Comments on: The Obama Birth Certificate Conspiracy…and Other Fairy Tales

By: tom

tom — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 09:02:55 +0000

At first I thought this must be a parody (seriously)of the usual Obot obfuscation and outright lying one has become so accustomed to. but can this Mario dude really be this stupid or more than likely just another prejudiced fool lost in his biases His treatise, such as it is. is laughable and sad at the same time not to mention scary

By: Symptoms of Swine Flu

Symptoms of Swine Flu — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 19:52:58 +0000

Great post, just wanted to know if you have any more information on this topic? Subscribed btw!

By: Firefly

Firefly — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 14:31:41 +0000

marcus: that’s a pile of trash you just wrote. The only bias which is evident is yours. If all of the U.S. authorities in question are satisfied with Obama’s legal qualification to be Pres, that’s good enough for me.

It’s laughable to see to what extremes of twisted logic you Obama-haters will go. Give it a break. He’s your president. Enjoy it.

By: marcus

marcus — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 14:11:25 +0000

mario”
if you need the Founding Fathers/Framers to define the term “natural born” or any other in the Constitution, for that matter…..well, that pretty much says it all. My 6th& 7th grade class ,30 yrs ago had little difficulty with the concept. citizen(naturalized or birthright), native-born(soil) and the far more expansive; natural-born(soil & hereditary right/natural law) Barack Obama Jr is NOT a natural born citizen, period. BO Sr. did not sever the ligament/tie to the “old country” before the birth of his child The child’s status at birth is what is at stake and as a foreigner the child’s(BO Jr’s)father passes ;shares his status(at least partially) with his off-spring since he was not an immigrant and did not pledge allegiance to the U.S. In fact , he never did. He could have “rightly” returned to his native land and gone on to become president had he such aspirations. Do i really have to “flesh it out” for you. Your bias is evident. The birth-certificate is only important if it shows that BO Jr. is NOT the biological child of BO Sr or reveals a foreign birth. Oh ,and by the way, we have yet to see a long-form vault version of the original document(see Hawaiian law and official statements from authorities there)with hospital name, Dr. signature, witness signature parent(s) sig and other vital data

By: marcus

marcus — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 13:48:53 +0000

you are, without a doubt, most ignorant and frighteningly misguided persons to comment on the B Obama situation. you simply haven’t any grasp of the facts it is sad do your homework.

By: mario

mario — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 23:30:49 +0000

No one has argued the point that the Fathers were influenced by the Law of Nations in writing the Constitution. That’s not the point here. I pointed out that there exists no where in the Constitution a definition of ‘natural born citizen’. For Sally to suggest that we interpret the Constitution in a legal sense based on the influences of the writers and not solely on the content of the document is ridiculous.

Once we begin doing that every contract in existence can be argued on the same merit. It makes no sense.

By: obamaman

obamaman — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 23:09:28 +0000

Very intelligent and well thought out comment Sally. And regardless of Political Persuasion, surely deserving of a more respectful and substantial response.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2148074/posts

“Emmerich de Vattel’s The Law of Nations was key in framing the United States as the world’s first constitutional republic.”

“The American Revolution was, in fact, a battle against the philosophy of Locke and the English utilitarians. Key to this struggle, was the work of the Eighteenth-century jurist, Emmerich de Vattel, whose widely read text, The Law of Nations, guided the framing of the United States as the world’s first constitutional republic. Vattel had challenged the most basic axioms of the Venetian party, which had taken over England before the time of the American Revolution, and it was from Vattel’s The Law of Nations, more than anywhere else, that America’s founders learned the Leibnizian natural law, which became the basis for the American System.”

“Among those citing Vattel in legal cases and government documents, were Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, James Wilson, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Jay, and John Marshall. John Adams, the future delegate to the Continental Congress, second President of the U.S., and father of President John Quincy Adams, recorded in his Diary on Feb. 1, 1763, that after spending the day frivolously, instead of reading and thinking, “The Idea of M. de Vattel indeed, scowling and frowning, haunted me. In 1765, Adams copied into his Diary three statements by Vattel, “of great use to Judges,” that laws should be interpreted according to the intent of the author, and every interpretation which leads to absurdity should be rejected. In a letter to the Foreign Minister of Denmark, in 1779, Benjamin Franklin quoted Vattel, and “his excellent Treatise entitled Le Droit des Gens.” James Madison, as a member of the Continental Congress in 1780, drafted the instructions sent to John Jay, for negotiating a treaty with Spain, which quotes at length from The Law of Nations. Jay complained that this letter, which was probably read by the Spanish government, was not in code, and “Vattel’s Law of Nations, which I found quoted in a letter from Congress, is prohibited here.”

By: mario

mario — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 19:40:21 +0000

Sally, Sally, Sally…

You admonish me for not including a passage from Vattel’s Law of Nations when quoting the U.S. Constitution? C’mon.

As much as Vattel’s work is worthy of discussion and surely had influence on the Founding Fathers, it is quite a stretch to believe that in a legal sense one would include the influences the Founding Fathers might or might not have been under when drafting the constitution.

If we extrapolate your thinking, no matter or controversy could ever be resolved for all one would have to do is go beyond the legal documents and begin introducing “influences” affecting the writers of the said documents. Where would it all end?

Sorry…you don’t get any points for this one.

By: Sally Hill

Sally Hill — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 18:57:50 +0000

You failed to include in your quotable quotes – the exerpt from “The Law of Nations”. This is very important as the text was read by many of the Founders of the United States of America, and informed their understanding of the principles of law which became established in the Constitution of 1787. It is from here than\t you can gleen their intended meaning of Natural Born Citizen.

“§ 212. Citizens and natives.

The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”

If you are going to choose quotes, please provide ALL the information to your readers so they can make a truly informed decision.

Obama may have lost his Kenyan citizenship at age 21, but that wasn’t the age with which the Framers of the Constitution were concerned with. They were concerned with natural born citizenship status at the time of his birth, not 21 years later. Like ANCHOR babies, Obama was merely a US Citizen AT birth and not BY birth as is required to be a natural born citizen.

By: DanC

DanC — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 23:17:02 +0000

Good synopsis Mario but do you really think it’s going to have any effect on the wingnuts? There is nothing any one can show them which would have them divert a fraction from their belief that President Obama is the devil incarnate.