vote no on "BO"

On Mon, 3 Nov 2008 12:24:34 -0800 (PST), Frank Reid © 2008
wrote:

On Nov 3, 10:45*am, "~^ beancounter ~^" wrote:
vote no on barrack hussein obama.....even if he fig's out
where is was born, of what country he belongs to......

Is McCain a citizen? Hmm, Obama was at least born in the US. McCain
was not and the ruling on that has never passed Supreme Court
scrutiny. However, being born in the US with at least one US citizen
as a parent has. So, do we vote for the American or the Panamanian?
Frank Reid

My gawd, Frank. Not you. McCain was born in the Canal Zone, a
legitimate part of Panama that belong to the U.S. Besides, he was
born to a member of the U.S. Military, so regardless *where* he was
born, he is a native born citizen of the U.S.

On last count, I don't believe Kenya is part of the U.S., nor is
Barrack senior a U.S. Citizen that served in the military.

Dave

Dave LaCourse wrote:
Frank Reid © 2008 wrote:
Is McCain a citizen? Hmm, Obama was at least born in the US. McCain
was not and the ruling on that has never passed Supreme Court
scrutiny. However, being born in the US with at least one US citizen
as a parent has. So, do we vote for the American or the Panamanian?

My gawd, Frank. Not you. McCain was born in the Canal Zone, a
legitimate part of Panama that belong to the U.S. Besides, he was
born to a member of the U.S. Military, so regardless *where* he was
born, he is a native born citizen of the U.S.

On last count, I don't believe Kenya is part of the U.S., nor is
Barrack senior a U.S. Citizen that served in the military.

I was born in Landstuhl, Germany to U.S. citizen parents,
my dad was an Air Force Sergeant at the time. I have a
German birth certificate issued at my birth in 1956 and
Naturalization papers from the U.S. State Department issued
in 1958. For my entire life, until this McCain thing came
up, I have believed myself ineligible for the presidency
because I was a Naturalized citizen. My father always
believed the same thing.

Like Frank said, it's never been put to the test and as
usual what you lack in knowledge you make up for with
certitude.

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 15:16:16 -0600, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

Like Frank said, it's never been put to the test and as
usual what you lack in knowledge you make up for with
certitude.

Horse caca. He was born in a U.S. possession. If he had been born on
Guam, Alaska or Hawaii before they became states, he would be eligible
for POTUS. Kenya is NOT part of the U.S. It has been reported that
Obama's own fraternal grandmother said he was born in Kenya. And,
yes, even you are eligible for POTUS. kaaaaack

Dave LaCourse wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Like Frank said, it's never been put to the test and as
usual what you lack in knowledge you make up for with
certitude.

... It has been reported that
Obama's own fraternal grandmother said he was born in Kenya. ...

I tried to warn you about wandering around outside without
your tin foil hat.

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 15:51:29 -0600, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

Dave LaCourse wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Like Frank said, it's never been put to the test and as
usual what you lack in knowledge you make up for with
certitude.

... It has been reported that
Obama's own fraternal grandmother said he was born in Kenya. ...

I tried to warn you about wandering around outside without
your tin foil hat.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...n_the_usa.html

"daytripper" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 15:51:29 -0600, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

Dave LaCourse wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Like Frank said, it's never been put to the test and as
usual what you lack in knowledge you make up for with
certitude.

... It has been reported that
Obama's own fraternal grandmother said he was born in Kenya. ...

I tried to warn you about wandering around outside without
your tin foil hat.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...n_the_usa.html

Please! No more facts. You are confusing people.

Steve A

On Nov 3, 3:34*pm, Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 15:16:16 -0600, Ken Fortenberry

wrote:
Like Frank said, it's never been put to the test and as
usual what you lack in knowledge you make up for with
certitude.

Horse caca. *He was born in a U.S. possession. *If he had been born on
Guam, Alaska or Hawaii before they became states, he would be eligible
for POTUS. *Kenya is NOT part of the U.S. *It has been reported that
Obama's own fraternal grandmother said he was born in Kenya. *And,
yes, even you are eligible for POTUS. *kaaaaack

Obama was born in Hawaii after it became a state. "It has been
reported..." is not good enough. Hell, if we believe the "it has been
reported" stuff, then space aliens are frequent overnight guests at
the White house. For Obama, there is a Hawiian birth certificate.
Works for me until proven in a court otherwise. United States v. Wong
Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898),
On the other the other hand, there is still, "tradition"
notwithstanding, question on the by birth/naturalization question of
those born in protectorates, possessions and of US parents. In
regards to the Panama Canal Zone, on July 28, 1904, Controller of the
Treasury Robert Tracewell stated, "While the general spirit and
purpose of the Constitution is applicable to the zone, that domain is
not a part of the United States within the full meaning of the
Constitution and laws of the country." So this question has been
floundering around for a very long time. It wasn't until 1953 that
those born in the Canal Zone were granted citizenship automatically.
Mr. McCain was born in '36. The Canal Zone at the time was under "US
control." Not a possession or protectorate. I'm not saying that John
McCain is not US citizen, I'm just saying that there is more leqal
grey area possible in John McCain's citizenship than in Barack
Obama's.
Frank Reid

On Mon, 3 Nov 2008 14:00:01 -0800 (PST), Frank Reid © 2008
wrote:

On Nov 3, 3:34*pm, Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 15:16:16 -0600, Ken Fortenberry

wrote:
Like Frank said, it's never been put to the test and as
usual what you lack in knowledge you make up for with
certitude.

Horse caca. *He was born in a U.S. possession. *If he had been born on
Guam, Alaska or Hawaii before they became states, he would be eligible
for POTUS. *Kenya is NOT part of the U.S. *It has been reported that
Obama's own fraternal grandmother said he was born in Kenya. *And,
yes, even you are eligible for POTUS. *kaaaaack

Obama was born in Hawaii after it became a state. "It has been
reported..." is not good enough. Hell, if we believe the "it has been
reported" stuff, then space aliens are frequent overnight guests at
the White house. For Obama, there is a Hawiian birth certificate.
Works for me until proven in a court otherwise. United States v. Wong
Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898),
On the other the other hand, there is still, "tradition"
notwithstanding, question on the by birth/naturalization question of
those born in protectorates, possessions and of US parents. In
regards to the Panama Canal Zone, on July 28, 1904, Controller of the
Treasury Robert Tracewell stated, "While the general spirit and
purpose of the Constitution is applicable to the zone, that domain is
not a part of the United States within the full meaning of the
Constitution and laws of the country." So this question has been
floundering around for a very long time. It wasn't until 1953 that
those born in the Canal Zone were granted citizenship automatically.
Mr. McCain was born in '36. The Canal Zone at the time was under "US
control." Not a possession or protectorate. I'm not saying that John
McCain is not US citizen, I'm just saying that there is more leqal
grey area possible in John McCain's citizenship than in Barack
Obama's.
Frank Reid

Frank, he is eligible to serve as POSTUS. If you think he isn't, you
are reaching for straws.

Why hasn't the DNC filed papers against him?

Dave LaCourse wrote in
:


Frank, he is eligible to serve as POSTUS. If you think he isn't, you
are reaching for straws.

Why hasn't the DNC filed papers against him?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us.../28mccain.html has a great
review on this, and its not as clear as you seem to think. It hasn't been
pursued just because of a sort of gentleman's agreement-- a can of worms
over a technicality. A contest would probably result in a SC decision in
favor of "natural born"

Then again, bringing it up might actually have resulted in the GOP fielding
a candidate who had a chance of winning, and we wouldn't want that!



--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

On 3 Nov 2008 22:21:09 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

Dave LaCourse wrote in
:


Frank, he is eligible to serve as POSTUS. If you think he isn't, you
are reaching for straws.

Why hasn't the DNC filed papers against him?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us.../28mccain.html has a great
review on this, and its not as clear as you seem to think.

It's clear. The term "natural born" as used in the US Constitution,
does not mean born within the boundaries of the US as they exist at any
given moment, nor does it even elude to geography. It means a "citizen
at birth," as opposed to "naturalized citizen" or other form of "created
citizen" from one who held prior foreign citizenship. Through at least
two Federal laws, The Naturalization Act of 1795 and the law that made
Panama Canal births to US citizens, citizens (even retroactively), and a
whole body of clear legislative intent, McCain was a US citizen at
birth.

It hasn't been
pursued just because of a sort of gentleman's agreement

It hasn't been pursued because there is nothing to pursue, and the only
people who have standing to pursue it, Congress, know as a body there is
nothing to pursue (individuals, etc., don't have standing in the case of
the POTUS).

HTH,
R
-- a can of worms over a technicality. A contest would probably result in a SC decision in
favor of "natural born"

Then again, bringing it up might actually have resulted in the GOP fielding
a candidate who had a chance of winning, and we wouldn't want that!