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


by Creg Maroney

How can someone with dual allegiance be considered a "natural born Citizen?" Why has this fact been obscured by the media and "conservative" writers and pundits? Why aren't they questioning?

(Apr. 28, 2011) — You ignorant souls that think any Communist Socialist foreign Dictator in the world including Hitler, if he were still alive (and he just might be), can come to America with his communist wife, not become a U.S. citizen by naturalization, have their child here on U.S. soil, go back to Germany, raise their child then plant him here on American soil during an election and Hitler’s son has the opportunity of becoming The President of The United States of America and the most powerful Army in the world?

You who believe that UNCONSTITUTIONAL qualification for U.S. Presidency are the problem and the downfall of America.

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution stipulates a distinct difference between a “CITIZEN” (14th Amendment) and an Article 2 “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.”

To only be a “CITIZEN” and become President you would have had to have been “ALIVE AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE CONSTITUTION” (The Grandfather Clause) and still alive today. Since that is impossible now to be eligible for United States Presidency, you must be a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. It is written in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5.  JUST READ IT. GOOGLE IT.


88 U.S. 162

Minor v. Happersett

…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, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.


Todd Leventhal of The U.S. State Dept CONFIRMS Barack Hussein Obama was born a DUAL CITIZEN.


Just research the context and definition of an Article 2 NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

Barry Soetoro/Soebarkah aka -Barack Hussein Obama just proved he is 100% USURPER.

He must step down or be removed. Weakness in The Constitution will cripple the People.


Editor’s Note: This note was posted at The Washington Times in response to an editorial by Ben Shapiro.  Did The Times publish it?

Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published.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. Notice no raised seal in the lower left hand corner. Only a stamp of the date in April

    2011. My son couldn’t get a job with anything like BHO’s fake birth cert.

  2. @Goss… and those statements do not conflict with ‘Natural born”…. why should there be objection?. Being the parents cannot owe allegiance to ‘no other sovereignty’..i.e. They would then be the only thing left.. US citizens.
    The off-spring of US citizen parents… born within the Territorial Jurisdiction of the United States, as defined in title 18 subsec 7. Are in fact natural born American’s. Nothing fancy there! Just like it’s always been defined.
    If the Founders meant a lesser standard.. they’d have just ‘re-used’ the standard used to become a Senator.
    Everyone is soviergn of somewhere. For example, according to the Mexican Constitution, there are no such thing as Mexican immigrants… All Mexican Nationals are Mexican Citizens.. no matter the country of residence… and further.. It claims as Mexican Subjects, all children born abroad of Mexican National parents. The fourteenth amendment has no subject matter jurrisdiction over another Nations Constitution… nor it’s citizens.
    So it stands to reason, American citizens are those within the jurrisdiction..whom cannot be claimed by another Nation.. nor holds allegence to another nation… and that is in complete harmony with Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5. USC

  3. This is a great comment from a poster at Michelle Makin’s blog. She has been a supporter of Obama’s usurpation of the presidency all along, but many on her blog do not agree with her.

    This is a reply to a post I made, I am BOB at Malkin’s blog.


    On April 28th, 2011 at 2:46 pm, Hiraghm said: On April 28th, 2011 at 2:21 pm, BOB said:

    This is what I’ve been arguing about.

    I know Ms Malkin doesn’t agree with me on the issue, but on other issues she has been outspoken on the need for open discussion.

    And the argument over “natural born citizen”, which is the important argument, has been glossed over and either merged with the birth certificate issue, or flat-out ignored.

    It’s political correctness. Not the kind that says you’re a racist if you don’t want to kiss Obama’s butt, but the kind that insists that if you disagree with the common opinion, it must be because you’re a crazy troublemaker, not because you have a valid argument.

    And, the Constitutionalists do have valid arguments to put forward. It does say “natural born citizen” in the Constitution. The Founding Fathers were more literate than your average supreme court jester justice today. There was a definition, at the time of the Constitution’s writing, that defined natural born citizen as having both parents citizens at birth (and certainly the father).

    If supreme court decisions since have fallaciously conflated the meanings of “natural born” and “native born”, that is a counter argument to be presented, not “taken as a given” simply because people who could not be bothered to study the issue can’t see how there could be a difference, or more importantly, why that difference is important.

    See, that difference is, in the modern vernacular, “discrimination”. It suggests that one form of citizen is more ‘equal’ than another, and in today’s politically correct world, the greatest heresy is to suggest that people are not, in fact, equal. That you can’t pull a drunk out of the gutter and plug him into a CEOs desk and expect him to do as well as a trained, experienced, and above all, talented, CEO. Why, that’s downright un-modern-American.

    And to suggest that someone born and raised in the U.S., by people who either were born and raised in the U.S. or chose to formally forswear any previous allegiance and jump through our hoops to become citizens, might have a bit more loyalty and dedication to America than the child of some peon who snuck across the border with a backpack of marijuana, why, that’s just bigotry. And we all all right-thinking people know that bigotry is just ignorance and redneck-ness. So, we can’t have that codified into our law.

    In most liberal circles, it’s already considered the greatest heresy to suggest that Americans are inherently different than non-Americans (unless the suggestion is that the perceived difference makes Americans somehow inferior).

  4. It is a good thing that Obama released whatever he did-what I think it really means is that he has now committed himself officially-no doubt about it- to his Kenyan father-cant change Daddys now-cant go findin another dead citizen who snuck into the apt and got to mommy-so we can blast at NBC from now on-with no other bs to get us or the uneducated public off track-and by golly the Senate sure stuck their foot in it -officially-when they issued SR511-the fast and easy definition is right there-“born to American citizens” It is more or less now undeniable-and since there is no remaining distraction issue-because whether the BC is valid or not-he’s publicly out there with his official admission of whos his daddy-he’s more or less a cooked goose-so its only a matter of how long it will cook-until it collapses like a souffle-this is gonna be tasty-if you guys remember how Watergate played out-this is going to make that look like childs play.

  5. Not the Congress, lower & higher judicial courts, military tribunals, pro-Usurper medias will stand to interpret the definition of natural born citizen stipulation in US Constitution.

    The Constitution follows their definition provided it suits their purpose to uphold the Usurper. Any other interpretation is beyond their comprehension. It’s everyone to their taste that’s their definition.

    “It is certain because it is impossible.” – Tertullian

  6. We should be used to it by now as when it comes to this WH it is always smoke and mirrors, smoke and mirrors.

    Yesterday the WH website posted the long version of Obama’s BC. But what it did not release is the ORIGINAL version of the (long form) archive entry.

    We do know for a FACT from the Hawaii DoH, through a UIPA court ordered release, that the ORIGINAL entry in the Hawaii DoH archives regarding Obama has been amended at some point.

    Such amendment should show on the document released yesterday if such document has not been created AFTER the said amendment.

    The document released yesterday, notwhithstanding the forgery issues, is at best the long form BC for Obama as it NOW stands at the DoH and nothing else.

    It does not shade any light on the circumstances of the original entry for Obama in the Hawaii DoH archives. It does not exclude the possibility of an application for Birth Certificate never followed by the issuance of a Birth Certificate until later following an amendment. It does not preclude a possible succession of changes to the BC caused by Obama’s Indonesian adoption and subsequent correction.

    In fact, it does not change a thing. We still do not know what the Original entry said. We still do not know anything for sure about the man… Except that he consistently declares to have been a dual citizen at birth which makes him uneligible to be the US president.

    1. Exactly… and that entry should show the adopted name change to Barry Soetoro… and maybe even the Citizenship change to an Indonesian National. …another exhibit denoting his ineligibility.
      I think this: .They are smarter than this… especially after getting busted the same way for the same thing.. last time. In fact… I say, it is so track proven by the first go around… that it may be deliberate.
      These same people.. received the Exact Same results from the short form… i.e. The pdf showed layers denoting the doc was altered.
      I have dinked around with adobe illustrator… just enough to know that an adobe photo shop created .pdf can have data groups that will show up in illustrator as layers. However, they are never just the filled in digits on a form. Nor one or two of the filled in digits in a group. The layers would show to be blocks of all, form And filled in digits. And gibberish. They would also contain pieces of the form. To the computer, Lines are Lines. It doesn’t classify nor separate them according to the time they were added to the original doc.

      When I saw him co-sign it as the real deal… I knew he just had done himself in.. But, I also saw that smug confidence… and when he made the disclaimer that it will still not satisfy people..I thought… He knows it will be found out, and that he has plans that coincide and harmonize with that finding. That scares me… as there are only a few avenues left open for him…… resign with congressional agreement not to prosecute? ..Or loot the WH and abscond with his entourage, thinking he’d be safe with chavis or his Paki buddies?

      …this COLB might have flown in 1957… but with today’s forensic tech. Not a chance. It’s positively assured to be proven beyond doubt …a fraudulent document… if it is in anyway, modified. They come apart, like they go together. Plus the WH further made statement today that Barry’s “personal attorney, female name, went to Hawaii and picked it up… and arrived here with it Tuesday”.So chain of custody is established.

      Thing is…. people that play with the adobe suite… tend to be office types that are predominately… democrats. Though old hat… Even they cannot stand to be called stupid. With an advertized D/L link… and with Everybody knowing somebody that is familar with Ai… Bet by Friday after tomorrow… most of America will have had enough.

  7. Quoting John Bingham the farther of the 14th amendment

    “All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862)).

    And again here two years later.

    “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 your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))”

    In both cases were no objections from any member of congress.

  8. Creg Maroney’s explanation of the meaning and intent of “natural born citizen” as it was used in Article II is correct. Until the authenticity of the document released yesterday is verified by document forensics gurus (or whatever their professional title[s] are), however, Barky’s birthplace has not yet been determined. Of course, Mr Maroney may have simply gone along with those who are satisfied with the document presented to the public yesterday in order to get straight to the lesson on nbc. Still, there are many others who should know better by now but seem to be satisfied that the document presented yesterday puts to rest the question of birthplace.