Its OK with me, good luck.
No, sickoflibs, the author is finally focusing upon the real issue. While it has been frustrating to us who value the Constitution, we are bit closer to the real, which is certainly complex, we have a solvable problem. If, as our ruling class pundits, sadly including many who call themselves conservatives, suggest, we ignore the Constitution, just one more time, every illegal contract aimed at crippling our republic will remain in effect. Like Nancy Pelosi’s never to be forgotten, “Sign it so you can find out what's in it,” we have signed documents which betray a pattern of deception, and betray the real reason Barack was buying time with the birth certificate misdirection, a birth certificate which not only showed nothing embarrassing, certainly nothing warranting six months in Leavenworth for a decorated Army Surgeon who asked for confirmation, but embarrassing whatsoever.
Senator Barack Obama signed his agreement to the following statements. There are some weasel words, but lets take a look at what he signed in Senate Resolution 511:
‘Because he was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind that Senator MCCAIN is a natural born Citizen.’ Patrick Leahy.
‘We conclude that Senator McCain is a natural born Citizen by virtue of his birth in 1936 to U.S. citizen parents who were serving their country on a U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone.’ Barack’s Harvard adviser and consittuional law professor Larry Tribe, with Ted Olson.’
The core principle in both statements was "citizen parents." While the purpose of SR 511 is clearly to silence the Republicans, it is full of sneaky half truths, and indeed, false implications, the authors, from Obama’s campaign committee, McCaskill and Larry Tribe, showed their true intent with the comment:
“And Senator Barack Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961—not long after its admission to the Union on August 21, 1959. We find it inconceivable that Senator Obama would have been ineligible for the Presidency had he been born two years earlier.” Larry Tribe and Ted Olson.
Their point and the point of supposed Resolution that McCain was Eligible as far as the senate was concerned (it had no force of law) is to pretend that Obama was/is eligible. They guessed that no one important would dare notice that while McCain had citizen parents, Obama didn't!z,
They all knew of Obama’s problem and conspired, with the assistance of the media, to distract the public.
What was so misleading about the Tribe-Olson letter? Here is one sneaky example which could serve as a “what's wrong with this reasoning” exercise in law school or a rhetoric class.
Congress has recognized in successive federal statutes since the Nation's Founding that children born abroad to U.S. citizens are themselves U.S. citizens. 8 U.S.C. §1401 (c); see also Act of May 24, 1934, Pub. L. No. 73-250, §1, 48 Stat. 797, 797. Indeed, the statute that the First Congress enacted on this subject not only established that such children are U.S. citizens, but also expressly referred to them as ``natural born citizens.’’ Act of Mar. 26, 1790, ch. 3, §1, 1 Stat. 103, 104.
The above might be called hand waving, or crass deception, but it is dishonest law by men who besmirch their vaunted positions.
Tribe begins by citing “federal statutes,” laws, and is properly referring to ‘citizens.’ So? Citizens by statute are, by definition, by Article 1 Section 8, naturalized. Title 8 Section 1401 is naturalization law. The president and vice president must be ‘natural’ citizens. To mislead, Tribe references ‘the First Congress’ and its extension of the natural born Citizen definition to children of citizen born abroad. That reference to natural born Citizens in US Code. the only one ever written, was repealed in 1795, probably because it was unconstitutional. Tribe constructed an argument which shifted subjects, citizens to natural born Citizens, and used a patently untrue clause, one repealed five years after it was proposed.
Tribe and Olson throughout referred to the equivalence of English Common law, of a subject to a citizen. Here is just a bit of a wonderful Treatise on Citizenship from one President who actually could write, President before the ratification, in 1785, the Congressional Historian, Dr. David Ramsay (find the whole ‘Dissertation’ on scribd.com)
A citizen of the United States, means a member of this new nation. The principle of government being radically changed by revolution, the political character of the people also changed from subjects to citizens.
The difference is immense. Subject is derived from the latin words, sub and jacio, and means one who is under the power of another; but a citizen is an unit of a mass of free people, who collectively, possesses sovereignty.
Subjects look up to a master, but citizens are so far equal, that none have hereditary rights superior to others. Each citizen of a free state contains, within himself, by nature and the constitution, as much of the common sovereignty as another. In the eye of reason and philosophy, the political condition of citizens is more exalted than that of noblemen. Dukes and earls are the creatures of kings, and may be made by them at pleasure: but citizens possess in their own right original sovereignty.
Our founders and framers did NOT base our Constitution on English common law. We have political opportunists who are taking us for fools. Not many understood our citizenship laws and Constitution before Obama, but we are learning quickly. Here is Prentice Webster in an 1891 Treatise on Citzenship:
“to repeate what has already been set forth as the rule prior to 1836, it must be affirmed that neither jus soli nor allegiance in the English sense an dmeaning had any thing whatever to do with the acquisition of citizenship in the United States.”
It is important to note that our Uniform Code of Naturalization, the code which applies, by his own admission, to Barack Obama, permits naturalized citizens to hold every office but the presidency and vice presidency. English common law does not admit naturalized citizens to membership in Parliament. No English law or constitution makes commoners eligible to be monarch.
The collusion of all senators in 2008, and the blatant disregard for our Constitution shown by Barack Obama, all of whom signed a Senate Resolution in which Obama’s eligibility was pointedly but dishonestly discussed, claiming John McCain was a natural born Citizen because both of his parents WERE US Citizens when he was born, but Barack too was eligible, both of whose parents were NOT citizens, was a smokescreen, and an enormous crime. The issue was never about a birth certificate. It was to distract the public from the obscure laws governing natural born citizens so that those in the ruling class might survive our transformation from a republic into a Dictatorship of the Proletariat, with most of their privileges intact.
These laws were clearly not obscure to Barack Obama, or to Pat Leahy, or Clare McCaskill, or to Jim Webb, or to Orrin Hatch, who actually attempted himself to amend Article II Section 1 in 2003, to make Schwarzenegger eligible. The Democrats didn't bother to try because our history is too clear on the point. Twenty five amendment attempts of Article II Section 1 have failed. It was easier, as with the health-care bill, to tell you what to believe, insult you if you ask questions, and to act like the dictators they intend to be. It is easier, now that we have a legal document confirming that Obama’s father, the British subject, was indeed his father, to say that there is no legal doubt about Barack Jr.s ineligibility. The courts have said that because we are all being injured, we have no standing use the courts. It is approaching time for a government of and by the people to replace the courts, and the legislature which failed to vet an ineligible presidential nominee.
Some of our ruling class pundits are saying “There are more important things, like the economy and our foreign policy, to attend to.” “It is foolish to address silly issues like constitutional interpretation.” Without a president, judiciary and legislative branches, who obey the Constitution no effort to right an economy has a chance of succeeding. Obama’s cadre intends a wholesale replacement of our Constitutional republic with a Marxist bureaucracy. Our framers required a natural born Citizen because it could help to insure a leader with the allegiance of his or her parents. We got what they anticipated, but ignored that the parents had to have sole allegiance to our sovereign republic. The author of the 14th Amendment used that term, allegiance, in place of citizenship, when addressing the House of Representatives to explain the basis for our naturalization laws. Congressman John Bingham to the House of Representatives, 1866:
I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that 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 .
As a veteran who took an oath to “defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic”, I'm tore on what to do. I've researched and posted all over the place, but it seems like many Americans (Dem and Repub) don't care about the Constitutional aspect. I feel like America is at a point, not unlike the movie Braveheart, where William Wallace is imploring the Scottish Kings son to lead the people. I think many patriotic Americans are anxiously hoping for someone, anyone, to stand up, and speak the truth.
I think that's why Donald Trump, with all his baggage, is getting traction, because at least someone is speaking to things which we believe and want looked at. Unfortunately, I think the giant wheels of politics will crush any political solution to this Constitutional problem and all that leaves is eventual violent repulsion of the political authority/class.