If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
PRESIDENTIAL ELIGIBILITY MEANS NO FOREIGN ALLEGIANCES
by Dwight Kehoe, ©2011
(Nov. 25, 2011) — Patriots, Over the past several months as I watched and listened to those concerned with preserving our Constitution, trashed, and belittled, I decided to lay out exactly what the positions of the so called “birthers” are and try one last time to get some official, somewhere to join the cause of right. I will spend the next week, sending this letter to every Sheriff, every State Election Commission in the country in hopes that we can find a few persons of integrity.
Each of these people will get a personally addressed letter, in the vein of what I have written below.
Why has America become the most economically powerful, productive and wonderful country, not just in the world today, but in all the history of mankind? If someone were to ask you that question, what would be your answer?
It is true we have always had brave, hard working, God loving people and this country has been blessed with beautiful land, lakes and resources. But so too have many other places in the world that have failed to even come close to the freedom and prosperity of America. The answer, for certain, is the brilliant document that was meticulously and assiduously forged by our founding fathers.
The Constitution of the United States.
The Constitution spells out the limits of the government and the rights of men, in that each man will be afforded, not equal outcome, but equal rights and opportunity, and that the rule of law will prevail over the rule of man.
Let us move from those thoughts to a very famous revolutionary, Saul Alinsky. A Marxist radical, who preached, organized and worked for the overthrow of our Constitution and economic system. His fairly well known, but little dissected book, written in 1971, “Rules for Radicals”, details how the “minority thought” can overcome and prevail over the majority. He describes how opposition and dissent can be silenced. The method is, identify your opposition, ridicule and label them, then isolate and finally, destroy them. This tactic of the left has been in full operational mode for years, but never more so than right now.
That brings the conversation to the “Birther” movement. While the term, in its origination, was adopted in the fashion of Alinsky- “Identify, label, isolate and ridicule”, many patriots have come to look on the term as a sign of someone concerned with the Constitution and is willing to counter the relentless assault on it.
Having said that, in fact, the tactic has worked and it has worked well. So much so, that no one in the news media, including those that claim conservatism, few politicians, either on the left or right, have had the courage to stand up for the principles of our Constitution for fear of being labeled and isolated. In other words, far from the sacrifices our founding fathers made during the struggle for Independence, our leaders today are willing to sacrifice or chance, nothing.
When one hears the word “birther”, what comes to mind? For me, it is a Constitutionalist. Someone with respect for America and a person who is willing to live by the Constitution, not just under it.
And now let’s discuss the Constitution and what it says about the eligibility for persons seeking to run for President and then to be the Commander in Chief and in that light, does Obama’s citizenship comply? Although there are many indications that he has had multiple ventures into forgery and obfuscation on the matter of state, hospital and documentation of his birth and it is very important that someone be held accountable for possible felonious actions, in the end, Obama is indeed a citizen because he was born to an American, his mother.
What is not in contention is the undisputed fact that Obama’s father was not at the time of Obama’s birth, nor was he ever an American citizen. That fact makes it illegal for him to be placed on any ballot, in any state, to run for the office of the President as required in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5.
Here is the wording of that Article:
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; 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.
Many have said, “But the Constitution does not define natural born” in their excuse to not take on this very important struggle to protect and abide by the law. It’s true, the Constitution was written without an attached glossary of terms. It seems the framers were under the assumption that those entrusted with protecting and enforcing it would be able to read a sentence and understand the intent, without an interpreter or the application of verbal gymnastics.
The founding fathers were intelligent, deliberate and educated men. To suppose words or phrases, used by them, were less than intentional or erroneously used, would be an insult to them and their memory.
There can be no other meaning or intent for the insertion of natural born than the intent of its meaning at that time in history, and there can be no other reason for it to have been included except to prevent people without the proper and assured allegiance to the United States from gaining control of the military and Executive Branch.
Proof of this concern can be found in a letter written by John Jay, in 1787, to George Washington, where in which he requested the term “Natural Born Citizen” be included in the Constitution relating to persons who would serve as President and Commander-in-Chief of the military. Writings and case law, then as it does now, defined exactly what the term natural born citizen meant.
John Jay (1745-1829), American diplomat and politician, guided American foreign policy from the end of the Revolution until George Washington’s first administration was under way. Jay headed the U.S. Supreme Court during its formative years.
The following is a letter John Jay wrote to George Washington:
Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government ; and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.
I remain, dear sir,
Your faithful friend and servant,
George Washington, serving as President of the Constitutional Convention, submitted the term to the delegates and it was approved. So those trying to provoke or illicit an ulterior meaning to the clause need to explain why John Jay wrote his concerns in the fashion he did and why Washington and the delegates agreed to include it in Article 2.
In closing, there will continue to be many, for whatever personal reasons they harbor, who will refuse to stand up for the Constitution while belittling those Americans that do. A terrible offense wounded our founding documents in 2008 when an entire country of scholars, law enforcement officials and politicians cast their eyes away from what was right for that which was easy.
No single man or single President is bigger or more important than the preservation of the Constitution and those that think and act otherwise will be the perpetrators and culprits of its eventual demise. It is time to end the “ostrich act”, separate your self from the Alinsky attack pack and join the effort to keep a second illegal presidential election from occurring.
There will be a final determination of this. Will you be part of the preservation of our Republic or will you continue to ignore your oath to defend and protect our constitution?
Mr. Obama is ineligible to run for President of the United States. Your duty is to see that his name is not allowed on the ballot for that office.
If you have any information that would disprove anything written here please contact me. I will be glad to entertain any thought you have if your determination runs contrary to my reference work.