5
votes

Barack Obama's Citizenship: Dilemma or Distraction?

posted March 20, 2009 - 12:10pm
Barack Obama's Citizenship: Dilemma or Distraction?

Barack Hussein Obama Jr. is not the legitimate 44th President of the United States.

(Let the ridicule begin.)

I know that’s not a popular statement to make in this political climate of ignorance and apathy, but I make it nonetheless. Why do I subject myself to endless derision from those who pretend to be formally educated and informed on current events? Because I know I’m right about this.

With a little bit of time, the capacity to use a computer effectively, and the ability to read and comprehend, one can find information on nearly anything on the internet. Free resources, even from centuries past, are right at our fingertips. If the internet is not your “cup of tea,” there’s always the local library – which is also free. Learning costs nothing, yet most of the country is vastly uneducated, especially when it comes to government, politics, and American history.

I can say that Barack Obama is a usurper because I have taken the time to study and learn the laws that disqualify him. I have studied and learned about the principles behind those laws and the founding philosophies that made this country what it is today – or what it once was. I can’t say the same for nearly all of the critics who decide to ridicule instead of learn and debate.

So, what are these laws that decide who is or is not a citizen or a “natural-born” citizen? I took the time to write an essay explaining our citizenship laws. That essay can be found here:

Thoughts on United States Citizenship

It’s long, but very informative with lots of source material. There’s no excuse for not having a better grasp of citizenship by the time one finishes reading it. It’s a good start for understanding Barack Obama’s situation and how he cannot be eligible for the presidency, which I explained here:

Barack Obama: The Illegitimate President

The facts are not hidden from us. We know that Barack Obama was born to a British citizen. Most people claim that because he was born in Hawaii (which has not been definitively proven, but that’s irrelevant) he is automatically a citizen of the United States. That may possibly be true, although it is doubtful. But does that make him a “natural-born” citizen? Absolutely not. Consequently, he cannot be the President of the United States. The Constitution requires our president to be a “natural-born” citizen.

Many people claim that if it was such a big deal, that some government agency or even Congress would have raised this issue and put an end to Obama’s candidacy before he was elected. I’m not so confident about their ability to uphold the law – or to even understand it. Our government has demonstrated time and again how grossly incompetent they are.

But getting back to the point…

The laws that make Obama ineligible for the presidency have not changed. The Constitution has not been amended to eliminate the eligibility requirements and the words used in it do, in fact, have specific meanings. I’m not sure why so many people refuse to acknowledge these points, but it is very disappointing to witness. As I stated at the beginning, our country is ignorant and apathetic – especially when it comes to government and politics.

The information is out there – much of it is in the links provided here. Some people have chosen to find the information and learn it. Others have chosen ignorance and mockery. Which do you think will lead us down the right path?

Which have you chosen?

Barack Hussein Obama Jr. – son of a British citizen and the usurper of the federal executive powers? Or, Barack Hussein Obama Jr. – son of a United States citizen and the legitimate 44th President of the United States?

Before you decide, make sure that your answer is an informed one. Your Constitution depends on it.

Author: Publius
-A +A


Comments

Citizenship

doodlebugs - Wed, 2009-14-10 9:14 pm

So why does the child of an illegal alien who crosses the border become a U.S. citizen? It is because it is in our constitution. See the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which sates: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

Any child born on U.S. soil becomes a U.S. citizen. That's a fact.  This is a non issue. It is being used as a campaign of lies and hate because a quarter of the U.S. really hates the idea of a black, or "part black" or perhaps a "non - lilly - white - WASP" president that doesn't sprinkle his speeches with god and prayer references.  Why stop with Obama. Let's take on John McCain, his former opponent who was born in Panama. He was born in a hospital in the then U.S. canal zone, which is a disputed territory as far as many Columbians (our allies) are concerned. You don't have to dig far to find the history about how Panama was illegally taken from Columbia so that the canal could be built. So, therefore, if Panama was illegally taken from Columbia, how could McCain be a U.S. citizen?  Or, were the land surveys accurate when the lines were drawn and was the Panamanian hospital where John McCain was born really inside the Canal Zone. You are an excellent writer so why not use your gift for good, not division? So many of your articles are designed to inflame. Why not use your gift to expose the problems our country faces such as lack of health care for a quarter of our citizens, corporations ripping off consumers, schools consumed with testing yet neglecting to teach kids how to reason, and so on? We are falling behind in all the rankings lately such as "best country to live in" and sadly things like infant mortality and children dying of "third world" diseases. The countries that have a more "socialistic view" as would be described by the far right, also are considered the best to live in. Norway is at the top of the list. We are becoming a nation where corporations have more rights, sorry, we HAVE become a nation where corporations have more rights than people. Now a corporation can write most of the legislation that governs it, thanks to how they have bought both political parties, and then kill, maim, sell faulty products and pollute the air, and siphon off most of the profits to an offshore bank. My favorite bumper sticker "We don't have a government, we have an auction". You should try and write some articles that seek to unite, ignite the imaganation, and not so many that seek to divide our already divided nation. For more info see this at Snopes.com  which is a non partisan site dedicated to busting false claims, spoofs, and forwarded e-mail lies.

Join Xomba Get PAID

Legitimate Online Income Methods

 

Publius, I don't think

jefflldo - Tue, 2009-24-3 9:13 pm
Congress would raise any questions about Obama’s legitimacy because they all see an open highway to the fulfillment of all their progressive dreams. Vegehead, Just because there is a discrepancy between the intent of the funding fathers and what is being practiced by the courts today, doesn’t give credence to the court rulings without consequence. There are those who are going to accept the statements of the justices as a form of precedent, but to me the ramifications of that are unacceptable. We know there are many in government who, like Obama, have a very different view of the direction America should be taking. To me these directions remove the power from the people, where it is bestowed by our Constitution, to those whose power is to come from the people, not over the people. American’s greatest responsibility to ourselves is personal responsibility , it is also one of the first things uninformed people are willing to give up to someone who has influential speaking ability. Someone who can put forward a blank canvas for all to paint their own image of utopia on. Many people have attributed some qualities of Abraham Lincoln to Obama. I don’t think they understand where Obama is on many things that are at the core of America’s existence as she is. Abraham Lincoln said, “America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter, and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.” Look at all of the ACLU and Human Rights type groups in America. They refuse to look at what they represent, and whom they claim to be in violation of these rights. Many of these groups are of foreign interests, not American interests. These are the people who will destroy America. I just don’t see Obama honestly making a statement like that at all. With Obama, we truly must hear what he ISN’T saying. That is where his true intentions lie. Let the congress do his deeds silently bidden and he remains removed. If Obama truly believes that he is eligible, why then has all of his past been locked up and the key thrown away? No college records, or any school records at all for that. Why are so many “informed” people telling us that it’s been “gone over” by so many people that any real problems would have been discovered. Doesn’t it bother anyone that Obama is spending millions of dollars in law suits to keep these documents out of the public eye raise any eyebrows? Liberals across the nation should be screaming to have the proof put before us Republicans just to shut us up, but you’re not. Why? “Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of the truth” Albert Einstein "Peace through strength,weakness only invites aggression" Ronald Regan

"Peace through strength,weakness only invites aggression"
Ronald Regan

By the way... The so-called

Publius - Mon, 2009-23-3 12:39 am
By the way... The so-called "expert" who provided his analysis in that article you linked to is completely incompetent regarding citizenship laws. Not only did he fail to make a distinction between the "natural-born" citizenship clause and the 14th Amendment, but he also failed to recognize that no citizenship laws grant "natural-born" citizenship, or that the Civil Rights Act of 1866 was actually passed before the 14th Amendment. The two men who took part in composing that article are not in any way whatsoever "expert" - or even mildly educated - on citizenship laws, their construction, or their history. Their overall analysis is ridiculously feeble and utterly worthless. Who is Publius? What is Rational Liberty? How do I join Xomba and get PAID to write?

Who is Publius?

What is Rational Liberty?

How do I join Xomba and get PAID to write?

wHATUP... Your second

Publius - Sun, 2009-22-3 7:36 pm
wHATUP... Your second comment was right. But where you erred in your first comment is when you assumed that there were competing definitions of "natural-born citizen" according to law. The only law that matters, assuming that there were differing legal meanings, is the Constitution. Unless there was a constitutional amendment rescinding the "natural-born" clause, it remains wholly intact and has the original meaning as adopted 230 years ago. That meaning disqualifies Barack Obama without any doubt. Whether or not the Courts, Congress, or the People will do anyhting about it is another argument altogether. But upholding the law is paramount in a society based on the rule of law. Who is Publius? What is Rational Liberty? How do I join Xomba and get PAID to write?

Who is Publius?

What is Rational Liberty?

How do I join Xomba and get PAID to write?

veghead... It's like I said:

Publius - Sun, 2009-22-3 7:30 pm
veghead... It's like I said: Some people choose ignorance and ridicule. Everything you've mentioned here was already discussed and refuted in the two articles provided. Read them. If you have evidence to the contrary, by all means, provide it. I won't be holding my breath. Who is Publius? What is Rational Liberty? How do I join Xomba and get PAID to write?

Who is Publius?

What is Rational Liberty?

How do I join Xomba and get PAID to write?

But Obama WAS born on American soil, wHATUP

veghead - Sun, 2009-22-3 12:25 pm
He was born in Hawaii, an American state, so it sounds to me like the traditional English law you cited is being followed. And as the article points out, pregnant Mexican women come over the border all the time to have their babies just so they'll be American citizens, even if their parents are not. And even if there were a discrepancy between what the Founding Fathers intended and what is practiced now, the very fact that the courts have legally altered the alleged original intent of the Constitution would cancel out any arguments that could be put forth about what "natural born" means. Of course, the Obama-Ain't-A-Citizen folks could also pursue a Constitutional amendment to make the definition crystal clear, but good luck with that.

veghead's Xombytes

interesting argument

Darrell Curts - Sun, 2009-22-3 12:10 pm
Publius puts forward, though. I believe his main argument is that the Congress way back applied English law, i.e. you're a citizen of the realm because you were born on our soil, rather than American law i.e. you are a citizen by your choice and the choice of the country - a free will thing. The article you posted doesn't address that argument. It just says that since Obama was born in Hawaii he is a "natural born" citizen. Publius is saying - not so fast, that is not what the founding fathers intended. Will Obama be thrown out office? Hell no - won't happen. But has the courts and Congress not applied the right definition of "natural born" - probably. Visit my homepage here

Visit my homepage here

Follow me on Twitter here

It's a non-issue except among sour grapes RWers, wHATUP

veghead - Sun, 2009-22-3 10:51 am
Who, for obvious reasons, want to keep it alive. Here's a link to one of the many websites that explain the legalities of this non-issue (i.e., "natural-born" American citizenship has more to do with where the child is born than his parents' nationality, although that factors into it if his parents are American and living overseas, as in the case of John McCain, who was born in Panama.) http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/06/is_barack_obama_a_us_citizen_y.html

veghead's Xombytes

ignorance is bliss

Darrell Curts - Sun, 2009-22-3 10:19 am
And I am very blissful. As you know, I took the time to read that long ass article. And yes, it was very good. I found that your details about English law and American law very interesting. The problem as I see it, and I could be wrong, is that there are contradictory decisions on what "natural born" is. I would make it virturally impossible to persue Obama for his citizenship. I believe it has become a non-issue although an interesting discussion. Visit my homepage here

Visit my homepage here

Follow me on Twitter here

The Supremes unconstitutionally elected George W. Bush

veghead - Sat, 2009-21-3 11:21 pm
And the left wingers made a stink about it but were ignored. So just think of the election of your alleged non-American citizen Barack Obama as payback, baby! But seriously, genius, Obama had a mother too (I noticed you conveniently didn't mention her), from whose American loins Obama emerged. Bingo! And no, this does not mean I'm willing to get into a totally wasted and useless debate with you over a non-issue. Bye bye.

veghead's Xombytes

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Join Xomba Today

Do you like to write? Would you like to make a little extra money on the side? These people do. Join the Xomba community today.
Become a Member