Retroactive birther movement

[Little Nemo]

Sure Barack Obama is a natural born American. But what about all those other guys who called themselves Presidents? Were they natural born Americans?

The argument has been made that secession is a legal right held by the states. Plenty of people are still arguing the point. So the secession of eleven states in 1861 must have been legal and those states ceased to legally be a part of the United States from the point of their secession.

So Bill Clinton, born in Arkansas in 1946? Not an American.

Jimmy Carter, born in Georgia in 1924? Not an American.

Lyndon Johnson, born in Texas in 1908? Not an American.

Dwight Eisenhower, born in Texas in 1890? Not an American.

These four men were not natural born Americans and I demand that their Presidencies be retroactively declared null and void.

[Argent Towers]

Also, King Edward IV of England was illegitimate and therefore all of his descendants were also illegitimate and everything that happened under their reigns must be reverted, including the renaming of New York back to New Amsterdam and the ceding of all territories within to the House of Orange, the giving of all land discovered in the New World in the name of King James back to the Indians, the official language of America to be changed to Dutch instead of English, the removal of all British influences from the flags of New Zealand and Australia, and indeed the complete dismantling of the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" since this was all established under the reign of pretenders descending from the bastard Edward IV.

[fuzzypickles]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

The argument has been made that secession is a legal right held by the states. Plenty of people are still arguing the point. So the secession of eleven states in 1861 must have been legal and those states ceased to legally be a part of the United States from the point of their secession.

So Bill Clinton, born in Arkansas in 1946? Not an American.

Jimmy Carter, born in Georgia in 1924? Not an American.

Lyndon Johnson, born in Texas in 1908? Not an American.

Dwight Eisenhower, born in Texas in 1890? Not an American.

Nice try, but all of these states were officially readmitted to the Union by 1870. If you can come up with a former president who was born in the south between 1861 and 1865, then you'll be on to something.

[Wile E]

I just now found out what "birthers" means. I had thought it was some Catholic thing.


The Eisenhauer clan came to the states before they were The States (DDE's branch later changed the spelling of the name) but they've been here longer than most Americans and having been born in Texas shouldn't be held against him.

[Sunspace]

Arise Boudica! Germans out! Everyone who came from the southern part of Great Britain should be speaking Welsh. We realise that there will be a transition period while things are restored, so there's still some time to start learning.

[Little Nemo]

Nice try, but all of these states were officially readmitted to the Union by 1870. If you can come up with a former president who was born in the south between 1861 and 1865, then you'll be on to something.

Doesn't matter. The secession was legal. cite cite cite So when the federal government forced those states to "rejoin" the United States that readmission was illegal.

[EvilTOJ]

I move that we have these seven Presidents made null and void. It's a well known fact they were in fact NOT natural born citizens when they were elected!

George Washington
John Adams
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
James Monroe
John Quincy Adams
Andrew Jackson

I salute you, Martin Van Buren. You were the first true president of the United States.

[jtgain]

Originally Posted by EvilTOJ

I move that we have these seven Presidents made null and void. It's a well known fact they were in fact NOT natural born citizens when they were elected!

George Washington
John Adams
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
James Monroe
John Quincy Adams
Andrew Jackson

I salute you, Martin Van Buren. You were the first true president of the United States.

Originally Posted by The Constitution

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.

The bolded part says that those 7 are real Presidents..

[jtgain]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

Doesn't matter. The secession was legal. cite cite cite So when the federal government forced those states to "rejoin" the United States that readmission was illegal.

They still rejoined. They could have fought to the death, I suppose, but they assented to rejoin the union.

[Zebra]

George Washington was born in 'Virgina' in 1732! Virgina was not a state in 1732. Therefore George Washington was not a naturally born citizen and therefore there is NO AMERICA! OR CHEESE!

[tdn]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

So Bill Clinton, born in Arkansas in 1946? Not an American.

Jimmy Carter, born in Georgia in 1924? Not an American.

Lyndon Johnson, born in Texas in 1908? Not an American.

Dwight Eisenhower, born in Texas in 1890? Not an American.

The thing of it is, those that would like to see Obama thrown out over something like this would probably like to see the rest of them thrown out, save for Eisenhower.

[The Great Sun Jester]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

These four men were not natural born Americans and I demand that their Presidencies be retroactively declared null and void.

No tacos for you, sailor boy. I tried this in GQ and the general consensus is that it'd be too complicated to right the injustice even if it were a recent event.

Just think of all the Eisenhower dollars that would be instantly worthless! The highway would be scrapped, we'd have to go back to war with Korea, the tunnel in Colorado would collapse, any number of stamps with his image on them--the post office would have to confiscate all those letters and return them to the senders.... As for Clinton, Carter and Johnson?

[Oy!]

Originally Posted by Argent Towers

Also, King Edward IV of England was illegitimate and therefore all of his descendants were also illegitimate and everything that happened under their reigns must be reverted, including the renaming of New York back to New Amsterdam and the ceding of all territories within to the House of Orange, the giving of all land discovered in the New World in the name of King James back to the Indians, the official language of America to be changed to Dutch instead of English, the removal of all British influences from the flags of New Zealand and Australia, and indeed the complete dismantling of the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" since this was all established under the reign of pretenders descending from the bastard Edward IV.

Edward the Fourth? He was legitimate. Not the son of a king, mind you, but a perfectly legitimate son of Richard, Duke of York, grandson of Lionel, son of Edward III. His son Edward V, on the other hand, was found to be illegitimate under Titulus Regulus, and replaced by his (again, legitimate) uncle Richard III, who was usurped by Henry VII.

[Polycarp]

Originally Posted by Argent Towers

Also, King Edward IV of England was illegitimate and therefore all of his descendants were also illegitimate and everything that happened under their reigns must be reverted, including the renaming of New York back to New Amsterdam and the ceding of all territories within to the House of Orange, the giving of all land discovered in the New World in the name of King James back to the Indians, the official language of America to be changed to Dutch instead of English, the removal of all British influences from the flags of New Zealand and Australia, and indeed the complete dismantling of the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" since this was all established under the reign of pretenders descending from the bastard Edward IV.

Well, if you're bringing up English kings, take William I -- there was a real bastard!

[Argent Towers]

Originally Posted by Oy!

Edward the Fourth? He was legitimate. Not the son of a king, mind you, but a perfectly legitimate son of Richard, Duke of York, grandson of Lionel, son of Edward III. His son Edward V, on the other hand, was found to be illegitimate under Titulus Regulus, and replaced by his (again, legitimate) uncle Richard III, who was usurped by Henry VII.

Edward IV was illegitimate.

Supposedly.

He also looked like Christopher Walken, and wore really psychedelic shirts.

[Freddy the Pig]

There were forerunners of the birthers 130 years ago arguing that Chester Arthur was born in Canada. His father was a travelling preacher. No word on whether his Mama used to dance for the money they'd throw.

[Oy!]

Originally Posted by Argent Towers

Edward IV was illegitimate.

Supposedly.

He also looked like Christopher Walken, and wore really psychedelic shirts.

Polydore Virgil was, with regard to any Plantagenet history, roughly equivalent to Rush Limbaugh as a historian of the Clinton years; he was writing under Henry VII. George, Duke of Clarence, along with Warwick, were also completely unreliable as sources, since they were attempting to depose Edward in favor of George <"Drowned in a butt of malmsey"> himself. There is no credible source of any question of Edward's birth; Shakespeare was also a Tudor creature, and wrote Richard III based on the biography credited to Thomas More, but actually probably written by John Morton, Bishop of Ely, who hated Richard with a passion. And I don't see the Walken resemblence, although I'll grant you the shirts. Edward was considered an uber-hunk, and was himself an incorrigible womanizer in his day.

[kunilou]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

Bill Clinton
Jimmy Carter
Lyndon Johnson
Dwight Eisenhower

Originally Posted by EvilTOJ

George Washington
John Adams
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
James Monroe
John Quincy Adams
Andrew Jackson

Don't be silly. None of those people were Muslims!

[Guinastasia]

Orly Taitz incorrectly states that BOTH parents must be citizens of the US for a child to be born a citizen. Which would let out Chester A. Arthur -- his father was Irish.

[Shirley Ujest]

Originally Posted by Guinastasia

Orly Taitz incorrectly states that BOTH parents must be citizens of the US for a child to be born a citizen. Which would let out Chester A. Arthur -- his father was Irish.

Damn Irish!

[Polycarp]

Originally Posted by Oy!

Polydore Virgil was, with regard to any Plantagenet history, roughly equivalent to Rush Limbaugh as a historian of the Clinton years; he was writing under Henry VII. George, Duke of Clarence, along with Warwick, were also completely unreliable as sources, since they were attempting to depose Edward in favor of George <"Drowned in a butt of malmsey"> himself. There is no credible source of any question of Edward's birth; Shakespeare was also a Tudor creature, and wrote Richard III based on the biography credited to Thomas More, but actually probably written by John Morton, Bishop of Ely, who hated Richard with a passion. And I don't see the Walken resemblence, although I'll grant you the shirts. Edward was considered an uber-hunk, and was himself an incorrigible womanizer in his day.

However, the allegations of King Edward's illegitmacy was purely circulated by partisans of Warwick the Kingmaker and later of Richard III, and maligns Cicely (Neville) York, Duke Richard's wife, who was still alive through the Wars of the Roses and both her sons' reigns, dying in 1495 with Henry VII and his wife, Elizabeth of York, Cicely's granddaughter, on the throne.

[Captain Amazing]

Right. It wasn't the Tudors who claimed that either Ed IV or Ed V were illegitimate. It was Richard III who done it.

[Oy!]

I challenge you to find a contemporary account of Richard or his partisans prompted by him claiming that. It would have traduced his mother, his wife, and his sister-in-law, all of whom lived quite comfortably with Richard during his reign; sister-in-law Elizabeth (whom no one blamed for her illegal marriage, as Edward had kept it secret) accepted a pension from him.

Tudor writers later claimed that Richard said it, but I'm not aware of any contemporary evidence to that effect.