This is about a legal matter; call me a “Birther” if you like

THIS IS NOT ABOUT A BIRTH CERTIFICATE!

by TexDix, blogging at http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~texdick/obama.htm

(Mar. 20, 2010) — I’m a non-partisan, constitutional conservative.  I call Obama the prince of fools and if you voted for the prince of fools?

This is not about a Birth Certificate! We can’t allow our U. S. Constitution to be selectively enforced.

President of the United States = POTUS: You have to be a Constitutional Natural Born Citizen = NBC to be POTUS.

The Dual Citizen, Obama, lacks legal authority to be POTUS! or Look here for another way of saying what I say below.

POTUS eligibility was never restricted to whites, males or anything else but what is in our Constitution listed below. Consider these source links from our United States Constitution as set in sequential order, and look at the clearly expressed systematics of the Framers’ purpose and intent:  You can click on them to go off my site to that source record, our United States Constitution. Obama II is not a Constitutional, United States Natural Born Citizen, because his father, Obama Sr., was not and never was any type of United States Citizen, but a British Subject and an alien.

Obama II has said that his birth was governed by his father, Obama Sr.’s, citizenship status at his own birth. This then makes Obama II, at the very best, a dual citizen and maybe not even that, as he has yet to prove that he is a born “citizen of the United States.”

For sure, Obama is not a Constitutional NBC as required by our Laws to be POTUS. Obama has said he gave up his British Citizenship. This is not about being a US Citizen but about being a Natural Born Citizen. You can only get that status at your birth and if you are not born that way, then you will never be that way. It would require something unnatural to even suggest that you are what you are not.

1787- 17th, September: To be eligible for President; The United States Constitution, Article. II. section I. clause 5. says: No person except a ‘NATURAL Born Citizen,’ or a Citizen of the United States, ‘at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution,’ (grandfather clause) 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.” Off-site to source record.

Article I, Section 2, clause 2, Eligibility for the House of Representatives: “No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a ‘CITIZEN’ of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.”

Article. I. Section. 3. clause 3. Eligibility for the Senate: “No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a ‘CITIZEN’ of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.”

Note the above are called source records and shows a clear difference between a U. S. Citizen and a Natural Born Citizen. The above is the law not an opinion or what some fool media talking head thinks. Our limited constitutional republic, which is our form of government, is a government by laws and not by polls or what a few or many current people think it should be. We are or should be a Nation of Laws!

These men who wrote our United States Constitution while born on United States Soil were dual citizens because their parents were also British. Because they knew this and didn’t see themselves as being A Natural Born Citizen because their parents were not US Citizens at the time of their birth. These men who fought for and created the US Constitution were just Native Born Citizens of The United States like Obama is at best. These men wrote into and used the ‘grandfather clause’ (see above) so they could be elected to be POTUS. It’s the way our founding fathers intended it to be. They have thus written it into our United States Constitution. If someone tells you this is not what they meant to say look for your own self at the above source record and see what you think it says.

Are we a Nation of Laws or a Nation of Fools?

SCOTUS 88 U.S. 162 Minor v. Happersett Argued: February 9, 1875 — Decided: March 29, 1875 “The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be Natural Born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was ‘NEVER DOUBTED’ that all children born in a country of parents who were its ‘Citizens’ became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or Natural Born citizens (para. 9), as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”

Most probably recognize that United States citizens are created either at birth or at the moment of naturalization. The former is a native (using that term in its modern sense and not in the sense that the Founders used it) and the latter is not. Most probably also recognize that a naturalized citizen is not eligible to be President. But what many fail to recognize is that the event of birth has two natural elements which always have and always will be present in every birth: (1) the place where one was born and (2) the two parents who procreated the child.

Hence, some also fail to understand that there are two types of born citizens, one being a born “Citizen of the United States” and the other being a “natural born Citizen.” Under current law, a born “Citizen of the United States” is one granted that status under the 14th Amendment or Congressional Act (e.g. Title 8 Section 1401), both of which consider either (1) being born on United States soil or (2) being born to at least one United States citizen parent sufficient conditions for being granted the status of a born “Citizen of the United States.”

Never in our history has the United States Supreme Court or the Congress ever required that one needs to satisfy both of these conditions in order to be a “citizen of the United States.” But as to a “Natural Born Citizen,” we have a different story.

There is a legal way to change our Laws but it can’t be done by Congress passing a law of any kind. Go over to Thomas and do a search and see how many times Congress has tried to change our Constitution in the correct way but got no place in trying to do it the lawful way.

Now they are doing it because they want to and no one will stop them. George Washington says it better than I ever could. He called it Usurpation! Don’t let these fools tell you what it says. You read it and it means what you think it means, not what someone tells you it means. In this matter the SCOTUS has stated what it takes to be a Natural Born Citizen of The United States, without any doubts. Congress can’t do away with it other than in the way the Constitution allows. They are trying to trash it and are doing a good job of it to this date.

No doubt in my mind every Congressperson, every judge, every person who took an oath or affirmed to uphold the U.S. Constitution and didn’t: all will be shown to be a traitor to the United States and our U.S. Constitution. That includes George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, my own Republican Congressman, all our State governors, including the so-called news media. Because Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen, they all know it is unlawful; all of them have helped it to happen rather than trying to stop this unlawful act. Therefore nothing citizen Obama does sitting as an unlawful POTUS is legal.

Tea Party…I just love these people!

“Interviews with Tea Partiers across the country paint a picture of a genuine, amorphous, conservative grassroots movement united by three core principles: constitutionally limited government, free market ideology ( not A corporate ideology ) and low taxes at least at the federal level. The American Constitution is a rallying cry and many now dub themselves “constitutional conservatives.”

People in the Tea Party are angry not just at what they describe as the socialist policies of Obama. They also feel Republican politicians have betrayed the party’s ideals of The US Constitution. For many in the movement, purging the party of moderate Republicans is a major goal.”

In Article, I, Section. 8 of The US Constitution, it lists all it allows our Congress to do. There are only 18 things and by law and their oath that is all that they can do. Why not take a look and read it.

“We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessing of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Did you know some people think George Washington was not the first President of the United States?

John Hanson was President of the Continental Congress and had quite the shoes to fill. No one had ever been President and the role was poorly defined. His actions in office would set precedent for all future Presidents. He took office just as the Revolutionary War ended. Almost immediately, the troops demanded to be paid.

Hanson, as President of the Continental Congress, ordered all foreign troops off American soil, as well as the removal of all foreign flags. This was quite a feat, considering the fact that so many European countries had a stake in the United States since the days following Columbus. Hanson established the Great Seal of the United States, which all Presidents have since used on all official documents. Hanson also established the first Treasury Department, the first Secretary of War, and the first Foreign Affairs Department. Lastly, he declared that the fourth Thursday of every November was to be Thanksgiving Day, which is still true today.

The Articles of Confederation only allowed a President of the Continental Congress to serve a one-year term during any three-year period, so Hanson actually accomplished quite a bit in such little time. He served in that office from November 5, 1781 until November 3, 1782. He was the first President of the Continental Congress to serve a full term after the full ratification of the Articles of Confederation – and like so many of the Southern and New England Founders, he was said to be strongly opposed to the U. S. Constitution when it was first discussed. He remained a confirmed anti-federalist until his untimely death.

Six other Presidents of the Continental Congress were elected after him: Elias Boudinot (1783), Thomas Mifflin (1784), Richard Henry Lee (1785), Nathan Gorman (1786), Arthur St. Clair (1787), and Cyrus Griffin (1788),  all prior to Washington taking office.

Why don’t we ever hear about the first seven Presidents of the Continental Congress of the United States?

It’s quite simple:  The Articles of Confederation didn’t work well. The individual states had too much power and nothing could be agreed upon. A new doctrine needed to be written – something we know as our Constitution.

George Washington was definitely the first President of the United States under the Constitution we are supposed to follow today, it is the law. The first seven Presidents of the Continental Congress are somewhat forgotten in the history of today.

Who really started the idea of a United States?

20 Responses to "This is about a legal matter; call me a “Birther” if you like"

  1. Cincinnatus Dogood   Monday, March 22, 2010 at 7:45 PM

    Healthcare will be going to SCOTUS. This might be the time to attach the NBC argument with all the states backing, and see if Obama can meet the requirements. He may have set himself up for a big fall. Unconstitutional as legislation and also the fact that he is a userper.

    Reply
  2. helen   Monday, March 22, 2010 at 4:58 PM

    formerly d2i – now just plain old Helen

    Here’s how I see things for what it’s worth. I believe Obama was born in the US. Where? Lord knows and who really cares. Not to be dismissive of others, just hang in there with me for a minute. What are the facts as we know them.

    Fact 1: we know he moved to Indonesia with his mother, Stanley Ann, and his adopted father, Lolo.

    Fact 2: we know that Indonesian law gives full citizenship to any child living in Indonesia prior to the age of 5.

    Fact 3: we know that Indonesian law requires children over the age of five to be formally adopted by an Indonesian citizen.

    Fact 4: we know that Indonesia lacks citizenship reciprocity with any country. Therefore, any order for Barry to receive any kind of Indonesian state benefit his mother HAD to forfeit the birth father’s parental rights (who had long since passed away so it didn’t matter) and sign them over to Lolo.

    Fact 5: we know Lolo formally adopted Barack whose name then changed to Barry Soetoro according to his school master who provided one of Barry’s report cards to the AP. This report card and her account has been reported widely throughout the internet but never on tv.

    Fact 6: at some point, Barry returned to Hawaii and lived with his grandparents and attended the private and expensive Panahou Prep School.

    So, let’s give him NBC from the time he was born until he was adopted by Lolo. Let’s meet him halfway. Because, it is his adoption by Lolo that has always mattered; not where he was born. That scavenger hunt ruese is dead. Certain attorney’s saw to it that we Constitutionalist’s were percieved as a bunch of whackos. Enough said.

    Therefore, the reason Hawaii refuses to provide the P&E info is b/c they likely don’t have any to give you. His birth certificate was sealed when he was adopted. That simple. No mystery here. The DHS cannot nor ever will be able to provide any of us with an original bc b/c adopted b/c’s are sealed. This is why folks keep bumping their head up against a brick wall.

    If there is anything you want to get your hands on it is the formal adoption papers. If there is anything you want to get your hands on it is his re entry into the US and if he ever applied for citizenship status. This is the issue. Always has been always will be.

    The disinformation folks embedded in both the R & D party have given this man a year to perfect his records by sending the well intended populous on a scavenger hunt. Their intent was purposeful, deliberate and intentional. We know who they are. They’ve championed our cause with weak cases built on toothpicks. C’mon, do you honestly believe they are on our side, that is the side of truth and exposure? If they were, then ask Ms. Taitz why she used a federal judge’s opinion on a TX state case, that political subdivisions had standing, in a California court. Not buying the crappola that she didn’t no better. She did.

    Texans have standing! Hello? Now, the big question is this, why aren’t the birther sites educating their bloggers and trying to help get the word out. We need Texan’s to file. Go to jbjd’s blogsite to get the details.

    Lastly, I live in Virginia. I filed an election fraud Memorandum of Complaint to Va’s AG in September 2009. Following last night’s vote on healthcare, jbjd has a new post up showing you and me the open letter she has sent to the AG. I will be cross posting this on my site with an introduction of past actions I’ve taken and will now demand from my AG, Cooch, he save the taxpayers money and simply ask a question…

    I ask P&E to do the same. Cross post jbjd’s/The T-Room’s post so we can build the pressure necessary to get AG Cuccinelli to ask the question…

    Reply
    1. Tex Dix   Monday, March 22, 2010 at 7:39 PM

      Helen, said “So, let’s give him NBC from the time he was born until he was adopted by Lolo.”

      Helen,

      We can’t give or take anything from him. He is what he is. If he was not Natural Born then he is not and never will be.

      What you speak to is …is Citizen Obama illegally in this country. That is a theory where as the other about NBC is a fact of Law.

      Tex Dix and my thanks to the Post and Mail for posting my blog. The hits went up 10 fold.

      http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~texdick/obama.htm

      Reply
    2. yo   Tuesday, March 23, 2010 at 9:51 AM

      helen:
      You have a good theory, i can certainly give you that, but this idea of yours to “give him” nbc status is just plain wrong. All any of us has are theories right now and they really aren’t worth a tinkers dam. We need the records to see which of the theories is right, and proceed from there. We know at least one of them is, or he wouldn’t be putting the full force of the gov’t and the fourth estate behind his efforts to squelch it all.

      Seek the courts to define nbc.
      Seek the vital records of his birth.
      Find out if he re-applied for citizenship after an adoption.
      Investigate all other inconsistencies.

      What will do us in is focusing on one of these and calling all the other theories smokescreens.

      Reply
  3. thinkwell   Sunday, March 21, 2010 at 9:53 AM

    The author captures my thinking fairly well. Our current governmental crisis really is about the rule of law over the rule of men as I see it. There may be cases of silly or outmoded local law that are rightfully ignored, but I believe every bit of our national Constitution should be followed to a “T” (including the wise provisions laid out for its guarded amendment from time to time). The Constitution is the fundamental law of the land that is the foundation that supports all other law and is the bulwark that protects the sovereign Citizens of our nation from an out-of-control government.

    As a so-called Constitutional scholar, Obama has known from the get-go that he is a usurper . This is something I just can’t get past and is a Constitutional assault that we must never let go. He is the President (albeit only putative) who never should have been. It is a sad and trying time for our nation.

    As you know, Obama claims/admits to being born equally a citizen of the USA and the UK, and his supporters still have the ignorance and/or nerve to call him a natural born citizen. To this, I have a slightly different counter argument to offer. The logical dichotomy I’d like to see put to the obots goes as follows:

    “Since Obama was born equally a citizen of both the UK and the USA and you claim he is a ‘natural born citizen’ of the USA, then he also must equally be a natural born citizen of the UK, right? But how absurd is that? How can one person be a natural born citizen of *two countries* at once?” — tw

    Reply
  4. Ed Warden   Sunday, March 21, 2010 at 9:19 AM

    I agree that Obama is NOT a Natural Born Citizen. Why is it that most Americans seem to think that he is and if he is not then that it OK as long as he GIVES THINGS to those who only want to be taken care of by the government. I want Obama and all who knew about this to be put on trail and HUNG until dead as the law says for TREASON.

    Reply
  5. yo   Sunday, March 21, 2010 at 8:29 AM

    I support the author’s desire to completely clean house and get some people in there that will enforce the laws.

    Reply
  6. TexomaEd   Sunday, March 21, 2010 at 3:08 AM

    A dual citizen is ineligible to be President for the same that a naturalized citizen is ineligible — both were subject to a foreign power at birth.

    Reply
  7. Robert Laity   Sunday, March 21, 2010 at 1:12 AM

    Link correction,Obama/Odinga:

    Reply
  8. Robert Laity   Sunday, March 21, 2010 at 1:09 AM

    Obama is not a “Natural-Born American” and can never be. It may interest you to know that the eligibility issue is not the only encumbrance that Obama faces to being POTUS. While a US Senator,Obama undertook to give aid and comfort to our enemies. While owing “allegiance” to the US,he campaigned actively for Raila Odinga to become POK (President of Kenya).
    Odinga is a known enemy of the USA. Obama’s actions,while a US Senator,to campaign for Odinga amounts to treason under the law.

    See 18USC,Part 1,Chapter 115,Sec.2381 (This law prohibits traitors from holding “any office under the United States”).

    Also See: Clinton v. Jones,520USC681(1997):
    “A sitting president is NOT immune from prosecution for acts commited before taking office”
    BBC report on Obama campaigning for genocidal felon and enemy of the US
    Raila Odinga,now currently Prime Minister of Kenya and complicit with the US Embassy bombings in Nairobi and Tanzania in 1998.
    http://sUaGe63Aqv4

    Reply
  9. tminu   Saturday, March 20, 2010 at 9:44 PM

    A natural born citizen of the United States has no other nation-ties at birth than American.
    Every other type of citizen, has one or more nations involved.

    Reply
  10. heather   Saturday, March 20, 2010 at 9:20 PM

    Obama is a proven dual citizen—British subject by way of birth due to Obama Sr and an Indonesian citizen by way of adoption. He states this himself in his book. He can never be a natural born citizen of the USA – ever—he pays to keep his creditials locked up, he signed an EO the day he was sworn in to keep them under lock and key….

    Per my conversation yesterday with my state congressmans aide, I was told in no uncertain terms, that they are all aware of this but do not know how to handle it. When I asked, what do you mean—I was told, that everyone was aware of this and they just don’t know what to do. Of course, I said, I do along with 3/4s of the American people.

    It just blew me away! He also repeated the names of Alan Keyes, Phillip Burg, Orley Taitz————–so they are aware of it.

    Why can’t we get these criminals out of our HOUSE?????
    ——————-
    Mrs. Rondeau replies: Before Obama was illegally sworn in, there was a push for the House Judiciary Committee to hold a hearing and issue a subpoena for his records. That would be very easy, as the committee holds just as much clout as a judge. That’s all they need to do. But they don’t have the backbone to do it, apparently. Sold out to the highest bidder. This is what we need to change; with a new Congress, we might just get that subpoena. Then BO will be cornered.

    Reply
    1. ELmo   Sunday, March 21, 2010 at 4:44 PM

      To Mrs. Rondeau, You do great work I’ve enjoyed reading your thoughts here on P&E. However, (IMO) you will never “Corner” Obama. He will resign from office and be pardoned if he finds himself in a pickle. I’m sure this has been all worked out in advance. It would be nice if Justice were served, but in this case, I think the electorate was duped by an elaborate scheme that was approved by both parties because neither had a “Clearly Constitutionally Qualified Candidate”. Keep doing your good work.
      —————–
      Mrs. Rondeau replies: Here at The Post & Email, we are looking for the truth, wherever and however it manifests itself. One way or the other, it will come out, and that is what counts.

      Reply
  11. Birdy   Saturday, March 20, 2010 at 8:47 PM

    I prefer to think that there is only one type of citizenship, but three paths to obtaining it – natural born, born, and naturalized. All citizens have the same rights, no matter how they obtained their citizenship. But eligibility to be President requires that you obtained your citizenship through the natural born path. Eligibility to be President is not a right, and not all citizens are eligible. This is how Leo Donofrio has explained it and it makes sense to me.

    The born path and the naturalized path are set forth in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. The natural born path is not described in the Constitution; as SCOTUS said, you have to look elsewhere.

    To determine the common understanding of “natural born citizen” that was in the minds of the authors of the Constitution, a good place to start is to research the law a nations as described in the book “The Law of Nations” by Emerich de Vattel. That research will review that the natural born path to obtaining citizenship is the be born an a country’s soil with both parents being citizens of the country. Under this definition, Barack Hussein Obama II is not a natural born citizen and is not eligible to be President; he is a usurper.

    Reply
    1. Birdy   Saturday, March 20, 2010 at 8:51 PM

      That research will reveal that the natural born path to obtaining citizenship is to be born on a country’s soil with both parents being citizens of that country. Under this definition, Barack Hussein Obama II is not a natural born citizen and is not eligible to be President; he is a usurper.

      (Sorry for the sloppy typing in the original post. Perhaps the moderator could fix it with the text here in this reply)

      Reply
  12. vharlow   Saturday, March 20, 2010 at 8:29 PM

    Excellent! And the links to history sites are great for my homeschoolers…. Thanks.

    Reply
  13. jtx   Saturday, March 20, 2010 at 7:21 PM

    TexDix is quite right about John Hanson (and the other presidents prior to Washington) as well as the situation with the Continental Congress organization nor being effective.

    Today, most people do not know any of that and for that matter most do not know that the United States Constitution is a legally binding contract (presently being violated left and right by the oligarchy) between citizens (called We The People in the contract) and the three branches of government (Legislative, Executive, and Judicial) with the latter branch supposedly guarding the validity of the contract. They’ve certainly failed their job so far.

    Reply
    1. Tex Dix   Friday, March 26, 2010 at 12:54 PM

      jtx, you have it right!

      Another thing that bothers me a great deal that I added to my web page is that we are or at least we should be a Republic.

      Not as speaker Nancy P. said Thursday on TV a Democracy. The opposite of our Republic. – link on my page.

      Reply
  14. ELmo   Saturday, March 20, 2010 at 4:19 PM

    Added to the above: Washington’s observation regarding Constitutional changes (not to be made by “Usurpation”. (All should go and read this).
    ELmo

    Reply
  15. ELmo   Saturday, March 20, 2010 at 4:17 PM

    This is an excellent essay. Minor vs Happersett is a “Wealth” of information.
    Waite indicates that “Citizenship” is a “reciprocal” arrangement. One in which the Government provides “Protection” in return for the Citizen’s “Allegiance”.
    (Obama needs to consider what “Allegiance” means).

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.