Friday, August 3, 2012
One of the most glaring examples of the failure of the Congressional Republicans to hold the Democrats accountable for their corruption and constitutional treachery is in regard to the background and documents of someone who holds the office of the President.
The Question All Republican Politicians Fear
August 2, 2012
Patriotic Americans all across the nation are continually amazed
and deeply disappointed at the acquiescence of the Republican party to
the endless expansion of federal government power & control, (and
deficit spending) by the socialist elites occupying the Congress, the
White House, the federal bureaucracy, and the courts. They not only do
not always attempt to block or nullified the expansionist-statist agenda
and actions but instead often join the neo-socialists in expanding
ever-larger unfunded government. They are fellow members of the same
club and are often loath to condemn the actions of their colleagues and
call them what they are; namely the constitutional treason of
oath-breaking traitors to our foundational American charter of
government.
One of the most glaring examples of the failure of the Congressional
Republicans to hold the Democrats accountable for their corruption and
constitutional treachery is in regard to the background and documents of
someone who holds the office of the President. Not one single Democrat
nor Republican in Washington will dare to raise the issue of Barack
Obama’s unconstitutional usurpation of the office of the President.
They all are solidly in the three-monkeys mode of see-no-evil,
hear-no-evil, speak-no-evil in regard the his violation of the
constitutional requirement that the President be a natural born American
and not an alien-born American. Every office of the United States
government is constitutionally open to naturalized citizens, and
native-born children of foreigners, except the office of the President
and its attached position of Commander in Chief of the U.S. military
with all of its nuclear weapons.
THE CONSTITUTION, VATTEL, AND "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN"
THE
CONSTITUTION, VATTEL, AND "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN"
By
Publius Huldah
NewsWithViews.com
NewsWithViews.com
We have
been visited recently with several very silly articles which
assert that Marco Rubio is a “natural born Citizen” within
the meaning of Art. II, §1, cl. 5, U.S. Constitution (ratified 1789),
and hence is qualified to be President:
Bret
Baier (Fox News) asserts that Congress can define (and presumably
redefine, from time to time) terms in the Constitution by means
of law.
Chet
Arthur in American Thinker quips that “the original meaning
of ‘natural born citizen’” is determined by reference
to “The Heritage Guide to the Constitution” and to the definition
of “citizen” at Sec. 1 of the 14th Amendment, ratified 1868.
Human
Events claims that anyone born within The United States is
a “natural born citizen” eligible to be President.
Jake
Walker at Red State purports to show how the term has been used from
1795 to the present. After quoting James Madison on the citizenship requirements
imposed by Art. I, §2, cl. 2, to be a member of the House,
Walker gleefully quotes a 1795 discussion of “natural born subject”
to “prove” that anyone born here is a “natural born
citizen”:
“It is an established maxim, received by all political writers, that every person owes a natural allegiance to the government of that country in which he is born. Allegiance is defined to be a tie, that binds the subject to the state, and in consequence of his obedience, he is entitled to protection…” [emphasis mine]“The children of aliens, born in this state, are considered as natural born subjects, and have the same rights with the rest of the citizens.” [emphasis mine]
But
“subjects” are not “citizens”; and we fought a
war so that we could be transformed from “subjects
of the British Crown” to Citizens
of a Republic!
The
four writers don’t know what they are talking about. But I will
tell you the Truth and prove it. We first address Word Definitions.
Obama campaign sues to restrict voting by military
August 3, 2012
Who's "suppressing the vote" now? More
When Exactly Did Barack Obama Renounce Communism?
August 3, 2012
"If Barack Obama has a story about how he stopped being a Marxist socialist, I'd like to hear it." More
August 3, 2012
Who's "suppressing the vote" now? More
When Exactly Did Barack Obama Renounce Communism?
August 3, 2012
"If Barack Obama has a story about how he stopped being a Marxist socialist, I'd like to hear it." More
Ann Coulter on Fox News: Unnamed Source In Kenya Says That Obama Was Born In Kenya
Ann Coulter on Fox News: Unnamed Source In Kenya Says That Obama Was Born In Kenya - VIDEO HERE.
Although Ann Coulter was cracking a joke the fact is Obama's own literary agent, the old-school media,...
Thursday, August 2, 2012
Hypocrisy Alert: Obama Media Leaks Mitt Romney's 9th Grade Report Card; Ignores Obama
Hypocrisy Alert: Obama Media Leaks Mitt Romney's 9th Grade Report Card; Ignores Obama's Hidden Records...
WATCH SHERIFF JOE'S 2ND OBAMA INVESTIGATION PRESS CONFERENCE HERE: CLICK HERE.
WATCH SHERIFF...
Rush Limbaugh: Obama Release Your Harvard Transcripts; Burden of Proof on Obama
Rush Limbaugh: Obama Release Your Harvard Transcripts; Burden of Proof on Obama - VIDEO HERE. Hat tip Mara Zebest.
WATCH SHERIFF JOE'S 2ND OBAMA INVESTIGATION PRESS CONFERENCE HERE: CLICK HERE.
WATCH...
2012 Democratic National Convention Schedule
2012 Democratic National Convention Schedule
Posted by By GeorgeM August 2, 2012
4:00 PM Opening Flag Burning Ceremony
4:05 PM Singing of “God Damn America” led by Rev. Jeremiah Wright
4:10 PM Pledge of Allegiance to Obama
4:15 PM Ceremonial ‘I hate America’ led by Michelle Obama
4:30 PM Tips on Dodging Sniper Fire Hillary Clinton
4:45 PM Obama Receives Oscar for BEST ACTOR from George Clooney, Whoopi Goldberg, & Oprah
5:00 PM UFO Abduction Survival Joe Biden
5:30 PM Eliot Spitzer Speaks on “Family Values” via Satellite
5:45 PM Tribute to All 57 States
6:00 PM Joe Biden Delivers 100,000-Word Speech Featuring 23-Minute Question and 2-Hour Answer
8:30 PM Airing of Grievances by the Clintons
9:00 PM Bill Clinton Delivers Rousing Endorsement of Obama
9:15 PM Tribute Film to Freedom Fighters at Gitmo Michael Moore
9:45 PM Integrity and Personal Finance Seminar – Charlie Rangle
10:00 PM Denunciation of Bitter Gun Owners
10:30 PM Ceremonial Waving of White Flag for IRAQ, & Afghanistan
11:00 PM Obama Energy Plan Symposium/Tire Gauge Demonstration
11:15 PM Crucifixion of Sheriff Joseph M. “Joe” Arpaio
11:30 PM Obama Accepts Tony and Latin Grammy Awards
11:45 PM Feeding of the Delegates with 5 Loaves and 2 Fish Obama Presiding
12:00 AM Official Nomination of Obama by Bill Mahr
12:01 AM Obama Accepts Nomination as Lord and Savior
12:05 AM Public Display of Forged Hawaii Birth Certificate
3:00 AM Biden Delivers Acceptance Speech
Obama’s October Surprise May Be His Ugliest Action Yet
Jerry McConnell Full Story
If
you think the illegal aliens problem in this country is bad; if you
think the outrageous amounts of our legal citizens’ tax paid dollars is
unfair to legal citizens; and if you think that all the other free
benefits such as welfare, housing, clothing, food, education even into
the post high school years and preferences in employment are too
burdensome now, as the saying goes, “You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.”
Jerry McConnell Full Story
If
you think the illegal aliens problem in this country is bad; if you
think the outrageous amounts of our legal citizens’ tax paid dollars is
unfair to legal citizens; and if you think that all the other free
benefits such as welfare, housing, clothing, food, education even into
the post high school years and preferences in employment are too
burdensome now, as the saying goes, “You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.”
In the Vision to America (VTA) July 27, 2012 online Newsletter an article titled “Obama Plans Massive 2nd Term Amnesty for Illegals”. A follow-up sub-heading read, “Program would immediately register new Americans to vote.” How does that grab you?
The Vetting: Obama, Radical Islam and the Soros Connnection...MUST READ...MUST WATCH...
The Most Important Press Conference Ever Held at Any Time in U.S. History: Part I
By James Simpson for Right Side News
The Vetting: Obama, Radical Islam and the Soros Connnection
On Thursday, July 19th, Cliff Kincaid of America’s Survival held a critical National Press Club event: The Vetting: Obama, Radical Islam and the Soros Connection. At this pivotal time, we face a national election that may well determine the fate of our great country. And as America goes, so goes the world.
The Vetting: Obama, Radical Islam and the Soros Connnection
On Thursday, July 19th, Cliff Kincaid of America’s Survival held a critical National Press Club event: The Vetting: Obama, Radical Islam and the Soros Connection. At this pivotal time, we face a national election that may well determine the fate of our great country. And as America goes, so goes the world.
Thus, it is not an exaggeration to describe this as the most important press conference in U.S.
history, because it explicitly details, with new facts and more
evidence than ever presented in one place at one time, from extensive,
highly credible sources, the dangerously extremist nature of President
Obama and the true goals of his virulently anti-American, radical
leftist administration.
It further reveals how a huge network of U.S.
and foreign communist and hard left organizations connected to this
President has colluded with radical Islam for decades to oversee the
destruction of their mutual enemy: America. Overshadowing all is the malevolent Soros network, and the billions he and others like him are devoting to facilitate this goal.
This information simply must reach the electorate before November.·
Speakers include veteran investigative reporter Trevor Loudon, author of Barack Obama and the Enemies Within; KGB defector Konstantin Preobazhensky, speaking on his report, Communists and Muslims, the Hidden Hand of the KGB; Paul Kengor, author of The Communist, Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor;
Larry Grathwohl, the only FBI informant to successfully penetrate Bill
Ayers’ Weather Underground; Rebel Pundit blogger Jeremy Segal; Joel
Gilbert, producer of the film, Dreams from My Real Father, a Story of Reds and Deception; and the Clarion Fund’s Ryan Mauro, speaking on the Muslim Brotherhood, the War on the New York City Police, and the film, The Third Jihad.
Additional contributions were provided in the form of printed reports
from former Romanian intelligence chief, Ion Mihai Pacepa, who exposed
Lee Harvey Oswald’s KGB assassin training; Walid Shoebat, who revealed
Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and
Tina Trent who describes the latest radical left agenda supported by
George Soros: the prison depopulation movement.
Wednesday, August 1, 2012
UPDATE:The
House passed the legislation Tuesday night by a vote of 261-116. The
bill now goes to President Obama’s desk for his signature.
The
House of Representatives is set to consider legislation Tuesday that
would exempt certain presidential appointees from having to be confirmed
by the Senate.
But a number of
conservative groups are arguing that the “Presidential Efficiency and
Streamlining Act” amounts to Congress neutering itself and giving the
executive branch unprecedented power.
Presidential
appointees that would no longer require Senate confirmation under the
legislation include the treasurer of the United States and the deputy
administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration.
“The
United States Constitution does not bestow kingly powers on the
President to appoint the senior officers of the government with no
process,” wrote Thomas McClusky,the senior vice president for the Family
Research Council’s legislative arm,in a Monday memo to lawmakers.
Sources
told The Daily Caller that there is concern in the ranks among
conservatives opposed to the legislation that House leaders will bring
the legislation up for a voice vote to avoid putting members on the
record.
Read More at the Daily Caller. By Alex Pappas.
Breitbart.com Offers $50,000 Reward for Obama-Khalidi Jew-Bashing Tape LA Times Hid
Breitbart.com Offers $50,000 Reward for Obama-Khalidi Jew-Bashing Tape LA Times Hid
Breitbart.com Offers $50,000 Reward for Obama-Khalidi Jew-Bashing TapeExcerpts via Jim Hoft @ Gateway Pundit
In 2008 The LA Times withheld a video that contained footage of Barack Obama celebrating...
Barack Obama, Marco Rubio, and Bobby Jindal were all not born to U.S. “citizen” parents (“natural born Citizens” or “citizens of the United States” at birth or after birth) at the time of their birth.
Attorney Mario Apuzzo Responds To Fred Thompson's
Article Defending Marco Rubio's Constitutional Eligibility
By Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States: “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.” Did you see that, today only a “natural born Citizen” is eligible to be President. A “citizen of the United States” is not eligible to be President today.
The clear distinction between a “citizen” and a “natural born Citizen” is natural and therefore universal, for a civil society must start with original members (called “citizens” in a republic) who are the creators of that society. Their children, grandchildren, etc. (“Posterity”) then are the “natural-born citizens.” This is what Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 in effect says. The creators of the new republic were “Citizens of the United States” and their “Posterity” (Preamble to the Constitution) were “natural born Citizens.” The Founders and Framers also allowed for new citizens through naturalization. Hence, any naturalized citizen under any Act of Congress becomes a “citizen of the United States,” just like the original “Citizens of the United States.” A reading of the plain text of the Fourteenth Amendment shows that it also only adds to the “citizens of the United States,” simply by persons being born (without requiring “citizen” parents) or naturalized in its jurisdiction. And the children (“Posterity”) born in the United States to those new first generation “citizens of the United States” then become “natural born Citizens,” just like the children of the descendents of the original “Citizens of the United States.”
Minor defined a "natural-born citizen" under the "common-law" with which the Framers were familiar. The definition it gave is a child born in a country to parents who were "citizens" of that country at the time the child was born. Some argue that this definition is not dispositive, because the Court did not say that a child born in the United States to alien parents is not a “natural-born citizen.” This argument is frivolous, for we need to understand what the Court intended by what it said, and not by what it did not say. If I want to define a dog, I include as many of a dog’s attributes, including that a dog by nature is an animal with warm blood. I do not also have to say at the same time that by nature a dog is not an animal with cold blood. There is no indication that this definition is not totally inclusive and exclusive. On the contrary, this has always been the definition of the clause. This definition has never changed.
It is more than clear that Minor had two types of “citizens” in mind, a “citizen” and a “natural-born citizen,” and it cannot be otherwise. In the doubt-free definition of a “natural-born citizen” presented by Minor and to which you also concede, the parents are “citizens” and the children are “natural born citizens.”
So, there was no question for the Minor Court whether children born in the United States to alien parents were or were not “natural-born citizens.” Those children simply did not meet the Founders’ and Framers’ definition of a “natural-born citizen.” So, they were not “natural-born citizens.” The only question was whether those children now fell under the new Fourteenth Amendment which included as “citizens of the United States” children born “within the jurisdiction” of the United States. Minor did not need to answer that question, for Virginia Minor was a "natural-born citizen."
Minor did not itself create this definition but only confirmed it. In fact, Emer de Vattel had already stated this same definition in 1758 as follows:
"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. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see, whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country."
Emer de Vattel, The Law of Nations, Section 212 Citizens and natives (London 1797) (1st ed. Neuchatel 1758). Vattel required that for a child to be a “natural-born citizen,” at the time of birth, the child had to be born in the country to “citizen” parents. See also The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253, 289 (1814) (C.J. Marshall concurring) (“The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens”); Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857) (J. Daniels concurring) (“The natives or natural-born citizens are those born in the country of parents who are citizens”).
Minor added that "some authorities" go further. But the Court was referring to whether a child "born in the jurisdiction" to alien parents is a "citizen of the United States" under the Fourteenth Amendment, not whether that child is an Article II "natural born Citizen." After all, the Founders and Framers had only one definition of a "natural born Citizen" in mind and the Court stated that doubt-free definition. That definition came from the law of nations and was confirmed by our First Congress which passed the Naturalization Act of 1790 and subsequent Congresses which passed the acts of 1795, 1802, and 1855 (all treated children born in the United States to alien parents as aliens), and also in 1814 by Founder, Chief Justice Marshall. When the Constitution was adopted, that one definition became the supreme law of the land which can be changed only by constitutional amendment. Minor would also not have referred to the Founders and Framers as "some authorities" and even add that "there have been doubts" about their definition of a "natural born Citizen." In fact, the "natural born Citizen" clause was not even debated during the Constitutional convention, so surely there were no doubts about its definition.
On the contrary, the Court even said that there were no doubts about the definition of a "natural-born citizen" that it gave.
Wong Kim Ark did answer the question left open by Minor and said that those children, born in the United States to domiciled and resident alien parents, are “citizens of the United States” under the Fourteenth Amendment. But Wong Kim Ark twice demonstrated that those children are only “citizens of the United States,” not “natural born Citizens.” Wong Kim Ark recognized that Wong was a Fourteenth Amendment “citizen of the United States,” but not an Article II “natural born Citizen.” Justice Gray told us twice of this distinction. The first time he said: “The child of an alien, if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle.' Page 22, note. This paper, without Mr. Binney's name, and with the note in a less complete form, and not containing the passage last cited, was published (perhaps from the first edition) in the American Law Register for February, 1854. 2 Am. Law Reg. 193, 203, 204. ” Wong Kim Ark, at 665-66. Later in his opinion, Justice Gray, in speaking about a child born in the United States to alien parents again said that an alien’s “child, as said by Mr. Binney in his essay before quoted, 'If born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle.'” Id. at 694. It is critical that when he mentioned it for the second time, his sentence followed the Court’s conclusion which he based on how the English common law held aliens in amity to have sufficient allegiance to the King to make his children born in the King’s dominion “natural born subjects,” that Wong was born “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. So twice, Justice Gray told us of the distinction between a child born in the country to aliens and a child born in the country to “citizen” parents. He explained that both are “citizens,” but only the latter is a “natural-born citizen.”
So, Minor confirmed the original definition of a "natural born Citizen" used by the Founders and Framers. That definition is a child born in a country to parents who are “citizens” of that country at the time of the child’s birth. To date, that definition has not been changed, not even by the Fourteenth Amendment (only defines a “citizen of the United States) or U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (construing the Fourteenth Amendment, only defined a “citizen of the United States”). Any other U.S. “citizen” is a “citizen of the United States” under the Fourteenth Amendment, Act of Congress, or treaty. So, today, a “natural born Citizen” is still a child born in the United States to parents who were “citizens” at the time of the child’s birth. That definition continues to be the supreme law of the land until changed by constitutional amendment.
Barack Obama, Marco Rubio, and Bobby Jindal were all not born to U.S. “citizen” parents (“natural born Citizens” or “citizens of the United States” at birth or after birth) at the time of their birth. Being born to just one U.S. “citizen” parent (Obama’s birth circumstance) is not sufficient because the child inherits through jus sanguinis from the one non-U.S. citizen parent a foreign allegiance and citizenship just as strong as if born to two non-U.S. “citizen” parents. Hence, Obama, Rubio, and Jindal are all not “natural born Citizens.” Rubio and Jindal, being born in the United States and “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” are “citizens of the United States” under the Fourteenth Amendment. If Obama was born in Hawaii, he too is a “citizen of the United States” under the Fourteenth Amendment. But what this means is that since Obama, Rubio, and Jindal are neither Article II “natural born Citizens” nor “Citizens of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution” they are not eligible to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military or Vice-President.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
July 31, 2012
_________________________________________
"Mr. Thompson,
I would appreciate it if you would release my comment from moderation."
My second comment is also still in moderation.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
July 31, 2012
_________________________________________
I posted my response to Mr. Thompson yesterday which he did not release from moderation. My response contained nothing but my legal argument on the question of whether Marco Rubio and Barack Obama and Bobby Jindal are "natural born citizens." I followed up with an inquiry as to why he did not release my comment from moderation. He also did not release that second comment. Today, I see that my two comments have been totally erased from Mr. Thompson's blog."
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
August 1, 2012
_________________________________________
Fred Thompson's article can be read here: http://fredthompsonsamerica.com/2012/07/31/is-rubio-eligible
A Few Water-Cooler Questions for Bair’-ack Obama
August 1, 2012
(correct phonetic pronunciation; -accent on first syllable as that was how his father pronounced their shared name)Hey Mr. President,…may I call you Barry? Thank you.
I was just wondering, are you really an American citizen?
You are? Great! I thought so.
Uuuuh, I have just one more question.
By what law are you an American citizen?
I can’t seem to find any answer to that question.
Since you’re a constitutional scholar and all, I expect that you will be able to explain the legal source of your citizenship.
Having read the 14th Amendment I’ve learned that you are not covered by its citizenship clause. It only bestowes citizenship to children of immigrants, but your father was not an immigrant. He was merely a foreign student in the country on a student visa.
That meant that neither he nor you, his natural off-spring, were subject, as the amendment requires, to the full jurisdiction of the federal government, -which included foremostly, the authority to draft immigrants into the U.S. military and send them to war. Since you and your father were subject to the British Nationality Act of 1948, -as was openly declared on your 2008 election website, it’s evident that neither you nor anyone else can possibly be totally subject to the full authority of two different nations.
READ MORE...
Rush Limbaugh to Ancestry.com: Find Obama's College Transcripts and Birth Certificate
Rush Limbaugh to Ancestry.com: Find Obama's College Transcripts and Birth Certificate - VIDEO HERE. Hat tip Mara Zebest.
WATCH SHERIFF JOE'S 2ND OBAMA INVESTIGATION PRESS CONFERENCE HERE: CLICK HERE.
WATCH...
Hillary Clinton: America's Worst Secretary of State
There's some stiff competition for the title, but the former first lady has lately surged ahead. More
There's some stiff competition for the title, but the former first lady has lately surged ahead. More
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
See Hundreds More Obama Crimes Here
Obama
biographer David Maraniss wrote an 1139-word article,“The Audacity of
Doubt,” for The Washington Post on Sunday that purported to be a
refutation of what some critics have been saying about the President.
Maraniss focuses mostly on questions about Obama’s religion and place of
birth and pretends to have the answers.
However,Maraniss
ignored the fact that the critics were right four years ago when they
identified communist Frank Marshall Davis as Obama’s mentor in Hawaii
and the mysterious “Frank” from Obama’s book,Dreams from My Father.
Maraniss
had written a 10,000-word piece for the Post in 2008,when the
information could have made a difference in the campaign,ignoring this
critical fact. He told me in an email that he had ignored Davis because
he had somehow concluded that Davis didn’t have much of an impact on
Obama.
The Maraniss piece,“Though Obama
Had to Leave to Find Himself,It Is Hawaii That Made His Rise Possible,”
ran in the August 22,2008 edition of the Post.
Not
content to slink away with egg on his face for ignoring the story of
the century,Maraniss spent years working on a book about Obama,thinking
the public would regard it as definitive. He is suffering under a
delusion.
Read More at gopusa.com. By Cliff Kincaid.
Those who suggest that there is no distinction between "citizen" and "Natural Born Citizen" would have us believe and accept that such a person might have been eligible to run for President of the US simply because he was born in America. According to defenders of the alleged eligibility of Barack Obama (or Marco Rubio, or Bobby Jindal), any person born on US soil to one or more alien citizens could be the leader of the free world. At some point, according to that path of logic, this should have included Anwar al-Awlaki.
Should Anwar al-Awlaki have been eligible to run for President?
Should Anwar al-Awlaki have been eligible to run for President?
Anwar
al-Awlaki was born in 1971 to Yemeni citizens in Las Cruces, New Mexico.
US Intelligence reports that, from the age of seven, al-Awlaki was
raised abroad, becoming an enemy of America, indoctrinated by the
highest powers of Al-Qaida and studying under the same teachers
as Osama bin Laden. He eventually influenced various terrorists such as
the Fort Hood shooter, Nidal Malik Hasan, and helped plan the thwarted
attack of the "Underwear Bomber," Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. Al-Awlaki's
phone number was found among the contact information of Ramzi bin
al-Shibh, the man known as "the 20th hijacker" in the 9/11 attacks.
Those who suggest that there is no distinction between "citizen" and "Natural Born Citizen" would have us believe and accept that such a person might have been eligible to run for President of the US simply because he was born in America. According to defenders of the alleged eligibility of
So, to say that every child born in America is a natural born citizen is also to say that any foreign interest whose child was born in the US could be allowed to raise that child abroad as an enemy of the US and return that child to this country in time to meet the Constitution's 14-year
Considering that Islam has been at war with itself and the rest of the world at least since the death of Muhammad almost 1400 years ago, it takes very little imagination to project how a powerful enemy of the US might take the necessary 35 years and other resources to groom a "Manchurian Candidate" for the US Presidency. If we accept the premise that every person born in the US is a natural born citizen, we allow the establishment of a flawed precedent permitting a family such as that of Anwar al-Awlaki (or a communist government, or a Mexican drug cartel, etc.) to gain control of our country through an orchestrated, long-term attack on the Presidency.
The Constitution itself argues against the assertion that every child born in America is also a natural born citizen. Constitutional eligibility requirements for members of the House and Senate include that they be "citizens," with progressively tighter restrictions on length of residency for Senators and the President. Following that same pattern of progressively increased restrictions, the Constitution also requires that the President must be, not just a citizen, but a "natural born Citizen."
The natural born citizen requirement is not an incidental flourish of language, but a national security provision of the supreme law of our land. It is not a "big tent" invitation but an intentionally restrictive, but not racist, prohibition. It serves as a foundation on which to permanently secure and preserve the rights and freedoms which are the heritage of all Americans. Its purpose is to ensure, to the greatest possible extent, that every American President has sole allegiance to the USA by virtue of a childhood steeped in the richness of American culture, anchored in a respect for freedom, emboldened by the spirit of independence and innovation, and committed to the continuation of the noble experiment of a republic created and protected by free men and women and their progeny.
Cheney is in the same recycling bin as Bill Clinton, recently called to the rescue of a flagging-in-the polls Obama.
GOP Old Boys Network still using Pony Express
Judi McLeod Full Story
Former Vice President Dick Cheney, like so many politicians well past his due date, must be kidding.
In this era of unprecedented destruction from the most unvetted US president of all time, Cheney wants to talk 100 days before November 6 elections about how Sarah Palin was unvetted?
Judi McLeod Full Story
Former Vice President Dick Cheney, like so many politicians well past his due date, must be kidding.
In this era of unprecedented destruction from the most unvetted US president of all time, Cheney wants to talk 100 days before November 6 elections about how Sarah Palin was unvetted?
See the Man Who Challenges Obama’s Family Story – Joel Gilbert Rips Silent Media at National Press Club
Bob Unruh / WND
A filmmaker whose full-length documentary, “Dreams from My Real Father,” presents a compelling case that Communist Party USA propagandist Frank Marshall Davis is Barack Obama’s biological father, is challenging the U.S. media to begin reporting the truth about the likely Democrat nominee for president in 2012.Joel Gilbert, whose website details his research, appeared recently at the National Press Club in Washington to talk about the questions raised in his film.
“What strikes me as most disturbing is that any one of the hundreds of American journalists in this building could win the Pulitzer Prize just by writing about the evidence presented in ‘Dreams from My Real Father,’” he said.
A journalist, after all, is supposed to report the news, truthfully and fairly, he argues.
He cited the National Press Club bronze that lists the “Journalist’s Creed,” as written by Walter Williams when he founded the Missouri School of Journalism more than a century ago.
It states: “That journalists must be public trustees with the full measure of responsibility to the public. That accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism. That a single standard of truth must prevail for all.”
Pointedly, he noted the credo states “that suppression of the news is indefensible.”
continue at WND:
http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/see-the-man-who-challenges-obamas-family-story/
|
|||
| RINO House Republicans Refuse to Defund ObamaCare ...They're Complicit and have No Intention of Getting Rid of It | |||
| Obama Ignores Plans for Russian Naval Base in Cuba ...Killed by a Communist, JFK, Turns Over in His Grave | |||
| White House: Jerusalem Not Capital of Israel | |||
| Rep: 'No Question' WH Leaks 'By Design' | |||
The Amazing Presidential Power-Grab
What began as a trickle of presidential power-grabs in 2009 has turned into a cascade of executive roguery. More
The Climategate and Jerry Sandusky Scandals: A Common Thread
America, it's time to meet your newest top-secret government employee: a professional cover-up artist with a radical agenda. More
GOP Edge in Swing States
Almost wholly overlooked in this year's election punditry is a quite possibly decisive advantage which Mitt Romney will have in thirteen extremely important swing states. More
Save American Medicine and Save Your Own Life
The trials and tribulations for doctors treating Medicaid patients are not getting any better -- not for the doctors, and not for the patients, either. More
What began as a trickle of presidential power-grabs in 2009 has turned into a cascade of executive roguery. More
The Climategate and Jerry Sandusky Scandals: A Common Thread
America, it's time to meet your newest top-secret government employee: a professional cover-up artist with a radical agenda. More
GOP Edge in Swing States
Almost wholly overlooked in this year's election punditry is a quite possibly decisive advantage which Mitt Romney will have in thirteen extremely important swing states. More
Save American Medicine and Save Your Own Life
The trials and tribulations for doctors treating Medicaid patients are not getting any better -- not for the doctors, and not for the patients, either. More
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
An election for President and Commander in Chief of the Military must strive to be above reproach. Our public institutions must give the public confidence that a presidential candidate has complied with the election process that is prescribed by our Constitution and laws. It is only after a presidential candidate satisfies the rules of such a process that he/she can expect members of the public, regardless of their party affiliations, to give him/her the respect that the Office of President so much deserves.
