Constitution Party to Barack Obama: Got Birth Certificate?

Lancaster, PA, The country’s fastest-growing third party (Ballot Access News 12/08) challenged Barack Obama to release his birth certificate and dispel the grave concerns that he is ineligible to assume office as president of the United States.

“The Constitution is crystal clear on the issue of citizenship. Article 2, Section 1 states that no one can be sworn into office as President of the United States unless he is a natural born citizen”, said Constitution Party National Committee Chairman Jim Clymer.

Clymer, a Pennsylvania attorney who has litigated cases based on Constitutional law added, “Obama has yet to produce even basic proof that he was born in this country. Average citizens can’t even get a driver’s license without such proof of citizenship and Obama is contending he can assume the highest office in the land without such proof!

If a non-citizen can be given a free pass to the presidency than what’s to say someone with no allegiance and who harbors ill will toward the country won’t someday assume office?”

The Constitution Party ,which holds that the Constitution is the supreme and abiding law by which our country should be governed, contends that no one is above that law. Even Barack Obama.

Obama has refused repeated requests to release his Hawaiian birth certificate, which would include the actual hospital that performed the delivery.

Lawsuits filed in a number of states asking for proof of the basic information have been dismissed.

“What is cause for concern here, in addition to the element of deceit shown by Obama and his handlers, is the apparent total disregard for the Constitution. If this eligibility question can be ignored, what does this say about how this administration will regard other Constitutional mandates?” Clymer asked.

The Constitution Party calls on Barack Obama, the Democratic National Committee, Attorneys General and Secretaries of State of the various states, Congress and the Courts to take their oaths of office and this constitutional question seriously in order to restore faith in our system of free and fair elections.

I would be interested to know what planks they were, of the Constitution Party Platform, that Alan Keys declared that he could not support. That might say a lot about both parties — that is, the differences between the two.

And what about the Falcon Party, which one here suggests should be graced by the CP and AIP joining in with them?

I was under the impression that the Falcon Party was more “libertarian” in nature, but I could be wrong. I only just took a cursory look at their web site an hour ago, rushing up against check out time at a hotel.

What are/would be the differences that would prevent the three parties (CP, AIP, FP) from forming a practical coalition or affiliating together to a degree significant to get some Constitutionalists elected to some House and Senate seats in 2012, 2014, 2016?

My position is this. A two party system is still the most stable, and the United States should not sink turn into something like a parliamentary system. But we citizens have been the ones keeping the same two parties in power—the two that should both be dumped (IMHO).

The Republicans are now (as someone has said) Democrat-Lite, evidenced ever more clearly from the way it ran this last campaign, scaredie-cat approach to Obama’s proposed policies, to bailouts, scaredie-cat immigration policy, fear of genuine tax reform, too many Colin Powell-types, etc. Yes, we have two Democratic Parties (both in Constitutional disguise). And it is ushering in a president that makes every world socialist dance with glee.

I have little hope that a third party, or even a coalition of several, could elect a president within the next twenty years. I do believe that a third party Constitutional/Conservative/Patriotic effort, perhaps a concerted effort of the CP, AIP, and FP could possibly take several House seats, and perhaps even a Senate seat in the very near future.

What would several “alternative” house seat wins accomplish. It would send the message to the American electorate and to the reigning Demopub Party, that the anointing of the current order can be removed; the current “two” parties can be replaced with two others.

I have many friends in the political arena (Republicans or former Republicans), a couple who have actually held offices in state legislatures in years gone by, who supported Chuck Baldwin and the CP. I've yet to speak directly with anyone I know who supported Alan Keys and AIP.

The fact that some (Republicans or former Republicans) who have served in state legislative seats and know government at that level is encouraging to me, but it is not enough. State legislators do not get very much press unless they are involved in scandal.

Still, it seems that a concerted effort of the CP, AIP, and FP could put many good people in office at state legislator level. Of course, one or two Governorships would shake things up as well, or is that too hopeful.

Loyalty to the Republican Party is getting us . . . well, the likes of Obama, and Congressional leadership the likes of Reid and Palms, and that's about all.

At the very least, the CP, AIP, and FP, without abandoning their own thrid party aspirations should openly and honestly, without subterfuge, but with open declaration, put concerted pressure on the Republican Party, and especially its leadership. The CP, AIP, and FP should look up the snouts of the RP leadership and tell them that they will be going after young, bright, Constitutionally minded Republicans.

If I were in any leadership position with the CP, AIP, or FP, I would be forming regular contact with the best and brightest of the Republicans (elected officials, appointed officials, party officials) who have Constitutional leanings. I wouldn't do this in a corner; not hiding — not secretively. And I would tell the heads of the RP exactly what I am doing.

I would be going after them. I would be openly encouraging them, saying, “Look, if you are hampered by your party leadership, if they are trying to get you to hush up or keep your views tailored to the democrat-leaning leadership or the Rhinos, then stand up, come out, and become a leader in a party that has a like mind and heart.

Conservatism and Constitutionalism is not dead. But the Republican Party is dead. Let's encourage their Constitutional-leaning bright ones not to join it in the grave yard. Is a resurrection possible for the Republican Party? Resurrections are quite difficult to perform, you know.

Something to consider in the discussion on 'natural born citizen':

The term “natural born citizen” has NEVER been defined in the U.S. Constitution or in codified U.S. law.

The OPERATIVE phrase of the 14th Amendment expressly states:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside ...”

It says “citizens” NOT “natural born citizens”.

In situations like this, SCOTUS has USUALLY devolved to ascertain what the “original intent” of the framers was ... What does the 14th Amendment mean and what is its intended scope, as introduced the United States Senate in 1866?

Sen. Jacob M. Howard (MI), who introduced it in the Senate, tells us (as it was being debated):

“The first amendment is to section one, declaring that all “persons born in the United States and Subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States wherein they reside. I do not propose to say anything on that subject except that the question of citizenship has been fully discussed in this body as not to need any further elucidation, in my opinion. This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country ... I concur entirely with the honorable Senator from Illinois [Senator Trumbull], in holding that the word “jurisdiction,” as here employed, ought to be construed so as to imply a full and complete jurisdiction on the part of the United States, whether exercised by Congress, by the executive, or by the judicial department; that is to say, the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now ...”

Sen. Lyman Trumbull, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, author of the Thirteenth Amendment, inserted the phrase:

“... All persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.’ That means ‘subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.’ What do we mean by ‘complete jurisdiction thereof?’ Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means ... Can you sue a Navajo Indian in court? Are they in any sense subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States? By no means. We make treaties with them, and therefore they are not subject to our jurisdiction. If they were, we wouldn’t make treaties with them...It is only those persons who come completely within our jurisdiction, who are subject to our laws, that we think of making citizens; and there can be no objection to the proposition that such persons should be citizens ...”

Senator W. Williams further stated:

” ... In one sense, all persons born within the geographical limits of the United States are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, but they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States in every sense. Take the child of an ambassador. In one sense, that child born in the United States is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, because if that child commits the crime of murder, or commits any other crime against the laws of the country, to a certain extent he is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, but not in every respect; and so with these Indians. All persons living within a judicial district may be said, in one sense, to be subject to the jurisdiction of the court in that district, but they are not in every sense subject to the jurisdiction of the court until they are brought, by proper process, within the reach of the power of the court. I understand the words here, ‘subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,’ to mean fully and completely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States ...”

Rep. John Bingham of Ohio, considered the father of the Fourteenth Amendment, confirms the understanding and construction the framers used in regards to birthright and jurisdiction while speaking on civil rights of citizens in the House on March 9, 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 [plural, meaning two] not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen...”

Barry Soetoro, aka Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Obama, admits on his own website that he held British citizenship at birth due to his Father being a British subject and in no way an American. Thus Barry is precisely whom Bingham was implying is not a 'natural born citizen' regardless of where he was born, for purposes of Constitutional eligibility.

No, it doesn’t force them. But, it does force at least two hours of debate per each challenge. As we have seen recently, the Pubbies can find their oysters and mount a formidable opposition, and, even gather some dummie support along the way.

The worst that could happen would be we lose, and we are already there, right? Further, if the challenges started with a Senator and a Representative that were already voted out of Congress, there would be no backlash in case no one else joined in. No harm, no foul.

BUT, what if the dummies decide to throw 0bama under his own bus? We hear rumblings already amongst his tribe. Add to the legally unqualified charge the Blago affair, and we might could get lucky.

Then the hildebeast could use her demon magic and start cutting deals. I never wanted to see her in the WH again, BUT, lesser of two evils and all, ya’ know.

If you read the Constitution, what I just hypothesized could happen. If the Congress doesn’t accept the electoral votes, they have to choose by polling the Electors, if that doesn’t produce a majority vote, then they choose from the qualified candidates. That would be Clinton or McCain. From my reading, there is wiggle room at the discretion of the President of the Senate.

So, we need a CALL TO FREEPER ACTION, who do we start bombarding with emails and phone calls?

DFU or another FReeper parody pro should do a “You Make Me Feel Like a Nat’rul Born Citizen” a la Carole King/Aretha.

You inspired me to try!

"Natural Born Citizen" as sung by BO

Looking through all my college grades
I used to feel uninspired
And when I knew I had to shred the truth again
Lord, it made me feel so tired
Before I lost my history, life was so unkind
But you, the media, were the key to my peace of mind

Cause you make me feel, you make me feel,
You make me feel like a natural born citizen

When my Granny told of my Kenyan birth
You came along to deny it
When the bloggers found just what was wrong with me
Your thrilly legs would not buy it

Now I'm no longer doubtful of what I'm living for
Cause if I can rule the country I don't need to do more

You make me feel, you make me feel,
You make me feel like a natural born citizen

Oh, baby, what you've done to me
You make me feel legit inside
And I just want to be the king of you
You make me feel so alive

You make me feel, you make me feel,
You make me feel like a natural born citizen.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.