Wait wait wait....

They originally claim that Obama's certificate isn't real. They said it was a forgery. Then they find evidence of forgery, but THAT evidence was forged, so the certificate is still OK. And now they're "looking into it" because it might be the White House that's behind it?

You see, if they're right, then Obama is illegitimate. If they get punk'd, Obama may also be behind THAT. You see why we're so quick to label them racists? It's all hate against him, all the time, with NO evidence anywhere for anything in either direction.

Noam Chimpsky: stoli n coke: Noam Chimpsky: stoli n coke:

Otherwise, you'd have to disqualify Rmoney too, since his dad was born in Mexico.
.

Geez you're stupid. A natural born citizen has parents that were US citizens, not necessarily US born.

If Arthur's father was not a US citizen, then Arthur wasn't a natural born citizen and no court would have declared him to be one. So his father was either a naturalized US citizen or Arthur lied about his eligibility. That clause was put there for a reason, and the reason wasn't to make it easier for a British or dual British citizen to become president, as you claim.

No, a natural born citizen is someone who is born in the U.S. and subject to it's jurisdiction.
The 14th amendment is pretty clear on that.

A dual citizen is subject to multiple jurisdictions. The 14th refers to "full and complete jurisdiction". They made that clear during the drafting of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment. But I do agree with you that the 14th defines natural born citizenship. It certainly defines constitutional citizenship which is the only other possible citizenship besides naturalized, so it must define natural born citizenship, and constitutional citizenship must be the same thing as natural born citizenship. Even if not previous to the ratification of the 14th, it must have made it so afterwards because it was the intention of the drafters to define natural born citizenship.

"Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen." (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))

Wow, I never would have thought the Birthers would finally tip their hand so blatantly. They're finally on the cusp of admitting it's all because the President is a Ni*bong that this whole nonsense is being dragged out so long.

The section of the Congressional Globe mentioned here had nothing to do with birthright citizenship, or with defining who was a natural born citizen, or indeed with any of the bullshiat ol' Chimpy has been expounding. I just spent 15 minutes reading the goddamn extract, and I can tell you, if you bother to look, that this is what they said:

The post-Civil War Congress was discussing enforcement of the 14th Amendment and how it was to be enforced in the various states (some of whom still called themselves "countries" at that time). Some factions in Congress (you can guess who) wanted each state free to be able to enforce the Amendment and the Freedmen's Acts (aka Civil Rights Act) as they saw fit in their own state constitutions; Bingham wanted to give the Amendment and Acts teeth and made them federally enforceable. He was planning to use the Commerce Clause and Full Faith & Credit Clause to enable Congress to force the states (aka "countries") to obey the Federal Constitutional amendments as regarded the newly-freed slaves.

The argument about "parents of other sovereignties" was being advanced, not by Bingham, but by the South, who were attempting to prevent ex-slaves from having full rights by virtue of their parents not having been themselves citizens of this "country"--read, the newly reminted US. Formerly, the slaves had been citizens of their various states, and the goal was to have them declared, by this "dual citizenship", ineligible for certain civil rights that white people would have. Bingham was determined that ALL people of whatever color should be considered Americans, and that could only be done if they were considered to have been born in America and not citizens of the Country of South Carolina.

So this whole argument Chimphead and his mates are advancing is founded on a misreading of an argument by a passionate PRO-civil rights advocate (for the time--Justice Frankfurter called Bingham the "Madison of the 14th Amendment"), who was arguing that everyone had to be a citizen of the US to obtain full civil rights; and that citizenship in another state was irrelevant.

It's amazing what some reading will get you.

Fluorescent Testicle: WizardofToast: Damnit, liberals! Quit making them believe in what is clearly a hoax and put up poorly spelled picket signs demanding a birth certificate that we all know shows he was born in Hawaii.

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 469x406]

/Just because it's funny.
//Maybe the real birth certificate is being stored with Rush's pudding.

Wow, wearing clothes in a flag design. That's totally not tacky at all!

The more decked out someone is in flag apparel and scream how patroitic they are, the more likely they support things that undermine what the flag is suppose to symbolize.

They don't wear it as a honor. They cower behind it as a shield from criticisms.

NeverDrunk23: hinten: One can only hope that it was Democrats or whomever.
The butthurt will be epic.

The whole movement started with the Clinton machine.

So yea, again the right is so unoriginal and need to copy things started by democrats.

It also shows the difference between Democrats and Republicans, in general:

Clinton supporters: "Is this guy even a natural-born citizen"

*birth certificate*

Clinton supporters: "Welp, I guess so"

--------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---------

Republicans: "Is this guy even a natural-born citizen?

*birth certificate*

Republicans: "FAKKEEE, FORGERY, LIBS LIBS LIBS, CONSPIRACY!!!"