Poll: More Than A Third Of Americans & 64% Of Republicans Say Obama Is Hiding Something 'About His Background And Birth' (house of representatives, generation)
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.
I thought you might try to spring those on me. Hoover and Wilsons mothers became U.S. citizens before Herbert and Woodrow were born. How? Under the Act of 10 February 1855, a woman automatically became an American upon marrying a U.S. citizen which were both their fathers prior to the future presidents births, hence they were born to two U.S. citizen parents. Buchanan's father naturalized to become a “citizen of the United States” prior to his son’s birth. James Buchanan was born to two U.S. citizen parents making him a natural born citizen eligible for Article 2 Section 1.
Author is a different story. He hid his status that he wasn't a natural born citizen. The Chester Arthur example is not and cannot be treated as any precedent since the nation was not aware of the truth about his father’s and mother’s non-U.S. citizenship status at the time of his birth. So what do we have. All presidents born after 1787, except for Chester Arthur and Barack Obama, met the “natural born Citizen” criteria, born on U.S. soil to a mother and father who were themselves U.S. citizens at the time of the President’s birth. Neither Arthur nor Obama were “natural born Citizens” at the time of birth. Arthur was born to an alien father who also made his U.S. citizen mother an alien. Obama was born to a non-U.S. citizen father who never became a U.S. citizen and, being here only on a temporary student visa, was never even an immigrant.
Regardless, since the Supreme Court has already refused to take on the previous Natural Born Citizen cases apparently the justices apparently disagree with your "assessment" of the situation.
I thought you might try to spring those on me. Hoover and Wilsons mothers became U.S. citizens before Herbert and Woodrow were born. How? Under the Act of 10 February 1855, a woman automatically became an American upon marrying a U.S. citizen which were both their fathers prior to the future presidents births, hence they were born to two U.S. citizen parents. Buchanan's father naturalized to become a “citizen of the United States” prior to his son’s birth. James Buchanan was born to two U.S. citizen parents making him a natural born citizen eligible for Article 2 Section 1.
so they were dual citizens since neither of them renounced their citizenship to the country of origin. Since they were dual citizens, they weren't really us citizen according to the birther mantra. So that means their children are also not NATURAL born citizens, since their mother's weren't actually real citizens, but became citizens without taking any oath or naturalization process
This is the crux of the stupidity of the birther 2 citizen parent argument that no court in this land accepts, and have on nearly 15 occasions have said, that the 2 citizen parent argument is merely bovine excrement.
Quote:
Author is a different story. He hid his status that he wasn't a natural born citizen. The Chester Arthur example is not and cannot be treated as any precedent since the nation was not aware of the truth about his father’s and mother’s non-U.S. citizenship status at the time of his birth. So what do we have. All presidents born after 1787, except for Chester Arthur and Barack Obama, met the “natural born Citizen” criteria, born on U.S. soil to a mother and father who were themselves U.S. citizens at the time of the President’s birth. Neither Arthur nor Obama were “natural born Citizens” at the time of birth. Arthur was born to an alien father who also made his U.S. citizen mother an alien. Obama was born to a non-U.S. citizen father who never became a U.S. citizen and, being here only on a temporary student visa, was never even an immigrant.
Arthur never hid anything. The citizenship of his parents was known, by and large by the public. WHAT WAS AT ISSUE was NOT his parents (namely his father's) citizenship, but OF WHERE HE was born. Hinman suggested that Arthur was born in Canada, of course all without evidence. It was nothing more than a political ploy during an election season to discredit Arthur. the fact that you don't know the history of Arthur's story means you never read Hinman's book (who even says that his father's citizenship wasn't at the heart of the issue)
Of course you take the word of a known liar, and ONE of the lawyers who was told in his birther case that his TWO citizen parent theory, was nothing more than bovine excrement. The Putz (aka Apuzzo) failed in his last birther outing, and the judge thoroughly trounced his two citizen parent theory.
The article by Politico released today reveals that Obama still has a problem when it comes to his background. Yesterday I posted a link to where Rush Limbaugh is calling for a 'background check' on Obama in order to vet his past once and for all. The poll was conducted by Fairleigh Dickinson University, the largest independent university in New Jersey. It is apparent with the Poll results, Rush isn't alone in his thinking. You see, the press all the time say's that all the "birther" theories have been PROVEN false. They have not, especially Sheriff Arpaio's findings that the PDF of Obama's long form birth certificate was fraudulent as well as his selective service registration with a 2 digit altered 'Pica U.S. Postal Date Stamp'. The Selective Service ONLY accepted registrations with a 4 digit pica date stamp. More recently the Obama loving press like to add that Hawaii has "certified" the LFBC when their "Verification of Birth" is INVALID on it face because it is UNDATED and RUBBER STAMP signed with initials of someone unknown. Furthermore it does NOT list Obama's Date-of-Birth since a birth-document via Hawaii DOH 338 - 17.8 does not require "proof" of Date-of-Birth. I submit that their refusal to use the words "CERTIFY" and "TRUE & ACCURATE" and instead "indicates" and "information matches" is not legally definitive. People can read through the bull**** that Obama/Hawaii is trying to perpetuate upon the American people and this 'Old Army Soldier' is not buying it either.
It really doesn't matter if he has been hiding something or not because we've been screwed for many years by the same people. Do you think the President controls the outcome of our nation? The people sure don't anymore. It sucks that we all have to fight each other and Presidents can't speak out like they really want to. We're dealing with a puppet podium and there's a new puppet and an anti-puppet sponsored by corporations and elites each 4 years.
so they were dual citizens since neither of them renounced their citizenship to the country of origin. Since they were dual citizens, they weren't really us citizen according to the birther mantra. So that means their children are also not NATURAL born citizens, since their mother's weren't actually real citizens, but became citizens without taking any oath or naturalization process
No. You are wrong. It was called Derivative Marriage. Under the Act of 10 February 1855 (a naturalization law at the time), a woman automatically became an American upon marrying a U.S. citizen or following the naturalization of her foreign husband. Kelly v. Owen, 74 U.S. 7 Wall. 496 (1868). So as we can see, a “natural born Citizen” can be produced by being born in the U.S. to naturalized parents who are “citizens of the United States. That means Arus, when little Woodrow and Herbert were born to two newly married U.S. Citizen parents, they automatically became true authentic natural born citizens eligible for Article 2 Section 1.
1. The Act of Congress of February 10, 1855, which declares
"That any woman who might lawfully be naturalized under the existing laws, married, or who shall be married to a citizen of the United States shall be deemed and taken to be a citizen" confers the privileges of citizenship upon women married to citizens of the United States if they are of the class of persons for whose naturalization the previous acts of Congress provide.
2. The terms "married," or "who shall be married" in the act do not refer to the time when the ceremony of marriage is celebrated, but to a state of marriage. They mean that whenever a woman who under previous acts might be naturalized is in a state of marriage to a citizen, she becomes, by that fact, a citizen also. His citizenship, whenever it exists, confers citizenship upon her.
3. The object of the act was to allow the citizenship of the wife to follow that of her husband without the necessity of any application for naturalization on her part.
4. The terms "who might lawfully be naturalized under the existing laws" only limit the application of the law to free white women.
Just as anyone who opposes gun control is a fear mongering profiteer, and anyone who opposes raising the debt limit is a dead beat who doesn't pay their bills, anyone who has doubt about Obama's murky past is a deluded birther.
If you RESPECT the founders original intent and the laws they gave us, you would want to continue with their original intent about who they wanted to qualify for Article 2 Section 1. That is what true Constitutionalists would do. Are you a true pro Constitutionalist who wants the true original meaning of that sacred document upheld............or do you wish to have it subverted? I took a oath to defend the Constitution. Would you?
The US Constitution is many things but sacred it is not.
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.
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.
