The political elite and the MSM are doing everything possible to suppress discussion of Obama’s ineligibility, pretend that we are not in a Constitutional crisis and allow him to contest the 2012 election
Obama’s ineligibility and Republican eunuchs
Comments | Print friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
It is difficult to imagine a more obvious scam and a more pliable group of suckers.
Of course, Republicans have always known that Barack Hussein Obama is ineligible to be President.
Unfortunately, many Republicans have spent so much time in the hallways of power and in TV studios; they now mistake cowardice for statesmanship. The love for their lifestyle has outgrown their respect for the oath of office, to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.
The explanation of Obama’s ineligibility is so simple that even a liberal could understand it.
Oddly enough, liberals appreciated the benefits of their complicity far more than the Republicans grasped the shame of their acquiescence.
In September 2008, during the controversy regarding Senator John McCain’s eligibility to be President, Lawrence B. Solum, the John E. Cribbet Professor of Law at the University of Illinois College of Law, published an article in the Michigan Law Review entitled “Originalism and the Natural Born Citizen Clause”
“What was the original public meaning of the phrase that establishes the eligibility for the office of President of the United States? There is general agreement on the core of its meaning. Anyone born on American soil whose parents are citizens of the United States is a natural born citizen.”
Solum concluded that there was no clear answer as to whether McCain was eligible to be President. I will return to that conclusion later.
The Constitution does not say “citizen”, but specifically combines the legal concepts of jus soli (right of the soil) and of citizen parents, jus sanguinis (right of blood). It was intentionally designed by the Framers to prevent a President from having dual allegiance.
The narrative of the 14th Amendment is consistent with the Framers intent.
Representative John Bingham, author of the 14th Amendment, while commenting on Sec. 1992, unequivocally stated the difference between ‘natural born” and ‘born” citizenships:
“It means every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of “parents” not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of our Constitution itself, a “natural born” citizen.”
According to the 14th Amendment, Obama is a citizen of the United States, but unambiguously not a natural born citizen.
It is interesting to note that the natural born requirement became the basis of the 2008 challenge, not to Obama’s candidacy, but to John McCain’s. The issue was taken so seriously, it required Senate resolution 511:
“Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a ‘‘natural born Citizen’’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.
Barack Obama voted in favor of that resolution. One can assume that he fully understood the meaning and intent of the Constitution. After all, was he not once a Professor of Constitutional Law?
For the moment, let’s forget the birth certificate debate. Let’s accept Obama’s own published story of his life. That is, his father was Kenyan, a British subject and bound by allegiance to the British sovereign at the time of Obama’s birth.
It is the simplest and most irrefutable argument to make regarding Obama’s ineligibility.
Contrary to statements made by politicians and the main stream media (MSM), there is no issue we presently face that is more important than the integrity of the Constitution. It is the foundation of our republic and the basis for the rule of law in our country.
Contravention of the Constitution is not a “technicality”. Fortunately, the solution resides in the Constitution itself.
No articles of impeachment need to be drawn up. No voters need to be disenfranchised. Simply invoke Section 3 of the 20th Amendment, which provides a remedy if a President is deemed unqualified.
Now permit me to return to the esteemed Professor Solum.
In April 2010, as the controversy surrounding Obama’s eligibility gained momentum, Solum strangely republished his original article, but substituted the word “parent” for “parents”, changing the interpretation in a way that could benefit Obama.
Quite a coincidence, wouldn’t you say? There appears to be a good deal of legal reinterpretation going on.
The political elite and the MSM are doing everything possible to suppress discussion of Obama’s ineligibility, pretend that we are not in a Constitutional crisis and allow him to contest the 2012 election.
I ask them: after this, are there any other parts of the Constitution do you intend to ignore? It would be good to know.
Clearly the Democrats and the MSM will continue to shield Obama and, presumably, the Republicans are too frightened to oppose them.
Perhaps it is time to vote with our feet and walk away from the Republican Party.