fact – Natural-Born Citizenship requires both of your parents to be citizens
fact – Natural-Born Citizenship also requires you to be born within the US

alot of people also say that McCain is not Natural-Born…

question – did McCain’s birth certificate look anything like Obama’s COLB?
answer – of course not, a BC and a COLB are 2 different documents

LAW OF NATIONS
Book1, Chapter 19

“The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.”
– why is there an “S” at the end of “PARENTS”?
“I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”
– like duh people…

We just tried the Somali pirates based on the Law of Nations and we’ve derived our political definitions from that book since 1758. The Constitution was written in 1776, so duh again.

Good move by the obots. Very, very clever.

The rule may have been set up this way (originally) to prevent someone loyal to Britain, which was probably a very valid concern at that time in history, from taking control of our newly-formed (vulnerable) country.
You always have to look at the “why” of something and so that is my best guess for the reason they made this rule.
I’ll admit that is just plain common sense that if you are born somewhere (IE your parents and other family members live in the country/have strong ties to it, you would more naturally feel a pat of it).

I would argue, however, that this rule will not keep out a terrorist who is intent on ruining our country.
If a group of people are conspiring against our country, they will gladly birth a child on this soil. So this is why I don’t really agree with the rule.

When I say “group”, I don’t necessarily refer only to Islamic terrorists. There are MANY groups that can be tyrants and terrorists and where they are from is not the issue. Their evil intentions WOULD be the issue.

Personal opinion? I don’t trust Bill Clinton. I don’t trust very many democrats, period, but that’s one president that really scared the hell out of me.
My gut instinct tells me that President Obama has more integrity than Bill Clinton had.
I’m not saying that we won’t suffer under taxes (or something else) and that Obama can do no wrong but I don’t think he’ll be any worse than any other democratic president we’ve ever had.
And I’m certainly not afraid that he’s the antichrist, lol!

Now, if he tries to create a North American Union or insists that we Texans make our private land owners (I HATE imminent domain) give up their property for a stupid Transcontinental Corridor, (we do need to trade more with Mexico and get them on their feet financially but we only need to widen the existing roads) then I will be the first one in line to try to impeach him. THIS is what I call unAmerican!

O’ I’m sorry, the “PATRIOT ACT II” and the Bush admin using the US Constitution as toilet paper stops me from giving a crap.

Who cares if Obama was boring in Hawaii, India, Kenya or Pot-hole-istan?
He was obviously a good enough liar to win the White House, let the Americans get what they voted for.

Now if he were a Republican, democrats would be suing in every court house in the United States to get him to produce his official birth certificate! This is pathetic, I want the constitution to prevail, not the win at any cost democrats whose ends jutify any and all means necessary to win!

The bigger hypocracy is that he could not work for himself if he had to provide the information asked on the application he wants people to fill out.

Actually, that does not seem to be the case legally. Under the law at the time Obama was born, a U.S. citizen mother who was married to a non-citizen and gave birth outside the U.S. would only transfer American citizenship to her child if she had lived in the United States for a total of ten years, and five of those years had to be after the age of 14. Since Obama’s mother was 18 when he was born, she was too young to transfer citizenship to him IF he was born out of the country with a non-citizen father.

I agree–Keyes is an attention hound–but it has no relevance to the argument at hand, which is: was Obama born in the U.S.? A Certificate of Live Birth (COLB), which is what Obama posted online, is NOT the same as the long-form birth certificate, which would list the location of birth, attending doctor, etc., which are not on the COLB short form. Any parent can request a COLB, certifying that a birth took place, without anything more than a verbal attestation that a child exists. It does not prove where he was born.

This question would be easily settled if Obama would simply produce his original, long-form birth certificate. However, he has repeatedly refused to do this. The logical question is, why, if he has nothing to hide? And why has he refused to release his records from college? Do they list him as a foreign student? Why have them sealed, if there is nothing to hide?

If an American has a baby and that mother had not given up her citizenship, the baby is a U.S. CITIZEN. No matter where the child was born. If this was the case, children of military personal overseas, would not be American citizens. including John McCain.

———————————————————————–
Intelligent Answer:
Because there is no natural-born citizen requirement to be a senator. The Presidency is the only office that has the natural-born citizen requirement.

Have any of you ever read the constitution or do you simply post that which you WISH to be true?

And I am sure that you have the materials to prove the moon landings were faked, and that Elvis is really still alive.

I recently ordered a copy of my Birth Certificate from the state I was born in, and guess what? The copy I received was printed on paper similar to material that you see in the pictures of Obama’s COLB – and guess what else? Mine was labeled as a “certificate of live birth”.

Does that mean that I am possibly a foreign born person? No, it means that when you order a reprint of your birth certificate you don’t actually get the real certificate, you get whatever the state sends out since (most) states are required to keep the physical records on-hand or if they have been electronically archived, you get it on one of the new style forms.

1.)Allegedly, Obama was born in Kenya, where his given name was “Barack Hussein Mohammed Obama”

2.)Allegedly, no long form original birth record exists in Hawaii. The “original record”, (i.e., the “long form”) as it was executed in many States back in 1961, was simply a little index card, or a 5” X 7” form, that was generally signed off on by a doctor, or a nurse, or a midwife, or whoever actually witnessed the birth. The so-called long form, if it exists, is the Holy Grail sought after in this particular exercise.

3.)As this theory goes, Obama’s mom falsely “registered” his birth in Hawaii, using the so-called “short form by declaration” method (look it up) which was legal in Hawaii thru 1972, and could be legally executed based on only the testimony of the parent, with no evidence or doctor’s statement or hospital record or witnesses.

4.)A legal birth certificate can be produced at any time from the short-form database record, and is generally not questioned. However, if Obama’s real birth certificate exists in Kenya, and if there is no long form on record in Hawaii, then the Supreme Court faces a Constitutional nightmare.

The above points, 1-4, exist as the latest theory regarding the Obama birth certificate issue. The “short-form by declaration” conspiracy isn’t much of a conspiracy, and if true, I am disappointed. I was really hoping for an elaborate and entertaining conspiracy. If Obama was born in Kenya, and if his mom simply traveled back to Hawaii with him shortly thereafter, and falsely declared his birth, (including the newspaper announcement) then she alone broke the law, without the assistance of any co-conspirators.

Too simple…

. . .

Where this may end up – -

The Electoral College meets (in each of the 50 States) on December 15.

According to the 20th Amendment, the Electors CLEARLY have legal standing to question the qualifications of the “Presumptive-President-Elect” (Obama is not really the President-Elect until after the Electoral College votes on 15-DEC-2008)

The 20th Amendment identifies the Electoral College as the place & time to challenge a candidate’s credentials…(Age and Citizenship)

An awful lot can happen between now and 15-December-2008

And, it really is that simple… If Obama was born in Kenya, then he is not eligible to hold the office of President of the United States of America (See Article II, Clause V of the Constitution )

. . .

Simply stated, this is a neat little conspiracy theory, as it has evolved, that seems to fit all known facts:

1.)Obama’s Kenya Grandmom has testified that Obama was born in Kenya;

2.)The Kenyan government will not admit if there is or is not an Obama birth record on file in Kenya, and they have denied all access to any Kenya government records relating to Obama;

3.)The long form vault record in Hawaii, if it exists, has allegedly not been examined, and Obama has refused to allow it to be examined.

I hope that the 9 Old Men on the Supreme Court can be made to understand that there are three types of documents or birth certificate records:

a.)The so-called birth certificate, which we have all seen on the Internet, and which may be created at any time from the data contained in either the long form physical record or the short form database record;

b.)The short form record could easily be bogus, in the scenario illustrated in the opening of my post, points 1-4;

c.)The long form physical record is harder to fake, and no one has seen that record.

These are the facts, and the facts fit the so-called “conspiracy theory”. The Electors have the right to challenge Obama on three points: (1.)Does a Kenyan birth record exist? (2.)Does a Hawaii long form original vault record exist? (3.)Forensics – - The Justice Department could simply send a forensic team to look at the original vault record, in order to at least verify the signatures and to verify that the ink and paper are the same age and type as the ink and paper on other sequential original records before and after Obama’s 1961 vault record original.

I have a little different perspective on this than most of you. I am a 59 year old American engineer. I have not been back to the USA since 2002. I live and work in Bangkok, Thailand. There is a place on Khao San Road, here in Bangkok, where I can have any raised impression seal made for about $10-USD and any rubber stamp made for about $2-USD. The paper that you see on FactCheck and Obama’s web site (The laser print job) is a recently produced certificate of life birth. (“COLB”) It was printed on a common style 25 pound bond 8.5” X 11” security paper known as “Check Protect, Basket Weave Pattern, Green”. I have an entire ream of it at the office. We use that paper to print machinery inspection certificates. Anyone can buy that paper, and it is the most common paper still in use by State agencies. My graphic artists and the guys on Khao San Road could whip out a beautiful COLB in under 48 hours, and you would never detect the difference.

Sadly, those are the facts.

Oh may where to start with the nonsense you’ve posted.

Obama has not produced a certificate of natural birth.

John has already posted this link, but I’ll do it again:

http://tinyurl.com/5vrus3

Barack Obama has produced a certified record from the State of Hawaii certifying his birth in that state on August 4, 1961. It’s the same document you would get from your state’s Dep. of Vital Records if you asked them for a record of your birth. Assuming you are an American citizen, of course.

if his mother married his stepfather, Obama would’ve been stripped of his citizenship as per the attendance of and standing of his legal father in Indonesia. He himself has also stated that he attended school in Indonesia, however during this period of time in Indonesia, only citizens of Indonesia could attend school.

Parents cannot legally strip their children of their American citizenship, so that’s a phony argument.

Associate Justice Soutre of the US Supreme court has issued a Writ of Certiorari by default as a result of reasonable ground to defend The Constitution. Obama has until Dec. 1st to respond with proof. He has not done so yet. In the event that he is unable to produce the documents in question, they will issue an order to unseal all his records and examine it themselves.

Since you’re probably not a lawyer, you probably don’t know this, but you got the substance of what is pending before SCOTUS entirely wrong.

After Philip Berg’s frivilous lawsuit against Obama was dismissed by a Federal District Court Judge in Pennsylvania, he filed an immediate appeal and request for an injunction to stop the election with the Supreme Court. Justice David Souter, who is the Supreme Court Justice in charge of the Third Circuit which includes Pennsylvania, denied the injunction.

An appeal to the Supreme Court is initiated by asking for what is called a Writ of Certiorari. Berg asked for this because he is appealing the case and the opposing parties, including Obama, have until December 1st to file briefs with the Supreme Court explaining why it shouldn’t take the appeal, if they choose to since there is no requirement under the Rules of the Supreme Court of the United States that they do so. Most importantly, Justice Souter did not issue an order requiring them to file any response at all and most certainly did not issue an order requiring Obama to produce his birth certificate since teh Supreme Court doesn’t consider appeals based on evidence, only appeals based on the law..

I would also note that Berg filed his appeal in the wrong Court. Since his case was dismissed by a Federal District Court Judge, his right of appeal was to the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, not the Supreme Court.