Navigation

DISSENT!

Defend Israel

The Patriots Call
The Black Robe Regiment - The Patriots Call

Democrats party of Racism
Racism of the Democrat Party
Herman Cain - The DNC has BRAINWASHED most of the Blacks of this Nation
Racism - the Nemesis of the Democrat Party
Democrats invented racism and democrats HATE all blacks
The Snooper Report articles on Democrat invention of racism

The March on DC
Callin’ All the Clans Together
Sick and tired - marching towards the Constitution of the United States
We. Are. Finished. With.  DC.
We. Are. Finished. With. DC. - Addendum Part 1

Civility: The Leftinistra Own None Of It
Civility: The Leftinistra Own None Of It Part 2(?)
Civility: Leftinistra Own None Part Three
Obama, Civility and The Clansmen of Dumb
Brain Dead Leftinistra: Their Stoic Civility
Libtards Have No Class - Civility Escapes Their Brain Deadness
The States Will Be the Next Battlefield in the Fight Over ObamaCare
War Is Coming: Blood On Our Own Streets - Thanks Democrats
Civil War…
We Are In The Midst of Chaos and Civil War
Live Free Or Die
Live Free Or Die Trying
State’s Sovereignty or Live Free Or Die
Live Free Or Die - The Movement Marches On
The Country Surrounds The City

When They Came
Is The Left Still “Proud To Be a Left-Wing Extremist”?
Be It Known - Attention Unconstitutional Congress
Obama: One Big Ass Mistake America
Do Birthers Rock and Roll or Stop and Drool?
Good vs Evil…It Is Your Choice
I Apologize For My Nation
Obama’s Civilian National Security Forces (CNSF)
Obama’s Brown Shirts - Civilian National Security Forces
What Is It About The American Liberal?
The Plan To Destroy America
Another Soldier Has Been Given the Haditha Treatment!
Callin’ All The Clans Together
Callin’ All The Clans Together Show
A History of the List of 45
Constitutionality: The Movement
Vindication: Iraq’s Saddam and Al Qaeda Links Revealed
Redefining The Center or the Moderate
The HIC (Hoax In Charge) Going To Copenhagen
We Didn’t Start This Goddamn War!

Copy Cat Frauds of the IAVA

Contract With America
Snooper’s Declaration of Independence
Thanks Obama

Contract From America

Timothy McVeigh
Thoughts To Ponder and Reflect Upon
Snooper Report Vindication: Al Qaeda, TWA Flight 800 and OKC Bombing
Clinton alludes to 1995 bombing, says words matter

Missing 13th Amendment
TITLES OF “NOBILITY” AND “HONOR” - The Missing 13th Amendment

The Coup
Military Coup Against Obama

The United States Constitution
Our founding document wasn’t set in stone for a reason

Deepwater Horizon
Did Hugo Chavez Sink the Deepwater Horizon Oil Platform?

MSLSD Lies
The New Right

Arizona Rising

Texas Wars

This is pretty much a bunch of crap, FYI.
Editor's Choice


REFERENCE MY NEW WEB SITE

Snooper Report dot org

CHRISTIAN WEB SITE





SEARCH HERE


Powered by Squarespace

1980

1984

Wake Up GOP

This is pretty much a bunch of CRAP, FYI HINT: “MOSTLY TRUE” is a “MOSTLY FALSE” deal which means “MOSTLY TRUE” is a LIE.
« Mayor Daley Senior LBJ Riot Tapes Released Today | Main | Westboro Baptist Church - Leftinistra Acting Like Christians »
Tuesday
Mar302010

OMG - The Tea Party Folks are BIRTHERS

Oh.  Wait.  I was reading so many marxist-sociopathic blogs and articles today - from both sides? - and I seemed to have lost my way but I am all better now.

Obama: The Core of Tea Party Movement are Birthers and People Who Think He's A Socialist - Obama is not a Socialist.  He is a marxist-sociopath and that's because I don't have any other way to actually call him what he is.  I could call him a Social Justice type of a person but that's only 1/5 of what he is, or less.  I could call him a Fascist because he emulates Adolf Hitler but, again, that's only a small portion.  A Marxist/Communist?  Not entirely.  A Socialist?  Partially.  A proponant of Black Liberation Theology stemming from South America in the communist regimes of destruction?  Partially.

So, I call him a marxist-sociopath.  Obama is the worst there is of Socialism, Communism, Fascism, Black Liberation Theology and Social Justice.  Combine all of that and you have the Theology of Barack Hussein Obama.  He is a Jihadi which falls under Fascism on the left side of the brain dead middle.  Islam and Fascism are one in the same.

And that is why Obama comes all unglued at the idiots that seem to think that he is a socialist because he isn't.  He just has the worst of the worse of it.  He doesn't cotton to the "nicer side" of Socialism.  It doesn't ever work, the "nicer side".

Listen to his pathetic America Bashing here.  Oh.  Wait.  His opposition aren't Americans.  I forgot.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

 

Obama Says Tea Party Is Built Around Core Group of Birthers

Remember… He’s a uniter not a divider. [...]

[...] Of course, the socialist label is something he’s worked hard to earn. The birther label is just another instance of this hard core leftist smearing those who oppose his disastrous policies and record. [...]

And that's the name of that.

It's Official, Obama's A Disgrace: Labels Tea Parties A Birther Movement

Now, some writers are using the term "Birther" as a bad name because they all believe that Obama is a United States Citizen and he just might be one.  What they do not understand is the United States Constitution where a Natural Born Citizen is a person born of TWO AMERICAN PARENTS as is stated in the US Constitution.  It helps when one reads Madison's Notes, readily available to all that would care to read them.

The Birthers are those that care about Kenya, Indonesia and other items which may or may not present a problem but my "problem" is Obama's daunting of the Constitution which he swore an Oath twice to perform and he isn't doing that one bit on anything he perports to believe in.  As far as I am concerned, he isn't even a President and everything he does and "accomplishes" I immediately ignore in my own life.  If it comes to it, seeing that I "have no standing" according to the Courts, we will talk about it in Court if I ever get there...which I won't.

His entire ploy today is merely a ploy.

The Snooper Report.
Join us as we Take Our Country Back.
Sic vis pacem para bellum
Fight Accordingly

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (19)

You said: "What they do not understand is the United States Constitution where a Natural Born Citizen is a person born of TWO AMERICAN PARENTS as is stated in the US Constitution. "

That is not stated in the Constitution. All that is stated is that the president must be a Natural Born Citizen, which means that he cannot be a naturalized citizen. Obama is a Natural Born Citizen due to his birth in Hawaii, which is proven by the official birth certificate of Hawaii which has been confirmed twice by the officials in Hawaii.

Here are some federal lawsuits in which the judge stated that the children of one or two foreign parents are Natural Born Citizens because they were born in the USA.

Mustata v. US Dept. of Justice, 179 F.3d 1017 (6th Cir. 1999) (children born in US to two Romanian citizens described as “natural born citizens” of the US):

Petitioners Marian and Lenuta Mustata are citizens of Romania. At the time of their petition, they resided in Michigan with their two minor children, who are natural born citizens of the United States.


Diaz-Salazar v. INS, 700 F.2d 1156 (7th Cir. 1983) (child born in US to Mexican citizen is “natural born citizen” of US):

Petitioner, Sebastian Diaz-Salazar, entered the United States illegally [from Mexico] in 1974 and has been living and working in Chicago since that time. *** The relevant facts which have been placed before the INS, BIA, and this court can be summarized as follows: The petitioner has a wife and two children under the age of three in Chicago; the children are natural-born citizens of the United States.

Nwankpa v. Kissinger, 376 F. Supp. 122 (M.D. Ala. 1974) (child born in US to two Biafra citizens described as “natural born citizen” of the US):

The Plaintiff was a native of Biafra, now a part of the Republic of Nigeria. His wife and two older children are also natives of that country, but his third child, a daughter, is a natural-born citizen of the United States.

March 31, 2010 | Unregistered Commenterrrihardson

Whatever you are babbling about reveals that you have not read the United States Constitution. As for any judicial review, dump it. It matters not seeing that the USC was not followed. Have fun.

Oh. Wait. Just for you:

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5. Also look up: http://www.constitution.org/vattel/vattel.htm Natural Born Citizen is a man or woman of TWO American (for us) citizens. Barack doesn't meet the parameters.

"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

March 31, 2010 | Registered CommenterMark "Snooper" Harvey

Also read: http://www.snooperreport.com/snooper-report/2010/3/7/the-obama-birth-certificate.html

Benjamin Franklin’s (a signer of our Constitution) letter to Charles W.F. Dumas, December 1775(emphasis mine)
“I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the Law of Nations. Accordingly, that copy which I kept (after depositing one in our own public library here, and send the other to the College of Massachusetts Bay, as you directed) has been continually in the hands of the members of our congress, now sitting, who are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained a high and just esteem for their author”

Thanks for stopping by.

March 31, 2010 | Registered CommenterMark "Snooper" Harvey

The US Constitution says that the president must be a Natural Born Citizen. This means that the president cannot be a foreigner and he cannot be a Naturalized citizen. However, it does NOT say that the president cannot be the US-born child of a foreigner, and as you can see the courts are ruling that US-born children of foreigners ARE Natural Born Citizens.

Vattel was a Swiss monarchist who never recommended elections and who never said that a leader of a country should be a citizen of that country. In fact, he gives several examples of countries picking their kings and emperors from the nobility of other countries, and he never says that that is a bad thing. Also, the words "Natural Born Citizen" do no appear in any translation of Vattel before the Constitution.

The place where Natural Born came from was the British and American common law, in which it meant "born in the country with the exception of the children of foreign diplomats."

That is why all those lawsuits have ruled that the US-born child of one or two foreigners is a Natural Born citizen, and that is why the Chief Justice of the United States swore in Obama.

March 31, 2010 | Unregistered Commenterrrihardson

And that is why all of you are constitutional dumbasses. Read Madison's notes before you make a total ass of yourself.

March 31, 2010 | Registered CommenterMark "Snooper" Harvey

I have read Madison's notes, and I believe that the Chief Justice read them too. There is not a word about Natural Born Citizen status not allowing the children of foreigners to be president. Sure, they did not want foreigners to be president, and they did not want naturalized citizens to be president. But they considered the US-born children of foreigners to be Americans, not foreigners at all.

And Madison said: "It is an established maxim, that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth, however, derives its force sometimes from place, and sometimes from parentage; but, in general, place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States.'

As you can see, there is only one criterion of allegiance in the USA, the place of birth. Not place of birth and the citizenship of the parents, which would be two. Just one, the Place of Birth.

April 1, 2010 | Unregistered Commenterrrihardson

And there you go with a Chief Justice like he knows what he is doing. Obama must have TWO American parents and he does not have TWO American parents so he is NOT qualified to be a President of the USA, plain and simple.

April 1, 2010 | Registered CommenterMark "Snooper" Harvey

"Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. " Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION, pg. 190 (2005)

(Edwin "Ed" Meese III (born December 2, 1931 in Oakland, California) is an attorney, law professor, and author who served in official capacities within the Ronald Reagan Gubernatorial Administration (1967-1974), the Reagan Presidential Transition Team (1980), and the Reagan White House (1981-1985), eventually rising to hold the position of the 75th Attorney General of the United States (1985-1988). He currently holds fellowships and chairmanships with several public policy councils and think tanks, including the Constitution Project and the Heritage Foundation.)

"There is no uniform rule among nations by which the nationality of effect of birth a person may be determined from the place of his birth. England and America claim all who are born within their dominions as natural-born subjects or citizens, whatever may have been the parents' nationality." Henry Wheaton, Elements of International Law, 1889 edition.


"Natural-born Citizens, those that are born within the jurisdiction of a national government; i.e., in its territorial limits, or those born of citizens, temporarily residing abroad." William Cox Cochran, The student's law lexicon: a dictionary of legal words and phrases : with appendices, Pg. 185 (1888)

"Citizens are either natural-born or naturalized. One who is born in the United States or under its jurisdiction is a natural-born citizen without reference to the nationality of his parents. Their presence here constitutes a temporary allegiance, sufficient to make a child a citizen." Theordore Dwight, Edward Dwight, Commentaries on the law of persons and personal property, pg. 125 (1894)

"The law of England, as of the time of the Declaration of Independence, was that a person born in that kingdom owed to the sovereign allegiance which could not be renounced. Many early American decisions applied that as the common law in this country. All agreed that every free person born within the limits and the allegiance of a State of the United States was a natural born citizen of the State and of the United States." Perkins v. Elg, 99 F. 2d 408 (US: Court of Appeals, Dist. of Columbia 1938)

April 1, 2010 | Unregistered Commenterrrihardson

Edwin Meese...an idiot that thinks on his own and not the USC. Another Judicial idiot. So what?

Case Law? English Common Law which we do not have?

Show me in the USC where Common Law exists. Show me in the USC where Case Law exists? Show me in the USC where Judicial Review is mentioned. Show me in the USC where precedence law is.

Give it up, punk.

Obama doesn't qualify to be a president of a fart factory let alone the USA.

April 1, 2010 | Registered CommenterMark "Snooper" Harvey

The USC does not apply to the Natural Born Citizen clause of the Constitution. Only the original intent of the writers and possibly the 14th amendment applies. The original intent of the writers in using the term "natural born" was the common law, which was common at the time. Vattel was not common, and his idea that jus sangunis affects citizenship was foreign to the writers, who were familiar with jus soli.

That is why Madison said:

"It is an established maxim, that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth, however, derives its force sometimes from place, and sometimes from parentage; but, in general, place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States."

As you can see, there is only one criterion of allegiance in Madison (and other framers') view, the place of birth. This stems from the common law meaning of Natural Born which was "born in the country with the exception of the children of foreign diplomats."

April 1, 2010 | Unregistered Commenterrrihardson

So sorry for you getting that verbiage from a Judicial quack.

I know you hate the facts of the case but Benjamin Franklin and the rest of the Framers has three copies of Vattel's book...

“I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the Law of Nations. Accordingly, that copy which I kept (after depositing one in our own public library here, and send the other to the College of Massachusetts Bay, as you directed) has been continually in the hands of the members of our congress, now sitting, who are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained a high and just esteem for their author” -- Benjamin Franklin

Vattel's book, Law of Nations was used and the very term of Law of Nations is in the USC. Sorry for you but that's the way it is so get over it.

Vattel, Law of Nations, Natural Born Citizen:

The Law of Nations
Book 1, Chap 19, § 212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights....

http://www.snooperreport.com/snooper-report/2010/2/9/do-birthers-rock-and-roll-or-stop-and-drool.html

April 1, 2010 | Registered CommenterMark "Snooper" Harvey

The law of nations referred to in the Constitution is not the book, it is the generic law of nations. Yes, it is capitalized, but then the Constitution capitalizes a lot of words. For example,

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Vattel is not mentioned in the Federalist Papers, and he was an expert on International Law, where citizenship and elections are under domestic law. Moreover, Vattel himself never recommends that the leaders of countries be even citizens, much less citizens with two citizen parents. He gives several examples of countries picking their kings and emperors from the nobility of other countries, and he never says that this is a bad thing.

The overwhelmingly common use of the term Natural Born at the time was in the British common law and the laws in the colonies before the Revolution, in which it is always means "born in the country with the exception of the children of foreign diplomats." John Jay, who used the term Natural Born Citizen in a letter to Washington, was a lawyer and expert in the common law.

April 5, 2010 | Unregistered Commenterrrihardson

No, dumbass. We fought a war over British Common Law and won that war so why bother utilizing a system that we fought a war against?

Silly libtards.

And thank you for confirming why Law of Nations is capitalized. Too bad for you nitwits, the capitalized verbiage you mentioned are not followed by you libtards. I wonder why that is? We Te People? We The People own the Constitution and not the federalis and when we say NO it means NO. We got an unconstitutional federal health care Bill against OUR will.

But, thanks for the pathetic effort.

April 5, 2010 | Registered CommenterMark "Snooper" Harvey

You said: "We fought a war over British Common Law and won that war so why bother utilizing a system that we fought a war against?"

Largely because we liked the legal system, we just hated the way that the political system was being used. Some idea of how strongly that love for the British legal system was is the island in the Hudson River near West Point, which is called Constitution Island, not for OUR Constitution, which was not written yet, but for the British unwritten constitution.

In our own Constitution, we embrace the Common Law in several ways. One is the use of such common law terms as Habeas Corpus. And the words common law appears in the Constitution in the Seventh Amendment (1791):

"In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."

"The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court (it may have been argued) will extend to causes determinable in different modes, some in the course of the COMMON LAW..." Federalist Papers (Number 81, written by Hamilton.)

"In this State (New York), our judicial establishments resemble, more nearly than in any other, those of Great Britain. We have courts of common law, courts of probates (analogous in certain matters to the spiritual courts in England), a court of admiralty and a court of chancery. In the courts of common law only, the trial by jury prevails, and this with some exceptions. " Federalist Papers (Number 83, written by Hamilton).

And John Jay actually wrote the common law into the first Constitution of New York (1777):

"XXXV. And this convention doth further, in the name and by the authority of the good people of this State, ordain, determine, and declare that such parts of the common law of England, and of the statute law of England and Great Britain, and of the acts of the legislature of the colony of New York, as together did form the law of the said colony on the 19th day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five, shall be and continue the law of this State, subject to such alterations and provisions as the legislature of this State shall, from time to time, make concerning the same. "

As I said, the words Common Law appear in the Federalist Papers 29 times, and Vattel is not mentioned at all.

April 6, 2010 | Unregistered Commenterrrichardson

And that long litany of brazen stupidity is the reason you are in the position that you are in. A brazen marxist-sociopath going along with the List of 45 that was read into the Congress in 1963. Idiot.

April 6, 2010 | Registered CommenterMark "Snooper" Harvey

that "long litany" of the history of the United States, in which the term "Natural Born Citizen" includes EVERY child born in the country (except for the children of foreign diplomats).

April 6, 2010 | Unregistered Commenterrrichardson

And that "rrichardson" is the usual banter from an idiotic libtard, aka marxist-sociopathic moron but you have fun with that one.

April 6, 2010 | Registered CommenterMark "Snooper" Harvey

You do not convince anyone by swearing.

April 7, 2010 | Unregistered Commenterrrichardson

You don't convince anyone by lying like a stuck pig.

April 7, 2010 | Registered CommenterMark "Snooper" Harvey
Comments for this entry have been disabled. Additional comments may not be added to this entry at this time.