Obama's Natural Born Status?

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

Originally Posted by jhagarty

Source is from a long Term Democratic supoporter that was also the Assistant Attorney General of the State of Pennsylvania as well as a prior Democratic Endorsed Candidate for Governor by the Democratic Party in Pennsylvania.

Simple Question.... Is the "Simple" Candidate up to providing an answer...?

Actually what your source is doing is attempting to get the information through a lawsuit. He does not have proof the certificate is a forgery since he has never been in physical contact with it. It is a typical lawsuit that casts a wide net hoping to gain information through discovery. My bet is the suit will be dismissed, without discovery taking place, since your source has no standing.

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

Originally Posted by jhagarty

Not being a Democrat or Republican, I strongly endorse the Constitutionalist principles endorsed by Ron Paul.

The case presented by Philip Berg does not require proof on his part....

The Burden of Proof lies on Obama to produce a verifiable birth certificate that he is a "Natural Born United States Citizen" as defined by our Quaker Forefathers that wrote / crafted the Constitution of the United States defining the candidacy for President.

As Berg is the plaintiff, he has the burden of proof. The defendant does not.

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

Originally Posted by jhagarty

Wrong,

The Candidate that presents himself as a Qualified "Constitutional Candidate" needs to present the verification...

Washington and the Founding Fathers understood and recognized this fact which it was incorporated over 200 years ago....

If you are talking about the lawsuit, the plaintiff MUST go first and has the burden of proof.

If you are talking about a person running for President having to supply information to the Federal Elections Commission: how do you know he has not furnished the Commission the proof. Just because he has not supplied it to the press, or individuals, or the courts, does not mean it has not been supplied to the Commission. Now I would venture to say that since we have not heard from the Commission there are a couple scenarios:

1. They have seen and accepted proof of his natural born citizenship. Doesn't mean they get a copy, only that they have verified it. The privacy laws were changed years ago regarding certain documents. A birth certificate is one of those documents that will not be released to anyone except the person named on the certificate.

2. Under what authority can the FEC require proof? Proof is not mentioned in the Constitution. The FEC is not mentioned in the Constitution. The FEC is not a Constitutional office.

3. Maybe the Hawaii State Registrar has confirmed the information to the FEC's satisfaction.

[whandley]

Originally Posted by sstanczyk

If you are talking about the lawsuit, the plaintiff MUST go first and has the burden of proof.

If you are talking about a person running for President having to supply information to the Federal Elections Commission: how do you know he has not furnished the Commission the proof. Just because he has not supplied it to the press, or individuals, or the courts, does not mean it has not been supplied to the Commission. Now I would venture to say that since we have not heard from the Commission there are a couple scenarios:

1. They have seen and accepted proof of his natural born citizenship. Doesn't mean they get a copy, only that they have verified it. The privacy laws were changed years ago regarding certain documents. A birth certificate is one of those documents that will not be released to anyone except the person named on the certificate.

2. Under what authority can the FEC require proof? Proof is not mentioned in the Constitution. The FEC is not mentioned in the Constitution. The FEC is not a Constitutional office.

3. Maybe the Hawaii State Registrar has confirmed the information to the FEC's satisfaction.

Wrong!

1. I just obtained two copies of my Son's birth certificate while on a job in Bakersfield, CA at the Kern County Recorders Office.

[whandley]

No president or vice-president to date has ever been born outside the united states since the adoption of the constitution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born_citizen

[Peter Doane]

He was born in my nightmare But that cant be proven either

[Peter Doane]

Originally Posted by whandley

Wrong!

1. I just obtained two copies of my Son's birth certificate while on a job in Bakersfield, CA at the Kern County Recorders Office.

That use to be a podunk little town. I've heard its gotten pretty big.

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

Originally Posted by whandley

Wrong!

1. I just obtained two copies of my Son's birth certificate while on a job in Bakersfield, CA at the Kern County Recorders Office.

I was in error. I should have written, a birth certificate is one of those documents that will not be released to anyone who is not named on the birth certificate. Since you are a parent, and most likely named on the birth certificate, you would be given copies.

When I needed a copy of mine, I asked my sister to go since it is easier for her to move around downtown then my 85 year old mother. They refused to give her a copy. She took my mother down and they had lunch next to the county offices. My mother was able to obtain it without problem but of course did have to provide ID.

[rmaday]

Originally Posted by sstanczyk

I suggest you contact a constitutional or immigration lawyer Nick. The fact they are born on US soil is the factor that makes them a natural born citizen.

All the other gobblygook that you keep posting about age or nationalities of parents is moot once the birth takes place on US soil.

There was a case in Chicago in the last 3 years or so where an illegal alien gave birth to a boy in Illinois and both mother and son lived here for a number of years. Something came up where the mother was to be deported but the INS wouldn't deport the son because he was a natural born citizn.

[rmaday]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Obama is a U.S. Citizen, he just isn't a natural born one. To be natural born either both your parents have to be U.S. citizens (like McCain's)... OR... 1 parent has to be a U.S. citizen for at least 10 years, 5 of them while the parent was over the age of 16. .

What's the source for this?

[rmaday]

Originally Posted by gromicko

The distinction between citizen and natural born citizen is to assure the candidate isn't just a mere citizen. Natural born is a higher standard.

Natural born (born on US soil) is a higher standard than Naturalized (someone born elsewhere who becaomes a US citizen)

[Nick Gromicko]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOzFl-Gm_Kc

[Frank M. Carrio, CMI]

Originally Posted by gromicko

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOzFl-Gm_Kc

It seems that this Kenyan born Senator is NOT LEGALLY eligible run for the Office of the Presidency of the United States.

I always knew that he was NOT QUALIFIED but I did not know that he was Ineligible!

[rmaday]

Originally Posted by fcarrio

It seems that this Kenyan born Senator is NOT LEGALLY eligible run for the Office of the Presidency of the United States.

I always knew that he was NOT QUALIFIED but I did not know that he was Ineligible!

What do you think the GOP will do with this new info?

[Frank M. Carrio, CMI]

Originally Posted by rmaday

What do you think the GOP will do with this new info?

As you can see a Lawsuit has been filed. Another one in a different state has also been filed.

Right now it is in the hands of the "Court System".

Just like you and I....... All the GOP can do is to mention the facts and "wait for the courts to decide".

Obama's Paternal Grandmother was an eye witness to his birth in Kenya!


In my opinion this is "Cut & Dried"..... this Kenyan born Senator does not qualify to run for this office.