Kansas considers removing Obama from ballot

The Republican party establishment just doesn't stop do they?

Why is it that they have to keep changing rules and making outrageous claims in order to help their chances in the election?

They screw with Ron Paul, changing the rules of engagement as they went.

Now a bunch of Republicans in Kansas want to drudge-up birth certificate questions so they can find a way to exclude Obama from the ballot?

Seriously, why can't they focus on their message and provide a solid platform instead of playing dirty tricks to manipulate the game?

I think Ohio and Florida should take Romney off of the ballot

Originally posted by flyswatter

Originally posted by unknown1234

For his school transcripts ... he has the right to say no, and we have no right to see them. If you want it released, thats fine. But just remember that he's under no obligation to do so.

And you are 100% incorrect about the definition of a natural born citizen. The fact is that nowhere is it completely defined. All that has to happen is that he has to be a citizen of the US at birth, which he was. His mother was a US citizen, and he was born in Hawaii - problem solved. He has no citizenship elsewhere. End of story. Are you just not paying attention to this having been proven wrong, or are you just not looking?

As far as how he got started on his path of education, I cant debate that because I do not really know much about it. For all I know, you may be right with your suspicions on it. I wont attempt to talk out my arse to prove this wrong.

And you are 100% incorrect about me being 100% incorrect
The rule of statutory construction, with regard to the Constitution, was stated by Chief Justice Marshall in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803):

“It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect; and therefore such construction is inadmissible, unless the words require it.” I

If the 14th Amendment was held to declare that all persons born in the country, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, were natural-born citizens, then the “natural born Citizen” clause would be rendered inoperative. It would be superfluous. And its specific provision would, therefore, be governed by the general provision of the 14th Amendment. The United States Supreme Court has determined that it is inadmissible to even make that argument.

Any genuine construction of the “natural born Citizen” clause must begin from the starting point that it requires something more than citizenship by virtue of being born on U.S. soil. Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), tells you exactly what that something is; citizen parents.

So much for your opinion about that........Don't you hate being wrong. But you go ahead and tell me I am anyways, i don't mind. If you need it further explained, if you ask me nicely I will do so. I do not seek to single out any person as being "purer" than the other. I know that they are both unworthy of the presidency. But I find it hard to sit quietly when someone tells me the words I plainly see written before me are not there, or mean something other than what I see, I can not let it go unchallenged with a clear conscience. Like when people try to convince me that the 10th Amendment gives the Federal Branch the power to overrule the voters of their state when ever they do not like the results of an election. I will concede that they do do it, but I will never concede that it is lawful to do so.

About you expertise in the field of scanned documents. I have scanned countless documents, I hate to think how many documents I have scanned. Never one time did they come back in layers. Even after pressing the Convert to PDF, did they mysteriously give me layers. Not saying it is not possible, but the stranger the locations of such an anomaly, and the more such anomalies happen on a single document, the more it seems"Funny" to me. Please stop insinuating I am stating that he was in fact born anywhere, because I have said any such thing. All I have stated is things seem odd to me and I would like clarification that is deeper than what has been presented to me thus far. Why this upsets you so much I do not understand, but I have my suspicians why you and others who find this subject so sensitive would feel this way.

Now I do respect your view about Obama not being under any obligation to show his school records, and I agree 100%....right until his people start demanding Romney show more of his tax records than what is required, and him not saying No No No, Mr.Romney should not show more than he already has and is required to.
Turnabout is fair play is it not?

edit on 16-9-2012 by unknown1234 because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-9-2012 by unknown1234 because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by thepresident
I think Ohio and Florida should take Romney off of the ballot

You're the president, you should want his name taken off all of the ballots.
Come on man, go big or stay home

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
The Republican party establishment just doesn't stop do they?

Why is it that they have to keep changing rules and making outrageous claims in order to help their chances in the election?

They screw with Ron Paul, changing the rules of engagement as they went.

Now a bunch of Republicans in Kansas want to drudge-up birth certificate questions so they can find a way to exclude Obama from the ballot?

Seriously, why can't they focus on their message and provide a solid platform instead of playing dirty tricks to manipulate the game?

edit on 16-9-2012 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)

For me personally the Republican Party is just the lesser of 2 evils, nothing more.
I agree with you.....to a degree. What they did to Ron Paul is wrong, and wrong is wrong no matter who does it.
My belief in the sanctity of the vote is so absolute that the blatant perversion of it sends me into a rage.
When we lose that, we lose everything.
When I watched that man call a vote 3x, and then have the nerve to declare the results the way he did, right in front of the people voting..........I wanted to cry like a husband who had just lost his lifelong partner. Although he did proclaim the results that I would have preferred were reached by consensus....he did so at a cost I would never have been willing to pay to get them. I waited in vain for some one of a higher position to stand up and say. "No No No that is not how we do things in the democrat party!"......but it never happened.

reply to post by sheepslayer247


Simple reason is they don't have a message. Their only position is that Obama sucks and that is not enough to get independent votes not by a long shot, so they have to resort to other means.

We'll never know if the certificate is real or not, i really wish they would just drop the whole thing. It's too bad a majority of the republicans have to nit pick on little things like this that will accomplish nothing. As a republican myself i find their tactics as being more of a waste of time than anything.

It's too bad really because there are decent republicans out there that believe in doing what's right, we just get sucked in the stereotype of "rich supporting zionist bankster thugs"

Originally posted by JackBauer
We'll never know if the certificate is real or not, i really wish they would just drop the whole thing.

Actually we do know for a fact that it is real.

Originally posted by wascurious

Originally posted by JackBauer
We'll never know if the certificate is real or not, i really wish they would just drop the whole thing.

Actually we do know for a fact that it is real.

really ??? you've seen it ?? you've examined it up close and in person ??
or are you just repeating the rhetoric of the day ??

i can tell you, without any doubt, that the "certificate" released on-line is absolutely, one of the worst produced pieces of fakery that i've seen a long time.

how do i know ??
because i have one, from that same time period in history and his is missing a very important legal phrase and subsequent follow-through.
(those born in the prior or latter decade know exactly what i'm talking about IF they bother to look at their own)

it can't be one if it's missing the other ... hence, what is posted is a joke.
and it's a shame to see millions fall for it, hook, line and sinker ... over and over again.

[for those who are wondering what phrase ... it'll read similar to this -- "This is a true and exact reproduction of the document officially registered and placed on file" ... blah, blah, blah]

to those who claim the posting is legit ... show me.

psssst: updating the "format" doesn't change the image of the original "document officially registered and placed on file".

Originally posted by Honor93
[for those who are wondering what phrase ... it'll read similar to this -- "This is a true and exact reproduction of the document officially registered and placed on file" ... blah, blah, blah]

to those who claim the posting is legit ... show me.

oh dear, it looks like you have not even bothered to look at it, you just made a false claim about it....
upload.wikimedia.org...

reply to post by spoor

hmmmm, don't read very well do ya ??
your link reads ...

I CERTIFY THIS IS A TRUE COPY OR ABSTRACT OF TXE RECORD ON FILE IN THE ...

well, let's see, where to begin ...
1. typo on a stamp that's at least 20yrs old ??? [color=amber]not likely
(remember, the forms were re-formatted in the 80s)
2. incorrect statement as a whole
3. after the re-formats, the statement was printed directly on the form, not stamped after the fact.
4. the form cannot be both -- true and exact copy OR an abstract.
5. where is the part of the phrase that reads "ANY ALTERATION VOIDS THIS CERTIFICATE" ??
6. "any alteration" includes re-entry of information FROM a previous format -- hence, the general insistance to release a certified copy of the "original" on file ... as this, clearly is not.

need more ?? i'm sure there is something ... it is pretty bad as far as fakes go.

[which is what happened in order to generate this particular piece, otherwise it would be an abstract of the original - again, it cannot be both]

ETA: oh yeah, almost forgot ... where is this statement --> "This copy not valid unless prepared on engraved border displaying seal and signature of the Clerk-Recorder" ?
[heck, my daughter's even reads ... "WARNING: It is illegal to Duplicate this Copy" ... blah, blah, blah]

before you go assuming (as you often do), please keep in mind, i have at my fingertips, 6 different BCs from 4 separate states dating back to 1933 ... i'm not making anything up.

Originally posted by popcornmafia
Remove him from the ballot>?

Hell, take it further remove this guy from the white house Now!

I doubt they are able to remove him, although it should be easy to
move an empty suit.

With barack were not in kansas anymore

CLICK THEM SHoES Dorothy

edit on 14-9-2012 by popcornmafia because: (no reason given)

Well said. Could not agree more. The idiot in chief should be removed just due to the fact that he has been linked to multiple social security numbers throughout his past alone - not to mention the fact that there have also been strange occurrences with his mothers social security number as well. I'm thinking that this kind of fraud runs in old Barry Soetoro - Barack Sobarkeh - Barack Obama's family.

Originally posted by Honor93
before you go assuming (as you often do), please keep in mind, i have at my fingertips, 6 different BCs from 4 separate states dating back to 1933 ... i'm not making anything up.

edit on 17-9-2012 by Honor93 because: ETA

How many are from Hawaii and when are you going to post them here for us so we do not have to just take your word for anything?

Originally posted by wascurious

Originally posted by Honor93
before you go assuming (as you often do), please keep in mind, i have at my fingertips, 6 different BCs from 4 separate states dating back to 1933 ... i'm not making anything up.

edit on 17-9-2012 by Honor93 because: ETA

How many are from Hawaii and when are you going to post them here for us so we do not have to just take your word for anything?

it doesn't matter how many are from HI and why would i post them here ??
most of the persons are still alive, hence, that would be beyond rude, don't ya think ??

[i will say this, HI forms originated from CA and this "posting" isn't even close]

guess my word is gonna have to be good enough.
Obama's seems to be so why shouldn't mine ??

i was born of 2 American citizen parents ... Obama ? not so much.

ETA -- ahhh, that's right, Obama didn't post or release anything ...
his campaign did

reply to post by wascurious

besides, IF you are an American, look at your own ... why would you need to see mine or any others for that matter ??
it's not like the information varies from state to state, it's a standard form or did the standard part confuse you ??

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by wascurious

 

besides, IF you are an American, look at your own ... why would you need to see mine or any others for that matter ??
it's not like the information varies from state to state, it's a standard form or did the standard part confuse you ??

The "standard" form varies from state to state. They all contain pretty much the same information, but they dont necessarily look the same.

And while you've noted a missing this, missing that, whatever ... you still have not shown anything requiring there to be the exact statements that you are speaking of.

And on the stamp below for his BC, it isnt an X. Its an H. No misspelling there, sorry to burst your bubble.

reply to post by unknown1234


Minor v. Happersett did not define natural-born citizenship. In fact it says right in the decision that they are not defining the term. As it was a case on voting they first needed to determine whether or not Minor was a citizen. As she was born to two US citizens there was no question about her citizenship. That's as far as they went n this case and made sure to state that they weren't defining anything.

There are however a number of cases where the courts define natural-born citizenship as being someone born on US soil. The earliest of these was Lynch v. Clarke. The most recent I'm familiar with is Perkins v. Elg. In the decision it was stated that as the defendant was born on US soil she was not only a citizen she was eligible to run for President.

reply to post by seabag


Kansas should remove itself from the Union.

These shenanigans have no place when this country is in the middle of the worst recession in decades.

reply to post by Honor93


Have YOU seen it? Have YOU examined it up and close?

No answer for that?

Take the strawman and go home then.