Obama’s Birth Certificate – CHANGE you can believe in.

[Sean of the Thread]

I'm fairly certain that a Prez candidate has to be a U.S. Citizen... whoops.

http://www.obamacrimes.com/

# his Illinois ARC registration
# Forensic analysis of Obama birth certificate
# Obama school record lists him as Indonesian citizen
# Soetoro divorce docket
# Philip J. Berg, Esq. Files Federal Lawsuit Requesting Obama Be Removed as a Candidate as he does not meet the Qualifications for President

Obama failed to list the name "Barry Soetoro" on his Illinois ARDC (Attorney's Registration and Disciplinary Record) , which was signed under oath with a penalty of perjury. See complete screen print here.

OBAMA failed to list his other names on his Illinois ARDC registration

[Daniel]

Obama was born in Hawaii, thus automatically an American citizen

[CrystalTears]

And yet McCain was born in Panama.

[Sean of the Thread]

Obama was born in Hawaii, thus automatically an American citizen

Or was he?

Forged birth certificate. /shrug


And then there is the issue of:

The docket is taken directly from:

Family Court (O`ahu First Circuit) Phone Number
Ka`ahumanu Hale
777 Punchbowl Street
Honolulu Hi 96813 - 5093 .

Online access to case information is provided by the State of Hawai`i Judiciary (Judiciary)

The Docket shows when Stanley Ann Soetoro filed for divorce against Lolo Soetoro. The marriage is important because bases on the laws at the time, it affects Obama's citizenship and likely caused him to be an Indonesian citizen and no longer an American citizen. The divorce decree proves that the marriage existed.

[Ashliana]

Wow. Well, at least your avatar is straight-forward about the obvious intake of alcohol before posting this.

[Sean of the Thread]

hilip J. Berg, Esquire stated in his lawsuit that Senator Obama:

1. Is not a natural-born citizen; and/or

2. Lost his citizenship when he was adopted in Indonesia; and/or

3. Has dual loyalties because of his citizenship with Kenya and Indonesia.

Berg stated: “I filed this action at this time to avoid the obvious problems that will occur when the Republican Party raises these issues after Obama is nominated.

There have been numerous questions raised about Obama’s background with no satisfactory answers. The questions that I have addressed include, but are not limited to:

1. Where was Obama born? Hawaii; an island off of Hawaii; Kenya; Canada; or ?

2. Was he a citizen of Kenya, Indonesia and/or Canada?

3. What was the early childhood of Obama in Hawaii; in Kenya; in Indonesia when he was adopted; and later, back to Hawaii?

4. An explanation as to the various names utilized by Obama that include: Barack Hussein Obama; Barry Soetoro; Barry Obama; Barack Dunham; and Barry Dunham.

5. Illinois Bar Application – Obama fails to acknowledge use of names other than Barack Hussein Obama, a blatant lie.

[Jorddyn]

Forged birth certificate.
Space aliens.

Just as likely.


The Docket shows when Stanley Ann Soetoro filed for divorce against Lolo Soetoro. The marriage is important because bases on the laws at the time, it affects Obama's citizenship and likely caused him to be an Indonesian citizen and no longer an American citizen. The divorce decree proves that the marriage existed.

And yet they didn't link to, or provide wording of, said law that apparently stripped his citizenship.

[NocturnalRob]

Simpsons did it!!

[Sean of the Thread]

Hmm.

http://www.obamacrimes.com/index.php/component/content/article/1-main/3-obama-school-record-lists-him-as-indonesian-citizen

[Ilvane]

And yet McCain was born in Panama.

On a US military installation, to two American citizens. I believe(though someone else who knows better can clarify), that military bases are considered US soil.

Angela

[Jorddyn]

We're taking a piece of paper filled out in 1968 (presumably) as gospel? Well, at least we can quit having the "Where was he born?" debate.

I'd still rather see the law that strips his US citizenship because he's an Indonesian citizen, and the document proving that he's an Indonesian citizen. I know I can't prove I'm an American citizen by producing the paperwork from my first day of kindergarten.

[Sean of the Thread]

Hey I'm just playing advocate here and putting this out there. It will be up for a judge to decide.

Unlike most conspiracy shit I've seen out there about all the candidates this one seems to have the most merit.

[Jorddyn]

Unlike most conspiracy shit I've seen out there about all the candidates this one seems to have the most merit.

Seems like regular old drivel to me.

[Sean of the Thread]

Legitimate drivel with an actual case filed.

/shrug

Just saying.

[TheEschaton]

Well, by that standard, the Devil has had suit filed against him in Federal Court, in an attempt to hold him liable for mankind's sins.

[Daniel]

The only way to lose your citizenship is if you renounce it.

[Sean of the Thread]

Or never had it to begin with? Or if your new guardian via divorce renounces it for you and reverts to Indonesia.. or was he really born there?

I don't know shit about this I'm just curious to see what's going on. There are some good points being made and they're actually factual.

I liked Obama or whatever his name is this month but he's been scaring me lately. He can barely speak without a teleprompter or coaching about simple questions concerning Iraq even.

Biden.. ugh.

Idk I was leaning towards Obama for awhile because I'm rather moderate etc... but lately I think I've made up my mind unless McCain picks Ben Stiller for VP.

IF either of them pick Kyle Richard Gass from Ten D as VP they win my vote. (also born in 1961 hmmmmmmmm)

[Parkbandit]

The only way to lose your citizenship is if you renounce it.

Incorrect.

[CrystalTears]

Idk I was leaning towards Obama for awhile because I'm rather moderate etc... but lately I think I've made up my mind unless McCain picks Ben Stiller for VP.

I don't know, that would kinda cinch it for me. :D

[Sean of the Thread]

Obama did piss me off a tad today when he announced he will now seek Florida's delegates in total.... balls .. I'll give him that.

[Daniel]

Incorrect.

http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_778.html

Feel free to pursue the following website and show me where I am wrong.

[Sean of the Thread]

I'm not certain about all of that and I don't feel like reading it right now but it's all moot if his citizenship wasn't legit or forged to begin with.

He's taking a dive right now on his own. Shit is getting interesting at least.

[Khariz]

http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_778.html

Feel free to pursue the following website and show me where I am wrong.

Daniel...the site shows how you are wrong lol. You said the ONLY way to lose citizen ship is by renouncing it:

obtaining naturalization in a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (1) INA);

taking an oath, affirmation or other formal declaration to a foreign state or its political subdivisions (Sec. 349 (a) (2) INA);

entering or serving in the armed forces of a foreign state engaged in hostilities against the U.S. or serving as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer in the armed forces of a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (3) INA);

accepting employment with a foreign government if (a) one has the nationality of that foreign state or (b) an oath or declaration of allegiance is required in accepting the position (Sec. 349 (a) (4) INA);

formally renouncing U.S. citizenship before a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer outside the United States (sec. 349 (a) (5) INA);

formally renouncing U.S. citizenship within the U.S. (but only under strict, narrow statutory conditions) (Sec. 349 (a) (6) INA);

conviction for an act of treason (Sec. 349 (a) (7) INA).

The bolded are ways you lose citizenship without renouncing it.

[Sean]

With the exception of committing treason and semantics aside aren't you essentially renouncing your citizen by willingly taking part in any of the activities?

[Khariz]

With the exception of committing treason and semantics aside aren't you essentially renouncing your citizen by willingly taking part in any of the activities?

Okay, fine, I accept semantics. Shall I edit my post and bold only the treason one? Point was he was wrong, and proved himself wrong, hehe.

[Daniel]

Daniel...the site shows how you are wrong lol. You said the ONLY way to lose citizen ship is by renouncing it:

obtaining naturalization in a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (1) INA);

taking an oath, affirmation or other formal declaration to a foreign state or its political subdivisions (Sec. 349 (a) (2) INA);

entering or serving in the armed forces of a foreign state engaged in hostilities against the U.S. or serving as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer in the armed forces of a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (3) INA);

accepting employment with a foreign government if (a) one has the nationality of that foreign state or (b) an oath or declaration of allegiance is required in accepting the position (Sec. 349 (a) (4) INA);

formally renouncing U.S. citizenship before a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer outside the United States (sec. 349 (a) (5) INA);

formally renouncing U.S. citizenship within the U.S. (but only under strict, narrow statutory conditions) (Sec. 349 (a) (6) INA);

conviction for an act of treason (Sec. 349 (a) (7) INA).

The bolded are ways you lose citizenship without renouncing it.


I take it you didn't read the preface to this list:


states that U.S. citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain specified acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Briefly stated, these acts include:

Emphasis US Department of State.

Further on:
If the answer to the question regarding intent to relinquish citizenship is yes , the person concerned will be asked to complete a questionnaire to ascertain his or her intent toward U.S. citizenship. When the questionnaire is completed and the voluntary relinquishment statement is signed by the expatriate, the consular officer will proceed to prepare a certificate of loss of nationality. The certificate will be forwarded to the Department of State for consideration and, if appropriate, approval.

An individual who has performed any of the acts made potentially expatriating by statute who wishes to lose U.S. citizenship may do so by affirming in writing to a U.S. consular officer that the act was performed with an intent to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Of course, a person always has the option of seeking to formally renounce U.S. citizenship abroad in accordance with Section 349 (a) (5) INA.

[Sean of the Thread]

I'd also like to add Obama's wife is pretty annoying to me for some reason.

Poor guy.

[Mabus]

Daniel...the site shows how you are wrong
Don't confuse him with the facts!

[Daniel]

Don't confuse him with the facts!

You gonna sit here and claim I edited my post again?

[Mabus]

You gonna sit here and claim I edited my post again?
I actually checked to see if you had edited your post to remove the word "only", knowing it had been fully quoted by someone else.

If me watching keeps you from doing it again, great. If not then you will be caught, again.

[Daniel]

Okay, fine, I accept semantics. Shall I edit my post and bold only the treason one? Point was he was wrong, and proved himself wrong, hehe.

You would still have to prove that the intention of your actions was to relinquish your citizenship. Obviously, that's a tough sell against for treason, but I bet you could make the case in some circumstances. Such as, in the case of providing material support to a family member who commits a treasonous act.

P.s. I was looking up the formal definition of treason and I found this in the constitution:


The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

WTF is corruption of blood?

[Daniel]

I actually checked to see if you had edited your post to remove the word "only", knowing it had been fully quoted by someone else.

If me watching keeps you from doing it again, great. If not then you will be caught, again.

Rofl.

Glad you're keeping the bullshit vigil alive.

[thefarmer]

Maybe something to do with relatives/family members? Fines and seizures can't be taken from children?

[Daniel]

You would still have to prove that the intention of your actions was to relinquish your citizenship. Obviously, that's a tough sell against for treason, but I bet you could make the case in some circumstances. Such as, in the case of providing material support to a family member who commits a treasonous act.

P.s. I was looking up the formal definition of treason and I found this in the constitution:



WTF is corruption of blood?



Several cases growing out of World War II presented an issue analogous to that of adherence and aid to an enemy, where petitioners of dual nationality (citizens of the United States by place of birth, and of the enemy nation by birth to nationals of that country) sought declarations that their service in the enemy's army in wartime under conscription was not an act of expatriation. In Knauer v. United States (1946) — with concern made manifest by its own reexamination of the full record — the Supreme Court sustained revocation of a decree of naturalization because it had been obtained by fraud; the record, the Court found, clearly sustained the finding that when petitioner foreswore allegiance to the German Reich he swore falsely. Rutledge, J., dissented, joined by Murphy, J. A native-born person, Rutledge argued, might lose his citizenship only for conviction of treason or other felony, with all the safeguards surrounding a determination that the requisite offense had been committed (after, for example, a "rigidly safeguarded trial for treason"); nothing in the Constitution or our traditions, he felt, warranted subjecting a naturalized person to any greater range of hazard of losing citizenship.12 Knauer might seem to forecast stiff handling of the later expatriation cases. But to the contrary the decisions gave full benefit of the doubt to those native-born citizens who, having been lawfully present in enemy countries at the outbreak of war, found themselves conscripted into enemy military service on the basis of their dual nationality. In Nishikawa v. Duties (1958) the Supreme Court held that — contrary to the ordinary rule that duress is a matter of affirmative defense — the government had the burden of proving by clear, convincing and unequivocal evidence that an apparent act of expatriation was voluntary; unless voluntariness were put in issue, it would be assumed, but when petitioner showed that he was inducted under a conscription law of the country of his dual nationality, and claimed that the induction was against his will, the government must sustain its burden of proof.13 The strong preponderance of lower federal court decisions before Nishikawa had already in effect come to the same result. Most of these decisions did not explicitly invoke the treason clause or cases, though at least one court intimated that the availability of the treason charge was a further reason why an expansive interpretation should not be given to the statutory provisions for expatriation.14 The prevailing emphasis of the cases was, rather, on the uniquely basic status which citizenship is, and on the doctrine established in statute and apparently of constitutional force, that no conduct may result in expatriation unless it be voluntary.

http://www.constitution.org/cmt/jwh/jwh_treason_6.htm

You're in law school. So, I hope I don't have to spell out the implications for this. However, the basic premise is that an act of reason, by definition, has to a voluntary act undertaken. Therefore, even under the semantic argument presented earlier, a person can not lose his citizenship unless he either verbally renounces his citizenship or commits an act that could be construed as the same.

[Parkbandit]

With the exception of committing treason and semantics aside aren't you essentially renouncing your citizen by willingly taking part in any of the activities?


So your assumption is that anyone who commits treason is doing so to renounce their citizenship?

Most treason cases I've read about are usually about money and or power.

[Daniel]

So your assumption is that anyone who commits treason is doing so to renounce their citizenship?

Most treason cases I've read about are usually about money and or power.

Thanks for conceeding the point.

[Khariz]

OKay Daniel...

I'll concede that the only way to LOSE one's citizenship, when one validly has it, is by some intentional act.

However, if you are not a U.S. Citizen ab initio, the government isn't taking anything away from you by correcting your status to non-citizen.

That said...I'm sure that, even if in the off chance that this conspiracy theory is correct, that we would be estopped from claiming that Obama isn't a citizen. Even if he is one by accident, there's no way anyone in their right mind is going to be like "Sorry, we know you've lived here and thought you were an American for most of your life, but eh, you aren't so fuck off".

This suit isn't going anywhere. It's still amusing to ponder though.

[Parkbandit]

http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_778.html

Feel free to pursue the following website and show me where I am wrong.

Here's another site which is easier for you to read. Especially pay attention to the first sentence, I'll bold it to show that there isn't ONLY one way to lose your citizenship, as you originally claimed:



There are several reasons why a naturalized US citizen could lose his or her US citizenship. We feel it’s important to summarize these reasons. As a naturalized citizen, you went to all the trouble to get your US citizenship in the first place. We’d hate to see you lose it merely because you did something wrong you did not know about.

Involuntarily Losing Your US Citizenship (Denaturalization)

Both the State Department and the USCIS have specfic laws and regulations they must follow in determining whether someone’s US citizenship should be taken away.

1. Convicted For An Act Of Treason Against The United States

Treason is a serious crime, and the Constitution defines the requirements for convicting someone of treason. Treason is waging a violent war against the United States in cooperation with a foreign country or any organized group. It includes assisting or aiding any foreign country or organization in taking over or destroying this country including abolishing the Constitution. Treason also consists of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the US government or of betraying our government into the hands of a foreign power. If you are caught and convicted of treason, you can pretty much count on losing your US citizenship as well as serving lots of jail time.

2. Holding A Policy Level Position In A Foreign Country

If you become an elected official or hold a policy-level position (like an ambassador, cabinet minister, or any high level administrative position where you make government policy) in your native country or a foreign country, you run the risk of losing your US citizenship. On the other hand, if you hold a non-policy level job like working in your native country’s embassy or working for your native country’s government in an advisory or purely administrative capacity, you run little risk of jeopardizing your US citizenship. For further information, see the State Department’s circular: ADVICE ABOUT POSSIBLE LOSS OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND SEEKING PUBLIC OFFICE IN A FOREIGN STATE.

3. Serving In Your Native Country’s Armed Forces If That Country Is Engaged In Hostilities Or At War With The United States

If your native country is engaged in hostile actions or is at war with America you need to be extremely careful. The US government will attempt to take away your US citizenship if they find out you are either aiding or serving in your native country’s armed forces in any capacity. Alternatively, the US government could try to nail you with a treason conviction and then strip you of your US citizenship.

4. Serving In Your Native Country’s Armed Forces As An Officer Or A Non-Commissioned Officer

If your native country is not at war with or engaged in hostilities towards the US, then serving in your native country’s armed forces is OK as long as you are not an officer or non-commissioned officer (usually the rank of sergeant or above). Serving as a civilian worker in your native country’s armed forces, or serving as an enlisted man or women are generally acceptable. For further information, see the State Department’s circular: ADVICE ABOUT POSSIBLE LOSS OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND FOREIGN MILITARY SERVICE.

The State Department has set several administrative guidelines for dual citizens to follow in order to avoid losing their US citizenship ( ADVICE ABOUT POSSIBLE LOSS OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND DUAL NATIONALITY ). The four reasons for losing US citizenship cited above were taken from these guidelines. We strongly suggest that you carefully review these guidelines if you are planning on maintaining dual citizenship. As you review the guidelines keep in mind that the State Department is primarily referring to native-born US citizens who become dual citizens by being naturalized in another foreign country. The guidelines are also applicable to naturalized US citizens who maintain their original citizenship.

5. Lying To The USCIS During The Naturalization Process

If you deliberately withheld information from or misrepresented information given to the USCIS or INS when filing your N-400, the USCIS may cancel your Certificate of Naturalization and revoke your US citizenship. This includes withholding information and misrepresenting yourself during your naturalization interview or oath ceremony. If your Certificate of Naturalization is cancelled and your US citizenship revoked, you may also find yourself facing criminal prosecution as well as deportation proceedings.

For example, if you lived outside the country for four months and deliberately omitted this absence from your N-400 and the USCIS finds out about it after you’re naturalized, they could move to have your Certificate of Naturalization cancelled. All they would need to show is that your absence would have disqualifed you from or materially affected your naturalization due to the “physical presence in the United States” requirement for naturalization applicants.

You may also lose your US citizenship if you withheld information or misled the USCIS or INS when becoming a permanent resident. If within five years of becoming a permanent resident, the USCIS finds out that you withheld information from them or misled them in order to obtain your green card, the USCIS may also strip you of your US citizenship. Of course, after five years from becoming a permanent resident, the only way the USCIS would be able to take away your US citizenship would be if you withheld or misrepresented yourself during the naturalization process.

The above examples illustrates why you need to be both truthful and accurate when filing for naturalization and permanent residency. You don’t want to give the USCIS any ammunition they could use against you later if they or someone else (like a politician or government bureaucrat) is looking for any means to get rid of you.

6. Refusal To Testify Before Congress About Your Subversive Activities

We included this legal provision for completeness. If you refuse to testify before Congress within ten years of being naturalized regarding your involvement in any subversive activities, the Attorney General can move to have your US citizenship revoked [ 8 USC 1451(a) ]. Subversive activities are not well defined but include activities such as spying, belonging to a terrorist or other organization wanting to overthrow the US, or other activities aimed at undermining our government [50 USC 783 & 843, 18 USC Ch. 115]. Of course, if you do testify before Congress about your subversive activities, you may still lose your citizenship if your testimony is later used to convict you of treason.


http://www.newcitizen.us/losing.html

http://www.kraftfoods.com/assets/recipe_images/Wave_Your_Flag_Cake.jpg

[Daniel]

I'll take the official website of the US Government over something else in regards to stipulations over US Citizenship, especially since your site tells you to reference it on several occasions. Maybe that's just me.

[Parkbandit]

Thanks for conceeding the point.

My apologies.. I didn't include a picture in that post for you... but in my defense, it was responding to Tijay.

I know now how it must have confused you so.

http://www.wright.edu/cola/Dept/eng/english_club/images/SadFace.jpg

[Parkbandit]

I'll take the official website of the US Government over something else in regards to stipulations over US Citizenship, especially since your site tells you to reference it on several occasions. Maybe that's just me.


If there was ONLY one way to lose your citizenship, there wouldn't need to be any lists on the official site as there is.

If I were to say "There is only one way to lose your citizenship to the US" I would be incorrect.

Much as you are incorrect.

Of course, I wouldn't be stupid enough to post that...

http://www.humorek.com/obrazki/2004-11-28-niedziela/noob.jpg

[Gan]

So your assumption is that anyone who commits treason is doing so to renounce their citizenship?

Most treason cases I've read about are usually about money and or power.

And some of them with the intention of remaining a US citizen. Why should every act of treason be considered a willful pursuit of renouncing citizenship, especially if its done for greed?

That would indicate that anyone who commits a crime knowingly renounces their freedom. I say its quite the opposite. Those who commit said acts are sometimes (most of the time) aware of the risks of committing said acts but have every intention not to get caught - ergo do not have the intention of renouncing anything at the risk of doing so if caught.

[Khariz]

I'd just like to point out that what I conceded was that losing citizenship requires "some intentional act". That's not the same thing as "renouncing citizenship".

Edit: Just sayin' in case Daniel tries to claim I conceded his exact point.

[Daniel]

If there was ONLY one way to lose your citizenship, there wouldn't need to be any lists on the official site as there is.

If I were to say "There is only one way to lose your citizenship to the US" I would be incorrect.

Much as you are incorrect.

Of course, I wouldn't be stupid enough to post that...

http://www.humorek.com/obrazki/2004-11-28-niedziela/noob.jpg

As I've already demonstrated. There is only one way to lose your citizenship: If you renounce it. There are different ways to do so, which is why there is a list. However, of all those things it has to be established that yuo did so with the expressed purpose of giving up your citizenship.

To the point of the OP: Obama would not lose his citizenship if he became a citizenship of Indonesia, and it definitely wouldn't be stripped from him as a 9 year old child. If you want to argue that point feel free. I suspect you'll just keep posting pictures though.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by ParkBandit
So your assumption is that anyone who commits treason is doing so to renounce their citizenship?

Most treason cases I've read about are usually about money and or power.

I wasn't supporting Daniels argument at the time. However, I was just pointing out that despite Daniel using the work renounce and that word officially showing up in 2 clauses in all the situations (except treason) you were essentially willfully renouncing your citizenship when you fulfilled the requirements of the other clauses. Daniel later came back and pointed out that you had to be committing treason with the intent to renounce.

[Daniel]

I'd just like to point out that what I conceded was that losing citizenship requires "some intentional act". That's not the same thing as "renouncing citizenship".

Edit: Just sayin' in case Daniel tries to claim I conceded his exact point.

That's more than enough for me. It effectively demonstrates that there was no way Obama had his citizenship "stripped" when he was 9 years old. If PB wants to continue playing the "I gotcha game" that's on him.

[Parkbandit]

I was never referring to Obama or any retarded conspiracy about him not being a citizen. I was merely pointing out your stupidity in thinking that there is ONLY one way to lose your citizenship.

[Daniel]

I was never referring to Obama or any retarded conspiracy about him not being a citizen. I was merely pointing out your stupidity in thinking that there is ONLY one way to lose your citizenship.

Which you have failed horribly at. Good job. Life is rough as a troll huh?

[BigWorm]

Here's another site which is easier for you to read. Especially pay attention to the first sentence, I'll bold it to show that there isn't ONLY one way to lose your citizenship, as you originally claimed:



There are several reasons why a naturalized US citizen could lose his or her US citizenship.

Pretty sure being born on U.S. soil means he's NOT a naturalized US Citizen.

Make sure you pay attention to the FIRST SENTENCE!!!!

[ClydeR]

Pretty sure being born on U.S. soil means he's NOT a naturalized US Citizen.

Make sure you pay attention to the FIRST SENTENCE!!!!

Right. The lawsuit is dependent on proving that Obama was born outside of the United States, contrary to the information printed on his birth certificate. If Obama was born outside of the United States, only then do the other issues raised in the lawsuit become ripe for determination.

Considering how many typos and grammatical errors there are in the lawsuit, I think the court will not take it very seriously. Somebody will probably file a similar suit against McCain because he was actually born in another country, and the court won't take that one seriously either.

[Stanley Burrell]

I'm voting for McCain so that I can float into heaven absolved of all sin and be given a Big Mac and machine gun for breathing His heavenly ethereal wafts.

Down with that evil Muslim bastard, Obama!

[sst]

The only way to lose your citizenship is if you renounce it.
Almost, you can have it revoked for some national security crimes... but thats neither here nor there for this issue

If he was born on U.S. soil he is a U.S. Citizen, period.

EDIT: i see this was addressed already...

[sst]

Somebody will probably file a similar suit against McCain because he was actually born in another country, and the court won't take that one seriously either.

unlikely, the law is clear he was born to U.S. Parents, There is no question to his citizenship. The only thing he will get out of it is possible duel citizenship at the time of his birth since he was born in Panama. IF he had Panamanian citizenship it would have been renounced a long time ago due to his time in the military and his job position requiring him to have a security clearance, which a stipulation of is no dual citizenship.

[crb]

unlikely, the law is clear he was born to U.S. Parents, There is no question to his citizenship. The only thing he will get out of it is possible duel citizenship at the time of his birth since he was born in Panama. IF he had Panamanian citizenship it would have been renounced a long time ago due to his time in the military and his job position requiring him to have a security clearance, which a stipulation of is no dual citizenship.
Moreso, unlikely because the supreme court already ruled on McCain's citizenship back in like January.

[ClydeR]

unlikely, the law is clear he was born to U.S. Parents, There is no question to his citizenship. The only thing he will get out of it is possible duel citizenship at the time of his birth since he was born in Panama. IF he had Panamanian citizenship it would have been renounced a long time ago due to his time in the military and his job position requiring him to have a security clearance, which a stipulation of is no dual citizenship.

I agree that a suit about McCain's citizenship would be a loser. I disagree that a suit is unlikely. The issue in a suit would not be whether or not McCain is an American citizen. Clearly he is. The issue, as with Obama, would be whether or not he is a "natural born" citizen. Also, where did you get the idea that dual citizenship is a bar to being president?

[ClydeR]

Moreso, unlikely because the supreme court already ruled on McCain's citizenship back in like January.

Really? That I had not heard. Do you remember why the court had occasion to consider the issue of McCain's citizenship?

[sst]

I agree that a suit about McCain's citizenship would be a loser. I disagree that a suit is unlikely. The issue in a suit would not be whether or not McCain is an American citizen. Clearly he is. The issue, as with Obama, would be whether or not he is a "natural born" citizen.

There is no legal basis to question his citizenship. So it is unlikely a suit would even be heard. Yes somebody might sue, since you can sue for anything as long as you pay the fees pretty much. No, it wont last long.



Also, where did you get the idea that dual citizenship is a bar to being president?

Reread what i typed. I said McCain can not be one due to his time in the military and him having had a security clearance (and most likely still does). At no time did i say it was a bar to being a president.

[Apathy]

Really? That I had not heard. Do you remember why the court had occasion to consider the issue of McCain's citizenship?

Obama, Clinton, and others clarified this in a provision they passed to make sure there would be no questions should McCain be elected.

Crappy link but I didn't feel like searching that much for this http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/05/01/clinton-obama-sponsor-mccain-citizenship-bill/

[Gelston]

The only requireents for President are:

be a natural-born citizen of the United States;
be at least thirty-five years old;
have been a permanent resident in the United States for at least fourteen years.

Even if Obama wasn't born in the US, he was born to a US Citizen, and as per the precedents set by Miller v. Albright, 523 U.S. 420 (1998) and Nguyen v. INS, 533 U.S. 53 (2001). These two cases state that a child born overseas to one US Citizen and one Non-US Citizen is not a US Citizen by Birth unless paternity is establish by a certain age(21 in the 1998 ruling and 18 in the 2001 ruling).

As Obama's mother was the sole parent by the time he was 18, he would therefore be a US Citizen by birth, and therefore be 100% eligible under current laws to be elected President.

As he is officially acknowledged and recorded as having been born in Hawaii, a US State, he further falls under US Citizen by birth by virtue of being born here.

As for McCain, he is a US Citizen by birth only ue to being born to two US Citizens. Overseas US bases, for the purpose of citizenship, are not considered US soil.

[Khariz]

As for McCain, he is a US Citizen by birth only ue to being born to two US Citizens. Overseas US bases, for the purpose of citizenship, are not considered US soil.

I'm pretty sure this is partially incorrect. Basically, it depends.

I've dealt with guys who were in both of the following situations:

1. Born in Germany in a U.S. military hospital on a U.S. military base.

2. Born in Germany to two U.S. parents (who were in the military), but in a German hospital because the base they were part of had no such facility.

Number 1 was a U.S. citizen by birth. NUmber 2 needed a naturalization certificate.

I suppose it's possible that #1 just didn't have the correct paperwork in order, but this comes up all the time.

[Warriorbird]

I think it'd be hilarious if the court had declared them both not natural born citizens.

[Gelston]

Incorrect, 7 FAM 1116.1-4 Not Included in the Meaning of "In the United States" clearly 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.

If you are born to two US Citizens, you are considered a Natural born US Citizen no matter where you are born, although you may also recieve dual citizenship in some nations. Persons born in the United States, and persons born on foreign soil to two U.S. parents, are born American citizens and are classified as citizens at birth under 8 USC 1401.

[Khariz]

Incorrect, 7 FAM 1116.1-4 Not Included in the Meaning of "In the United States" clearly 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.

If you are born to two US Citizens, you are considered a Natural born US Citizen no matter where you are born, although you may also recieve dual citizenship in some nations.

See...I'm not talking about some rule, reg, or info on PAPER. I'm talking about in everyday real life, with my own eyes, I meet people, and have to deal with their backgrounds....being born in foreign countries, on military installations, who DO NOT Have naturalization certificates, but are nonetheless considered U.S. Citizens by birth.

This isn't a "popular conception" problem. It is perhaps a "my parents didnt' do what they were supposed to do at the time" problem, but nobody is filing lawsuits against these people to determine their citizenships either.

[Gelston]

Yes, they were born to two US Citizens, so they are US Citizens by that virtue.

Or even to one US citizen who has taken parental responsibility as stated in previous posts.

[Back]

I get the feeling that this is a pre-jab by the McCain camp to deflect any question about his having been born in Panama.

Regardless... I doubt either would have been nominated if that crowd inside the beltway and their teams of lawyers and lobbyists had any shred of evidence otherwise.

[Gelston]

Bottom line, they are both legal natural born citizens, and meet the prerequisites to be President.

[Parkbandit]

I think it'd be hilarious if the court had declared them both not natural born citizens.


How awesome would that be!? Imagine.. a redo of candidates.

That might be better than Hillary going crazy at the podium at the convention.

[Back]

It’s too bad we can’t get Arnold for president.

[Apathy]

It’s too bad we can’t get Arnold for president.

The day a Stallone movie becomes reality is the day I move.