digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at worldnetdaily.com

Is Obama's candidacy constitutional?

worldnetdaily.com — Bloggers are raising questions about Illinois Sen. Barack Obama's qualifications to be U.S. president, because of the secrecy over his birth certificate and the requirement presidents be "natural-born" U.S. citizens. Jim Geraghty cited the "unlikely" rumor that Obama was born not within the United States, but possibly in Kenya.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • djmdjm, on 06/11/2008, -20/+73Wow, wouldn't that be a typical Democrat lawless stunt. Run a candidate that does not meet plain constitutional guidelines. Oh I forgot, even if it where true the Dems are above the Constitution, (their motives being ever so pure.)
    • pjr12345, on 06/11/2008, -24/+8If he was born in Hawaii, as it appears, then he meets the Constitutional requirement of being a natural born citizen. The article quibbles over his mother's residency status, which might have been a legal issue, but has no bearing on Obama's constitutional legitimacy.

      In fact, McCain was born outside of the United States. He does NOT meet the Constitutional test, but for some reason this always seems to get ignored.
      • sbernie, on 06/11/2008, -4/+20You would be quite wrong on this issue. John McCain was born to two American citizens on a US naval base on territory controlled by the US government. I will agree with you on Obama, though, if he is born in the US even though his father was a foreign national, his mother is a citizen of the US and he was born on US soil. But John McCain is a natual born citizen also. I will vote for neither candidates becasue both are at the minimum socialist and Obama is a communist.
        • ozydingo, on 06/11/2008, -7/+5Communist?
        • pjr12345, on 06/11/2008, -7/+2Here's what the actual Constitution says"

          "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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

          What does "natural born Citizen" mean? That's the question. If we take McCain to meet the definition, then so does Obama.

          The nuts and bolts are that this is a non-issue for either candidate. It's simply red meat to feed the party faithful in either camp.
        • tkstock, on 06/11/2008, -2/+2pjr12345,

          McCain and Obama's circumstances are completely different, so saying "If we take McCain to meet the definition, then so does Obama" is not true.

          Obama was born in Hawaii to parents who had mixed citizenship.

          McCain was born on a Navy Base in to two US Citizens stationed there.

          Both of them are eligible for the presidency. Both of them are naturalized citizens, but under different circumstances.
        • IconoclastStill, on 06/11/2008, -1/+7If "natural born" is a requirement, then obie's sudden appearance after the rock was kicked over may not qualify . . . .
      • BooObama, on 06/11/2008, -0/+14Since he was born in Hawaii, then he should be able to show his birth certificate to back up his word.
        • pjr12345, on 06/11/2008, -1/+2Isn't it a matter of public record? Perhaps a digger in Hawaii can do some research.
        • CaptEnder, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2The article said Hawaii doesn't make public the information contained in birth records. So Obama has to release it for the information to be accessible.
      • OwdenBowden, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1"The article quibbles over his mother's residency status, which might have been a legal issue, but has no bearing on Obama's constitutional legitimacy."

        Less I am mistaken - "You cannot break the Law to Enforce the Law". As such, if his mother broke the law by being in the country Illegally and then giving birth to Obama; then she has broken the law and thus you cannot enforce Obamas citizenship because the law was broken. Therefore - Obama in not a natural born US citizen.
    • CBound, on 06/12/2008, -1/+2djmdjm, both Democrats and Republicans have shown themselves to believe that they are above the Constitution. Please wake up to the fact that these two parties could care less about adhering to the U.S. Constitution.
      • djmdjm, on 06/12/2008, -2/+5CBound,
        I am a Republican by doctrine, not by party, never have been. I also believe in the constitution the way the writers of it did. There is plenty out there that shows exactly what they had in mind when they penned it, such as the various state constitutions. Libertarianism is anathema to me, they have no upstanding of reality i.e. the nature of man, the nature of God, natural law and they way things just work. Oh they are adamantly believe they do, but I have never seen any understanding displayed by them in my 30+ years being involved in politics. As far as the Dems versus the GOP party wise. Good people will generally band together in one political party and evil people generally the same. The Democratic Party has been the spawn of Satan in our country since it's birth under Andy Jackson.
        They sided with pure evil and mass murderers in every period of our nations history. They plunged us into a needless civil war that caused millions of deaths and terrorized and oppressed African Americans up the Johnson Admin. They lead the world into Fascism under Wilson until it fell out of Vogue with the Holocaust, They sided with the Soviets against freedom in every quarter of the world and purged their party of anti communists. They did not create the freedoms and atmosphere that enables the prosperity this nation enjoys but seek to seize it from those who did. (Those who created it would be those pesky conservative Christians.) I could write a book but you get my drift, so you can see why I have such a low opinion of them and a better opinion of the GOP. People who actually do care about the constitution are not going to band together in the libertarian party, assuming that is where you are coming from. Tell me, why would you not want a bordello on one side of your house that you are trying to raise kids in, and crack house on the other side and a casino across the street?
  • DrReaper, on 06/11/2008, -16/+35When did the constitution even count? Our money isn't back by anything but bombs. The supreme law of the land the constitution says in black and hemp. Gold and Silver should be the only money.
    • dragonfire417, on 06/11/2008, -14/+2"Our money isn't back[ed] by anything but bombs."

      Then why does BHO want to get rid of all of our nuclear bombs????

      “Pursue goal of a world without nuclear weapons. (Feb 2008)” --BHO
  • IllegalsGoHome, on 06/11/2008, -19/+62This anti-American, anti-God of the Bible, racist Marxist should be scrutinized just like McCain and even more so since his birth circumstances are highly questionable. Frankly, I would celebrate if this closet Muslim were disqualified. He doesn't fool me one iota!
    • theaceoffire, on 06/11/2008, -27/+3He has helped the poor... worked in the places that few people even look at to help others...

      And that makes him anti-American?

      Go to hell dude. You would shoot your mom in the face as long as your side wins the argument.
      • Breticus07, on 06/12/2008, -2/+8"Go to hell dude. You would shoot your mom in the face as long as your side wins the argument." Wow a real obamabot...
        • dafunkmonster, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2You mean hypocrite? Oh wait, you said that...nevermind.
    • bullcutter, on 06/12/2008, -9/+2what is an "anti-God of the Bible" ?

      if you're referring the Anti-Christ you're contradicting yourself, because I think he's supposed to be a Jew. That's what your man Falwell thinks anyway. Well Obama's already a closet Muslim with a Christian Pastor, so why not tack on one more religion, right?

      "since his birth circumstances are highly questionable."

      you meant, "highly questionable _too_." McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone. Shouldn't that make him ineligible for the presidency too?
      • dafunkmonster, on 06/12/2008, -1/+2Against the God of the Bible.

        Is it really that hard to figure out?
        • bullcutter, on 06/13/2008, -1/+1why wouldn't he have just said anti-God??? to make the point that he's simply anti-Christian?? what was the CHURCH of his PASTOR again????
  • Taquoshi, on 06/11/2008, -6/+64It would be so simple to resolve this...just by releasing his birth certificate. Failing that, his passport would do.
    • lookingforHim, on 06/11/2008, -2/+30You are correct. But it makes one wonder why they have not done so.
      Are they trying to hide something else? Like his FULL name? What other information could they be not wanting to share?
      • DrReaper, on 06/11/2008, -1/+24It is fishy. Remember when they libs were insulting Bush's intelligence only to find out later he had better grades then Kerry. That was a laugh.
      • Taquoshi, on 06/11/2008, -1/+15I'm an amateur genealogist. I've got LOTS of practice in this kind of guessing game. Maybe Mama Obama didn't name daddy, or maybe it was a different father. Then there is the whole spectrum of where he was born. Or, maybe Obama is adopted and the records are sealed. Also, in the early days of adoption, one could, I am told by reliable anonymous sources, have the birth record amended depending on where you were and who you knew. That included the date and the race of the child. There are also legal ways of doing it, too, or so I have been told. Interesting, no???
    • Kythas, on 06/11/2008, -1/+8Not so. A passport doesn't mean a person is a "natural-born" citizen, only that they are a citizen. For example, I am not a "natural-born" citizen but am a naturalized citizen. I was born a citizen of South Korea and am now a US citizen and have a US passport.

      I can never be President because of this, whether or not I have a US passport.
    • geddon, on 06/12/2008, -1/+3Forget that! I just appeared in child support court with my 2007 tax returns but the judge required that I provide my most up-to-date pay stubb to determine my monthly payments. If my child support doubles, then that bastard needs to provide his most up-to-date information as well! This court don't accept no outdated passport.
  • klesb, on 06/11/2008, -8/+53No one is above the law. (Judicial Watch)
    • geddon, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2yeah, what happens if this gets overlooked as a technicality, or buried as a political stunt?
  • sweetnsour, on 06/11/2008, -16/+34This man is bought and paid for by the British via an Iraqi millionaire crook. He is a danger to the US and must be removed from the race.
  • rjwusa, on 06/11/2008, -15/+58If Obama comes under more scrutiny and there are threats of disqualification, he'll then pull the race card, causing his detractors to cower and scurry away.
    • dlbfromLA, on 06/11/2008, -7/+21Hey ELRETARDO the truth hurts doesn't it!
    • LadyAmerica, on 06/11/2008, -0/+23rjwusa, did elwizardo just made a terrorist threat against you? Or was it an inside joke?
      • rjwusa, on 06/11/2008, -0/+24Elwizardo tends to stalk me on digg. Not an inside joke. Not funny at all, either.
        • these3remain, on 06/11/2008, -0/+22He's an obnoxious, mentally unhinged troll. Report it, I did , because even if your a lefty, there is no justification for that type of comment. It should not be tolerated.
        • michael4lsu, on 06/11/2008, -0/+17Elwizardo's account has already been terminated, and his death threat comment removed. That was a lot faster than I thought.
        • drachemorder, on 06/11/2008, -1/+15"Elwizardo's account has already been terminated, and his death threat comment removed."

          And there was much rejoicing!

          * goes to listen to "Another One Bites the Dust" in commemoration of this event *
        • flip2trip, on 06/12/2008, -0/+15Oh, that's why I couldn't find the death threat. So long Elwizardo you will not be missed.
    • USNavyBlue, on 06/11/2008, -0/+29Threats of violence just because you don't like what a person has to say? There are laws on the books for that. And reported by the way.
  • yaridanjo, on 06/11/2008, -40/+4You Israelis are sure afraid of Obama!
    • Barbrady, on 06/11/2008, -3/+29You Obama nutswingers sure are clueless.
  • VinBea, on 06/11/2008, -10/+46Everything about Hussein Obama is wrong for America, from the way he's been brought up out of virtually obscurity in the senate - packaged - and is now being sold to America as the best thing since sliced bread was created!
    America is ripe to be plucked - harvested - for all the evils being advanced within its borders (not to mention nation building globally via our military advancing UN back policies) by the progressives making up both main political parties in the United States; and I can not think of a better example of America's total deprivation and inability to discern right from wrong, than to have B. ""Hussein"" Obama grabbing hold of the 'supposed' reigns of power in becoming president via 'bogus' elections using electronic voting machines without a paper-trail; and this irregardless of his national-origin.
    If we were the Christian nation of even fifty years ago - neither Obama or McCain would be electable for obvious reasons...
    • theaceoffire, on 06/11/2008, -18/+3....

      Dude, assholes like you made fun of my name all through grade school. Assholes like you harrased my friends and family because of our names. Why? Because we thought differently from them? No. Just because our name was different.

      You are longing for the past? For the days when we were "Christian" nation?

      Do you not know WHY America was founded? America was founded due to people being persecuted for having different religions, for not fitting in with the rest.

      You sir, are un-American, because you would harass those not of your beliefs.
      • lookingforHim, on 06/11/2008, -1/+18Different religions??? My history books read a little different.
        America was founded by Christians being persecuted for practicing their Christian faith as they believed. NO State Church etc.
        • soofan, on 06/11/2008, -1/+11you undoubtedly were educated by educators and not the History revised books of today. Great post and a correct one.
        • oldamerican, on 06/11/2008, -0/+8The assonfire would be a rough name to grow up with.
      • dafunkmonster, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1You had every right to stand up for yourself. You apparently did not.

        I have no sympathy for you.
    • BooObama, on 06/11/2008, -2/+10I only needed to read the first 8 words to know that I needed to click on the thumbs up.
  • Paigelil, on 06/11/2008, -26/+14Where are some of you people getting your facts?

    * "This anti-American, anti-God of the Bible, racist Marxist should be scrutinized just like McCain and even more so since his birth circumstances are highly questionable. Frankly, I would celebrate if this closet Muslim were disqualified."
    It has been shown time and again that Obama is Christian, though I really don't think any religious preference should be taken into account when it comes to governing a country. The founding ideas behind the United States is the SEPARATION of Church and state, and I frankly find the fact that people have such hatred for a man just because of a possible rumor of a non-standard American religion horribly bigoted and prejudiced. Obama has been scrutinized even more than McCain because of his prolonged primary race. The media has turned over every stone they can find, have listened to every speech he has ever made and have researched every word he has ever written.

    *"This man is bought and paid for by the British via an Iraqi millionaire crook. He is a danger to the US and must be removed from the race."
    What!? I have no idea what rumor you are even mentioning here... I don't even know what to say.

    Please don't just believe anything you read, it makes you look like an uneducated idiot when you repeat these statements and it makes it harder for people to find the truth.
    • SpankyBojangles, on 06/11/2008, -18/+9I agree. And this whole "B. Hussein" thing is ridiculous. It stirs up baseless fears. I can't believe people are still trying to imply that Obama is Muslim after the whole Rev Wright thing. .
      • DavidS9, on 06/11/2008, -1/+9It's mostly done because he says it hurts his feelings when people use it. He's gotta grow a much thicker skin in order to be president. Whats he going to do when people really start to attack him?

        You are fooling yourself if you think its started yet.
    • dragonfire417, on 06/11/2008, -6/+13First: "It has been shown time and again that Obama is Christian."

      **** BHO's "church" has members who sympathize with the muslim religion - go back and research the chicago "community activitists" who hung with the likes of Louis Farrakhan - including Christian pastor Jeremiah Wright. The community activists who converted to a black power, "Malcom X" type of "Moorish" Muslim spread throughout the area by these SW Chicago churches, blending the "political" Moorish Muslim concept (anti - European establishment Christianity) within their "Christian" in name, churches.

      Second: "SEPARATION of Church and state."

      **** Fine there should be separation of church and state, but BHO's church, and several others in the same area (St. Sabina- Pfleger included) preach politics from the pulpit. And this is the type of political activist church that BHO has called home for 20 years. Makes you wonder about his concept of separation of church and state. Seems like he is comfortable with his church which has blended the two.

      Third: I am not saying that this is true about BHO, but it just makes a person think.... People can assume a role as a Christian, to gain trust, and then once they are trusted and in power, they can easily show their true loyalties. It could happen. (I still think he is more like point #2.) But regardless, remember that many Middle eastern Muslims are still in a Jihad (supposedly meaning inner struggle - outwardly appearing as making war; blowing up buildings, cutting off peoples' heads etc.) against Crusaders. According to their religious writings, it is perfectly okay to lie if it helps further the Muslim movement.
      • Gemfinder, on 06/11/2008, -4/+2First of all —
        When the Moors were in charge of Spain, Christians, Muslims and Jews lived side-by-side in peace for over 700 years. Moorish culture was everything but anti-Christian. Bin Ladin's vision of Al Andaluz is a joke because with his intolerant, hidebound views it wouldn't be Al Andaluz anymore than if Dick Cheney drew up his own personal Constitution and tried to pass it off.
        Secondly: Obama left his church. Or didn't you read that? And don't even bother with the "Obama threw his pastor of 20 years under the train for his own political career" line, we've all heard it a hundred and plenty times.

        Lastly:
        This showed up on the blogs last night, and got hammered down instantly. Not because it's the System sticking it to Trooferism, but because it's inaccurate. The law cited only applies to children born to Americans abroad. Hawai'i was admitted as a state in 1959, two years before Barack was born there.
        Burying this article as inaccurate.
        • dragonfire417, on 06/13/2008, -0/+2I respectfully disagree that when the Moors were in charge of Spain, Christians, Muslims and Jews lived side-by-side in peace for over 700 years. Their idea of peace is when everyone submits to islam.

          Moorish Spain (Paperback)
          by Richard Fletcher (Author)

          This is an excerpt from a book review on Amazon:

          “Fletcher details the Islamic, Arab-led Berber invasion of Visgothic Spain (formerly a Roman territory) from northern Africa in 711 (after the conquest of northern Africa). We are informed that in large part the conquest was intended to further the Islamicization of the Berbers. Many of the cities were originally surrounded and reached an accomodation with the invaders allowing the continued existence of djimmis of Christians. Those which did not were crushed and the lands of those who made any attempt to oppose the invasion were taken and redistributed (with the Arabs getting the most arable land and the Berbers getting the remnants). Captives were either ransomed or - if too poor or otherwise unable to pay ransom - sold into slavery. Conversion from Christianity meant an opportunity to advance oneself and to avoid periodic outbreaks of anti-Christian violence. In the meanwhile, the conquest was pushed back from those northernmost areas considered least habitable, setting the stage for the slow "reconquest" of Spain.”

          Source:
          http://www.amazon.com/review/R9N963KYRDXDJ

    • DrReaper, on 06/11/2008, -3/+14Sorry the Separation between church and state was a judicial fiat. The Supreme court removed God from the schools without ANY previous case law. That was the first time they passed a law without previous case law.

    • USNavyBlue, on 06/11/2008, -3/+10Pagelil: Here let me help you with some of the facts.

      And keep this in mind it is NOT just a republican or democrat issue here - they are on the same page. John McInsane is NO different from the mulatto Obama!

      1. Both for "global taxes on the global warming hoax" and support the communist UN.
      2. Both for the "global taxes on the war on poverty" (what a joke that is)
      3. Both are for bigger fatter bloated government.
      4. Both are members of the corrupt Council of Foreign Relations.
      5. Both attended the recent Bilderburg meeting in Chantilly, VA. Obama office was called and his staffer would neither confirm or deny it! McInsane at least does not hide it.
      4. Both pledged their undying support for Israel (instead of pledging their loyalty to the USA) at an AIPAC Meeting, which AIPAC members have been caught red handed again committing espionage against the USA!
      5. Both for not withdrawing troops before 2013.
      6. Both for abortion regardless of what McIsane says check his voting record on the matter.
      7. Both are gun grabbers - Go to Gun Owners of America for their voting record - Obama scored a D, while McInsane scored a whopping F-!
      8. Both are for OPEN BORDERS and AMNESTY of some 30-40 million illegal alien invaders.
      9. Both are for NAFTA which is a driving force of the illegal alien invasion. In addition to shipping all of America’s jobs oversees.
      10. Both are for increasing immigrant work visas and HB1 Visas that give high tech jobs in America to people from India! More unemployment for America.
      11. Both support the North American Union – a merger between Canada, USA and Mexico! Say goodbye for good to the 2nd Amendment.
      12. Both are for universal health care. – MORE TAXES on the already broke Americans.
      13. Both supported giving illegal alien invaders OUR Social Security, but have never paid a damn dime into it!
      14. Both voted for the war and ALL bills pertaining to it.
      15. Both voted for the un-Patriotic Act.
      16. Both voted for the un-Patriotic II – that just passed the Senate Committee.

      There is more however it is too much to list. Tell me just how there platforms are any different? THERE NOT! It is more of the same for the NWO – global slaves and serfs.

      Tell me how there platforms are any different? More of the same of crap!
      • tkstock, on 06/11/2008, -3/+3Where are you coming from? Your statements contain half-truths and outright falsities:

        1. Both for "global taxes on the global warming hoax" and support the communist UN.

        I don't know anything about "global taxes" - please enlighten me here. How can they have a global tax?

        2. Both for the "global taxes on the war on poverty" (what a joke that is)

        Same thing - who is collecting these global taxes?

        3. Both are for bigger fatter bloated government.

        Wrongo - McCain is for cutting government size.

        4. Both are members of the corrupt Council of Foreign Relations.

        How exactly is the CFR corrupt?

        5. Both attended the recent Bilderburg meeting in Chantilly, VA. Obama office was called and his staffer would neither confirm or deny it! McInsane at least does not hide it.

        It sounds like a meeting to promote pro-American sentiment in the world - what's wrong with that?

        4. Both pledged their undying support for Israel (instead of pledging their loyalty to the USA)

        Pledging support for Israel and loyalty to the USA are not mutually exclusive. You can be loyal to the USA and loyal to our partners at the same time...

        5. Both for not withdrawing troops before 2013.

        Don't let the liberals hear you say that - they still believe Obama wants to leave immediately!!

        6. Both for abortion regardless of what McIsane says check his voting record on the matter.

        McCain is pro-life - even the head of the pro-life movement considers him pro-life. Obama is pro-abortion.

        8. Both are for OPEN BORDERS and AMNESTY of some 30-40 million illegal alien invaders.

        If you call harsh punishment for entering the country illegally amnesty, I guess I can't prevent you.

        10. Both are for increasing immigrant work visas and HB1 Visas that give high tech jobs in America to people from India! More unemployment for America.

        Immigrant work visas are not for high-tech jobs. Just a point of clarification.

        11. Both support the North American Union – a merger between Canada, USA and Mexico! Say goodbye for good to the 2nd Amendment.

        I can't find evidence of this, but the only academic theories for the NAU would bring the countries under our current framework (hence, constitution, hence 2nd amendment here to stay)

        12. Both are for universal health care. – MORE TAXES on the already broke Americans.

        Don't know where you get that McCain is for universal healthcare. He is for a free-market solution. Do some research already.

        13. Both supported giving illegal alien invaders OUR Social Security, but have never paid a damn dime into it!

        I can't find evidence of this. Links please.

        14. Both voted for the war and ALL bills pertaining to it.

        So did most of our government.

        15. Both voted for the un-Patriotic Act.

        So did most of our government.

        16. Both voted for the un-Patriotic II – that just passed the Senate Committee.

        So, all evidence is that Obama and McCain are in collusion with each other rather than running against each other.

        Well, we all know what side of the conspiracy bed you woke up this morning.
  • arkansasindian1, on 06/11/2008, -4/+29The Constitution-- Amendment XIV,section 1)Citizenship......"All persons born or naturalized in the United States,And subject to the jurisdiction thereof,are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside".now if you really want to get a discussion going,look up what "And subject to the jurisdiction thereof", means.It can get very interesting!
  • Kaffir, on 06/11/2008, -11/+43Two of my sons were born overseas, and therefore are ineligible to become President of the United States of America. Even though both of us parents are American citizens (we were missionaries for some 9 years) and my oldest son has served for 4 years and is now serving with the U.S. Marine Corps in Iraq, he cannot even dream of reaching for such a position! Yet here is Obama, with only one parent a U.S. citizen, no birth certificate to certify his eligibility, is running a campaign for the highest position upon the planet! Where are the news magazines, reporters and commentators asking for his birth certificate, proof certain of his meeting Constitutional laws? McCain's situation has been put under a magnifying glass, and he has provided all the information demanded of him. He's been vetted and proven in this matter to be eligible! The same must be DEMANDED of Obama! The U.S. Constitution must be upheld . . . otherwise, how can Obama possibly mean what he says if he were to take the "Oath of Office"?
    • VinBea, on 06/11/2008, -2/+20Kaffir, I wish it were all about meaning what one says over and against what is said verses what's actually done - irregardless of what the topic is.
      Fact - everything going on out of WDC today is illegal, and is the worse kind of illegal activity in that those who are guilty will not be held accountable anymore than Bill or Hillary Clinton are being held accountable for the crimes they're guilty of...
      If those who control the GW Bushes of our nation, or control the Bill and Hillary Clintons of our nation et al, want to select Hussein to represent America there's not thing one you or I can do about it...
      http://www.newswithviews.com/Stang/alan52.htm
      The worse thing Americans can do now is bury their head in the dirt wishing it'd all just go away!
    • ElWizardo, on 06/11/2008, -27/+8"no birth certificate to certify his eligibility, is running a campaign for the highest position upon the planet!"

      Where do you get this *****? He's shooting for president not Ming the Merciless.
      • cashman57, on 06/11/2008, -0/+16He told Charlie Gibson he was running for leader of the free world. It is on youtube if you care to find it.
    • theaceoffire, on 06/11/2008, -9/+2"My kids can't become president, how dare this asswipe try!"
      • Kaffir, on 06/11/2008, -0/+3You miss my point entirely, ElWizardo. I really don't care. Nor do any of my other kids. That's life. Like I've always told all of my kids: "Life's not fair - get over it!"
        What's wrong here, is the fact we have a Constitutional requirement. If Obama does not meet even that one requirement, then he, too, is ineligible! The Law is the Law!
    • Dibou, on 06/12/2008, -1/+4If both parents are US citizens then the child is a natural-born citizen.
    • dafunkmonster, on 06/12/2008, -1/+2All those news magazines, reporters, and commentators are in his pocket.
  • jfm777, on 06/11/2008, -9/+41 Since when do we take someone's word that they were born a US citizen as fact? If he IS eligible to run,he DOES need to prove he is eligible. There's a lot of folks who want to run for president that cannot, because they are not naturalized US citizens, so who is Mr. smiley here to say he is above it, especially after John McCain just had to prove HE was a legit American born candidate by law????
    If John McCain was black, he could have just said "screw the law you racists.. ", right?

    Almost every time someone REFUSES to show they are legally whatever, you can bet they are not..
    Illegal aliens could just start calling the cops racists for asking for proof of US citizenship, right?

    (how could someone with a name that sounds just like "IRAQ [saddam] HUSSEIN OSSAMA" ever get this far after 9-11 to begin with????)

    Another day... another brick taken out of our country's wall of sanity!
    • farmerjohn48pan, on 06/11/2008, -0/+7Illegal aliens and their advocates are already calling it racist to ask if they are citizens.
  • Ruler4you, on 06/11/2008, -6/+24What's all the hub-bub? There isn't a politician in this country that holds the Constitution as the document of authority for anything EXCEPT those things they WANT. And it's been that way for years.
    My own Senator (I hate to Say his name) Larry Craig, has told me the Constitution is viewed as a "dynamic" document. In other words, it means what ever they want it to mean.
    Granted, L. Craig would be the last person I'd believe as the final word on anything except bathroom protocol, but it's the way THEY view it that matters. Since citizens can't keep them on point all the time even if they would listen to us.
    The Constitution is now used as a lever to be applied against citizens only and only at the discretion of THEM.
    The power of: We the People, has been turned completely around. It's now viewed as their club. Not a CONTRACT between We the People and government. (Which by the way, I believe has been broken, and is now null and void).
    Citizens need to pull their heads out of their collective asses and either hold guys accountable or revolt.
  • 14justice, on 06/11/2008, -4/+30It shouldn't be difficult for an enterprising investigator to obtain a copy of Barack Obama's birth certificate. Of course it wouldn't have his Social Security number on it, you get your Social Security number afterward. It isn't copyrighted either, it's a public record. Get it and post it on the internet.

    Enterprising investigator, where are you?
    • proliance, on 06/12/2008, -1/+4The problem is that in Hawaii, birth certificates are not public record.
      • 14justice, on 06/12/2008, -0/+6You're right, sort of. The law in Hawaii states that "a certified copy of a vital record (birth, death, marriage, or divorce certificate) is issued only to an applicant who has a direct and tangible interest in the record." However, in the case of the birth certificate of a candidate for the Presidency of the United States, one would think that all of us would legitimately have that interest.
    • Gemfinder, on 06/13/2008, -0/+2Here you go.

      http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/3/BO_Birth_ ...
      • 14justice, on 06/13/2008, -0/+1Good job! It looks authentic and answers all questions. I do wonder why the "Certificate No." is blacked out.
  • exgop, on 06/11/2008, -7/+32If their is nothing to this, the O-Blah blah campaign needs to simply show his birth certificate. This will answer every question. The more they hesitate in showing his birth certificate the more the American people will suspect the accusation is true.
  • papipablo, on 06/11/2008, -22/+4You morons know that John McCain wasn't born in the United States right?
    • MrsSpooky, on 06/11/2008, -2/+19That was addressed in the article and in a previous comment. Maybe you should actually read the article we're commenting on so you won't post messages on digg proving you didn't. :)
    • these3remain, on 06/11/2008, -1/+14"You morons" - as in morons who post comments without reading the article where the issue is already addressed?
  • cashman57, on 06/11/2008, -5/+25I can't understand why Obama has yet to provide his birth certificate. Did Hillary slip up? She's usually adept at this kind of thing
    • DavidS9, on 06/11/2008, -0/+16It was probably one of the "nukes" she decided not to luanch.
  • spinningplates2, on 06/11/2008, -7/+20Obama was elected by a landslide in Illinois for one reason. Republicans voted Democratic as a Protest against Dr. Alan Keys because he was from out of state. (last minute replacement for a GOP dropout) Think about that when you 3rd Party voters allow Obama to be elected in November.
    • michael4lsu, on 06/11/2008, -6/+7How does one person with one vote become guilty of "allowing" someone else to become President, unless it really came down to one vote? Do you believe people should not be allowed to vote FOR someone they actually WANT to be President, rather than voting for who they hope to be the minisculely slightly lesser of two evils as an appeasement or compromise with the domestic enemies who hijacked our government and media? When will you ever learn? YOU are part of the problem here. We will have a bad President because people like you VOTED FOR A BAD PRESIDENT, while people like me voted for a GOOD one!
      • DavidS9, on 06/11/2008, -0/+12If you think Kerry (the back stabbing traitor) or Gore( the biggest con-man in history) Would have done a better job then Bush you are smoking something seriously mind altering.
      • spinningplates2, on 06/12/2008, -1/+0I do think that a vote for President should not be wasted. I think people like you put Bill Clinton in power and changed our country for the worse. You are blinded to the facts if you can't see this. How you can even be so self righteous and proud of your holier the thou attitude is mind boggling.
        Still waiting for the list of reasons the Patriot Act took my rights away.
      • dafunkmonster, on 06/13/2008, -2/+1You're a pretentious dick. Please disable your account.
    • dlarson, on 06/11/2008, -3/+4I was thinking of voting for the lesser of two evils until I read this commentary by a guy named Bob on WND's "E-mail to the Editor" section a couple days ago:

      Vote with your conscience
      ________________________________________
      James Twine, in a recent letter to the editor, asked Mr. Farah:
      "Good God, man, how can you not see this?"
      This was in reference to Mr. Farah's lack of advocacy of Juan McCain. I would turn the question back at you, Mr. Twine, and ask how can you not see this? What is so difficult to understand when it comes to the fact that voting for the lesser of two evils will always produce evil? Why can't you see this blatantly obvious fact? Perhaps if I were to re-frame the question it would help.
      Suppose there were a vote for a new teacher at your child's school. There are two leading candidates: one a woman-hating rapist and the other a demented child molester. There is a third teacher running as well. A sane, morally upright, ethically balanced teacher who truly had your child's best interests at heart, who upheld your beliefs and your traditions. The third teacher is relatively unknown and not likely to win. Would you vote for the woman-hating rapist simply to prevent the "more immediately dangerous" child molester from being elected to the teaching post? Or would you campaign your heart out and yell at the top of your lungs:
      "Wake up people! Do we want a rapist or a child molester teaching our children? Both are scum of the Earth and can produce no good for our children. We do have a better choice. We can vote for the third teacher. All we need to do is fight for him, spread the word and demand a teacher worthy of leading our children. Don't vote for either of the human cancers; vote for someone we'd be happy to have leading our children!"
      What sane parents would not get out and work their butts off to get that third teacher elected so that their children would not be led by criminals and deviants?
      The same thing applies to voting for president. The Founding Fathers did not intend your vote to be a popularity contest. This is not "American Idol;" this is voting for the man who will lead this country. This is also not a chess game, nor did the Founding Fathers intend the vote as such. Voting is about voicing your opinion as to whom is best suited to run your country the way you believe is best for you, your children and your neighbors. When you fail to vote based on your conscience, you are not voting. You are either gambling or playing chess. There is a big difference between those actions and voting as intended by the founders of this country. And if enough people don't soon wake up to that reality, we very well may one day lose our right to vote entirely
      Bob
  • DrReaper, on 06/11/2008, -5/+10If you want to read another funny Hilliary was unable to be president also. Read the constitution again.
    • InRussetShadows, on 06/11/2008, -1/+7You're telling me to read the Constitution when you can't be bothered to read the article you're commenting on? Now that is rich.
    • DrReaper, on 06/11/2008, -0/+6sorry had to run out to work... here you go

      "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows"
      Notice is says he. That is the only place in the constitution that makes gender specific for an elected office.
      • drachemorder, on 06/11/2008, -3/+8Not really. The word "he" doubles as a generic pronoun if the gender is unknown. They didn't have that politically correct "he or she" crap when the Constitution was written; the language was a bit more elegant back then.
        • GodzGurl59, on 06/11/2008, -0/+6Well, actually it meant HE. Back then, when it was written, only land owning MALES (above 21 I think) could even vote. LOL! Frankly, I sometimes agree that women should not be allowed to vote...........mostly liberal women! Only males could hold office at that time, thus if the constitution reads "he" it truly means HE and not the generic he.
      • CBound, on 06/12/2008, -0/+4Remember, we needed a constitutional amendment just to allow women to vote. Wouldn't we need an amendment to allow women to hold Federal office?
  • watnext, on 06/11/2008, -5/+23Obama the boob! Not much experience in just about anything, not able to talk without a teleprompter and a written speech and now not even a legitimate candiditate. Time for the damnocrats to wake up and read some history of former Democrats years ago when they were not socialistically ruining our country. I think there were a few but am not certain of that.
    • DrReaper, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1sorry had to run out to work... here you go

      "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows"
      Notice is says he. That is the only place in the constitution that makes gender specific for an elected office.
  • DrReaper, on 06/11/2008, -10/+12John McCain was born in Panama and Obama can't prove anything... I guess Ron Paul has the most votes for someone that can be president.
    • InRussetShadows, on 06/11/2008, -0/+10The article STATED that McCain is a U.S. citizen, because the Panama Canal zone was the property of the United States at the time; his parents were both U.S. citizens, and the birth occurred on a US military base.

      READ THE ARTICLE!
  • USNavyBlue, on 06/11/2008, -7/+25There is another aspect of Obama’s citizenship in question that NO ONE is reporting on. I wonder why?

    On November 23, 1993, President Clinton signed United States Public Law 103-150, which not only acknowledged the illegal actions committed by the United States in the overthrow of the legitimate government of Hawaii, but also that the Hawaiian people never surrendered their sovereignty.

    The latter is the most important part of United States Public Law 103-150 for it makes it quite clear that the Hawaiian people never legally ceased to be a sovereign separate independent nation. There is no argument that can change that fact.

    United States Public Law 103-150, despite its polite language, is an official admission that the government of the United States illegally occupies the territory of the Hawaiian people.
    In 1999, the United Nations confirmed that the plebiscite vote that led to Hawaii's statehood was in violation of article 73 of the United Nations' charter. The Hawaii statehood vote, under treaty then in effect, was illegal and non-binding.

    Hawaii Declares Independence From All Foreign Powers Samuel Keolamauloa Kaluna, Jr. Regent, Prime Minister P.O. Box 359 96-3148 Pikake Street Pahala-Kau, Kingdom of Hawaii 96777

    In 1999, the United Nations confirmed that the plebiscite vote that led to Hawaii's statehood was in violation of article 73 of the United Nations' charter. The Hawaii statehood vote, under treaty then in effect, was illegal and non-binding.

    In a world where nations are as governed by laws as are men, Hawaii is not and has never legally been a part of the United States. Hawaii was stolen from the Hawaiian people, and they want it back.

    Hawaiians submitted a petition to Congress with 29,000 signatures opposing annexation, and petitions to the Republic of Hawaii (the satellite government imposed upon the native Hawaiians), asking that annexation be put to a public vote. They were never permitted to vote on the issue.
    In all, three separate Treaties of Annexation were sent to congress. All three failed. In the end, Hawaii was annexed by a joint resolution of Congress. But Congress did not have the legal authority to do so. A joint resolution of the U.S. Congress has no legal standing in a foreign country, which is what Hawaii remained, even under the provisional government.

    If one holds that the government of the United States is obliged to obey the laws and the UN charter it freely signed, then the status of the Hawaiian people as a distinct and sovereign nation is beyond debate. This makes the United States in Hawaii, as Gandhi described the British in India, acting as the masters in someone else's home.

    ARTICLE II, Section I. of the Constitution of the United States requires:
    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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

    Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii and thus was not a “natural born Citizen” of the United States to satisfy the constitutional requirement for the U.S. Presidency. His mother was from Wichita, Kansas, but his father was born in Nyangoma-Ko-Kogelo, Siaya District, Kenya. Legally then, Barack Obama is a foreigner, per United States Public Law 103-150. It is revealing that the American Communist party (CPUSA) actively supports Obama. In admitting his birth in Honolulu Barack Obama has, perhaps innocently, claimed to be a natural born Citizen, a false presentation nevertheless. An innocent violation of the U.S. Constitution in such an important matter as that of vying to be President is still a most serious transgression.

    President Bush has sworn to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States in his oath of office.

    Will President Bush issue an executive order disqualifying Barack Obama as a Constitutional Candidate for President of the United States? Or who will sue the Federal election Board and the DNC over this abuse of the constitution? Will the RNC sue? Will the McCain campaign sue? Will President George Bush sue to have a decision from the Supreme Court? Will some group of concerned citizens sue? Or shall the fraud continue without action to correct it until the election?

    • 14justice, on 06/11/2008, -0/+15Interesting research, Navy. Of course, a law is not worth the paper it's written on if it's not enforced. Our masters in Washington, D.C., have a long history of enforcing laws that suit them, and otherwise not. I believe that the politicians of both parties are happy to let the fraud continue and that the courts will say that concerned citizens have no "standing" in such a case.
      • USNavyBlue, on 06/11/2008, -0/+10Agreed.

        As Patrick Henry stated: When the leaders of the government begin not to obey the Constitution and the will of the people, but begin making up there own laws to suite there needs with no regard for the will of the people, it is unfortunate in that the only thing that will preserve the Constitution, freedom and liberty will be the use of down right force. Not the exact quote - but you get the point.

        I believe this is where we stand today.
    • michael4lsu, on 06/11/2008, -1/+11Very interesting! You should email all of this information to WND and Jerome Corsi so that they might investigate it further and write another top headline piece on it that might also get linked to by Drudge Report. Also, you could post it in the WND forums.
      • USNavyBlue, on 06/11/2008, -1/+10Where do I find the email address in WND? Thanks
      • Christinewjc, on 06/11/2008, -1/+8Unfortunately, Drudge seems to have taken a "far left turn" as of late. Just checked his site and he has more negative headlines about McCain than about Obama!

        Boo...hiss
        • USNavyBlue, on 06/11/2008, -0/+7Thanks! Done - I sent the email @ 15:14 hours EST. I hope Farah prints this or something!
    • drachemorder, on 06/11/2008, -1/+11Hmm. Hawaii always votes Democrat anyway. If they want independence, retroactive to their annexation by the U.S., that would have the double benefit of removing a Democratic state from the Union AND disqualifying Barack Obama from the Presidency. Let's get moving, people! This is the opportunity of a lifetime! SECESSION FOR HAWAII!!
      • 14justice, on 06/11/2008, -0/+7If Hawaii gets independence retroactively, shouldn't we be able to bill them for the $5 trillion in capital improvements we've made since 1898?
        • USNavyBlue, on 06/11/2008, -1/+6You got that right! However, Hawaii demanded rate before Christmas of this year that they want Pearl harbor evacuated and all US Military, US State and US Federal governments to be turned over to the Hawaiian Tribal Government - If not than Hawaii would begin charging enormous rates of rent for Pearl Harbor and any other spaces that they deem are occupied.
    • Christinewjc, on 06/11/2008, -1/+10This entire revelation about Hawaii's history makes me realize even more why they hate visiting mainlanders over there.
    • DWposts, on 06/12/2008, -0/+5Hey Blue! I'm willing to write of Hawaii if it means eliminating Obomba! :) But damn . . .we might get McCain. :(
  • InRussetShadows, on 06/11/2008, -7/+33I don't see any evidence that Obama is a legal citizen. Let's see the birth certificate and see it now. Otherwise, he's just Obama the Illegal!
  • twitchr, on 06/11/2008, -22/+4How Typical of Republicans. You know that your John McCain can't beat him, so you resort to to dirty tricks to try to force him out of the race. Dirty Repub tactics, somehow i'm not surprised. Hey, see ya all in November when i'm rubbing it in your face that Obama is president. John McCain is old, out of touch, and even rupublicans don't like him.
    • exgop, on 06/11/2008, -2/+7you must be one of O-blah blah's obamabots working to clear up rumors on the Internet
      • twitchr, on 06/11/2008, -6/+2Do you really think that Obama would be the Democratic nominee if there was any chance he wasn't an American citizen? If so, then you really are as gullible as you seem.
        • IconoclastStill, on 06/11/2008, -3/+4Do you really think the obamessiah is anything but an empty suit ?? "If so, then you really are as gullible as you seem."
    • RSandman, on 06/11/2008, -2/+7Wait...are you serious?
      "How Typical of Republicans."???
      It is PRECISELY the same issue that Democrats first raised, questioning McCain's eligibility!
      "Dirty Repub tactics,"? Only if you consider Democrat tactics to be dirty...
    • DOGODSWILL, on 06/12/2008, -4/+0 You must be a closet MUSLIM also
  • mickeybutane, on 06/11/2008, -6/+14You've just described your Demoncrat senators!!! Old, out of touch, and republicans don't like them!
  • DavidS9, on 06/11/2008, -4/+20The question I have is he a duel citizen with his fathers country? That splits his loyalties way more then any one should be comfortable with.
    • dafunkmonster, on 06/13/2008, -0/+2What about the fact that his cousin, Odinga, has run for president in Kenya, and has attempted to establish Muslim Sharia law in Kenya, and in the process his people have killed and burned the homes of many Christians. The government there now is pro-American, but Odinga has created mass violence in attempting to overthrow it.

      Or the fact that Obama supported his cousin BEFORE the election process started, or the fact that Obama interrupted his campaigning in New Hampshire to speak to Odinga on the phone.

      Or the fact that Obama's father was part of one of the most violent and corrupt governments Kenya has ever had?
  • coffee200am, on 06/11/2008, -3/+27Why does Obama hide his birth certificate?
  • sequoyah101, on 06/11/2008, -4/+12Interesting.

    As I recall though, I had to supply a birth certificate to get a passport so why the need to go to Hawaii and get it released?

    Also, doesn't one have to supply some credentials to register to run for President? You do in local elections.

    I've always thought most politicians were SOBs but never had the proof and now we have one who admits it.
    • mejaredme, on 06/11/2008, -0/+5I find this whole situation very amusing. Very amusing. Perhaps he lost it.
    • Christianptriot, on 06/11/2008, -0/+6you can get a US passport as a naturalized citizen who was NOT born here but became a US citizen by other legal means - and thus not eligible to be President - like Arnold Schwarzeneggar
  • Brumbar, on 06/11/2008, -4/+5Fascinating, yet if SEN Obama were born outside of the United States, even to American Parents, he is not entitled to serve as President of the United States under the rule established under the Constitution and law. This comes from first hand experience as I was born overseas.
    The rub comes in, and this is tenuous in its verification and I heard it second hand. Apparently the second, or so, thing the President signs after taking the Oath of Office is to re-sign the War Powers Act established by Franklin D. Roosevelt at the outset of WWII. This act supersedes the Constitution and permits the President and Congress to govern extra-Constitutionally. Every President since FDR has supposedly signed this document to reinstate the Act upon Inauguration. If that is the case than it would lend credence for why the Government ignores the people, heels to the Special Interests amongst others, and things have developed as we see them today.
  • Christinewjc, on 06/11/2008, -5/+12I think that the media will have a hard time covering up this one!

    Wouldn't that be a hoot if Obama ends up disqualified from running for the presidency either at or before the Dem's convention?

    Look out! Here comes that dynamic duo - the Clintons - back into the spotlight again! Hannity will have to re-start the "Stop Hillary Express!"

    In my book, one is as bad as the other! Either one of them - Obama or Hillary - would ruin our country if [God forbid!] they were ever elected...

    http://talkwisdom.blogspot.com/2008/06/wheres-obam ...
  • wilgeno, on 06/11/2008, -5/+14Lets make a deal, I'll agree that McCain isn't a natural born citizen if you agree Obama isn't.

    Then we can run new primaries for both parties and get real Presidential quality candidates.

    Vote Conservative
    http://www.wilgeno.com
  • Brumbar, on 06/11/2008, -4/+9Forgot to mention that now it becomes more clear why Hilary only suspended her campaign. In Politics, it is a long time from here to Election Day. Maybe she knows of, or figures something that we don't, and is in position to replace him at some point.
    • farmerjohn48pan, on 06/11/2008, -0/+2Good point, but I think it might have more to do with being able to continue taking campaign contributions so she can recoup some of the money she had to donate to her campaign. Can't do that if she formally ends it.
  • Wordsmytheist, on 06/11/2008, -3/+6This would be sweet justice considering his (alleged) tactics in Chicago where he would have his opponents disqualified from contention because of technicalities in their candidacy registrations
  • JekJob, on 06/11/2008, -10/+1Um, since when have the Republicans cared about the Constitution?

    They need to do some real research instead of reporting on "rumors."
  • karishore, on 06/11/2008, -4/+8SO HOW DO WE DEMAND TO SEE HIS BIRTH CIRTIFICATE?
  • RSandman, on 06/11/2008, -5/+8Strange to me that McCain is even in question...

    Those who have served either in the military or in any government position overseas know well that all babies born to a U.S. citizen - even if one parent is not - while assigned to a US military base, facility, or embassy - EVEN IF the hospital is 'local' and is not "on" the actual base - are considered to have been born on U.S. sovereign "soil."
    The child is considered a natural born U.S. citizen, though (as one would expect) the paperwork must be completed to document this. So WHY will they NOT release his Birth Certificate?

    Also, if one parent is a citizen of the foreign country where the birth takes place, the baby is eligible to be assigned "dual citizenship" and may have a passport from each country.
    _______________________

    Obama, I understand, is reported to have been born "in Hawaii" Aug 4, 1961. This would be a couple of years after Hawaii was "declared" by legislative fiat to be annexed as a state (not the Constitutional process used by other territories).
    So, as much as I would love to disqualify that young Senate intern from Illinois, I can't imagine this line of speculation going very far,
    UNLESS there is reason his birth certificate has not been released...

    * Perhaps he was actually born in '59 and was in school grades in the years stated because he was 'held back' a couple of years riding the 'short bus' in Indonesia? Then his 'real' birthdate would be prior to the illegal annexation of Hawaii...

    * Perhaps Hillary intends to submit another Senate resolution recognizing the same facts of Hawaii's tribal independence that her husband Bill signed into effect, passed by Congress in '93, that in effect Obama is a native Hawaiian/Kenyan rather than a U.S. citizen?

    * Speaking of Kenya...perhaps Obama was actually born in Kenya, then taken to Hawaii and a birth certificate applied-for...resulting in his dual-Kenyan-citizenship claims?

    * Perhaps he was born in-transit and 'reported' as born in Hawaii upon the mother being taken to the hospital on arrival?

    * Perhaps the identity of the father was...in question?

    * Perhaps his birth certificate contains another name than Barack Hussein Obama? Perhaps there's an Abdul or a Muhammad in there, or perhaps it's actually Benny Hill Obama and he changed it later to Hussein?
    _______________________

    What has been nearly inexplicable is the reluctance of the McCain campaign to point out the blatant ridiculousness of Obama running as if he were qualified in any way for the Presidency, the silliness of most of Obama's failed Marxist ideology, and the confused spinning Obama gets into any time he has to actually answer a question without having a teleprompter or flash-card from which to read. So, while we're having fun...
    * Perhaps BHO is just his "stage name" - and he's actually John McCain's love-child?
    http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=1299

    hehe...;)
    • watnext, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3Then again, from Hank Williams SR's. song, I'll never get out of this world alive, "And I was doing fine untill a lawyer came along and said that I was never born, I was only hatched".

      If he was hatched it wasn't from the Bird of Paradise. Those noisy seagulls must have been busy.
  • IconoclastStill, on 06/11/2008, -4/+10This reminds me of pierre kerry's reluctance to release his military records which would have disproved the Swift Boat charges if they were, indeed, untrue.
  • lodibug3, on 06/11/2008, -2/+4so is this where they're headed??? ..."Others say the issue isn't quite that simple, and the matter could be resolved fully only by a constitutional amendment or a U.S. Supreme Court ruling" There is always the proverbial constitutional amendment. .
  • m2garand, on 06/11/2008, -3/+6I would like to say that I would be happy if Obama was disqualified but that would just mean McCain or Hillary would be the next President. Hardly anything to celebrate.

    The people that really run this country, mainly people that control the Federal Reserve System would still be in power. The oligarchs that rule over the US always make sure all their bases are covered. To quote Rothschild "It doesn't matter what puppet is put on the thrown as long as I can print the money".
  • JupiterRising, on 06/11/2008, -9/+6I find it ironic that people are questioning Obama's citizenship status when John McCain is actually the one who isn't a natural-born citizen. Since both his parents were American citizens McCain obtained his citizenship by descent which “is not embodied in the U.S. Constitution, but such citizenship is granted through statute.” This differs from a “natural-born citizen” “a rule of common law under which the place of a person’s birth determines citizenship. In addition to common law, this principle is embodied in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the various U.S. citizenship and nationality statutes.”

    The Panama Canal Zone was not U.S. territory. It was the “Panama Canal Zone”, and not US owned territory. In fact the US paid an annual fee to Panama. One does not pay to rent what is theirs. The USA had LEASE rights not territory rights.

    Sorry, but McCain is naturalized not natural-born.



    From the State Department website:

    7 FAM 1116.1-4 Not Included in the Meaning of “In the United States”

    c. Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth.
    • karishore, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1sorry again pal; born on US military site classifies as US territory... not matter where on earth you are. I know way t many "kids" born all over the world on military bases.... one, my best friend; born in Germany on a US military base, father from Minnesota; mother from UK... When she turned 18 (lives here in US) she had to select a finality of citizenship. It would be US; UK or Germany. Her documents show her as a "natural born" citizen of the United States of America. Of course, she chose USA.
  • bullcutter, on 06/12/2008, -7/+7uh, sorry to rain on your parade of illogicality, but if Obama were a non-citizen, don't you think that the possibility that this issue would be raised had occurred in that good-sized noggin of his at one point or another across the last 2 years???
  • mikesbaker, on 06/12/2008, -7/+7Can we get a source for this that isn't a right wing blog. i mean i am no obama fan but come on this is *****.
  • Teribssn, on 06/12/2008, -7/+4Typical Fascist Liberal!
    • Gemfinder, on 06/13/2008, -0/+1BAH-HAHAHAHAHAHA...
      Oh, wait. You were serious?
  • nblsavage, on 06/12/2008, -7/+7Man, I thought you wingnuts were crazy but this is off the scale.
  • SydBloom, on 06/12/2008, -5/+8This is easy. As a democrat as democrats exist today he has renounced his citizenship. No one could maintain a democrat party affiliation and still be an American as they exist now. He is a Stalinist America hater Obamanation. Next question.
  • DOGODSWILL, on 06/12/2008, -6/+4 So what new with our LIBERAL government , they don't care what is right as long as they are getting what they want.They don't care about GODS laws , so why does anyone think they care about our CONSTITUTION , unless they can bend it to suit their agenda. The I R S was never ratified either , remember. As I have been saying , the LIBERALS have and are doing everything they can to pull this AMERICA as far away from CHRISTIAN morals as they possible can.Now they are trying to get a MUSLIM elected as president regardless of the price AMERICA will have to pay , because they know HE has no regard for CHRISTIAN MORALS.
  • bill66, on 06/12/2008, -5/+7Barack Obama has written two books that reveal much about him and his core values. The books are “DREAMS OF MY FATHER” and “AUDACITY OF HOPE”.
    The following quotes are taken from DREAMS OF MY FATHER

    1) “I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.”
    2) “I found solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother’s race.”
    3) “There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.”
    4) “It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.”
    5) “I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn’t speak to my own. It was into my father’s image, the black man, son of Africa, that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, Dubois and Mandela.”

    And from AUDACITY OF HOPE…Is this his core value?

    1) “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”




  • JupiterRising, on 06/12/2008, -8/+3Wow bill66, you're a ***** retard zombie shill. I didn't think anyone actually read chain letters anymore. You must still be using AOL.

    First off EVERYTHING you quote is out of context, many of the them are edited, and one wasn't even written by Obama but by someone reviewing Obama's book. You can't put quotes around words and credit them to someone if you edit them, but I don't blame you personally because I'm sure you just copy/pasted and you're just too stupid to do your own research. If you actually read the book you would know that nothing you quoted was racist or hateful in context, but I don't expect that because you're obviously a gullible asshat.

    Maybe you should focus on McCain's use of the word "tarbaby" and how he "hates gooks instead..
    • spinningplates2, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1Hey, what is wrong with AOL? Why be prejudice?
    • Overgrown, on 06/16/2008, -0/+0white folks greed runs a world in need!
  • bioya1, on 06/12/2008, -4/+6Aside from where he was or wasn't born, Obama is mentally unfit to be president. Socialism has made no country great. Its a failed ideology that ensures that all citizens suck on the government tit. The only freedom Obama aspires to is the freedom of government to grow.
    • Ramble, on 06/12/2008, -4/+4Most of Europe is socialist and considering they have the biggest economy in the world I'm led to think your statement is *****.

      Also consider Soviet Russia. While they were not a very good socialist state (in terms of socialism) you were scared of these guys for 30-40 years.
    • zephyear, on 06/12/2008, -3/+2perhaps you should look at

      australia
      new zealand
      most european countries
    • lydecker, on 06/13/2008, -1/+1declaring the black guy mentally unfit to be president because he doesn't like his decisions...

      I saw this 24 episode. I think he won.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 60 of 60 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.