NOT ANOTHER BERG V. OBAMA UPDATE – OPPOSING VIEWS
If you have been following the Obama “natural born citizen” drama since August, when I first posed the question of whether or not BHO could hold the office of POTUS, you are most certainly aware of the numerous sites, that detail the multitude of lawsuits filed to discover the truth about Obama’s identity… his birth father and place of birth.
For those on the chase, I’m recommending you look at a pro Obama site called What’s Your Evidence? This is the first site I’ve found that analyzes the Berg complaint, as well as, the collateral issues surrounding this epic journey into whether or not Barack Hussein Obama II is eligible to hold the office of POTUS under our Constitution from an opposing view of those of us who believe that Obama is not a natural born citizen or eligible to hold the office of POTUS.
Clearly, someone has taken a great deal of time to “debunk” the Berg claim. Make no mistake, the site is pro-Obama. If you haven’t stumbled across the site already, I am recommending this site for a number of reasons. The writer keeps insisting on evidence to support claims against Obama’s status as a natural born citizen, at the same time he/she either glosses over or omits evidence that supports Berg and others.
Agree or disagree with the legal conclusion here, it is an interesting compendium of the issues that many may find useful on their quest for the truth.
A quick read will show that the writer believes Factcheck.org is a reliable source, that Obama didn’t lie on his Illinois lawyer registration form, and that the Obama COLB posted on the Factcheck.org is a reliable record for determining Obama’s birth. No mention is made as to whether the Tooth Fairy is considered a reliable source. (Ok, cheap shot! So what!)
The following is from the site’s front page:
Berg v. Obama Citizenship Lawsuit: Status & Summary as of December 29
This blog is in the process of evaluating the allegations set forth in the complaint brought by Mr. Philip Berg against Senator Obama, alleging that he is not qualified to serve as President, on multiple different grounds.
The case was filed in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, by Mr. Philip Berg. Mr. Berg has published a website, www.obamacrimes.com, with copies of the pleadings and some materials related to the case. Mr. Berg’s lawsuit was dismissed by the District Court, on October 24, 2008. See Memorandum and Order. However, Berg is appealing this decision to both the Third Circuit (registration required) and the Supreme Court.
This birth certificate is real.
Should anyone still question the import to this Constitutional issue please review the following article from the American Thinker website.
[...] Obama has refused to disclose the vault copy of his Hawaiian birth certificate. This raises the question whether he himself has established that he is eligible to be President. To date, no state or federal election official, nor any government authority, has verified that he ever established conclusively that he meets the eligibility standard under the Constitution. (emphasis mine)
For those tracking this story on a daily basis, visit Oil for Immigration, Citizen Wells, TD Blog, Obama Crimes, America’s Right . . . etc.
7 Comments
Leave a Reply
-
priceline
copyright
calendars
Stumble It!
George W. Bush thinks Obama is qualified to be president–he has been cooperating fully with the transition. I guess he must also be part of the conspiracy.
Obama’s mother is a US citizen, therefore, so is Obama. There is no proof that Obama was born in Kenya. His birth certificate states his place of birth as HI.
If you’re still not sure, find a psychiatrist and ask what they think of you believing Obama is not a US citizen. Or your local republican politician (notice how none of them have come out against Obama?)
I believe that we can only make a decision of natural born status by the intent of the Law. The purpose was that no one who having been influenced by their parents “homeland”, political, Birth, allegiance could ascend to the office of the President of the United States. With having stated the obvious for many Obamanationites, because they don’t know what the Constitution is or says; I would suggest they examine all records of Congress to see how we treat foreign born naturalized citizens during war. I am from Maine, and was told a story by an old man as we were camping and gold panning. He told me that during the second world war there was a man who escaped to the woods to live free rather than live in a camp, or under constant observation. The US very clearly has stood in position to guard against any foreign born, half citizen, or even 2nd generation person from having all rights of the natural born. Whether or not we agree with all that they did, I believe that they who having lived through such times showed us the mind set of how to protect the Constitution and our country from a take over from what now appesrs to be from within.If this law is in place to keep anyone who could have a competing interest from becoming President, then ther is no exceptions. I don’t know about you, But I know that Obama is a Socialist. Oh, by the way look up the definition of Communism.
CHALLENGE, CAN ANYONE PROVE THIS WRONG?:–
1. Constitution Article II requires USA President to be “natural born citizen”.
2. BHO’s website admits his dad was Kenyan/British, not American, citizen when BHO was born.
3. BHO is therefore not a “natural born citizen” (irrespective of Hawaiian birth or whether he may be a 14th Amendment “citizen” of USA) — confirmed in the Senate’s own McCain qualification resolution (that both parents must be citizens of USA) co-authored by BHO.
4. Supreme Court has already docketed two upcoming conferences, 1/9/09 and 1/16/09 — between dates Congress counts electoral votes (1/8/09) and Presidential inauguration (1/20/09) — to address Berg Case and fashion relief on BHO’s eligibility to be President.
5. Since the fact of BHO’s dad being Kenyan/British not in dispute, Supreme Court rules on Summary Judgment to enjoin BHO’s inauguration as President.
6. Therefore, BHO is not inaugurated as President.
7. Vice President Elect Biden is inaugurated Acting President under the 20th Amendment to serve until new President is determined — the procedure for which determination to be set out by Congress and/or the Supreme Court so long as in conformance with the Constitution.
ANSWER TO ABOVE CHALLENGE
IF, when counting the electoral votes, Congress WERE TO find by 1/8/09 that Obama — not being an Article II “natural born citizen” (father Kenyan/British, not American) — fails to qualify as President, Biden would become the full fledged President under 3 USC 19 (free to pick his own VP such as Hillary) AND THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR DEFERRAL TO THE SUPREME COURT to enjoin Obama’s inauguration relegating Biden to being merely Acting President under the 20th Amendment until a new President were duly determined.
(The preferable choice, at least for the Democrats, would seem obvious.)
Thank you. You’re reasoned response is encouraging and important at this late hour in the days leading up to the innauguration. However, if the SCOTUS does nothing to stop Obama’s innauguration what is possible to bring justice to this usurper?
According to wikipedia, the constitution is vague on what is meant by “natural born”. The truth may lie in finding what the original founding members meant by “natural born” by investigating their writings in other books and newspaper articles written prior to and around the time that the constitution was written.
I think what the founding constitutional members were concerned with was English aristocracy coming to the United States to have a kid so that that kid could one day be president.
Therefore, Natural born citizen probably meant two actual citizens (not necessarily naturalized) living on US soil who in turn had a child on US soil would be acknowledged as a natural born citizen.
Because the early days of the U.S were almost entirely slanted towards the male point of view, I think a compromise position was if the male was a citizen of the United States, and lived on the soil, and the birth mother lived in the United States but was not a US citizen, the child would be still be considered natural born because of the status of the FATHER, not the mother.
However, if the MAN was NOT a US citizen, and the birth mother was, that would NOT be considered natural born, because 233 years ago the man was considered the primary wage earner of the family.
One could argue that that viewpoint is now outdated and sexist, and that probably is accurate.
But the spirit of the natural born citizen was that anyone who can become president of the United States needs to have familial roots on this soil, familial roots being defined as living in the United States and a citizen of the United States.
Barack Obama may not be a natural born citizen, but his daughters are. If Barack Obama’s father never became a United States citizen, then Barack Obama is not a natural born citizen, he is however, a citizen of the United States.
The most effective way to have this issue be decided in Barack Obama’s favor is to show other examples of presidents whose fathers never became US citizens. If there are none, then Barack Obama actually might be breaking constitutional law.
If other presidential candidates have already broken constitutional law and no challenges were filed, then Barack Obama would possibly have an out by arguing that you can’t just pick and choose who the natural born citizen rule is applied to, it either applies to all presidents, or to none.
If there are no other presidents whose father was from another country AND who also never became a US citizen, and if it is true that Barack Obama’s father never became a US citizen, then Barack Obama should not be eligible to become president of the United States until the constitution is changed.
MESSAGE TO EVERY MEMBER OF CONGRESS:
When counting the electoral votes, either Congress finds by 1/8/09 that Obama, not being an Article II “natural born citizen”, fails to qualify as President whereupon Biden becomes the full fledged President under 3 USC 19 (free to pick his own VP such as Hillary) or thereafter defers to the Supreme Court to enjoin Obama’s inauguration with Biden becoming only Acting President under the 20th Amendment until a new President is duly determined.
The preferable choice, at least for the Democrats, should seem obvious.
Ties between the president-elect and Illinois politicians are not reassuring.