What if Obama Really Were Born in Kenya? Then what...?

It wouldn't really matter. Then Nothing as stated above. The man would be hailed and praised for pulling off the greatest coup-de-tat in the history of the US. The news stated the next terror attack would be financially and that is what we are currently seeing. Whether he was born he or there, the man is a mirage, he is not who people think he is.

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
Why does anyone think he was born in Kenya anyway ?

The whole idea doesn't make sense.

Anyone would think that Sherlock Holmes WOULD KNOW THE ANSWER!!!!
Obama Sheeple crack me up....

FIRST of all it's not a 'Birther' movement fueled by racism, as some have pointed out..

Why does anyone think he was born in Kenya anyway ?

The answer is because of OBAMA himself, His grandmother, his wife, his friends and his fraudulent social security number# 042-68-4425, forged BC, as well as his half-brother, half-sister. They all say Obama is from Kenya.

End of story.... has nothing to do with racism or crazy Birther movement etc..
It's all from Obama and his family.

The Grandmother,


The Wife


Friends


Associates


Obama himself



There you go... Obama is from Kenya!

Does it make sense now!!! Do you wonder why still?!

Originally posted by filosophia
But he's not, he's American.

No he's not. Please explain how he has a a Connecticut Social Security number please.

This alone will be good to hear.

Originally posted by Quaght
There is a fairly large group of "birthers", as they are called, that claim President Obama was not born in Honolulu, Hawaii, much less in the United States, but was actually born in Kenya, Africa, thus rendering him ineligible to be the president of the U.S. The other side says that it doesn't matter because his mother was American and that makes him an American.

No. The “other side” says Barack Obama has provided the adequate documentation — prior to the election even, unlike any other candidate or President in history — to satisfy the constitutional question.

It would mean he is not a constitutional president and the constitution moves one step closer to illegitimacy. This could be a good thing because then the federal government wouldn't be able to twist the words of the constitution by saying things like "supremacy clause" but the downside is there would be tyranny because the bill of rights would be scrapped, which it already is.

Originally posted by filosophia
then the federal government wouldn't be able to twist the words of the constitution by saying things like "supremacy clause"

What does this even mean? “Twist the words of the constitution by saying ‘supremacy clause.’” You are free to disagree with it but the clause is there.

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by filosophia
then the federal government wouldn't be able to twist the words of the constitution by saying things like "supremacy clause"

What does this even mean? “Twist the words of the constitution by saying ‘supremacy clause.’” You are free to disagree with it but the clause is there.

No, it's not. If nothing could go against the federal government there'd be no point in having the bill of rights. At any moment the federal government could say no more free speech, no more guns, and then cite the supremacy clause. The president could say everyone has to wear red hats because of the supremacy clause. Everyone must give all their wealth to foreign bankers because of the supremacy clause. It's ridiculous. Even if it were in there, no one would follow it and there'd be a revolution in the streets tomorrow. The only thing quelling the anger is the feigned attempt at giving the people freedom and liberty, but obviously not even that is working out so well for the "supremacists".

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
Why does anyone think he was born in Kenya anyway ?

His Kenyan born dad met his mother in the USA, so why would she have flown thousands of miles to a foreign country to give birth ?

The whole idea doesn't make sense.

The argument is that Obama's mother original intention was to fly to Kenya to give birth to him and leave him with his relatives. However, she changed her mind and brought him back to the US with her. I'm not saying that I believe that...I'm just saying that is the explanation some give for her being in Kenya when he was born.

Originally posted by filosophia
No, it's not. If nothing could go against the federal government there'd be no point in having the bill of rights. At any moment the federal government could say no more free speech, no more guns, and then cite the supremacy clause.

Then you don’t understand the Supremacy clause.

The president could say everyone has to wear red hats because of the supremacy clause.

The President, or the federal government, couldn’t do something against the Constitution, in part because of the Supremacy clause itself, that says that “[t]his Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof ... shall be the supreme law of the land.”

You don’t know what you’re talking about.

I don't know why we should have been shuffled over to this thread which was exhausted a year ago. This one clearly states Kenya, whereas the other thread does not mention place of birth. Much more interesting from the point of view that he could have been born anywhere. I was only ever told where I was born 'cos I don't 'effing know. It just goes to show how stupid things like a written constitution can be, or even if that constitution is allowed to be rewritten time after time, and left for the law to tidy things up for a time. Think of the opposite, you were born in the US, you lived there for many years, or you never left, no criminality does that entitle you to be President, No is one definite answer, possibly is another.