Obama's Spot On Kansas Ballot Set
Associated Press - Mon 10:53 AM 09/17/2012
President Barack Obama's place on the November election ballot in Kansas is now secure.
President Barack Obama's place on the November election ballot in Kansas is now secure.
The all-Republican State Objections Board on Monday formally ended its review of whether the Democratic president should be listed as a candidate for re-election.
The board's action came after Manhattan resident Joe Montgomery dropped his objection. Montgomery said Friday he was withdrawing his challenge because of what he called intimidation directed at him and people around him.
But California lawyer and dentist Orly Taitz showed up at the meeting demanding to speak. He told board members they were ignoring evidence questioning Obama's citizenship. That brought an angry response from Topeka progressive activist T.J. Gaughan. He and a few other Obama supporters shouted at Taitz.
A security officer ordered them outside.
Comments must stay on topic and be respectful. Comments that are personal attacks, make unfounded accusations, or are for the purpose of "trolling" or inciting others will be removed. Offending users will have their profile suspended.
Post a comment Log in or Register to comment
kskid
Monday 17 September 2012 11:40 Report this comment
I demand they ban lawyers!
leo
Monday 17 September 2012 12:33 Report this comment
How about progessive activists? I wonder how well that pays.Can't be a very heavy work load ?
RedNeckWatch
Monday 17 September 2012 15:22 Report this comment
And ban tea drinkers too.
Aurora
Monday 17 September 2012 23:43 Report this comment
And ban tea baggers too!
MinutemanCDCSC
Tuesday 18 September 2012 13:00 Report this comment
Mr. Obama is an outlaw, fraud, impostor, and usurper who defies the Constitution on an ongoing basis, though he once knew it well, and who violates continuously one of its basic protections: that control of the armed forces and the authority of the President should not devolve upon a foreigner or one with foreign loyalties, but only upon a natural born Citizen of the U.S.. A natural born Citizen is one born in the country of parents who are citizens. The U.S. Supreme Court established the above interpretation by unanimous decision in Minor v. Happersett (1875), which was quoted verbatim as authoritative in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), in both the opinion and the dissent. See supporting or corroborating U.S. Supreme Court opinions in Perkins v. Elg (1939), The Venus (1814), and Shanks v. DuPont (1830); also cf. Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), The Slaughterhouse Cases (1873), and Elk v. Wilkins (1884).
MinutemanCDCSC
Tuesday 18 September 2012 13:00 Report this comment
(The lower courts are all over the place on their interpretations of natural born Citizen, whether through ignorance of the established U.S. Supreme Court interpretation, or through defiance of the Constitution, which, legally, no lower court decision can contradict.) From the creation of the world, lineage has passed from father to child, and with lineage is conferred a natural birthright, which includes turf, meaning "homeland" or "citizenship", what the law defines as "turf". At the time of the ratification of the Constitution and for 110 years thereafter, birth on U.S. soil alone did not confer citizenship, except to foundlings with neither father nor mother to pass along his or her citizenship. So, according to the original intent of the Framers of the Constitution, birth on U.S. soil by itself, which in 1787 did not even make one a citizen, could not make one a member of the more restricted subset, "natural born Citizens."
MinutemanCDCSC
Tuesday 18 September 2012 13:01 Report this comment
When the Framers wrote "a natural born Citizen" in Art. ii, § 1, ¶ 5, they had no thought of mere birth on U.S. soil creating a natural born Citizen, or any other kind of citizen (unless said born person would otherwise be without a country). Amendment XIV (1868) assigned citizenship to those born in the U.S., but only to those "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," that is, born of a citizen father, or if no father is found, of a citizen mother, or foundlings with no identified parent. Until Wong Kim Ark in 1898, birth on U.S. soil by itself did nothing for a child of non-U.S. citizens except to put him closer to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office.
MinutemanCDCSC
Tuesday 18 September 2012 13:01 Report this comment
Lord Christopher Monckton of Brenchley has prepared a Peers briefing on Mr. Obama's computer-fabricated Long Form Birth Certificate, his forged Selective Service Registration, and his stolen Social Security Number, issued in 1977 to a Connecticut resident who was born in 1890. http://www.moncktononline.com/images/peers-briefing.pdf WorldNetDaily has a link to the Israeli Science and Technology page which debunks Mr. Obama's counterfeit ID documents. http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/israeli-science-website-obama-birth-certificate-forged/
Aurora
Tuesday 18 September 2012 22:44 Report this comment
@ Minuteman, news flash! Obama's mother was a citizen of America and Obama was born in Hawaii automatically makes him a natural born citizen! As for proof that Obama is not a natural born citizen, the burden of proof is upon you. As for Framers' original intentions, times change and in present America, being born in America is considered as "natural born" citizen.
Aurora
Tuesday 18 September 2012 22:48 Report this comment
Just my personal opinion, I think requiring President to be a "natural born" citizen is outdated. Framers intended it to be that way to keep British from taking control of America again but we don't have this problem now. Many countries now allow "naturalized" citizens to run for President.