Natural born citizen controversy over, Constitution FEC ruling Senate Resolution 511 and founding fathers provide answer, Politico The Blaze Media and politicians clueless
“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense, to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells
“Why did Obama employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to request an advisory opinion on FEC matching funds that he was not eligible for?”…Citizen Wells
“You can’t fix stupid.”…Ron White
I have reported several Obama controversies from early in 2008. The Larry Sinclair Obama sex and drug encounter, Obama’s ties to Rezko and corruption in Chicago and Illinois and Obama’s eligibility deficiencies and efforts to hide his records.
I do not often report on the eligibility issue but I have kept the Hassan vs FEC rulings in the forefront for a reason. The FEC has helped to clear up some of the confusion regarding the definition of Natural Born Citizen. This also explains why Obama refused matching funds from the FEC in 2008. He was not eligible for matching funds or the presidency.
The Obots, imbeciles in the biased mainstream media and politicians were either confused, ignorant and/or biased in 2008 when Obama’s eligibility as a natural born citizen was questioned. Many of them used the terms citizen, naturalized citizen and natural born citizen interchangeably. If Obama had requested matching funds from the FEC, as he had promised to do, his eligibility would have been challenged, as was Abdul Hassan’s.
There is no more controversy.
The US Constitution is a good starting point. It states:
“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 . . . .”
This confirms that citizen is not equivalent to natural born citizen.
The FEC ruling against Abdul Hassan on September 2, 2011 states:
“No, as a naturalized American citizen, Mr. Hassan is not eligible to receive
presidential matching funds under the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act (“Matching Payment Act”).
The United States Constitution provides that “[n]o 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 . . . .” U.S. Const. art. II, sec. 1, cl. 5.”
Senate Resolution 511 from April 30, 2008, which Barack Obama signed, states:
“Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 193”
McCain had 2 US citizen parents. Lawyers and legislators must be specific in what they include and omit.
The founding fathers, some of whom were trained in the law, had a clear understanding of what a natural born citizen is and that is why they had to be grandfathered in.
We have come to expect biased reporting from Politico and of course The Blaze, owned by Glenn Beck, who is clueless regarding Obama’s eligibility, predictably mis reporting on the Natural Born Citizen clause.
From The Blaze January 8, 2013.
“POLITICO WONDERS: IS TX SEN. TED CRUZ A ‘NATURAL BORN CITIZEN’ ELIGIBLE TO RUN FOR THE U.S. PRESIDENCY?”
“Only one week into his tenure as a Texas senator, Ted Cruz, 42, is already drawing presidential murmurs. While it’s certainly too early to tell what sort of leader Cruz will be, in practical terms, Politico raised a larger issue on Monday evening. Based on the fact that the politician was born to an American mother and a Cuban father in Canada, the outlet wondered if he is eligible to run for the American presidency.
The question at the center of the discussion is hypothetical at this juncture, as there’s no indication that the new senator is interested in the role. According to some, the fact that he was born outside of the U.S. could cause constitutional complications and uncertainties that would potentially cloud a candidacy. However, there is no precedent to examine that answers the viability question definitively. Politico explains:
While there’s no legal precedent for Cruz’s situation, most constitutional scholars surveyed by POLITICO believe the 42-year-old tea party sensation would be OK. But there’s just enough gray area to stoke controversy, as Cruz learned during his campaign for Senate last year.”
“Despite this analysis, it’s important to remember that Cruz is a newly-minted congressman. There’s no indication that he’s interested or seeking the presidency and such prospects, even if he does show an inclination, are years away. Still, on a grander scale, the discussion about natural born citizenship is pertinent — and one that seems continually unresolved.”
What is going on at American Thinker? Too much Orwellian brainwashing?
Thanks to Obama Release Your Records for calling them out.
“Last Word: American Thinker Pushes Leftist Myth 14th Amendment Citizen Is Natural Born Citizen”
“Note to American Thinker’s Ken Blackwell, Bob Morrison, and J.R. Dunn.
If you don’t like Article II of the Constitution then seek to have it
amended. Crapping all over it and misleading your readers is
disgusting and shameful. Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Bobby Jindal are
citizens of the United States but they are not “natural born Citizens”
of the United States. See here and here.
Either you three are the stupidest fools on the planet or you are
purposely misleading the readers of American Thinker. And judging by
the lashings you’re receiving in the comment threads they clearly are
not stupid. Again, if you don’t like the Article II requirement then
have it amended. Articles in question declaring several potential, and
ineligible, presidential candidates eligible, here and here.
“Consider this historical question: Could it have been the original
intent of the Founders to disqualify themselves from serving as
president? It was not until Martin Van Buren, eighth president, that
we elected a man who had been born an American citizen.”
I was going to point out the Grandfather Clause to you but your reader
Countryman did it for me:”