a candidate for President had been born to one American citizen and one Iranian citizen. Just something to think about.

Correction before I’m piled on:

This candidate is at least 35 YEARS of age.

I'm sure there will be an appeal, followed by another dismissal, followed by Orly Taitz' disbarment hearing.

So? Must the entire judiciary system waste its time dismissing these frivolous suits?

Better start working for 2012 then, mimmee.

Findings of lack of standing and jurisdiction ARE decisions on the merits. Quit listening to those losers like Orly (has she ever had a single MOTION granted?) Maybe a Motion for Pro Hac Vice, but those days are OVER. Her attempts to get admitted as such in Idaho have been REJECTED unless she finds local counsel. Good luck finding any real lawyer to put their ticket on the line for Orly.

Vattel never used the phrase “natural born citizen.” That only came into it in an english translation that came out ten years after the Constitution was ratified.

You are also highly over-estimating Vattels influence, but it doesn't matter. It's not possible they took their definition of “natural born” from Vattel for the reasons I stated.

ORRIN G. HATCH:
“What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.”

DON NICKLES:
“It is clear that a child born within the physical borders of the United States and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States is eligible to run for President.”
*********************
“if a candidate for President had been born to one American citizen and one Iranian citizen.”
—

That candidate would get as many votes as Alan Keyes….. LOL!

Vattel's law of Nations has nothing to do with our Constitution. Sorry, dude. You are the only sucker and you have been taken by so-called attorneys who like to see their name in lights — even if they lose.

Some of the Birthers — like de facto leader Orly Taitz — believe that Obama wouldn't be eligible for the presidency even if he were born in the U.S. That's because, in their infinite wisdom, the Founding Fathers included in the Constitution a fair amount of phrases they never really bothered to define. One of those is this explanation of who can be president: “No person except a natural born citizen.”

The Supreme Court has never ruled directly on the question of what “natural born citizen” means. So the Birthers have simply settled on their own definition — someone born to two citizen parents — and found a source,”The Law of Nations,” a 1758 book by the Swiss philosopher Emerich de Vattel, to back them up.

There are a couple of problems with this. Most important, Obama isn't the first president with a non-citizen parent: Chester A. Arthur, the 21st president, was. His father was from Ireland and apparently did not become a U.S. citizen until more than 10 years after the future president's birth.

Plus, even if the Founding Fathers did rely on Vattel as much as the Birthers say — always a dubious proposition — Swiss philosophy books aren't legal precedent in the United States. British common law is. And in 1898, in the case of U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court looked into the meaning of “natural born” in the common law and concluded that a non-citizen's mere presence in the U.S. is enough to make their child, if born here, a natural-born citizen.

You lose.

Now why would anyone click on your links? I've read the opinion, Weigel is totally accurate (as usual). If you ever read the ruling, we can discuss it. Until then, go away.

Actually, you need to read up. Why is it that he lost his american citizenship before he was 30, John?

If you’re going to cite the original Berg v Obama case, you might also want to link to the 9 October letter on the case

http://www.scribd.com/doc/20860730/BERG-v-OBAMA-OPEN-DOCUMENT-Submit-Notification-for-Monday-10-26-2009-TLW-Transport-Room

No oral argument to be heard.

Ah the racist birfoons are crawling out from under their rocks…………

We already have — Bush is gone.

I suspect he’s waiting to see what she does with her appeal.

If she acts towards Judge Carter like she did Judge Land, sanctions are more than likely

Nothing new in the above link, just more blathering from people who don’t understand the concept called “burden of proof”.

Nothing new in the above link, just more blathering from people who don’t understand the concept called “burden of proof”.

More silly birfer crap disguised as a less looney approach. It's still immaterial, irrelevant and inapplicable. Go read Judge Carter's ruling.

“Plaintiffs have encouraged the Court to ignore these mandates of the Constitution; to disregard the limits on its power put in place by the Constitution … Plaintiffs have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed their claim, as unpatriotic and even treasonous for refusing to grant their requests and for adhering to the terms of the Constitution which set forth its jurisdiction. Respecting the constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic. Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of patriotism.”

Judge David Carter

Ellid, I suppose you have some historical evidence that no one else has ever seen that somehow states that Vattel’s Law of Nations was a summary of Swiss law?! Talk about ignorant silliness.

And Vattel wasn’t unearthed to unseat Obama. I had to read the Law of Nations and reference many times along the way during my poly-sci major. In fact, any college level institution worth it’s salt requires its students to read and reference the law of nations.

Additionally, the truth is more along the lines of coordinated revisionism by the Democrat’s and GOP because their two most popular candidates this time around happened to NOT be Natural Born Citizens.

The Shepherd of the Sheople has led you astray, my freind.

Not to mention the fact that Vattel never used the phrase in question. He wrote in French, and what he said was, “Les Naturels ou indigènes font ceux qui font nés dans le pays de Parens Citoyens.” No “natural born citizen” in there, nor in the english translations that existed at the time the Constitution was ratified.

“I don’t have the time to correct”

Spare us your arrogance and B.S.

http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/does_barack_obama_have_kenyan_citizenship.html

And you’re still a lying idiot with more spare time than common sense fully deserving of derision for your stupidity.

For Immediate Release: July 27, 2009 09-063
STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D.
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai?i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital
records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama
was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement
or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”
###

Sorry folks, I'm going to repost this to the top for people who aren't familiar with the blower mentality. I just don't want them to have to spend a couple of days cleaning up their machines if they can avoid it.

WARNING: Feel free to argue with the blowers…I promise you it will be entertaining. However, I would encourage you NOT to click on their links, they are only forgeries and wild theories anyway. Besides, it has been reported that virus attacks have happened when visiting some of these sites, so if you click, make sure your antivirus software is up-to-date. Also, before you click, consider that these sites are paid by advertisers by the click, so if you choose not to go you will be cutting off a source of their income. Now that this case has been dismissed, you will see the blowers no longer debating, but just trying to get you to click on their links.

[...] Orly Taitz loses another one. [...]

[...] Another challenge from birther queen Orly Taitz against President Obama’s birth certificate has been thrown out of court. [...]

There is a different between your opinion on the issue and historically established, scholarly verified facts.

This where I took the quote from, however they are not unique in their representation of Vattel's words.

http://www.lonang.com/exlibris/vattel/vatt-119.htm

Lonang welcomes your scholarly, research verifiable objections. Feel free to correct the record.

The concept of the definition of natural born citizen pre-dated Vattel, it wasn't his idea, he simply recognized what was already in practice and documented it.

There are American Law Review articles for the 19th century that verify this and acknowledge that a NBC must be born of two citizen parents on the soil of the country of citizenship. To argue otherwise is essentially saying that ANYONE who becomes a citizen can become the President. This is a very slippery and dangerous slope. Obama, the Democratic party and the whole of Congress have been reckless in allowing this dangerous precedent to be set.

President Obama’s Hawaii birth certificate is not relevant. Taitz is completely off the mark and doesn’t understand even the most basic aspects of Federal court.

And your a person who lacks the intellect to follow the logic, research the facts and have an original thought of your own.

You’re a prime example of the deadthink status of mainstream America. everything is win or lose and look how funny I can be with put-down one-liners.

I imagine you’re correct, but I’ve seen Federal Judges sanction litigants for relatively minor things like hard-nosed discovery tactics. I’ve always been amused by how quick Federal judges are to sanction versus state court judges who will put up with almost anything.

These lawsuits are clearly what Rule 11 is all about and it’s hard for me to understand why she hasn’t been sanctioned in every court she’s filed these suits.

Judge Carter's ruling has nothing to do with the points I am making.

I think Orly Taitz, Gary Kreep and Alan Keyes are looney and as misguided as the next person.

What I speak of is a failure of the early vetting process. Obama should have never had his candidacy declaration validated by the DNC, let alone the various S.O.S.

There really are only two options remaining . . . the House would have to miraculously suddenly wake up to their Constitutional duties OR come next election, proper vetting of Obama's candidacy filings would need to occur.

[...] Orly Taitz loses another one. [...]

We can read the ruling for ourselves, numbnuts. I already have. Your birthtard take on it is irrelevant.

Neither of these comments answer the question I posed.

Again just repeating what you’ve read, rather than following the logic, the facts and historical precedent.

Look at the date on that translation. It's in the preface. Grasp the concept here–he never used the phrase. Two earlier translations that did exist PRIOR to the ratification also did NOT use that phrase.

And you're right–the definition did pre-date Vattel. British common law actually DID use that phrase. Read Blackstone. He used the phrase. Vattel never did. And it NEVER in history meant what you claim it meant.

And those arguments from the 19th century were arguments about who was and was not a citizen at birth. They never intended “natural born” to mean some extra third kind of citizenship. And they lost those arguments. It's now the 21st century, and those arguments have been long put behind us. You're side lost.

Why is Vattel’s definition relevant? Because when the Framer’s were drafting the Constitution, Vattel’s “Law of Nations” was the single most influential text on the subject of government, specifically democracy.

The Founding Fathers could not have relied on subsection 212 as you quote it, because up until the time the Constitution was drafted and adopted, it never contained the term “natural born citizen.”

When de Vattel original wrote Law of Nations in French, he used the term indigènes – which literally translates to “natives” in English. Well into the 1790s, English translations of de Vattel left this term in its original French incarnation. It wasn’t until nearly a decade after the Constituion was adopted that English translations began introducing the term “natural born citizens.”

So, the Founding Fathers’ use of the term “natural born Citizen” could not have come from de Vattel, and originated from a different source. But from where? As it turns out, by 1787, “natural born citizen” was a commonly used term in colonies such as Massachusetts, which referred to persons who were born in the United States. This was distinguished from “naturalized citizens” – those citizens who weren’t born in the United States and became citizens at some time after their birth, and “aliens” or “foreigners,” who were not U.S. citizens at all.

These categories of citizenship were well understood at the time the Constitution was drafted, and terms like “naturalized” and “natural born” were frequently and casually used by courts for decades afterwards in the same context. If the Founding Fathers planned some radical overhaul of the jus soli principles were inherited from English common law, the Founders left no trace of their intentions, and the courts missed them entirely as well.

What you are proposing is that the Founding Fathers put in place THREE categories of U.S. citizens – (1) natural born, (2) naturalized, and (3) citizens who are neither, and that Obama is in the third category. But I challenge you to point to one single case in the history of American jurisprudence, at the state or federal level, which agrees with your assertion.

I’ll bet you can’t.

You're wrong but obviously to stubborn or dense to comprehend.

And you shouldn't copy/paste concepts you clearly don't understand.

Your blathering is irrelevant.

Yes, they can appeal. But Judge Carter was right, so the appeal will fail.

You birthtards are all the same: you keep predicting victory, but you can't explain what, specifically, is wrong the with decisions of the judges who rule against you.

Give it up, Nance-y boy.

And hiding your bigotry behind the Constitution is desperate and pathetic.

“Why is Vattel's definition relevant?”

I think it's relevant precisely because it *isn't.* Digging some antiquated text out of your crack does not mean you've got anything to talk about . . . .

Do you wonder why there's not one Constitutional scholar that buys your definition? Even in the 19th century it was a minority opinion–a minority opinion that lost.

Welcome to the 21st century, where that particular argument has long been settled.

Do you wonder why there's not one Constitutional scholar that buys your definition? Even in the 19th century it was a minority opinion–a minority opinion that lost.

Welcome to the 21st century, where that particular argument has long been settled.

Your rebuttal is specious and I don't have the time to correct the many errors of statement you have made.

Your position is consistent with the general historical malaise this country suffers from, especially with regard how the Constitution came to be, and legal precedent.

Suffice to say, prior to Obama, this issue has only been dealt with once before, and that President, clearly covered up the facts of his fathers citizenship status. A precedent was unknowingly set at the time, to be discovered in later years. My guess is Obama if was ever actually backed into a corner he would point to this precedent to substantiate his candidacy.

My guess: Orly is strongly attracted to Obama, and in order to exorcise this “taboo” relationship, she is compelled to attack him.

Or she's just nuts.

Relevant:

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
News Release
LINDA LINGLE
GOVERNOR
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CHIYOME LEINAALA FUKINO M.D.
DIRECTOR
Phone: (808) 586-4410
Fax: (808) 586-4444
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release: July 27, 2009 09-063
STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D.
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai?i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital
records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama
was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement
or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”
###

Irrelevant:

Your lies and delusions.

Relevant:

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
News Release
LINDA LINGLE
GOVERNOR
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CHIYOME LEINAALA FUKINO M.D.
DIRECTOR
Phone: (808) 586-4410
Fax: (808) 586-4444
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release: July 27, 2009 09-063
STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D.
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai?i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital
records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama
was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement
or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”
###

Irrelevant:

Your lies and delusions.

Silly, ignorant me. I thougtht for sure that the framers of the Constitution were thinking about Shakespeare's MacBeth in which McDuff informs the doomed MacBeth, “Know thee I was of no woman born:. That is, I was sure “naturally born citizen” meant someone who had passed through a woman's birth canal, and not been “untimely ripped from his mother's womb” — the product of a c-section. Carried to its logical conclusion by a strict constructionist such as Justice Scalia, this would mean that any citizen of the U.S.A. who was born by c-section or who was conceived with medical assistance would be ineligible to be the President.

Silly, ignorant me. I thougtht for sure that the framers of the Constitution were thinking about Shakespeare's MacBeth in which McDuff informs the doomed MacBeth, “Know thee I was of no woman born:. That is, I was sure “naturally born citizen” meant someone who had passed through a woman's birth canal, and not been “untimely ripped from his mother's womb” — the product of a c-section. Carried to its logical conclusion by a strict constructionist such as Justice Scalia, this would mean that any citizen of the U.S.A. who was born by c-section or who was conceived with medical assistance would be ineligible to be the President.

In which case they would have to look at the document released by the Hawaiian Dept of Health that clearly says Obama was born in the state and meets the requirements as natural born citizen.

Then what will the birfers do?

I can’t believe you cited Chester Arthur. It is known that Arthur LIED about his Father’s naturalization status. When he was running as VP, he maintained to the press and anyone else that asked that his father was already a naturalized citizen when he was born. Arthur’s lie has been proven by the discovery of news accounts dated at and before his election as Vice-President under Garfield.

It wasn’t until YEARS later that it was discovered that Arthur’s father was not naturalized until many years after his birth. Arthur, like Obama, was born with a claim to dual citizenship and thus not a NBC.

Now WHY would Arthur lie about his Father’s naturalization to the press during the election, through Garfild’s election and Arthur’s assumption as the 21st President?!

Because Arthur knew he was NOT a NBC, and that if this fact were to be known, he would have been disqualified as a candidate.

“And dual citizens at birth ARE NOT natural born citizens as defined in the Constitution”

BZZZZT. Wrong. You are dismissed.

COME ON PUSSY WHAT YOU WAITING ON??? WHY DON’T YOU COME OUT OF MAMAS BASEMENT AND SHOW US LIBERALS HOW YOU DO IT!! I DOUBLE DOG DARE YA.. IF YOU DON’T YOU ARE A PUSSY!! HERE KITTY KITTY KITTY

I wonder how Judge Carter feels about bieng the start, of a REVOLUTION!
Do you all think we are just going to walk away and hide under a rock?
Pffttt, JUST THE OPPOSITE!

Judge Carter's decision, has only made us more determined. Since the courts are TOO AFRAID and don't seem to be the way, to get this SETTLED, then we will have to go the route that it is supposed to be done. I spose it's time to put the PRESSURE on Congress and the one's that let this LIE, get past them to begin with!

Just for the record, I didn't lose. “WE” lost. How can a person who self-admittedly, was born with DUAL citizenship ever be considered a natural born citizen – which historically means a person born to two citizen parents on the soil of the country of citizenship – with no loyalty or claim to another country?!

Your arguments do not follow any sort of logic.

[...] oo rr ll yy By hamthechimp Leave a Comment Categories: mental instability, orly might as well get her own tag and politics Orly Taitz Smacked Down: Birther Lawsuit Dismissed [...]

Why don’t you go OUT THERE, grab the truth and bring it up to us? Why do you choose to believe fake Kenyan BC and doubt Hawaiian authorities? It doesn’t make any sense to me. Tell us exactly, what’s the beef with Obama?

Dude, we are talking about people that think the results of an AOL poll are considered legitimate evidence.

Ah, concern trolling at its finest.

HAHAHAHAHAHA DAMN YOU ARE A JOKE!!! HERE KITTY KITTY KITTY

I'm shocked, shocked that an 18th century Swiss scholar did not write in English. The nerve! Jesus wrote in English — it should be good enough for everyone!

(Thanks for pointing out the mischief that occurs when we ignore that texts have gone through multiple translations. I assume you are referring to the 1759 English translation of the 1758 original text).

Your arguments are ignorant to the extreme. “Natural born” NEVER meant anything about two citizen parents. At no point in history did it ever mean that. That's just a bit of nonsense that ignorant birthers made up.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!

Have fun providing the Happy Meals, Cornholio!

He is a natural born citizen because he was born in the US
A person can be both a natural born citizen and have dual citizenship.
All this was settled a long time ago by minds much greater than you. Give it up. YOU and the rest of your brain dead sore loser ilk lost. Get over it.

Majority Will, speaking of arrogance and BS – one of the links you post is to Obama’s campaign website. Go ahead and read through it. You’ll that Obama openly admits that he is a dual citizen at birth.

Your boy tee’d one up right in my wheelhouse.

Now go read up on Chestur Arthur – ya know the guy that your boy up above cites as an example of President. During the campaign and in candidacy declaration Arthur claimed that his father was naturalized BEFORE Arthur was born. The TRUTH is Arthur LIED during the campaign about his fathers naturalization – and we know this from published NEWS ACCOUNTS of ARTHUR’S statements at the time. It wasn’t until after Arthur was out of office that the truth about his Father’s naturalization came to light. That is, Arthur’s father was NOT a US citizen at the time of Chester’s birth.

Now ask yourself, why would Chester Arthur lie about his Father’s citizenship status at the time of Chester’s birth?! I’ll let you think this one out for yourself.

The Founder Fathers never decided to use Vattel definition to decide who would be a natural born citizen. Your argument IS irrelevant. We should continue to follow British Common Law, considering anybody born on US soil as a natural born citizen.
If your argument was valid, the GOP, the RNCC and HC would have risen the issue during the campaign.

It wasn't until the 1797 translation that the phrase “natural born citizen” was introduced. I don't recall off hand the dates of the earlier English translations, but neither of them used the phrase.

Vattel was Swiss and pre-Revolution. Not even vaguely relevant to the American legal system.

Hey Loser, stop fillin up my inbox…

Do you ever wonder why the phrase “natural born citizen” appeared only in Article II, Section 1?

And unlike you I don't have the ego to assume that ALL Constitutional scholars disagree with my position.

Yes I am sure you guys will rise up and overthrow the president now. How delusional are you? Seek professional help.

LOL YES ON THE INTERNET YOU CAN BE WHAT YOU WANT TO BE!!! LOLOL

Turn yur fucking caps off dickbreath!

HEY SHITBREATH GO FUCK YOURSELF HERE KITTY KITTY KITTY

It was a phrase taken from British common law. Anyone born on the soil was a “natural born subject.” It was also used in the citizenship laws of the states prior to the ratification to mean the same thing. The framers changed “subject” to “citizen” since this was no longer a monarchy.

But you obviously haven't read the decision, as Judge Carter mentions de Vattel:

“Plaintiffs presume that the words of Emmerich de Vattel, John Jay, and John
Armor Bingham alone empower this Court to define the natural born citizen clause. The Complaint conveniently chooses to ignore Congress’ long history of defining citizenship, whether naturalized or by birth. See Charles Gordon, “Who Can be President of the United States: The Unresolved Enigma,” 28 Md. L. Rev. 1, 7-22 (1968) (contrasting 150 years of active Congressional legislation against judicial restraint).”

This is satire, no?

To all birthers out there:
The law of the country is as follows: You have to bring compelling proof before a court that some wrong have been done. Get off your basement, take our PJs and/or underwear off and buy a ticket to Kenya. Find the proof that Obama was born there. The burden of proof is on you, not Obama. How come you don't get it?
Just put your money where your mouth is.

And you’re a person “who lacks the intellect” to choose the correct form of the homophone.

Come next election The President will show the same Hawaii birth certificate that he did in 2007/2008, and since it is a completely valid legal document, it will be accepted and he will be re-elected. End of story.

First, I haven’t called anyone names. But then you are a product of simple pop-culture thought, so I shouldn’t be surprised that you do.

Again I’ll state it, Obama was 100% most definitely born in Hawaii. That fact has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether or not he was a natural born citizen – because, by Obama’s own acknowledgment, his Father was NOT a US citizen when Barrack was born. Thus, Obama was born of DUAL loyalties and cannot under any legal definition, historical or imagined, be a natural born citizen.

If you go to Obama’s OWN birth certificate posting on his Fight the Smears website, he NEVER claims to be a Natural Born Citizen, he cleverly claims to be a NATIVE born citizen.

1. I've been running the linked website since 2002, and before then it was hosted at a site I started in 1995. If anyone lies about my sites, I am perfectly willing to sue them for libel and I will not hesitate to collect the judgment. Of course, those smearing below aren't naming specific sites, they're just trying to smear all BHO opponents and trying to get you from learning the truth.

2. In case you missed it, here's just one of the things Dave Weigel doesn't want you to see. That focuses only on a false assumption the judge made that may indicate bias, or ignorance, or that he has a problem with engaging in sloppy thinking. That doesn't involve who has burden of proof; it involves a flaw in the judge's thinking that might indicate problems elsewhere in the ruling.

3. If you're wondering why Dave Weigel didn't tell you about that, see the link. He is not in any way a credible source.

4. If the “N.B.C. brigade” were able to give me some assistance, hacks like Weigel wouldn't write things like this, others wouldn't smear you, and the judge might have been more careful in his ruling. My main goal is to show that the MSM and others have repeatedly lied about the simple facts of this matter, yet I've gotten almost zero help in doing that. And, that's why you see articles like this.

Here–

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documen…

Notice this actually DOES precede the ratification of the Constitution.

To quote yourself below:

“Pathetic game show sounds and Bill Maher style humor are best left for entertainment purposes.”

WHY DON’T YOU BRING YOUR PUSSY ASS HERE AND MAKE ME! HERE KITTY KITTY KITTY

Unfortunately, no. Tracey is paranoid, mentally unstable trailer trash.

You can rub it in all you want. What you guys call a WIN, is merely just MORE COVER UP. Wouldn't you all like to see his REAL Birth Certificate and be able to LAUGH IN OUR FACES, when it is TRULY PROVEN?

You all are living on a LIE and you defent it as if you are 100% sure he is legal, when there is NO possible way, you could know, without seeing the REAL THING. If you had any moral judgement or integrity at all, you would want the TRUTH, but instead you laugh and say you have won, when you haven't, you are have just piled lie on top of lie. You should all feel ashamed, that you hide the TRUTH!

Nope: typos; misspellings, bad punctuation and worse grammar are the signs of a true birfer. What's that saying? One french fry short of a Happy Meal?

Links to your paranoid drivel are SO credible. </sarcasm>

Beware of viruses and spyware to anyone dumb enough to go there.

Please by all means, you and your tiny itsy bitty minuscule minority, put on all that pressure. My God, how will they be able to stand it when a short bus full of wackos descends on them? Please, I fully support your efforts. Now that Arrested Development is off the air, those of us in the reality based community can use the laughs.

Completely and utterly wrong. Swiss law is not and never was used as the basis for anything in the American or British legal codes, and I am stunned that a supposed patriot would believe this nonsense.

As for how the Constitution came to be, I would suggest that you reread the Federalist Papers and not obscure Swiss legal scholars whose deservedly unknown writings were resurrected by fanatics determined to unseat a President based on specious concerns about his birthplace.

Your mother should be ashamed she didn't send you to school.

Your mother should be ashamed she didn't send you to school.

Send Tracey to one of those FEMA camps that Oily Taintz keeps squawking about.

Kenya schmenya, I could care less about that. I’m more interested in him being adopted at age 6 and becoming an indonesian. His school records say that and it is highly unlikely he went to Pakistan in 81, with a US passport, given the US/Pakistani relations at the time.

He more likey had an Indonesian passport, which would prove he swore allegiance to Indonesia, therefore relinquishing him of his US citizenship, since Indonesia does not recognize dual citizenship.

Unlike some parts of the Constitution (Treaty Clause) where it is clear that “the Framers” referred to Vattel during the debates, there is no record whatsoever of debate, discussion or clarification during the drafting of the Constitution with respect to the meaning of “natural born citizen.' In over 200 years, the federal courts have never issued a precedential interpretation of the phrase “natural born citizen” in Article II, Section 1, Clause 4; when it has been mentioned, it has been in dicta.

If you think the federal courts will or should wade into that briar patch, you are nuts.

At a minimum, “natural born citizen” is to be distinguished from “naturalized” citizen. In other words, to be eligible to be President, you have to have been a citizen of the United States at birth. But do you have to be a citizen based both on being born in the U.S. and having one or both parents be U.S. Citizens? If so, why?

What I usually hear is a concern that a President who had dual citizenship at birth or was born to U.S. citizens abroad may have “divided allegiance.” I suppose that could be true. It could also be true that voters might think a President born in the U.S. to U.S. citizen parents has “divided allegiance”: John Adams was accused of being a monarchist, after all, and there certainly were people alleging that John F. Kennedy (as our first Roman Catholic president) was going to be taking orders from the Vatican.

Those are issues the voters can sort out. Beyond the basic notion of “citizen at time of birth,” I think the federal courts would wisely find the varying interpretations of “natural born citizen” to be a political question best left to the vigorous debate of elections, to be decided by the voters.

Does the fact that John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone (to parents who clearly were American citizens) make him unfit to be President? Why should a judge decide that?

Does the fact that Barack Obama's father was from Kenya (a fact he has never denied) make Barack Obama unfit to be our President? Why should a judge decide that, when the real question being asked is one common to ALL Presidential candidates: will this man or woman be committed to serving the best interests of the nation, above all else? That is a question the voters decide.

uhhh, no…

As long as the candidate was born on American soil or an American military base, she would be a natural born citizen and thus eligible.

The truth is out…ORLY LOST AGAIN!!

You obviously aren't aware of Orly's followers!
It's only going to get WORSE, WATCH!

“Scholarly verified facts”? Never heard that one before. I'm a scholar as are probably at least half the people on this board, possibly even including yourself, does that mean if we verify something, that makes it a “fact”? That would at least explain how you've reach your conclusions but I fail to see how that actually differs from your opinion. That's like calling a Janitor a “Sanitation Engineer”.

I need to remember that, the next time I state my opinion, I'll call it a “scholarly verified fact”.

OMG you are hiiiiiilarious.
Come clean. You really are a writer for Colbert and you come here to test drive new material.

In case I am wrong, hate to break this to you, but we already got the truth.
Feel free to call the Hawaii Dept of Health:
(808) 974-6006

That would be nice, but considering that Obama’s family has been put under a gag order by the Kenyan Government, from talking about him, it’s a little hard to get them to talk!

Why the gag order?

Don’t you have a trailer to clean, Tracey?

Oops, notice how 24AheadDotCom can't make his arguments here, but instead wants you to click on his link.

Don't do it. If he had anything worthwhile to say he would say it here. Don't feed the monkeys.

What? You mean they are going to break out the Sheets and Torches?

“First, I haven’t called anyone names.”

Liar. From your own comment above:

“The Shepherd of the Sheople has led you astray.”

Believe me, I have called them many times and they are of no help. The won't answer ANY procedural quetions over the phone. Why is that? They, along with Judge Carters courthouse are soon going to get tired of the calls and they are going to want something done about it.

I just spoke to a guy from the courthouse and he actually was nice to me. He told me he has been on the phone non stop, since this came out. People are pissed and he says he would rather not have to deal with this crazy situation.

Believe me, we have only just begun!

What you call “false assumption the judge “is in the legal world called “burden of proof”. Look it up sometime.

So let's assume that you are 100% correct.

We are now in the future. It is 2019 and the race for President in 2012 is in full gear. A candidate emerges in the Republican Party (assuming its still around) who was born on United States soil to an American citizen father and an Iranian citizen mother. This candidate like Obama was born with dual citizenship.

Except this candidate spent his formative years in Iran and didn't make the US his full-time home until he was 30 years old in 2004 (16 years before the 2012 election). Under your view of Constitutional qualification, this person is qualified.

This candidate, like Obama, Bush, Clinton and every President before makes a lot of grand promises during the campaign and convinces a majority of the American public that we will be the best choice for President. He is elected as the first Iranian-American to assume the highest office in the land. The country's media presents this as America celebrating wildly about a new era of Iranian-American relations and reconciliation.

First of all, I doubt this would happen with Iran's political and social climate, but let's say it did.

This candidate is a Natural born citizen (under your definition).
This candidate is at least 25 years of age.
This candidate is a living in the US for 14 consecutive years.

However this candidate spent 25 years of his life in Iran, attending all levels of school until college which he attended an Ivy League school in the US. He then returned to Iran for 5 years before settling in the US for the next 16 years of his life.

Does it seem reasonable that this person who has spent the majority of hi life living in a country that has been an enemy of the United State for several generations should be handed the title Commander in Chief?!

And if you enter that dark hole of a site, it'll be like you've been with everyone who's ever been there before you.

Dude, FUCK OFF. I finished high school, 2 years of college and am certified in about 5 other areas. SO BLOW ME!

NO, the PEOPLE lost!

No, Tracey is just a delusional lunatic.

[...] The Washington Independent: Central District of California Judge David O. Carter has dismissed Barnett et al v. Obama et al, [...]

I had a case in Judge Carter's court. He's a very hard working judge, no nonsense tough guy with a military background. I didn't agree with every ruling he issued (being an advocate for my client of course), but he earns the respect of every lawyer who appears in his court.

Judge Carter is a U.S. Marine. I don't think Corny's Revolution is going to cause him to lose any sleep. Are you going to throw your keyboard at him?

Oh! My!!!
You get your evidence from the internets? Do you realize there is a lot of people in their basements, still in their PJs at this time, some in their underwear, living off mom and dad, posting “information” on the web?
No, pal, there is no evidence, solid or otherwise, that O is not our legitimate president.

AND, as everyone knows..this was dismissed on STANDING. The merits have never been argued. You didn't win anything, you just succeeded in hiding the TRUTH. I don't see how ANYONE can be HAPPY about that!

You laugh over hiding the TRUTH. Pretty pathetic, I must say!

Tracey misspelled “certifiable”. Oooh, 2 years of college. That may be more hours than Oily Taintz has.

[...] I can has Dismissal? [...]

The document issued by the Hawaii DOH is valid, legal proof of the President’s natural born U.S. citizenship.

Children not born in Hawaii can get a birth document from the state. But it won’t say they were born in Hawaii, as Obama’s does.

“If you were born in Bali, for example, you could get a certificate from the state of Hawaii saying you were born in Bali,” Janice Okubo, the director of communications for the state Department of Health, told the Washington Independent’s David Weigel recently. “You could not get a certificate saying you were born in Honolulu. The state has to verify a fact like that for it to appear on the certificate.”

LMAO ! ! !

She has informed us that “Royal Blood” runs in her veins. I think that explains the mental instability and the anti-democratic tendencies.

Liar.

Actually, yes. He would be eligible.

You’re also assuming that this candidate would be nominated by a major party so s/he had a chance of winning, which ain’t gonna happen in this country nohow, right or wrong.

The other take on this is: say the candidate has your stated pedigree to age 30, comes to the US, starts a very successful company and becomes a poster child for US-style capitalism. Why *shouldn’t* that person have a chance to be president?

You’re making the assumption that someone coming from elsewhere could never never adopt the customs of the country s/he currently lives in – that it’s the country and not the individual that counts. However, the US – more than most other advanced industrialized countries – is a country of *individuals*, where you’re *supposed* to be able to come and prove yourself. And the Constitution is not in the business of deciding what countries are “okay” for a dual national to come from in a given year. Arnold Schwartzenegger came from Austria. Sixty years ago we were very much at war with Austria.

A third take: Alexander Solzhenitsyn was a citizen of the USSR for 56 or so years. Doesn’t mean he loved Communism.

And lastly: US citizens who assume offices in other countries above a certain level have to give up their US citizenship (Benjamin Netanyahu, for example, was originally a US-Israeli citizen). I’m betting that the same thing would likely happen to your Iranian-American, whether due to existing Iranian law or because the Iranian government would be pissed at him/her and revoke it.

Heck, there are too many narrow assumptions here to really address this.

Liar.

Worse? How so, Corny? It will only get worse – and more expensive to pursue – for you and Orly.

Yes Jim, that’s correct and I can vouch for it. I clicked on one of their links once and before the page even loaded my virus scan went nuts! I immediately killed the Internet switch and ran a complete scan. I had been infected w/3 different viruses, which were quarantined and removed. So anyone going to these links be careful!

So much anger, so much hate coming from the sore losers.
Never fails. When they have nothing credible, just toss around some 4 letter words. That always does the trick NOT

THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE, MR. URSURPER! THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE!

Liar and a hypocrite.

Tracey drooled, “HE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE, MR. URSURPER!”

lololololol

The burden of proof is on YOU, as you well know.

Please don’t bring your so-called sex life into this.

Also, what’s the name of the restaurant you purportedly manage?

I for one am happy crazy people like you are here providing us with lots of laughs.
Please keep it coming. This is pure comedy gold.

No, it was dismissed on a couple of different grounds.

But Judge Carter also commented on some of the issues of the case, and you probably should take these words to heart:

“Plaintiffs presume that the words of Emmerich de Vattel, John Jay, and John Bingham alone empower this court to define the natural born citizen clause. The Complaint conveniently chooses to ignore Congress’ long history of defining citizenship, whether naturalized or by birth. See Charles Gordon. “Who Can be President pf the United States: The Unresolved Enigma,” 28 Md. L. Rev. 1, 7-22 (1968) (contrasting 150 years of active Congressional legislation against judicial restraint).”

Why don't you let people see the evidence and decide for themselves?
Are you too afraid of that? You think they might see something to sway them and you have to stop them from going there?

Why don't you just shut the fuck up and stop accusing people of spreading viruses, you stupid piece of shit! You know there are no viruses there, you are just trying to HIDE THE TRUTH, as always.
THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE!

Why don't you let people see the evidence and decide for themselves?
Are you too afraid of that? You think they might see something to sway them and you have to stop them from going there?

Why don't you just shut the fuck up and stop accusing people of spreading viruses, you stupid piece of shit! You know there are no viruses there, you are just trying to HIDE THE TRUTH, as always.
THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE!

You conveniently left out the last part of my statement.

Pathetic game show sounds and Bill Maher style humor are best left for entertainment purposes.

It already has. You should try some yourself.

It's not going to cost anything to go through Congress to get this done. Since we are told that is the only way, then Congress better watch out!

To quote your comrade below:

Bzzzzt, Your Wrong. Dismissed.

The GOP ALSO had a candidate which did not qualify as a NBC.

Inbreeders, that explains a lot

Oh! MY!!!!
You have an answer for everything, on why you can’t prove it. Sorry, but you’re pathetic. Pathetic. Pathetic.

We have all seen your “evidence”.
A forged birth certificate? The results of an AOL poll?
BWAHAHAHAHA!
Nothing short of brilliant!

Gotta love the birthers. No matter how crappy their arguments, no matter how incompetent their counsel, no matter how fantastical their claims, they just keep on truckin'.

I love to picture them huffing and puffing at home, SO SURE OF THEMSELVES that they have the “correct” constitutional interpretation, that they totally have the real Kenyan birth certificate as PROOF, and NO ONE WILL LISTEN TO THEM!!! That must be SOOOOOO frustrating for these losers. I LOVE it.

This isn't an athletic event, pal.

This isn't about winning and losing, nor right and left – it's about being right or wrong.

And before you knee-jerk like the typical pop-culture mainstream libs and neo-cons alike . . . I have not voted for either major party for two decades now.

You mean the MAJORITY of AMERICANS that voted for Obama lost? Hmmm That's a rather silly argument, but your logic fails on so many levels that I would guess a silly argument is all you are capable of understanding. . . .

You mean the MAJORITY of AMERICANS that voted for Obama lost? Hmmm That's a rather silly argument, but your logic fails on so many levels that I would guess a silly argument is all you are capable of understanding. . . .

Well that’s what happens to people that spend their days at work repeating the same phrase over and over… “Would you like to supersize that?”

You are an imbecile, if you see not one stitch of credible evidence, that has been shown around the web lately. I would be embarrased, if I were you to even admit that. Just showes how gullible you are! PATHETIC!

Oh and I'm not angry, because we can now see that this country is being bought out by this ursurper and people are going to rise up. These teaparties that are out now are going to get CRAZY! Even your channels are showing it, so you HAVE TO watch it!

Is that what you were told while you were confined in that padded cell?

The only gag order is on the patrons of your alleged restaurant to keep them from suing you for ptomaine.

Also, just what *is* the name of that restaurant? I’d love to see the address and incorporation papers…..

I don't care if there is a birth certificate or not. Just the fact that all you idiot birthers are having a collective heart attack is enough for me. I'm going to wear a red dress to your funeral and what I do on your grave won't pass for dancing. Goodbye Whorly Tits!

BigGuy, little dick!

Sorry, but I don't like little ones!

You should try medication. Valium helps. Maybe some antipsychotic stuff i also needed. I pity you. No life. Just this horrible hate. Psychiatric help also is warranted. Clearly, you are delusional.

We have all seen your “evidence”.
A forged birth certificate? The results of an AOL poll?
BWAHAHAHAHA!
Nothing short of brilliant!

BTW you realize everyone here is just playing you, egging you on to see how crazy we can get you? You are playing right into our hands chump!

No, We the People won!
The wacko minority lost.

Ah yes, an associate’s degree from East Cornhole Institute of Culinary Arts. Excellent preparation for life, that.

The majority that voted for Obama were Fake Acorn Votes. Everyone knows that and all the convictions, PROVE THAT. It is only getting worse and worse for Acorn, as they find more and more fraud with them. Does that make you guys feel GOOD, that you won by FRAUD. You are all living a lie and you are happy about it…pretty damn funny to me!

screaming untruths using all capitals doesn't make them true. it just makes you appear more ignorant and hard-headed

LOL, so much for the intellectual level of your arguments!

“Maybe some antipsychotic stuff i also needed”

You needed?..that explains it!
hahahahaha

You call hiding the truth WINNING?
What is wrong with you people. No morals at all!

Ahhhh fuck off dweeb

WHEN YOU STOP SMOKING METH YOU WILL BE FREE

DAMN YOU ARE A FUCKING DUMBASS WHERE IS YOUR BIRTH CERTIFICATE?

WOMP WOMP WOMP, nothing intellectual about ANY of you here, so what's the point! Someone that is afraid to let the truth out, is a poor excuse for a person. A total waste of space!

DAMN YOU LOVE SHOWING OFF YOUR STUPIDITY UNDER THE COVER OF THE INTERNET HUH?? HERE KITTY KITTY KITTY!!

Anddddd, that's from experience?

Profanity, like violence, is the last refuge of the incompetent.

AHHH THE RAMBLINGS OF ANOTHER IDIOT PRICK!!

Way to make an argument on its merits, Obamacorn.

Way to make an argument on its merits, Obamacorn.

HEY SHIT FOR BRAINS ALREADY BEEN PROVEN CASE CLOSED YOU ARE DAMN STUPID

HEY SHIT FOR BRAINS ALREADY BEEN PROVEN CASE CLOSED YOU ARE DAMN STUPID

Good Lord! Heads Exploding!

Don't these trolls have day jobs?

Sucks to loose, Eh?

I seem to remember 'Elections have consequences'….

Loosers!

“I AM CORNHOLIO! BRING ME TEEPEE FOR MY BUNGHOLE!”

How do you spell that sound, when you stick your tongue out and blow?

bllleuuuuhhhuuuhhuuu

COME ON KITTY!! WHY DON'T YOU BE THE FIRST PATRIOT TO TAKE ONE FOR THE TEAM OR ARE YOU JUST A SCARED LITTLE KITTY????

Fucks that got to do with the price of eggs?

“I AM BIRTHOLIO! BRING ME TEEPEE FOR MY ORLYHOLE!”

Awww, poor whiny sore loser!

Take it like a man, can't you? Maybe next time around you'll get some solid evidence and a real lawyer.

HAHAHAHA DAMN I LOVE IDIOTS LIKE YOU!! YOU ARE MORE STUPID THAT THE COMEDYS ON TV!!!!! COME ON SHIT FOR BRAINS ENLIGHTEN IS WITH SOME MORE OF YOUR STUPIDITY

Awww come on crazy lady, you can do better than that.

Awww come on crazy lady, you can do better than that.

The only acorns I have are the ones on my deck.

The only acorns I have are the ones on my deck.

The only acorns I have are the ones on my deck.

This is a blog. If you think Judge Carter was wrong, you can explain your reasoning here. In my opinion, it is trashy behavior to use blog posts to generate traffic for you own website.

I'm still laughing about Corny's boast yesterday about running a restaurant—-god that was a hilarious exchange!!!
Oh and didi I mention?
Birfers get super-sized for free!!!
LOL

Wow, my 4 year old does the same thing when they dont get their way.

JUST READING YOUR FUCKING STUPIDITY PUSSY

Hello, did you just get here, yesterday? Nothing has been PROVEN. No one has seen the long form, so it has NOT been proven. Until his HIDDEN documents come one, he is NOT proven!

Hello, did you just get here, yesterday? Nothing has been PROVEN. No one has seen the long form, so it has NOT been proven. Until his HIDDEN documents come one, he is NOT proven!

Oh my! Did you rant this way when W got the Supremes to make him president? Ummmm, I’m kind of embarrassed for you, your family, the town you live and all your ancestors. And the overwhelming facts are . . Oh you are deranged at the thought that a brilliant, African American democrat is in office who blew the other candidate away. I see.

[...] another lawsuit bites the dust: Orly Taitz Smacked Down: Birther Lawsuit Dismissed Central District of California Judge David O. Carter has dismissed Barnett et al v. Obama et al, [...]

Yep, the kind girl you'd bring home to mom, huh?
I bet you're hubby's proud of your vocab—-trailerpark queen

Queen's English, please. Remember your Royal Blood!

kids throwing rocks at your door, then running away, does not meet my standards for a neighborly visit…

FOR YOU CLOWNS ON THE PLANET OF STUPID IT HAS NOT COME ON KITTY COME ON AND SHOW US LIBERALS HOW MUCH OF A PATRIOT YOU ARE KITTY KITTY KITTY

Now, Joe. Seriously, how is my statement that you quoted, calling someone a name?!

I and others are being “idiot’s”, “douschebags”, “stupid”. he same folks that are calling those names are then attempting to explain why I’ and others are those names.

That’s the height of arrogance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPKP86P8Fwc&feat…

tp for my bunghole

This is helping Cornporn forget all her Birfer woes—she's sobbing as she pecks at her keyboard. The neighbors are growing uneasy at the wailing wafting thru the walls…

Then why doesn’t Obama himself claim to be a Natural Born Citizen? And he doesn’t. You need only go to his Fight The Smears website to his clever turn of phrase.

I think that since you show a remarkable lack of mental function or integrity in your posts, then your sites must contain nothing but lies and ignorance. Sue me.

EXCATLY WHAT IS A LONG FORM BC? DAMN YOU ARE GULLIABLE! NO WONDER THE REPUBLICANS CAN MIND FUCK YOUR STUPID ASS HAHAHAHA

Take it like a man, like you?
Sorry, real men don't have teeny weenies

How has anything I said bigoted? Please explain, I’d be humored to read it. From your vantage point I could be any of the races and skin colors that exist on this planet.

More appropriately you may be labeled a thought bigot.

Dissent is far more patriotic than being a pawn of the machine.

Let it all out Cornporn—-show your repressed Birfer compatriots what a good raging hissy fit can do for pent up frustration——that's it…now breathe….good

Yeah this guy is obsessed w/Weigel and probably considers it some pathetic form of victory to lure bloggers off this site LOL

I’l betcha you’d like a big black one, wouldn’t you?

Uh huh, I'm a lifeguard as well. Sorry, but it's not a fast food joint I work in, far from it.

I’m starting to understand, Cornporn: one minute you say you have a black husband, next minute you need someone to lick your balls…you are finally starting to make sense to me.
You know there are many civil rights in place for hermaphrodites, so dont be ashamed. Be proud of what you are—-there are no genders on the internet!! I promise to stop calling you a freak. How was I to know?

And the birthers lose again…nut seriously, is anyone really surprised?

In lieu of devastating insults and snide remarks, I'd like to dedicate the following video to all the birfers out there:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ytCEuuW2_A

I reckon soooo

That is an intentional misrepresentation of Wong Kim Ark and you know it.

The key statement made by the majority position in that case is:

‘If born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen…’

That statement only purpose is to validate being a “native born citizen” as Obama claims he is. It does not equate citizenship to the status of being “natural born”.

MEANING Won Kim Ark, born within the US, was as much as citizen as the natural born child of a citizen.

ObamaacornLies,
It’s time to go home now. These people have punked you and made you look like an ass and you are too sad and clueless to see that they are winding you up. They want to see how crazy you’d get–and you basically let us all know there is no limit. It’s kind of funny—(you don’t have kids do you?)–if you do then it’s not funny at all.
Don’t give anymore money to Orly–seek professional help.

Stick around and witness just how little impact that the real world has on the minds of the delusional freaks here known as Birfers. As far as they're concerned this just proves to them that one more judge is 'in' on the conspiracy. LOL

Furthermore, Wong Kim Ark was decided less than a generation before Chester Arthur’s candidacy for VP. So he and the rest of the country would have been completely aware of what the meaning of Wong Kim Ark was.

And it didn’t have anything to do with the meaning of Natural Born Citizen.

Give it up, Tracey. By the way, what's a ursurper? Is that part of a secret trailer trash language?

And two whole years of college. Woo.

You're losing it, Tracey.

Even Obama himself doesn't have the gall to claim that he is a “Natural Born Citizen”.

But don't take my word for it, go to Fight the Smears post regarding Obama's Hawaiin Birth Certificate.

Obama cleverly claims to be a “native born citizen”.

I'll give him this . . . he's taken Willie-speak to a new level! “I did not have sexual relations with that woman”

Pull the wool up from over your eyes!

Right. A typo equates to not knowing your from you’re even though I used it properly in the same post.

Cheap shot. Make sure you proof read your posts carefully from here on out, Joe. I’ll be nitpicking.

Thanks, but I have no neighbors, Mr Assumer.
My closest neighbor is about a 1/4 mile away.

He doesn't have to say a thing. He's president, idiot. Some of the Birthers — like discredited leader Orly Taitz — believe that Obama wouldn't be eligible for the presidency even if he were born in the U.S. That's because, in their infinite wisdom, the Founding Fathers included in the Constitution a fair amount of phrases they never really bothered to define. One of those is this explanation of who can be president: “No person except a natural born citizen.”

The Supreme Court has never ruled directly on the question of what “natural born citizen” means. So the Birthers have simply settled on their own definition — someone born to two citizen parents — and found a source,”The Law of Nations,” a 1758 book by the Swiss philosopher Emerich de Vattel, to back them up.

There are a couple of problems with this. Most important, Obama isn't the first president with a non-citizen parent: Chester A. Arthur, the 21st president, was. His father was from Ireland and apparently did not become a U.S. citizen until more than 10 years after the future president's birth.

Plus, even if the Founding Fathers did rely on Vattel as much as the Birthers say — always a dubious proposition — Swiss philosophy books aren't legal precedent in the United States. British common law is. And in 1898, in the case of U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court looked into the meaning of “natural born” in the common law and concluded that a non-citizen's mere presence in the U.S. is enough to make their child, if born here, a natural-born citizen.

lolol
Mannn, you are such a ball licker…

Good thing for them! And I'm sure they even consider that a little too close for comfort

I dunno, you figure it out, shit for brains!

There you go again, trying to confuse the birthers with facts… :)

That's what halitosis will do.

Not the SKANK lady again!

My far away neighbors love me, so kiss off bioootch

Whereever this issue goes, the noise brigade will surely follow. I don't know where all these people are coming from, but the goal of the great majority of the comments from BHO fans is to simply create noise. In case you haven't seen the page where I discuss how the judge is either biased, ignorant, or unable to figure things out, see the link.

You're wasting your time with factual posts like this. Birthers aren't interested in facts, unless those 'facts' are manufactured or distorted to support their views.

Still hijacking this page to whore out your blog, I see. It's bad form, you know.

That's right. School cafeterias actually have to serve food with a smidgen of nutritional value.

Somehow I'm not surprised.

Answer the question. Also, please provide the name, address, and web site of your place of employment. How do we know you aren't doing this from your parents' basement, or Leavenworth?

Okay, how long before Orly starts calling Judge Carter a traitor and treasonous and accuse him of being bought off or threatened by “Obama’s Brown shirts”. Will it be before or after Carter files charges against her for “suborned perjury”? After all he does have sworn statements, signed sealed and delivered which is much more than she ever had!

I'm sure they love that you're far away.

And I guess you all think it's great news that Turkey has now,DROPPED the dollar. Look what your wonderful man is doing to our country, exactly what he planned. TO TEAR DOWN ALERICA. Well, if that's what you all wanted, you got it!

http://en.rian.ru/business/20091028/156617011.html

Absolutely jail her for standing up for our Constitution! How dare she hold our dictatorship up to scrutiny. Fine her till she screams.

I am sure glad that our straw dog president will sign away our sovereingty in Denmark in December, then we can just shoot people that stand up for their rights.

By all means lets outlaw challenging our wonderful governmemt about anything at all.

I am so ashamed to be called an american now. I am truly saddened by the future Chinese Style Government that is planned for us.

Time to move to a small country without resources our evil government would want.

Or stay and watch as millions of americans attempt a peaceful overthrow of our new dictatorship.

You know that with the extremely advanced weapons opposing them, the people will be mowed down like grass.

We put “In God We Trust” on everything and then turn our backs on HIM.
We get what we deserve for that.

Then move to Turkey, bitch.

$10 says she already has.

Here's what Judge Carter says about Birthers and the Constitution:

“Plaintiffs have encouraged the Court to ignore these mandates of the Constitution; to disregard the limits on its power put in place by the Constitution … Plaintiffs have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed their claim, as unpatriotic and even treasonous for refusing to grant their requests and for adhering to the terms of the Constitution which set forth its jurisdiction. Respecting the constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic. Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of patriotism.”

Judge David Carter

Fuck youuu, I ain't gotta answer shit from you, pinhead!

“Time to move to a small country without resources our evil government would want”

We'd be happy to help you pack.

god less alerica

Yeah, I guess that's why they always come by…
IDIOT!

She wasn't standing up for the Constitution, she was trying to over turn it. Go to school, learn to read, read the Constitution. Using baloney arguments, lies, and attempting to suborn perjury in an attempt to overturn a lawful Presidential election is not something to be proud of. The judge did what was right–if that shames you then perhaps you should move somewhere else.

Do you always talk to yourself. It seems you are mired in the quicksand of obsession and suffer from delusions of adequacy.

You are truly pathetic! How does it feel to be covered in lies?

Exactly! And telling the judge, to his face, that they are going to file case after case until he gave them the discovery wanted on Obama's birth certificate. The Courts are used to that kind of conduct coming from prisoners; less so with non-prisoner pro se civil litigants, but it does happen. But for an ATTORNEY to make that kind of statement is regarded an abuse of her position as an officer of the Court.

Good news! Your paranoid ramblings are not true and will not come to be!!! All the danger is simply your overactive imagination!

I love people as stupid as bob, they make life that much more entertaining.

Ahhh fuck off Mr. Brady! Go fuck ALICE or somethin!

Read the decision again…The People Elected Obama…

lololol, sorry..I have no clue how to spell america, thought I'd guess and see if it slipped through. But you all are JUST TOO SMART!

Please don't discourage this paranoid hate-monger from leaving my country: good riddance! Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out, bob

I wouldn't know. How does it feel to be covered in flies?

Dunno. How does it feel to be covered in flies?

Crap! you beat me, mystylpix! !

I guess his telltale stench is recognizable to everyone… ;)

Jinx??
LOL

um, “her” telltale stench. Evidently, Cornporn is a she

So, Obamacorn? Are you finally tired of your lies?

I came here specifically to see if you had posted more of your bullshit. Thanks for being so predictably lame.

“you all are TOO DAMN SMART” you should practice that one, Cornporn, you'll be using it alot…

And here the birthtards were thinking they could get away with their criticism of the courts. They must think each judge lives in a bubble.

They'd fix her foul infidel mouth in a Constantinople Minute!

It comes from the latin, “ursus”, which means “bear.” A ursurper is someone who pretends to be a bear.

Well, it was a 50/50 chance.

“…I don't know where all these people are coming from…”
LOL
We're the MAJORITY which elected Obama, pinhead!

I'm sure the words came out of her mouth as soon as she got the news. I'm keeping an eye on her website. Seems to be pretty busy right now but no words from the “wiseone” as of yet. I'm assuming there are a lot of visitors because there has been a tremendous wait and sometimes I get routed to a page with search results.

The truth will set you free, Obamacornflakes. Obama doesn't have to do anything but the job he was elected to do by “We the People”. Try to undo our election with blatant lies and this is where it gets ya…

ms daisy’s use of the term was introduced in a resolution on another blog. It is most appropriate and I’m unsure if she actually gave us permission. If not, I’d be happy to pay royalties for using the term because it is so fitting.

Birthtard is in the public domain with Msdaisy’s blessings if I am not mistaken

I had a look too; maybe she hasn’t posted anything because she’s been taken into custody. (No, too much to hope for) But I’ll bet when she does get around to it she’ll spew like a fire hose! Probably oozing with insanity and making enough threats to be taken into custody anyway!

You started off trying to sound scholarly, dispassionate and reasonable. But now you are letting your birfer colors show. What’s the matter? The revelation that you were using a translation of Vattel that didn’t exist until after the adoption of the Constitution was just too much for your ego?

Correction: actually, if you read the thread below, Cornporn just came out of the closet as an hermaphrodite—-I know, I know. How could we know?

Sorry folks, I'm going to repost this to the top for people who aren't familiar with the blower mentality. I just don't want them to have to spend a couple of days cleaning up their machines if they can avoid it.

WARNING: Feel free to argue with the blowers…I promise you it will be entertaining. However, I would encourage you NOT to click on their links, they are only forgeries and wild theories anyway. Besides, it has been reported that virus attacks have happened when visiting some of these sites, so if you click, make sure your antivirus software is up-to-date. Also, before you click, consider that these sites are paid by advertisers by the click, so if you choose not to go you will be cutting off a source of their income. Now that this case has been dismissed, you will see the blowers no longer debating, but just trying to get you to click on their links.

[...] David Weigel has the story: [...]

Ha! Then we were both right!

OK, who is bankrolling this dingbat? Somebody with deep pockets has got to be backing her up financially on these lawsuits.

Any ideas besides the Republican Party's slush fund?

[...] demanding President Barack Obama prove he’s a citizen of the United States had their case dismissed by a California District Court. Interpreting the Constitution is a serious and crucial task with which the federal courts of this [...]

I'm a fan of the Constitution. If you want to remove a sitting President from office, there is only one legal way to do it: impeachment in the House of Representatives, followed by trial and conviction in the Senate.

And no, we're not going to follow the link to boost the traffic numbers on your website.

You would know, you tell me

Definitely NOT her clients…I hope! Otherwise, they are WAAAAAAY overpaying!

No, tired of you covering up lies!

She's not sober yet…

Obviously you are uneducated to think you know better than a sitting Federal Judge.

“Time to move to a small country without resources our evil government would want.”

Somalia is just the country you are looking for. Minimal resources. No national government to interfere with the freedom of the people to pursue their livelihood. No gun control. A libertarian wet dream. A rifle, a wooden boat with an outboard motor, and you are in business.

You will be happy there.

Bye!

But it's fun to kick the ant hill and watch the flying monkeys surround it!!!

They are anyway aren't they?

How else will the Birthtard Mythology spread? LMAO!!

The birthtards are financing her through PayPal donations and, fortunately for us, she's taking the money and using it for lavish lunches and fashion shoes rather than paying her “legal team” anything. Of course, she could get the finest legal minds and still would have no standing. Now, her followers are calling for civil unrest on her website.

She should be paying them for her representation.

Orly will spew, but more like Linda Blair in The Exorcist.

By the way, I've been meaning to thank you for giving us all permission to use the term “birthtard.” You did give us permission, didn't you? Because if I owe you royalties for every time I've used it, I'm truly screwed.

She might be doing time soon…The Judge pointed out her perjury in his decision.

If I hear one more republican MORON talk about the Constitution as if they have a clue as to what's in it, I will VOMIT. These people are so stupid they cant even understand this:
————————————————————————————————————–
Interpreting the Constitution is a serious and crucial task with which the federal courts of this nation have been entrusted under Article III. However, that very same Constitution puts limits on the reach of the federal courts. One of those limits is that the Constitution defines processes through which the President can be removed from office. The Constitution does not include a role for the Court in that process. Plaintiffs have encouraged the Court to ignore these mandates of the Constitution; to disregard the limits on its power put in place by the Constitution; and to effectively overthrow a sitting president who was popularly elected by We the People‚ sixty-nine million of the people. Plaintiffs have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed their claim, as unpatriotic and even treasonous for refusing to grant their requests and for adhering to the terms of the Constitution which set forth its jurisdiction. Respecting the constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic. Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of patriotism. Therefore, for the reasons stated above, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.

Better get a deep bucket…the birthtards run rampant here…LOL!

I can understand. It's know it has been really hard to cover your lies.

Now all we need is for one of the news stations to invite her on for an interview.

If nothing else, perhaps it will help in getting her disbarred.

I'll bet you're one of the idiots that think that the words “In God We Trust” has always been on our currency from the beginning of time when in fact it was under Eisenhauer that those words were added.

Her clients would be overpaying her even if she worked pro bono.

same gene pool as Paula Jones
same backers

O.K., I have to ask — how do you tell the difference between Orly drunk and Orly sober?

LOL

Yeah, so she can get the word out, to the world!
Good Idea!

Ohhhh shadddduupppppp!
As if…

Tell em how it is!

I was thinking more in the terms of the entertainment value of her going off on her standard diatribe and having another meltdown.

ObamacornFlakes does tend to run rampant.

Man, why are you all so afraid of her? You are soo pathetic. Why are you sooo afraid of this case, goingto court? Are you afraid of the outcome, if it DOES actually get to court?

That's it…try to HIDE the truth and not let the people, THINK for themselves.

There are NO viruses people, just the ones here, telling you NOT to look at the evidence!

Damned those turkeys!

My God, are all modern-day american conservatives truly as ignorant, paranoid, irrational, immoral, dishonest and cowardly as they seem? Maybe they always have been, but new media have given them platforms to more widely expose themselves. I guess they're welcome to stay, but maybe they should consider leaving the country for some place where there are more like-minded people. Perhaps some of those Taliban-dominated tribal regions of Afghanistan. The only thing that seems to differentiate the two..is an explosives belt.

I'm not even near anybody else. They are free to click on any site they wish. I'm allowed to warn them of problems that arise from those choices. The truth was told today by Judge Carter, and you're still a blower!

Uh, actually — “In God We Trust” first appeared on U.S. coins during the Civil War and has been on all U.S. coins since 1938. It became the official “U.S. Motto” in 1956 (around the time that “one nation, under God” was added to the Pledge of Allegiance).

Sorry folks, I'm going to repost this to the top for people who aren't familiar with them yet.

Hmmm, I was wondering how all you leftie losers here, explain these articles:
(I am sure they will probably get scrubbed after being put here, so get your snapshots people)

“African News Headline: KENYAN-BORN OBAMA MAKES HISTORY!”
http://jillosophy.blogspot.com/2008/06/african-…

“Little wonder then why Kenyan-born Barack Obama, America's first Black President,”
http://allafrica.com/stories/200908200781.html

“As Kenyan born US Senator Barack Obama jets into Kenya today as part of his African tour,”
http://www.africa-ata.org/ug_newsletter.htm

“Both were born outside the country — Obama in Indonesia, Duckworth in Thailand — and graduated from high school in Honolulu — Punahou and McKinley, respectively.”
http://web.archive.org/web/20060207151627/http:…

“Kampala — Ugandans have formed a group to mobilise support for Kenyan born-senator, Barack Obama for the US presidency.”
http://allafrica.com/stories/200802180051.html

“The Kenyan-born Senator will, however, face a stiff competition from his Republican counterpart,”
http://www.nigerianobservernews.com/4112008/411…

“She also describes the stories that have been exciting, including the U.S. presidential race of Kenyan-born Sen. Barack Obama.”
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?st…

“Olara Otunnu (Harvard Law, 1978) relating the remark of Kenyan historian Ali Mazrui on the oddity that a member of Kenya's Luo tribe (Barack Obama, a Kenyan citizen and Luo tribe member from birth) may become president of the United States before a Luo tribe member becomes president of Kenya.”
http://www.archive.org/details/OtunnuOnLuoTribe…

And lastly, the missing debate thapes that will PROVE from Obama's own mouth that his is NOT natural born! (We need to find this debate from 2004 people)

http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/10/15/o…

Video about it too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjtwwxILZxQ&feat…

ANYONE????

Glad you can understand, cause I can never understand ANY of your comments. Learn how to speak, would ya!

The morons are planting bogus articles in african media to match their bogus court “cases” here.

Crackpot!

yap yap yap. I'm free to warn them. You are a fucking low life piece of garbage. They only way for you to fight back, is to make up LIES about people. Well, you learn from the best.

I'd like to warn people also, because I clicked on a link you sent me and it fucking started that “you are infected, let us do a scan and clean your pc and I couldn't get out of the damn page. That was a really low thing to do. PLEASE BE AWARE PEOPLE THAT HE IS ACCUSING OTHERS< WHEN “HE” IS THE ONE SENDING PEOPLE TO GET VIRUSES. I guess he thinks he can cause us to get a virus, then we can't come here to post the real truth. You are a pathetic piece of white trash!

Sure, I'll bite. Of the thousands of articles world-wide about Obama, some of them contained errors. It happens all the time. How about the WND article that states that the COLB is not a forgery? Do you have the same confidence in that?

And about the Keyes interview — get real! That was debunked long ago. Don't you wonder why there's a video *about* it but not a video *of* it?

Nice try!

Uh yeah, we planted them years ago. What an idiot!

Sorry, many of us have asked them if they have redacted these sayings and NONE have. Why do you think that is? Because they KNOW it's TRUE! They should know better than anyone, he is FROM there!

Wow,

How is it possible to go through your day with so much hatred?

Don't you have anything else to to with your life?

Right wing “patriotism” is such a joke.

Awww, sorry dumba$$ – the “Kenyan-born” headlines have been debunked:

http://totalbuzz.freedomblogging.com/2009/10/26…

Paul Colford, director of media relations for the Associated Press: “The AP has never reported that President Obama was born in Kenya. In fact, AP news stories about the state of Hawaii have confirmed that he was born there. The Kenyan paper that you cite rewrote a 2004 AP story, adding the phrase ‘Kenyan-born.’ That wording was not in the AP version of the story.”

As for the video…WHAT VIDEO???

Move on with your life, a-hole.

How can you claim to believe all of the articles you listed? One is saying he was born in Indonesia, others in Kenya. If you want to be consistent in your delusions, surely you'd only include articles that at least agree with each other. It only makes you look more ridiculous to pretend you believe he was born both in Kenya and Indonesia.

Another babbling idiot.

Heh, wingnut, you provided your own rebuttal in the menagerie of factually incorrect trip (intentional or not) culled from every article about Obama ever.

What impresses me most is that you don't even realize it, and will most assuredly continue with your cognitive dissonance even once it is pointed out to you.

Hint: there are claims within your provided links both of him being born in Indonesia and in Kenya. Well, which is it?

Once you understand that it's possible that the links you've provided are factually correct you might want to weigh the evidence, rather than rely on unsubstantiated reporting.

At that point, you come up rather short.

Hah! “tripe” and “incorrect” obviously.

No playing with trolls in the morning for me.

WARNING! WILL ROBINSON, WARNING! Do not click on any of the links other than the one for YouTube unless you have good virus protection.

They are delusional as you are.

Afraid of her? That's hardly the case. She's a delusional buffoon that we enjoy.

There is no evidence to look at.

I think you have your statement backwards. It is YOU that make up lies to fight back because that's all you have. Just lies.

My bad.

You lost
Get used to it.

I'm not sure what you mean about “redacting.” But the Standard, just a few weeks later, wrote:

“Simultaneous with Obama’s rising stature is the increasing desire by Kenyans to identify with him. Typical newspaper headlines and messages flying around the Internet tend to lead with the theme “Kenyan-linked”, or “Kenyan-American”, or even, erroneously, “Kenyan-born”.”

http://web.archive.org/web/20040706035526/www.e…

And are you still standing by that bogus Keyes debate claim?

Hatred? I have no hatred in my life…????
Cept, what's coming from you guys, but I can deal with it. You guys bother me at all!
That's why I made this video, I've dealt with your kind for years and years on YT:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BmvJ3tDW78

Um. Hello? *taps microphone*

It got to court.

And got dismissed.

Thanks for playing.

NEXT!

Not on your life, fleabag!
We will prove you wrong, mark my word!

One of them says he was born in Indonesia, which contradicts the others that say he was born in Kenya. So if someone was wrong in saying he was born in Indonesia, why couldn't the others saying he was born in Kenya be mistaken as well?

And just because they are from Africa doesn't mean they would know whether Obama was born in Africa. There are also lots of people from the US who say he was born in the US, so by your logic he must have been born in the US, in addition to Kenya and Indonesia.

Also, most of those links don't work.

He was Kenyan born and adopted into Indonesia at age 6 and swore allegiance to them as an adult. So, perhaps that's what they meant. As you can see, I am not trying to puul the wool over anyones else. I post them all. One Indonesian but ALL THE OTHERS say Kenya. Can that many be wrong? I don't think so, especially when that country should know better, then us!

Already responded to that flighty…
Try and read the comments first before being redundant!

hahahaha TOO LATE IDIOT..
They've all already clicked as you can see from their comments. PROOF THAT NONE OF THEM HAD VIRUSES, thanks all, for confirming there were no viruses at those links…

You've been debunked schmucharoni!

Cornporn calls another blogger redundant:
LOL!!!!

But, we WILL win, in the end!
Get used to it!

Roundly debunked. No question about it, Birthtard

It boggles the mind, truly boggles the mind, that you can't comprehend how I might have posted that comment before you posted your reply to the other comment.

Truly, how do you manage to function in day to day life?

Only when hell freezes over.

And cornflakes continues to spew her lies.

The truth already is out, nutbar. Obama was born in Honolulu. FACT.

Quick! Someone find 10 articles, hell, blog posts! That, in the process of destroying birthtards claims with logic, also manage to intimate they have low IQ's and a functional disconnect with reality…

I mean, that many couldn't be wrong!

Wait, that doesn't help my case… oh, there are tens of thousands? Phew.

It is quite clear that you have valiantly battled the real world for years and and years.
It is equally clear that you have kept it from breaching your delusion citadel—you've built those walls of solid rock!
You remind me of the valiant and arrogant French cavalier guarding the castle in Monty Python's Holy Grail.
His greasy and contemptuous scowl is SO Cornporn!
LOL

The only thing I’m afraid of is the mascara falling off Taitz’s eyelashes while she’s performing a root canal, even if it would almost certainly make News of the Weird for great lulz.

JBL, Wong Kim Ark is *the* seminal case that determined that children born on US soil of alien parents *are* natural born citizens, simply by virtue of their birth here. It’s been cited for that purpose ever since. See Perkins v Elg or Kwock v Fat.

You don’t know how to read the case. ‘If born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen…’ MEANS Wong was a natural born citizen. “As much as” doesn’t mean as much as except for one thing.

JBL, Wong Kim Ark is *the* seminal case that determined that children born on US soil of alien parents *are* natural born citizens, simply by virtue of their birth here. It’s been cited for that purpose ever since. See Perkins v Elg or Kwock v Fat.

You don’t know how to read the case. ‘If born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen…’ MEANS Wong was a natural born citizen. “As much as” doesn’t mean as much as except for one thing.

I think Cornholio needs some teepee for her pie hole.

I think Cornholio needs some teepee for her pie hole.

When Reagan and JFK visited Ireland, the locals were thrilled, flattered and proud of their 'native sons'. There were no equivalent insinuations at the time about those Presidents' loyalties or origins.
This time it's different.
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to ascertain why…

Yeah. All of your “Kenyan-born” links refer to the fact that he was born of a Kenyan. Notice they don't say “Kenya-born”. It has been explained in many cases by the papers who printed the original articles that they are very proud his roots are in Kenya:
http://web.archive.org/web/20040706035526/www.e…

http://www.eastandard.net/InsidePage.php?id=114…

As far as the article on Duckworth, the author admitted he was in a rush and picked the first reference on Google without fact-checking.
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2006/…

And lastly, the missing debate tapes. We have them all. Not a word there. Even Keyes says he doesn't remember such an exchange – now why would he forget something like that if it did indeed happen?

Just more grasping at straws by a birfer/nutter. You gullible idiots will seize on every typo, misstatement and outright lie as proof of your position. Too bad you have no concrete FACTS like, oh, certified copy of record of US birth corroborated by no less than two newspapers, statements by officials of the State of Hawaii, including a US Congressman who knew the Obama's before the President was even born, Kapiolani Hospital's recognition during their centennial that he was born there, unanimous vote of the US House that he was born in Hawaii.

LOL! You look like the fool you are.

Yeah. All of your “Kenyan-born” links refer to the fact that he was born of a Kenyan. Notice they don't say “Kenya-born”. It has been explained in many cases by the papers who printed the original articles that they are very proud his roots are in Kenya:
http://web.archive.org/web/20040706035526/www.e…

http://www.eastandard.net/InsidePage.php?id=114…

As far as the article on Duckworth, the author admitted he was in a rush and picked the first reference on Google without fact-checking.
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2006/…

And lastly, the missing debate tapes. We have them all. Not a word there. Even Keyes says he doesn't remember such an exchange – now why would he forget something like that if it did indeed happen?

Just more grasping at straws by a birfer/nutter. You gullible idiots will seize on every typo, misstatement and outright lie as proof of your position. Too bad you have no concrete FACTS like, oh, certified copy of record of US birth corroborated by no less than two newspapers, statements by officials of the State of Hawaii, including a US Congressman who knew the Obama's before the President was even born, Kapiolani Hospital's recognition during their centennial that he was born there, unanimous vote of the US House that he was born in Hawaii.

LOL! You look like the fool you are.

Well, considering another came to my email first AND, if you look, you will see the one at 1 hour ago and yours at 58 minutes ago, THAT'S HOW I KNOW! DOOOOH

You’re wrong. Chester Arthur’s issue was whether he was born in Canada vs Vermont, not his father’s citizenship status. It was known at the time of the election that his father had not naturalized by the time of his son’s birth. That was never the issue.

You’re wrong. Chester Arthur’s issue was whether he was born in Canada vs Vermont, not his father’s citizenship status. It was known at the time of the election that his father had not naturalized by the time of his son’s birth. That was never the issue.

You do know that the actor who played Mike Brady was gay, don’t you?

Ahhhh shaddduuuppp!

All I’m asking is for you to live up to same standards you would impose on the President. Otherwise, kindly shut up.

All I’m asking is for you to live up to same standards you would impose on the President. Otherwise, kindly shut up.

Don't be too sure about that. These sleazes are petulant little shits who will prove to have no patience with democracy, mark my words

Sorry Mary Mary quite contrary, you might want to go back to your garden now. No use for you here!

I didn't make the claim that I posted before the other poster.

I made the claim that I posted before your reply to the other poster.

So the fact you had already replied to him when you replied to me was completely irrelevant. So why did you mention it?

If your claims of my redundancy were based on me saying the same thing as another poster (whether or not you had already replied), then may I direct you to the fact our posts are a mere 3 minutes apart? The most logical explanation is that we were composing our posts at the same time.

Of course, my apologies, I do doubt anyone has ever accused you of utilizing logic.

What you are doing is advocating trashing the Constitution in favor of an obsolete Swiss philosophy that was never the law of any land, let alone the United States. That is not dissent. That is anarchy. Please stop.

What you are doing is advocating trashing the Constitution in favor of an obsolete Swiss philosophy that was never the law of any land, let alone the United States. That is not dissent. That is anarchy. Please stop.

> And I guess you all think it’s great news that Turkey has now,DROPPED the dollar. Look what your wonderful man is doing to our country, exactly what he planned. TO TEAR DOWN ALERICA. Well, if that’s what you all wanted, you got it!

Of COURSE this had NOTHING to do with that other guy who couldn’t “spel” America – you know, W, the man who made damned sure his successor would be facing the W Depression.

What a fucking moran you are, “cornLies”.

> And I guess you all think it’s great news that Turkey has now,DROPPED the dollar. Look what your wonderful man is doing to our country, exactly what he planned. TO TEAR DOWN ALERICA. Well, if that’s what you all wanted, you got it!

Of COURSE this had NOTHING to do with that other guy who couldn’t “spel” America – you know, W, the man who made damned sure his successor would be facing the W Depression.

What a fucking moran you are, “cornLies”.

If this theoretical candidate wins the election, yes, of course he should be sworn in as President. Anything else would be a clear breach of the Constitution.

If this theoretical candidate wins the election, yes, of course he should be sworn in as President. Anything else would be a clear breach of the Constitution.

You actually got through college without knowing the difference between “it’s” and “its,” and you have the unmitigated gall to lecture to me? Add in your atrocious grammar and spelling, and your complete misreading of the Constitution, sir, and I question whether you went to college at all, let alone majored in political science.

You actually got through college without knowing the difference between “it’s” and “its,” and you have the unmitigated gall to lecture to me? Add in your atrocious grammar and spelling, and your complete misreading of the Constitution, sir, and I question whether you went to college at all, let alone majored in political science.

You also called me “ignorant” and “silly,” plus you insulted my intelligence.

Please produce a source* written by a reputable historian that states, in plain English, that the citizenship of Chester Arthur’s father was a campaign issue. A photostat of a contemporary newspaper would be even better.

Otherwise, please stop. You are looking worse and worse with every entry you post.

*Wikipedia and right wing blogs don’t count. Sorry.

Please produce a source* written by a reputable historian that states, in plain English, that the citizenship of Chester Arthur’s father was a campaign issue. A photostat of a contemporary newspaper would be even better.

Otherwise, please stop. You are looking worse and worse with every entry you post.

*Wikipedia and right wing blogs don’t count. Sorry.

This, right here, is why you should reexamine your world view and perhaps question why you are so willfully being misled.

Your claims are obliterated, comprehensively, by logic, fact and citation.

Your response? To put figuratively put your fingers in your ear and yell “lalalalalalala I can't hear you!”.

Please, seek help.

Guess that’s kind of like the answer Obama’s giving you birthtards.

Guess that’s kind of like the answer Obama’s giving you birthtards.

What the hell are you babbling about now, cretin?
Your job here is to entertain—stop being a boring goober and get back on stage NOW!

'cept that's a lousy French accent, buckwheat

Please stop spamming. I think your fryalator is overflowing.

As usual, birthers SMACKED DOWN by FACTS. LOL!

What a fine, elegant, well-mannered fry cook you are!

Does this surprise you? Orly is going to appeal. Even I expected that. What's really entertaining in her latest post is that she completely ignores the judges statements that she didn't argue the case properly and has attacked the courts who have dismissed her case. Rather, she's concentrating on addressing the depositions that were submitted to the judge that she had asked her witnesses to lie.

So we end another episode of as the birthtards turn.

Yo! Oldfartman666! You in here? Or are you off fuming in your backyard and yelling insults at the neighbor kids? Or perhaps you felt the need to visit a road side rest stop for a little R E C R E A T I O N?

That's a good image. LOL!

THE WORDS DIRECTLY FROM OILY TASTES' MIND:

As many of you know, Judge Carter has issued an order to grant the motion to dismiss.

Clearly it is not the end of the road. We will continue. I need some time to study this order and provide full answer point by point. I will not give a full analysis of judge Carter’s orders at the moment. Today I was inundated with phone calls from different media outlets. Interviews were given to different affiliats of FOX radio, CBS, WND, LA Times, LA Daily Journal, City report, I don’t remember all of them. One interview I remebered. It was with Jessica Rosenthal from FOX radio. She asked me, when will I give up? I asked her in turn: “Jessica, when do you give up on the Constitution of this country? When do you give up on your constitutional rights for redress of grievances, for your right not to be defrauded by the government, not be treated as a slave?”

While I will not address the legal aspects of the order today, I will address a couple of issues relating to me personally, as I can see a concerted effort to assassinate my character similar to what was done to Sarah Palin, when she joined McCain, when within a day McCain-Palin ticket was 12 points ahead of Obama. What did Chicago combine do? They assassinated her character. So I have to address some of those issues, because it appears that the media has named me a leader of this movement. I am the only attorney, who brought legal actions from plaintiffs with real standing. I brought actions from active duty military and state representatives. My opposition see me as a threat. What was done? Some puppets were used to defame me, slander me, write garbage letters to judge Carter.

First of all I need to point that I never did anything unethical and never told anyone to do anything unethical. I was horrified to see that Judge Carter has mentioned in his order some complete garbage that was in some letters that he received. Those letters were a complete defamation of character, I had no opportunity to address those allegations, those were not part of the record, and it is extremely prejudicial for a judge to include this complete garbage in his order. If anything, this is definitely something that can and should be addressed on appeal. I hoped that this judge had more integrity of character, I guess I was wrong.

Another point – Judge Carter state in court and in his order that I told people to call him This is not true. Who told it to judge Carter? His new clerk, fresh out of Perkins Coie, law firm, that represented Obama, in some 100 cases?

Just my general thought… Orly isn't even worthy of a pimple on Sarah Palin's ass.

Fucking traitorous idjit.

WOMP WOMP WOMP. All ya sound like to me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUyLwXhqlWU

Hey, I saw the video of you, on the other thread. Thought I'd post it here so everyone could see what ya look like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48DgA5xS914

What the fuck is up with these threads. C'mon mannn, get the shit right!
Tryin to argue here…

I don't care what I sound like to you, because that's not what is at issue. As my logic is sound and well presented, any problem in communication lies squarely with you. I know, it's hard to deal with the fact you have shortcomings… don't worry, this is one of the least of them.

What is at issue is your complete lack of logic, your disconnect from reality, and that you're dead wrong about your stated assertions…

You might need to learn how to deal with that in a manner other than sticking your fingers in your ears and hoping that the people exposing you to reality go away.

Fuck off would ya. Tired of seeing your emails come in, yapping away! Yur wastin yur time!

Must be something with the website. All of their stories seem to be having this issue.

Had to switch to using FireFox because using IE, the page wasn't loading correctly.

Wait…

Are you contending that after having made outrageous claims in a public forum, you should not have to defend them in a logically sound manner simply because you do not wish to expend the effort to do so?

Impressive!

And why am I wasting my time? With every reply I am exposing the complete ridiculousness of both you and your assertions.

I know you are too far disconnected from reality for this to influence “you”. But I'm certainly hoping it will keep others, reality based but credulous, from being misled by your insanity.

OMG, I made outrageous claims? Where? When

LOLOL, calling you redundant is an OUTRAGEOUS claim? Mannn, tranny or whatever sex you are, you got some serious problems

Sure will, in about 8 years he'll be gone. Then, you can claim you go rid of him in January of 2017. Of course, then you might have to start questioning Biden's BC…but you'll still be entertaining!

Even if he makes it through the next 3, more than likely NOT, there is no possible way it will happen again. Not having all of Acorns fraudulant votes, there is NO WAY!

The proof would be in the pudding but, sadly, you have none.

I think you've mistaken my point, that's what I want to happen. If we, the people, decide that someone else would be better at the job, we elect him by a majority of the Electoral College votes, minimum of 270. Not you, a minority of blowers, begging the courts to ignore the constitution and give you something you have no right to. Now, you DO understand that if he runs for re-election, you can bring the whole qualifying question up again, don't you? I mean, he would be a candidate then and, I assume from reading Judge Land and Judge Carter's opinions, you could claim the 3rd party harm to ask the court for proof. I personally don't believe you have anything but garbage that will never be able to overcome the Hawaii BC, but then you could possible get the hearing you have been wanting.

Of course, before you do that, I would HIGHLY recommend that you get a real lawyer. Orly would mess it up for you so bad, you'd never get the Judge to have Hawaii send a BC to shoot you down.

You insulted every one of the 69,000,000 people who voted for President Obama last November, plus the President himself. You also insulted ME by calling me ignorant and silly, and by claiming that I’ve somehow been led astray because I do not agree with your ridiculous contention that a little known Swiss philosopher’s writings from the 18th century have diddly squat to do with modern Constitutional law.

Sorry, but I’m not giving you a pass on this one.

Your outrageous birtherism.

Claiming I was redundant wasn't “outrageous”, just pitiful. An entirely poor refutation in the face of logic.

(hint: logic and facts don't get worse with the repeating)

You have still provided no reason why we should place any validity in your contradicting sources other than to say that perhaps one of them “meant” something different than it actually said (because otherwise it would be wrong, and open up the possibility that your other sources, as I highly suspect, are also full of tripe).

Though the utter hilarity of you suggesting I have serious problems was worth the time spent posting.

Try something, look up the meaning of cognitive dissonance… reflect on whether it applies to you… curl up somewhere and cry… come back to us unchanged because your brain has the remarkable ability to override perception and logic in order to not have to deal with new evidence conflicting with your world view.

It is truly majestic to watch someone delude themselves so comprehensively.

You’re still wrong. A dual citizen who is born on American soil is still a natural born citizen, which is Chester Arthur’s father is irrelevant.

Go ask a law professor about this. I dare you. Seriously. Put your money where your mouth is and go check with someone who actually knows the law and teaches it. Use exactly the same arguments you’ve used here.

I dare you.

Please cite a single American law professor, judge, or legal scholar who agrees with Vattel on this issue. You cannot use Wikipedia or a right wing blog, but that leaves you with literally thousands of experts you can consult.

Unless and until you do this, I see no reason to take your preference for a pre-Revolutionary Swiss philosopher over the American legal code. Sorry.

Wrong. John McCain was born to American parents in an American military zone. He was and is natural born.

Well, if it’s about being right or wrong, then they are wrong and we are right. Obama released his actual birth certificate almost two years ago and the kooks just pretend it didn’t happen or it’s not real.

Only begun? To what? You’ve been proven wrong. But please keep it up because every time you kooks carry on it gains votes for the Dems!

He wasn’;t adopted, chum, and even if he were, it is a *legal impossibility* for a natural born American minor to lose his citizenship in any way based on anything his parents do. Simply, it’s against the law to lose your citizenship rights as a minor.

And not the Pakistan canard again!! Haw haw haw!!! That was debunked over a year ago. It was NEVER against US policy or regulation to travel to Pakistan, not in 1981 and not ever. He had an AMERICAN passport. He couldn’t possibly have had an Indonesian passport. By 1981 he hadn’t been in Indonesia for TEN YEARS. He left there to return to Hawaii at age 10, sport.

No wonder you birfers are such luzers. You don’t even know the first thing you’re talking about.

And it took a Congressional resolution to affirm that. There i question as to whether such a thing is even legal.

I just read an interesting survey on birthers.
They don't vote.
They don't travel outside the US.
They don't read.
They don't believe in science.

They do believe in alien abduction.

I guess that explains Tracys paranoia, blame it on the anal probes.

There's probably no point trying to explain this to you, but to anyone out there tempted to buy into your utter disconnect from reality, here's a hint:

Voter REGISTRATION fraud could not procure a single extra vote for Obama.

Why?

Because eve if Mickey M. Mouse is on the voter roles, Obama doesn't get a single extra vote UNLESS MICKEY M. MOUSE ACTUALLY SHOWS UP TO VOTE.

And just a little aside, Acorn was actually legally required to hand over the voter registration forms, even if it strongly suspected that “Mickey M. Mouse” wasn't a real person.

Why?

Well, I'm guessing you don't want an organization like Acorn to be able to pick and choose which voters they register.

Think about why.

I'll give you a hint. “I” would start off by sorting registrations into two piles, one of them marked “R”. One of these piles will be going in the bin.

Really though? I wouldn't. Because I believe even idiots should be allowed to vote, but it's obviously not something you considered before spouting off your wingnut mouth.

Hmmm… always before when I heard birfoons calling Obama an alien I had thought they meant from another country. This explains a alot of puzzling little things about the birfsquad though.

Anything on that survey about what percentage of them are married to siblings? That could, along with the anal probes, be a contributing factor.

Interesting. There are usually a lot of birfers posting here when there is a new birfer article here at WI. I only see 1 birfer.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

I guess they are all in mourning. I guess they are all crying in their beer.

Game over, birfers. You are done. You were never going to succeed, but now your EPIC FAIL has been confirmed by a Federal Court. No case was ever going to succeed. Orly got farther than anyone, only to screw up so massively that the Judge was able to write an appeal-proof decision. She was always going to fail. But she gave Judge Carter enough rope to hang y'all for good.

I know, “Obama got to the Judge”; “Carter's law clerk was an Obama plant”; “the DOJ shouldn't have been representing Soetoro and it was unfair”; “I am a tax-payer and I have standing”; “Orly meant to lose so that she can get this decided by the USSC”; etc, etc, etc.

Now that birferism is dead, what will I do for entertainment?

[...] one that got the furthest through the legal system — demanding proof of the president’s … Read Full Article (No Ratings Yet)  Loading … Word [...]

[...] Carter said before the ruling came down that his office was getting 40 to 100 calls from birthers urging him to back Taitz, after she asked for support on her website.also confirms that witnesses complained Taitz wanted them to lie on the stand. [...]

Dismissing the case on standing issue did not make Obama an NBC.
The eligibility issue did not go away.

There are several holes in Carter's ruling. If you read it carefully you will find them.

An organization receiving federal money is not supposed to be a tool of any political party.

No election can make Obama an NBC.

The only way to make him eligible is to change the constitution and remove the NBC requirement.

Yet there is no long term birth certificate, Obama has been using a duplicate SS# issued in CT (state where he never lived), numerous reports placing his birth in three different countries? Two different Hawaii birth hospitals claimed by Obama and his sister, fake COLB posted on the web,…

Is that the logic you are talking about?

What is the proof of Obama's Hawaiian birth? Fake COLB document posted on a friendly web site. How did “factcheck.org verify the document? They only mention having a physical document in hands – how do they know that it represents the data stored in Hawaii DoH?

Are you lost or something CaptianSteve. Oops, sorry. I thought that you were a different birther.

Where have you been hiding. The case was dismissed. Honestly take some time to read the reading. It could be really educational for you. It will show you everywhere your arguments were wrong and the reasons why.

Sorry CaptianSteve, you are wrong again. Just give it up.

“But, we WILL win, in the end! Get used to it!” That makes absolutely no sense. Why must be get used to something that has never happen. See what happens when you make illogical arguments.

What does ACORN have to do with whether Obama is a natural born citizen or not. Man you are confused.

Unfortunately, the courts have ruled on the legality of your position. It is over. I know how much you are avoiding reading the ruling, but take some time. It will should that every sentence you typed is utter nonsense.

Hey, CaptainSteve how are you. It must be a very hard day for you. Well it isn't the end of the world, and you can find something else to do.

What you don't understand. Or just fail to understand, is that your question is mute. However, if you actually took time to read the ruling you would notice that the judge did address the birth certificate issue. Let us sum it up for you easily. The judge ruled that he has better faith in the check and balance that America when dealing birth records than he has with Kenya. Actually, he stated that he believes the America is the absolute best.

Sorry, to crush the last argument you are clinging to.

Umm….he's BEEN POTUS for nearly a YEAR. If he wasn't “eligible”, I BELIEVE that this would NOT be the case (IANAL).

The -racists- birthers really are out in force here, eh?

[...] David Weigel quoted from the ruling: [...]

I actually had to read you comment twice. The first time I thought it was nonsense. The second time I also thought it was nonsense, for a different reason. It is a well known fact that John McCain decided to take federal money for his presidential campaign. Honestly, what happened to logic and using the facts. Oh, I forget birthers threw that out when they became birthers.

Just one note: The courts a venue to try to make a political statement, which is based on a current court ruling.

Oh really???
What about this:
http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?mave…

BUSTEDDDDDDDDDDD!

He is President BY FRAUD!

Pfffttt Wrong…I don't think so. Once they get to the merits of the case, we will PROVE YOU WRONG!
Watch and seeeeeee!

Hello IDIOT, comment to the right person, would ya!
Just because YOU are many accounts here, doesn't mean that I am. Just because you LIE AND CHEAT, doens't mean I do!

lololol

Geeez, what's Obama sending his kids here now, to fedend him. Learn how to write schmuck!

Acorn has NOTHING to do with the NBC, but they have EVERYTHING to do with the USURPER!

Honestly. Go do something useful, like clean the streets. Or tell us the name, address, and URL of this restaurant you supposedly manage. How do we know you're telling the truth?

Are you another corntard, or do you have the capacity to understand the problems with your position as enumerated by the judges opinion on this case, should you bother to read it?

First hint: Obama is not the first president with a non citizen parent upon their birth.

Second hint: Centuries old opinion on international law by some european guy has slightly less bearing on the constitution than American courts. It would be amusing to consider whose rule you would be under otherwise.

We have no proof that you aren't Sam Sewall. Please provide evidence of same.

Also, I'm still waiting for the name, address, and website of the restaurant you supposedly run.

First, define “fedend.” It does not seem to be a word.

Second, I'm very likely older than you are. Wherever did you get the idea that I'm the President's daughter?

Anyone who claims that 69,000,000 votes are all or mostly fraudulent has clearly been snorting too many Big Macs.

My first reaction to your post: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

Carter's opinion shoved the birther's opinions down their throats. As they say, everyone has an opinion just like every one has an a* hole. The birthers have a lot of a* holes.

The birthtards think their case wasn't dismissed on its merits. Carter states he believes that the BC provided (the Hawaiian) proves that Obama was born in the US. However, because that will never be satisfactory for you, by all means, keep up the fight cuz it is amusing.

Carter put it pretty simple and to sum it up. Birthtards want to disrupt the US government and have him kick Obama out of office with the swipe of his pen when he was elected by the majority of US voters.

Carter wrote he believes that the records of the United States are much more reliable than those that may be from another country like Kenya.

Carter wrote that Orly hurt her plaintiffs' case through rhetoric seeking to arouse the emotions AND prejudices rather than using the language of a lawyer seeking to present arguments through cogent legal reasoning.

Bye bye birthtards. Stick a fork in 'em. They're done.

I'm sure they believe that the earth was created in 7 days.

They will continue to muddle on. Before they're done, they'll have a lot of new conspiracy theories about Obama. It wouldn't surprise me if they tried to prove that he fought with the Taliban back in 2002.

Wait, so 38 possibly fraudulent ballots in a city council election with absolutely no connection to the presidential election somehow “proves” Acorn managed to arange for at least

NINE POINT FIVE MILLION

people to double vote.

Busted nothing,

I would try to explain orders of magnitude to you, but I am thoroughly convinced you not just would not comprehend them, but do not even have the capacity to learn to comprehend them.

But let me spell out the conclusion for you.

Y.O.U. A.R.E. M.E.N.T.A.L.L.Y. R.E.T.A.R.D.E.D A.N.D. S.H.O.U.L.D. S.E.E.K. H.E.L.P.

The case was dismissed, retard. If she tries to appeal again, she'll not only be sanctioned BIG TIME, her disbarment will proceed.

They've all crawled back under their rocks for now, but like cockroaches in the south, they'll creep back out when the lights get turned back off. There are still flat eathers insisting the world is a disk and the oceans pour continually over the edge–birfoons, I'm certain, will be no less persistent in their delusions.

Heh, birthtard, I don't usually harp on people making spelling errors. Heck knows I do it myself.

But when the only pathetic little thing you can muster in response to someone who points out how completely retarded your arguments are is a, entire baseless mind you, critique of their writing (it's not their fault if you have a condition which means you can't parse logic), then… well… making a spelling mistake in that post would make you look like, well, an utter idiot.

Or to put it another way:

PERHAPS YOU SHOULD LEARN HOW TO WRITE, SCHMUCK!

You keep using the word “usurper”. I told you when you were on your knees: “You a slurper”.

The only hole is in your head.

“Plaintiffs have encouraged the Court to ignore these mandates of the Constitution; to disregard the limits on its power put in place by the Constitution … Plaintiffs have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed their claim, as unpatriotic and even treasonous for refusing to grant their requests and for adhering to the terms of the Constitution which set forth its jurisdiction. Respecting the constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic. Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of patriotism.”

Judge David Carter

You didn't see in Judge Land's decision where he got letters claiming Obama was from another planet? That is the blowers in a nutshell, totally delusional.

Well, if you visit Orly's website, you'll see they're running rampant and calling Judge Carter a traitor. But that is to be expected.

HUH? Hawaii officials said it. Where have you been?

And round and round you go. Prove the COLB was fake. You have no proof. You have no standing. U R Dun….

” . . . to fedend him. Learn how to write schmuck!

Thanks for the irony. Maybe two years of college wasn’t enough, Tracey.

” . . . to fedend him. Learn how to write schmuck!

Thanks for the irony. Maybe two years of college wasn’t enough, Tracey.

You shouldn’t use big girl words that you don’t understand, Tracey.

You shouldn’t use big girl words that you don’t understand, Tracey.

Evidently, logic and reason weren’t taught during the two years in college Tracey claims to have attended.

Most likely, the trailer trash failed out of clown college.

Evidently, logic and reason weren’t taught during the two years in college Tracey claims to have attended.

Most likely, the trailer trash failed out of clown college.

Illogical and irrelevant.

Our President is a natural born U.S. citizen from the state of Hawaii. Your irrelevant blather will never change this fact.

Illogical and irrelevant.

Our President is a natural born U.S. citizen from the state of Hawaii. Your irrelevant blather will never change this fact.

Liar.

Long term? Is that for a 10 month pregnancy?

You are a lying traitor to the U.S.

Liar.

Long term? Is that for a 10 month pregnancy?

You are a lying traitor to the U.S.

How would a delusional, cowardly, bigoted, brain damaged waitress do that exactly?

How would a delusional, cowardly, bigoted, brain damaged waitress do that exactly?

And you are a pathetic, little, cowardly bigot.

And you are a pathetic, little, cowardly bigot.

And the first motto on U.S. coins in 1776 was “Mind Your Business”.
Pretty funny!

And the first motto on U.S. coins in 1776 was “Mind Your Business”.
Pretty funny!

Do you kiss your parole officer with that mouth?

Do you kiss your parole officer with that mouth?

More irony from Tracey, the illiterate waitress.

Do you still wear knee pads to work, Tracey?

More irony from Tracey, the illiterate waitress.

Do you still wear knee pads to work, Tracey?

LMAO ! !

LMAO ! !

That’s a weird thing to name your genitals.

That’s a weird thing to name your genitals.

Someone stirred up the ant hill real good over there…rofl!!! Only the really crazy wingnuts are posting anywhere now, the rest are crying as they dig their bunkers deeper…

You’re an arrogant prick and obviously much too stupid to understand why you’re wrong. Keep making shit up. It’s mildly amusing.

You’re an arrogant prick and obviously much too stupid to understand why you’re wrong. Keep making shit up. It’s mildly amusing.

It was a thorough beat down…for your information, not having standing did make the issue go away. American birth documents trumping any foreign documents also made it go away…you really didn't read it did you?

The Judge ruled on Standing which is the merit of the case, he also ruled that American documents trump foreign documents. With judges Carter and Land both issuing thorough smack downs, any new cases will be smacked down that much faster because legal precedent has been set.

Orly's appeals will fall on deaf ears because she has broken the law in order to further her frivolous cases and will be soon disbarred.

Countdown clock is ticking… LOL!

We want the long form documents… ROFLMAO!!!

I haven't seen that ass, but I'm sure you are absolutely correct!

Birther's have a strange but consistent immunity to the facts…quite entertaining if you sit back and watch all the flying monkeys zip around all agitated as they try dodging the “fact-swatter”

Slaped with the facts and you still think you're correct. Seems to be a popular stance with the delusion of the Birthtards…

And in North Carolina, redneck mouth breathers like Tracey will be burning Bibles on Halloween.

“Marc Grizzard, of Amazing Grace Baptist Church in Canton, North Carolina, says that the first King James translation of the Bible is the only true declaration of God’s word, and that all others are 'satanic'.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/reli…

As has been repeated ad nauseam, his dual citizenship like the drivel you’ve been spewing is irrelevant.

If you weren’t such a fucking, delusional birthtard and an arrogant prick, you would have also read:

“Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”

More importantly, the SCOTUS has never definitively ruled on the meaning of natural born and probably never will. The proof offered by the state of Hawaii has been accepted as legal, prima facie evidence of the President’s natural born, U.S citizenship.

Your paranoid drivel is meaningless.

I wouldn’t call you a bigot. Pathetic sophist, maybe.

I wouldn’t call you a bigot. Pathetic sophist, maybe.

Go clean your trailer, Tracey.

“Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.”
- Abraham Lincoln

Oh heck, I forgot to give cornyliar and the rest of the blowers their victory meal.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_6JPrNHnRVZI/SW5WXZh6s…

Enjoy!

It doesn't matter where he was born. The birthers have no standing and the court finds that American records are far superior to those of other countries. You are such a desperate loser. Go back to panhandling.

That is so funny. Nobody cares. Keep copying and pasting. It's good therapy for trailer retards.

Point already made but wort repeating. Check your editions of Vattel. The one the Framers had didn’t have the term “natural born citizen”.

And since Vattel also wrote that only the nobility should be allowed firearms, obviously the Framers weren’t that enthralled with him.

There’s your logic, birthtard.

Point already made but wort repeating. Check your editions of Vattel. The one the Framers had didn’t have the term “natural born citizen”.

And since Vattel also wrote that only the nobility should be allowed firearms, obviously the Framers weren’t that enthralled with him.

There’s your logic, birthtard.

The Obama/Holder/DOJ loons posting in defense of Obama on every website that speaks against the administration are PAID WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS to blog, search “The Obama Justice Department’s Secret Blogging Team… Is it Illegal?” and see for yourself! Also search “TRACY RUSSO, DOJ BLOGGERS” and learn how “BIG” (ACTUALLY MASSIVE!) TRACY RUSSO and the DOJ are ILLEGALLY wasting OUR TAX DOLLARS TO SUPPORT THE TOTALLY EVIL MARXIST, GLOBALIST POLICIES of CONSTITUTIONALLY ILLEGAL OBAMA! OBAMA HAS ALMOST NO “GRASSROOTS SUPPORT”, THE FALSE IMPRESSION HE DOES IS BEING FOSTERED and FED BY THE DOJ PAID BLOGGING TEAM! HOW LOW WILL WE ALLOW OBAMA/HOLDER/DOJ TO STOOP BEFORE THE UPSTANDING CITIZENS of THIS NATION ARISE AND FIGHT?! THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IS A TOTAL DISGRACE FROM TOP TO BOTTOM!

The Obama/Holder/DOJ loons posting in defense of Obama on every website that speaks against the administration are PAID WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS to blog, search “The Obama Justice Department’s Secret Blogging Team… Is it Illegal?” and see for yourself! Also search “TRACY RUSSO, DOJ BLOGGERS” and learn how “BIG” (ACTUALLY MASSIVE!) TRACY RUSSO and the DOJ are ILLEGALLY wasting OUR TAX DOLLARS TO SUPPORT THE TOTALLY EVIL MARXIST, GLOBALIST POLICIES of CONSTITUTIONALLY ILLEGAL OBAMA! OBAMA HAS ALMOST NO “GRASSROOTS SUPPORT”, THE FALSE IMPRESSION HE DOES IS BEING FOSTERED and FED BY THE DOJ PAID BLOGGING TEAM! HOW LOW WILL WE ALLOW OBAMA/HOLDER/DOJ TO STOOP BEFORE THE UPSTANDING CITIZENS of THIS NATION ARISE AND FIGHT?! THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IS A TOTAL DISGRACE FROM TOP TO BOTTOM!

Majority Will – You’ve been calling EVERYONE who disagrees with Obama a “bigot” for MONTHS, but it is YOU who is “bigoted”, you cheaply paid, FAT TRACY RUSSO/DOJ blogger! Now read and understand the LAW regarding “natural born Citizen” : E. de Vattel, The Law of Nations, bk 1, c. 19, sec. 212 (1758) (1759 first English translation); The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253, 289 (1814) (Marshall, C.J., concurring) (cites Vattel’s definition of natural born citizens); Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 242, 245 (1830) (same definition without citing Vattel); Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167-68 (1875) (same definition without citing Vattel); Ex parte Reynolds, 1879, 5 Dill., 394, 402 (same definition and cites Vattel); United States v. Ward, 42 F.320 (C.C.S.D.Cal. 1890) (same definition and cites Vattel); U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) (only declared under the Fourteenth Amendment a child born on U.S. soil to foreign parents and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States a “citizen of the United States” and not an Article II “natural born Citizen” and Fuller, C.J, dissenting confirming Vattel’s definition of a “natural born Citizen” ); Keith v. U.S., 8 Okla. 446; 58 P. 507 (Okla. 1899) (common law rule that the offspring of free persons followed the condition of the father was applied to determine the citizenship status of a child); Rep. John Bingham (in the House on March 9, 1866, in commenting on the Civil Rights Act of 1866 which was the precursor to the Fourteenth Amendment: “[I] find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen. . . . ” Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Session, 1291 (1866)); Sen Jacob Howard (the framer who co-wrote the Fourteenth Amendment citizenship clause stating in 1866 that the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment excluded persons born in the United States who were foreigners, aliens, or who belonged to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers. Congressional Globe, 39th Congress, 1st Session, May 30, 1866, p.2895, 2nd col.)) We requested that the Court enforce the United States Constitution, the supreme law of the land, and, given that Obama was not born in the country to a mother and father who were themselves United States citizens at his birth, not allow Obama to amend the Constitution by usurpation. U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 2; George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796.

Now, we agree that the image on FactCheck proves nothing, but you’re asserting it’s fake with no evidence.

You can be pretty sure you’re going to be called on that BS whenever you try to pull it.

Not the State of Hawaii. Just Dr. Fukino. She has mislead the public in the past. She continues to do the same when responding to UIPA law requests for public information.
I have challenged Obots to put both of her statements (from October 2008 and July 2009) on top of the thread and parse it carefully, the same way you parse my statements.

Nobody has taken the challenge so far. I guess it is easier to say – “you have no standing”

Let me ask you another question – who can protect third party candidates from having to run against ineligible candidates from major parties. What mechanism is in place to enforce the Constitutional requirement that presidential candidate must be an NBC in order to be placed on the ballot?

Even judge David the “Guard Dog” Carter admitted of having a hard time answering this question.

[...] Arti­cle: Orly Taitz Smacked Down: Birther Law­suit Dis­missed — Wash­ing­ton Independent Related Posts:CNN: Mul­ti­ple Bomb­ings Slowly Destroy US Soldier’s Brain — He Com­mits [...]

Even more amusing. I enjoy commenting on birthtard videos on YouTube. Many of Orly's followers still believe the case is going to court on January 26, 2010. And that from posts less than an hour old at this time.

Orly is posting comments on where Carter was wrong in his opinion and every part of it was wrong. I look forward to her appeal.

Carter has a word for the military plaintiffs that were represented by Orly but he's leaving it up to the military to define it. My harshest word would be they're traitors. At the very least, insubordinate. Personally, I say take away all of the benefits of those that are inactive. Give them all dishonorable discharges. They swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States and yet they wrap themselves in and say they're protectors. What a farce.

I give Sarah Palin more credence that I ever would Orly and I find Sarah to be laughable. So, if there are any pimples on Sarah's ass, Orly isn't worthy of one of them. She is so insignificant and yet she believes she ranks up with some of the world's greatest people.

The Obama/Holder/DOJ loons posting in defense of Obama on every website that speaks against the administration are PAID WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS to blog, search “The Obama Justice Department’s Secret Blogging Team… Is it Illegal?” and see for yourself! Also search “TRACY RUSSO, DOJ BLOGGERS” and learn how “BIG” (ACTUALLY MASSIVE!) TRACY RUSSO and the DOJ are ILLEGALLY wasting OUR TAX DOLLARS TO SUPPORT THE TOTALLY EVIL MARXIST, GLOBALIST POLICIES of CONSTITUTIONALLY ILLEGAL OBAMA! OBAMA HAS ALMOST NO “GRASSROOTS SUPPORT”, THE FALSE IMPRESSION HE DOES IS BEING FOSTERED and FED BY THE DOJ PAID BLOGGING TEAM! HOW LOW WILL WE ALLOW OBAMA/HOLDER/DOJ TO STOOP BEFORE THE UPSTANDING CITIZENS of THIS NATION ARISE AND FIGHT?! THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IS A TOTAL DISGRACE FROM TOP TO BOTTOM!

The Loch Ness monster didn't go away either; it was simply never there in the first place.

From the very start this was a fake controversy invented by some people on the Internet, along with all the other conspiracy theories. The only reason it got this far is that one of the believers was very motivated and could navigate the legal system.

That, and plenty of opportunists were happy to sell her fake documents on eBay. It's fascinating how these flare-ups are caused by people with the right combination of cleverness, skill and outright gullibility.

Learn and understand the LAW regarding the meet and proper legal definition of “natural born Citizen” : E. de Vattel, The Law of Nations, bk 1, c. 19, sec. 212 (1758) (1759 first English translation); The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253, 289 (1814) (Marshall, C.J., concurring) (cites Vattel’s definition of natural born citizens); Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 242, 245 (1830) (same definition without citing Vattel); Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167-68 (1875) (same definition without citing Vattel); Ex parte Reynolds, 1879, 5 Dill., 394, 402 (same definition and cites Vattel); United States v. Ward, 42 F.320 (C.C.S.D.Cal. 1890) (same definition and cites Vattel); U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) (only declared under the Fourteenth Amendment a child born on U.S. soil to foreign parents and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States a “citizen of the United States” and not an Article II “natural born Citizen” and Fuller, C.J, dissenting confirming Vattel’s definition of a “natural born Citizen” ); Keith v. U.S., 8 Okla. 446; 58 P. 507 (Okla. 1899) (common law rule that the offspring of free persons followed the condition of the father was applied to determine the citizenship status of a child); Rep. John Bingham (in the House on March 9, 1866, in commenting on the Civil Rights Act of 1866 which was the precursor to the Fourteenth Amendment: “[I] find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen. . . . ” Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Session, 1291 (1866)); Sen Jacob Howard (the framer who co-wrote the Fourteenth Amendment citizenship clause stating in 1866 that the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment excluded persons born in the United States who were foreigners, aliens, or who belonged to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers. Congressional Globe, 39th Congress, 1st Session, May 30, 1866, p.2895, 2nd col.)) We requested that the Court enforce the United States Constitution, the supreme law of the land, and, given that Obama was not born in the country to a mother and father who were themselves United States citizens at his birth, not allow Obama to amend the Constitution by usurpation. U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 2; George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796.

AGAIN : The Obama/Holder/DOJ loons posting in defense of Obama on every website that speaks against the administration are PAID WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS to blog, search “The Obama Justice Department’s Secret Blogging Team… Is it Illegal?” and see for yourself! Also search “TRACY RUSSO, DOJ BLOGGERS” and learn how “BIG” (ACTUALLY MASSIVE!) TRACY RUSSO and the DOJ are ILLEGALLY wasting OUR TAX DOLLARS TO SUPPORT THE TOTALLY EVIL MARXIST, GLOBALIST POLICIES of CONSTITUTIONALLY ILLEGAL OBAMA! OBAMA HAS ALMOST NO “GRASSROOTS SUPPORT”, THE FALSE IMPRESSION HE DOES IS BEING FOSTERED and FED BY THE DOJ PAID BLOGGING TEAM! HOW LOW WILL WE ALLOW OBAMA/HOLDER/DOJ TO STOOP BEFORE THE UPSTANDING CITIZENS of THIS NATION ARISE AND FIGHT?! THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IS A TOTAL DISGRACE FROM TOP TO BOTTOM!

UNTIL EVERYONE KNOWS : The Obama/Holder/DOJ loons posting in defense of Obama on every website that speaks against the administration are PAID WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS to blog, search “The Obama Justice Department’s Secret Blogging Team… Is it Illegal?” and see for yourself! Also search “TRACY RUSSO, DOJ BLOGGERS” and learn how “BIG” (ACTUALLY MASSIVE!) TRACY RUSSO and the DOJ are ILLEGALLY wasting OUR TAX DOLLARS TO SUPPORT THE TOTALLY EVIL MARXIST, GLOBALIST POLICIES of CONSTITUTIONALLY ILLEGAL OBAMA! OBAMA HAS ALMOST NO “GRASSROOTS SUPPORT”, THE FALSE IMPRESSION HE DOES IS BEING FOSTERED and FED BY THE DOJ PAID BLOGGING TEAM! HOW LOW WILL WE ALLOW OBAMA/HOLDER/DOJ TO STOOP BEFORE THE UPSTANDING CITIZENS of THIS NATION ARISE AND FIGHT?! THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IS A TOTAL DISGRACE FROM TOP TO BOTTOM!

No court has ever examined Obamas COLB. Fake image on factcheck.org proves nothing.

I have asked Obama supporters whether any government agency would hire a person who posts the eligibility documents on a web page? The response is usually – “you have no standing in courts”.

You are supporting an usurper in the White House.

E. de Vattel, The Law of Nations, bk 1, c. 19, sec. 212 (1758) (1759 first English translation); The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253, 289 (1814) (Marshall, C.J., concurring) (cites Vattel’s definition of natural born citizens); Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 242, 245 (1830) (same definition without citing Vattel); Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167-68 (1875) (same definition without citing Vattel); Ex parte Reynolds, 1879, 5 Dill., 394, 402 (same definition and cites Vattel); United States v. Ward, 42 F.320 (C.C.S.D.Cal. 1890) (same definition and cites Vattel); U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) (only declared under the Fourteenth Amendment a child born on U.S. soil to foreign parents and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States a “citizen of the United States” and not an Article II “natural born Citizen” and Fuller, C.J, dissenting confirming Vattel’s definition of a “natural born Citizen” ); Keith v. U.S., 8 Okla. 446; 58 P. 507 (Okla. 1899) (common law rule that the offspring of free persons followed the condition of the father was applied to determine the citizenship status of a child); Rep. John Bingham (in the House on March 9, 1866, in commenting on the Civil Rights Act of 1866 which was the precursor to the Fourteenth Amendment: “[I] find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen. . . . ” Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Session, 1291 (1866)); Sen Jacob Howard (the framer who co-wrote the Fourteenth Amendment citizenship clause stating in 1866 that the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment excluded persons born in the United States who were foreigners, aliens, or who belonged to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers. Congressional Globe, 39th Congress, 1st Session, May 30, 1866, p.2895, 2nd col.)) We requested that the Court enforce the United States Constitution, the supreme law of the land, and, given that Obama was not born in the country to a mother and father who were themselves United States citizens at his birth, not allow Obama to amend the Constitution by usurpation. U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 2; George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796.

COMPREHEND THE LAW : E. de Vattel, The Law of Nations, bk 1, c. 19, sec. 212 (1758) (1759 first English translation); The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253, 289 (1814) (Marshall, C.J., concurring) (cites Vattel’s definition of natural born citizens); Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 242, 245 (1830) (same definition without citing Vattel); Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167-68 (1875) (same definition without citing Vattel); Ex parte Reynolds, 1879, 5 Dill., 394, 402 (same definition and cites Vattel); United States v. Ward, 42 F.320 (C.C.S.D.Cal. 1890) (same definition and cites Vattel); U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) (only declared under the Fourteenth Amendment a child born on U.S. soil to foreign parents and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States a “citizen of the United States” and not an Article II “natural born Citizen” and Fuller, C.J, dissenting confirming Vattel’s definition of a “natural born Citizen” ); Keith v. U.S., 8 Okla. 446; 58 P. 507 (Okla. 1899) (common law rule that the offspring of free persons followed the condition of the father was applied to determine the citizenship status of a child); Rep. John Bingham (in the House on March 9, 1866, in commenting on the Civil Rights Act of 1866 which was the precursor to the Fourteenth Amendment: “[I] find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen. . . . ” Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Session, 1291 (1866)); Sen Jacob Howard (the framer who co-wrote the Fourteenth Amendment citizenship clause stating in 1866 that the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment excluded persons born in the United States who were foreigners, aliens, or who belonged to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers. Congressional Globe, 39th Congress, 1st Session, May 30, 1866, p.2895, 2nd col.)) We requested that the Court enforce the United States Constitution, the supreme law of the land, and, given that Obama was not born in the country to a mother and father who were themselves United States citizens at his birth, not allow Obama to amend the Constitution by usurpation. U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 2; George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796.

READ AND COMPREHEND THE LAW : E. de Vattel, The Law of Nations, bk 1, c. 19, sec. 212 (1758) (1759 first English translation); The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253, 289 (1814) (Marshall, C.J., concurring) (cites Vattel’s definition of natural born citizens); Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 242, 245 (1830) (same definition without citing Vattel); Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167-68 (1875) (same definition without citing Vattel); Ex parte Reynolds, 1879, 5 Dill., 394, 402 (same definition and cites Vattel); United States v. Ward, 42 F.320 (C.C.S.D.Cal. 1890) (same definition and cites Vattel); U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) (only declared under the Fourteenth Amendment a child born on U.S. soil to foreign parents and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States a “citizen of the United States” and not an Article II “natural born Citizen” and Fuller, C.J, dissenting confirming Vattel’s definition of a “natural born Citizen” ); Keith v. U.S., 8 Okla. 446; 58 P. 507 (Okla. 1899) (common law rule that the offspring of free persons followed the condition of the father was applied to determine the citizenship status of a child); Rep. John Bingham (in the House on March 9, 1866, in commenting on the Civil Rights Act of 1866 which was the precursor to the Fourteenth Amendment: “[I] find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen. . . . ” Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Session, 1291 (1866)); Sen Jacob Howard (the framer who co-wrote the Fourteenth Amendment citizenship clause stating in 1866 that the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment excluded persons born in the United States who were foreigners, aliens, or who belonged to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers. Congressional Globe, 39th Congress, 1st Session, May 30, 1866, p.2895, 2nd col.)) We requested that the Court enforce the United States Constitution, the supreme law of the land, and, given that Obama was not born in the country to a mother and father who were themselves United States citizens at his birth, not allow Obama to amend the Constitution by usurpation. U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 2; George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796.

OBAMA IS NOT A “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN”, HERE IS THE APPLICABLE LAW : E. de Vattel, The Law of Nations, bk 1, c. 19, sec. 212 (1758) (1759 first English translation); The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253, 289 (1814) (Marshall, C.J., concurring) (cites Vattel’s definition of natural born citizens); Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 242, 245 (1830) (same definition without citing Vattel); Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167-68 (1875) (same definition without citing Vattel); Ex parte Reynolds, 1879, 5 Dill., 394, 402 (same definition and cites Vattel); United States v. Ward, 42 F.320 (C.C.S.D.Cal. 1890) (same definition and cites Vattel); U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) (only declared under the Fourteenth Amendment a child born on U.S. soil to foreign parents and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States a “citizen of the United States” and not an Article II “natural born Citizen” and Fuller, C.J, dissenting confirming Vattel’s definition of a “natural born Citizen” ); Keith v. U.S., 8 Okla. 446; 58 P. 507 (Okla. 1899) (common law rule that the offspring of free persons followed the condition of the father was applied to determine the citizenship status of a child); Rep. John Bingham (in the House on March 9, 1866, in commenting on the Civil Rights Act of 1866 which was the precursor to the Fourteenth Amendment: “[I] find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen. . . . ” Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Session, 1291 (1866)); Sen Jacob Howard (the framer who co-wrote the Fourteenth Amendment citizenship clause stating in 1866 that the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment excluded persons born in the United States who were foreigners, aliens, or who belonged to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers. Congressional Globe, 39th Congress, 1st Session, May 30, 1866, p.2895, 2nd col.)) We requested that the Court enforce the United States Constitution, the supreme law of the land, and, given that Obama was not born in the country to a mother and father who were themselves United States citizens at his birth, not allow Obama to amend the Constitution by usurpation. U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 2; George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796.

AGAIN: another blower spouting without proof. I guess Orly's upset with her latest loss so now she has to blame ordinary citizens who believe in our constitution and not the communist one she likes to cite.

THE LAW WILL BE ENFORCED OR THE REVOLUTION WILL COMMENCE : E. de Vattel, The Law of Nations, bk 1, c. 19, sec. 212 (1758) (1759 first English translation); The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253, 289 (1814) (Marshall, C.J., concurring) (cites Vattel’s definition of natural born citizens); Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 242, 245 (1830) (same definition without citing Vattel); Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167-68 (1875) (same definition without citing Vattel); Ex parte Reynolds, 1879, 5 Dill., 394, 402 (same definition and cites Vattel); United States v. Ward, 42 F.320 (C.C.S.D.Cal. 1890) (same definition and cites Vattel); U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) (only declared under the Fourteenth Amendment a child born on U.S. soil to foreign parents and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States a “citizen of the United States” and not an Article II “natural born Citizen” and Fuller, C.J, dissenting confirming Vattel’s definition of a “natural born Citizen” ); Keith v. U.S., 8 Okla. 446; 58 P. 507 (Okla. 1899) (common law rule that the offspring of free persons followed the condition of the father was applied to determine the citizenship status of a child); Rep. John Bingham (in the House on March 9, 1866, in commenting on the Civil Rights Act of 1866 which was the precursor to the Fourteenth Amendment: “[I] find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen. . . . ” Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Session, 1291 (1866)); Sen Jacob Howard (the framer who co-wrote the Fourteenth Amendment citizenship clause stating in 1866 that the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment excluded persons born in the United States who were foreigners, aliens, or who belonged to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers. Congressional Globe, 39th Congress, 1st Session, May 30, 1866, p.2895, 2nd col.)) We requested that the Court enforce the United States Constitution, the supreme law of the land, and, given that Obama was not born in the country to a mother and father who were themselves United States citizens at his birth, not allow Obama to amend the Constitution by usurpation. U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 2; George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796.

Oh, silly, did you read Judge Carter's decision? He dealt with your Vattel-based citizenship theories rather deftly, I think.

Oh, you disagree with him, do you? Well, too bad, but he's the judge and you're not.

Let's see, who to believe…an anonymous message board poster who has no clue of our constitution and laws, or the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS? Boy, that's a tough one. I'll go with Chief Justice Roberts. Orly (attorney) has proven time and time again to be bat-sh*t crazy!

Blather blather blather. Vattel never even mentioned the phrase “natural born citizen” so the idea that the framers got their definition of that phrase from him is not only far-fetched, it's literally impossible.

But don't let historical facts and reality interfere with your blathering. Please continue… ;)

Blather blather blather. Vattel never even mentioned the phrase “natural born citizen” so the idea that the framers got their definition of that phrase from him is not only far-fetched, it's literally impossible.

But don't let historical facts and reality interfere with your blathering. Please continue… ;)

Feel free to stop spamming the board any time now

I Googled that phrase and found a blog post alleging that Eric Holder directed DOJ staff to post pro-Obama comments on blogs. Their “proof” was simply that another blog said so. The claim originated at a blog called The Muffled Oar, which presented it without evidence.

Apparently the dude at the Muffled Oar is peeved that everyone keeps asking him to back up his claims. He eventually wrote, “Conclusive evidence makes things easy for lazy people.”

But no matter, it's absurd to argue that the president's support is fake. Did the DoJ fake the 69 million votes?

Blather blather blather. Vattel never even mentioned the phrase “natural born citizen” so the idea that the framers got their definition of that phrase from him is not only far-fetched, it's literally impossible.

But don't let historical facts and reality interfere with your blathering. Please continue… ;)

Really? I could be getting paid for this? Sign me up!!!!!

Debunked ad nauseam.

Nothing to see here but spam and drivel from a lunatic birfoon claiming to be an officer of the court. HAH ! ! What an idiot.

I'd say there's no possible way you could be an attorney and be that ignorant… but then Orly is an attorney and is that ignorant, so I suppose it's possible. Did you get your law degree on the internet too?

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
News Release
LINDA LINGLE
GOVERNOR
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CHIYOME LEINAALA FUKINO M.D.
DIRECTOR
Phone: (808) 586-4410
Fax: (808) 586-4444
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release: July 27, 2009 09-063
STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D.
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai?i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital
records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama
was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement
or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”
###

The lying idiot birfoons reek of desperation.

And this one has definitely slipped down the rabbit hole.

Yes, they hand out free brown shirts and you get free training at your local FEMA camp.

Oily Taintz said so.

Why don't you post her statement from October 2008 as well, and we can debate both statements because there are important differences that indicate her as being dishonest and trying to manipulate the public.

And the birfoon replies to it's own comments. It must be the voices in the mirror barking instructions again.

Liar.

Gotta love the birfoons–”HERE IS THE APPLICABLE LAW : E. de Vattel, The Law of Nations, ….”

Uh huh… Treatise by a Swiss philosopher is now “the law.” Right. It's especially funny since Vattel never defined “natural born citizen.” He spoke of “naturals or natives.” Never even used the phrase “natural born citizen” at all.

How about the fact that the WH is using NEA as a propaganda tool for Obama. Google name Yosi Sargent.

“Plaintiffs presume that the words of Emmerich de Vattel, John Jay, and John Armor Bingham alone empower this Court to define the natural born citizen clause. The Complaint conveniently chooses to ignore Congress’ long history of defining citizenship, whether naturalized or by birth. See Charles Gordon, “Who Can be President of the United States: The Unresolved Enigma,” 28 Md. L. Rev. 1, 7-22 (1968) (contrasting 150 years of active Congressional legislation against judicial restraint).”

- The Honorable Judge Carter

What is the definition of an NBC?

If that were true, then Chester A Arthur, who was also president, and had a foreign father, would not have been eligible for the presidency either. But, he was, so explain how this is any different?

Oh, and the 14th Amendment states that ” all persons born within the United States and subject to its jurisdiction citizens of the United States” This was, of course, written for slaves to gain their freedom, but how does it not apply here? Please explain? And the latest you site is 1866, but the 14th amendment wasn't ratified until 1868!

COLB document cited as a proof of Hawaiian birth is a fake. The registration number is incorrect. The DoH refuses to release the index data related to that number.

Obama has been using fake SS# (a duplicate one from CT) – why would a person born in Hawaii, living in Hawaii have a SS# from CT?

You have not exactly shown the capability to accurately interpret even what you “hear yourself.” You hear what you want to hear–are you certain you parsed the callers words carefully enough?

For Immediate Release: October 31, 2008 08-93

STATEMENT BY DR. CHIYOME FUKINO

“There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawai‘i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record.

“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.

“No state official, including Governor Linda Lingle, has ever instructed that this vital record be handled in a manner different from any other vital record in the possession of the State of Hawai‘i.”

“Citizen at birth.” Duh. Why do you think they call it that?

Natural BORN means BORN a citizen. Thus the word BORN.
Natural-IZED means MADE a citizen. Thus the suffix IZED.

This aint exactly rocket surgery. You birfoons are trying to make it way more complicated than it is, and trying to turn it into some special extra kind of citizenship that has never existed. You are either BORN a citizen, or MADE one later. Those are the only two kinds of citizenship that have ever existed in this country. Stop trying to invent a whole new kind.

Now you're lying. What's your evidence that the COLB is a fake?

Hint: As usual, “I can't think of any other reason…” is not evidence.

There you go. There's your statement from Oct 2008. Seems to be the original of what she said, word for word, in Jul 2009.

Oh, and “persons who do not have a tangible interest” actually DO include people who are just calling in to see the records. There has to be a legal reason for needing to see the records and just calling to pester and say “I want to see it” doesn't qualify.

Which document? An image of the fake document posted on Obama friendly web page. Is that the American birth document judge Carter referenced?

If so, does it count as a legal precedent – can all of us use the same approach when submitting documents to government agencies – just post them on a private web page and submit a link to the government official where to find it?

Which document? An image of the fake document posted on Obama friendly web page. Is that the American birth document judge Carter referenced?

If so, does it count as a legal precedent – can all of us use the same approach when submitting documents to government agencies – just post them on a private web page and submit a link to the government official where to find it?

The National Endowment for the Arts has reassigned former communications director Yosi Sergant, who had become the latest target of FOX News talk show host Glenn Beck.

Acting NEA communications director Victoria Hutter said Thursday that Sergant had left the communications post. The move came after he had come under attack from Beck, a conservative commentator who accused Sergant of attempting to use taxpayer money to fund art to support the president's initiatives.

The talk show host accused Sergant of arranging an August conference call with the White House Office of Public Engagement and United We Serve to recruit artists to create works in support of Obama policies. The NEA has denied that the call was inappropriate, and the White House has said that it did not force Sergant's reassignment.

Beat me to it!

Thanks.

This was funny:
“we can debate both statements”

As if I care for irrelevant spew from a paranoid, delusional birfoon.

Sounds more like Sargent and everyone else was tired of Glenn Beck (from FOX News — what a surprise) yapping on and on and on like a dog that doesn't know when to shut up.

And, of course, you believed him. What a surprise there as well.

Do you have a reading comprehension problem or trying to mislead the public like Dr. Fukino?

Where in the October 2008 statement does she mention Obama's Hawaiian birth? Please parse her statement carefully.

She says NOTHING about the CONTENT of the original birth certificate.

And he thought only nobility should be allowed to own and carry firearms. The Framers disagreed.

It's about as valid as the often repeated birfoon lie that the President has spent millions to hide records which started as an unsubstantiated claim from birfer/troofer Philip Berg.

Birfoons are desperate, pathological liars.

Here's the definition.

NBC is an American television network and former radio network headquartered in the GE Building in New York City's Rockefeller Center with additional major offices in Burbank, California.

Here's the definition.

NBC is an American television network and former radio network headquartered in the GE Building in New York City's Rockefeller Center with additional major offices in Burbank, California.

In October 2008 statement she mentions the original birth certificate (yet she does not confirm Hawaiian birth).

In her July 2009 statement she mentions original vital recordS (plural) and mentions Hawaiian birth.

She did not use the magic combination: Original Birth certificate and Hawaiian birth.

In October 2008 statement she mentions the original birth certificate (yet she does not confirm Hawaiian birth).

In her July 2009 statement she mentions original vital recordS (plural) and mentions Hawaiian birth.

She did not use the magic combination: Original Birth certificate and Hawaiian birth.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA…naturalnut, you just continue to crack me up. You just can't get rid of him and it eats at you to no end. She assumes that most of the country has at least a modicum of intelligence, but you blowers show you can't even read or understand English. BTW, do you know anything about privacy laws? Obviously not. LOL

He also thought one of the main responsibilities of the Gov. was to administer a state mandated religion–something the framers specifically prohibited. Birfoons have clung to what they thought was Vattels definition of “natural born citizen” simply because it fits what they want to hear.

Look at the date on that translation. It’sd in the preface. Grasp the
concept here–he never used the phrase.

And you’re right–the definition did pre-date Vattel. British common law
actually DID use that phrase. Read Blackstone. He used the phrase. Vattel
never did. And it NEVER in history meant what you claim it meant.

If such a person could elected they would be eligible. That’s no different
from someone who was born on US soil to two citizen parents and who then
spent most of his life in Iran. IOW, you are presenting a nonsense argument.
Does it seem reasonable that the natural born child of a serial killer is
eligible? But the framers obviously couldn’t anticipate every possible thing
that might be objectionable. They left it up to the voters with the only
exceptions being what is enumerated in the Constitution.

Besides, Obama spent most of his life in America.

The question you posed was assinine. What does your scenario have to do with
the citizenship of the parents? Nothing. You are grasping at straws. If you
object to someone who’s spent most of their life in another country being
President then lobby your representative. As it stands such a person would
not be ineligible, and that’s true whether their parents were citizens or
not. It’s just as possible for someone with two citizen parents to spend
most of their life in another country. Your question didn’t even make sense
in the context of the discussion.

These birfoons are little, mad, barking dogs stretching their chains.

Pathetic attempts to micro analyze statements is a definite sign of desperation and mental illness. It reminds me of the moon landing idiots chasing shadows. These are sick, sad fools.

Probably to complain about your 100′s of cats defecating in their flower
beds.

I wouldn’t know. How does it feel to be covered in flies?

For your explanation of an NBC, the word “natural” is not needed in the Constitution – yet it is there.

People who wrote Constitution obviously made distinction between the two phrases: “natural born citizen” and “born citizen”.

NBC = born in the country of citizen parents

By George I think you've cracked it! The “Vital Record” she was referring to must have been his death certificate! He's really a zombie! You've blown this case wide open! Oh! The humanity!

It is possible to amend the vital records.

Where in her October 2008 statement she mentions Hawaiian birth?

I can’t wait…Orly’s last dance as an attorney…LOL!

But her flying monkeys keep telling her magic mirror that all is well…LOL!!!

Let me get this straight, you are so dumb that she had to make a second, even more clear statement to try and get through to blower idiots, and now you don't like it because she didn't realize how dumb you people are when she made the first statement?

What does that have to do with anything?

No no! You've really blown this wide open. “Vital Record” can refer to birth certificates, marriage licenses, or death certificates. Since he didn't get married in HI, and since she didn't specifically say “birth certificate” that proves she must have meant his death certificate! He's a zombie! Zombie President!

NC, you are a GENIUS! You've figured out the scam!

Sorry…but that tired argument isn’t going to work anymore today than it did last month…

His long form was certified…you were just not privileged enough to get to see it. And the COLB was not faked, it was legitimate as well…but keep on believing what you want, it doesn’t change the fact that Obama is still your President.

Beck PLAYED the TAPE recorded by a person who participated in that call. I do not need Beck to tell me anything. I could hear it myself.

Using taxpayer funds to create propaganda for Obama is illegal.

Where is the original long form birth certificate which would indicate Kapiolani as a birth hospital?
Various newspapers have reported Obama's birth in three different COUNTRIES!?

Obama used law firm Perkins Coie to fight for dismissal of eligibility lawsuits – he does not want us to know the truth about his birthplace.

Maybe it would have something to do with the fact that she's the State Health Director of Hawai'i. That would sorta clue a person in that she was looking at a Hawai'ian birth certificate. She would not have the authority to look at, say, a KY certificate since she doesn't sit on the KY State Board of Health.

Would you like to try again?

If it amuses you all to play with naturalizedcrazy, the by all means do so. It's just getting kind of boring with NC's constant posting of the same thing over and over again. Arguing with him is akin to arguing with a shoe.

That pretty much sums it up. Naturalcrazy is just plain dumb like the other birthtards.

My bet that this was written by Orly. She's come into our forum to educate us.

Hmmm, what do you conclude from that?

Either he was born in three different countries … or newspapers are sometimes wrong.

Oh well, that's why we have birth certificates.

For your explanation of an NBC you have to be a moron. “Natural born
subject” was the phrase from british common law, and it became “natural born
citizen” in America.

By golly! I do believe this may be Orly. Surely has her writing style. GO BACK TO RUSSIA, BITCH!

Baghdad Jim is back on the floor dancing like in good old days.
Please explain where in her first statement she confirms Obama's Hawaiian birth?

It was an attempt to mislead the public.

She refused to clarify her second statement, when people sent her request (under the UIPA law) whether amended birth certificate is on file with DoH.

Go back to Russia, BITCH!

Actually, I consider it more like scraping the sh*t off the bottom of my shoe. Gotta scrape these losers away!

LMAO ! ! !

GO BACK TO RUSSIA, BITCH!

Doesn't make any difference, idiot. Whether he was born in Hawaii, Kenya or on Mars, as long as his mama was an American citizen which she was, he is natural born. Judge Carter shot down your 2-parent Vattel theory like Cheney shooting a friend. Your “case” is over. You lost and Orly will be in an orange jump suit.

Who is Eligible to Apply for an Amended Certificate of Birth?

As provided by law (HRS §§338-17.7, 338-20.5), the following persons may apply for an amended certificate of birth:

A person born in the State of Hawaii who already has a birth certificate filed with the Department of Health and

has become legally adopted, or
has undergone a sex change operation, or
a legal determination of the nonexistence of a parent and child relationship for a person identified as a parent on the birth certificate on file has been made, or
previously recorded information in relation to the person’s surname and/or the father’s personal particulars has been altered pursuant to law.

A person born in a foreign country who has been legally adopted in the State of Hawaii.

Wow! That should keep all Americans up nights with worry. What a fool!

And a paranoid fool.

Oops, I didn't specify which poster.

Well, some things are just obvious, aren't they?

And, again, you talk through your ass, NC. There was no amended BC, there was only the President's BC, No BC for Maya, and the marriage of the President's parents. They release it and since it doesn't say what you want, you ignore it. BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

As his mother was an American citizen, how, in any case, would the certificate need to be amended?

And….ready for this?

SHE DOESN'T HAVE TO.

I do believe that all birthtards were kicked in their heads by butterflies when they were kids.

This is exactly what she wants US public – to assume things that are not explicitly said in her statement. This way she has a wiggle room from perjuring herself.

In her second statement (July 2009) she mentioned the Hawaiian birth but she avoided the original birth certificate.

It is sad when a government official in charge of DoH cannot issue a straightforward statement like this one:
“Obama's original birth certificate confirms that he was born in Hawaii”

I seriously doubt that Dr. Fukino is a parrot like you. It is ludicrous for anyone to expect her to have verbatim statements over a period of 8 months. Sheeet! Had she made the exact same statement this year as she had last year, then you would still argue that she's hiding something.

Once again, she can only view the Hawai'ian certificate. She's not trying to wriggle out of anything.

NC: “It is so sad when a public official won't say what I want them to say when I say it.” BWAHAHAHAHA…like I said, no Public Official can anticipate the stupidity of the blowers…so that would be a no-win situation, except you blowers are the ones with no wins!!! LOL

Well, since she wasn't under oath, that wouldn't be perjury. Your arguments don't hold water. LOSER!

Index data released by DoH indicates only name (Barack Obama) , the data is insufficient to determine what is the content of the file. It could be just an affidavit that he was born in Hawaii.

More significant is the refusal of DoH to release the index data for certificate # posted on “factcheck.org”. This is the information that could either confirm COLB authenticity or destroy Obama's house of cards.

It is hidden from public and we know why: the number does not belong to Obama – they cannot release it.

You know nothing. And you continue to prove it. Don't like it…get the laws changed. But, you idiots don't know or understand anything about law and constitution unless it's on WND or Orly says it…which is definitely not US laws.

Poor lying, trailer trash Tracey.

Here’s a fun quote from a real person in a position to know the truth:
Paul Colford, director of media relations for the Associated Press: “The AP has never reported that President Obama was born in Kenya. In fact, AP news stories about the state of Hawaii have confirmed that he was born there. The Kenyan paper that you cite rewrote a 2004 AP story, adding the phrase ‘Kenyan-born.’ That wording was not in the AP version of the story.”

She did not connect original birth certificate and hawaiian birth.

In 1961 it was possible to register birth based on an affidavit from a relative.
Dr. Fukino saw the original – and if it did not come from the Hawaii hospital, she would have to be very careful not to mention original birth certificate as proof of Hawaiian birth.
We can observe this behavior in her statements to the public.

The discourse on here has become thoroughly pathetic.

Partisan politics has become a vile national team sport. Partisanship requires participants to defend policies and positions they would ordinarily diagree with or find some exception to – stifling intellectual discussion of the facts and reducing public discourse to name calling.

Obama supporters have bought the propaganda from “The Savior of Hope” hook line and sinker (with emphasis on sinker, as in our Republic is sinking right before our eyes). The Obama-ites take a partisan position – clearly willing to look past legitimate Constitutional issues that have been politically squashed. It's clear Libs and Dems alike would have taken a far different view of the situation if the tables had been turned. But you “feel good” about yourself because you were able to elect an “African-American” as President . . . rhetoric and rock concerts and all.

The neo-cons and GOP are a party without direction and true leadership, and party members have found it difficult to deal with such abysmal showing at the polls last election. The GOP has, of course, done this to itself. Nearly 2 years ago, Ron Paul had a remarkable grassroots up-swelling taking place, and as New Hampshire approached, Ron Paul had more in his war chest than any other Republican. But the “bi-partisan” thought police stepped in and prevented Paul from participating in ANY of the debates that mattered. Now they are in the political basement as neo-cons are sniping at mainstream Republicans and visa versa.

What we are left with is what we are seeing here . . . over-confident, arrogant “winners” squaring off against sore losers.

And whats worse is, some of those name callers in this forum are likely on the government payroll. I refuse to be talked down to and belittled by people who may be illegally participating in a propaganda campaign.

You want real change and progress? Let's get rid of political parties and install Instant run-off voting for starters.

The original birth certificate might have been based on an affidavit from a relative.

That would explain Dr. Fukino's statements.

BS Prove it!!! Remember, you've tried pulling this one about 10 times already and been shot down. Can you remember why? Do you remember how it was explained to you? Did they change your meds…again? LOL

The proof is in the fact that DOH will not release the index data for registration number from “Obama's COLB”. They are violating the law.

2. SS# used by Obama is a duplicate from CT. Person born in Hawaii would have a legitimate SS#.

That is the voice of one Federal Judge.

This is not an issue of citizenship. This is an issue of Article II, Section 1. I and many others readily acknowledge that President Obama was born in Hawaii and thus a citizen at birth. But being a “native born citizen” as Obama calls himself is not the same as being “natural born”. That the Supreme Court has never ruled on it is neither here nor there. The Congress, specifically the House of Representatives, if not for partisan politics, is the more appropriate and preferred venue for this issue to be hashed out.

If this were Bobby Jindal that was elected and the Republicans were attempting to keep the legit Constitutional concerns suppressed, I'd be just as passionate and vocal about my disgust.

Dems and Repubs alike need to get past partisan ignorance and start looking at things from a non-partisan vantage point. Those of us that have been independent most of or all of our adult lives find this behavior repugnant.

Politics isn't a sport. And the name calling here is pathetic.

If it ever is Bobby Jindal, I hope the challenge is made at the candidacy stage. Once he's elected, confirmed by the Congress, and inaugurated, it's too late.

Don't like it? Tell it to the judge.

The Director Health for any State is not an authority on the Constitutionality of a person's Presidential eligibility. Dr. Fukino's declaration that President Obama is a “natural born American citizen” is no more authoritative than if any of us made the same statement. The only part of the Dr.'s statement that has any bearing is that she confirms that she has seen his original birth record and that is on file. Fine. President Obama is a “native born citizen” as he claims. I'm on board with that. I'm not on board that he is “natural born”. US Law does not govern UK citizenship. Obama, whether he has a current passport or not has never stated that he has formally renounced his claim to British citizenship. And as many people have cited the UK definition of native born, Obama still has claim to British citizenship any time he cares to renew it.

1. “Guard Dog” Carter cannot change the Constitution.

NBC = born in the country of citizen parents

2. According to the law in 1961, Obama's mother had to be a US citizen at least 10 years, five of those after the age of 14 to pass him her US citizenship automatically in case when baby was born in another country and father was not a US citizen.

If Obama was born in a foreign country, his mother had to be at least 19 years old to pass him US citizenship automatically She was 18 at the time and in this scenario he could not be a US citizen at birth. He would have had to go through the naturalization process.

No proof but wild theories and forged documents. All you've ever had and why you're now 0-41 in these suits.

Wrong again, fool. His mama was not legally married to his daddy. Therefore, she only had to be in this country ONE YEAR. You are so DUMB!!!

I know I'm not being paid to be here. However, I will defend my choice for president to the end and I will not have some right wing nuts decide my vote did not count.

Good one! create a false equivalency, then simply call one party imcompetant while accusing the other of malfeasance!

Hint: There were no constitutional issues.

Hint: If they were, they were JUDICIALLY quashed, with no political involvement from the left at all. And, ummm, that would be the courts job. I believe we could have had a discussion about how things turn out when there is partisan involvement in the judicial process… around 9 years ago.

“likely on the government payroll”
Paranoid blather. Provide credible evidence other than an anonymous, fright wing blog or Whirled Nut Daily.

“I refuse to be talked down to and belittled . . .

Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out and good riddance to rubbish. Are you really that thin-skinned?

Birfoons deserve derision for being traitors, for mocking the U.S. Constitution and the laws of the U.S., for stubbornly refusing to understand the concept of providing credible evidence and for the utter disrespect of the Office of the President.

“But you “feel good” about yourself because you were able to elect an “African-American” as President . . . rhetoric and rock concerts and all.”

Spare us your blatant bigotry and asinine assumptions. A clump of moss could have beaten McSame and Failin' Palin.

“The discourse on here has become thoroughly pathetic.”

An excellent description of your whiny post.

“reducing public discourse to name calling.”

And yet you do the same, hypocrite. – “over-confident, arrogant “”winners'” is name calling.

“Obama supporters have bought . . .”

You presume to know them all? Pretty bold generalization there, Skippy.

But do you feel better? That's all that matters.

No more so does British citizenship govern US citizenship. IE even if he were still a British citizen that has nothing to do with his status as a natural born US citizen. That whole argument is perhaps the weakest among a field of incredibly weak birther arguments. Nothing anywhere in the constitution, and no legal arguments whatsoever, support the claim that dual citizenship disqualifies him. At least the “two citizen parents” argument has _some_ credible historical support, but the dual citizenship argument is something birthers _completely_ have pulled out of their asses.

Where do we get our checks and a fresh, clean brown shirt?

I think it's the voice of something like 41 judges at this point…. but birfoons are too stupid to accept reality. As for the name calling, this has long since gone past the point where there's any obligation to be polite to you whackjobs. You don't know what you are talking about. You continue repeating ignorant lies. When your mistakes are pointed out to you it makes no difference.

Try to grasp the concept–you are attempting to invent a whole new kind of citizenship that has never existed, and doing it solely in a strained attempt to argue Obama is not eligible to be President. You are pissing all over the Constitution even as you self-righteously pretend to be supporting the Constitution. You are not entitled to be treated politely. You are an ignorant dishonest nutjob.

Sometimes you just have to speak the truth, even if the truth isn't polite.

Hint: We have a presidential precedent.

Hint: Even if we didn't, this would seem to be something to which you should just STFU:

“”It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.

III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.”"

But no, you're going to continue to spout your bullshit without mentioning Wong, hoping people buy it. All while claiming to be oh so ever concerned and bipartisan.

Damned right! If they're paying others to be here to defend Obama, then I should get mine. GIMME GIMME GIMME!

The instant run-off voting is a good idea even if impractical. You'd have to get all 50 states to go along with it, and that's not a real possibility.

The blather about anyone being paid is just that–blather. However, if I'm wrong and there are Gov. jobs doing this… call me. I could use the money.

What a loser. You wrinkle your brow, raise your nose and announce how trans-partisan you are, with your accusations that bloggers here are “on the payroll”. and somehow engaged in some illegal activity——what a snot-nosed little prick! Ron Paul?
I didn't know Paultards were such morons! I mean, I had SOME idea—after all: Ayn Rand? LOL
I guarantee you that as long as you make juvenile, petulant, nonsensical statements like this one above you'll be condescended to. Who the fuck do you think you are?

Not only British law, but the citizenship laws of the states also defined it prior to the ratification. Georgia for example–

http://books.google.com/books?dq=%22article%20I…

“and returning to and from the same Also we do for ourselves and successors declare by these presents that all and every the persons which shall happen to be bom within the said province and every of their children and posterity shall have and enjoy all liberties franchises and immunities of free denizens and natural born subjects “

It was a commonly understood phrase.

Enough already with your hackneyed and phony airs of superiority to us lowly “partisans”
You are suffering under a mighty delusion if you think this tack of yours is how to launch a 3rd party—-which I'm all for, BTW.
Under the bs you're just another Birthtard

Majority Will, thank you for reinforcing every point that I have made.

Then what was the purpose of the press release other than to mislead the public?

Original birth certificate could have been based on AFFIDAVIT from a relative, thus insufficient to determine the actual place of birth. Hawaii had very loose rules regarding registration of births.

Oh, and I most certainly did NOT vote for McCain, nor did I vote for Bush or Dole. So leave you simple-logic pot shots at the door.

Listen the TAPE, do not spread the Obot propaganda.

I was just as outspoken about the mess that was Bush V Gore. The common thread here that the Obama supporters fail to grasp is there are two political parties that have usurped the phrase “We Are The People”. They make backroom deals that first and foremost based on self-preservation. Did you ever ask yourself why Gore backed down when he clearly would have won if he chose to proceed? There are those of us that need no political party allegiance to get our cues from as to what position we should take on an issue.

She was trying to shut up functional illiterates who have no idea what they’re talking about.

I prefer no parties. Political parties are set up to influence and make deals in the name of political self-preservation. They long ago ceased to represent the people they are supposedly elected to serve.

Was Vattel even alive when the Constitution was written? And how is his work at all relevant to American law? I’m still trying to figure that one out since he was SWISS.

Does this mean I can sue the government for back wages since I haven’t been paid for countering Orly’s illiterate screeds?

Orly, dear.

You’ve already posted this. You’ve also tried it in court. You have always lost and you always will.

Please, please, PLEASE stop. You are risking your law license and possibly your husband’s government contracts. You are wrong, and are closing in on pure paranoia. For the sake of your children, please stop.

Thank you.

The fatal flaw in all of your positions is continuing to link Article II, Section 1 with the 14th Amendment. There is simply no logic to that argument.

Furthermore, I HAVE MENTIONED WONG, several times, and I am hardly alone in recognizing that it has nothing to do with Article II, Sec. 1.

FURTHERMORE, your Presidential precedent is no precedent at all. Chester Arthur LIED about his Father's naturalization status. It wasn't until many years later (after Arthur was voted out of office as arguably one of the worst Presidents in history) that it was discovered by an Arthur biographer that Arthur's father didn't become a citizen until many years AFTER Arthur was born. Now ask your self, WHY would Arthur lie about the date of his Father's naturalization?! Oh, and you better go back and hit the history books, because Arthur's Vice Presidency and Presidency was just shortly AFTER Wong Kim Ark. Meaning – Arthur and Washington were very aware of the actual intent of Wong Kim Ark.

Hint: It had NOTHING to do with defining “natural born citizen” as in Article II Sec 1.

Oh, and an unrelated but interesting side-note there is considerable circumstantial evidence that suggests Arthur conspired to have Garfield assassinated, so that he may assume office.

I have only your word on how outspoke you were…

Which, along with the rest of your post, doesn't actually address any of the points I made…

Your writing is somewhat in the style of Charles Lincoln III. Just an observation…

“Chose to proceed?” SCOTUS put a stop to it–just how was he supposed to “proceed?”

Besides that, you are sashaying into non sequitars. “We The People” elected Barack Obama, whether you like it or not. The two major parties don't have a monopoly on that phrase, but neither do third parties or no parties. And whether you like it or not, he is eligible to be President, he is in FACT President, and there's nothing you or anyone else (other than Congress) can do about it until 2012 when you will have a chance to vote against him. That's how it works. All these attempts by birfoons to short circuit the system and convince a judge to overthrow the rule of law, the Constitution, and the principle of separation of powers, are the pathetic thrashings of sore losers who can't accept reality.

If you have come here for a civil debate, then you're in the wrong place. I will only speak for myself and I have no use or respect for Orly Taitz since she has taken it upon herself to use every legal angle she could find to attempt to have the courts unseat the president elect whom I voted for. To me, she's worth nothing. She is nothing. Some of the recent posts lead me to believe that she or one of her minions has decided to come over here and change our minds. She started the 'war'. We'll finish it.

Call names if you wish, it's your credibility that takes the hit, not mine. And I resent being lumped in with the likes of Orly Taitz, Gary Kreep and that whole “dream team”. Taitz is a sick woman who grew up in a Totalitarian regime. She may have a law degree, but she clearly lacks an understanding of the Federal Judiciary process.

The issue of Constitutional qualifications should have been dealt with prior to inauguration – in reality prior to nomination. But the bi-partisan Two-Party Party monolith didn't want to rock the boat, so they ignored an issue as clear as day and obscured the truth to the point we are now – with a bunch of hack neophytes regurgitating propaganda.

It's actually up to the citizens of each State to demand better accountability from the of office of Secretary of State as to who is allowed on the ballot and who isn't. There were 7 States that allowed a Nicaraguan born to two Nicaraguan parents onto the ballot as a candidate for President, including my own state of Connecticut. When a challenge was filed in State court, the State Attorney General's office intervened on behalf of the Secretary of State's office.

The State Constitution explicitly States that the AG's office exits to protect the interest of the Citizens of Connecticut. The AG should have demanded an accounting of how Calero was allowed onto the ballot, but instead represented the SOS in court with a motion to dismiss. Calero remained on the ballot, illegally. Just like Obama.

If you think Wong has nothing to do with article II section I then you've never read it.

You're problem is you are still trying to invent a new kind of citizenship that has never existed before. “Natural born” is simply an archaic way of saying “native born.” It's no coincidence the words “natural” and “native” are etymologically related. There have only ever been two kinds of citizenship–you are either a citizen at birth, or you are made a citizen later.

Natural BORN means BORN a citizen. That's why they call it that.

Natural-IZED means you are made a citizen later. That's why they call it that.

Never in history has “natural born” referred to a separate third kind of citizenship. Read the decision in Wong Kim Ark–they explicitly talk about the meaning of “natural born.”

IOW there is NO distinction between a 14th amendment citizen and a natural born citizen. That's purely garbage invented by birfoons in an attempt to change the meaning such that Obama won't be eligible.

The citizenship of Obama's father is no secret. No one other than birfoons think it makes him ineligible.

And the phrase “natural born citizen” appears ONLY in Article II, Sec 1. and no where else in the Constitution. Now given what we know about this countries origins, do you not think the Founding Fathers wanted to implement a safeguard that prevented a British national, for example from making a bid for the Presidency?

The one issue that NONE of you Constitution-as-you-see-fit types can answer is why does the phrase only appear in Article II, Sec 1 and NO WHERE ELSE?!

Talk about idiocy.

You have no credibility to lose. You think there's an “issue” that is “clear as day.” That makes you a delusional idiot. Calling a delusional idiot a delusional idiot doesn't lose me any credibility. Sorry if you think it does.

I didn't imply you did. And I really don't care. It was a general statement about the election but your pomposity makes you assume everything is about you.

And you obviously don't have a clue for what constitutes logic or fallacy.

But you are an amusing, self righteous prick.

You're going to need a lot of cheese for that whine.

Feel better now, little puss puss?

These truths I hold to be self evident.

1. You made no mention here of wong before my post.

2. Chester A Arthur DIED THREE YEARS BEFORE the Wong decision

3. You are an idiot (see 2, at the very least)

4. The wong decision does most definitely lay out what it means to be natural born… taking its cue from the term used in english common law. Something I think the framers “might” just have been aware of when chosing their wording.

Where's your credible evidence of posters being on the government payroll?

<crickets>

Yeah, I thought so. You shouldn't make accusations you can't back up. That's something the birfer's can't seem to grasp.

[...] http://washingtonindependent.com/65703/orly-taitz-smacked-down-birther-lawsuit-dismissed Please make this embarrassing woman go back where she came from, or lock her up in an institution, , one of the two. Comments (0) [...]

Marriage status is not relevant.

According to the law in 1961, if the baby was born abroad and one parent was a foreign citizen, other parent had to be US citizen for 10 years (5 of those after the age of 14) for baby to get an automatic US citizenship.

LMAO ! ! Nice catch.

” . . . the only constitutional requirements for being elected president are that one be at least 35 years old, reside in the U.S. for 14 consecutive years prior to election and be a natural-born citizen. Obama was born in Hawaii. And he lost his Kenyan citizenship around the same time Don Johnson created a minor crisis in the sock and the razor blade manufacturing industries.”
- Posted by Joe Miller, 9/3/09, factcheck.org

“Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1984.”
- Posted by Joe Miller, updated 9/3/09, factcheck.org

“UK Law does not govern US citizenship.”

FIFY

That’s about the dumbest argument I’ve ever heard. You are seriously
reaching for it, way too far. It appears there and nowhere else because
President is the only job where you are required to be a citizen from birth.

And you are the one trying to rewrite the Constitution, not I. You’re the
one using arguments like “Don’t you think they would have wanted…” I’m the
one saying “This is what they said.”

Sorry, but there ARE no Constitutional questions. The President was born in Honolulu. That makes him a natural born citizen.

Case closed.

You're in Connecticut?

*runs to fortify the Massachusetts border*

“It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect; and therefore such construction is inadmissible…”

-Chief Justice John Marshall, Majority Opinion, Marbury v Madison.

Meaning . . . Article II, Sec 1 is written the way it is for a reason. And nothing subsequent to it, not Won Kim Ark, not the 14th Amendment has any direct effect on Article II, Sec 1.

It is that reason that you will NEVER hear President Obama, the great Constitutional Scholar claim to be a Natural Born Citizen. Because OBAMA knows that he is not, and can’t claim to be. Obama’s challenge would have been that the 14th Amendment had a direct effect on Article II, Sec 1 – but Chief Justice Marshall would have rejected that out of hand.

You’re very wrong. Accept it.

1. Wrong. “Natural born” means EITHER “born to American citizen parents” OR “born on American soil. Otherwise there would be no problem with the children of undocumented workers born in America being American citizens, and thus entitled to stay in the country when their parents are deported.

2. Not relevant. He was born in Hawaii, which has belonged to the United States since the late 19th century.

Again, not relevant since the President was born in the United States.

You are seriously daft. It’s written the way it was for a very good
reason–because it says what it means! The framers required the President to
be a citizen from birth. “Natural born” was common usage for that meaning,
and that’s how they wrote it, because that’s what they meant.

I’d ask you why you are trying so hard to get it to mean something other
than what it says, but I know the answer to that.

In the course of one sentence you acknowledged the credibility of my position and then discredited it.

If you don't have two citizen parents, then you have a person who is born with dual loyalties. Obama, as President or private citizen has claim to be a British citizen. Today, the President could apply for British citizenship and more than likely receive it, as the UK allows Dual Nationality, while Kenya does not.

Someone born of two citizen parents would not have that option. The person who is elected to be Commander in Chief and the Chief Executive should have no other immediate claim of nationality.

My issue is not with the individual, it's with the system. I disagree with much of President Obama's positions (as was the case with Bush), but I do not believe him to be a sinister character. Misguided perhaps,but not the agent of another state. I am purely concerned with the dangerous precedent that is being set.

I think I’ll trust the framers more than you…that’s why they allowed amendments to the constitution. Not so the amendments could be ignored by blowers like you, but so the constitution could become a living, breathing document able to change with the times. Besides, Obama doesn’t have to claim what he already knows to be true, as does the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS. You remember him, don’t you? He swore Obama in and knew, as everyone in the country who was paying attention, where and to whom Obama was born. You lose, again.

And in the world of reality, where I reside, and you aspire to be accepted, I can follow the chronology and logic of what separates the requirements outlined in Article II, Section 1 from the 14th Amendment and subsequent associated cases.

And I do this all without calling names and turning to the likes of the DailyKos, Olberman and The Nation for my talking points.

Massachusetts is a mess, as is Connecticut. And what do those two states have in common? Generations of Liberal-leaning Democrats and Republicans spending wildly, even in the face of virtually un-Constitutional unfunded and funded mandates. Rell had her honeymoon, now she is in for a rude awakening. The same can be said for Patrick. But “real change” (the Dems empty buzz phrase for the last 20 years) won't come until the either/or trap is broken.

I'm sure you can invent some rationalizations for this “chronology and logic,” but what you don't seem to grasp is no one cares. You don't get to just make things up and declare them to be what you think is logical. The fact is there has never been a distinction between 14th amendment citizen and natural born citizen. Neither the history nor the the law supports such a distinction. You might think there “should” be such a distinction, but there isn't, and you don't get to decide.

BTW, even if “Natural born” had meant what you are weirdly trying to twist
it into meaning, the 14th amendment would most certainly change it. That’s
why they call it “amending” the constitution.

You would flunk Jr.High civics. You are *that *dumb.

I'd be interested to hear your thought process. Please explain.

I'm somebody who can attempt to discuss issues without using insults, sophisms, pseudo-facts and rhetoric as the only basis for my position.

I'm not trans-partisan – whatever that is, as you apparently just invented it. I doubt you know anything about Ayn Rand, and even if she was an influence of mine, she'd hardly be the only one. I'm not into pop-politics. You are.

Finally, you among others are the juveniles. I've been able to defend and cite the facts behind my position. All you and your ilk know how to do is make blanket statements, supported by disconnected logic and sprinkle in curse words and insults.

Believe you me, I can insult with the best of them, but then I don't view this issue as lightly as you.

My regards as you go down with the ship.

Notes on “natural born.”

One thing birfoons try desperately to do is to redefine the meaning of the phrase “natural born.” It's already been pointed out that the phrase comes from British law (as all our words and phrases come from the Brits) and that according to British law anyone born on the soil was a “natural born subject.” British law ALSO held that the child of a subject, if born off the soil, was still a natural born subject. So for the Brits, even as it is for the US today, it was either/or–born on the soil OR citizen parents.

By todays usage “natural born” in reference to citizenship is archaic, but I did want to point out that there are surviving uses. For example, we might use in today in “Bob is a natural born leader.” (or any other quality) It refers to a quality which is innate. “Innate” is, not surprisingly, etymologically closely related to the words “natural” and “native.” And it means, not surprisingly, “something you are born with.”

A natural born leader is someone who was born with the quality of leadership. A natural born citizen is someone who is born a citizen. That's all it ever meant. Through the years there have been disagreements over who is and is not a citizen at birth, no one has ever, until the birthers, tried to turn “natural born citizen” into a special third kind of citizen. In this country we are either born as citizens, (natural born) or we are made citizens later (naturalized.) That's it. Those are the only distinctions.

If you think Wong has something to do with Article II, Sec 1, then you aren't aware of Chief Justice Marshall's Majority opinion in Marbury v Madison, where he clearly stated:

“It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect; and therefore such construction is inadmissible…”

Wong Kim Ark was not a case about Article II, Sec 1. It was a case about citizenship when born within US borders to two alien parents. Wong Kim Ark was not a natural born citizen and was not eligible to run for President. He could be a Senator or Representative, but President he could not.

As the passage is written in Wong Kim Ark, I can understand how someone with a 5th grade reading comprehension could mistakenly view it as redefining Article II, Sec 1, but luckily our SCOTUS Justices aren't as illiterate.

Actually, it was also the accepted definition of the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS. You remember him, don't you? If he felt Obama wasn't a NBC then he would have been going against his oath of office when he swore Obama in. Of course, now you'll make up something else to cover that, but it is all you blowers have…your delusions.

Why bother post her original statement form 2008. You have repeatedly demonstrated that any facts that are presented that dispute your position that you reject. Additionally, if you took time to read the the document you would notice that she stated she verifies that Barack Hussein Obama “is a natural-born American citizen.” This document just re-enforces Dr. Chiyome Fukino position on the facts.

Saying you have the reading comprehension of a 5th grader would be generous.
Wong was not about Art.II, it was about citizenship at birth. In the course
of it they talk about the meaning of “natural born” Explicitly. Seriously.
The Sylvan Learning Center. Look them up. They have programs for people like
you.

Did you honestly take time and read the court ruling. Many news outlets had highlighted the main points, include the issue of natural born citizen. Stop making things up, the court ruling was very explicit about why your conspiracy theory is just ill conceived.

I mean seriously, try VERY HARD to grasp that they didn't just make up the
phrase “natural born” just for article II. The phrase had an existing
meaning. That meaning did NOT come from Vattel as Vattel never even used
those words. It came from the same place all our words and phrases came
from…the Kings English.

Get it?

And I can man up and admit when I've been in error. In my haste to reply I confused Minor v Halperstadt with Wong kim Ark. Minor took place in 1873. In the subsequent years, Arthur became VP, when he succeeded to the Presidency he appointed Justice Horace Gray to SCOTUS. Grey wrote the majority opinion on Wong Kim Ark. As we know now, Arthur lied about his fathers citizenship because if Arthur's Father wasn't a citizen at the time of Arthur's birth, there would have been doubts as to whether Arthur was even a citizen, with the way the law was being applied at the time.

Even still Wong Kim Ark never touched Article II, Sec 1. I can understand how someone could read the closing paragraphs and mistakenly make that assumption, but it just isnt the case.

The court ruled that based on the evidence presented that Obama was born in America. Second, that he has the utmost confidence in the safe guards America has in place to protect it citizens. I would accept that the court ruled indirectly at Obama is a “natural born citizen”

Are you unpatriotic?

Here's a silly question JBL, where did you find that Arthur lied about his father? According to the NY papers, it was well know at that time about Arthur's father. So, show me where you're coming up with that BS, or disown it.

Not in the least.

I would appreciate if you and others ceased in attempting to lock me down to some sort of stereotype of thought.

I know its a stretch for the partisans, but just try and realize that there are many of us who very easily separate race from politics. And who accept everyone on their own merits.

Marbury v Madison preceded Wong by about 80 years. The passage I cited above is still precedent of meaning that is applied to cases today. It would have been no different for Wong.

Wong WAS NOT ABOUT Article II Sec1 in any way shape or form. Article II is about Executive Powers.

The 14th Amendment and Wong Kim Ark are about Citizenship.

Wong Kim Ark, the person, was not seeking to run for President. He was simply seeking the citizenship that he was due for having been born in the United States.

Wong is not a blanket redefining of the entire Constitution. It had and has NO RELEVANCE to natural born citizen clause as stated in Article II, Sec 1. For if it was it would have been in direct conflict with Chief Justice Marshall's statement:

“It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect; and therefore such construction is inadmissible…”

et it through yer thick skull. Just because you say something is, doesn't make i any more real than the Easter Bunny or the Great Pumpkin.

No, Attorney is just a name like Anteni.

It is quite interesting that “attorney” seems to have left out some court rulings. Specifically, more recent court rulings.

Well, clearly the lawyers in 1898 thought that citizenship at birth was the same as natural born citizenship.

You know so little, but talk so big. Sad existence that you lead.

And again you’re reading something that simply isn’t there.

Get it through yer thick skull–you don't get to redefine the meaning of
“natural born” no matter how hard you try. And all your non-sequiters are
just that, non-sequiters. Wong was about citizenship at birth. That was the
whole point. Wong Kim Ark was born on US soil but his parents were not
citizens. So the qestion was did that qualify him as a citizen at birth?

A “natural born citizen” is a citizen at birth. The justices pointed out
that the framers immortalized that phrase in the Constitution, and that the
same phrase had been used for CENTURIES in Britian where anyone born on the
soil was a citizen at birth. Therefor they concluded that Wong also was a
citizen from birth due to being born on the soil.

Wong didn't clarify the meaning of “natural born,” that was already known.
What they clarified was who did and did not qualify.

Coming from an idiot that couldn't even pass Jr High civics and has the
logic skills of a toadstool I'll take that as a compliment.

JBL, it was well known. Your got that information from the NJ lawyer’s web site. We know that because it has already been round debunked. You do NO research, you just read blower sites and consider them a fine source. Ambulance chasers are not a good source.

I don’t understand how you can tie that passage in with 200 years of SCOTUS decisions.

And Vattel is well known to have influenced the thinking of the Framer’s which isn’t to say they used everything or even anything that Vattel wrote word-for-word.

The term Natural Born Citizen, as it it is designed into Article II, Sec 1 was a new implementation, a stroke of genius by the Framers to ensure there was a little something extra that would prevent the notion of a foreign agent from occupying the Executive branch. That is not to say that is what Obama has done. Because I DO NOT believe that to be so in any way shape or form. But what he has done, and what the DNC and RNC have allowed to happen is a callous afront to the Founding Fathers.

“being eligible to the Presidency of the nation, conferred by the Constitution in recognition of the importance and dignity of citizenship by birth?

If no one cares, then why have you spent two days responding to my posts? Please save it.

See, you don’t have to man up and admit you are in error. I put it right out there in black and white and you had no choice.

Now given that was a rather large part of your citationless assertion regarding an apparent presidential conspiracy only you’re aware of… why should we give any of the rest of your tripe any credence without, you know, some evidence?

And others have already pointed out, there are so many ways you’re wrong over Wong it isn’t even funny.

A steady A student in government and majored in Poly Sci in college, thank you.

Apparently you can’t even count. Two days? Lol!

Right. That’s like someone who doesn’t know what H2O is claiming to have
majored in chemistry. Sure, I believe you.

You’re wrong about Wong and wrong about Arthur. It was well known at the time of the 1880 election that Arthur’s father was not yet a citizen at the time of Arthur’s birth. The entire controversy was about the rumor that Arthur had been born in Canada rather than Vermont. His father’s citizenship status was not at issue, only the location of Arthur’s birth.

Wong of course settled it. Birth on US soil, even with illegal alien parents, makes one a natural born US citizen. This is not even in dispute.

The second statement by Joe Miller is actually taken from the Fight The Smears website, if I recall correctly.

And all it means is, that President Obama didn’t swear an allegiance to Kenya by his 23rd birthday. Kenya does allow dual citizenship. And the only reason Obama had it in the first place was because of his Father being a Kenyan national and British subject.

Obama still has a very real claim to British citizenship to this day if he chose to apply. In fact, if after Obama leaves the office of President, he chooses to become a citizen ofthe UK and it is granted , he then moves to the UK and runs for Parliament, then was elected Prime Minister there is nothing in his way on the British side of the law that I know of.

We all know that birthers arguments are based on conjecture after they have disregard any facts that disprove their arguments. However, they will even reject additional facts that are later found, or pick specific wording to try to support their position. Thank you for the information.

” . . . but your pomposity makes you assume everything is about you.But you are an amusing, self righteous prick.”

This criticism coming from the person who goes by the name “Majority Will”.

You're a real gasser.

Oh yeah…don’t you recognize who JBL is? There’s really only a few blowers on here, after they get beat down, they pop back up under another name. It’s all they have left.

And again that’s where your lack of any substantive civics comprehension shines like the sun in the middle of July . . . .

The 14th Amendment was written to clarify and augment the aspects lacking in Article 4 Section 2 – that would be the section that originally discussed ‘citizenship’. The 14th Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with Executive branch or the requirements to hold the office of President.

Article II, Section 1 – Executive Branch

Article 4, Section 2 – Citizenship –> 14th Amendment –> Minor v Halperstadt –> Wong Kim Ark

Are ya starting to get it yet? Refer to my posting about Chief Justice john Marshall’s poignant statement in the Majority opinion of Marbury v Madison.

Amendments are written to deal with very specific changes to the Constitution, they aren’t written to change the meaning of the entire document.

Dude, you are really an uppity fool. Natural born citizen, by your definition means born of two citizens, but only if you follow the dictates of Vattel.

“Plaintiffs presume that the words of Emmerich de Vattel, John Jay, and John Armor Bingham alone empower this Court to define the natural born citizen clause. The Complaint conveniently chooses to ignore Congress’ long history of defining citizenship, whether naturalized or by birth. See Charles Gordon, “Who Can be President of the United States: The Unresolved Enigma,” 28 Md. L. Rev. 1, 7-22 (1968) (contrasting 150 years of active Congressional legislation against judicial restraint).”

In fact, Vattel was written in French and never used the term “natural born citizen”. You rely upon Vattel but the Framers would never have done so. Vattel wanted only royalty to have access to firearms.

You talk about propaganda. That is the nature of the birther movement. Honestly, even Bill O'Reilly has stated birther are nuts. Everyone knows that Mr. O'Reilly is not a support of Obama. There are many more conservatives, independents and people who are of different political ideologies who think birthere are nuts. Honestly, you are just another fraud.

Full citation of your source, please.

I get it–you don’t. The 14th has nothing to do with requirements to be
President. I don’t know why you keep bringing up non-sequiters other than
that you are so confused you don’t know what else to say. The 14th has to do
with citizenship, specifically in this context, who is a citizen at birth.

Art II has to do with requirements for the Presidency, and relevant in this
context is the requirement the President be a citizen from birth–a natural
born citizen. You see how those two interact? The 14th is about citizenship,
Art II is about Presidential requirements, which includes a citizenship
requirement.

Only crazier, wetter, tighter, hotter . . . .

LOL

Let us pull out our thesaurus shall we.

“Native” is the same word as “natural.”

And if you put your knee-jerk reactions aside for a moment, you'll note that I have stated that Barrack Obama is President and that the only recourse now is to make sure now that our SOS are held accountable for who they place on the ballot the next Presidential election cycle. We had a foreign born, to foreign national parents Candidate on the ballot in 7 States during the last election cycle.

Either that or home that the District Attorney for the District of Columbia decides to do something about it . . . but we all know that will not happen.

And please spare me that the Two-Party Party doesn't have a monopoly on the phrase “We The People”. The national office holder that goes to Washington to do the People's business is few and far between these days. We elect deal makers that are largely in the business of protecting their own ass first. This mentality has led to unprecedented Federal power and scope. This nation was founded to be a union of individual states who were free to make their own laws within the construct of the Constitution. Today we have one Federal mandate after another bankrupting some States and making others struggle mightily. This big brother federal monstrosity simply isn't what our forefathers shed blood for.

Only a total hack would assume that the closing paragraph is the only pertinent part of a legal decision.

You got robbed, JBL, go back to that college and demand your money back…LOL

Ah, I see. You are unhappy that you do not live in New Hampshire. Might I put you in touch with friends of mine in Penacook? There’s some very nice land up there, cheap, and I’m sure you’d find plenty of like-minded folk to sit around and complain about how unfair it is that your superior intellect and education is not evident to the unwashed masses.

I see that they teach 19th century rhetorical and writing skills at your alma mater, as well as 19th century racial and political attitudes. How sad that it’s the 21st century.

Hey, JBL, should I assume that your “Arthur lied” statement is not true? Then, we have a precedence for a President who was not born of 2 citizen parents. Which, of course, makes all your statements suspect. BWAHAHAHA…I love idiot blowers who are so dumb they can't realize there is something more important than WND and Orly blatherings…the constitution and laws of our great nation!

The two words are not synonyms.

And no one has yet answered my challenge.

If the phrase is “natural born citizen” in Article II, Sec 1 and native means the same as natural, then why does the President insist on referring to himself as “native born”?

Call me all the names you like, but deep down you know there is something strange about it.

“Wong Kim Ark was not a natural born citizen and was not eligible to run for President. He could be a Senator or Representative, but President he could not.”

Hmmm, well it seems that the central argument from the written brief of the attorneys who opposed the Wong Kim Ark decision (and lost) was that if he was found to be a citizen by birth, then he would be eligible to be president, which was unacceptable to white, Anglo-Americans.

“— —
For the most persuasive reasons we have refused citizenship to Chinese subjects; and yet, as to their offspring, who are just as obnoxious, and to whom the same reasons for exclusion apply with equal force, we are told that we must accept them as fellow-citizens, and that, too, because of the mere accident of birth. There certainly should be some honor and dignity in American citizenship that would be sacred from the foul and corrupting taint of a debasing lineage.

Are Chinese children born in this country to share with the descendants of the patriots of the American Revolution the exalted qualification of being eligible to the Presidency of the nation, conferred by the Constitution in recognition of the importance and dignity of citizenship by birth?
— — —

Is this your position as well?

I have nothing in common with nor do I care for Charles Lincoln or his misguided leader Orly Taitz, I believe they have down irreparable harm and made a joke of the singular issue that I and many others remain correct on.

Call me all the names you like OK, you are a sophist.

Hey Jim, I don't read World Net Daily, nor do I care what they have to say in the least. I do not support Orly Taitz in any way shape or form. This sort of simple minded knee-jerk partisanship is part and parcel to the pop-politics that Olberman, Maddow, O'Reilly'Limbaugh and the ilk disseminate. It's nonconstructive and damaging our very fabric.

I think there's been a lot of confusion about this, and I'm conjecturing to a certain extent as well, but it's the only definition that is consistent across all uses. British law used “natural born” and said anyone born on the soil OR anyone who's father was a subject, were themselves a natural born subject. But I don't take it as that they were defining “natural born subject” rather, they were defining who did and did not qualify as a subject from birth. If they, let's say, changed the criteria to require BOTH born on the soil and a subject father, they then would have called THAT a natural born subject.

Similarly, IIRC, NY states citizenship laws prior to the ratification required both born on the soil and a citizen father, and they called it “natural born.” Georgia, on the other hand, called anyone born on the soil period “natural born.” I don't think that means they disagreed on the meaning of “natural born” I think they were simply expressing different requirements for who was a citizen from birth. They had different requirements for who was entitled to citizenship from birth, but whatever those requirements were, anyone who met them was a natural born citizen–a citizen from birth.

The framers didn't specify who was entitled to citizenship from birth, but they did require the President to be a citizen from birth–a natural born citizen. Apart from that they left it up to Congress to fill in the details. And like I said, the first Congress would not have felt free to fill in those details if they had believed the framers meant something more specific by the term. If the framers intended “natural born citizen” to mean “born on the soil of citizen parents” as birthers would have it, then Congress could not have extended that meaning to those born off the soil with a mere congressional act–they would have needed a Constitutional amendment.

Well Phil, at least we can both agree that Orly's nuts.

Answer the question JBL, where do you get that Arthur lied? Or did you just make it up because it is inconvenient to your delusions?

In the latter part of the 19th century, the United States, in one of its less glorious moments, enacted a series of laws known as the Chinese Exclusion Acts. The point of these laws was that Chinese laborers were welcome to come to the U.S. and work but they were denied the perks of U.S. citizenship.

In the Wong Kim Ark case, the son of a Chinese couple, who was born in San Francisco left to visit China. When he returned, he was refused entry at the port of San Francisco. He sued, claiming that he was a citizen under the 14th amendment.

Wong Kim Ark won the case in the lower courts and the U.S., represented by a Mr. George Collins, appealed the decision, they lost and it was appealed again, all the way to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court upheld the lower courts decisions and ruled that Wong Kim Ark was indeed a natural born citizen.

Of note is the argument that Mr. Collins presented to support his case in the Supreme Court. In his written brief, his last and best argument against giving Wong Kim Ark the status of citizenship by way of birth went as follows:

— —
For the most persuasive reasons we have refused citizenship to Chinese subjects; and yet, as to their offspring, who are just as obnoxious, and to whom the same reasons for exclusion apply with equal force, we are told that we must accept them as fellow-citizens, and that, too, because of the mere accident of birth. There certainly should be some honor and dignity in American citizenship that would be sacred from the foul and corrupting taint of a debasing lineage.

Are Chinese children born in this country to share with the descendants of the patriots of the American Revolution the exalted qualification of being eligible to the Presidency of the nation, conferred by the Constitution in recognition of the importance and dignity of citizenship by birth?
— — —

How many of you can see the same tired, racist, arguments being made by the birthers?

Note also that Mr. Collins clearly concedes that if he lost this case (which he did), then being born in this country as a citizen was enough to qualify one to be president.

Jim it wasn't well known, there was a singular reporter for a NY paper that had raised the issue that Arthur was a British national and not even a US citizen. It wasn't until years later that it was discovered that that NY reporter was onto something. He was wrong about Arthur's citizenship status as Wong Kim Ark would later affirm, but he was right that Arthur's father was not a US citizen at the time of rthur's birth.

And it came from research, my friend.

LARPing? Forgive me for asking…

Thanks. I am not going to comment on birthers motives, other than Mr. Collins comments were acceptable in the time he lived.

I'm starting to think we initially had Orly in here posting as Attorney and now Charles Lincoln is in here posting as JBL. Just a feeling…

the perhaps one of the first thing you did here shouldn't have been to accuse already participating posters of illegalities amonst calling them names.

By the way, interesting that you're a follower of RP but not Rand…. but still, RP revolutionaries is “not” pop politics?

Whatever, my regards as the ship keeps on sailing just fine an we wave to the blathering idiot on the iceberg he's christened S.O.Somalia.

An interesting fact about Mr. Collins: In 1905 he was convicted of perjury and bigamy and sentenced to the penitentiary wher he was put to work in the jute mill.

I guess what comes around goes around.

Why do you want to complicate things? Ellid stated his or her thoughts. He or she believes Obama is a natural born citizen. That's pretty simple. Why do you need to know the thought process that brought this conclusion?

My guess is that JBL is (Phillip) J. Berg, Lawyer

It is a lie that court ruled about WKA being a natural born citizen. He was granted CITIZENSHIP.

You are using a dramatic quote from an attorney who lost the case to support your opinion. It has no legal weight.

The Court clearly define citizenship at birth as being the same as natural born citizenship.

You lose.

Further corroboration: Encyclopedia.com lists an archaic definition for “natural born” as “having a position by birth.”

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O999-naturalbo…

He is a native-born Hawai'ian. Nothing strange about it.

Please provide proof of this.

I'll save you the trouble, there's a very specific process you have to go through to become naturalised. You will not find any evidence of WKA undertaking this process.

The court ruled that he had been a citizen since his birth.

In addition to this, you fail at logic, because if the lawyers arguments had been correct, then surely he would have won the case!

He lost… so what does that say about his arguments?

Actually, you're right, it says they have no legal weight!

But they're the same argument as yours…

IDIOT.

What are you talking about please get a thesaurus.

Synonym – a word or phrase that means exactly or nearly the same as another word or phrase in the same language.

Both “native” and “natural” are English words.

Let us look at a dictionary.

Native – A person born in a specific place or associated with a place by birth.

Natural – in accordance with the nature of, or circumstances surrounding, someone or something.

Natural-born – have a specific innate characteristic or ability (having a particular position by birth i.e. a natural-born citizen)

reference: Oxford Dictionary of English.

The only thing that is strange is your insistence on manipulating English to put forth a categorically false position.

Did you not see they were arguing that Wong, if counted a citizen by birth, would be eligible for the Presidency?

What I enjoy about birthers is they challenge reasonable people to honestly do research and think. Honestly, I have learned a lot even the term for the scientific condition for birthers.

It's telling. the ones they don't respond to ;)

Because, yeah, outright claiming, without a shred of evidence, that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America knowingly violated their oath of office…

That's a biggy.

And their entire argument falls down around it.

Wrong. The Court ruled, by a 6-2 margin, that Wong Kim Ark had been a natural born citizen from the moment of his birth because he was born on American soil. The citizenship of his parents had nothing to do with it.

Wrong. The quote was used to express the racist position that Mr. Collins took.

All you folks – wondering where the Orly clan is? I have a strange feeling we’ve been speaking with her right here . . . as NaturalizedCitizen.

My thought process? Very simple:

President Obama was born in America. People born in America are natural born citizens regardless of their parents' status. Therefore, President Obama is a natural born citizen, qualified to be President, and the birther movement is full of hooey.

I hope this helps.

*thanx and a tip o' the hat to buckaroni*

You have cited a great many irrelevancies and ignored American law and precedent. You are not logical.

Please do something useful with your time, like tutoring at an adult literacy clinic.

[...] previously here, and one of the people in that Jon Stewart clip, Orly Taitz, the Birther Lawyer, remains determined to make a laughing stock of herself before every judge she’s appeared before. After they [...]

What is interesting about that argument is that it was the final argument in the brief. In other words, it was their best argument.

Same here. I haven't gotten a penny from this and never will.

You really are a pompous bloviator, aren't you? I swear, this is like reading my ex-husband's “editorials” for a bad LARPing magazine.

the latest Orly crapolla from her blog:

–”Another point – Judge Carter state in court and in his order that I told people to call him This is not true. Who told it to judge Carter? His new clerk, fresh out of Perkins Coie, law firm, that represented Obama, in some 100 cases?”–

She is such a putz

I'm still waiting for my checks from debunking chemtrails and truthers.

1. Subject and citizen is not the same. Brits did not have to be concerned that a “natural born subject” will become the commander of their military. The king/queen could not have been replaced with a “natural born subject”.

2. In USA, framers of the Constitution were worried that a foreigner could become a commander of US military. That is why they added phrase “natural born citizen” to the eligibility requirement. It is national security issue.

If they wanted to make anybody born on US soil eligible for US presidency, they could have used the phrase “born citizen”. Yet they did not do it. They wanted to avoid dual loyalties that come in play when parents are not US citizens.

3. The naturalization act of 1790 gives “natural born citizen” status to children of US citizens (plural) who were born outside the USA. The law was repealed in 1795 and children of US citizens born abroad were given citizenship status.

NBC – Born in the USA of citizen parents.

What's amazing is how often all those are found in the same person. True story: birther the other day cites a “forensics expert” who has determined Obama's COLB is a forgery. I google him up and he's got a website with articles on 911, birtherism and chemtrails as well. Out of curiosity I click the article on chemtrails. He's got a solution. We need to telepathically contact sylphs to help us clean up the chemtrails. Apparently sylphs are some kind of air fairy.

Explain this then, NC, why did the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS swear him in? It was no secret who Obama's parents were. Is it because he knows what a Natural Born Citizen is better than you?

That is correct – citizen at birth – not a natural born citizen. There is a distinction between the two.

Explain this then, NC, why did the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS swear him in? It was no secret who Obama's parents were. Is it because he knows what a Natural Born Citizen is better than you?

1. “Subject” is the British word for “citizen.” “Natural born” means the
same in front of either word. To suggest that “natural born” means something
different in front of “subject” than it does in front of “citizen” is
asinine.

2. Yes, which is why they required the President be a citizen from birth. No
one uses the phrase “born citizen.”

3. Yet the 1790 act was not unconstitutional. And removing the phrase
“natural born” was simply because it wasn't necessary.

NBC Citizen from birth.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O999-naturalbo…
(No way you get “two citizen parents” requirement. Birfoons have just
completely made that up.)

Explain this then, NC, why did the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS swear him in? It was no secret who Obama's parents were. Is it because he knows what a Natural Born Citizen is better than you?

“…the exalted qualification of being eligible to the Presidency of the nation, conferred by the Constitution in recognition of the importance and dignity of citizenship by birth?”

Which part did you not understand? The only distinction between the two is in the wishful thoughts of birfoons.

Actually, I was able to find “Natural-born – have a specific innate characteristic or ability (having a particular position by birth i.e. a natural-born citizen)” in an English dictionary. Thus, this further supports your arguments.

This has been very educational.

Your have been very informative.

That's why I enjoy doing this in my free time. It's educational and entertaining at the same time. The blowers have made me look at and understand the constitution more than I ever thought about since HS (or was that jr hs?) civics. It has been excellent to remember why I love being a citizen of this country so much.

I cited Ron Paul as a recent example of the tyranny of the majority stifling a grassroots movement. In this case a movement from within the Republican Party that opposed the absurd and damaging course that the religious right and the neo-cons have taken the party in over the last 20 years.

And in my opinion Ron Paul and his supporters are far from having pop-culture status. Paul’s brand of Conservativism rebukes the neo-cons, calls them what they are (pathetic, opportunistic and self-serving) Paul is legitimately anti-war unlike Obama who played up his Johnny Come-Lately opposition to the Iraq War during the campaign, all while downplaying and even being ignored on his support for the expansion of the Afghanistan occupation.

And if you really must know who I have supported most recently, it’s none other than every Democrat psuedo-Progressive’s best friend – Ralph Nader, also legitimately anti-war, and recognizes that mutli-national corporations should not EVER have more rights, power and influence than the individual citizen. A concept that is foreign to the power-hungry Two-Party Party, the American Oligarchy, the Republicrats and Demoplicans, since campaign finance laws and ballot access is tailored to them and their corporate donors.

Orly Taitz is a sylph

Reading comprehension was never their strong point.

As I am learning about “lawyering” techniques – Roberts can always claim that he assumed that Obama was eligible.
There is no official requirement that Chief Justice must review evidence (prior to sworn in ceremony) that the president-elect is indeed eligible for office. He had no “standing” to stop the ceremony.

Yet, he fumbled the oath. His conscience did not allow him to perform the ceremony correctly.

It destroys one of “Guard Dog” Carter's arguments that Orly's lawsuit was filed few hours late.

We can only speculate on Roberts' opinion about the NBC definition. The only way to know for sure is that a case is accepted by the SCOTUS and official ruling made.

Reality comprehension was never their strong point.

Where does it mention the birth place or parents?
You missed critical arguments in your explanation.

You are assuming prosecutorial techniques of only taking one side…a very tenuous one at that. You know, I know, all these readers know that Chief Justice Roberts knew who Obama's parents were and their citizenship status. We also know that if he delivered the oath of office, he was breaking HIS oath of office and WOULD be impeached. The straight answer is he knows better than you what a Natural born citizen is and Obama qualifies.

It doesn't. That's the whole point. “Natural born citizen” means citizen from birth. That's all it means. The details of who is and is not a citizen from birth is a different question. In this country you are a citizen from birth if you are born on the soil OR if you have a citizen parent. We could change those rules if we want, but whatever the rules, the President has to be a citizen from birth.

You really aren't very bright.

Same here. :)

As a lawyer that actually went to an accredited law school, it always cracks me up when birfers try to “interpret” the Constitution, then get upset when the judge has to remind them that case law from the Supreme Court of Birferstan isn't binding on the United States.

Luckily for us sane people, Orly is waaaaayyyyyy too stupid to quit now. For her, the mere threat of disbarment isn't enough; she won't stop until the State Bar of California burns her law license on national television…right before they use her “law degree” for toilet paper. We should have enough free comedy to last us the next couple of decades.

I'm tempted to wonder if you're not too bright, Mr. Naturalizedcitizen. According to the above, Wong Kim Ark was not “granted citizenship.” The court recognized him as having been born a citizen. That's what he had been arguing — that he was entitled to return to the US, the country of his birth and citizenship. So you're arguing that the courts decided to give him something he claimed he already had? Nonsense. Our constitution says you're a citizen if you're born here. Like Barack Obama was.

It satisfies all requirements by the federal government for BC's. It is also used by many states in the union, including Missouri. Funny story about that. Earlier this year, the pubs in Missouri were talking about an amendment (HR 34 I think) where a “Long form” bc would be required to run for nationwide office in Missouri. That didn't last too long. Seems Missouri uses the same type form as Hawaii and because of the 10th amendment, the law would actually just prohibit any person born in Missouri from running for national office in Missouri. Blower intelligence at it's best!!! LOL

In the past citizen father = citizen mother because citizenship was granted automatically upon marriage.

If the framers intended that anybody who was born citizen would be eligible for US presidency, they would have used the exact phrase “born citizen” in the Constitution. They did not. It means that they considered that phrase “natural born citizen” has different meaning than “born citizen”.

The only eligibility definition, that does not require any debate whether person has a dual loyalty at birth, is the one where person was born in the USA of citizen parents. Only in this case there is no ambiguity, no need for speculation, debate or arguing whether person is eligible to be CIC.

NC, did you ever happen to read any Shakespeare?

You are correct. He was not naturalized. Court determined that he was citizen at birth.
But not the natural born citizen. The WKA case did not define who the NBC is.

As for Obama – I would agree with you but only after I see the long form birth certificate indicating birth in the Kapiolani Hospital.

You seem to be under the impression that you can just make stuff up an
people will listen. That makes you a typical birther.

As for your attempt at logic–nice try but baloney. “Natural born,” as has
already been demonstrated to you repeatedly, was the commonly used phrase.
“Born citizen” was not. They used the commonly used phrase. By your logic no
one would ever use the phrase “natural born” since they could always just
use “born” instead. You're not even close.

LOL – funny stuff.

Uh huh. And you think that Wong Kim Ark set forth that all people born in the United States are natural born citizens, right?

Cuz you left that part out.

And if that is the case, I would like you to humor me and point out the relevant passages of Wong that make that so.

Live action role playing. Basically, D&D with costumes and props

You guys are arguing all the time that nobody has standing to challenge Obama's eligibility.

Is there a procedure for Roberts to officially challenge Obama's eligibility? How would Congress and Administration react if Roberts tried to stop the ceremony.
Separation of powers in government? “Guard Dog” Carter mentions it in his ruling.

Please show where it *doesn’t* state that someone born in the United States is a natural born citizen.

Also, where in Connecticut do you allegedly live? I’d like to avoid that area the next time I drive through the Nutmeg State.

Actually, I thought it since the President's parents were no secret for many years and Chief Justice Roberts felt comfortable enough to swear him in. Why, what makes you uncomfortable?

Ok. Haven’t done any D&D since college. My kids came across my old books and asked about it. They couldn’t understand where the fun was with no joysticks! Made ME feel old…LOL

And now is where I really have fun smacking you around. If Chief Justice Roberts was uncomfortable with Obama's birth…he'd gone right to congress. Because, then it becomes a political question. But even more interesting than that is the thousands of Constitutional Scholars (people that know a heck of a lot more about it than you or I) would have LOVED to have a long, drawn out talk whether or not Obama was eligible. Again, it was NEVER a secret and it would have made a wonderful case for all those scholars to argue over. You don't understand this country. We love open discussions…not the backroom junk that you blowers adore. That's why you're here…because of these freedoms that allow a minority to air their concerns and worries…and their paranoid delusions. But, they know he is a Natural Born Citizen. And our President.

Yes, before he was sworn in his eligibility could have been challenged, and indeed was, but unsuccessfully and not by anyone with any credibility.

Where is Tracey? The nutter bean is late for her looser party, My guess is she had to go get a booster shot of birther crazy before she can come her and restate the same old rants.

Ahhhhhh Finally….

Sorry, wasn't ignoring you shitheads, I was boycotting the site, cause it was screwed up!

Nahhhh, if you read up, you will see why. I'm sure you had the same problems with comments being cut off, so you know that I am not LYING!

Pfftttt!

Does it cut you off at around 200 messages? I don't think their software was designed to handle this kind of traffic.

“NBC – Born in the USA of citizen parents.”

That's gotta be my favorite. Mainly because it's wrong.

There's actually an issue being addressed by homeland security currently, and I quote:

“There are many US citizen children born to illegal aliens parents (thanks to an interpretation of the 14th Amendement)…”

Currently, thanks to the 14th, born in the United States (unless otherwise claimed by the parents) equates to natural born citizen.

Yuppppp, they get their people in no matter what. This dude, Siddarth Velamoor, is the newest law clerk for Judge Carter. Velamoor is from the law firm Perkins Coie, the same law firm of Robert Bauer – top lawyer for Obama, Obama's presidential campaign, the Democratic National Committee and Obama's Organizing for America – and the same Washington, D.C., lawyer who defended President Obama in lawsuits challenging his eligibility to be president.

Just a little tooooo close for comfort! You all think this is RIGHT?

He had a facebook page and a myspace page up, but has since been scrubbed!

lolololol

Cauldron, you're a GENIUS!!! You've just given the blowers another conspiracy to check out! Let's see how long it takes for the bloggers that come here for ideas can come up with some wild theory and tie it to your statement…

“Currently, thanks to the 14th, born in the United States (unless otherwise claimed by the parents) equates to natural born citizen.”

ALL RIGHT FOLKS!!! Which theory do you think AXJ will come up with first.

1) Parents claimed he was a Kenyan Citizen

2) Parents claimed he was Indonesian

3) Parents claimed he was Alaskan (blowers sometimes forget)

4) Parents claimed he was from Alpha Centauri

Hi Tracey!

I thought it was the other hostipal he was born at. He said one and his sister said another. OOOPS!

Why did Chief Justice have a case erased from the docket, that would hve brought up the subject and had it PROVEN?

I know it isn't true. She opening advocated through her posts that people should call and write the judge.

What case is that corny?

The major birthtards are back. NaturallyCrazy is one of the finest of the birthtards.

Nothing was erased from the docket. It was an issue with the database that was fixed. Paranoid freaks.

Nothing was erased from the docket. It was an issue with the database that was fixed. Paranoid freaks.

Federal judges typically hire their clerks at least a year in advance, which would place the time of the hiring well before the case was assigned to Judge Carter.

In addition to which, this is hardly a novel event. The legal community is finite in size, and it happens from time to time that a clerk is hired who might have a potential conflict of interest over a case. There are detailed guidelines for how such situations are to be handled, and if Judge Carter followed the rules, there shouldn't be a problem.

Birthtards have no strong points.

No, you’re willfully ignoring the intent of the ruling and spouting birther talking points.

Birfers are compulsive fabricators: their lies must be replaced constantly, as the frequency with which they are debunked demands a ready supply.
Pakistan, circa 1981, is one of their more pathetic projects

But, without conspiracies, where would Oily Taste be?

That is patently absurd. First of all, I din’t create any such thing. The Founding Fathers intentionally built in an additional safeguard as a qualification to be the Chief Executive and the Commander in Chief. Hardly reasonable.

The notion that being a natural born citizen is somehow a separate class of people is disingenuous at best. We are all citizens with equal protection under the law, but to ascend to the highest office in the land, a job that one person gets every 4 years, by popular election (not by hereditary fiat as you suggest), the Founding Fathers built in one additional unique safeguard – you must be a natural born citizen born of two citizen parents on US soil. There is nothing unreasonable about that especially given the modern job description of the President includes the key codes to a nuclear arsenal.

And where do you get the 2-citizen parents from? As you said, it’s not anywhere written. Where is your interpretation coming from…the air?

That is wrong. If you are born on this soil, you ARE a citizen, but not necessarily a Natural Born Citizen. If your parents have sworn their allegiance to another country, which is passed down to you, then you are at best, a dual citizen, at that time. But, at adulthood, you need to make a choice as to whom your allegiance is sworn to, considering some countries don't recognize dual citizendhip, like Indonesia or Kenya and the fact that he went to Pakistan in 1981, it's more than likely that he was on Indonesian passport, NOT an American one!

Show your passports Obamacorn!

Jim, I’m tired of the circular arguments. I prove one point definitively and you bring up a previously proven point in another area of this forum. Go read up for yourself. Stop being a follower and learn to think for yourself.

Hmmmm, GOOD NEWS!
Washington DC, here we come!

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/

Then what kind of citizen are you corny?

You know even less about the British monarchy than you do about American law. There have been *numerous* British military officers, including First Sea Lords and high ranking generals, who were not born in Britain or whose parents were not British. Most notable are the Mountbattens, who were German and changed their name from Battenberg due to anti-German sentiment during World War I. There have also been several British sovereigns who were not born in Britain, most notably George I and his son George II, both of whom were born in Hanover.

I dunno, but I hate it when I want to reply to someone and it doesn't go to the comment because it's 4 pages down.

Yo, upgrade this thing, would ya Wash. Ind!

Did I mention that you are easily the most sanctimonious Birfer I’ve heard from in days?

I know the paragraph you are referring to and although it is cited among the considerations the majority had in deliberating their final decision, the only relevant passage for the purpose of discussions is the final paragraph where Justice Grey declares Wong Kim Ark a citizen of the United States.

Thanks for the endorsement.

Only I’m not a ‘birfer’ or birther in any way shape or form.

Why are you tired of it? I’m sitting here reading KWA and all about how they came up with Natural Born Citizen. It is a wonderful history of British Common Law, which our government was formed after. Do you want the part that says your wrong?

Some of us DO have to work, you know. We can't just sit around on the couch like you eating Doritos and expect Obama to just take care of us with free healthcare and unlimited unemployment benefits.

This country is going to SHIT!

FU NO E

Sorry, wrong. Go back to Hamburger University.

Keep reading for the context. There is a passage where they point out that British common law while it certainly had an influence prior to ratification it serves no purpose as it pertains to the post-ratified Constitution or interpretations thereafter.

Paragraph? Wow, you really don’t read anything but what agrees with what you think, do you? It goes on for many paragraphs. Discuses all the uses and conditions and precedences. Really, you should read rather than assume.

Oh and you miht like to know that Justice Grey was appointed by Chester Arthur who lied about his fathers naturalization. For that reason and many others, Wong Kim Ark, though correct in its declaration of Wong Kim Ark as a citizen, remains a highly controversial decision, even amateurish in its approach to its final declaration.

Jim,

It’s a fine read, but ultimately it’s not relevant to the decision as you will see at the end.

The majority punted on attempting to apply the term “natural born citizen” in Wong Kim Ark. There isn’t a legal scholar worth their reputation that would tell you otherwise pro-Obama or not.

JBL, running out of space. Let’s Continue here. Your last:

“Oh and you might like to know that Justice Grey was appointed by Chester Arthur who lied about his fathers naturalization. For that reason and many others, Wong Kim Ark, though correct in its declaration of Wong Kim Ark as a citizen, remains a highly controversial decision, even amateurish in its approach to its final declaration.”

Sorry, wrong again. It was well known that Arthur’s father was not a citizen when Chester was born. In fact, it was well established. The only question was if he was born in Vermont or Canada. But, that’s what happens when you get your news from an ambulance-chasing lawyer’s site.

And where in Wong Kim Ark does it explicitly state that he was a “natural born citizen”?

THIS is the concluding statement to the Majority Opinion in Wong Kim Ark:

“The evident intention, and the necessary effect, of the submission of this case to the decision of the court upon the facts agreed by the parties were to present for determination the single question stated at the beginning of this opinion, namely, whether a child born in the United States, of parent of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States. For the reasons above stated, this court is of opinion that the question must be answered in the affirmative.

Order affirmed.”

Wong Kim Ark is a **citizen** of the United States by virtue of his birth here and not being a child of a diplomat, and having never renounced his allegiance to the United States.

THAT is what Wong Kim Ark decided and not the imagined or superimposed retro meaning that Obama and your ilk have attempted to attach to it.

“One of the finest of the Birthtards”
That's an absolutely precious turn of phrase LOL

JBL, what kind of a citizen is Mr. Ark then?

So your saying that lawyers and Judges that use different parts of the opinion are wrong to do that, that they have no meaning? You obviously don’t practice law…I mean they’ve been using parts of Judicial opinions for over 200 years.

What a bizarre statement to make. Chief Justice Roberts has/had an OBLIGATION to swear Obama in. It’s not like Roberts could decline to do so.

And what makes me uncomfortable, about what?! If you making some veiled reference to me somehow being uncomfortable because of the color of President Obama’s skin, then I’m offended to say the least. I resent your insinuation and I suggest you grow up.

My problem isn’t with the man, so much as the precedent that he is knowingly setting, and what it could lead to in the future. And in that regard I am uncomfortable with the notion of a guy like Rupert Murdoch, for example suddenly deciding that he wants to run for President. Was he born here? no, he wasn’t, but now that the first layer of security has been knocked down, it won’t be long before someone challenges the next layer. Wait and see.

Hmmm…Perhaps you are mistaken…
http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/10/27/v…

“Bottom line: One of the 2009-2010 clerks for Judge Carter (Barnett/Keyes v Obama) is Siddharth Vijaykumar Velamoor previously of Perkins Coie = Robert Bauer = barry’s lawyer. Clerkships are set up months ahead of time. One comes on in August (Lindsay Lutz) and one in October (Velamoor).”

from link:
http://citizensagainstproobamamediabias.wordpre…

The oddest part of the whole thing — it appears he went to Mercer Island High School, where barry’s mom went. Somehow that seems too tidy. But again, there’s nothing nefarious I ran into. Maybe others have found something.

Other curiosities on Mercer Island – Velamoor not being a common name: A TRISHNA Velamoor also went to MIHS (younger sister?). And a SESH Velamoor (father?) hails from Hyderabad, India, lives on Mercer Island and works at Foundation for the Future as Trustee & Director of Programs.

AND another coincidence…During his 1981 trip to Pakistan, one of the thug-in-chief’s side trips was to… (drum roll, please)… … Hyderabad, India.

“superimposed retro meaning”
christ, what a dolt.

Sorry, I don't see the contradiction.

Is there reason to believe that Velamoor was hired subsequent to Carter's being assigned the Barnett case?

But, his parental situation was know for many years. It wasn’t a secret. And, you would assume since you are so adamant, that the Chief Justice of SCOTUS would absolutely know that Obama wasn’t qualified. So, it would have been brought to congress’ attention long before the election. By uncomfortable I meant about Obama being qualified, nothing else needed to be read into it.

He went on a US Passport you idiot that was issued in 1967. Here is your proof that Americans could travel to Pakistan in 1981 with their US Passports

NO. 81-33A

Travel Advisory
Passport Services/Bureau of Consular Affa[irs]
Department of State/Wahington. D.C. 205__

AUGUST 17, 1981

TRAVEL TO PAKISTAN

BEFORE TRAVELING TO PAKISTAN, AMERICAN CITIZENS SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE FOLLO[WING] UPDATED VISA REQUIREMENTS: 30 DAY VISAS ARE AVAILABLE AT PAKISTANI AIRPORTS [FOR] TOURISTS ONLY. AS THESE VISAS ARE RARELY EXTENDED BEYOND THE 30 DAY TIME PER[IOD,] TOURISTS PLANNING TO STAY LONGER SHOULD SECURE VISAS BEFORE COMING TO PAKIS[TAN.] ANY TRAVELER COMING INTO PAKISTAN OVERLAND FROM INDIA MUST REPEAT MUST HA[VE A] VALID VISA, AS 30 DAY VISAS ARE NOT REPEAT NOT ISSUED AT THE OVERLAND BOR[DER] CROSSING POINT AT WAGHA.

ANY NON-OFFICIAL AMERICAN WHO IS IN PAKISTAN FOR MORE THAN 30 DAYS MUST REGIS[TER] WITH THE GOVERNMENT’S FOREIGNER REGISTRATION OFFICE. EXIT PERMITS ARE REQUI[RED] FOR THOSE WHO HAVE STAYED LONGER THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE THEY ARE ALLOWED TO LE[AVE T]HE COUNTRY. ALL AMERICANS TRAVELING TO PAKISTAN ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS OR [FOR] PRIVATE EMPLOYMENT ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A VISA BEFORE ARRIVAL, AND, AS [THE] GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN’S CLEARANCE PROCESS IS OFTEN QUITE LENGTHY, WE WOULD URGE TH[OSE] COMING TO APPLY AT THE NEAREST PAKISTANI EMBASSY OR CONSULATE AS FAR IN ADVA[NCE] OF THEIR SCHEDULED ARRIVAL AS POSSIBLE.

THIS SUPERSEDED REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN DEPARTMENT PUBLICATION M-264, ["VISA] REQUIREMENTS OF FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS.["]

EXPIRATION DATE: INDEFINITE.

Jim, your question is nonsensical.

You are either a citizen or you are not.

But some citizens are not “natural born citizens” as required by Article II, Section 1 to be eligible to serve as POTUS.

First, the President hasn't attached any meaning to this case, at least publicly (he may well have taught it when he was adjunct faculty).

Second, you are wrong. Wong Kim Ark was a natural born citizen. So is the President. All the bloviation and obscure Swiss philosophes in the world won't change that.

ChrisJay, I'm a dolt?

Haven't you stated several times, like many of the other intellectual retards in this forum, that Wong Kim Ark was determined to be a “natural born citizen”, case closed?!

Am I somehow mistaken?

No, Jim's question is legitimate. You just said that Wong Kim Ark was not a natural born citizen. What kind was he, then? There are only natural born and naturalized citizens under the law. If he wasn't natural born (despite being born in California), then what was he?

I think the Great Cornholio is a natural born citizen of McDonaldland.

So, what your saying is we fought a revolutionary war to get away from monarchy to create a different monarchy?

Everybody should know that Corny has no E in it !

You are so dumb. You have no chance relying upon Vattel. NONE.

“Plaintiffs presume that the words of Emmerich de Vattel, John Jay, and John Armor Bingham alone empower this Court to define the natural born citizen clause. The Complaint conveniently chooses to ignore Congress’ long history of defining citizenship, whether naturalized or by birth. See Charles Gordon, “Who Can be President of the United States: The Unresolved Enigma,” 28 Md. L. Rev. 1, 7-22 (1968) (contrasting 150 years of active Congressional legislation against judicial restraint).” – Judge David Carter

U.S. Immigration Law CLEARLY states that only ONE parent need be a U.S. citizen in order for his/her child to become a natural born U.S. citizen by birth. Obama's mama was a born and raised native of Kansas, which was admitted into the Union as a state on January 21, 186. She was a U.S. citizen.

Since ONE parent is a U.S. citizen, the child automatically acquires U.S. citizen upon birth. Therefore, since President Obama's mother was a U.S. citizen, he acquired his U.S. citizenship via his mother. It's called citizenship by “Acquisition.”

Thus, even IF he was born in Kenya, Hawaii, or Krypton, he is STILL a natural born U.S. citizen, which citizenship passed from his mother to him.

You are like a pimple on an elephant's ass, trying to use Vattel over British common law. This book by a Swiss philosopher written in 1787, didn't have the term “natural born citizen” in it. Vattel believe that ONLY nobility should be allowed firearms.

And since Vattel also wrote that only the nobility should be allowed firearms, obviously the Framers weren't that enthralled with him. You guys are tripping if you think any court will not laugh you out again.

ellid, I'm pointing out what SCOTUS really held in Wong Kim Ark, which is in complete disharmony with what you and ChrisJay, Jim, MajorityWill and the rest of the lot have been repeatedly and erroneously stating all over this forum.

Wong Kim Ark is a citizen by virtue of his birth. It is no coincidence that Justice Horace Gray avoided employing the term “natural born citizen” in the concluding paragraph of the majority opinion.

Who cares? Did anyone investigate his specialty? I did. Product liability. Another birther wet dream.

That's just ridiculous. So a citizen at birth is not a “natural born” citizen? Hey, if the doctor used forceps, does that mean not “natural born”? How about Cesarean Section? What about in vitro fertilization? Um, induced delivery? What about being born on a US military base overseas? What if only one parent were a citizen and that parent died before the baby's born? What if the baby is born in a swimming pool? What if it's born feet first?
I'm having trouble thinking of things that might mean “not natural born” to someone whose BRAIN IS NOT ENGAGED!
A natural born citizen and a citizen at birth are the same thing. Go ahead and tell me it was “never decided.” Gad, it was “never decided” because it was “not in contention.” It was understood that a citizen at birth is a natural born citizen. Until now. When crazy people have decided to wonder what a perfectly rational phrase in American English means. Augh! My head hurts.
Maybe Barack Obama wasn't really born at ALL. Maybe he's a figment of our imagination. Maybe someone knew all the way back in the sixties that they were going to pass a fake black guy off as a candidate for US president, so they announced his birth in the newspapers even though he wasn't real. OH, NO, I know what … they didn't put that announcement in the paper because they knew back then … they discovered that announcement a few years ago and just used it! They decided to pass off this fake person as the real Barack Obama whose birth announcement they found. That must be why there's all this evidence that SOMEONE NAMED BARACK OBAMA was a real citizen back then. I wonder what they've done with that real guy? Some dungeon somewhere, do you think? Sure, that's the ticket. A dungeon. Prove it isn't so.
Gad.

You are insufferably pompous and you are a Birther:
that makes you imminently mockable;
deal with it

Huh?

We don't have a monarchy, that would require a King or Queen. Over the last 100 years or so we have devolved into a virtual oligarchy, on the other hand . . . although we initially didn't set out to do so.

You're creating a separate class of citizenship. Then only allowing that royal class to ascend to the thrown. That is a monarchy. Doesn't matter what you call it then, you've got a ruling class and an underclass.

Ellid, you must be kidding right? I've linked the complete text of the Majority Opinion in Wong Kim Ark. You can read it for yourself. But the relevant passage to the issue we have been bloviating back and forth about is the one that I cut and paste word for word right from the Justice Grey's majority opinion, the final concluding paragraph that states that Wong Kim Ark is absolutely 100% a US citizen by virtue of his birth.

NOWHERE in that majority opinion of the final declaration is Wong Kim Ark stated to be a “natural born citizen”: NOWHERE.

What's that faint sound I hear? Oh look! Your House of Cards is crumbling.

Did you happen to read the whole thing JBL? There is a wonderful section on natural born in there for you to enjoy. Instead of just taking the last paragraph, you should really try reading the whole thing…it would make you proud to see how our constitution is used to overcome bigotry.

Whats the matter, can't debate me on the facts anymore?

Only intellectual lightweights resort to calling names when they run out of baseless facts to hurl.

He also thought the state should mandate and regulate religion. From book 1 chapter 12–

“In religious affairs a citizen has only a right to be free from compulsion, but can by no means claim that of openly doing what he pleases, without regard to the consequences it may produce on society.(52) The establishment of religion by law, and its public exercise, are matters of state, and are necessarily under the jurisdiction of the political authority. If all men are bound to serve God, the entire nation, in her national capacity is doubtless obliged to serve and honour him (Prelim. § 5), And as this important duty is to be discharged by the nation in whatever manner she judges best, — to the nation it belongs to determine what religion she will follow, and what public worship she thinks proper to establish.”

Obviously Congress wasn't following his opinions.

I'm not kidding. I am, however, going to bed.

Have fun in Frog Hollow, or wherever you live.

A Birfer talking about baseless facts: now there's a subject you can sink your teeth in!

If you had any intellect it wouldn't do you any good anyway. You can't separate fact from fantasy. Vattel was a Swiss philosopher who didn't want the people to have firearms at all. Do you really think the Framers adhered to his philosophy over the country from which they came? Childish and stupid.

ChrisJay,

Did you not make a statement to the effect that Wong Kim Ark was declared a “natural born citizen” as many of your other fellow comrades?

It's OK, to admit you are wrong once in a while.

The only definition of NBC that does not require any laws to be considered in determination of child’s citizenship is the one that includes birth in the country of citizen parents.

Shall we discuss your accusation that there is “illegal propaganda” occurring here?

You are confused. I never weighed in on Wong Kim Ark.
You're confused about a lot of things

Actually, you’ve got that wrong too. It wasn’t us who claimed it, it was Collins…the losing attorney. You see, even back then they understood what a natural born citizen was and they were bigots who didn’t want chinese-americans to be able to become president. Why do you ignore that fact?

Did you honestly decide to take some time to read the tread.

A reasonable person will always look at the general case and take time to understand the facts relating to that case. Then they will look a more specific cases if it is required. What is being discussed is the general case.

However, you have continued to look a specific case and attempt to try to make the facts support your position. The problem with this is that reasonable people will always look at the general case, and then let conspiracy theorist know where they are wrong.

This is a simple concept that you fail to understand.

Through the process of continual debunking of misinformation we have gotten a better understanding of the issues. This is what has happened, and you seemed to have missed it.

naturalizedcitizen it is over, you have lost.

A reasonable person would try to determine what the words meant within a historical context.

However, you have a more serious problem. You fail to realize that a lot has changed in the over 200 years, since the constitution has been enacted.

Please read this about dual citizenship.

http://www.consular.canada.usembassy.gov/dual_citizenship.asp

You continue to attempt to make the facts fit your opinion. Unfortunately, that is not how it works.

It didn't have to. Because there's only two types of citizen. Natural Born, or Naturalized. This has been constantly pointed out to you, and your inability to parse that people never actually had to cater to a made up category just for you smack of delusion of the highest order.

So how's the other side doing? Don't pick on us too much! LOL

Is this still more of birther misinformation or just a blatant lie. The ruling of the case is stated as above, it has been dismissed. One would have believed that you would be “soaking in your sorrow” after having yet another frivolous birther case being dismissed. Your disillusioned is so sever that you are will to actually believe something that is overtly false.

In 1790 US Congress passed a law declaring the children born abroad of US citizen parents are “natural born citizens”.
That law was repealed in 1795 and such children were declared as citizens.

“Natural born citizen” phrase means that child has loyalty to only one country at birth. It is not necessary to examine any law to determine the citizenship of that child.

The only definition that fits this description is a child born in the country of citizen parents.
No law either US or foreign one is necessary to determine the citizenship at birth for such child.

Naturalizedcitizen: “The only definition that fits this description is a child born in the country of citizen parents.”

Why is it the only definition that fits? Where does it state in the law or constitution that YOUR definition is the correct one? Or, are you just assuming and have nothing to back that up?

Obots have talking points. When discussing the NBC issue – WKA is their bible.
Regardless of how many times you point out to them what was the issue resolved by WKA, they will come back and claimed that WKA is an NBC.

It seems the deep you go down the fugitive “rabbit hole,” the more things that you have to make up to support your disillusion “Stevie.” Anyways, it is kind of amusing watch your disillusion. We are waiting to read more of your writings. Too bad your writing will only relieve that you are having difficult grasping one simple fact that our president was born in Hawaii.

Wrong.

According to your logic, I can quote Orly’s opinion as settled law.

Collins probably exaggerated the situation trying to influence the court by playing the prejudice card. His opinion has zero legal weight in courts.

I think we are seeing how the birther mind works from Tracy's rant about Judge Carter's clerk.

This is how the wheels and gears in their heads grind out birther logic.

Judge Carter hires a clerk.

The clerk's father is from Hyderabad.

President Obama visited Hyderabad.

The President is a thug.

This must be true because the Thuggee cult started in Hyderabad.

How can you argue with this bear-trap logic.

Resistance is futile.

When they finally come to get Tracy, whomever he or she is, the little springs and gears will be spilling out onto the keyboard.

I didn’t say anything about settled law. I said a brilliant attorney was arguing that if they gave citizenship to a chinese-american, that he could become president…even though his parents were not US citizens. Now, nowhere is that contested. Why? You like to plug in things, why don’t you think that was challenged? Maybe because it was true and a smart lawyer knows the laws better than you? Unless you’re some kind of legal or constitutional scholar, I would have to take that man’s opinion over yours.

Hey, JBL, NaturalizedCitizen…how about we restart here. Unless you're through bending laws and making up stuff. If so, I may have a solution to your dilemma on how to get to the next step to get discovery. And, I'll bet it can even work…if there are enough of you.

Seeing as how both Judge Land AND Judge Carter smacked the birfers down harder than Ivan Drago beat down Apollo Creed in Rocky IV, that's probably a good idea. You may want to stay down for a while, just to be on the safe side..

In two words or less?

“Pathetically hilarious.”

That is the only description that fits the national security concern that framers had in mind when deciding the eligibility requirements for POTUS.

It is the only definition that ensures that person does not have dual loyalty at birth.

It is the only definition that does NOT NEED any LAW to determine which country can claim the child as its citizen.

Judge Roberts did not have “standing” to question Obama (separation of powers).
I am sure if a case comes before the SCOTUS that he will speak out and let us know what his legal opinion is. Until that time you are just assuming things.

And yet, you cannot point to anywhere that spells that out. You can only assume and speculate. But, why is your speculation any better than mine? I can speculate that it means born in the country and say that the only loyalty they have is to the place providing the protection…therefor natural born citizen of the country.

He could have said it because of the following possibilities:
1. He believed it
2. He did not believe it but thought that tactic might be useful to sway the court towards his argument (that WKA not be declared as a citizen), even if he had to embellish his claims and play on prejudice towards a Chinese.

I do not know how good lawyer he was – but he lost that case.

Regardless of the whether assumption 1 or assumption 2 is true, it is just one man’s opinion – this opinion was not confirmed by a court’s decision.

You didn't read Judge Carter's ruling very carefully did you – this has already been dismissed in the District of Columbia court which is why Ms. Taitz re-filed in the Federal Court of California – and if she refiles – it will be dismissed again.

But wait a minute, your whole assumption is that Obama can't be president because his father was Kenyan. Are you saying that it's a big secret? That, long before the election was held, Chief Justice Roberts knew the constitution that he swore to uphold could be breached and he'd of said nothing to anybody in congress? Wow, what kind of a vacuum do you live in?

He could have also said it for the best reason of all…it’s true. Note how you always leave the most obvious answer out of your list. But, that’s neither here nor there because all you’re left with is congress. Good luck on that, they think you all are nuts too. Goodnight.

That's what I thought…we do aim to please!!!

Your definition of NBC allows the Congress to change the Constitution by changing the citizenship rules.
It does not make sense from national security standpoint – children of foreigners born in the USA have dual loyalty and are not suitable to command the US military.
Your definition could have been expressed in a simpler phrase: “born citizen” than the one used by Constitution.
My definition does not rely on speculation that person born in USA of foreign parents will be loyal to the USA only.

But, you assume that they spoke the same way back then as we speak now. Back then, natural born citizen could just be their fancy way of saying the same thing as born citizen. Do you remember Shakespeare? Does anyone nowadays speak like that? So all you have are your assumptions, which do not make you correct.

No, this is not my whole assumption. I think that Obama is not eligible because of two reasons:
1. Not born in the USA
2. His father was a foreigner.

One of the reasons used by Carter to dismiss Orly's case was separation of powers.
Looking at decisions made by numerous judges involved in eligibility cases – they are more interested in following the process than discovering the truth. In addition, they do not want to deal with a “hot potato” issue, unless they have to. I would not be surprised if Roberts was doing the same.
He will deal with the issue only if he has to – when there is a case in front of SCOTUS.

Well, the separation of powers came up because Orly was having one of her snit fits and didn't get filed in time. And, that was tenuous for the candidates anyway since they weren't on enough ballots to have a chance to win.

1) yeah, now I remember. You like to call state officials liars and crooks with no proof. That, and twist words so hard they'd snap if they could. But, as Judge Carter said, American records are the best in the world. So, if you'd believe some forgeries over Hawaii, it just shows your agenda.

2) We have precedence on that…Arthur's dad wasn't a citizen when he was born. So, as you can see, this has not been a problem until now, when some with an agenda decided they didn't like Obama.

Judges, unfortunately for you, tend to prefer to follow the constitution and laws…not delusional rantings of a beach-blond communist (see hearing comments). The truth has been out there all along, you just don't like it.

Dr. Taitz response in part: Citizens seem to have no voice, they have no standing to bring any legal actions in face of any fraud. They only have standing to pay taxes and pay for the judges, clerks, congress and senate who never address any issues. They should have no concerns about an inhabitant of the White house sporting 39 social security numbers, some are the social security numbers of the deceased. How long will it take for those citizens to revolt? Washington Post has written that 8 out of 10 Americans know about this issue. According to AOL-it’s 85%. This number is growing. How long will those people be silent? 4,5 million marched on Washington DC on September the 12th. How many will march next time around, when so many loose their jobs (half a million jobs every month officially) and probably double that number unofficially. When they loose their homes at a rate higher then the rate during great depression. When they become numb from hatred against this fraudulent usurper in the White House, corrupt politicians and corrupt judges. Who will stop them?

Yawn…better question, when will Orly figure out how to be a lawyer?

1. I am just using common sense. When a person’s birth is reported in three different COUNTRIES, and the COLB image is posted on the friendly web page, I am suspicious.

It would cost Obama nothing to produce the long form birth certificate showing Kapiolani as birth hospital. After all, Obama friendly web sites (like snopes.com) have reported both Queens and Kapiolani as birth hospitals thus adding to the confusion. His sister was the source for Queens hospital birth.

No college documents are available to public.
DoH index data for certificate number shown on the “factcheck.org” is hidden from public.

Statements from Dr. Fukino that were designed to mislead the public. Legal opinion form AG Bennet (used by Fukino to issue press release in July 2009) is hidden from public. There are too many little things that make no sense for someone who claims Hawaiian (USA) birth.

All of the above and many other suspicious details about Obama’s birth could have been resolved in no time.

Honolulu Advertiser published the long form birth certificate for Nordyke twins several months ago. There was nothing in that document that would violate anybody’s privacy.
Kapiolani Hospital did not complain, neither did the attending physician. Obama could have done the same – there is no privacy protection issue here.

I am not aware of the fact that judge Carter had Obama’s birth certificate in hand. He is just speculating that COLB image posted on the web represents truthful information.
I have asked before and have to ask again: Can this be used as a precedent, all of us can now post documents on the web and ask government officials to take them as valid documents?

The point of comparing USA and foreign documents would be valid only in case that judge Carter had physical copies of both in his hand. In that case we could say that USA document trumps the foreign one.

2. Just because one usurper succeeded, does not mean that the Constitutional requirement has been changed. I would like to see the SCOTUS debate the issue and rule on it. It is time to make it crystal clear to everyone what the meaning of the eligibility rule is.

Orly is not a communist – she grew up in a communist country and is familiar with totalitarian regime’s court system.

I am curious about the claim of 39 different SS numbers. According to the report from private investigator (which was submitted to judge Carter) there was only one SS# (a duplicate from CT) used by Obama?

Where did you get the number of 4.5 million marchers on Sept 12?

Perhaps, but keep in mind that Shakespeare predates US Constitution by almost 200 years.

I think that the length of the Constitution, if today's Congress were to write it from scratch, would be an order of magnitude bigger than the existing one. Today's generation would be more likely to add extra words where not needed.

I doubt that framers of the Constitution put meaningless fluff into such an important part of the Constitution as eligibility for POTUS.

Phrase “born citizen” requires interpretation of citizenship laws, “natural born citizen” does not. It is not susceptible to changes in the law.
The only way to change the eligibility requirement is through the amendment process (sufficient number of states have to ratify it) not just a vote in Congress. This would also explain why the naturalization act from 1790 (defining children of US citizens born abroad as NBCs) was repealed just five years later. The 1790 law changed the eligibility requirement – thus violating the Constitution since proper process was not followed.

She's been allowed to bring all those frivolous law suits. And her statement is illustrative of her level of honesty–for example her own investigator only confirmed one number that was actually used by Obama, and also said it's not uncommon for other numbers to become “associated” with a person for a variety of reasons. Yet she's back to claiming that he was “sporting 39 social security numbers.” Perfect example of the way she, and birftoons in general, like to twist the truth.

Then you've got even people like Lucas Smith and Larry Sinclair–not exactly Obama lovers–saying she asked them to lie in court. These are two people who would do just about anything to get Obama, so when they make accusations like that I tend to think there may be something to it. They certainly have no motivation to lie about Orly–quite the opposite.

When are the barfsquad going to start asking themselves why the only people on their side are all liar and scumbags of one sort or another? Why aren't there any credible people taking up their cause? How many lies do they have to buy into, only to be exposed later, before they stop believing everything they read on a birther blog?

I suspect the answer is there will never be an end to their insanity. That's one of the signs that it is in fact insanity. Only medication and years of therapy will bring burfoons back to reality… and that's assuming they were ever in touch with reality in the first place.

What recourse do 3rd party candidates have when ineligible candidates from major parties are placed on the ballot? Secretary of state ignores the issue, Congress ignores the issue and courts dismiss cases for the lack of standing.
Who is protecting the rights of minority party candidates to participate in fair elections?