Tweet
It is time to leave Obama bin Laden’s questionable claim to being a natural born citizen in the hands of America’s body politic.
The Birthers
Teo Bear
11/5/2012
Excerpt:
It is time to leave Obama bin Laden’s questionable claim to being a natural born citizen in the hands of America’s body politic. Long ago I knew it would end back here, a few weeks before the election, we would be telling you that Obama is not a constitutionally qualified natural born citizen under Article II, Section 1, clause 5. I knew this because the courts, the press and elected officials have been evading this issue for over 4 years now. However, this election we are prepared and have had the time to make this known to a majority of America.
I can say with absolute certainty that the definition of a natural born citizen last used by the Supreme Court of the United States demonstrates that Obama does not qualify under it, and that no other laws were passed or court decisions reached to change the national common law of the United States which is a natural born citizen is the child of citizens born under the protection of their parents citizenship.
As our opponents in this national debate, the Obots, have tried to have you believe is that the court decision of Wong Kim Ark made all persons born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States natural born citizens, if you follow their logic. But we have shown that Supreme Court ruled that Wong Kim Ark became a “citizen of the United States” because he was born in the United States and his parents were permanently domiciled residents and not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity by their native country. A citizen of the United States does not mean a natural born citizen in Article II, Section 1, clause 5, which states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”
Wong Kim Ark was a “citizen of the United States” at his birth, but critical question is, was he born before or after the adoption of the Constitution of the United States? He was born after the adoption of the Constitution, and thus ineligible to hold the office of commander in Chief. If Obama’s claim to presidentially eligible citizenship is based upon the 14th amendment he too was born after the adoption of the Constitution.
The fact is that before the 14th Amendment the United States had no national citizenship laws except for those concerning naturalization and the first case to reach the Supreme Court concerning the 14th Amendment was a case called Minor v Happersett. Here a woman born in Missouri wanted to vote. Her standing was under two clauses in Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, first that she was citizen of the United States under the 14th Amendment because she was born in the United States and that she was entitled to the same rights as any other citizen of the United States, including males. The court broke the question into two parts, first was she a citizen of the United States and was she equally entitled to the privileges and immunities clause also found in Section 1 of the 14th Amendment. As to the citizenship of Ms. Minor the court wrote a complete history of the character of our national citizenship from founding of the Republic to the 14th Amendment. The court said they could use the 14th Amendment to establish citizenship, but warned that wording of citizenship was explicit, the 14th Amendment explicitly made a person “a citizen of the United States.” The judge then said that a national citizenship existed before the 14th Amendment and explained in detail who were the “citizens of the United States at the Adoption.” The judge then said that the Constitution allowed for the creation of new citizens explicitly by the powers of Congress was given to establish a uniform rule naturalize and implicitly by using Article II to demonstrate that citizen can also be born under the Constitution. The court then went on to give the national common law definition of a natural born citizen.
The later Court hearing Wong Kim Ark citied Minor v. Happersett of 1874, accepting and incorporating the previous Court’s definition of a natural born citizen into the dicta, consideration and holding of the Wong Kim ark decision of 1898. Using the decisions already made by the Supreme Court of the United States, Obama is not a natural born citizen. Game over. It is for this reason Obama has spent over 5 million of private/public money denying us, natural born citizens standing in every court we tried to raise the issue in.
Oh, if you are wondering what was the final outcome of Ms. Minor, she was found to be to be a citizen, not under the 14th amendment, but because she was deemed to have been a natural born citizen, but she was denied the right to vote. The reasoning of the court was that the 14th Amendment did not add privileges and immunities to the constitution, very interesting to read. Ironic that she could run for the office of President but not vote for herself.
During this whole time we were marginalized by the right and ridiculed by the left. The left was especially agitated that we would dare to challenge their choice’s constitutional qualifications that they want to brand us with the scarlet letter, Birthers, There is an interesting fight among Obama’s supporters of who actually gave us our name. But I credit Ben Smith for giving us our name. As Ben and the left were busy applying Saul Alinsky’s Rule 5 to us, public ridicule, Alinsky tells his disciples that it is their most potent weapon, one that there is no defense for. We appeared. Unknown to Smith because it was also unknown to Alinsky is that there is a defense and that defense is to embrace the ridicule. It isn’t easy, but with faith and history as a guide it does work. Today when a person searches on the term “birther” on Goggle it comes in as the number two site, only the wiki site is higher. This allowed us to get the essays and other websites to the people so they could have access to the history and laws on just who is a natural born citizen, and to compare them to the facts and make their own decision, unfiltered from people like Smith. Over 60% of the American public has some sort of question surrounding Obama’s eligibility now, because I would like to think it was because the left was so obsessed with branding people. I trust that when the American people know the facts they will have inner courage to call a spade a spade when faced with the truth that idol and the idolaters have deceived them.
.................................................. ...
View the complete post at:
http://birthers.org/misc/EoB.htm
The Birthers
Teo Bear
11/5/2012
Excerpt:
It is time to leave Obama bin Laden’s questionable claim to being a natural born citizen in the hands of America’s body politic. Long ago I knew it would end back here, a few weeks before the election, we would be telling you that Obama is not a constitutionally qualified natural born citizen under Article II, Section 1, clause 5. I knew this because the courts, the press and elected officials have been evading this issue for over 4 years now. However, this election we are prepared and have had the time to make this known to a majority of America.
I can say with absolute certainty that the definition of a natural born citizen last used by the Supreme Court of the United States demonstrates that Obama does not qualify under it, and that no other laws were passed or court decisions reached to change the national common law of the United States which is a natural born citizen is the child of citizens born under the protection of their parents citizenship.
As our opponents in this national debate, the Obots, have tried to have you believe is that the court decision of Wong Kim Ark made all persons born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States natural born citizens, if you follow their logic. But we have shown that Supreme Court ruled that Wong Kim Ark became a “citizen of the United States” because he was born in the United States and his parents were permanently domiciled residents and not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity by their native country. A citizen of the United States does not mean a natural born citizen in Article II, Section 1, clause 5, which states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”
Wong Kim Ark was a “citizen of the United States” at his birth, but critical question is, was he born before or after the adoption of the Constitution of the United States? He was born after the adoption of the Constitution, and thus ineligible to hold the office of commander in Chief. If Obama’s claim to presidentially eligible citizenship is based upon the 14th amendment he too was born after the adoption of the Constitution.
The fact is that before the 14th Amendment the United States had no national citizenship laws except for those concerning naturalization and the first case to reach the Supreme Court concerning the 14th Amendment was a case called Minor v Happersett. Here a woman born in Missouri wanted to vote. Her standing was under two clauses in Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, first that she was citizen of the United States under the 14th Amendment because she was born in the United States and that she was entitled to the same rights as any other citizen of the United States, including males. The court broke the question into two parts, first was she a citizen of the United States and was she equally entitled to the privileges and immunities clause also found in Section 1 of the 14th Amendment. As to the citizenship of Ms. Minor the court wrote a complete history of the character of our national citizenship from founding of the Republic to the 14th Amendment. The court said they could use the 14th Amendment to establish citizenship, but warned that wording of citizenship was explicit, the 14th Amendment explicitly made a person “a citizen of the United States.” The judge then said that a national citizenship existed before the 14th Amendment and explained in detail who were the “citizens of the United States at the Adoption.” The judge then said that the Constitution allowed for the creation of new citizens explicitly by the powers of Congress was given to establish a uniform rule naturalize and implicitly by using Article II to demonstrate that citizen can also be born under the Constitution. The court then went on to give the national common law definition of a natural born citizen.
“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.” Chief Justice Waite, Minor v. Happersett, 1874.
The later Court hearing Wong Kim Ark citied Minor v. Happersett of 1874, accepting and incorporating the previous Court’s definition of a natural born citizen into the dicta, consideration and holding of the Wong Kim ark decision of 1898. Using the decisions already made by the Supreme Court of the United States, Obama is not a natural born citizen. Game over. It is for this reason Obama has spent over 5 million of private/public money denying us, natural born citizens standing in every court we tried to raise the issue in.
Oh, if you are wondering what was the final outcome of Ms. Minor, she was found to be to be a citizen, not under the 14th amendment, but because she was deemed to have been a natural born citizen, but she was denied the right to vote. The reasoning of the court was that the 14th Amendment did not add privileges and immunities to the constitution, very interesting to read. Ironic that she could run for the office of President but not vote for herself.
During this whole time we were marginalized by the right and ridiculed by the left. The left was especially agitated that we would dare to challenge their choice’s constitutional qualifications that they want to brand us with the scarlet letter, Birthers, There is an interesting fight among Obama’s supporters of who actually gave us our name. But I credit Ben Smith for giving us our name. As Ben and the left were busy applying Saul Alinsky’s Rule 5 to us, public ridicule, Alinsky tells his disciples that it is their most potent weapon, one that there is no defense for. We appeared. Unknown to Smith because it was also unknown to Alinsky is that there is a defense and that defense is to embrace the ridicule. It isn’t easy, but with faith and history as a guide it does work. Today when a person searches on the term “birther” on Goggle it comes in as the number two site, only the wiki site is higher. This allowed us to get the essays and other websites to the people so they could have access to the history and laws on just who is a natural born citizen, and to compare them to the facts and make their own decision, unfiltered from people like Smith. Over 60% of the American public has some sort of question surrounding Obama’s eligibility now, because I would like to think it was because the left was so obsessed with branding people. I trust that when the American people know the facts they will have inner courage to call a spade a spade when faced with the truth that idol and the idolaters have deceived them.
.................................................. ...
View the complete post at:
http://birthers.org/misc/EoB.htm