Herman Cain On Obama: “He should prove he was born in the United States of America.”

[jillian]

wow... USArmyRacist loon is at it again, huh?

I'll bet the fat fuck hides at home. Total disgrace to the uniform.

he never served.... he's just a disgrace to humanity.

if that makes you feel any better.

 

[Obamerican]

wow... USArmyRacist loon is at it again, huh?

I'll bet the fat fuck hides at home. Total disgrace to the uniform.

he never served.... he's just a disgrace to humanity.

if that makes you feel any better.

Sure. I'm good. Thanks Jillian!!

 

[Dot Com]

 

[elvis]

lol

He already did.

Stick a fork in Herman Cain. He's done.

President Romney.

Yep. Cain is done. It's a shame he fell for this nonsense.

Cain is smart.

How long before Palin starts waxing Cain's knob?

 

[Obamerican]

Yep. Cain is done. It's a shame he fell for this nonsense.

Cain is smart.

How long before Palin starts waxing Cain's knob?

What was she doing last Wednesday??

 

[Dot Com]

oh neat..... another Birfer thread

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Sorry but the 14th amendment doesn't mention the term 'natural born Citizen' as stated in Article 2 Section 1. The 14th amendment doesn't apply to Article 2 Section 1 when it comes to the requirement to hold the presidency and if it did it would have been amended to it. Obama doesn't meet the requirement to be the president. As I stated before, his birth status was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 (as stated on his website) and natural born citizens births are not governed by a foreign sovereignty.

The 14th Amendment confirms the president’s citizenship status, he therefore meets the requirement.

As for the British Nationality Act of 1948, you’re insane.

 

[USArmyRetired]

Sorry but the 14th amendment doesn't mention the term 'natural born Citizen' as stated in Article 2 Section 1. The 14th amendment doesn't apply to Article 2 Section 1 when it comes to the requirement to hold the presidency and if it did it would have been amended to it. Obama doesn't meet the requirement to be the president. As I stated before, his birth status was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 (as stated on his website) and natural born citizens births are not governed by a foreign sovereignty.

As for the British Nationality Act of 1948, you’re insane.

Mr Jones, this statement is from Obama's own campaign website right now called Fight The Smears. It states this:

“As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.”

What does that last sentence mean?

 

[USArmyRetired]

Sorry but the 14th amendment doesn't mention the term 'natural born Citizen' as stated in Article 2 Section 1. The 14th amendment doesn't apply to Article 2 Section 1 when it comes to the requirement to hold the presidency and if it did it would have been amended to it. Obama doesn't meet the requirement to be the president. As I stated before, his birth status was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 (as stated on his website) and natural born citizens births are not governed by a foreign sovereignty.

The 14th Amendment confirms the president’s citizenship status, he therefore meets the requirement.

As for the British Nationality Act of 1948, you’re insane.

Show me the exact wording where 'Natural Born Citizen' is used within the 14th Amendment. You can copy and paste it from any website and place it here. Remember, it's the specific wording 'Natural Born Citizen' that is used in Article 2 Section 1 we are looking for:

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.

 

[candycorn]

Sorry but the 14th amendment doesn't mention the term 'natural born Citizen' as stated in Article 2 Section 1. The 14th amendment doesn't apply to Article 2 Section 1 when it comes to the requirement to hold the presidency and if it did it would have been amended to it. Obama doesn't meet the requirement to be the president. As I stated before, his birth status was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 (as stated on his website) and natural born citizens births are not governed by a foreign sovereignty.

The 14th Amendment confirms the president’s citizenship status, he therefore meets the requirement.

As for the British Nationality Act of 1948, you’re insane.

Nice post.

 

[Toro]

Sorry but the 14th amendment doesn't mention the term 'natural born Citizen' as stated in Article 2 Section 1. The 14th amendment doesn't apply to Article 2 Section 1 when it comes to the requirement to hold the presidency and if it did it would have been amended to it. Obama doesn't meet the requirement to be the president. As I stated before, his birth status was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 (as stated on his website) and natural born citizens births are not governed by a foreign sovereignty.

The 14th Amendment confirms the president’s citizenship status, he therefore meets the requirement.

As for the British Nationality Act of 1948, you’re insane.

Show me the exact wording where 'Natural Born Citizen' is used within the 14th Amendment. You can copy and paste it from any website and place it here. Remember, it's the specific wording 'Natural Born Citizen' that is used in Article 2 Section 1 we are looking for:

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.

Natural Born Citizen has already been defined by the Supreme Court. That's one reason why you guys are 0-83 in the courts.

 

[USArmyRetired]

The 14th Amendment confirms the president’s citizenship status, he therefore meets the requirement.

As for the British Nationality Act of 1948, you’re insane.

Show me the exact wording where 'Natural Born Citizen' is used within the 14th Amendment. You can copy and paste it from any website and place it here. Remember, it's the specific wording 'Natural Born Citizen' that is used in Article 2 Section 1 we are looking for:

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.

Natural Born Citizen has already been defined by the Supreme Court. That's one reason why you guys are 0-83 in the courts.

Yes it has been defined by the Supreme Court, in Minor vs Happerset. The case set binding precedent as to what a natural born Citizen is.............born to Citizen parents (plural). Obama doesn't pass the test because his father was not a citizen. Also none of the cases ever went to trial. None was ever heard on the merits because they all were dismissed on a technicality.

 

[Toro]

Show me the exact wording where 'Natural Born Citizen' is used within the 14th Amendment. You can copy and paste it from any website and place it here. Remember, it's the specific wording 'Natural Born Citizen' that is used in Article 2 Section 1 we are looking for:

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.

Natural Born Citizen has already been defined by the Supreme Court. That's one reason why you guys are 0-83 in the courts.

Yes it has been defined by the Supreme Court, in Minor vs Happerset. The case set binding precedent as to what a natural born Citizen is.............born to Citizen parents (plural). Obama doesn't pass the test because his father was not a citizen. Also none of the cases ever went to trial. None was ever heard on the merits because they all were dismissed on a technicality.

Wong Kim Ark

http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...-state-law-tracking-thread-4.html#post3392942

Done.

Next.

 

[Dot Com]

What brought this about? USAR must still be sore about the Glen Rice revelation

 

[USArmyRetired]

Natural Born Citizen has already been defined by the Supreme Court. That's one reason why you guys are 0-83 in the courts.

Yes it has been defined by the Supreme Court, in Minor vs Happerset. The case set binding precedent as to what a natural born Citizen is.............born to Citizen parents (plural). Obama doesn't pass the test because his father was not a citizen. Also none of the cases ever went to trial. None was ever heard on the merits because they all were dismissed on a technicality.

Wong Kim Ark

http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...-state-law-tracking-thread-4.html#post3392942

Done.

Next.

Wrong. The Court determined Wong Kim Ark was a “citizen” (not a natural born citizen) under the 14th Amendment, but in doing so the Court did not expand the “class” of persons who were eligible to be President. This is because the Court specified clearly that it was only construing the 14th Amendment, not Article 2 Section 1. Article 2 Section 1 and the 14th Amendment are mutually exclusive sections of the US Constitution. The Court held that Minor was a citizen under Article 2 Section 1 because she was born in the US of citizen parents, that definition became national law. Therefore, Minor supersedes all other sources (Wong Kim Ark) on this point and has not been overturned. It is a direct Constitutional interpretation and definition. It is crucially important to recognize that Wong Kim Ark’s citizenship could not be established without the 14th Amendment since he was not a natural-born citizen. If he had been in that class, the Court would have established his citizenship under Article 2 Section 1 as the court had previously done for Virginia Minor.

Nice try but again, you are wrong.

 

[candycorn]

The 14th Amendment confirms the president’s citizenship status, he therefore meets the requirement.

As for the British Nationality Act of 1948, you’re insane.

Show me the exact wording where 'Natural Born Citizen' is used within the 14th Amendment. You can copy and paste it from any website and place it here. Remember, it's the specific wording 'Natural Born Citizen' that is used in Article 2 Section 1 we are looking for:

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.

Natural Born Citizen has already been defined by the Supreme Court. That's one reason why you guys are 0-83 in the courts.

That along with being foul smelling racist pigs who can't stand a black man being in the Oval Office.

 

[USArmyRetired]

Show me the exact wording where 'Natural Born Citizen' is used within the 14th Amendment. You can copy and paste it from any website and place it here. Remember, it's the specific wording 'Natural Born Citizen' that is used in Article 2 Section 1 we are looking for:

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.

Natural Born Citizen has already been defined by the Supreme Court. That's one reason why you guys are 0-83 in the courts.

That along with being foul smelling racist pigs who can't stand a black man being in the Oval Office.

We should always adhere to what the founders original intentions were when it comes to the presidency and what type person should be in the oval office.

 

[Obamerican]

Natural Born Citizen has already been defined by the Supreme Court. That's one reason why you guys are 0-83 in the courts.

That along with being foul smelling racist pigs who can't stand a black man being in the Oval Office.

We should always adhere to what the founders original intentions were when it comes to the presidency and what type person should be in the oval office.

Under your interpretation of who is eligible to be POTUS the following DO NOT QUALIFY:

1. George Washington
2. John Adams
3. Thomas Jefferson
4. James Madison
5. James Monroe
6. John Quincy Adams
7. Andrew Jackson

All of the above listed Presidents were born under British rule and were NOT eligible to be POTUS.

Case closed.

 

[jillian]

what a quandry for USArmyRetard... attack the black guy... or go with what he's saying b/c he's attacking the black guy you hate more.

what a hobson's choice...

 

[Toro]

Yes it has been defined by the Supreme Court, in Minor vs Happerset. The case set binding precedent as to what a natural born Citizen is.............born to Citizen parents (plural). Obama doesn't pass the test because his father was not a citizen. Also none of the cases ever went to trial. None was ever heard on the merits because they all were dismissed on a technicality.

Wong Kim Ark

http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...-state-law-tracking-thread-4.html#post3392942

Done.

Next.

Wrong. The Court determined Wong Kim Ark was a “citizen” (not a natural born citizen) under the 14th Amendment, but in doing so the Court did not expand the “class” of persons who were eligible to be President. This is because the Court specified clearly that it was only construing the 14th Amendment, not Article 2 Section 1. Article 2 Section 1 and the 14th Amendment are mutually exclusive sections of the US Constitution. The Court held that Minor was a citizen under Article 2 Section 1 because she was born in the US of citizen parents, that definition became national law. Therefore, Minor supersedes all other sources (Wong Kim Ark) on this point and has not been overturned. It is a direct Constitutional interpretation and definition. It is crucially important to recognize that Wong Kim Ark’s citizenship could not be established without the 14th Amendment since he was not a natural-born citizen. If he had been in that class, the Court would have established his citizenship under Article 2 Section 1 as the court had previously done for Virginia Minor.

Nice try but again, you are wrong.

No wonder you guys are 0-83 in the courts.

The Court in Wong Kim Ark reaffirmed Minor in that the meaning of the words “citizen of the United States” and “natural-born citizen of the United States” “must be interpreted in the light of the common law, the principles and history of which were familiarly known to the framers of the constitution.” ... The Wong Kim Ark Court explained:

The fundamental principle of the common law with regard to English nationality was birth within the allegiance-also called „ligealty,‟ „obedience,‟ „faith,‟ or „power‟-of the king. The principle embraced all persons born within the king‟s allegiance, and subject to his protection. Such allegiance and protection were mutual, ... and were not restricted to natural-born subjects and naturalized subjects, or to those who had taken an oath of allegiance; but were predicable of aliens in amity, so long as they were within the kingdom. Children, born in England, of such aliens, were therefore natural-born subjects. ...

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, and 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. ...

All persons born in the allegiance of the king are natural-born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country, as well as of England. We find no warrant for the opinion that this great principle of the common law has ever been changed in the United States. It has always obtained here with the same vigor, and subject only to the same exceptions, since as before the Revolution.​

... Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States [] natural-born citizens.” ...

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11120903.ebb.pdf[/QUOTE]

Buh-bye birfer!