U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-13-2011, 01:30 PM
 
1,777 posts, read 1,156,043 times
Reputation: 589

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by claudhopper View Post
Everybody has a different interpretation of what a "natural born citizen" is. I believe Vattel, Law of Nations, is the authority. He says a natural born citizen has no divided allegiance, born in the United States to 2 American citizens.
Obama cannot prove he was born in the U.S. and his father, being a Kenyan, was a British subject, making Obama a British subject (divided alliance).
This can only be settled by the Supreme Court, which repeatedly refuses to take up the case.
I'm done here. we are going in circles
I'm sorry, but your interpretation of the natural born citizen clause is one that not a single current judge, congressman, constitutional scholar or law professor agrees with.

In 1897, the Supreme Court in Wong Kim Ark stated that anybody born in the United States, regardless of parentage, is a natural born citizen.

Quote:
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.

The dissenting justices cited Vattel, as you do, in support of what they thought a natural born citizen was. However, no court has cited Vattel in over 100 years as reflecting who is a natural born citizen of the United States. The Wong case is still one of the leading cases on citizenship and has been positively cited by SCOTUS to this day.


It would also be a neat trick if Vattel actually said that "a natural born citizen has no divided allegiance, born in the United States to 2 American citizens," since Vattel himself died a decade before the American Revolution!

 
Old 04-13-2011, 01:35 PM
 
19,125 posts, read 9,064,090 times
Reputation: 3855
Quote:
Originally Posted by claudhopper View Post
Everybody has a different interpretation of what a "natural born citizen" is. I believe Vattel, Law of Nations, is the authority. He says a natural born citizen has no divided allegiance, born in the United States to 2 American citizens.
de vattel never used the term "natural born citizen" in his lifetime ( either in english or in the original french translation ) so he couldn't have defined it. the translation of de vattels " Les Naturels ou îndigènet" to "natural born citizen" didn't happen till after both de vattel's death and the ratification of the US constitution.

it's unlikely that de vattel had any opinions on US policy since the country didn't exist in his lifetime ( de vattel died in 1767 ). as we know we were at that time a british colony and subject to english law. when it came to citizenship england followed jus soli, birth on soil, regardless of parents citizenship ( a fact de vattel mentions in "law of nations" ).
 
Old 04-13-2011, 01:43 PM
 
19,125 posts, read 9,064,090 times
Reputation: 3855
Quote:
Originally Posted by claudhopper View Post
I'm done here. we are going in circles
which point that you've brought up do you think we've gone in circles?
 
Old 04-13-2011, 04:47 PM
 
Location: Eastern NC
18,092 posts, read 16,618,330 times
Reputation: 15930
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffington View Post
This post is messed up completely.

The House was under the massive gavel of Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
Senate under "Dingy" Harry Reid (D-NV) at tghe time.

However, In 2012, the required standard of proof will be much higher. Push will come to shove.

It is common knowledge (if you are even partially-aware of this issue) that he spent $2M. Go educate yourself and then back.
As for the first part, I was refering to this new house. As for the last part, I guess since you refuse to post a link, it must mean that you made the numbers up.
 
Old 04-13-2011, 05:40 PM
 
Location: Gone
25,237 posts, read 13,302,229 times
Reputation: 5915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Driller1 View Post
I hope Donald does find the answer.
To finding what, a better wig maker?

Birthers = Dead From The Neck Up

Casper
 
Old 04-13-2011, 07:25 PM
 
Location: Northern CA
12,775 posts, read 9,437,690 times
Reputation: 4238
Update - now who are the liars?
I can see why you hate World Net Daily, and prefer to listen to the lies spewed by MSNBC, they tell you what you want to hear, truth be damned.

Does Hawaii ever release long-form birth certificates?

It was in an interview with MSNBC that Fukino asserted that the state issues only short-form Certifications of Live Birth.
Joshua Wisch of the Hawaii attorney general's office went further, telling MSNBC the original document belongs to the state and cannot be released to anyone – or copied by anyone.
"It's a Department of Health record and it can't be released to anybody," he told MSNBC, saying there are no provisions that authorize copying such records.


Moreover, on Oct. 13, 2010, a contributor with the username "Danae" posted on FreeRepublic.com a copy of her long-form birth certificate originally issued in 1969, but which the Hawaii Department of Health mailed to her Sept. 28, 2010, after she paid a $10 fee.
Danae" obtained her long-form, hospital-generated certificate of birth to win a $200 bet with another FreeRepublic participant operating under the username "james777." The dare was for someone to prove he or she could get a long-form birth certificate from the Hawaii DOH after 2001, when the Hawaii DOH went electronic and agency spokeswoman Janice Okubo claimed the department quit issuing such documents.

The Hawaii Revised Statutes, Paragraph 38-13(a) specifies that the agency "shall, upon request, furnish an applicant a certified copy of any certificate, or the contents of any certificate, or any part thereof." Further, subparagraph C allows that copies of birth certificates "may be made by photograph, dry copy reproduction, typing, computer printout or other process approved by the director of health."
Others have obtained long-form birth certificates from Hawaii, according to a report in "The Post & Email" blog by Miki Booth.
"When my son, Alan, requested a copy of his birth certificate he got just that – a "Certificate of Live Birth," not the same as Obama's. Different titles and different information. Obama's is sorely lacking information required for obtaining a passport – Mother's State/Country of Birth and Father's State/Country of Birth," she wrote.
She also released an image of a "Certificate of Live Birth" belonging to a friend that appears to be a long-form document with much additional detail not included in a short-form "Certification of Live Birth."
She said the long-form "Certificate of Live Birth" was obtained from Hawaii in March 2011.

images availabe to the link
Read more: Does Hawaii ever release long-form birth certificates?
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=285921

 
Old 04-13-2011, 07:38 PM
 
1,777 posts, read 1,156,043 times
Reputation: 589
Quote:
Update - now who are the liars?
WND's lead editor says that they at times post misinformation. Why would you believe anything that such an organization publishes?

Again, they recently posted an editorial that claimed that a photo of Obama with his grandparents in New York was photoshopped, and linked to a YouTube that claimed to have the original photo. Course, the "original" still had Obama's knee in between the parents!

Faced with this embarrassing revelation, WND simply cut the lies from the editorial without bothering to note that they had corrected the piece. So yes, I don't take anything they say at face value. Why would you after they have lied to you over and over and over again? They lied to you about the Pakistan travel ban. They lied to you about a picture of Obama in New York being faked. They lied to you that the Framers relied on Vattel for their definition of natural born citizen. Why would you keep believing them?

Unless it's just because they're telling you what you already want to hear?

As for Post and Email, their stories and commenters (comments are very heavily regulated, so anything that appears is with the site's approval) regularly call for a military coup d'etat.
 
Old 04-13-2011, 08:06 PM
 
Location: Northern CA
12,775 posts, read 9,437,690 times
Reputation: 4238
Quote:
Originally Posted by bc42gb43 View Post
WND's lead editor says that they at times post misinformation. Why would you believe anything that such an organization publishes?

Again, they recently posted an editorial that claimed that a photo of Obama with his grandparents in New York was photoshopped, and linked to a YouTube that claimed to have the original photo. Course, the "original" still had Obama's knee in between the parents!

Faced with this embarrassing revelation, WND simply cut the lies from the editorial without bothering to note that they had corrected the piece. So yes, I don't take anything they say at face value. Why would you after they have lied to you over and over and over again? They lied to you about the Pakistan travel ban. They lied to you about a picture of Obama in New York being faked. They lied to you that the Framers relied on Vattel for their definition of natural born citizen. Why would you keep believing them?

Unless it's just because they're telling you what you already want to hear?

As for Post and Email, their stories and commenters (comments are very heavily regulated, so anything that appears is with the site's approval) regularly call for a military coup d'etat.
You will have to show me where they say they post misinformation.
I'm not saying everything they post is true, I am saying they post what they have, and where they got it from. It's not necessarily the end of the story, but perhaps the beginning. Obama has covered up his history so well, and the media has shown no interest in digging further, so we are left to the bloggers. Maybe they don't always get it right, but at least they are digging. I appreciate their efforts. I want the truth, and that won't come from CNN, MSNBC, Fox, or our corrupted justice system. It will come from private citizens digging thru the information blackout. That's the beauty of the internet, we have many sources for our news, and aren't held captive by 2 or 3, telling us what they want us to know.
 
Old 04-13-2011, 08:21 PM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
18,681 posts, read 14,804,749 times
Reputation: 3839
Quote:
Originally Posted by claudhopper View Post
You will have to show me where they say they post misinformation.
I'm not saying everything they post is true, I am saying they post what they have, and where they got it from. It's not necessarily the end of the story, but perhaps the beginning. Obama has covered up his history so well, and the media has shown no interest in digging further, so we are left to the bloggers. Maybe they don't always get it right, but at least they are digging. I appreciate their efforts. I want the truth, and that won't come from CNN, MSNBC, Fox, or our corrupted justice system. It will come from private citizens digging thru the information blackout. That's the beauty of the internet, we have many sources for our news, and aren't held captive by 2 or 3, telling us what they want us to know.
You have already gotten the truth, state verified and certified truth....
 
Old 04-13-2011, 08:25 PM
 
1,777 posts, read 1,156,043 times
Reputation: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by claudhopper View Post
You will have to show me where they say they post misinformation.
Right-wing publisher: We run "some misinformation" - War Room - Salon.com

Quote:
At that point WND simply scrubbed the first two paragraphs of the story, without so much as an update, let alone a correction...
Jack Cashill is an OPINION columnist. Admittedly, we publish some misinformation by columnists, as does your publication and every other journal that contains opinion. Bill Press seldom gets anything right in his column, but because we believe in providing the broadest spectrum of OPINION anywhere in the news business, we tolerate that kind of thing. Yes, Cashill’s column contained an egregious error, which we corrected almost immediately, which is far more than I expect you to do in what I assume is a NEWS piece you wrote.
I asked Farah if it is standard practice at WND to remove major sections of stories without any correction. To which he responded:
How long have you been in this business, punk? My guess is you were in diapers when I was running major metropolitan newspapers. You call what you wrote a news story? You aren’t fit to carry Chelsea Schilling’s laptop.
Worm.
WND is run by a classy guy.
Quote:
I'm not saying everything they post is true, I am saying they post what they have, and where they got it from. It's not necessarily the end of the story, but perhaps the beginning. Obama has covered up his history so well, and the media has shown no interest in digging further, so we are left to the bloggers. Maybe they don't always get it right, but at least they are digging. I appreciate their efforts. I want the truth, and that won't come from CNN, MSNBC, Fox, or our corrupted justice system. It will come from private citizens digging thru the information blackout. That's the beauty of the internet, we have many sources for our news, and aren't held captive by 2 or 3, telling us what they want us to know.
So your position is that you don't care if they lie to you three times or four times or more, because this time they might be right!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top