If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!

PERCEPTIVE READER LINKS TERM WITH THE BEGINNINGS OF OUR NATION

by Constitutional Patriot

Portrait of Benjamin Franklin by Jean Baptiste Greuze

(Apr. 18, 2010) — Has anyone else noticed that Supreme Court Associate Justice  Clarence Thomas, in his exchange with Rep. Jose Serrano last week, did not label the “eligibility issue” the “ineligibility issue” with the “birther” label?

However, “birther” has been redefined by comments made by a reader of The Post & Email.

“Birther” Re-Defined:

A patriot who holds dear every word of the Contract between the People and the Government that is the envy of the world and whose ratification heralded the “BIRTH” of this great nation, The Constitution of the United States of America. — From a commenter/reader of The Post & Email

When we view the Constitution of the United States of America as that Contract between the People and the Government instead of just a “living document” which should be changed at the whims of current events, which is a view held by many in this great Country, our view of that document changes to a jealousy for the Rights and Liberties which the Founders of this Country enshrined in that Contract between the People and the Government.

When we possess that jealousy for the Constitution, even the least appearance of an encroachment on those invaluable Privileges should make our blood boil exceedingly.

Just as such encroachments on those invaluable Privileges would have made Benjamin Franklin’s blood boil exceedingly, because those were his exact words, taken from his Silence Dogood Letter #2, which was published in The New-England Courant on 16 April 1722:

I am naturally very jealous for the Rights and Liberties of my Country; and the least appearance of an Incroachment on those invaluable Priviledges, is apt to make my Blood boil exceedingly. — Silence Dogood, Silence Dogood Letter #2, 16 Apr 1722

so should they with us today.

If you were buying a house and in the contract, the seller agreed to include options or fix problems before you moved in and you signed the contract, only to discover that the seller reneged on including those options or fixing problems with the house, what would you do?

Are you just going to ignore that, or fight for your rights to obtain a remedy for those breaches in the contract?

It was agreed upon in the Constitution of the United States of America, Contract between the People and the Government, at Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5, that one of the qualifications for the office of President would be:

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.

Since no one today can claim that he was a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of the Constitution, the following portion of that qualification for the office of President remains relevant and in effect today:

No person except a natural born Citizen … shall be eligible to the Office of President.

Are we going to continue to ignore the increasing evidence, the weight of which tends to support that this qualification for the office of President, which was agreed upon in that Contract between the People and the Government, The Constitution of the United States of America,  was ignored, disregarded and encroached upon by those who committed fraud so that Obama could illegally and unconstitutionally attain the office of President of the United States of America?

Join the Conversation

7 Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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

  1. I’m glad Thomas and others found humor in this issue. I personally do not. Why is the military brass standing by doing nothing to remove BO to protect the US Constitution and American citizens as they swore to? Where are the CIA and FBI? No action from them either! Why is this usurper still in our WH?

  2. I truly think Justice Thomas was saying much more than any of us not in the know…knows. Like he would know how many short they were in allowin a case to go foward.

    Could it have just been one and obama’s justice will have to excuse herself?

  3. H. J. Res. 5
    Sponsor: Rep. Serrano
    Introduced: January 6, 2009

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual [Obama the USURPER] may serve as President.

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hj111-5

    H. J. RES. 5

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

    January 6, 2009

    Mr. SERRANO introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

    JOINT RESOLUTION

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

    ‘Article–

    ‘The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.’.

    1. Justice Thomas: We are evading the eligibility issue
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7qEH-tKoXA&feature=player_embedded

      Rep. Serrano: I’m glad to hear that you don’t think that there has to be a judge on the Court because I am not a judge. I have never been a judge.

      Justice Thomas: And you don’t have to be born in the United States. So you never have to ask, answer that question.

      Rep. Serrano: Oh, really?

      Justice Thomas: Yeah.

      Rep. Serrano: So, you haven’t answered the one whether I can serve as President but you answered this one.

      Justice Thomas: We’re evading that one. We are giving you [Rep. Serrano] another option [you are eligible for the Supreme Court, but you are NOT eligible to the office of President, as you aren’t an Article II natural born citizen of the United States].

  4. We hear so many lies from Lefty about how the SCOTUS decision in Wong Kim Ark made Barrack Hussein Obama 2 a Natural Born Citizen of the USA.
    Apparently Alexander Porter Morse, International Lawyer, Lecturer,Constitutional Scholar and Author of “Treatise on Citizenship” 1881, held a different veiw.

    “It remains to be
    decided whether a child of domiciled Chinese parents, born in the United States, is eligible, if
    otherwise qualified, to the office of president and to all the privileges of the Constitution. And it
    would be a strange conclusion, in another aspect, if the child of American parents, born in China,
    should be denied correspondent rights and privileges in the United States.”

    NATURAL-BORN CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES: ELIGIBILITY FOR THE OFFICE OF
    PRESIDENT
    By ALEXANDER PORTER MORSE (ALBANY LAW JOURNAL VOL. 66 (1904-1905)