PDA

View Full Version : "This Sounds As If They are Going to Admit that He Isn't Native Born !"



megimoo
11-28-2008, 11:26 PM
AMENDING THE NATURAL BORN CITIZEN REQUIREMENT: GLOBALIZATION AS THE IMPETUS AND THE OBSTACLE

" So The Soros Goal Has Been to Create a Constitutional Crisis All Along and Bring Down America !"

INTRODUCTION

The natural born citizen requirement in Article II of the United States Constitution has been called the “stupidest provision” in the Constitution,1 “undecidedly unAmerican,”2 “blatantly discriminatory,”3 and the “Constitution’s worst provision.”4 ...

snip

The natural born citizen clause of the United States Constitution should be repealed for numerous reasons. Limiting presidential eligibility to natural born citizens discriminates against naturalized citizens, is out-dated and undemocratic, and incorrectly assumes that birthplace is a proxy for loyalty. The increased globalization of the world continues to make each of these reasons more persuasive...the natural born citizen clause has increasingly become out of place in the American legal system. However, even though globalization strengthens the case for a Constitutional amendment, many Americans argue against abolishing the requirement.
........................................
Comments:
I'm aware this is almost three years old. But this may be a blueprint of exactly how Obama's lawyers intend to circumvent the Article II requirement for our nation's President to be "natural born".

"Although some of the reasons for maintaining the natural born citizen requirement are rational, many of the reasons are based primarily on emotion. Therefore, although globalization is one impetus that should drive Americans to rely on reason and amend the Constitution, this paper argues that common perceptions about globalization ironically will convince Americans to rely on emotion and oppose a Constitutional amendment."

Sarah P. Herlihy is employed by Kirkland & Ellis LLP http://www.kirkland.com . Note: this law firm is based in Chicago. Bruce I. Ettelson, P.C., is a Member of the finance committees for both U.S. Senators Barack Obama and Richard Durbin.

It now appears that the One World Order proponents behind Barack H. Obama have been working on this issue for a few years. They intend to thoroughly trash our Constitution and destroy the United States of America.

For a complete look at the document go to the above listed source URL. This is truly frightening.
...........................................
The scenario I envisioned goes something like this.

Zero gets himself elected. (done) After taking office it’s proven that he’s ineligible to hold that office leading to a major fight in congress. The democrats refuse to remove him but fail to get a constitutional convention. The issue is left unresolved. By 2016 another foreign born presidential hopeful shows up at the supreme court demanding their “right” to run and citing the Obama presidency as a precedent set and showing that “no harm was done”.

I suspect the next foreign wannabe will be someone easily acceptable like a Canadian. (Jenny Granholm seems to be getting groomed for that job now) Next it will be a Mexican candidate and by then the free for all will be well underway.
.........................................
We need to get out the alarm that this nation is under seige.This is extremely upsetting. Up to now I have been deeply troubled but now I’m really damned angry. Mostly at how thoroughly this whole setup has developed.McCain would have been no better. He was born in Colon, Panama.
......................................
“I’m beginning to very seriously think that 0bama is NOT a natural born citizen, and that the libs have known it and started preparing for an amendment to the Constitution years ago.”

BUT, he committed fraud by running in the first place. I suspect the house would have to impeach and the senate would have to convict. If not, I believe there would be a military coup or, perhaps even better and armed uprising!

Nothing he could or would say would have effect because he would NOT be legitimate in any conceivable way.

......................................

This stinks to heaven of George Soros.
.........................................
Alexander Hamilton was probably the only foreign born American citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution that the founders intended to be eligible to be president:

“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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

Martin Van Buren was the first president actually to have been born an American citizen. All prior presidents to Van Buren were born in British colonies!
.......................................

AmPat
11-29-2008, 05:17 AM
The footprints are already being laid out.
Allow me to say it again here as I've said in other posts. The DIMocRAT party will not allow impeachment to go forward if this turns out to be true. The DIMS love power more than they love their country. They will prove this by their actions, or inactions regarding the Obama Birth facts.:mad:

GrumpyOldLady
11-29-2008, 08:09 AM
It now appears that the One World Order proponents behind Barack H. Obama have been working on this issue for a few years. They intend to thoroughly trash our Constitution and destroy the United States of America.

I fully and absolutely agree with you.

jinxmchue
11-29-2008, 01:45 PM
Maybe this is why they are fighting so hard to get their super-majority (i.e. Franken's cheating).

Troll
11-29-2008, 03:20 PM
It now appears that the One World Order proponents...have been working on this issue for a few years. They intend to thoroughly trash our Constitution and destroy the United States of America.

My, how far CU has come since 2005. What could have changed since then?

EricMartin
11-29-2008, 03:27 PM
My, how far CU has come since 2005. What could have changed since then?

http://media.ebaumsworld.com/picture/dingodrive85/RonPaul-1.png

;)

patriot45
11-29-2008, 03:33 PM
My, how far CU has come since 2005. What could have changed since then?

What does that mean!?

There is nefarious stuff afoot! The Obama is just the beginning. You know the old saying? Give them an inch and they will take a mile. C'mon get with the hysteria! Doom! We will be the shining light through it all. This whole deal has been orchestrated.

http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i230/patriot45270/obama/10zpw6g.jpg

Troll
11-29-2008, 03:55 PM
;)

http://www.esreality.com/files/placeimages/2006/46138-i-lold001.jpg


What does that mean!?

I'm just being ironic. When I got here in 2005, any mention of "One World" anything or "globalism" was met by an endless parade of 'tinfoil hat' and 'moonbat' jokes. I'm just wondering what has changed since then.


The Obama is just the beginning.

Sir, Obama-Wan Kenobi is far from the beginning. The plan to destroy the Constitution and America has been underway for some time, and it would have continued just as surely under a McCain presidency. They may talk differently, but the Democrats and Republicans are answerable to the same people. To quote TR, "Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people."


This whole deal has been orchestrated.

Agreed.

patriot45
11-29-2008, 04:05 PM
http://www.esreality.com/files/placeimages/2006/46138-i-lold001.jpg



I'm just being ironic. When I got here in 2005, any mention of "One World" anything or "globalism" was met by an endless parade of 'tinfoil hat' and 'moonbat' jokes. I'm just wondering what has changed since then.

But now it looks like it is actually going to happen!


Sir, Obama-Wan Kenobi is far from the beginning. The plan to destroy the Constitution and America has been underway for some time, and it would have continued just as surely under a McCain presidency. They may talk differently, but the Democrats and Republicans are answerable to the same people. To quote TR, "Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people."


We do have a choice, Fast or slow!:cool:


Agreed.

Its funny, that all the people that we need to take the bull by the horns are just in it for the money and notoriety. Rush, Hannity and O'Rielly, They love it that this is happening. Ratings for rantings. I don't think normal people(conservatives) need a messiah. What we need is an actual straight shooter who will piss off the status quo.

megimoo
11-29-2008, 04:22 PM
Its funny, that all the people that we need to take the bull by the horns are just in it for the money and notoriety. Rush, Hannity and O'Rielly, They love it that this is happening. Ratings for rantings. I don't think normal people(conservatives) need a messiah. What we need is an actual straight shooter who will piss off the status quo.Ah but their 'game' must be played by 'their' rules and Ron Paul was an outsider .

Troll
11-29-2008, 04:30 PM
Its funny, that all the people that we need to take the bull by the horns are just in it for the money and notoriety. Rush, Hannity and O'Rielly, They love it that this is happening. Ratings for rantings.

Oh Lord, yes. I know Boortz was (semi) joking, but do you remember the weeks of the Hillary/Obama gridlock? Boortz was just shy of gleeful that Hillary had a shot at the White House because of all the great material she would give him. I love Boortz, but I kept thinking "Yes, and meanwhile down here in real America..."


I don't think normal people(conservatives) need a messiah. What we need is an actual straight shooter who will piss off the status quo.

I agree, but the problem is we have too many different interests, and nobody can agree on what our top priority should be. Can you imagine if all the conservatives in the country united under ONE banner - even for a short time - and decided that we were actually going to get involved with the political process?

An example: I think the FairTax legislation under this pathetic Congress now should be a top priority for us all - without the support of the people, and SOON, this idea will die for sure. What would happen if one in every TEN conservatives/Republicans in this country took a few days off work and demonstrated in DC in favor of the FairTax? Then after the rally, we bog down the fax machines and office phones of our Congressmen for a solid month? Every phone call, every fax, promising that regardless of party, we will vote for the challenger over the incumbent unless the FairTax gets put on the front burner, no exceptions. I think the FairTax would pass, and then we could focus on something else.

We have to start using our votes to motivate our elected officials, because this reverse laissez-faire attitude we've taken as citizens is going to be our undoing.

patriot45
11-29-2008, 08:10 PM
An example: I think the FairTax legislation under this pathetic Congress now should be a top priority for us all - without the support of the people, and SOON, this idea will die for sure. What would happen if one in every TEN conservatives/Republicans in this country took a few days off work and demonstrated in DC in favor of the FairTax? Then after the rally, we bog down the fax machines and office phones of our Congressmen for a solid month? Every phone call, every fax, promising that regardless of party, we will vote for the challenger over the incumbent unless the FairTax gets put on the front burner, no exceptions. I think the FairTax would pass, and then we could focus on something else.

We have to start using our votes to motivate our elected officials, because this reverse laissez-faire attitude we've taken as citizens is going to be our undoing.[/QUOTE]

You are talking to the choir! I am One of the biggest FairTax supporters out there. The power that would take from the power hungry would be impossible. I am all for it!

Its not dead. We need to educate the people who listen to the liberal tripe about it how it would work.

AmPat
11-29-2008, 09:07 PM
Oh Lord, yes. I know Boortz was (semi) joking, but do you remember the weeks of the Hillary/Obama gridlock? Boortz was just shy of gleeful that Hillary had a shot at the White House because of all the great material she would give him. I love Boortz, but I kept thinking "Yes, and meanwhile down here in real America..."



I agree, but the problem is we have too many different interests, and nobody can agree on what our top priority should be. Can you imagine if all the conservatives in the country united under ONE banner - even for a short time - and decided that we were actually going to get involved with the political process?

An example: I think the FairTax legislation under this pathetic Congress now should be a top priority for us all - without the support of the people, and SOON, this idea will die for sure. What would happen if one in every TEN conservatives/Republicans in this country took a few days off work and demonstrated in DC in favor of the FairTax? Then after the rally, we bog down the fax machines and office phones of our Congressmen for a solid month? Every phone call, every fax, promising that regardless of party, we will vote for the challenger over the incumbent unless the FairTax gets put on the front burner, no exceptions. I think the FairTax would pass, and then we could focus on something else.

We have to start using our votes to motivate our elected officials, because this reverse laissez-faire attitude we've taken as citizens is going to be our undoing.
Excellent ideas. The name recognition problem could be overcome with a known fair taxer. I believe Huckabee or maybe somebody like Fred Thompson. Fred is probably too old now but this is the new direction for Conservatives. trange the new direction is actually the old one. Also, you can't have a party resurgence if there is only one issue. Why not put forth Small Gov't. and secure borders. We managed to keep South Korea secure for 55 years, I think we can manage Mexico.

Troll
11-29-2008, 11:47 PM
Excellent ideas. The name recognition problem could be overcome with a known fair taxer.

Eh, I'm just using the FairTax as an example of something conservatives could work together on to throw our weight around a bit more. There are other issues just as important, but I feel like the FairTax in particular is in deadly peril now with this Congress and (coming) White House.


Also, you can't have a party resurgence if there is only one issue.

You're probably right, but I'm talking one issue at a time here. I think the more issues we put on the table to hit our elected officials with, the higher risk we run of having people lose interest or withdraw support. If we made it FairTax and ending the War on Drugs, for example, we would lose half our supporters before the first rally. Also, I'm not talking 'party' resurgence here - the Republican party can go to hell. More and more conservatives are deciding every day that they have no party, so I'm talking right-wing resurgence. Principles before party.


Why not put forth Small Gov't.

Good idea but too nebulous. We all want smaller government, but we can't just tell the politicians that, because 'smaller government' could mean anything. We need to name specific agencies that we want gone. The ones I would most like to see gone are the IRS, BATF, ED, and DHS.

The overall point I'm making here is that we, as conservatives, really need to get our ducks in a row. I understand the general consensus here at CU is to just keep voting Republican and hope for the best. I reject that idea. I think we need to pick one issue (at a time) and get it through Congress. If the Republican guy won't get it done, vote for whomever is challenging him/her for their seat next time - no exceptions - even if it's a Democrat or Libertarian.

The time for party politics is over. We had better start voting issues NOW. And we can't let the politicians tell us what the issues are. If we decide the issue is the FairTax, then by God, we cannot tolerate this 'gay marriage' drivel in Congress, or another 'steroids in baseball' dog and pony show. I say conservatives should choose one issue, show our representatives we're serious about it, get it passed, then move onto the next. We'll decide what the next issue is when the previous one is settled.

patriot45
11-30-2008, 12:04 AM
Eh, I'm just using the FairTax as an example of something conservatives could work together on to throw our weight around a bit more. There are other issues just as important, but I feel like the FairTax in particular is in deadly peril now with this Congress and (coming) White House.



You're probably right, but I'm talking one issue at a time here. I think the more issues we put on the table to hit our elected officials with, the higher risk we run of having people lose interest or withdraw support. If we made it FairTax and ending the War on Drugs, for example, we would lose half our supporters before the first rally. Also, I'm not talking 'party' resurgence here - the Republican party can go to hell. More and more conservatives are deciding every day that they have no party, so I'm talking right-wing resurgence. Principles before party.



Good idea but too nebulous. We all want smaller government, but we can't just tell the politicians that, because 'smaller government' could mean anything. We need to name specific agencies that we want gone. The ones I would most like to see gone are the IRS, BATF, ED, and DHS.

The overall point I'm making here is that we, as conservatives, really need to get our ducks in a row. I understand the general consensus here at CU is to just keep voting Republican and hope for the best. I reject that idea. I think we need to pick one issue (at a time) and get it through Congress. If the Republican guy won't get it done, vote for whomever is challenging him/her for their seat next time - no exceptions - even if it's a Democrat or Libertarian.

The time for party politics is over. We had better start voting issues NOW. And we can't let the politicians tell us what the issues are. If we decide the issue is the FairTax, then by God, we cannot tolerate this 'gay marriage' drivel in Congress, or another 'steroids in baseball' dog and pony show. I say conservatives should choose one issue, show our representatives we're serious about it, get it passed, then move onto the next. We'll decide what the next issue is when the previous one is settled.

Good job! Obfuscatiion is thier best friend! 1 issue at a time and stop looking when the moonbats try to make us think about something else. But they are the masters at doing that. It will take a big man to lead the way for us.

Speedy
11-30-2008, 03:57 AM
It will take a big man to lead the way for us.

Instead we get McCain. :rolleyes:

In 2012 we will get another "reach across the aisle" idiot and we will run out and try to drag his ass across the finish line we did McCain. Hell, why even fake it. Why don't we nominate Chris Matthews for our side and stop faking it.

This election was it for me. I will not support anyone for on the Republican side who even slightly resembles a fucking RINO. If a RINO is the best we can do then fuck him. Let the Democrats and I hope he winds by a Reagan type landslide because that is what we deserve. When Murtha and all of the others that are so deserving of being outted, insult their constituents and remain in office then what the fuck is the point?

We let our Representatives slide to the left until we could no longer support them ourselves and the Democrats were never going to support them and we let it happen. Then when we get our asses handed to us we run around shrieking and screeching about what it is we must do. Like we did know what it was we had to do in 2006 and this time. We won't do shit just like we did not do shit in 2006 and last month.

The Republicans in Congress have got to be held to single standard and that standard being that they vote against every single bill and project that does not jibe with Conservative principles and every single representative that does , even once vote with the Democrats gets tossed out. Reaching across the fucking aisle should not be thought to be a badge of honor but a reason for ridicule.

I am out of the game and will stay out. I will withhold my money (if in his supreme benevolence Our Lord Obama allows me to keep any) and votes until I can bestow my vote on someone who truly deserves it. Never again will I lower myself to vote for someone who disgusted me just because his opponent disgusted me more. I feel shamed for having done it and it is even a bigger shame that I got nothing for it. The African still won. I whored myself out and while I did get fucked, I did not get paid.

Troll
11-30-2008, 02:18 PM
In 2012 we will get another "reach across the aisle" idiot

Probably, and he/she will be trounced. I am convinced McCain lost exclusively because the independent conservatives wouldn't vote for him. If a scant 25% of the independent voters in this country had voted for McCain, he would have crushed Obama in the popular vote. I'm just hoping we all stick to our guns and not vote for whatever RINO they put up in 2012 and 2016 just because 'Obama is even worse.'


This election was it for me. I will not support anyone for on the Republican side who even slightly resembles a fucking RINO. If a RINO is the best we can do then fuck him. Let the Democrats and I hope he winds by a Reagan type landslide because that is what we deserve.

One could make the argument that we're better off with a Democrat than with a RINO. For one, the conservatives and Republicans will be less likely to let Obama simply get away with some of the things Bush did and McCain promised to do because of party loyalty. Secondly, I say with a Democrat, at least you know what you're in for - at least they're honest about their policies. We know Obama will grow the size of government and government spending - who saw that coming under Bush? I'd prefer to know what's coming down the pipes than get a nasty surprise.

Goldwater
11-30-2008, 05:02 PM
You'll never see the FairTax or any program like it come about.

It involves getting rid of certain government agencies, thats an automatic no no under any American government.

Zeus
11-30-2008, 05:37 PM
http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c323/BadKittySF/image001-1.jpg

djones520
11-30-2008, 05:42 PM
If they can get an Amendment to the Constitution pushed within the next 3 weeks, then I'll be absolutely amazed. But I don't see how anyone could legal-weasel their way around this in time for the Electoral College.

I just pray that the SCOTUS halts any efforts to circumvent the Constitution if this actually plays out.