Obama Has His Day in Court ...

[Trojan_Ripper]

Georgia is a state. The Presidency is a federal office. That's why I posed the question?

It seems clear from the proceedings that the judge in the case thinks the whole affair is a circus and didn't care that Obama or his attorney were not present.

That is misleading as hell barts. Putting words in text, (leading the reader to believe they came from some other person’s mouth), is worse than plagiarizing Imo, and falsely making claims that don’t exist.

It seems “clear” to whom….you? I saw nowhere were the judge “thinks the whole affair is a circus” and “didn’t care that Obama or his attorney were not present”.

The article itself is misleading by mentioning that the hearing is supposedly about Obama being born in Kenya and therefore not a natural born citizen…. when actually it’s about whether he qualifies to be on the presidential ballot in Georgia because of his parents qualifications as naturalized citizens.

There was no dispute in this case that President Obama was born on American soil; (however, many citizens even dispute that based on reported conversations with his Kenyan Grandmother who said he was born in Kenya.)
According to this complaint, he was born of one parent who was American and one who was subject to the United Kingdom.

If the Constitution requirement is that a candidate for US President be that of a “natural born” citizen – and the determination is that both parents must be either born in America or be a naturalized citizen and the child born in America – then President Obama would not qualify.

As far as your question on Georgia being a state and the president being federal is answered by:

In Georgia, state law requires “every candidate for federal” office who is certified by the state executive committees of a political party or who files a notice of candidacy “shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.”

The Judge determined that Georgia Law allows any citizen to challenge a candidate’s qualifications to be on the state ballot.
The decision before the Judge now is to decide over the next week as to whether or not President Obama documented his eligibility to the satisfaction of the court.

It was reported by Bob Unruh of World Net Daily that the judge considered granting a default judgment because President Obama did not appear. However, this was not what those attorneys who brought the case wanted. They wanted a definitive decision based on the facts; and for them to be recorded as part of the court records for any future appeals.

Not appearing may have been a big mistake on Mr. Obama’s part as often times appeal judges do not wish to hear evidence that was not presented in the original hearing.



[COLOR=#800080]http://www.examiner.com/news-you-can-use-in-atlanta/obama-could-have-lost-georgia-case-by-no-show-default[/COLOR]

[The Decider]

You constantly talk about how Americans should revolt....well what do you think about revolting against the unfair politicians who break the law every day with no type of normal justice or retribution required by us?

Not appearing may have been a big mistake on Mr. Obama’s part as often times appeal judges do not wish to hear evidence that was not presented in the original hearing.

Appeal judges? This case will be decided by the Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp, a Republican. He will either strike Obama's name from the ballot or ignore the frivolous lawsuit and do nothing. He will do the latter or be subjected to a political shit storm the likes of which he and the state of Georgia haven't witnessed in many years. The case will be tied up in state and federal litigation and Obama's name WILL appear on the ballot as the case moves through the courts. Obama will use the controversy on the campaign trail to great effect.

So, bring it on. Republican crazies know how to shoot themselves in both feet. More rational folks like Romney, the likely eventual nominee, do not want the birthers at the front and center of the Republican campaign.

[Thanatos]

Secretary of State Brian Kemp seems comfortable with this idiocy.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&p...kMTI5&hl=en_US

I have been racist against Georgians for a long time and this news only strengthens my resolve. The time of cleansing draws nigh. From the funny-smelling red dirt to the genetically inferior slime that crawls upon it, we shall purge this land and reclaim it for humanity. Who will stand under my banner?

[Meleagar]

That is misleading as hell barts. Putting words in text, (leading the reader to believe they came from some other person’s mouth), is worse than plagiarizing Imo, and falsely making claims that don’t exist.

Some people like using the term "it seems to me", because such a preface carries with it no assertion or even implication about facts, truth, or a position supportable by logic or evidence --- only what "it seems" to the person making the statement.

The evidence indicates that Obama has something to hide about his eligibility, or else he could have easily put this to rest by having his documents entered into the official court record to have an official court ruling on his eligibility.

There is absolutely no reasonable excuse for Obama simply ignoring the court order. The judge is supposed to make his ruling this week, from what I read. Then it is up to the Georgia Sec. of State to obey the ruling and strike Obama's name from the ballot.

Does anyone here think this is going to stop with Georgia? With a legally binding precedent, I can see challenges springing up in every state. How is it going to look if in largely democrat-controlled states such suits are dismissed, whilen in Republican-controlled states Obama is removed from the ballot because he will not even show up to defend his eligibility?

[Meleagar]

Appeal judges? This case will be decided by the Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp, a Republican. He will either strike Obama's name from the ballot or ignore the frivolous lawsuit and do nothing. He will do the latter or be subjected to a political shit storm the likes of which he and the state of Georgia haven't witnessed in many years. The case will be tied up in state and federal litigation and Obama's name WILL appear on the ballot as the case moves through the courts. Obama will use the controversy on the campaign trail to great effect.

So, bring it on. Republican crazies know how to shoot themselves in both feet. More rational folks like Romney, the likely eventual nominee, do not want the birthers at the front and center of the Republican campaign.

So the Sec. of State is supposed to enter a ruling not based on fact (the evidence presented by the plaintiff, and the complete lack of evidence or rebuttal presented by the respondent), but rather based on fear for his political future? And we're all supposed to just ignore the POTUS breaking the law because it's "crazy" to challenge his eligibility in the first place?

Yeah, that's a great society - one where court decisions are based on fear of political backlash and the media "approved" perspective trumps perfectly legal challenges.

[brendand]

While I see the motivation behind these challenges to be completely political, a more widespread implication would be the creation of a division (or sub-class) of citizens deemed "non-natural-born citizens" who are not granted the same opportunities despite being legal citizens of the country for their entire lives. It makes me wonder if/why any court would want to rule on such an issue. I find it doubtful that any challenges to citizenship with retroactive effects would be upheld.

Unless of course the argument is that he is not a citizen at all...

[NoJingoLingo]

Supposedly she did not meet the criteria of the part bolded

So you think that his mother had not been "physically present" in the US for 5 years before having the child and didn't reside in the US for at least 2 years before the childs 14th birthday? LOL... Notice the word "total" in the bold print? You don't think Obama's mother spent at least 5 years in the US out of her entire life up to the point Obama was born and then at least 2 years before he was 14? Nothing there says, the 5 years previous to his birth, just 5 years in total.

[tinybear]

Perhaps. There's no "contempt" unless the judge so rules, and if he does there may be an issue of jurisdiction. Does a Georgia judge have the authority to order the appearance of a sitting US President in, what amounts to, a civil matter? I just raise the question.

Disobeying a subpoena is contempt. One doesn't need a judge's ruling to know that. If there is an issue of jurisdiction, then the subpoena should have been challenged and ruled upon. Not ignored.

[Meleagar]

While I see the motivation behind these challenges to be completely political, a more widespread implication would be the creation of a division (or sub-class) of citizens deemed "non-natural-born citizens" who are not granted the same opportunities despite being legal citizens of the country for their entire lives. It makes me wonder if/why any court would want to rule on such an issue. I find it doubtful that any challenges to citizenship with retroactive effects would be upheld.

That division already exists, and has always existed in the USA. The only exemptions were those grandfathered in at the time of the founding of the country.

For instance, Arnold Schwartzenegger is not a natural born citizen, although he is a citizen. That is why he could not run for President, but could run for Governor of California.

[brendand]

That division already exists, and has always existed in the USA. For instance, Arnold Schwartzenegger is not a natural born citizen, although he is a citizen. That is why he could not run for President, but could run for Governor of California.

That's true. But he was not born in America.

[Meleagar]

That's true. But he was not born in America.

Which is one of the necessary conditions for being a natural born citizen - born in America, or born on what is legally considered to be American soil. That is call jus soli, by right of soil. Another condition is jus sanguinas, or by right of blood - your parents must both be citizens. Both conditions must be met in order to be considered a "natural born citizen". Yet a third condition is that one cannot have dual citizenship, or have ever had dual citizenship that has not been annulled. Yet another condition is that one never have renounced their citizenship. Those people can only become "naturalized" citizens; they are not "natural born" citizens.

There are citizens, dual citizens, naturalized citizens, and natural born citizens. These are legal terms that have the purpose of determining who has what kind of rights in the USA and abroad. Not every "citizen" has the same rights.

[arX]

It continues to amaze me how people continue to think Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States. Such people have serious psychological issues, and I'm not kidding in the least.

Indeed, how much evidence do they need to be made publically available and officially verified?

Never enough, apparently.