Main Menu

It depends on what the definition of “says” says

WorldNetDaily, always happy to quote somebody else telling lies against Barack Obama, published this comment from Mario Apuzzo:

He said in American jurisprudence “there is not one case that says being born to an alien parent creates a natural born citizen.”

Certainly there are cases where courts wrote in clear language that the child born of aliens in the United States is a natural born citizen. Examples include Lynch v Clarke and Ankeny v Daniels. If by “says” Apuzzo means that the court made a specific ruling making the children of alien parents natural born, then he is technically accurate although misleading since no court has “ruled” on the question in any fashion.

By the common law, all persons born within the ligeance of the crown of England, were natural born subject, without reference to the status or condition of their parents…

The term citizen, was used in the constitution as a word, the meaning of which was already established and well understood. And the constitution itself contains a direct recognition of the subsisting common law principle, in the section which defines the qualification of the 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,” … The only standard which then existed, of a natural born citizen, was the rule of the common law, and no different standard has been adopted since. Suppose a person should be elected President who was native born, but of alien parents, could there be any reasonable doubt that he was eligible under the constitution? I think not.

Lynch v Clarke NY (1844)

In either case Apuzzo and his client Charles Kerchner are trying to hide behind the general population’s ignorance of Constitutional law when they make this argument. The authorities are clear: being born a citizen in the country always makes a natural born citizen. Read your high school civics book.

134 Responses to It depends on what the definition of “says” says

  1. avatar
    Lupin April 30, 2011 at 5:08 am #

    Meretricious Mario is baaaack!

  2. avatar
    Suranis April 30, 2011 at 6:40 am #

    I would just like to mention that Mario really is not a typical example of his profession, and people should not let Mr Apuzzo colour their opinion of ambulance chasing layers in any way.

  3. avatar
    obsolete April 30, 2011 at 8:09 am #

    Doc C.:
    “Read your high school civics book.”

    But Obama snuck into my house, ripped those pages out, and erased all my related computer files.
    Is there any book or file he didn’t get to and scrub?

  4. avatar
    misha April 30, 2011 at 9:41 am #

    Suranis: people should not let Mr Apuzzo colour their opinion of ambulance chasing lawyers in any way

    Mario is not reading this. There’s been an accident on the Jersey Pike.

  5. avatar
    misha April 30, 2011 at 10:26 am #

    Tom Tancredo: Obama Withheld Birth Certificate To Make Republicans Look ‘Nuts’

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/29/tom-tancredo-obama-withhe_n_855718.html

  6. avatar
    Majority Will April 30, 2011 at 10:49 am #

    misha: Mario is not reading this. There’s been an accident on the Jersey Pike.

    Yes, and troopers will swat Mario on the nose again with a newspaper and make him scoop it up. He’ll never learn.

  7. avatar
    bjphysics April 30, 2011 at 11:47 am #

    misha: Tom Tancredo: Obama Withheld Birth Certificate To Make Republicans Look Nuts’ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/29/tom-tancredo-obama-withhe_n_855718.html

    Like contemporary Republicans need any encouragement to look crazy. Bill Maher showed a picture of 19 year old Barrack last night, in a hat with a Fro, smoking a cigarette like a doobie and wondered out loud how Republicans would react if he grew it back.

  8. avatar
    Jimmy April 30, 2011 at 11:59 am #

    This will be the undoing of Obama and the democratic and republican parties right here watch this Video it dams all in our GOVERNMENT OF A MASSIVE COVER-UP !!!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=VJgY86nmEHc

  9. avatar
    Jimmy April 30, 2011 at 12:05 pm #

    why would the Democratic Party and Obama allow McCain to continue to be a POTUS candidate in 2008 when they uncovered he was ineligible in July of 2008 2 months after Obama co-sponsored a Bill in the senate , senate resolution 511 , to allow McCain to be deemed eligible ??? So they could BRIBE McCain to not challenge Obama in his Ineligibility because of his Own admitting to that when he cosponsored the 511 Bill that Obama greed to natural born meaning that the candidate would need 2 parents US citizens as the definition . People we have massive corruption here and this is coming to a head .

    This was Obama and the democrats way of bribing McCain and the republicans, because they allowed McCain to perpetuate knowing he was Ineligible and presented the evidence 2 months later after Obama co-sponsored McCain’s ratification to Run for POTUS .
    The 2 parties conspired to cover this up and bribe each other and they are still to this day locked in a battle of deceit over this you can tell by the way they will not challenge each other in constitutional order , we the people are under siege by this and its got to STOP NOW !!!!
    When this review of McCain’s ineligibility came out 2 months later I think this is when the bribing and cover-up and deal making between the 2 parties began , http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract-id=1157621 http://articles.cnn.com/2011-04-20/opinion/chin.natural.born_1_natural-law-united-states-and-subject-citizenship-clause?_s=PM:OPINION
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriel_J._Chin

  10. avatar
    misha April 30, 2011 at 12:11 pm #

    Jimmy: they allowed McCain to perpetuate knowing he was Ineligible

    Jimmy, read this:
    http://newyorkleftist.blogspot.com/2009/10/likely-scenario.html

  11. avatar
    Sef April 30, 2011 at 12:12 pm #

    Jimmy:
    This will be the undoing of Obama and the democratic and republican parties right herewatch this Video it dams all in our GOVERNMENT OF A MASSIVE COVER-UP !!!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=VJgY86nmEHc

    Jimmy boy, someone should give you a quick course in logic. I’m sure others here will pounce quite effectively on this, so stay tuned and you might learn something.

  12. avatar
    Jimmy April 30, 2011 at 12:24 pm #

    they all BOTH political parties are up to their ears in this cover-up because thats the only way this could have got this far !!! ROVE all the RINOs that went after TRUMP they are all in this thing and all need to go down for this BIG time !!!
    I will Gladly go to the FEDERAL RESERVE and Work for NOTHING to PRINT the MONEY to BUILD the FEMA CAMP ALL THESE CRIMINALS WILL BE HELD IN , YES ????

  13. avatar
    Jimmy April 30, 2011 at 12:29 pm #

    Obama has condemned himself in the Video to the term natural born meaning 2 parents being US citizens by agreeing to McCains eligibility being this way when Obama Co-Sponsored senate resolution Bill 511 . watch the Video .

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=VJgY86nmEHc

    Obama cannot have it both ways , he cannot be eligible with only having one parent a US Citizen and then co-sponsor McCain Bill saying he had to have 2 parents , hes screwed himself here big time !!!!!

  14. avatar
    obsolete April 30, 2011 at 12:32 pm #

    Jimmy, you’re among the second group to be rounded up for the FEMA Camps. We have your IP and co-ordinates.
    The first group will be taken soon- look for a new event regarding Libya to keep the press distracted…

  15. avatar
    obsolete April 30, 2011 at 12:35 pm #

    Of course, if I were going to debunk you, I would say that they are describing McCain’s situation (born to two American citizens), NOT describing what everybody must have.

    Unless you think that to be a NBC, you have to be born in Panama to two American citizens.
    Remember, you can’t have it both ways…

  16. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 30, 2011 at 12:42 pm #

    This seems like one of the new birther tactics (pretty pathetic that all they have left is word games and the analysis of artifacts of their own creation) – I had a birther on another website challenge me when I said that the SCOTUS declared Wong Kim Ark a natural born citizen (by upholding the lower court’s ruling that made him a natural born citizen [I was using their word games against them – he didn’t like it… ;-)])

  17. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 30, 2011 at 12:46 pm #

    obsolete:
    Jimmy, you’re among the second group to be rounded up for the FEMA Camps. We have your IP and co-ordinates.
    The first group will be taken soon- look for a new event regarding Libya to keep the press distracted…

    Wow – that’s the most accurate ultra-birther parody I’ve ever seen! I would have no problem believing that it came from a real birther if I saw it at Dr. K(h)ate’s…

  18. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 30, 2011 at 1:26 pm #

    Jimmy: Obama has condemned himself in the Video to the term natural born meaning 2 parents being US citizens by agreeing to McCains eligibility being this way when Obama Co-Sponsored senate resolution Bill 511 . watch the Video .

    S. Res. 511 was passed by the Senate unanimously. Barack Obama’s election was certified by the Senate unanimously. Apparently you must have misunderstood what S. Res. 511 says (and you have).

  19. avatar
    Suranis April 30, 2011 at 1:27 pm #

    Jimmy:
    Obama has condemned himself in the Video to the term natural born meaning 2 parents being US citizens by agreeing to McCains eligibility being this way when Obama Co-Sponsored senate resolution Bill 511 . watch the Video .

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=VJgY86nmEHc

    Obama cannot have it both ways , he cannot be eligible with only having one parent a US Citizen and then co-sponsor McCain Bill saying he had to have 2 parents , hes screwed himself here big time !!!!!

    Thanks for the heads up Jimmy. I just wrote some debunking comments.on that video.

  20. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 30, 2011 at 1:30 pm #

    Jimmy: why would the Democratic Party and Obama allow McCain to continue to be a POTUS candidate in 2008 when they uncovered he was ineligible in July of 2008 2 months after Obama co-sponsored a Bill in the senate , senate resolution 511 , to allow McCain to be deemed eligible ???

    You seem to be somewhat confused. S. Res. 511 is not a “bill;” it is a resolution that has no force in law.

    The majority of authorities believe McCain was eligible.

  21. avatar
    Mary Brown April 30, 2011 at 2:26 pm #

    These poor deluded people will just not stop because they cannot accept President Obama. Some of you have commented about the intelligence or lack of intelligence among birthers. Many of the folks I know are very smart and can discuss issues logically. The exception is this President. Emotions have taken over. It baffles me but then very intelligent Germans supported Hitler.

  22. avatar
    Joey April 30, 2011 at 2:26 pm #

    I’m going to type this really slowly, so that Jimmy might possibly be able to understand it:
    (1) John McCain was born OUTSIDE OF THE TERRITORIAL UNITED STATES, in the Panama Canal Zone, hence his parentage plays a role in his natural born citizenship.
    (2) Barack Obama was born WITHIN THE TERRITORIAL UNITED STATES, in the state of Hawaii, hence he is a “Citizen of the United States-at birth” (natural born citizen) as long as his parents weren’t foreign diplomats or members of a foreign occupying military force.
    That’s two different sets of circumstances of birth and under the law of the land, two different sets of requirements in order to be considered natural born citizens.

    “Based on the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the boundaries of the United States are ‘natural born citizens” regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”–Indiana Court of Appeals, Ankeny v The Governor of Indiana, November 12, 2009

  23. avatar
    Joey April 30, 2011 at 2:29 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: You seem to be somewhat confused. S. Res. 511 is not a “bill;” it is a resolution that has no force in law.

    The majority of authorities believe McCain was eligible.

    Poor Jimmy needs to take an eighth grade civics class and learn the difference between a bill and a non-binding resolution. If Jimmy needed to take the US Citizenship examiniation, he’d be on a boat back across the ocean by now.

  24. avatar
    Joey April 30, 2011 at 2:39 pm #

    I haven’t seen this story posted yet on this site:
    “Swede Provides ‘proof’ in the Obama birth debate:”
    http://www.thelocal.se/33472/20110429/

  25. avatar
    Suranis April 30, 2011 at 2:40 pm #

    Well that was a successful round of denunking on Jimmys video. Brought in James Madison, the 2009 congressional report, US law from Cornell, The dissent from Dred Scott, Wong Kim Ark and Alkeny Vs Daniels. Oh yes and Lupins translation of Vattel. It’s really great to have suck an armoury of great debunking facts at ones fingertips.

    *heart*

  26. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny April 30, 2011 at 2:43 pm #

    obsolete: Remember, you can’t have it both ways…

    What do you mean? Birfers have been having their cake and eating it for two years now.

    1) “The COLB is a forgery and it proves that Obama’s father was not a US citizen when Obama was born, so Vattel says no NBC.”

    2) “The Indonesian school record proves he was adopted so he had Indonesian citizenship which means he lost US citizenship. It does not prove that he was born in Hawaii.”

    3) “Obama was ineligible, so his win does not count and Biden is disqualified too. So, McCain won, but he was not ineligible either, meaning that the real President of the USA is Sarah Palin”.

    4) “If Obama had shown his long form earlier, Lakin would not have disobeyed his orders, so Obama screwed a veteran hero soldier’s defense, and should be impeached for putting the country at risk by causing the military to desert their duty. And of course, the long form is a forgery.”

    And I am sure these are not all the illogicalities we heard from the mouths of birthers.Orly at least could say that a Russian Business Network virus from Kazakhstan caused her to type those things on her computer, but what excuse do nc1, Jess Beard and Farleftview have?

  27. avatar
    Sean April 30, 2011 at 2:45 pm #

    Jimmy, no bribe was needed. If you look at McCain’s situation reasonably, his Dad was in the military serving this country. That’s what happens when they create a resolution, it’s a way of the Senators to say it’s reasonable for McCain to run for President under his circumstances. It’s reasonable that McCain isn’t a one man Panamanian sleeper cell.

    Obama was born in the US, so he doesn’t have anything to worry about. He IS a natural born citizen regardless of his parents.

    Jimmy:
    why would the Democratic Party and Obama allow McCain to continue to be a POTUS candidate in 2008 when they uncovered he was ineligible in July of 2008 2 months after Obama co-sponsored a Bill in the senate , senate resolution 511 , to allow McCain to be deemed eligible ??? So they could BRIBE McCain to not challenge Obama in his Ineligibility because of his Own admitting to that when he cosponsored the 511 Bill that Obama greed to natural born meaning that the candidate would need 2 parents US citizens as the definition . People we have massive corruption here and this is coming to a head .

    This was Obama and the democrats way of bribingMcCain and the republicans, because they allowed McCain to perpetuate knowing he was Ineligible and presented the evidence 2 months later after Obama co-sponsored McCain’s ratification to Run for POTUS .The 2 parties conspired to cover this up and bribe each other and they are still to this day locked in a battle of deceit over this you can tell by the way they will not challenge each other in constitutional order , we the people are under siege by this and its got to STOP NOW !!!!When this review of McCain’s ineligibility came out 2 months later I think this is when the bribing and cover-up and deal making between the 2 parties began ,http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract-id=1157621http://articles.cnn.com/2011-04-20/opinion/chin.natural.born_1_natural-law-united-states-and-subject-citizenship-clause?_s=PM:OPINION
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriel_J._Chin

  28. avatar
    misha April 30, 2011 at 4:02 pm #

    Jimmy: I will Gladly go to the FEDERAL RESERVE and Work for NOTHING to PRINT the MONEY to BUILD the FEMA CAMP ALL THESE CRIMINALS WILL BE HELD IN

    Jimmy, I want to thank you for your mutiple comments. We were able to record your IP address and GPS coordinates. It will make it easy to arrest you, and send you to that FEMA camp. Don’t bother packing. You won’t need anything where you’re going.

    You can run but you can’t hide. It’s been nice knowing you.

  29. avatar
    sarina April 30, 2011 at 5:33 pm #

    Oh really Mario Apuzzo?

    James Madison, The Founders’ Constitution Volume 2, Article 1, Section 2, Clause 2, Document 6 (1789)

    “It is an established maxim, received by all political writers, that every person owes a natural allegiance to the government of that country in which he is born. Allegiance is defined to be a tie, that binds the subject to the state, and in consequence of his obedience, he is entitled to protection… The children of aliens, born in this state, are considered as natural born subjects, and have the same rights with the rest of the citizens.”

  30. avatar
    Tarrant April 30, 2011 at 6:07 pm #

    I noted Dr. Kate just posted the same about the long form – one, that it’s a forgery, and two, that it proves he’s not a Vattel NBC. It’s like, pick one or the other. It can’t be both.

  31. avatar
    Stanislaw April 30, 2011 at 6:50 pm #

    Jimmy:
    So they could BRIBE McCain to not challenge Obama in his Ineligibility because of his Own admitting to that when he cosponsored the 511 Bill that Obama greed to natural born meaning that the candidate would need 2 parents US citizens as the definition . People we have massive corruption here and this is coming to a head .

    So tell us Jimmy, exactly how did a junior senator of extremely modest means manage to bribe someone worth millions of dollars? In formulating your answer try not to spin too hard, otherwise you’ll make yourself dizzy.

  32. avatar
    Suranis April 30, 2011 at 7:16 pm #

    That Other Mike:
    Doc – OT, but have you seen this?

    http://theconservativemonster.com/2011/04/29/certificate-of-live-birth-birthplace-kenya-registered-in-honolulu.aspx

    The article and image that link points to is dated march 18th 2010. *head banging on desk*

  33. avatar
    todd April 30, 2011 at 7:59 pm #

    I’m sure everyone is familiar with this case by now, but it seems apropos:
    PERKINS V. ELG, 307 U. S. 325 (1939)

    Some findings:

    1) On her birth in New York, the plaintiff became a citizen of the United States. Civil Rights Act of 1866,

    2) It has long been a recognized principle in this country that, if a child born here is taken during minority to the country of his parents’ origin, where his parents resume their former allegiance, he does not thereby lose his citizenship in the United States provided that, on attaining majority he elects to retain that citizenship and to return to the United States to assume its duties.

    3) The cross-petition of Miss Elg, upon which certiorari was granted in No. 455, is addressed to the part of the decree below which dismissed the bill of complaint as against the Secretary of State. The dismissal was upon the ground that the court would not undertake by mandamus to compel the issuance of a passport or control by means of a declaratory judgment the discretion of the Secretary of State. But the Secretary of State, according to the allegation of the bill of complaint, had refused to issue a passport to Miss Elg “solely on the ground that she had lost her native born American citizenship.” The court below, properly recognizing the existence of an actual controversy with the defendants (Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Haworth, 300 U. S. 227), declared Miss Elg “to be a natural born citizen of the United States,” and we think that the decree should include the Secretary of State as well as the other defendants. The decree in that sense would in no way interfere with the exercise of the Secretary’s discretion with respect to the issue of a passport, but would simply preclude the denial of a passport on the sole ground that Miss Elg had lost her American citizenship.

  34. avatar
    bjphysics April 30, 2011 at 8:13 pm #

    Jimmy: This will be the undoing of Obama and the democratic and republican parties right here watch this Video it dams all in our GOVERNMENT OF A MASSIVE COVER-UP !!!http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=VJgY86nmEHc

    Jimmy,

    Add this to your video arsenal:

    Obama’s Birth Certificate: The Conspiracy Deepens

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=si2zh0Gt2VM

  35. avatar
    Gregory April 30, 2011 at 8:38 pm #

    Tarrant:
    I noted Dr. Kate just posted the same about the long form – one, that it’s a forgery, and two, that it proves he’s not a Vattel NBC. It’s like, pick one or the other. It can’t be both.

    Birthers have always believed that having several weak, half-baked arguments why Obama is not eligible to be president – will somehow add up to one strong argument. But logic doesn’t work that way, and birthers have never excelled at logical thinking.

  36. avatar
    El Diablo Negro April 30, 2011 at 11:20 pm #

    Since I live around a lot of birthers (Columbus, OH) The talk that is going around now is that Obama Senior was Deported. I don’t have a clue what brought this on but if you google “obama’s father deported” there are lots of recent articles for this in the last couple of days.

    I don’t know how this ties to the COLB issue. But it’s the new toy they have to play with.

  37. avatar
    El Diablo Negro April 30, 2011 at 11:25 pm #

    It seems like they are going to devolve into slandering his parents and asking for college records.

    http://messageboards.aol.com/aol/en_us/articles.php?boardId=38496&articleId=18641322&func=6&channel=News&filterRead=false&filterHidden=true&filterUnhidden=false

    A quote from here:

    “Obama [Sr.] has shown his hatred for Britain. This has been shown time and time again. The reason was because his father was jailed by the British.
    Could this be the reason Obama [Jr.] is trying to destroy America?”

    Seriously, I could not make this stuff up if I tried. And if I could, then that means I have entirely too much free time.

  38. avatar
    Majority Will April 30, 2011 at 11:36 pm #

    El Diablo Negro:
    Since I live around a lot of birthers (Columbus, OH) The talk that is going around now is that Obama Senior was Deported. I don’t have a clue what brought this on but if you google “obama’s father deported”there are lots of recent articles for this in the last couple of days.

    I don’t know how this ties to the COLB issue. But it’s the new toy they have to play with.

    Ooh, shiny object.

  39. avatar
    El Diablo Negro April 30, 2011 at 11:41 pm #

    Majority Will: Ooh, shiny object.

    Or from than movie “UP” I think it works here too.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBWrMQVsuak

    ….Squirrel!!!

  40. avatar
    US Citizen May 1, 2011 at 12:10 am #

    Jimmy, only you can read this message.
    I know, they laugh at you. They laughed at me too.
    But I know the truth too.
    Obama DID bribe McCain and everyone IS in on a huge plan to destroy the US!
    It all makes complete sense when you’re smart and informed.
    I think I can trust you here, so I should tell you now that it’s China trying to take us over.

    Now Jimmy, please listen closely…
    Go around your home immediately and throw everything that says “Made in China” out to your curb or dumpster.
    It’s the only way we can rid your home of possible bugs or even viruses.
    Unfortunately we can’t help protect your precious bodily fluids, but it’s a start.
    We’ll be by soon to haul all the infected stuff away.

    Thank you for your patriotic cooperation.

    -The underground resistance

  41. avatar
    G May 1, 2011 at 1:27 am #

    Suranis: The article and image that link points to is dated march 18th 2010. *head banging on desk*

    As they thrash and wail about, the rabid birthers will be pulling out every fake Kenyan BC in their arsenal over and over again (and probably make up a host of new ones) in their infantile and delusional cries of “fraud”.

    Let them be as ridiculous as they want. It will be to no avail and unable to get any traction beyond the usual fantasy conspiracists that gullibly believe anything.

    The chain of custody and vouching for the certified HI LFBC and the HI COLB has been established and vouched for thoroughly on both official sides of the issue (HI & WH).

    That is truly end game on this issue and sufficiently air tight that the birthers “fraud” lies are an utter lost cause. Birthers continuing to scream and pursue this fake/fraud angles only serve to further discredit themselves with the real world.

  42. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy May 1, 2011 at 2:02 am #

    That Other Mike:
    Doc – OT, but have you seen this?

    http://theconservativemonster.com/2011/04/29/certificate-of-live-birth-birthplace-kenya-registered-in-honolulu.aspx

    I saw this birther vision of what the birth certificate should look like when it came out a year or so ago.

    Note that the law referenced at the bottom of the form wasn’t passed until 21 years after Obama was born, proving the document a fake. There are other problems, but the one is sufficient.

  43. avatar
    Arthur May 1, 2011 at 2:52 am #

    US Citizen:

    Whatever form of encryption you were using to communicate secretly with Jimmy has been compromised! I recommend we execute plan “Abundant Taco” using go code “Dora the Explora.”

    Jimmy–I don’t know where you are, but where ever it is, it’s not safe. They know, now, that YOU know. We’ve been using this site to communicate clandestinely about “you know what.” but Dr. C. has sold us down the river! Of course there aren’t any ads on this site–DNC pays for everything. Of course Soros has one part–oh Christ, I don’t have time to reveal the whole rotten web. We gotta get moving!

    Meet me in 48 hours at the headwaters of the Raccoon River, Ida County, Iowa. The Ida County Toastmasters are hosting a ComicCon convention under a tarp by the Sirloin Stockade. I’ll be masquerading as a large Raccoon who dresses like a slut. You’ll say, “My, that’s a handsome negligee Mrs. Hightower” And I’ll reply, “Thank you, but my name is Taitz.” After that, you’ll get to choose either the red pill or the blue pill. One allows you to study hotel/motel management at an uncredited community college, and the other brings you into the fight, you learn kung fu and meet Keanu Reeves. (He’s got a reputation for being mumbly and super sad, but that just part of his cover–he’s tootes into it.)

    For the time being, DON’T POST. Anything, anywhere. It’s too dangerous. J. R. “Bob” Dobbs will let you know when t he moment is right. Here’s his website: http://www.subgenius.com/

    Take care, Jimmy!

  44. avatar
    misha May 1, 2011 at 3:06 am #

    Arthur: After that, you’ll get to choose either the red pill or the blue pill.

    One pill makes you large, and one pill makes you small, but the ones mother gives you don’t do anything at all. I asked Alice.

  45. avatar
    Arthur May 1, 2011 at 3:09 am #

    misha: One pill makes you large, and one pill makes you small, but the ones mother gives you don’t do anything at all. I asked Alice.

    Yes, but have you spoken with the sub genius, J.R. “Bob” Dobbs? By the way, go Jefferson Airplane and Grace Slick!

  46. avatar
    MichaelN May 1, 2011 at 3:34 am #

    Dr Conspiracy quoted:

    “By the common law, all persons born within the ligeance of the crown of England, were natural born subject, without reference to the status or condition of their parents…”

    Lynch v Clarke NY (1844)
    ————————————————————————–

    This is incorrect according to the common law per Lord Coke in Calvin’s case.

    There is a clear reference in common law “to the status or condition of the parents” where it is essential to qualifying as NBS.

    Coke (common law):

    “There be regulary (unlesse it be in special cases) three incidents to a subject born. 1. That the parents be under the actual obedience of the king. 2. That the place of his birth be within the king’s dominion. And 3. the time of his birth is chiefly to be considered; ……”

    and

    ” ……that issue is no subject to the King of England, though he be born upon his soyl, and under his meridian, for that he was not born under the ligeance of a subject …..

    What you quoted is also incorrect in the reference to “within the ligeance of the crown of England”

    Coke (common law)

    ” ….. it is necessary to be considered, to which capacity ligeance is due. And it was resolved, that it was due to the natural person of the King (which is ever accompanied with the politique capacity, and the politique capacity as it were appropriated to the natural capacity) and it is not due to the politique capacity only, that is, to his crown or kingdom distinct from his natural capacity, and that for divers reasons.”

    So there are two essential qualities required for NBS nature/procreation & birthright.

    In Common law, born on the soil was not enough, the status of the parent father was an essential consideration in determining NBS.

  47. avatar
    Sean May 1, 2011 at 3:35 am #

    Arthur: Yes, but have you spoken with the sub genius, J.R. “Bob” Dobbs?By the way, go Jefferson Airplane and Grace Slick!

    Are you referencing the Marshak scene from A Serious Man?

  48. avatar
    Lupin May 1, 2011 at 4:44 am #

    Jimmy:

    As I am actually writing this in French, if you can read this in English, it means that your computer has been infected with the LePetomane virus 3.0 which automatically downloads all your files to the serveur-magnifique of the Third French Empire (c/o Mme LaFolle, Chaillot).

    If anyone else reads this in English, you’re my bitch now. Bwa-ha-ha.

  49. avatar
    Majority Will May 1, 2011 at 5:30 am #

    Lupin:
    Jimmy:

    As I am actually writing this in French, if you can read this in English, it means that your computer has been infected with the LePetomane virus 3.0 which automatically downloads all your files to the serveur-magnifique of the Third French Empire (c/o Mme LaFolle, Chaillot).

    If anyone else reads this in English, you’re my bitch now. Bwa-ha-ha.

    Merde.

  50. avatar
    That Other Mike May 1, 2011 at 6:14 am #

    Suranis: The article and image that link points to is dated march 18th 2010. *head banging on desk*

    Jeez, I just thought it might be some more material…

  51. avatar
    Obsolete May 1, 2011 at 6:19 am #

    MichaelN

    You are lying to our faces again by cutting off the first part of the sentence which explains we are discussing an invading soldier. You know the part. Since invading soldier’s kids are exempt from being NBC’s, you’re point proves nothing. Except that you will lie to try to make a point.

    P.S.- Although we like toying with lying birthers, after last week, the general population has seen through your BS and never wants to hear from birthers again. No one will give your two-parent crap the time of day.
    After all, birthers were exposed as liars…

  52. avatar
    Judge Mental May 1, 2011 at 7:37 am #

    I suspect MichaelN goes around so many discussion boards trying to pull that fast one by missing out the full content and context of the quote that he occasionally forgets those places where he has already had his pants pulled down over it.

    A bit like a busy cold caller for an iffy double glazing firm ringing the doorbell of a guy who has already succesfully sued the cold caller’s company for fraudulently selling him defective sub standard windows at over the odds prices.

  53. avatar
    Greg May 1, 2011 at 7:48 am #

    In Common law, born on the soil was not enough, the status of the parent father was an essential consideration in determining NBS.

    Lynch v Clarke doesn’t say birth on the soil is enough. One must be born on the soil AND within the ligeance of the King. Diplomats are not within the ligeance of the King. Neither are invading soldiers. Aliens, though, are in the ligeance of the King because they are entitled to the protection of the King and have go follow the King’s laws.

    Now, in the US, do aliens have to follow our laws? Are they entitled to the protection of our laws?

    Since you don’t live in the US and are oblivious to the nuances of American law, let me answer these for you. Yes, you have to follow our laws when you come here. And, unfortunately, the government will prosecute anyone who abuses your rights. So much for my plan to reenact “The Most Dangerous Game” with Australians.

  54. avatar
    US Citizen May 1, 2011 at 7:58 am #

    Thank you Arthur,

    Unfortunately I will not be available on that date.
    I have my calendar already penned in on that day for slacking.

    However, I will have an agent attend the meeting en proxy.
    She will attend either as Michelle Bachmann, Mary Beth Buchanan or Ann Coulter.
    I don’t yet know which disguise she will use, but you can positively identify her by a number of darts protruding from her face.
    Good luck on this mission.

  55. avatar
    bjphysics May 1, 2011 at 10:29 am #

    Recent video release proves Obama was born in Africa; lead in starts at 2:00 with birth video at 2:58.

    Definitely the OMG moment birthers have awaited; we here are going to have trouble disputing this evidence.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9mzJhvC-8E&feature=player_embedded

    It is instructive to watch the video from the beginning because it starts off with a master-blaster.

  56. avatar
    MichaelN May 1, 2011 at 11:00 am #

    Obsolete:
    MichaelN

    You are lying to our faces again by cutting off the first part of the sentence which explains we are discussing an invading soldier. You know the part. Since invading soldier’s kids are exempt from being NBC’s, you’re point proves nothing. Except that you will lie to try to make a point.

    P.S.- Although we like toying with lying birthers, after last week, the general population has seen through your BS and never wants to hear from birthers again. No one will give your two-parent crap the time of day.
    After all, birthers were exposed as liars…

    Doesn’t matter if the father is not a subject because he comes from Mars.

    The point is, that in the common law, the parent’s status matters in determining NBS.

    “There be regulary (unlesse it be in special cases) three incidents to a subject born.
    1. That the parents be under the actual obedience of the king.”

    So it is not only jus soli, as the quote from Lynch v Clarke NY (1844) erroneously proposes.

    If the parent doesn’t cut it, nor does the kid.

    The status of the parents does matter. ………….. it’s not a lie ………… it’s the common law.

  57. avatar
    MichaelN May 1, 2011 at 11:04 am #

    Greg: Lynch v Clarke doesn’t say birth on the soil is enough. One must be born on the soil AND within the ligeance of the King. Diplomats are not within the ligeance of the King. Neither are invading soldiers. Aliens, though, are in the ligeance of the King because they are entitled to the protection of the King and have go follow the King’s laws.

    Now, in the US, do aliens have to follow our laws? Are they entitled to the protection of our laws?

    Since you don’t live in the US and are oblivious to the nuances of American law, let me answer these for you. Yes, you have to follow our laws when you come here. And, unfortunately, the government will prosecute anyone who abuses your rights. So much for my plan to reenact “The Most Dangerous Game” with Australians.

    The ligeance of the subject is to the English sovereign, not the laws.

    Coke (common law)

    ” ….. it is necessary to be considered, to which capacity ligeance is due. And it was resolved, that it was due to the natural person of the King (which is ever accompanied with the politique capacity, and the politique capacity as it were appropriated to the natural capacity) and it is not due to the politique capacity only, that is, to his crown or kingdom distinct from his natural capacity,”

  58. avatar
    GeorgetownJD May 1, 2011 at 11:35 am #

    That Other Mike:
    Doc – OT, but have you seen this?

    http://theconservativemonster.com/2011/04/29/certificate-of-live-birth-birthplace-kenya-registered-in-honolulu.aspx

    Even Mario the Putz has debunked this one.

  59. avatar
    Greg May 1, 2011 at 11:37 am #

    The ligeance of the subject is to the English sovereign, not the laws.

    So? The common law of England remained unchanged in the US In this subject and you haven’t shown otherwise. In fact, you haven’t tried.

    That was the argument in WKA. Government = common law changed. WKA (and Gray) = common law didn’t change.

  60. avatar
    That Other Mike May 1, 2011 at 12:10 pm #

    GeorgetownJD: Even Mario the Putz has debunked this one.

    I just thought it might make for some interesting post fodder; yet another fake BC, and I didn’t recall seeing it here before.

  61. avatar
    gorefan May 1, 2011 at 1:13 pm #

    MichaelN: The point is, that in the common law, the parent’s status matters in determining NBS.

    Wrong, again,

    “Nationality by birth or origin depends, according to the law of some nations, on the place of birth; according to that of others on the nationality of the parents. In many countries both elements exist, one or other, however, predominating. Thus, by the law of England, the status of a subject depends generally on the place of birth: nevertheless, the descendants, of a natural-born subject, for two generations, though born out of the dominions of the Crown, are, to all intents and purposes, subjects. In like manner, by the law of France, though, generally speaking, it is necessary to be born of French parents to be a Frenchman, an exception is made in favour of the child of a foreigner, if born in France, subject only to the condition of the French nationality, being claimed within a prescribed period.

    By the common law of England, every person born within the dominions of the Crown, no matter whether of English or of foreign parents, and, in the latter case, whether the parents were settled, or merely temporarily sojourning in the country, was an English subject; save only the children of foreign ambassadors (who were excepted because their fathers carried their own nationality with them), or a child born to a foreigner during the hostile occupation of any part of the territories of England. No effect appears to have been given to descent as a source of nationality. * * *

    “The law of the United States of America agrees with our owm. The law of England as to the effect of the place of birth in the matter of nationality became the law of America as part of the law of the mother country, wdiich the original settlers carried with them. * * *

    Or are you so stupid, you think you know more then Chief Justice Cockburn.

  62. avatar
    Jimmy May 1, 2011 at 4:49 pm #

    Orly Taitz seeking Photoshop experts to evaluate Obama’s birth certificate
    http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=21194

    CBS joined ABC and C-span to request recording on camera my Monday, May 2. 2011 hearing in Pasadena
    http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=21203

    the truth will set us all free !!!!!

  63. avatar
    tom May 1, 2011 at 4:51 pm #

    “Barack Obama is KGB “illegal spy” ?” . Mikhail Kryzhanovsky

    There’s a lot of suspicious information concerning our socialist President Obama’s place of birth, his original birth certificate and his Columbia University attendance records. Loooks like he might be a KGB “illegal spy” or a “plant”. I have some questions – what they were talking about with Bill Clinton in December 2008 and why Obama hired Hillary Clinton as the Secretary of State ? Did Bill Clinton blackmail Obama ? How ?
    Do you remember espionage scandal of a century – in June ,2010 GBI arrested 10 (ten) Russian illegal spies, a whole ring. Obama ordered to exchange them for 4 former CIA secret sources arrested in Russia. There was no investigation – why ? Maybe there’s another Russian “ring” in America ? Or 2 ? or 3 ? Who knows ? 10 Russian spies were sent back to Russia without a single question ! What is that ? Who is Obama ?
    He’s destroying America – its called “socialist intervention into the US economy”. Why ? Show me a single American who’s happy about that.
    On April 25, 2011 the White House, finally, released Obama’s birth certificate, but it actually doesn’t mean much – KGB (now – SVR) experts can do whatever you order – fake ID’s, money, any documents of a very high quality. So, the question is open.

    =================

    Obama’s hidden public records:

    1. Dunham-Obama marriage license. Not released.
    2. Dunham-Soetoro marriage license. Not released.
    3. Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama adoption records. Not released.
    4. Obama’s aka Soetoro’s Besuki School application obtained.
    5. Obama’s aka Soetoro’s Punahou School records. Not released.
    6. Selective Service Registration – a proven forgery released and a criminal act.
    7. Obama’s Occidental College records. Not released.
    9. Obama’s passport from Indonesia, he had to have one to attend school in Indonesia. Not released
    10. Obama’s U.S. Passport, if one exists. Not released.
    11. Obama entered Pakistan on what countries passport. Not released.
    12. Obama’s Columbia University records, a foreign exchange student? Not released.
    13. Obama’s Columbia University thesis. Not released.
    14. Not one name of any student who knows Obama attendant Columbia released or known.
    15. Obama’s Harvard Law School records, a foreign exchange student? Not released.
    16. Obama’s Harvard Law Review articles, none released.
    17. Obama’s Baptism certificate, if one exists ? None released.
    18. Obama’s Illinois State Senate records. Not released.
    19. Obama’s Illinois State Senate schedule. Not released (alleged to have been lost).
    20. Obama’s Law practices client list and billing records. Not released.
    21. Obama’s University of Chicago scholarly articles, none released or exist
    22. The reason Obama lost his license to practice law in Illinois.
    23. Explanation for his false Connecticut Social Security number
    ========================

    The highest intelligence level – illegal spies, intelligence operatives who are secretly deployed abroad and covertly operate there under assumed names and well-documented cover stories, masquerading as native citizens. It’s very important if you get , for example, original birth certificate of American citizen, who died (at young age preferably) or any records and documents on him(birth, wedding, death, any IDs, etc) .

    The process of training and “installing” such officer is rather complex and includes:

    a) Special training.
    Foreign language, general, political and special (espionage and counter-espionage) knowledge of the target country; personal cover story — new biography, special technical devices, recruitment methods). Up to three years.
    b) Illegal probation period abroad. A trip abroad through intermediate countries with numerous changes of passports and cover stories, jobs, personal connections. Then he gets to the target country, stays there for another 1-2 years and goes back to his country for additional training and correction of cover story — actually, it’s his first combat assignment. The most important part of this assignment is to check the reliability of the cover story and documents; the cover story has to be reinforced with new and old true facts, like short-term studies at universities or professional training courses).
    c) Intermediate legislation.
    On his way back the officer could stay in an intermediate country for another 1-2 years, make contacts with business, scientists, government employees, celebrities.
    d) Basic legislation.
    Officer comes to the target country, obtains genuine documents, gets a job which allows him to travel and talk to many people, recruit informants thus creating an illegal station.

    The illegal is usually supplied with a variety of cover documents to make him “invisible” for counter-intelligence — some are used only to cross the borders on the way to a target country, others — to live there, other documents — only for travel to “third countries” to meet with officers of legal or illegal stations or to be used in case of urgent recall to home country (in that case the illegal is supposed to transit at least two or three countries). His further activity depends on how professional counter-espionage service is working in the country.
    He could fail in his mission also because of:
    – poor training and low quality documents
    – neglecting security rules.
    – one mistake in pronunciation can give you away
    – treason (traitor-informant or a “mole” inside his own service)
    – low personal security level (while working with sources)

    If we talk about “legal plants”, KGB (and modern Russian SVR) loves to recruite Harvard, Yale and Columbia students and “push” them to the top of American politics – US Congress, the White House, the Cabinet.
    It might the reason CIA together with FBI and Secret Serevice conspire to give Obama “one-way ticket” – you can imagine the scandal if Obama IS a Russian “illegal spy” !

    Mikhail Kryzhanovsky
    a former KGB intelligence officer
    a former KGB “Nabat” anti-terror group member (a sniper)
    a former Ukrainian National Security officer
    CIA, FBI and US Secret Service “Filament”
    the author of the “White House Special Handbook”

  64. avatar
    tom May 1, 2011 at 4:53 pm #

    2012 OBAMA’S VICTORY SPEECH. Full text.

    .
    November 5, 2012, Chicago

    Hello, Chicago !

    If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible ?
    No !
    It’s the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Socialist, Communist, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled – Americans who sent a message to the world that we have never been just a collection of individuals or a collection of Red States and Blue States: we are, and always will be, the CAU – Communist American Union !
    It was a long way, it took 4 years to make my 2008 “CHANGE!” slogan a happy Communist reality – everybody has a bed in a shelter !
    This campaign wasn’t an easy one. In January 2012, Vice President and my running mate Joe Biden resigned, I respect his decision. I’ve picked up Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and only supercynical people call this a “wel-planned trick to get the votes .

    A little bit earlier this evening I received an extraordinarily gracious call from Donald Trump, though we,Communists, prefer to talk to “money bags” like him in Guantanamo Bay. He’s defeated and it’s not me – history defeated him and all those “goldfen” 4,000 from the “Fortune” list !

    I want to thank my partner in this journey, a woman who campaigned from her heart , the vice-president-elect of the United States, Hillary Clinton.
    I want to thank my chief strategist Mikhail Kryzhanovsky,a former KGB intelligence officer and CIA “Filament”, the author of my Communist “White House Special Handbook” who has been a partner with me every step of the way – you made Communism happen, and I am forever grateful for what you’ve sacrificed to get it done.
    But above all, I will never forget who this victory truly belongs to – it belongs to you, 50 million of temporarily poor people of CAU. This is your victory.
    Finally you have a president you can trust indefinitely – I promise you the Constitution amendment on that. Presidents come to the Oval Office and leave – national leader will stay. Thank you.
    I know you didn’t do this just to win an election and I know you didn’t do it for me. You did it because you understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead. For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenge that tomorrow will bring is the greatest of our lifetime – International Union of Communist Nations !

    The road ahead will be long – we have to turn the globe into Communism. Our climb together with all other nations will be steep. We may never get there but America – I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there !
    It cannot happen without a new spirit of sacrifice.
    So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism; of service and responsibility where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves, but each other.
    And report each other to our new American Communist Security Service – the one I’ve promised you in 2008.

    Thank you.

    “Barack Obama 2012: KGB technology 2008”. YouTube
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvG4nLRn4PI

    “Mikhail Kryzhanovsky, KGBspy, CIA,FBI and US Secret Service “Filament”. YouTube
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksQU0D-D2_Y

    “White House Special Handbook” by Mikhail Kryzhanovsky, ALGORA,2007

  65. avatar
    obsolete May 1, 2011 at 5:25 pm #

    MichaelN: Doesn’t matter if the father is not a subject because he comes from Mars.

    MichaelN, I will try to explain this so even YOU can understand this…

    Here is the full sentence:
    “for if enemies should come into the realm, and possess a town or fort, and have issue there, that issue is no subject to the King of England, though he be born upon his soyl, and under his meridian, for that he was not born under the ligeance of a subject, nor under the protection of the King.”

    This is the part that you conveniently leave out when you spam us:
    “for if enemies should come into the realm, and possess a town or fort, and have issue there,”

    Try to follow;

    Leaving aside, for the moment, your bullsh*t “two-citizen parent” theory, most experts will tell you that a child born in the United States is a natural-born citizen, with the following exceptions:
    1. A child born to a diplomat.
    2. A child born to an invading soldier.

    Are you with me so far?

    Now, reading the full sentence, it is clear the subject being discussed is an invading soldier. How do I know? The clue is the part that you always leave out: “for if enemies should come into the realm, and possess a town or fort,”

    What the Full sentence does, is describe a situation (number 2, above) in which it is universally acknowledged where a child, although born here, is NOT considered a natural born citizen. Why? Because an exception is made for the children of invading soldiers.

    You are repeatedly claiming that you found a case of a child simply being born here, and not being a natural born citizen: “that issue is no subject to the King of England, though he be born upon his soyl, and under his meridian, for that he was not born under the ligeance of a subject, nor under the protection of the King.”

    What you are not letting the reader know, by cutting off that first part, is that you have found a situation where the child, although born here, is not considered natural born because it is from one of the two exceptions to the natural born rule.
    You know, this part: “for if enemies should come into the realm, and possess a town or fort,”

    To try and dumb it down further:
    1- There are two exceptions to being natural born.
    2- You found a case that describes one of the two exceptions.
    3- You obscure that the case is referring to one of the two exceptions.
    4- You believe it proves your point. It doesn’t. It proves you found a case describing one of the known exceptions, as well as you are dishonest.

    The reason WHY the child is not considered natural born does matter MichaelN. It matters because there are two universally acknowledged exceptions to Jus soli*, and your situation describes one of them.
    Duh.

    Definition: Jus soli(Latin: right of the soil),[1] also known as birthright citizenship, is a right by which nationality or citizenship can be recognized to any individual born in the territory of the related state.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_soli

    (I notice you are spamming your theories on birther-only boards. Are you going to eventually leave here and retreat into the safety of the endless echo-chamber? I hope not.)

  66. avatar
    obsolete May 1, 2011 at 5:29 pm #

    Furthermore, if the first part of the sentence doesn’t matter (“for if enemies should come into the realm, and possess a town or fort, and have issue there,”) why don’t you leave it in when you post it? Why do you leave it out?

  67. avatar
    obsolete May 1, 2011 at 5:31 pm #

    tom,
    That is some serious, dedicated crazy. How many friends & family have you lost due to your mental illness?

  68. avatar
    G May 1, 2011 at 6:38 pm #

    Crazy commenter Tom is obviously stuck on stupid. His case appears to be terminal.

    Hey Tom, we’ve sent some Black Helicopters for you… the FEMA camps await… And yes, our guards there are all secret Muslim Lizard People, bought and paid with Bilderberg NWO money, laundered through our debt to Communist China…

    Now go back to hiding under your bed until they come to collect you….BOO!!!

  69. avatar
    richCares May 1, 2011 at 6:43 pm #

    hey tom, don’t worry, we will protect you the scary black guy, just stay in the basement, we’ll give adequate supplies of cat food to your mom.

  70. avatar
    Sean May 1, 2011 at 7:02 pm #

    Tom is really worried we won’t find a typo in Obama’s lifetime of records.

  71. avatar
    Slartibartfast May 1, 2011 at 7:10 pm #

    Sean:
    Tom is really worried we won’t find a typo in Obama’s lifetime of records.

    Don’t worry, I’m sure the odds are that there’s at least one real anomaly in his records (any idea what those odd are Doc?). In fact, if there were no anomalies, that itself would be anomalous…

    See, there you go – Tom has nothing to worry about. πŸ˜€

  72. avatar
    G May 1, 2011 at 7:34 pm #

    That Other Mike: Doc – OT, but have you seen this? http://theconservativemonster.com/2011/04/29/certificate-of-live-birth-birthplace-kenya-registered-in-honolulu.aspx

    Here’s an article for you that more throroughly explains the history of this HOAX document, including an explanation from the creator of that hoax that it was always intended to PUNK the birthers:

    http://barackryphal.blogspot.com/2011/04/provenance-of-blaine-birth-certificate.html

  73. avatar
    MichaelN May 1, 2011 at 7:55 pm #

    Greg: So? The common law of England remained unchanged in the US In this subject and you haven’t shown otherwise. In fact, you haven’t tried.

    That was the argument in WKA. Government = common law changed. WKA (and Gray) = common law didn’t change.

    So you agree that the ligeance is to the sovereign king and not the crown or the law …………… right?

    That’s what is ‘so what’ at this point.

    Then you said:

    Greg – “Aliens, though, are in the ligeance of the King because they are entitled to the protection of the King and have go follow the King’s laws.”

    The common law is not the ‘King’s laws’ ……………… you got that wrong too!

    Here’s a piece from Coke (Calvin’s case) that might help you grasp the distinction…

    “legal obedience, or ligeance which is called legal, because the municipal laws of this realm have prescribed the order and form of it; and this to be done upon oath at the Torn or Leet.”

    So if it were as you say, then an alien in US would need to swear an oath of allegiance to have legal ligeance ………………………………… right?

    Moving along ………..

    So you agree that ‘Sherley’ the Frenchman (Calvin’s case) although alien born,was a subject to the king of England ……………….. right?

    And you agree that if the Frenchman came to England as an enemy, he would not be a subject of the king of England, therefore his off-spring, even if born on English soil would not be a born subject …………………. right?

    So the status of the parent does matter ……………. right?

    An alien in USA does not have ligeance to a US sovereign king nor is an alien in US a subject of any US sovereign king, this alien in US has no legal ligeance unless he/she swears an oath of allegiance ………………………………… and you say that US as a new found constitutional republic didn’t change and so you say all friendly aliens visiting USA are somehow subjects to some mysterious sovereign king of USA and have made some automated oath of allegiance to have legal allegiance?

    Fact = US did change, and in WKA the reference to the English common law was to establish whether soli was sufficient in USA to give birthright citizenship UNDER the US Constitution, but in English common law it took at least TWO ESSENTIAL qualities (possibly three) to make a ‘natural born, i.e. nature, procreation and birthright.

    That’s why WKA only got ‘birthright’ US citizenship and not NBC.

    That’s why Article II eligibility clause for POTUS does NOT SAY ‘native’.

  74. avatar
    misha May 1, 2011 at 8:05 pm #

    tom: 2012 OBAMA’S VICTORY SPEECH. Full text.

    How much coffee have you had? Have a drink.

  75. avatar
    misha May 1, 2011 at 8:06 pm #

    tom: 2012 OBAMA’S VICTORY SPEECH. Full text.

    Maybe it’s not coffee, LSD perhaps?

  76. avatar
    Suranis May 1, 2011 at 8:11 pm #

    MichaelN: So you agree that the ligeance is to the sovereign king and not the crown or the law …………… right?

    That’s what is so what’ at this point.

    Micheal Norris,. please review the last time you went on that drivel and I brought up the Commonwealth of England, 1820 to 1849, where Lord Cokes rules worked just fine in England without a king. That’s when you blubbered something irrelevant and then abruptly vanished.

    So, Micheal yes there was precedent in English law for Jus Soli without a king. Guess what replaced the king?

    Why is it that you keep bringing up debunked crap. Unlike you some people memories actually do go back more than 3 days.

  77. avatar
    G May 1, 2011 at 8:12 pm #

    MichaelN: Fact = US did change, and in WKA the reference to the English common law was to establish whether soli was sufficient in USA to give birthright citizenship UNDER the US Constitution, but in English common law it took at least TWO ESSENTIAL qualities (possibly three) to make a natural born, i.e. nature, procreation and birthright.
    That’s why WKA only got birthright’ US citizenship and not NBC.
    That’s why Article II eligibility clause for POTUS does NOT SAY native’.

    You know, you keep repeating this nonsense and no one’s buying it.

    You must have a really thick skull for it to have not sunk in that nobody believes you and nobody cares.

    Your “novel” views of US NBC clauses and their origins have gained no traction and have no impact on reality.

    Face it, your peculiar take on Birtherism is a non-starter and your whole “movement” is nothing but a dead man walking…

  78. avatar
    G May 1, 2011 at 8:13 pm #

    misha: Maybe it’s not coffee, LSD perhaps?

    You beat me to saying it, Misha. Tom definitely sounds like he’s on a bad acid trip bender…

  79. avatar
    MichaelN May 1, 2011 at 8:15 pm #

    obsolete: MichaelN, I will try to explain this so even YOU can understand this…

    Here is the full sentence:
    “for if enemies should come into the realm, and possess a town or fort, and have issue there, that issue is no subject to the King of England, though he be born upon his soyl, and under his meridian, for that he was not born under the ligeance of a subject, nor under the protection of the King.”

    This is the part that you conveniently leave out when you spam us:
    “for if enemies should come into the realm, and possess a town or fort, and have issue there,”

    Try to follow;

    Leaving aside, for the moment, your bullsh*t “two-citizen parent” theory, most experts will tell you that a child born in the United States is a natural-born citizen, with the following exceptions:
    1. A child born to a diplomat.
    2. A child born to an invading soldier.

    Are you with me so far?

    Now, reading the full sentence, it is clear the subject being discussed is an invading soldier. How do I know? The clue is the part that you always leave out: “for if enemies should come into the realm, and possess a town or fort,”

    What the Full sentence does, is describe a situation (number 2, above) in which it is universally acknowledged where a child, although born here, is NOT considered a natural born citizen. Why? Because an exception is made for the children of invading soldiers.

    You are repeatedly claiming that you found a case of a child simply being born here, and not being a natural born citizen: “that issue is no subject to the King of England, though he be born upon his soyl, and under his meridian, for that he was not born under the ligeance of a subject, nor under the protection of the King.”

    What you are not letting the reader know, by cutting off that first part, is that you have found a situation where the child, although born here, is not considered natural born because it is from one of the two exceptions to the natural born rule.
    You know, this part: “for if enemies should come into the realm, and possess a town or fort,”

    To try and dumb it down further:
    1- There are two exceptions to being natural born.
    2- You found a case that describes one of the two exceptions.
    3- You obscure that the case is referring to one of the two exceptions.
    4- You believe it proves your point. It doesn’t. It proves you found a case describing one of the known exceptions, as well as you are dishonest.

    The reason WHY the child is not considered natural born does matter MichaelN. It matters because there are two universally acknowledged exceptions to Jus soli*, and your situation describes one of them.
    Duh.

    Definition: Jus soli(Latin: right of the soil),[1] also known as birthright citizenship, is a right by which nationality or citizenship can be recognized to any individual born in the territory of the related state.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_soli

    (I notice you are spamming your theories on birther-only boards. Are you going to eventually leave here and retreat into the safety of the endless echo-chamber? I hope not.)

    In England, the status of the parents was essential in determining who are excluded from being NBS or who are not excluded.

    The status of the parents DOES matter ……………. it’s really that simple.

    That’s why Article II says ‘natural born’ and NOT ‘native born’.

    That’s why 14th Amendment says ‘citizen’ and not ‘natural born Citizen’

    That’s why WKA says ‘citizen’ and NOT ‘NBC’

    That’s why John Bingham made it clear. (from Leo Donofrio’s site)

    Quote:
    During a debate (see pg. 2791) regarding a certain Dr. Houard, who had been incarcerated in Spain, the issue was raised on the floor of the House of Representatives as to whether the man was a US citizen. Representative Bingham (of Ohio), stated on the floor:

    “As to the question of citizenship I am willing to resolve all doubts in favor of a citizen of the United States. That Dr. Houard is a natural-born citizen of the United States there is not room for the shadow of a doubt. He was born of naturalized parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, and by the express words of the Constitution, as amended to-day, he is declared to all the world to be a citizen of the United States by birth.” (The term “to-day”, as used by Bingham, means “to date”. Obviously, the Constitution had not been amended on April 25, 1872.)

    Notice that Bingham declares Houard to be a “natural-born citizen” by citing two factors – born of citizen parents in the US.

    John Bingham, aka “father of the 14th Amendment”, was an abolitionist congressman from Ohio who prosecuted Lincoln’s assassins. Ten years earlier, he stated on the House floor:

    “All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862))

    Then in 1866, Bingham also stated on the House floor:

    “Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))

    According to Justice Black, Bingham’s words uttered on the floor of the House are the most reliable source. Bingham made three statements, none of them challenged on the Floor, which indicate that a natural born citizen is a person born on US soil to parents who were US citizens. Obama does not fit that description since, at the time of his birth, his father was a British subject.”
    ———————————————–

    That’s why the/your notion that the framers were negligent & derelict in their duty and intention to protect the office of POTUS from any foreign influence, persuasion and claim is ABSURD ………………….. your entire silly, desperate, politically biased argument is based on ABSURDITY.

  80. avatar
    Majority Will May 1, 2011 at 8:18 pm #

    MichaelN: My entire silly, desperate, politically biased argument is based on ABSURDITY.

    Finally, the mentally challenged, delusional troll admits the truth.

  81. avatar
    obsolete May 1, 2011 at 9:02 pm #

    MichaelN, you ignore that you were thoroughly debunked, and try to hide it by pasting even more nonsense.

    Why aren’t you busy trying to edumacate John Roberts, so he doesn’t swear Obama in for a third time in 2013?

  82. avatar
    gorefan May 1, 2011 at 9:12 pm #

    MichaelN: In England, the status of the parents was essential in determining who are excluded from being NBS or who are not excluded.

    Wrong, again,

    Nationality by birth or origin depends, according to the law of some nations, on the place of birth; according to that of others on the nationality of the parents. In many countries both elements exist, one or other, however, predominating. Thus, by the law of England, the status of a subject depends generally on the place of birth: nevertheless, the descendants, of a natural-born subject, for two generations, though born out of the dominions of the Crown, are, to all intents and purposes, subjects. In like manner, by the law of France, though, generally speaking, it is necessary to be born of French parents to be a Frenchman, an exception is made in favour of the child of a foreigner, if born in France, subject only to the condition of the French nationality, being claimed within a prescribed period.”

    By the common law of England, every person born within the dominions of the Crown, no matter whether of English or of foreign parents, and, in the latter case, whether the parents were settled, or merely temporarily sojourning in the country, was an English subject; save only the children of foreign ambassadors (who were excepted because their fathers carried their own nationality with them), or a child born to a foreigner during the hostile occupation of any part of the territories of England. No effect appears to have been given to descent as a source of nationality. * * *”

    “The law of the United States of America agrees with our owm. The law of England as to the effect of the place of birth in the matter of nationality became the law of America as part of the law of the mother country, wdiich the original settlers carried with them. * * *”/I>

    Or are you so arrogant, you think you know more about English Law then Chief Justice Cockburn.

  83. avatar
    MichaelN May 1, 2011 at 11:05 pm #

    gorefan: Or are you so arrogant, you think you know more about English Law then Chief Justice Cockburn.

    On this particular point, yes, I either know more than Cockburn or he knew and yet failed to openly recognize the fact that English common law requires TWO essential qualities, i.e.soli and sanguinis to make a NBS.

    Cockburn’s nonsense about what ‘appears’ to him:

    “No effect appears to have been given to descent as a source of nationality”

    Coke’s statements that Cockburn fails to acknowledge:

    “Calvin the Plaintiff naturalized by procreation and birth right,”

    ” ….. that issue is no subject to the King of England, though he be born upon his soyl, and under his meridian, for that he was not born under the ligeance of a subject ….”

    There is nothing arrogant about it …………… it’s about HONESTY, something you clearly avoid to embrace, due to your silly politically biased agenda and clinging desperately to absurdity.

  84. avatar
    MichaelN May 1, 2011 at 11:06 pm #

    obsolete: MichaelN, you ignore that you were thoroughly debunked, and try to hide it by pasting even more nonsense.

    You’re dreamin’

  85. avatar
    Slartibartfast May 1, 2011 at 11:13 pm #

    Mikey,

    Do you know what President Obama is about to do?

  86. avatar
    gorefan May 1, 2011 at 11:17 pm #

    Slartibartfast: Do you know what President Obama is about to do?

    Announce that Osama Bin Laden is dead?

  87. avatar
    Majority Will May 1, 2011 at 11:18 pm #

    Slartibartfast:
    Mikey,

    Do you know what President Obama is about to do?

    You’re just going to confuse the idiots with reality.

  88. avatar
    Slartibartfast May 1, 2011 at 11:21 pm #

    Majority Will: You’re just going to confuse the idiots with reality.

    Mikey’s a foreigner – he doesn’t understand that his beloved seditious movement just got its second mortal blow in a week.

  89. avatar
    gorefan May 1, 2011 at 11:22 pm #

    MichaelN: There is nothing arrogant about it

    So your arrogance is such that know more about it then Justice Blackstone, James Madison, William Rawle, Zephaniah Swift who lived the effects of English Common Law. That you know more about it the Alexander Porter Morse and Professor James Gilmore who wrote about it in 1881 and 1891 respectively. WOW, you are delusional.

  90. avatar
    MichaelN May 1, 2011 at 11:29 pm #

    Slartibartfast:
    Mikey,

    Do you know what President Obama is about to do?

    Further his career as a stand-up comic?

  91. avatar
    MichaelN May 1, 2011 at 11:32 pm #

    Slartibartfast:
    Mikey,

    Do you know what President Obama is about to do?

    Make bigger fools of you than he already has!

  92. avatar
    Majority Will May 1, 2011 at 11:33 pm #

    Slartibartfast: Mikey’s a foreigner – he doesn’t understand that his beloved seditious movement just got its second mortal blow in a week.

    And an irrelevant, brain damaged troll and douche who should be ignored.

  93. avatar
    MichaelN May 1, 2011 at 11:35 pm #

    Slartibartfast:
    Mikey,

    Do you know what President Obama is about to do?

    Play some more golf with his commie mates whilst he sends USA down the tubes & his first ‘lady’ prances around on expensive junkets at tax-payers expense?

  94. avatar
    misha May 1, 2011 at 11:40 pm #

    MichaelN: Play some more golf with his commie mates whilst he sends USA down the tubes

    I was a kibbutznik. You do not know what communism is.

    You are writing from Oz. GTFO.

  95. avatar
    Greg May 1, 2011 at 11:43 pm #

    MichaelN: Fact = US did change

    When Wong Kim Ark says something, we call that Law of the Land

    When MichaelN says something, that is technically called SIOTI – Some idiot on the internet.

    So, when Wong Kim Ark says that the US did not change the definition of ligeance, that common law applied with equal force and with equal results, that is the law:

    And if, at common law, all human beings born within the ligeance of the King, and under the King’s obedience, were natural-born subjects, and not aliens, I do not perceive why this doctrine does not apply to these United States, in all cases in which there is no express constitutional or statute declaration to the contrary. . . . Subject and citizen are, in a degree, convertible terms as applied to natives, and though the term citizen seems to be appropriate to republican freemen, yet we are, equally with the inhabitants of all other countries, subjects, for we are equally bound by allegiance and subjection to the government and law of the land.

    So, no, Michael, the US did not change.

    You imagining things and repeating them does not make them so.

  96. avatar
    Greg May 1, 2011 at 11:46 pm #

    MichaelN: English common law requires TWO essential qualities, i.e.soli and sanguinis to make a NBS.

    I’m just curious. Do you even know what the word sanguinis means?

    Blood.

    It’s something permanent.

    A person who is born in England is a natural born subject. When that person goes abroad, he takes his English blood with him and his children, wherever born, are English. That’s jus sanguinis – by the blood!

    An alien, a non-diplomat, non-invading soldier, has ligeance to the King. If that alien leaves England and has children outside England, his children ARE NOT ENGLISH! The alien in this question does NOT HAVE ENGLISH BLOOD!

    Ligeance does NOT EQUAL blood!

  97. avatar
    Slartibartfast May 1, 2011 at 11:47 pm #

    MichaelN: Fact = US did change

    In your language Mikey:

    Fact = US changed tonight

  98. avatar
    Greg May 1, 2011 at 11:49 pm #

    MichaelN: but in English common law it took at least TWO ESSENTIAL qualities (possibly three) to make a natural born, i.e. nature, procreation and birthright.

    That’s why WKA only got birthright’ US citizenship and not NBC.

    WKA wasn’t procreated?

  99. avatar
    G May 2, 2011 at 12:14 am #

    Slartibartfast: Mikey’s a foreigner – he doesn’t understand that his beloved seditious movement just got its second mortal blow in a week.

    I’d call it their 4th mortal blow in a week.

    First, the devastating CNN debunking coverage.

    Second, the surprise masterful press conference and release of the COLB, with FULL documentation of the chain of events and subsequent corroboration by HI.

    Third, the brilliant thrashing and mocking of the birthers & Trump at last night’s WHCD.

    FOURTH – and the one MOST important for America… tonights thrilling announcement of the successful trackdown and KILL of World Enemy #1, Osama Bin Laden, as the result of a carefully planned special ops mission, deep within the heart of Pakistan, with ZERO casualties to our brave soldiers and operatives conducting that mission. Includes capture and positive ID of Osama Bin Laden’s remains.

    ALL within the course of 1 WEEK! Doesn’t get much better than that!

  100. avatar
    Slartibartfast May 2, 2011 at 12:31 am #

    G: I’d call it their 4th mortal blow in a week.

    First, the devastating CNN debunking coverage.

    Second, the surprise masterful press conference and release of the COLB, with FULL documentation of the chain of events and subsequent corroboration by HI.

    Third, the brilliant thrashing and mocking of the birthers & Trump at last night’s WHCD.

    FOURTH – and the one MOST important for America… tonights thrilling announcement of the successful trackdown and KILL of World Enemy #1, Osama Bin Laden, as the result of a carefully planned special ops mission, deep within the heart of Pakistan, with ZERO casualties to our brave soldiers and operatives conducting that mission.Includes capture and positive ID of Osama Bin Laden’s remains.

    ALL within the course of 1 WEEK!Doesn’t get much better than that!

    Since this had a marked psychological effect on me, I’m guessing that it’s going to have a pretty big effect on the country as a whole as well. It seems almost irrelevant to talk about the birthers anymore – I’d like to see someone do an analysis of traffic at a birther site (like, say, drk(H)ate’sview…[wink, wink.. nudge, nudge… know what I mean?]) starting a month before convicted felon Lakin’s court martial and running until a month from today – I’m betting that traffic will be down at least 50% in one month’s time.

  101. avatar
    G May 2, 2011 at 12:49 am #

    Slartibartfast: I’d like to see someone do an analysis of traffic at a birther site (like, say, drk(H)ate’sview…[wink, wink.. nudge, nudge… know what I mean?]) starting a month before convicted felon Lakin’s court martial and running until a month from today – I’m betting that traffic will be down at least 50% in one month’s time.

    That is a good timeframe to focus on. I really think it will take a number of weeks (perhaps more than just a month…so I say continue the analysis for 3 months after this week) for the Birther hornet’s nest to go from being all riled up from their nest being destroyed for reality to be set in and to drop off into fairly quiet obscurity.

    Use the PUMAs as an example of where they went in 1 year from solar flareup to brown dwarf burnout. The 2008 Presidential Election results were really the watershed moment of their EPIC FAIL…but they remained super riled up through the 2009 inaugeration and even then, it still took a few months afterwards for the inevitable to set in…

  102. avatar
    Greg May 2, 2011 at 12:51 am #

    G: Second, the surprise masterful press conference and release of the COLB, with FULL documentation of the chain of events and subsequent corroboration by HI.

    Third, the brilliant thrashing and mocking of the birthers & Trump at last night’s WHCD.

    Don’t forget, in between these two, the self-inflicted body-blows that the birthers smacked themselves with.

    Layers. Hospital address. Dad’s DOB.

    The birthers have put their Obama Derangement Syndrome into sharp contrast. (Similarly, Trump has highlighted his almost fatally thin skin and ego-centrism, first crowing about how proud he was to force the President to release his birth certificate, then whining about how mean they were to him at the Correspondent’s Dinner!)

  103. avatar
    G May 2, 2011 at 1:04 am #

    Greg: Don’t forget, in between these two, the self-inflicted body-blows that the birthers smacked themselves with.
    Layers. Hospital address. Dad’s DOB.
    The birthers have put their Obama Derangement Syndrome into sharp contrast. (Similarly, Trump has highlighted his almost fatally thin skin and ego-centrism, first crowing about how proud he was to force the President to release his birth certificate, then whining about how mean they were to him at the Correspondent’s Dinner!)

    Good points. So, FIVE major factors within the course of one week that has completely changed the landscape and rendered Birtherism as effectively irrelevant in the big picture.

    Of course, Orly’s inevitable EPIC FAIL debacle tomorrow will be #6… still within that 1 week timeframe!

  104. avatar
    Slartibartfast May 2, 2011 at 1:05 am #

    Greg: Don’t forget, in between these two, the self-inflicted body-blows that the birthers smacked themselves with.

    Layers. Hospital address. Dad’s DOB.

    The birthers have put their Obama Derangement Syndrome into sharp contrast. (Similarly, Trump has highlighted his almost fatally thin skin and ego-centrism, first crowing about how proud he was to force the President to release his birth certificate, then whining about how mean they were to him at the Correspondent’s Dinner!)

    Funny how all they managed to do was make the president look more presidential and their guy look more like a buffoon and now they’re trying to make every sane person in the country think that they are whackjobs. But I’m sure that Orly’s 10 minutes tomorrow is going to change everything – after all, she said she’d have President Obama out in 30 days…

  105. avatar
    Slartibartfast May 2, 2011 at 1:12 am #

    G: Good points.So, FIVE major factors within the course of one week that has completely changed the landscape and rendered Birtherism as effectively irrelevant in the big picture.

    Of course, Orly’s inevitable EPIC FAIL debacle tomorrow will be #6… still within that 1 week timeframe!

    It’s kind of a shame – I thought that Doc’s birther debunking operation here was just hitting its stride. Now it will never have a real test. It’s like gearing up to storm the gates of Mordor only to get to fight Saruman in the Shire…

  106. avatar
    Slartibartfast May 2, 2011 at 1:16 am #

    G: Of course, Orly’s inevitable EPIC FAIL debacle tomorrow will be #6… still within that 1 week timeframe!

    Remember – just when you think the birthers don’t have another epic FAIL in them, they pull another one out (of their bum). Although Orly on TV in court tomorrow may be the coup de grace…

  107. avatar
    MichaelN May 2, 2011 at 1:26 am #

    Greg said:
    “So, when Wong Kim Ark says that the US did not change the definition of ligeance, that common law applied with equal force and with equal results, that is the law:”

    Then Greg quoted? this from somewhere: [my comments]

    “And if, at common law, all human beings born within the ligeance of the King, and under the King’s obedience, were natural-born subjects, and not aliens, I do not perceive why this doctrine does not apply to these United States, in all cases in which there is no express constitutional or statute declaration to the contrary.”

    [Yes, in England those born soli and sanguinis (see Coke’s statements) were NBS.

    So too in USA, those born soli & sanguinis are ‘natural born’ but not subjects of a sovereign king, but rather citizens as sovereigns them selves of a republic.

    The establishment of the new constitutional republic of USA, is where ‘subject’ and ‘citizen’ parted as being interchangeable by definition & terminology.

    The NBSubject of England did not get to vote for who would be highest office, commander in chief & NBS was never a qualification for highest office, but rather merely for membership of the body politic.

    The NBCitizen of USA IS a qualification for highest office and gets to vote who occupies the position of highest office]

    Greg’s quote goes on to say:

    ” . . . Subject and citizen are, in a degree, convertible terms as applied to natives, and though the term citizen seems to be appropriate to republican freemen,”

    [The ‘degree’ that ‘subject’ & ‘citizen’ are convertible terms ONLY as it applies to ‘native’ and not ‘natural born’.

    Citizen is appropriate term for members of the body politic of the new US republic.

    i.e.’Subject’ and ‘citizen’ part their ways]

    Greg’s quote goes on to say:

    “yet we are, equally with the inhabitants of all other countries, subjects, for we are equally bound by allegiance and subjection to the government and law of the land.”

    [This is crap ………… the ‘subject’ of England is a non-voting, subject to a sovereign king and not a subject of the government or the laws, i.e. subject to ONLY the sovereign king.

    In England one must swear an oath to have legal allegiance to be bound by ‘subjection to the government and law of the land’ & it is not a measure to gain ‘subject’ status, but merely legal standing.

    In USA an oath is what is required for an alien to be naturalized as a US ‘citizen’ & not to gain legal status, e.g. non-naturalized aliens can purchase & sell property & land in a free market.

    Birthright citizenship of USA was modeled from birthright subject-hood of England as far as jus soli & as per your quote …………”as applied to natives” … that’s where USA departed from English common law.

    14th Amendment affirms this & guess what? …………. ‘citizen’ ONLY in 14th, i.e. ‘as applies to natives’ but NOT ‘natural born’, because if it was true that the framers meant ‘natural’ to mean ‘native’, they would have said so in Article II.

    The framers knew precisely the difference between the two distinctly DIFFERENT terms & that’s why they worded the USC as they did.

    The framers also knew what Coke said in Calvin’s case and yet in light of this, with every opportunity at the time of the drafting of the 14th Amendment, to make it clear (if they so intended) that ‘native’ meant ‘natural born’, they STILL DIDN’T say ‘natural born’ for the born ‘citizens’ referred to in 14th]

    Greg:
    So, no, Michael, the US did not change.

    Me:
    So yes Greg, the US DID change in several and various ways.

    Greg:
    You imagining things and repeating them does not make them so.

    Me:
    My citing what was truthfully said makes the truth apparent to those who have un-biased honesty to recognize and acknowledge the truth.

    But your problem with regard to NBC of USA will always be based on absurdity.

  108. avatar
    G May 2, 2011 at 1:33 am #

    Slartibartfast: It’s like gearing up to storm the gates of Mordor only to get to fight Saruman in the Shire…

    FTW!!! πŸ™‚

  109. avatar
    G May 2, 2011 at 1:35 am #

    MichaelN: Me:
    My citing what was truthfully said makes the truth apparent to those who have un-biased honesty to recognize and acknowledge the truth.
    But your problem with regard to NBC of USA will always be based on absurdity.

    um….yeah…

    You just keep telling yourself as you rock back & forth in your straight-jacket out in Australia, while the entire nation of America and our justice system continues to ignore you…

  110. avatar
    Greg May 2, 2011 at 1:36 am #

    MichaelN: Greg’s quote goes on to say:

    Greg’s quote = Wong Kim Ark = Law of the Land.

    You can pretend, Michael, to understand the law better than the Supreme Court, but until you become the Supreme Court, you are arguing about the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.

    The Supreme Court (Law of the Land) has said that the US understanding of ligeance DID NOT CHANGE!

  111. avatar
    Greg May 2, 2011 at 1:52 am #

    MichaelN: But your problem with regard to NBC of USA will always be based on absurdity.

    69 million people voted for Obama, despite the common understanding that his father was from Kenya. That’s more than have ever voted for anyone in the history of the United States.

    Obama is running for re-election, and is the Vegas odd-on favorite for reelection.

    His father’s citizenship won’t be mentioned in the campaign.

    The next time someone runs for President with a parent or two who weren’t naturalized, Obama will be pointed to (along with Arthur) as an example of how it’s not an issue. Well, actually, it probably won’t even be raised, just as no one ever thought to check to see why Spiro Agnew’s dad was listed as an unnaturalized alien on the census.

    The sooner you begin to accept that your view is worthless and futile and rejected by history, the sooner you can get on with your life!

    Or, as Misha would put it:

    Osama is dead. Obama will be reelected. Suck it!

  112. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy May 2, 2011 at 2:06 am #

    Slartibartfast: Funny how all they managed to do was make the president look more presidential and their guy look more like a buffoon and now they’re trying to make every sane person in the country think that they are whackjobs.

    That’s how you see it. The birthers’s see things differently. They saw Obama winning a “straw man” argument (Dr. Kate’s words), when the real list of documents (passport, kindergarten, Social Security and a dozen more) hasn’t been touched. The newest slogan is “Where’s the adoption record?” I guess it’s safer to ask for something impossible.

    http://drkatesview.wordpress.com/2011/04/30/wheres-the-indonesian-adoption-record/

  113. avatar
    Suranis May 2, 2011 at 2:54 am #

    MichaelN: That’s why Article II says natural born’ and NOT native born’.

    Blackstone’s commentaries disagrees with you. Surprised?

    “That provision in the constitution which requires that the president shall be a native-born citizen (unless he were a citizen of the United States when the constitution was adopted,) is a happy means of security against foreign influence…”

    “Nothing is better settled at the common law than the doctrine that the children even of aliens born in a country while the parents are resident there under the protection of the government and owing a temporary allegiance thereto are subjects by birth.”

  114. avatar
    MichaelN May 2, 2011 at 4:49 am #

    Suranis: Blackstone’s commentaries disagrees with you. Surprised?

    “That provision in the constitution which requires that the president shall be a native-born citizen (unless he were a citizen of the United States when the constitution was adopted,) is a happy means of security against foreign influence…”

    “Nothing is better settled at the common law than the doctrine that the children even of aliens born in a country while the parents are resident there under the protection of the government and owing a temporary allegiance thereto are subjects by birth.”

    There is no ‘provision in the constitution which requires that the president shall be a native-born citizen’

    Same as there is no ruling in WKA of ‘natural born Citizen’

    Same as there is nothing in 14th Amendment that defines a ‘citizen of the United States’ as a ‘natural born Citizen’

    You are dreaming and your entire argument is based on absurdity ……… as you know.

  115. avatar
    Scientist May 2, 2011 at 7:24 am #

    MichaelN: The guy with the foreign father got the #1 enemy of the United States after 2+ years in office. The guy whose father was a President didn’t after 7+ years.

    If i’m going in for a delicate brain operation, I want the best surgeon, whether he comes from India or Indiana, whether his father was a surgeon or a janitor. A meritocracy in which who your parents were doesn’t matter is what makes a nation great.

  116. avatar
    Black Lion May 2, 2011 at 7:47 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: That’s how you see it. The birthers’s see things differently. They saw Obama winning a “straw man” argument (Dr. Kate’s words), when the real list of documents (passport, kindergarten, Social Security and a dozen more) hasn’t been touched. The newest slogan is “Where’s the adoption record?” I guess it’s safer to ask for something impossible.http://drkatesview.wordpress.com/2011/04/30/wheres-the-indonesian-adoption-record/

    Reading Dr. K(H)ate’s nonsense makes me want to have some sort of mind eraser…Her hatred and derangement is so strong no rational person could survive talking with her for more than 5 minutes….Her and her buffoon followers are just a bunch of delusional idiots…

  117. avatar
    MichaelN May 2, 2011 at 8:09 am #

    Scientist:
    MichaelN:The guy with the foreign father got the #1 enemy of the United States after 2+ years in office.The guy whose father was a President didn’t after 7+ years.

    If i’m going in for a delicate brain operation, I want the best surgeon, whether he comes from India or Indiana, whether his father was a surgeon or a janitor.A meritocracy in which who your parents were doesn’t matter is what makes a nation great.

    So how do you know before the operation, that he is the best?

    Look on the internet for an image of his diploma?

    Or on YouTube for the most thumbs-up?

    When one is being born as a NBC, one is not selecting the best chances of survival of an operation.

    It’s a really bad analogy that you have employed. ………… that’s what clinging to absurdity does to ya’.

    Why don’t you get real, it’s not about what his parents did or didn’t do, it’s about what the Constitution requires for eligibility for office of POTUS, i.e. what the parents were in terms of citizenship at the time of birth.

    It doesn’t matter whether the parents are janitors, bankers, lawyers, homeless street-dwellers, etc, etc. as long as they are US citizens.

  118. avatar
    MichaelN May 2, 2011 at 8:22 am #

    Greg: The Supreme Court (Law of the Land) has said that the US understanding of ligeance DID NOT CHANGE!

    The US ‘understanding’ of English common law’s definition and types of ligeance of English ‘subjects’ of a sovereign monarch may not have changed, but the US method of determining allegiance & establishing allegiance was based on a new found constitutional republic model that has no foundation in English common law, so US made their own, to the extent that in the early days of the independence era, those who were suspected of being old-school monarchists (e.g.Tories) were required to swear an oath of allegiance.

  119. avatar
    obsolete May 2, 2011 at 8:31 am #

    I find it amazing that MichaelN repeated the same lie that I debunked in detail for him a mere few hours earlier.
    A complete inability to understand what he is pasting, or insanity.
    Cast your votes for what MichaelN’s condition is…

  120. avatar
    Greg May 2, 2011 at 8:35 am #

    so US made their own

    Supreme Court says no!

    The Supreme Law of the Land is nope, Michael is wrong.

    You know what you call an un-overturned Supreme Court case based on a misinterpretation of British common law?

    The Supreme Law of the Land!

    You know what you call a guy who has a non-citizen father and wins more than half the electoral college in a Presidential election and is certified by Congress?

    Mr. President!

    Four more years!

    An infinity of MichaelN pissing in the wind trying to change US law by posting on Conspiracy sites!

  121. avatar
    Scientist May 2, 2011 at 8:49 am #

    MichaelN: When one is being born as a NBC, one is not selecting the best chances of survival of an operation.

    I only care about results. All Presidents are NBCs (Congress finds them eligible, which means they find them to be NBCs, over 35 and residents for 14 years). It’s not about the parents, except in your twisted fantasies; it’s about the person who is in office.

    I want the best person, you don’t. Now we have proof.

  122. avatar
    The Magic M May 2, 2011 at 10:03 am #

    > so US made their own

    And again: the Founders made up their own definition of “natural born”, contrary to Common Law, and told no-one about it? They put it in the Constitution knowing full well that none of their citizens knew of the writings of some Swiss guy, yet supposed everyone would have to understand it that (secret) way? And now they are turning in their graves because they were so stupid to consider no-one would understand their little prank and instead base 200+ years of case law on the Common Law interpretation of NBC? Well, maybe that explains the hurricanes (esp. Washington is rotating at close to light-speed by now), but it still doesn’t add up in the sane world.

  123. avatar
    JoZeppy May 2, 2011 at 10:58 am #

    MichaelN: The US understanding’ of English common law’s definition and types of ligeance of English subjects’ of a sovereign monarch may not have changed, but the US method of determining allegiance & establishing allegiance was based on a new found constitutional republic model that has no foundation in English common law, so US made their own, to the extent that in the early days of the independence era, those who were suspected of being old-school monarchists (e.g.Tories) were required to swear an oath of allegiance.

    And yet no one of consequence (i.e., scholars, judges, 99.9% of the legal community) agrees with you? I wonder what that means?

  124. avatar
    Suranis May 2, 2011 at 11:47 am #

    MichaelN: There is no provision in the constitution which requires that the president shall be a native-born citizen’

    Same as there is no ruling in WKA of natural born Citizen’

    Same as there is nothing in 14th Amendment that defines a citizen of the United States’ as a natural born Citizen’

    You are dreaming and your entire argument is based on absurdity ……… as you know.

    Its not my argument, its Blackstones. You are calling the argument of the most respected legal mind of the 18th century “based on absurdity”?

    According to the most respected legal mind of the 18th century, native born = Natural born.

    Also native born = the most effective method of curtailing foreign influence according to the most respected legal mind of the 18th century. And since you have blathered incessantly about how they were desperate to keep foreign influence out of the presidency, wouldn’t you agree they at least followed the guys advice?

    But then you are not even respected among birthers so…

  125. avatar
    Slartibartfast May 2, 2011 at 12:43 pm #

    MichaelN: based on a new found constitutional republic model that has no foundation in English common law

    Mikey,

    I’m curious as to why you keep repeating this lie when it has been pointed out you that England was a Republic (for a while), which seems a pretty solid foundation that you’re trying to ignore – do you think that we are as stupid as you?

  126. avatar
    bjphysics May 2, 2011 at 1:22 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: That’s how you see it. The birthers’s see things differently. They saw Obama winning a “straw man” argument (Dr. Kate’s words), when the real list of documents (passport, kindergarten, Social Security and a dozen more) hasn’t been touched. The newest slogan is “Where’s the adoption record?” I guess it’s safer to ask for something impossible.http://drkatesview.wordpress.com/2011/04/30/wheres-the-indonesian-adoption-record/

    Just so we have it for future reference here is the (perma?) link to the cartoon Dr. Kate thinks is so profound:

    http://www.brainreboot.com/images/stories/cartoons/brainreboot20110429whiteboarddistribution.jpg

  127. avatar
    Majority Will May 2, 2011 at 1:39 pm #

    bjphysics: Just so we have it for future reference here is the (perma?) link to the cartoon Dr. Kate thinks is so profound:

    http://www.brainreboot.com/images/stories/cartoons/brainreboot20110429whiteboarddistribution.jpg

    Who is Soeboro? I thought birthers never made trivial mistakes.

  128. avatar
    Joey May 2, 2011 at 1:47 pm #

    Live reports are being sent from the Pasadena court room to birtherreport.com on the Orly Taitz-9th Circuit appellate hearing today.
    http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/

  129. avatar
    gorefan May 2, 2011 at 1:48 pm #

    MichaelN: but the US method of determining allegiance & establishing allegiance was based on a new found constitutional republic model

    Nope, wrong again.

    Here is what Alexander Porter Morse, an international law expert, said in 1881,

    “§ 5. In the law of nations, “citizen” is a term applicable to every member of the civil society, every individual who belongs to the nation.”

    “This character is acquired in various ways, according to the laws of each state. In many states birth is sufficient to confer it; so that the child of an alien is a citizen from the fact of having been born within the territorial limits and the jurisdiction.2

    In Footnote #2, he writes, 2 It is so in England and in the United States [but the births must be “within the jurisdiction”].”

    Morse also writes,

    Ҥ 90. A natural-born citizen is one not made by law or otherwise, but born. And this class is the large majority, in fact, the mass of our citizens; all others are exceptions specially provided for by law. As they become citizens by birth, so they remain citizens during their natural lives, unless, by their own voluntary act, they expatriate themselves and become citizens or subjects of another nation ; for we have no law (as the French have) to dedtizenize a citizen who has become such either by the natural process of birth or the legal process of adoption.

    The Constitution does not make the citizens (it is, in fact, made by them); it only recognizes such of them as are natural, home-born, and provides for the naturalization of such of them as are alien, foreign-born, making the latter, as far as nature will allow, like the former.

    So for A.P. Morse there are only two types of citizens, natural born and naturalized. And children of aliens born in the United States are citizens from the moment of birth.

    And there is James Madison’s statement which totally and completely destroys your ridiculus, dishonest theory.

    “It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States”

    But I’m sure you are convinced that you know more them James Madison and all the other members of the founding generation who rejected your stupid ideas. How embarrassing to have James Madison laugh at you.

  130. avatar
    Majority Will May 2, 2011 at 1:55 pm #

    bjphysics: Just so we have it for future reference here is the (perma?) link to the cartoon Dr. Kate thinks is so profound:

    http://www.brainreboot.com/images/stories/cartoons/brainreboot20110429whiteboarddistribution.jpg

    And the birthers behind the cartoons:

    “Who are we?
    We are choosing to remain anon because we don’t want you to judge us based on our unbiased conservative views.”

    Birtherism is a mental disease.

  131. avatar
    G May 2, 2011 at 2:04 pm #

    MichaelN: You are dreaming and your entire argument is based on absurdity ……… as you know

    Ahh… classic projection!

    Tough cookies, Michael N.

    Meanwhile, Obama is POTUS and will remain POTUS and retains a good chance of getting 4 more years as POTUS…

    None of your bizarre fantasies has any effect on that. Sucks to be you!

  132. avatar
    Horus May 2, 2011 at 2:19 pm #

    Jimmy: why would the Democratic Party and Obama allow McCain to continue to be a POTUS candidate in 2008 when they uncovered he was ineligible in July of 2008 2 months after Obama co-sponsored a Bill in the senate , senate resolution 511 , to allow McCain to be deemed eligible ??? So they could BRIBE McCain to not challenge Obama in his Ineligibility because of his Own admitting to that when he cosponsored the 511 Bill that Obama greed to natural born meaning that the candidate would need 2 parents US citizens as the definition . People we have massive corruption here and this is coming to a head .

    Moron, it does not matter where McCain was born, he was born to parents that were US citizens, making him an NBC no matter where he was born.
    The same holds true for Obama, even if he WERE born in Kenya he is still an NBC because of his mother.
    Case closed.

  133. avatar
    sfjeff May 2, 2011 at 2:29 pm #

    If I remember correctly Michael also argues that this ‘misinterpretation’ of the term Natural born citizen started shortly after the Constitution was written by some Conspirators and that basically all politicians since then have been complicit in misleading the American public.

    Basically Michael thinks the fix has been on for 200 years, but he will lead Americans back to the true path….apparently from Australia.