GA Judge rules against birthers - Uses Indiana case law, not Supreme Court's!!

Maybe you could answer this simple question?

If being a Citizen at birth made you Natural Born, why would it matter where Obama was born?

 

His citizenship status would be US citizen at birth if he had been born in Africa.. and she would have registered his birth at the Nearest US Consulate.

So basically.. it doesn't matter. The baby would be fingerprinted or foot printed and issued a US Passport.

Citizen can be either naturalized or natural (native) born... but a naturalized citizen cannot be POTUS.

 

Well, there it is - the nutters choose nutters. Clearly the Republicans are totally unfit to govern - they couldn't run a (*)(*)(*)(*)-up (drunken celebration) in a brewery. The only question is whether decent America will remove their power of veto over legislation.

 

Obama didn't have to do anything... The law is perfectly clear.

 

Because it's simply not true, as the Supreme Court stated in Wong Kim Ark. I mean, your argument here is directly counter to the Supreme Court's ruling on this matter. You are literally having to throw out the judgments of the only group of people who are legitimately vested with the authority to interpret the constitution--in order to make a nonsensical argument.

It's very clear that "natural born" refers to the method of birth; namely that only citizens born without surgical intervention are eligible to be president.

 

You would only be considered to have "dual" loyalties if you had dual citizenship.

Its NOT a fuzzy definition.

 

Would he be considered "Natural Born, in your mind?

I notice you didn't answer that question.

A simple yes or no would suffice.

You seem to think that having Citizenship at birth makes you Natural Born, but there is a reason they want to know if he was not born in the U.S.

I want to see if you understand that, and if so, then you must also understand you can in fact be born a Citizen but not born a Natural Born Citizen.

Again, it is a simple question.

 

And Obama himself says he also had British Citizenship at Birth, given to him by his Father.

You understand that, right?

So does that disqualify him or not, in your mind?

 

You are a citizen at birth if you are born on US soil or if you are born overseas to American citizen parents.

IF Obama had been born in British East Africa to a US citizen mother and a father who was a British subject.. He could claim dual citizenship.. but I think the option to do that lapses around age 24..

In either case he would be native born AKA natural born.

I know US law on this matter.. British law .. not so much.

 

Then why do you suppose they are so interested in whether he was born in Africa or not?

You obviously don't understand it as well as you think you do...

 

Because they are ignorant of the law... or only reading part of the law.. or because they are too stubborn to learn anything.

I was trained to read Legalese years and years ago.. and I have experience with these citizenship issues.

Obama is a native AKA natural born US citizen... So are Rubio and Jindal and McCain.

This isn't fuzzy stuff.. the law is VERY clear.

 

HAHAHA. So now you libs say barak hussein obama is the same as joe smith????? HAHAHA

The nationality of obozo's father is critical. It proves obozo is not an NBC

Obozo admits to three years of school in indonesia. That's a lot and it's prolly a lot more than 3. Obozo is a pathological liar.

 

Minor vs happersett. Everyone but you knows that.

 

Minor V Happersett is not about citizenship. Its about a woman's right to vote.

 

The nationality of Obama's father is irrevelant.. because Obama was born in Hawaii.

 

Are you stupid? That case literally has nothing to do with this.

 

The birthers will never give up.

They are to stupid to know when they are wrong.

 

And you obviously haven't read up on this issue, or are simply lying.

Let me ask you something:

The State of Hawaii has, on several occasions, verified Obama's Hawaiian birth. They have done so in official statements issued from the office which maintains birth records under Hawaiian law. They have verified the documents he has released. The verification has been done by state officials who are both Republicans and Democrats.

How then, do you presume, he was born elsewhere?

 

In the United States, the right of national citizenship is defined by federal law; which legislative authority, under the Constitution, resides in Congress. In the 1950's, the Congress enacted 8 U.S.C. §1401, et seq. defining nationals and citizens of the United States at birth. These provisions, some of which apply retroactively, govern a person’s status as a natural born citizen; which federal statutes supercede prior case law (including decisions of the Supreme Court) on the subject of citizenship to the extent inconsistent with the Congressional legislation. Under this law, both Barack Obama and John McCain are eligible to be President of the United States. (NB: Prior to the enactment of § 1403(a) of title 8 of the United State Code in 1952, Senator McCain would not have been deemed a "natural born citizen" eligible to be President.)

 

Well at least you're honest about the fact that most of the birthers' claims against the President are solely based on racism.

 

Because SCOTUS has never ruled that NBC means born of two citizen parents...ever.

Birthers lie. They have nothing else.

 

I think we need to have this thread moved to the mini-Stormfront sub-forum.

 

We know how this goes. You provide an excerpt specially truncated to eliminate context.

We provide the rest of the excerpt which reveals that your excerpt does not support your contention.

You ignore it for the rest of the thread.

 

I agree. There is no hope for them at this point.