Below, I submit quotes from legal precedent regarding my position on "birtherism". I do believe there is ample information here to make the case that the Vattel definition of the term "natural born citizen" applies to the current occupant of the White House, and that he is ineligible to serve as President of the United States. Unfortunately, many Americans (including Glenn Beck, with whom I agree on almost all other matters) not only disagree with those who believe as I do, but call us "kooks" and "extremists", claiming that we have no credibility. I would like to see similar information that supports this position for my perusal. Show me your evidence and make your case.

Searching the Internet via Google for "the case against birthers", this is the only page that is returned with any sort of relevance in the first ten hits (click next a few times and you get hits with similar claims). It establishes Obama's COLB as evidence of birth in Hawaii to Barack Obama, Sr. and Stanley Ann Dunham, and referenced two birth announcements in two local newspapers, along with testimony from people who say they have seen the vault birth certificate.

Both of these documents are questionable, first because the COLB was frequently issued to people born abroad, and therefore cannot be used as a substitute when a court has subpoenaed the original, and second because Obama and Dunham are known to have been communist progressive extremists who would have had an interest in concealing the fact that they had been abroad if their having been abroad were in violation of some applicable law or for reasons they would have wanted to conceal. Don't forget that 1961 America wasn't exactly the most pro-communist place in the world. As for the testimony of those who have seen the birth certificate, they have only testified that they have seen it, and apparently not to its contents. Americans deserve to see the original.

However, even if it can be conclusively demonstrated that Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. was born in Hawaii and is a native born citizen of the United States of America, which is quite possible - even likely - given that there is a vault birth certificate on record there, this does not in and of itself make him natural born. Upon learning that officers on US naval vessels during the War of 1812, fought not only under a Founding Father president but under James Madison himself, were required to be natural born citizens, I sought the definition used in that conflict, as it was fought during the lifetime of the Founding Fathers. Surely there should be some reference with regard to how it was applied then.

What I found was that not only was the Vattel definition applied in this case, but it was applied in ALL of the four relevant cases that have come before the US Supreme Court in the history of this great country. John Charlton posted his research here this past October, and included all four cases in his post. In each case, Vattel (shown first) is supported.

Vattel: The Law of Nations

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. . . .

(Note that the word "natives" as included here has been determined to be a mis-translation. The correct word here should be "naturals".)

The Venus (1814)

On page 12 of the ruling, Justice Henry Brockholst Livingston quoted the Vattel text verbatim in his own translation. Livingston was a Lieutenant Colonel in the Revolutionary War, and served under the direct command of pre-treason General Arnold.

Shanks vs. DuPont (1830)

children born in a country, continuing while under age in the family of the father, partake of his national character as a citizen of that country. - Justice Joseph Story

Very similar to Vattel, indeed. Justice Story's father was a participant in the Boston Tea Party.

Minor v. Happersett (1875)

At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens - Chief Justice Salmon Portland Chase

United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898)

At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. - Supreme Court Justice Horace Gray (citing Happersett)

This stuff seems pretty compelling. The only thing I could find that even tried to make a case against "birthers" was the post cited above (and a couple of similar ones), which doesn't even address the issue of natural born citizenship with regard to parentage.

Therefore, Mr. Beck, Mr. Hawkins, and the rest of you who disagree with us on this matter, please present your case or at least respect the fact that we have a legitimate position here. At a minimum, stop portraying us as extremist kooks. This is the United States Constitution we are defending here, and doing so is not only the right, but the responsibility of every citizen of the United States of America - including those not sworn an oath to it. There is more than ample evidence that we are right here. Let's see yours.

RWR