About Me

Name: Mike
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Government of the People

Posted by Mike on Thursday, December 17, 2009 1:47:30 PM
http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/
It wasn't for nothing that the Founders included safeguards in our Constitution to keep those of questionable status from occupying the highest office in the land, that of President of the United States. Today, legal scholars can quibble all they want over whether or not the Fourteenth Amendment substantially changes the restrictions on eligibility of Article II, Section 1. However, in the person of Barack Hussein Obama, America is witnessing the very form of anarchy of which the Founding Fathers warned against.

Barack himself has made clear his antipathy to the Constitution as a document limiting the power of the federal government with negative provisions designed to keep the government in check. Barack the megalomaniac believes inside that the power of the federal government should be absolute. Barack and the other Washington liberals are really only interested in satisfying their own big egos. They want to impose a tyrannical dictatorship like that of ancient Egypt wherein Pharaoh has absolute power. This is really what the government economic bailouts and healthcare takeover are all about.

Americans must therefore change the course of government following the constitutional mandate protecting our individual rights and keeping big government permanently in check.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Wisdom of Our Founding Fathers

Posted by Mike on Sunday, October 25, 2009 8:44:55 PM
http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/
The Constitution of the United States is a quintessentially practical document. The first thing that comes to mind in examining Article II, Section 1 are the words "at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution" in reference to eligibility for the office of President. Anyone who was already a citizen of one of the thirteen several states following the American Revolution and within the age limits could serve as President. As to these citizens, it did not matter whether they or their fathers were subject to a foreign power or not. As to those who were not citizens at the time of Adoption or ratification, only those who were "natural born" were eligible for the office of President, meaning that they must be born in one of the states which form the Union, and that each of their fathers must have been a citizen of one of these states at the time of their birth. This gives our government the power to discriminate against the foreign born and those whose fathers were subjects of a foreign power, with regard to qualifications for the offices of President and Vice-President as amended. Arguably, the "natural born" requirement should also pertain to what was meant at the time of Adoption.

The rationale for the rule is clearly to prohibit those who may have mixed loyalties from serving in the highest office in the land, as John Jay made clear to our first President George Washington. Clearly, the Fourteenth Amendment's inclusion of all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, as citizens, does not change the limitations on qualifications for President or Vice-President, because the rationale behind the Fourteenth Amendment was not to change eligibility for higher office, but rather to confer citizenship on the newly emancipated freemen following the Civil War. Using the limited formula for qualification to be President or Vice-President, the first generation freemen would not have been eligible to hold these offices, but this is a moot point insofar as none of them ever became candidates.

In our history, Chester Arthur, whose father was Irish born and a subject of George IV at the time of Chester's birth, still got to be President because he succeeded President Garfield who died in office. The electorate rejected the candidacies of Barry Goldwater in 1964 and John McCain in 2008. Barry Obama is the stealth President. Could it be that Barry Obama was elected only because neither candidate was qualified to hold this office in 2008?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's Birth a Red Herring

Posted by Mike on Wednesday, October 14, 2009 3:39:24 PM
http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/
The question of where Obama was born is a distraction to shift the focus away from the real reason why he is unqualified to serve as President of the United States. Kenyan officials and relatives of Obama have a vested interest in saying that he was born there to promote their own country. The real question is not one of birth, but of parentage.

Barry Obama's status follows that of his father. When born in Hawaii in 1961, Obama was a subject of the British Crown like his father. He only obtained US citizenship by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment.  Hence he is not a natural born citizen.

The question is one of remedy. The federal court in exercising jurisdiction is called upon to decide whether Barack Obama can actually prove that he is qualified to be President. Citizens have a right to demand that our government leaders, and the Commander in Chief in particular, are qualified to hold public office. Because of the separation of powers, it is doubtful whether a federal magistrate can remove someone from the office of President. Congress alone has that power through impeachment proceedings. However, the Constitution only allows impeachment in the case of "high crimes and misdemeanors".

It is worth noting again that Barack Obama took the presidential oath twice, because in the first ceremony there was a defect. This basis of impeachment will have to be fraud on the electorate, which will require proof of intent. This will be difficult to prove in Obama's case, mostly because of prior cases of unqualified candidates running for office.  The court could at some point, however, issue an order barring Obama from seeking reelection in 2012.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Can the Illegitimate Son of an Alien Be President?

Posted by Mike on Monday, October 12, 2009 7:41:00 PM
The answer is no.
http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/
There were certain classes of people excluded by our Founding Fathers from being eligible to hold the office of President of the United States. The first excluded class is citizens of foreign countries or subjects of foreign powers. The second is people who were not US citizens by virtue of being too young or not having been emancipated. The third is people who lived within the states but were not citizens because they belonged to a Native tribe or nation. Barry Hussein Obama born in 1961 in Hawaii is a US citizen because the Fourteenth Amendment grants citizenship to all persons born within the United States of America, and within the jurisdiction thereof. Barry Obama's father Barack Obama was a subject of the British Crown at the time of Barry's birth. He was a resident alien living in Hawaii on a student visa. Barack Obama purportedly married a US citizen in Hawaii. At the time he was married to a Kenyan woman and the Hawaiian marriage is therefore legally invalid. This means that Barry Hussein Obama was illegitimate, something we all knew anyway. This has no bearing on his qualifications to be President of the United States, or lack thereof. Would a child of an alien father here in America illegally, who happens to be born here, be eligible to hold the office of President someday? Most Americans would agree that such an offspring of an alien here illegally would lack the status to qualify for holding the highest office in the land. They would be right. Under our Constitution, such offspring would not be a natural born citizen.

 Does it in any way matter that Barry's father was here legally on a student visa?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Article II, Section 1 not Superceded by Fourteenth Amendment

Posted by Mike on Sunday, October 11, 2009 12:34:15 PM
http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/
In the previous post, Barry Obama's fraud in running as a Democrat candidate for President was discussed. It might be added that there is evidence of Obama's foreign birth in Kenya introduced in the case of Barnett et al. vs. Obama. Depending on the outcome of this case, Obama may not only be ineligible to serve as President, but may be subject to deportation back to Kenya if it is found that he was actually born there. There is also some question as to whether Obama had prior knowledge of his foreign birth, if indeed that was the case, before running for President.

The Fourteenth Amendment's definition of U.S. citizenship to cover all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, cannot reasonably be construed to broaden the citizenship requirements for federal public office enunciated in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution. Moreover, any subsequent Congressional statute can have no bearing on the classification as a "natural born citizen" of Article II, Section 1, insofar as the legislative branch has no authority pursuant to the Tenth Amendment to redefine this terminology or to expand the class of persons eligible to serve as President or Vice-President.

In American history, Chester Arthur was never qualified to serve as Vice-President under Garfield, nor as President after Garfield's death in 1881. Timely objections were raised based upon his father being born in Ireland and not having been naturalized at the time of Chester's birth in 1829.

Barry Goldwater was not eligible to serve as President when he ran in 1964, because at the time of his birth in 1909, the Arizona Territory was not a state within the Union.

John McCain was not eligible when he ran for President in 2008 because he is a Panamanian citizen born in Panama in 1936. Furthermore, he is not qualified to serve in the United States Senate.

None of this has anything to do with fairness. It is about limited, constitutional government. Even if Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961 as he contends, this only makes him an ordinary citizen pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment. He is still ineligible to serve as President by virtue of his not being a natural born citizen within the meaning of Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution at the time of its ratification in 1787.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »