I can't believe this problem still exists and is ongoing!
There is no longer any question as to where Obama comes from--His home town is Mombasa, Kenya.
There is so much discrepancy in his background, I'm amazed he's not in jail already!
Even Sheriff Joe has declared the certificate Obama showed the public to be a forgery--which we already knew!
So why are people still voting for this clown? He's lied to us, and lied about his background--what little he has exposed. While at Occidental, he admits he was using weed--and probably cocaine, since we know it was in high fashion at the time. (Still is, I think!)
He admits that in his book! So why wasn't he busted for it?
Remember the big stink over whether or not Big Bubba Clinton had used weed, or not?
It was nothing to what Obama admits too. We even know some of his buddies were criminals. Bill Ayers and his wife. They believed bombing buildings was a good method of protesting. And Obama was "best buddies" will Billy-baby!
What's that old saying about, "birds of a feather--"??
The problems in our country have gotten out of hand, due mainly to this usurper!
I'm beginning to believe it will take a full scale revolution to return the country to its previous stature, but I sure hope I'm wrong, because a revolution like that will make the civil war look like a disagreement in an ice cream parlor!
1 comment:
Re: "The common law of England is not the common law of these States.” –George Mason
--or did you overlook that little matter?"
I agree. But who told you that to be different, the US Common Law has to be different in every single item?
So, when the US Common Law is different from the British Common Law, guess what happens---they tell us about the difference, that is what they do. And they never told us that there was a difference in the Natural Born qualifications for a citizen under the US Common Law than for a subject under the British common law.
The two common laws differ in some things and are the same in some things, and where they are different, they tell us---and they did not tell us. Oh, and Vattel's book was not translated into English to include the phrase Natural Born Citizen until TEN years after the Constitution was written.
So where did they get the definition? Not from Vattel (who was not mentioned even once in the Federalist Papers). From the common law, of England or of the USA--it does not matter. Why not? Because if there were a difference in the Natural Born requirement for a citizen, they would have told us---and they did not tell us.
Post a Comment