USA TODAY ad: Obama NOT legally qualified? - SHOCKER

Status
Not open for further replies.

Soon Rev 22:11-12

Senior Member
Feb 26, 2005
549
13
✟760.00
Faith
Christian
full-page ad to be published in USA TODAY

http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/UPDATE/misc2008/Obama-USA-TODAY-ad.htm



An Open Letter to Barack Obama:


Are you a Natural Born Citizen of the U.S.?


Are you legally qualified to hold the Office of President?




Dear Mr. Obama:
On October 24, 2008, a federal judge granted your request to dismiss a lawsuit by Citizen Philip Berg, who challenged your qualifications under the “Natural Born Citizen” clause of the U.S. Constitution to legally hold the office of President of the United States of America.
Mr. Berg presented factual evidence to the Court in support of his claim that you are either a citizen of your father’s native Kenya by birth, or that you became a citizen of Indonesia, relinquishing your prior citizenship when you moved there with your mother in 1967.
In your response to the lawsuit, you neither denied Mr. Berg’s claims nor submitted any evidence which would refute his assertions. Instead, you argued that the Court lacked the jurisdiction to determine the question of your legal eligibility because Mr. Berg lacked “standing.”
Astonishingly, the judge agreed, simply saying, “[Mr. Berg] would have us derail the democratic process by invalidating a candidate for whom millions of people voted and underwent excessive vetting during what was one of the most hotly contested presidential primary [sic] in living memory.”
Unfortunately, your response to the legal claim was clearly evasive and strikingly out of character, suggesting you may, in fact, lack a critical Constitutional qualification necessary to assume the Office of President: i.e., that you are not a “natural born” citizen of the United States or one who has relinquished his American citizenship.
Before you can exercise any of the powers of the United States, you must prove that you have fully satisfied each and every eligibility requirement that the Constitution mandates for any individual’s exercise of those powers.
Regardless of the tactics chosen in defending yourself against the Berg lawsuit, significant questions regarding your legal capacity to hold this nation’s highest office have been put forth publicly, and you have failed to directly refute them with documentary evidence that is routinely available to any bona fide, natural born U.S. Citizen.

As one who has ventured into the fray of public service of his own volition, seeking to possess the vast powers of the Office of President, it is not unreasonable to demand that you produce evidence of your citizenship to answer the questions and allay the concerns of the People. Indeed, as the one seeking the office, you are under a moral, legal, and fiduciary duty to proffer such evidence to establish your qualifications as explicitly mandated by Article II of the Constitution.
Should you proceed to assume the office of the President of the United States as anything but a bona fide natural born citizen of the United States that has not relinquished that citizenship, you would be inviting a national disaster, placing our Republic at great risk from untold consequences. For example:
· Neither the Electoral College on December 15, nor the House of Representatives on January 6 would be able to elect you, except as a poseur - a usurper;
· As a usurper, you would be unable to take the required “Oath or Affirmation” of office on January 20 without committing the crime of perjury or false swearing, for being ineligible for the Office of the President you cannot faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States;
· Your every act in the usurped Office of the President would be a criminal offense as an act under color of law that would subject the People to the deprivation of their constitutional rights, and entitling you to no obedience whatsoever from the People;
· as a usurper acting in the guise of the President you could not function as the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy and of the militia of the several states, as such forces would be under no legal obligation to remain obedient to you;
· No one in any civilian agency in the Executive Branch would be required to obey any of your proclamations, executive orders or directives, as such orders would be legally VOID;
· Your appointment of Ambassadors and Judges to the Supreme Court would be VOID ab initio (i.e., from the beginning), no matter what subsequent actions the Senate might take as well as rendering any such acts by such appointed officials void as well;
· Congress would not be able to pass any new laws because they would not be able to acquire the signature of a bona fide President, rendering all such legislation legally VOID;
· As a usurper, Congress would be unable to remove you from the Office of the President on Impeachment, inviting certain political chaos including a potential for armed conflicts within the General Government or among the States and the People to effect the removal of such a usurper.
As an attorney and sitting U.S. Senator, I’m sure you agree that our Constitution is the cornerstone of our system of governance. It is the very foundation of our system of Law and Order – indeed, it is the supreme law of the land. I’m sure you also agree that its precise language was no accident and cannot be ignored if Individual, unalienable, natural Rights, Freedoms and Liberties are to be protected and preserved.
As our next potential President, you have a high-order obligation to the Constitution (and to those who have fought and died for our Freedom) that extends far beyond that of securing a majority of the votes of the Electoral College. No matter your promises of change and prosperity, your heartfelt intent or the widespread support you have garnered in seeking the highest Office of the Land, the integrity of the Republic and Rule of Law cannot, -- must not -- be put at risk, by allowing a constitutionally unqualified person to sit, as a usurper, in the Office of the President.
No matter the level of practical difficulty, embarrassment or disruption of the nation’s business, we must -- above all -- honor and protect the Constitution and the divine, unalienable, Individual Rights it guarantees, including the Right to a President who is a natural born citizen of the United States of America that has not relinquished his American citizenship. Our nation has endured similar disruptions in the past, and will weather this crisis as well. Indeed, it is both yours and the People’s mutual respect for, and commitment to, the Constitution and Rule of Law that insures the perpetuation of Liberty.
As a long time defender of my state and federal Constitutions, and in consideration of the lack of sufficient evidence needed to establish your credentials as President, I am compelled to lodge this Petition for Redress of Grievances and public challenge to you.

Make no mistake: This issue IS a Constitutional crisis. Although it will not be easy for you, your family or our Republic, you have it within your ability to halt this escalating crisis by either producing the certified documents establishing beyond question your qualifications to hold the Office of President, or by immediately withdrawing yourself from the Electoral College process.
With due respect, I hereby request that you deliver the following documents to Mr. Berg and myself at the National Press Club in Washington, DC at noon on Monday, November 17, 2008:

(a) a certified copy of your “vault” (original long version) birth certificate;
(b) certified copies of all reissued and sealed birth certificates in the names
Barack Hussein Obama, Barry Soetoro, Barry Obama, Barack Dunham
and Barry Dunham;
(c) a certified copy of your Certification of Citizenship;
(d) a certified copy of your Oath of Allegiance taken upon age of maturity;
(e) certified copies of your admission forms for Occidental College, Columbia
University and Harvard Law School; and
(f) certified copies of any court orders or legal documents changing your name
from Barry Soetoro.
In the alternative, in defense of the Constitution, and in honor of the Republic and that for which it stands, please announce before such time your withdrawal from the 2008 Presidential election process.
“In a government of laws, the existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy
Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 469-471.
Thank you for your understanding and cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,

Robert L. Schulz,
Founder and Chairman, We The People Foundation for Constitutional Education, Inc.
 

kermit

Legend
Nov 13, 2003
15,477
807
49
Visit site
✟27,358.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Upvote 0

keith99

sola dosis facit venenum
Jan 16, 2008
22,889
6,561
71
✟321,445.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
To be a natural born citizen he needs one out of these 3 things. Mother a citizen, father a citizen, born in the United States. Obama has 2, he only needs one.

One does not lose citizenship by moving. He would have to actively renounce it. If that is the argument being made the burden of proof falls on the nutcases making the claim.

If McCain had not picked that pitbull (and a female one) as his running mate I would have voted for him. As it was I still did not vote fort Obama. Clear everyone? I'm not an Obama person.

But this kind of garbage really (explictive deleted) me off. If some bright laywer finds a chargable offense I will admit that some of the time bright lawyers are useful.
 
Upvote 0

Lockguy3000

Senior Member
Nov 14, 2007
1,075
62
NYC
✟9,055.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Wow the crazies just don't give up.

That, and they close their ears and yell "La! La! La!" whenever anyone presents the actual facts that refute them.
2.gif
 
Upvote 0

elanor

Reunite Gondwanaland!
Nov 9, 2003
3,002
413
68
Left Coast
Visit site
✟16,184.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Oh for the love of pete! The group that bought this ad is just like a dog with a stinky old bone. They guard it ferociously and keep shaking it furiously even though to everyone else it's smelly and disgusting and nobody is the least be interested in it. Good. Let them spend their money on useless ads. They're the ones who are poorer for it.
 
Upvote 0

Sphere

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2003
5,528
631
✟8,980.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Republican
First of all. Berg is a 9/11 truther. So it's pretty amusing to see disgruntled mccain supporters taking the side of a conspiracy nut.

Second, this birth certificate issue nonsense has been beaten to death and has been shown to be demonstrably false.
 
Upvote 0

Polycarp1

Born-again Liberal Episcopalian
Sep 4, 2003
9,588
1,669
USA
✟25,875.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
To be a natural born citizen he needs one out of these 3 things. Mother a citizen, father a citizen, born in the United States. Obama has 2, he only needs one.

One does not lose citizenship by moving. He would have to actively renounce it. If that is the argument being made the burden of proof falls on the nutcases making the claim.

If McCain had not picked that pitbull (and a female one) as his running mate I would have voted for him. As it was I still did not vote fort Obama. Clear everyone? I'm not an Obama person.

But this kind of garbage really (explictive deleted) me off. If some bright laywer finds a chargable offense I will admit that some of the time bright lawyers are useful.

Nitpick: The three standards are: Born on U.S. soil, or both parents citizens, or one parent a citizen who was resident within the country for X years. If you want lawyerese Latin, the first is ius soli and the other two ius sanguinis. Otherwise a rock-solid post. (I do support Obama but I also support your right to support McCain; in 2000 I would have voted for him if he'd gotten the nomination.)

Philip J. Berg is a lawyer who files these sorts of nuisance lawsuits in behalf of himself, Philip J. Berg, and then issues press releases as Philip J. Berg Esq. announcing that he, Philip J. Berg, has filed such-and-such lawsuit in such-and-such court because he, Philup J. Berg, believes in pursuing justice.

To which I'd add: And in getting his name in front of the public as much as possible. (Did I mention that his name is Philip J. Berg? If he'd written this, he'd have found at least ten other places to insert his name, Philip J. Berg, so that you won't forget that Philip J. Berg filed the lawsuit and Philip J. Berg issued the press release announcint the lawsuit filed by Philip J. Berg. Get my point?)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Lockguy3000

Senior Member
Nov 14, 2007
1,075
62
NYC
✟9,055.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Philip J. Berg is a lawyer who files these sorts of nuisance lawsuits in behalf of himself, Philip J. Berg, and then issues press releases as Philip J. Berg Esq. announcing that he, Philip J. Berg, has filed such-and-such lawsuit in such-and-such court because he, Philup J. Berg, believes in pursuing justice.

To which I'd add: And in getting his name in front of the public as much as possible. (Did I mention that his name is Philip J. Berg? If he'd written this, he'd have found at least ten other places to insert his name, Philip J. Berg, so that you won't forget that Philip J. Berg filed the lawsuit and Philip J. Berg issued the press release announcint the lawsuit filed by Philip J. Berg. Get my point?)
watch
 
Upvote 0

salida

Veteran
Jun 14, 2006
4,305
278
✟6,243.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Keith99-

What we need is a pitbull conservative somewhere - especially as a President of the U.S. You are either a conservative or your not. It this doesn't happen, the Republican party will be in the ditch. If Ronald Reagon would have ran against Obama - Obama would be only a bumper sticker on someones car. Look at history.
 
Upvote 0

salida

Veteran
Jun 14, 2006
4,305
278
✟6,243.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Keith99-

What we need is a pitbull conservative somewhere - especially as a President of the U.S. You are either a conservative or your not. It this doesn't happen, the Republican party will be in the ditch. If Ronald Reagon would have ran against Obama - Obama would be only a bumper sticker on someones car.
 
Upvote 0

JGL53

Senior Veteran
Dec 25, 2005
5,013
296
Mississippi
✟14,276.00
Faith
Pantheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
...

What we need is a pitbull conservative somewhere - especially as a President of the U.S. You are either a conservative or your not. It this doesn't happen, the Republican party will be in the ditch...

I think far right politics is forever out of power in this country - IF America pulls out of this recession/depression with Obama being President. The number of young vs. old people, the number of Hispanics, blacks and other non-fishbelly white people and the number of people on line willing to give small amounts of money to Democrats - the numbers of such people are racheting up against far right politics with each passing year.

Your only hope is that the depression/recession lasts four years, and with Obama admitting that he is a Communist or something, THEN anything can happen, e.g., maybe Pat Roberson will be our next President. :D

I suppose you could pray about it.

...If Ronald Reagon would have ran against Obama - Obama would be only a bumper sticker on someones car...

28 years ago, sure. But not today. Barack Obama is MUCH more of a celebrity now than Ronald Reagan.

And it was probably those who were born after Reagan was first elected in 1980 that put Obama over the top in many states. i.e., those under 30 made up 18 per cent of the vote and went for Obama 2 to 1. You do the math.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Billnew

Legend
Apr 23, 2004
21,246
1,234
58
Ohio
Visit site
✟35,363.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Conservatives
To be a natural born citizen he needs one out of these 3 things. Mother a citizen, father a citizen, born in the United States. Obama has 2, he only needs one.

.
Actually only one thing makes you a naturally born citizen. Being born in the USA, its territorys, or military bases across the world. Illegals in the USA have naturally born citizens. The parents are illegal, but being born in the USA makes the babys USA citizens.
Parents can be any nationality and swear alliance to any country, but if the baby meets above, they are citizens.
 
Upvote 0

Sphere

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2003
5,528
631
✟8,980.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Republican
If Ronald Reagon would have ran against Obama - Obama would be only a bumper sticker on someones car.

Oh oh, I can do one of these too.

If FDR had ran against Reagan - Reagan would only have been remembered for being in movies, rather than royally screwing up the country from the white house. :wave:
 
Upvote 0

Polycarp1

Born-again Liberal Episcopalian
Sep 4, 2003
9,588
1,669
USA
✟25,875.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Actually only one thing makes you a naturally born citizen. Being born in the USA, its territorys, or military bases across the world. Illegals in the USA have naturally born citizens. The parents are illegal, but being born in the USA makes the babys USA citizens.
Parents can be any nationality and swear alliance to any country, but if the baby meets above, they are citizens.

So if an American soldier is stationed overseas defending our country at a place he can have his wife with him, and their child is born there, you want that kid to go through naturalization? Fortunately, our legislators decided otherwise.

I take your point about ius soli and illegal immigrants, but ius sanguinis has been around longer than either of us. (I think at least one of John Quincy Adams's kids was born in England or Europe while he was serving as ambassador there -- that kid went on to be a good American citizen.)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.