President Davis?

Good Lord! Eligibility-doubters are in trouble. Hussein might be eligible after all:

Frank Marshall Davis was American as was Hussein’s mother:

Parenthetically, here are the links to two interesting articles, and a video showing Paul Robeson, for younger Americans who might not know about him:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh9WayN7R-s&feature=player_detailpage

March 30, 2012
Obama's Ship of Fools at U.S. Embassy in Jamaica
By David Paulin

http://www.americanthinker.com/arti...s_ship_of_fools_at_us_embassy_in_jamaica.html

And this:

The Nation's Top 50 Progressives… and Socialists and Communists
By Paul Kengor on 3.30.12 @ 6:08AM

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/03/30/the-nations-top-50-progressive/print

If Davis is Hussein’s father that would make Hussein eligible without a doubt. If Davis’ DNA is available it would settle the question. I say dig him up and let’s find out.

If Davis turns out to be Hussein’s biological father the question arises: Should Hussein’s eligibility be judged on who he claims is his father? What a thorny legal question that is. Should the details in the two part article grow legs the Supreme Court will have to wrestle with a much tougher question.

Here’s the piece about Frank Marshall Davis in two parts:

Film: President's father not Barack Obama
2 years of research, rare photos support compelling case
Published: 11 hours ago
by JEROME R. CORSI

“Who’s your real Daddy?” is a question that remarkably continues to dog Barack Obama, even as he proceeds into his fourth year as president.

With the release this July of Joel Gilbert’s full-length documentary, “Dreams from My Real Father: A Story of Reds and Deception,” the mystery deepens regarding who Obama really is.

“The film provides the first cohesive understanding of Obama’s deep-rooted life journey in socialism, from his childhood to his presidency,” Gilbert told WND.

Gilbert rejects the official story that the Kenyan-born Barack Obama was the president’s father.

Instead, he argues, Frank Marshall Davis, the radical poet and journalist who was a card-carrying member of the Communist Party USA, was the real, biological and ideological father of Barack Obama.

“I decided to investigate Frank Marshall Davis. His close physical resemblance to Obama was shocking, while Obama little resembled the Kenyan Obama,” Gilbert said. “How could this be?”

Gilbert launched into what became two years of research during which he conducted interviews and discovered rare film footage and photos.

“I unearthed two film archives of Frank Marshall Davis, one from 1973, the other from 1987, as well as Davis’ photo collection,” he explained. “I then acquired 500 copies of the Honolulu Record, the communist-run newspaper where Davis wrote a weekly political column for eight years.”

Gilbert’s research turned shocking when he obtained seven indecent photos of Ann Dunham, Obama’s mother, at Frank Marshall Davis’ house, suggesting an intimate connection between Dunham and Davis.

“I was not happy to include these racy photos in the film but found it necessary to substantiate the intimate relationship between the two,” he said. “Those photos ended up in a men’s mail-order catalog of nude women, likely sold to them by Davis. I placed black bars on parts of the photos to be respectful.”

To establish the foundation for the photos, Gilbert documented that Davis was one of the founders of a photography club in Chicago, known as the “Lens Camera Club,” and that he specialized in nude photographs.

See the trailer for “Dreams from My Real Father”:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jrrnkKmUzo&feature=player_embedded

Later in life, Davis also penned a scurrilous, autobiographical sex novel, titled “Sex Rebel: Black,” in which he detailed an illicit sexual relationship with an underage woman named “Anne.” Gilbert believes the name was a thin disguise for Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham.

Gilbert reconstructs Obama’s autobiography, “Dreams from My Father,” and concludes that the tale of the goat-herding father from Kenya is a cover story, concocted to mask an inconvenient pregnancy.

The truth, Gilbert argues, is that Barack Obama II was born from the illicit sexual relationship that rebellious teenager Ann Dunham began with Davis after her parents forced her to move to Hawaii.

Gilbert believes that when Dunham first arrived in Hawaii after graduating from high school, she used the sexual relationship with Davis to act out her frustration that her parents would not permit her to fulfill her wish to attend the University of Washington in Seattle with her Mercer Island High School friends.

In 2010, Gilbert wrote and directed a film titled “Atomic Jihad: Ahmadinejad’s Coming War and Obama’s Politics of Defeat.” “Dreams from My Real Father” will be released this summer, with screenings in theaters across the country currently in the planning process.

Communist roots

The FBI had Davis under surveillance for 19 years, monitoring his support of the Communist Party both in Chicago and in Hawaii.

Gilbert portrays Obama as a “Red Diaper Baby,” a phenomenon among the radical left, referred to as “hand-me-down Marxism,” in which children of radical parents grow up to be radicals. Such was the case with much of the leadership of Students for a Democratic Society and the Weather Underground, including Obama senior political adviser David Axelrod, who was born to a mother who wrote for a communist newspaper in New York City.

“Obama sold himself to America as the multi-cultural ideal, a man who stood above politics. His father was a goat herder from Kenya, he would bring people together, so it went,” Gilbert explained. “While voters will overlook some fudging by politicians, promoting a false family background to hide an agenda irreconcilable with American values is a totally unacceptable manipulation of the electorate.”

What Gilbert presents is a direct challenge to the official narrative, arguing it is more likely President Obama has a deeply disturbing family background and a hidden Marxist agenda.

“Unfortunately, Obama’s style is to minimize, misdirect, and outright lie about damaging information about his past,” Gilbert said. “I hope the media will now demand that he come clean about his family background, his political foundations and fully reveal his agenda for transforming America.”

In writing his autobiography, Obama masked his relationship with Davis, naming him only as “Frank,” a friend of his grandfather who “lived in a dilapidated house in a run-down section of Waikiki.”

Gerald Horne, a contributing editor to “Public Affairs,” an openly Marxist political review, made the first positive identification of “Frank” as Frank Marshall Davis.

In March 2007, Horne gave a speech at New York University on the occasion of the Communist Party USA archive being placed at an NYU library.

In that speech, Horne discussed Davis, noting that Davis, who was born in Kansas and lived much of his adult life in Chicago, had moved to Honolulu in 1948 at the suggestion of his good friend, actor Paul Robeson. In the 1940s, Robeson was an outspoken critic of segregation and racial discrimination in the U.S., a strong advocate of the Soviet Union and a member of the Communist Party USA.

Horne also documented Davis’s friendship with the Dunham family in Hawaii.

“Eventually, [Davis] befriended another family – a Euro-American family – that had migrated to Honolulu from Kansas, and a young woman from this family eventually had a child with a young student from Kenya East Africa who goes by the name of Barack Obama, who, retracing the steps of Davis, eventually decamped to Chicago.”

Lorne further stated Davis was “a decisive influence in helping [Obama] to find his present identity as an African-American, a people who have been the least anti-communist and the most left-leaning of any constituency in this nation.”

After Horne’s speech, the identity of “Frank” was never in doubt, nor his importance in the development of the young Barack Obama.

On Dec. 5, 1956, Davis appeared in executive session before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee investigating “the scope of Soviet activity in the United States,” one of the McCarthy-era panels seeking to expose communists considered to be a security threat.

Invoking his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination, Davis refused to answer a direct question asking if he was then a communist.

A year earlier, in 1955, a Commission on Subversive Activities organized by the government of the Territory of Hawaii identified Davis as a member of the Communist Party USA. The committee singled out for criticism several articles Davis published in the “Communist Honolulu Record” that were critical of the commission.

 

PART TWO:

May 19th Communist Organization

Gilbert documents Obama’s association at Columbia University with what was known as the May 19th Communist Organization, an above-ground support group for the Weather Underground based in New York City from 1978 to 1985.

“May 19th” carried out raucous anti-Apartheid and anti-Klan protests and operated a host of front organizations.

At the time, Weather Underground co-founder William Ayers – Obama’s Chicago neighbor and colleague in education reform – wrote that May 19th provided “a sea for the guerrillas to swim in.”

Some May 19th members committed acts of violence and terrorism, such as the 1981 Nanuet Brinks robbery and murders, the bombing of South African offices in 1981 and the U.S. Capitol bombing in 1983.

“I spoke with a former FBI informant who told me the May 19th Communist Organization had a weapons training camp in the Catskill Mountains, run by former Black Panthers,” Gilbert told WND. “In addition, some May 19th members were sent to Cuba for several weeks each year with the Venceremos Brigade, a continuation of the SDS/Weather Underground program begun in the ’60s, for explosives training from Cuban intelligence, DGI.”

Obama’s election was not a sudden political phenomenon, Gilbert maintains.

“It was the culmination of an American socialist movement that Frank Marshall Davis nurtured in Chicago and Hawaii and has been quietly infiltrating the U.S. economy, universities and media for decades,” he explained. “To understand Obama’s plans for America, look no further than communist Frank Marshall Davis.”

http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/film-presidents-father-not-barack-obama/

 

LOLOL.. this birther business just gets wilder and more pathetic every day.. Naturally WND leads the charge..

My favorite is still the 1998 oil scam.

http://www.wnd.com/1998/10/3351/

 

To Margot: I thought you would be pleased. I guess there in no satisfying ostriches.

 

Kind of like the War on Women, isn't it, except that's led by the White House and MSNBC. Or, maybe the "Truther" nonsense led by liberal politicians and bureaucrats. Yes, the birthers are, in my opinion, grasping at straws. Whether President Obama is a U.S. citizen or not is a dead issue. But, the Democrats will do whatever is necessary to keep it alive.

 

Is that what Flanders and the Dems are doing?

 

Yeah I have heard the "must be some scarey American daddy' theory before also. Birthers are willing to embrace any theory- even contradictory theories- as long as they malign Barack Obama.

I heard both Frank Marshall suggested and also Malcolm X! Oddly enough never Thurgood Marshall or Martin Luther King Jr.

Oh well, WND has to keep the audience stirred up;so they will buy more bomb shelters.

 

Wow, more racism, ignorance, and mistakes of law from the birthers.

Color me surprised.

 

To PatrickT: You are correct about one thing. Hussein’s citizenship is a dead issue. In fact, it’s never been an issue because his mother was American.

Read what a federal judge has to say about PRESIDENTIAL ELIGIBILITY. Note that:

Sooner or later the US Supreme Court will have to clarify the meaning of natural born citizen regarding presidential eligibility. I’ll wager that Hussein will claim the guy from Kansas is his father should the High Court rule him ineligible because the guy from Kenya disqualifies him.

Judge wants definition of 'natural born citizen'
'Resolution of this federal issue will resolve the case'
Published: 8 hours ago
by Bobh Unruh

A federal judge has determined in a case challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility for a state ballot that the meaning of the constitutional phrase “natural born citizen” is “important and not trivial.”

U.S. District Judge S. Thomas Anderson of Tennessee said the courts ultimately must define “natural born citizen,” affirming that the “issue of whether President Obama is constitutionally qualified to run for the presidency is certainly substantial.”

“This specific question has been raised in numerous lawsuits filed since President Obama took office,” Anderson wrote in his opinion. “The outcome of the federal question in this case will certainly have an effect on other cases presenting the same issue about whether President Obama meets the constitutional qualifications for the presidency.”

Van Irion, whose Liberty Legal Foundation brought the case, alleges the plan by Tennessee Democrats to register Obama as their nominee for president opens a case, under state law, of negligent misrepresentation and fraud or intentional misrepresentation because of doubts about Obama’s eligibility.

Irion was pleased the court recognized the significance of the claims.

“The court made several very positive statements about our case,” he noted.

He cited Anderson’s statement that the court “finds that the federal question presented, the meaning of the phrase ‘natural born citizen’ as a qualification for the presidency set out in Article II of the Constitution, is important and not trivial.”

“It is clear that the stated federal issue of President Obama’s qualifications for the office are ‘actually disputed and substantial,” the judge said.

Anderson said it also is “clear that there will be a legal dispute over the Constitution’s definition of ‘natural born citizen’ and the Supreme Court’s decision in Minor.”

Irion told supporters, “While it is certainly dangerous to read too much into such an opinion, the statements from this federal court are encouraging. The court appears to understand the most critical issues presented by our complaint.”

He told WND that the issue identified by Anderson is what virtually all of the dozens of cases challenging Obama’s eligibility have been seeking: a ruling on accusations that Obama is unqualified.

Previously, cases have been dismissed based on standing or other technicalities, not on the merits.

The decision from Anderson came in a case brought by Irion on behalf of voters and political candidates in Tennessee. The plaintiffs argue Obama’s name cannot be submitted because he is ineligible.

The defendants had moved the case from state court, where Irion wanted to argue the state issues, to federal court, where Obama virtually has batted a thousand in preventing cases from reaching the point at which the merits are assessed.

Irion had submitted a motion to have the case returned to the state courts, a request Anderson denied.
But Irion was heartened by the comments from the judge, who said that without a determination on the questions facing the court, there easily could be differing results in court jurisdictions around the nation.

“There is a risk of inconsistent adjudications on the federal issue presented,” the judge said.

Irion also had raised questions about “Obama’s dual citizenship” and allegations that his Social Security number is fraudulent.

“The court construes these allegations about President Obama … as corroboration of plaintiffs’ main allegation that President Obama is not a natural born citizen or otherwise qualified to be president,” the judge wrote.

Anderson’s opinion included a notation that the U.S. Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett defined “natural born citizen” as “all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens.”

“It is undisputed that the material fact at issue in this case is whether under the circumstances of president Obama’s birth, the president is a ‘natural born citizen,’ a term set out in the United States Constitution and construed under federal law,” he wrote.

The case is developing just as a new petition urges members of Congress to take the issue seriously by investigating it. The number of names on the document has surged past 40,000 and soon will be approaching 50,000.

WND reported just a day ago that members of Congress, regarding Obama’s eligibility, still are relying on statements from Hawaii officials, “vetting” by voters and his own word.

Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio., for example has said. “I will continue to take the president at his word that he is a natural born citizen of the United States.”

Obama released an image of a Hawaiian long-form birth certificate on April 27, 2011, after years of stating that the document was not available. But at that time, the Hawaii Department of Health and governor’s office refused to confirm for WND that the image released was an accurate representation of the state’s records.

However, Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s law enforcement investigators have found probable cause that the document is a forgery. Others, meanwhile, argue that the document affirms Obama is not eligible, because it lists his father as a foreigner. The Founders, they argue, understood “natural born citizen” to be the offspring of two American citizens.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/judge-wants-definition-of-natural-born-citizen/?cat_orig=politics

 

More and more pathetic........ Native born or natural born has never been in question.. If you are born on US soil, you are native/natural born... Are you all now reduced to semantic games? How many "types" of citizenship are you trying to invent?

 

To Margot: Do you have the faintest understanding of the issue? Do you honestly believe that all of the lawsuits filed, and all of the ballot eligibility laws being considered, and all of the opinions stated by constitutional experts, and federal judges, are designed to invent new types of citizenship? I pray you continue to respond with your inane comments because you are the true voice for all of Hussein’s defenders.

 

Hysterical. This most recent "case" is another example of birthers LOSING and then pretending, against all rational belief, that a loss is a win.

The judge's statements referred to in the WND article come from his decision DENYING birthers' motion to keep the case in State court (where, in solid red Tennessee, they're likely to find a birther judge to entertain their nonsense). When he said the case has a "significant" federal issue, he was saying that for the purpose of drawing a distinction between a federal and state issue.

No doubt, in another two weeks or so, when he rules on the Defendant's motion to dismiss under FRCP 12(b)(6), he will dismiss this ridiculous lawsuit, and yet another birther claim will go up in flames.

 

There is no 'issue'- there are a few racists and xenophobes trying to pretend that there is a different definition of natural born citizen than the one that all Americans know, and that every legal opinion agrees on.

Let us review what actual judges have said about the whole two citizen parent nonsense theory:

Ankeny v. Daniels, 916 N.E.2d 678 (Indiana Ct. App. 2009, ). The Ankeny court ruled that the citizenship of President Obama's father is irrelevant:

Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are "natural born Citizens" for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.

Judge Malihi

In 2009, the Indiana Court of Appeals (“Indiana Court&#8221 addressed facts and issues similar to those before this court. [Ankeny] v. Governor, 916 N.E.2d (Ind. Ct. App. 2009). … The Indiana Court rejected the argument that Mr. Obama was ineligible, stating that children born within the United States are natural born citizens, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. … This Court finds the decision and analysis of [Ankeny] persuasive.

Do you have any clue as to how there is no issue here? That this is an entirely invented 'controversy'?

 

and does losing every single legal challenge to obama's eligibility tell you anything? that you are wrong perhaps? It would to a sane person.

 

Of course I understand.. I have read the laws and gone with my family to the nearest US consulate to register the birth of a brand new baby Native/Natural Born American.

Thousands of Americans are born overseas every year.. Its not big del.

For Obama, Rubio nd Jindal.. they were BORN on US soil so they didn't have to go to the consulate.

I don't know if the birther problem is one of utter ignorance of the citizenship laws of the US, but you can find the Statutes laid out at Cornell Law.

You are a willing dupe.

 

To Margot: No you don’t. You keep taking about citizenship. That is not the issue. PRESIDENTIAL ELIGIBILITY IS THE ISSUE. If, as you imply, every American who is automatically a citizen at birth is eligible, it will not be long before those who hate America’s Constitution will find justification for making naturalized citizens eligible.

To Margot: Only a dupe of the Constitution. On the other hand you are a dupe of America-haters, or perhaps you are one of those who loves the UNIC (United Nations/International Community) more than you love this country?

Since you obviously do not understand the issue on the most basic level, I better explain that it’s about replacing the US Constitution with a global government worldview. After all, “We are all citizens of the world.” It just happens that Hussein’s lack of eligibility presented an unexpected opportunity to eliminate one clause in the Constitution. Once he got away with getting on the ballot in all fifty states those who have no use for the Constitution circled the wagons around him.

Note that at least one Supreme Court justice openly stated her displeasure with the Constitution. With such people on the highest court in the land it’s no wonder her kind of thinking is common among congressional Democrats, media pundits, and run of the mill Socialists. So you might want to rethink your role as their dupe.

 

no CITIZENSHIP IS THE ISSUE. Every legal authority has said that any citizen at birth is a natural born citizen, and eligible for the POTUS.

conspiracy theory drivel.

there is no lack of eligibility. that's why he's POTUS, and every single court decision that has had the issue before it told you to go pound sand.

you prove daily that you have no idea what is in the constitution.

 

Every citizen who is automatically a Citizen at birth is eligible- that is how it has been for the last 200 years for white men. And if American's choose to change the Constitution to make naturalized citizens eligible- something I don't particularly endorse, and pass an amendment to the Constitution, then America has honored the Constitution by following the Constitutional Amendment procedures.

And the rest of your stuff is just conspiratorial nonsense. The fact is that Margot and myself and Bullslawden choose to refute attacks on our Constitution by those who seek to restrict the rights of children of immigrants.

 

What a typical bunch of your bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

The Constitution specifies natural born citizen. It uses those exact words. How could a naturalized citizen be eligible? There's an obvious bright line there.

If they want to amend the Constitution to allow naturalized citizens, so be it. But it's clear that's what's needed to make a naturalized citizen eligible.

You are really grasping at straws. It's quite pathetic.

 

To BullsLawDan: Do you understand the words “find justification”? You should because all of Hussein’s ostriches found a way to justify his eligibility and to hell with amending the Constitution?

 

There's nothing to "find justification" in. The Constitution uses the exact words "natural born," which any high school kid knows is different than naturalized.

What would they need to amend? It says natural born citizen, which he is. The fact that you and a couple of other kooks disagree out of hatred and racism does not change what every Court has confirmed for the last 200 years. Being born in the United States makes a person a natural born citizen.

Even your legendary Minor v. Happersett says there are only two types of citizen: naturalized and natural born.

 

who is justifying his eiligibility? his eligibility has been proven beyond any shred of a reasonable doubt.

 

As my signature says....'Hussien's ostriches' proudly includes almost 70 million voters, the Electoral College, the entire Congress, Chief Justice Roberts, every court and judge which has heard this preposterous claim, the Congressional Research Service and every legal scholar with any gravitas who has written a scholarly paper on the subject.

We all know that Barrack Obama was and is eligible because we have all always known that anyone born in the U.S. is eligible. We are upholding the Constitution...you are proposing an extra-Constitutional subversion of the Constitution because you can't stand Barack Obama as President.

 

Just curious

Can any of Hussein’s ostriches tell me how many countries allow a foreigner to acquire citizenship then run the country? I believe my question is legitimate in our world of “democracies” (over one hundred to hear Socialists tell it). I haven’t heard how many of the new democracies supposedly created in the twentieth century are republics practicing a form of limited representative for the benefit of all. They all appear to be designed to empower parasites the world over at the expense of society’s contributors.

 

Having trouble. No message here.