Barack Obama v. The Constitution of the United States


UPDATE:  Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs has another first class update on the issues and history behind Senator Obama’s refusal to make public those documents that would lay this issue to rest.  I was especially intrigued by the reference to some of Obama’s Chicago attorney friends’ efforts dating back two years to try and remove the reference to “natural born” citizen from the Constitution.  Why would they even bring this up if there was no question regardingBarack Obama’s eligibility to serve as POTUS?

UPDATE 2:  The deeper I look into Barack Obama and this “natural born” citizen business, the more of a “sticky wicket” it seems to become for Mr. Obama.  Now, a group of Washington state residents have sued to have Obama’s votes set aside because is is not a natural born citizen, AND because he ran under a false name.  According to this local news article, Barack was adopted by his step-father while living in Indonesia as a child, and took “Barry Soetoro” as his legal name.  What a swamp!  Barry/Barack Soetoro/Obama, step up and be a man – either provide the proof of natural born citizenship or admit that you cannot and take the consequences! (thanks to Atlas Shrugs for the reference)

Original post:

So, here we are days away from the Electoral College’s constitutionally required meetings in the 50 states (with Michigan’s 17 Democrat-Obama/Biden electors scheduled to gather in Lansing), and the questions about where Barack Obama was born are still percolating around the Internet.  Why?  Because the United States Constitution says that to be eligible to serve as President of the United States, a person must be a natural born citizen.  

What does “natural born citizen” mean?  Under U.S. law, it means:

  • Anyone born inside the United States
  • Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person’s status as a citizen of the tribe
  • Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
  • Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
  • Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
  • Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
  • Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
  • A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S. 

If President-elect Obama was born in Kenya (as rumors and Kenya’s sealing of Obama’s records suggest), then he is ineligible to serve as President.  Things get even weirder if one includes the other Internet rumor that Obama’s mother renounced his U.S. citizenship when they lived in Indonesia.  

This is why I have avoided discussing this topic, until an American Thinker article entitled “Why the Barack Obama Birth Certificate Issue Is Legitimate” caught my eye today.  Author “Joe the Farmer” analyzes the whole mess, from archaic Hawaiian state laws to the latest evaluation of the various lawsuits putting pressure on Obama to release his original Certification of Live Birth (which is apparently different from the alleged Certificate of Live Birth that has been posted on various websites.

Why get all worked up about this?  Shouldn’t Barack Obama be allowed to become our 44th President since he was elected by a majority of U.S. voters?  The same could be said for others, like star California Governor Schwartzenegger (who came from Austria as an adult) and our own Michigan star Governor Jennifer Granholm (who moved from Canada as a child).  However, the Constitution has the final say.  That’s why it is important – to uphold the Constitution, something which virtually all public officials in this country swear (or affirm) to do, including Senator Obama.

The Supreme Court will very soon take up this issue, which may come as a surprise to those that get their news from CNN and MSNBC.  President-elect Obama and his legal advisors have had weeks and even months to lay this mess to rest by simply making public the documentation needed to show he satisfies the constitutional requirements – but he hasn’t done it yet!  I’m amazed that the Democratic National Committee didn’t require exactly this before he stepped out on the stage in Denver to accept the nomination.  It seems like that is nothing more than doing the necessary due diligence to avoid this sort of constitutional “buyer’s remorse!”

More than 145,000 Americans have signed an online petition asking Barack Obama to release documentation proving his status as a natural born U.S. citizen before the Electoral College meets to certify his election to the highest office in this land.  In a constitutional republic, that is an eminently reasonable thing for the people to expect before Mr. Obama accepts the high office of President.


Advertisements
This entry was posted in 2008 Election and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Barack Obama v. The Constitution of the United States

  1. I posted on this a couple days ago, although your post is better than mine. One thing though that I pointed out that Obama also has shady problems with his draft registration card- he provided to the internet a throughly discredited phony one, but has not let anyone see a valid card. Why all the phony information and covering up the release of the real stuff? Odd.

  2. Thanks for the “heads up” about Barack Obama’s draft card. That one, if true, says more about him as a person than anything he did on the campaign trail. Why not be honest and say that you chose not to register way back when for reasons of conscience? Everyone who followed this guy in the news at all knows he is the flaming High King of Liberalism – it comes as no surprise that he would choose not to register.

    Heck, I didn’t like the Selective Service business myself at 18 either.

    It is the shamelessness involved in these acts of political fraud that are so disturbing. If Barack Obama is unwilling/unable to be honest with the American people *Before* he is President….

    Worse yet, we have a mainstream press totally in his pocket – that is a circumstance ripe for disaster.

  3. Jasper James says:

    The first bullet under what does natural born citizen mean should be: a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;

    “Subject to the jurisdiction” can be interpreted to mean complete jurisdiction – not owing allegiance to anybody else. So how can someone have “Dual Citizenship” and “Not owe allegiance to anybody else” at the same time?

    The 14th amendment does not really mention the phrase “Natural Born Citizen” nor does Sec 301.[8 U.S.C 1401] referenced actually use the phrase “Natural Born Citizen”. Instead they use the phrase “Citizens At Birth”. But I will assume that the intent is to convey the same concept. There are many circumstances where a foreign visitor (or student) may have no intention of remaining in the U.S. and such a person may not wish to have their children born here having U.S. Citizenship forced upon them. Similarly if I was visiting a foreign country and my child was born – I would not want that child to have a foreign citizenship forced upon them. So just because you are born in the U.S. that should not automatically mean you should be granted U.S. Citizenship. But if you have parents that are Citizens, And you are born in the U.S. that is clearly (and naturally) a Citizen, hence a “Natural Born Citizen”. All other cases of “Citizenship At Birth” are weaker forms of “Natural Born Citizenship”.

    The Framers of the Constitution probably meant the Stronger Definition of Citizenship and this is consistant with “The Law Of Nations” where it states “The natives, or natural born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.”

  4. Thanks for the clarification.

  5. Pingback: NEWS: OBAMA AND CHINA’S ECONOMIC INVASION | Pitts Report

  6. Pingback: OBAMA WELCOMES CHINESE ECONOMIC ATTACK | Pitts Report

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s