Sunday, January 30, 2011 2:31 AM
Thank you, Citizens4Freedom. You are spot on with Part 1. Actually, Mr. Obama has spent more than $2 million to have at least 75 lawsuits and appeals dismissed. But since Jan. 20, 2009, he has been spending taxpayer money, not his campaign funds. He reported to the FEC paying his primary law firm, Perkins Coie, $1.7 million just for Q3 and Q4 of 2008 and Q1 of 2009. That does not include their bills for legal expenses during the past 22 months, although some of that is said to be pro bono. It also does not include legal expenses charged to the taxpayers by the U.S. Attorneys and staff, and by the U.S. Army and other military attorneys and staff.
Part 2 is easily verified as incorrect. Fulbright scholarships are indeed awarded to foreign students studying in the U.S., but NOT to undergraduate students. The "Soetoro" listed in California records of scholarship beneficiaries was not named "Barry". I was unaware that "Americans for Freedom of Information" was still circulating this misinformation, and they probably aren't. But feathers released from a pillow and carried by the wind are almost impossible to get back into the bag.
A similar misunderstanding is that he could not have traveled to Pakistan in 1981 on a U.S. passport, so he must have used a Kenyan or an Indonesian one. This is also incorrect. The U.S. Dept. of State discouraged travel to Pakistan on U.S. passports, but it was still legal and possible and done. A U.S. passport bearer visiting Pashtun country in NW Pakistan might very well never return, but it was possible for him to go.
What was NOT possible in 1981 was to travel from Karachi in Pakistan to Islamabad in India without originating the round trip in India and obtaining an Indian visa before entering Pakistan. Bill Burton, then Mr. Obama's press secretary, misspoke that Barack Obama II traveled to Karachi and from there to Islamabad, India. That was impossible in 1981. Actually, he traveled to Karachi and from there to Islamabad, Pakistan, a trip of about 50 miles. Pakistanis, who well know the difference between Islamabad, Pakistan, and Islamabad, India, were no doubt suitably unimpressed by Mr. Burton's knowledge of Pakistan.
"A natural born Citizen is a citizen born in the country of parents who are citizens then." This definition from Emerich de Vattel's _The Law of Nations_ was:
the norm in Western Civilization dating back to Plato and Herodotus;
used in correspondence among the Framers of the Constitution;
quoted nearly verbatim in the U.S. Supreme Court cases _The Venus_, _Shanks v. DuPont_, _Minor v. Happersett_, _Wong Kim Ark_, and _Perkins v. Elg_, and never contradicted in any U.S. Supreme Court case;
quoted by authors of Amendment XIV, U.S. Rep. John A. Bingham and U.S. Sen. Jacob Howard;
and characteristic of every duly-elected President born since the ratification of the Constitution in 1787... except Chester A. Arthur, who even burned his Presidential papers to hide his father's Canadian citizenship, which status was only discovered in 2008 by Atty. Leo Donofrio's researchers.
Mr. Obama, on the other hand, was not only born in Kenya, but his mother was not yet 19, the age required in 1961 to confer her U.S. citizenship to her newborn child. Hiis father (of record) was a Kenyan, a British Protected Subject, which status passed to all of his offspring. How could a newborn Barack Obama II, whose birth status was governed by British law, be a natural born Citizen of the United States? He was not even a U.S. citizen at birth. UNLESS he has been NATURALIZED (which would exclude him from being a natural born Citizen), HE IS NOT NOW, NOR HAS HE EVER BEEN, A U.S. CITIZEN!!!
HE'S A BRIT; HE'S NOT LEGIT!
http://tinyurl.com/mapuzzo
http://alipac.us/ftopic-137238-.html
http://forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?t=1216821
http://theconservativemonster.com/2010/05/14/day-one-of-the-obama-columbia-university-trial.aspx
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/