‘BIRTHERS’ and Sarah Palin are actually just ‘CONSTITUTIONALISTS’
December 15th, 2009
SARAH PALIN has ANNOUNCED HER AVAILABILITY for the PRESIDENCY as a Constitutionalist ‘Birther’..
Article by Neil Turner
How so, you say?
First of all, ‘Birthers’ who know what this is really all about, know that the ‘Birth Certificate’ is nothing more than a ‘red herring’ in this issue. A Red-Herring because they know that:
1. Article II of the Constitution requires that the U.S. President be a ‘Natural-Born’ U.S. Citizen, not just a ‘born-here’, Naturalized, Anchor-babied, Native-born, etc. U.S. Citizen, but ‘Natural-Born’ - of two (2) U.S. Citizen parents.
2. Barack Hussein (the Long-Legged Mac Daddy) Obama has already admitted that he is not a ‘Natural-Born’ U.S. Citizen when he:
a. Admitted to Alan Keyes in his 2006 Senatorial race that he is not ‘Natural-Born’ when Ambassador Keyes said: ‘But you’re not a ‘Natural-Born’ citizen, Mr. Obama; and Obama answered (paraphrased): ‘Granted. But I’m not running for the Presidency here’;
b. Admitted in his book ‘Dreams From My Father’ that his father was a British/Kenyan citizen when he was born;
c. Admitted (and proven by the divorce papers, now in the public domain) that his mother was, in fact, married to non U.S. Citizen Barack Hussein Obama Sr. (NOTE: When the Hawaiian record-keepers provided certified copies of the Divorce Record, they stated beforehand that it consisted of 13 pages. They ultimately provided only 12 – with no explanation for the shortfall. However, in a divorce proceeding such as this, the Judge would have required a ‘certified’ copy of the Birth Certificate of any minor children of the marriage. The missing page 13 would certainly be the 1964 ‘certified copy’ of by then 3 year-old Barack Hussein Obama’s [Kenyan] birth certificate).
Therefore, no matter what kind of certified ‘Birth Certificate’ We The People finally see – Hawaiian, Kenyan, or Equatorial Guinea (another country that has recently turned up in records research by a former U.S. Immigration official working with Orly Taitz), he is not a ‘Natural-Born’ U.S. Citizen as required by the Constitution. Period.
So real ‘Birthers’ are only interested in seeing that the so-far unaltered terms of the Constitution are met (it takes a bona fide Amendment to the Constitution to change it – a rather long and laborious process, with the full knowledge and acceptance of We The People). We are CONSTITUTIONALISTS!
So where does Sarah Palin come in, you ask? Well, when on December 3rd, 2009, radio talk show host Rusty Humphries asked Ms. Palin point blank: “Would you make the birth certificate an issue if you ran?”, her reply was classic Palin when she answered: “I think the public rightfully is still making it an issue. I don’t have a problem with that. I don’t know if I would have to bother to make it an issue, because I think that members of the electorate still want answers.”
The media would love to bash her (for anything), but not about this, because they are forbidden to talk about ‘IT’ for fear of losing their voice or their publishing or FCC licenses. So she doesn’t have to make it an issue – her constituents will do it for her, and she supports them – the Constitutionalist Citizens of the United States. That make Sarah Palin a Constitutionalist ‘Birther’, without having to actually declare it. BRILLIANT!
OK. So what makes you say she is ready to be drafted for the Presidency – NOW?
On page 44 of ‘GOING ROGUE – An American Life’, 1980’s Miss Alaska Scholarship Pageant contestant, Sarah Palin, responds to a judge’s question: ”Do you think a woman can be vice president?”
ME: “Yes. I believe a woman could be vice president. I believe a woman could be president.”
In another quote from the book on page 44: ‘That exchange, a quarter century ago, now seems either strangely coincidental or a Providential signpost pointing toward my future. And I don’t believe in coincidences.’
We can survive 4 years of anyone as President. But we cannot survive without our Constitution. We cannot wait until 2012 to remove the Usurper, or we will no longer have a Constitution, and we will no longer have a Constitutional Republic.
So just as soon as we remove this treasonous Usurper (and his whole complicit team) from our White House, we will need a firm believer in the Constitution and all its terms to take his place. And considering that ALL 535 members of Congress (Senators and Representatives alike) are ALL complicit, it means that the replacement for President and Vice President CANNOT be drawn from them.
It is nice to know that we have a ready and capable Constitutionalist standing by to take the Office of President and Commander in Chief of these United States.
Neil B. Turner
Veteran, Captain
U.S. Army-Aviation (1957-1964)
December 15th, 2009 at 11:01 am
Removing that usurper from office and getting rid of all the other accomplices in this fraud and treason sounds too good to be true. I sure hope that it could be true some day soon. They are the worst people and most corrupt ever to be in the WH. BO overrates himself. He is very arrogant. I am tired of him blaming Bush for all his own crap and foolish policies. Bush was doing fine till BO came along as a bogus senator and then ran for president and now usurped the office. BO and the other dems like Pelosi and Reid had a lot to do with that so-called financial crisis and I don’t blame Bush one bit.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:25 am
Notice how many people unemployed under Obama, 4-5 million now, not under Bush, Bush had problems, but he was and is an American president, Obama is a Muslim president and I will take the American anytime. Bush was troubled with the border, Obama wants to let anybody and everybody in, overwhelm America, if the lending practices hadn’t been so screwed up, with the unions and Acorn threatening the banks for loans, that is why so many got loans that shouldn’t have. They threatened banks and the bankers caved, so why blame Bush, I don’t. God Bless America
December 15th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Didn’t I read an article here not 2 weeks ago talking about Palin’s Facebook page listing Obama’s birth under “wacky conspiracies?” Or maybe it was on Orly’s page?
December 15th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Yep, here ya go:
On Facebook, Sarah Palin walks back her remark yesterday that questions about President Obama’s birth certificate are “fair,” writing under the heading “stupid conspiracies” that she only meant that voters can ask whatever they want:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1209/Palin_walks_back_birth_certificate_remark.html
December 15th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
I understood her to say that the stupid conspiracy was when the bo camp was asking for Trig’s birth certificate, when they were trying to say that Trig was not Sarah’s son.
December 15th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
Okay but that’s not what the article said. I never saw her FB though.
December 15th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
I might be wrong, but I got the impression the “stupid conspiracies” was also about her son’s birth. It’s just possible that Politico turned it around to mean Obama’s birth. They are sooooo good at flipping words and meanings like that. Our media has perfected this ‘art’ of deception. We have truly lost honest journalism this last couple of years. I don’t trust what any of them say anymore.
December 15th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
I was under the assumption that as your blog states in the lead article a person must be born of two U.S. Citizens to be a natural born citizen. I got challenged on this and went to the Constitution and found the following below; ( BASICALL NO MENTION OF 2 PARENTS BEING U.S. CITIZENS I’m not a nut job I’m a member of the American Grand Jury and sure would like an explanation, can anbody help me? jcscuba@gmail.com
U.S. Constitution - Article 2 Section 1
Article 2 - The Executive Branch
Section 1 - The President
<>
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
(The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not lie an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; a quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two-thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice-President.) (This clause in parentheses was superseded by the 12th Amendment.)
The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United 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; 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.
Am I missing something here, the guy I was discussing this with kicked my ass and I’d love to go back for more but Article two says nada about parents being 2 American Citizens. Hope you have the answer I’m looking for, Thanks, for your health. Love to know where todays author on your blog got his information. Thanks for your help, Jim
December 15th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
Jim Campbell,
The explaination is in the CAPITAL words below:
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…
That is what we call the GRANDFATHER CLAUSE. The Framers had to grandfathered themselves to become President, since they were only Citizens at the time of the adaptation of the Constitution, because they had dual citizenship at birth thru Great Britain.
December 15th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
So you see: CITIZEN is not enough, you have to be NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. And you cannot be NBC with dual citizenship.
December 15th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
In fact, NOBODY was a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN in your country before the adoption of your Constitution.
December 15th, 2009 at 6:25 pm
JIM, you can have your friend listen to this video:
Exacly What Is A Natural Born Citizen?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEnaAZrYqQI
December 15th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
Jim, the key words are NATURAL BORN CITIZEN
What is a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN?
A Natural Born Citizen is one who is born on US soil by TWO US Citizen Parents. By being born on the soil of the United States AND by two US Citizen parents, you are born owing SOLE loyalty to the United States ONLY!
NO other country could ever claim any citizenship over you.
If you are merely born on US soil and one or both parents are is a foreign citizen then you are born a DUAL CITIZEN of both, the US and a citizen of the country one or both of your parents are a citizen of. It is impossible to be both, a DUAL Citizen AND a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. You are one or the other.
At BEST, Obama can only be a 14th amendment citizen which made him a citizen by legal statue. A Natural Born Citizen is NOT a citizen that is made a citizen under any Federal or State statue. You are AUTOMATICALLY a citizen by natures common law.
ASSUMING, Obama was in fact born in HI (WHICH NO ONE KNOWS FOR CERTAIN) but ASSUMING he was, that only makes him a US Citizen under Federal statue through the 14th amendment because Obama’s father was not nor ever a US Citizen. Obama’s father never even had a permenant residence in the US. He was only here on a student visa to go the college here.
Obama’s father was a British Subject. That made Obama a DUAL Citizen at birth subject to the laws of both, the US AND Britian. To this day, Britian could claim Obama as their citizen. If Obama was to travel to Britian they COULD take him and hold him their as their own citizen and there would be nothing the US could do about it!
Now do you really think the founding fathers would have ever wanted to run that risk of having a President that owes allegiance to another country? Of course not.
The founding father were all DUAL citizens. In order for them to be able to become President AT THE TIME THE CONSTITUTION WAS ESTABLISHED, they had to put a grandfather clause into the constitution to allow them to become President. BUT, from that day forward, anyone born from that day and after, anyone running for President had to be a Natural Born Citizen. Anyone that was born before the date the constitution was established was grandfathered in where they only had to be a US Citizen.
So unless Obama was born prior to the date of the constitution being established, he is not elegible because he is not a Natural Born Citizen and only a DUAL Citizen of the US AND Britian.
Some want to argue BS that because the constitution does not state two US Citizens then that is not true. It IS true! The question is, WHAT is a Natural Born Citizen? The constitution does not define the definition, but all the writings of our founders clearly show that a Natural Born Citizen is a person born on US Soil AND born of TWO US Citizen parents!
It is also a fact that the founders heavily relied on the Law of Nations when they wrote the constitution.
The founders specifically cite Law of Nations in the constitution which is proof in itself that they did in fact rely on the Law of Nations.
Article I - The Legislative Branch
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
It’s right there plain as day! Now this reference to Law of Nations here does not define Natural Born Citizen. But what it does prove is the founders did in fact rely on Law of Nations when writing the constitution.
So what does Law of Nations say about Natural Born Citizen?
Law of Nations
CHAP. XIX.
OF OUR NATIVE COUNTRY, AND SEVERAL THINGS THAT RELATE TO IT.
December 15th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
CHAP. XIX.
OF OUR NATIVE COUNTRY, AND SEVERAL THINGS THAT RELATE TO IT.
December 15th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
There it is! Plain as day!
The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.
Of parentS which is plural meaning TWO. BOTH parents must be citizens of the country!
It also states:
those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.
So Obama’s citizenship and all rights follow his FATHERS which his father was a foreignor and a British Subject! Obama owes more loyalty and allegiance to Britian than he does to the US no matter where he was born and no matter where he was raised! He is more British than US under the Law of Nations!
So the question is, HOW can a person born with DUAL citizenship, AND, owing allegiance to a FOREIGN Country possibly be a Natural Born Citizen???? IMPOSSIBLE!
Some try to argue his British citizenship expired on his 21st birthday. Well that is not true, but even if it was true, that does not change what the status of his birth was. You are BORN a Natural Born Citizen at BIRTH or you are not! Obama was not! NOTHING that happens later in life that may change ones status of citizenship can never change what the status of your birth was!
The constitution does not say you must be a Natural Born Citizen unless your citizenship status changes somehow later in life! You are either BORN that way or you are not!
Obama is NOT a Natural Born Citizen no matter where he was born and nothing can ever change that fact! Therefore he is NOT constitutionally elegilbe to be President of the United States! PERIOD! END OF STORY!
December 15th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
Follow the Constitution,
PERIOD! END OF STORY!… lol. Well said! I don’t know why so many Americans cannot understand this simple difference between Citizen and Natural born citizen. NO dual citizenship because of possible divided allegiances. The POTUS must own allegiance to only ONE country. It is so logic. Jus solis and Jus sanguis: Natural Born Citizen.
December 15th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
Not sure why my comment above was truncated…But Alan Keyes himself as well as his campaign stated that this event never happened…
Tom Hoefling
Chairman, America
December 15th, 2009 at 8:27 pm
I guess when your comment is in “moderation” you only see a part of it….very confusing..
December 15th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
I have used the “Law Of Nations” argument on several people and they all come back with the same thing. The Constitution does not state it. Bottom line is you are not going to convince someone who wants the USURPER to remain in office that he does not belong there.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
Flordiafree, while I’m sure that those whom are addicted to Obama’s Hopium won’t understand there’s a point to be made. It does NOT say “native born.” Clearly “natural born” means something else and thus you MUST go to external references to understand the meaning.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:24 pm
Flordiafree,
The constitution clearly states law of nations in it as I pointed out.
Words have meaning and the constitution does not define any of the words it has in it. Only the ignorant or those that don’t want to face truth or those that just don’t care and will do anything to help and try to conceal this fraud will argue over this.
Only simple common sense is all one needs. Heck, Obama himself has ADMITTED he is not eligible to be POTUS. The libtards will deny that as well!
December 16th, 2009 at 3:03 am
Even more conclusive, prior to the election, when Congress was tasked to verify McCain’s citizenship due to his birth in the Panama Canal Zone, they determined that since his father was stationed with the military there serving our nation on a US military base, with his mother there as well, he qualified as a NBC. Congress wrote a piece of legislation stating that because “both” of McCain’s “parents” were US citizens born of the soil of America, he was in fact a NBC.
No questions were asked by the Communist Congress regarding the usurpers qualifications. They brushed it aside because they new he was ineligible, a Muslim plant who suited their plan for the destruction of America. It is clear that the Constitution prohibits a POTUS from having duel loyalties, meaning one parent was not born on US soil. Interesting to note, the usurper agreed with and signed onto the McCain (picked to throw the election) legislation.
One parent born under British rule, never naturalized, dual loyalties, end of argument! One other thing British citizenship cannot be thrown off, it’s for life!
Understand further that every bill that Congress and the criminal Executive and Judiciary have passed or are trying to force through are unconstitutional. By changing America creating laws that alter our way of life without legally amending the Constitution is the greatest act of treason in American history. To try to interpret a clause that talks about “promoting the general welfare” to mean enact legislation to provide a socialist government run health care, is a perverse interpretation of the meaning. Read the Constitution people. Every bill, every piece of legislation either passed or proposed is not only illegal, it’s treason on a massive scale. The Patriot Act, DHS, Cap and Trade, Tarp, National Healthcare, government takeover of private industry (automotive, banks, etc.), is blatantly UNCONSTITUTIONAL! Time for the talk to stop, we need to drive the fox out of the hen house! Our servants simply refuse the will of the people, their employers. Read the Declaration of Independence and you’ll find it’s even more viable today then when it was originally written and presented to the British monarch!
December 17th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
I am so glad to see the term “CONSTITUTIONALIST” being repeated….I am diligently pushing support to refer to all who are searching for the perfect word to define us, and get away from the “right / left ” conservative / liberal..republican / democrat….terminology.and even terms like socialist , facism, marxist, communist..a lot of people don’t actually know how to associate a definition of those words to what’s happening all around us…and they leave a door open for a “middle ground” position or idealogy…but with “CONSTITUTIONALIST” OR THE OPPOSITE ” ANTI-CONSTITUTIONALIST”…There is no position of “middle ground” or leaning a little to the right or left of….a pure heart supporter of our founding document stands firmly for the entire scope of it’s truth and power. all others are nothing more or less than “ANTI-CONSTITUTIONALIST’… and that would mean you would be “anti-America”.
Thanks Neil, let’s all drive this term until it’s the only word used to describe us.
December 24th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
Maggie;
Thanks for your comments on us being CONSTITUTIONALISTS. I became involved in fighting this Treasonous act of the Usurper taking over OUR White House since before the fraudulent ‘electoral’ votes were cast in December 2008.
You see, I was an Elector for the CONSTITUTION PARTY’s Presidential candidate, Chuck Baldwin, in the 2008 elections, and was the victim of ‘ELECTION FRAUD’ when Obama’s name was fraudulently entered on the ballot in CA (plus 49 other States - or 56 if you’re a muslim). We sued the CA Secretary of State, Deborah Bowen, for this election fraud, and the case is still sitting buried before our corrupt and complicit SCOTUS.
People keep looking for candidates who are CONSTITUTIONALISTS, so I think it would be a good time to look to the already established (and already on the ballot in 47 States) CONSTITUTION PARTY. You can find out all about them and thier candidates throughout the country at http://www.ConstitutionParty.com.
NOTE: We have an outstanding Constitutionalist running for Governor here in CA. Check her out at http://www.NightingaleForGovernor.com.
December 24th, 2009 at 11:15 pm
Neil…have you checked out Chuck DeVore? Was wondering if his record is more conservative than Carly’s, both running against Boxer. I’ve liked what I’ve read so far on DeVore, but admit that I haven’t checked everything out on where he stands on all issues.
December 25th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
Thistle;
I have heard and met Chuck DeVore. I would pick his conservativism over Carly’s anytime. He is a true patriot and Constitutionalist. He will help stop illegal immigration, and will work with the anti-Anchor Baby issue in CA. The San Diego Minutemen endorse him all the way.
I did ask him to participate in the eligibility issue and he said ‘No, it was too late and going nowhere’. I truly beg to differ with him on that one, and I’m sure he will come around when we get more publicity and make the news more often.
December 25th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
Thanks Neil for the info. on Chuck DeVore. That’s helpful and he will get our vote.
Sorry he doesn’t wish to be involved in the eligibility issue. So many of the politicians are afraid to touch it, but my thoughts are: The Constitution isn’t a buffet table where one can pick and choose what to use or to ignore. Either the whole Constitution is important, or none of it is. Who knows….maybe DeVore is afraid it will hurt his campaign to back this issue at the moment. He could be more effective once he’s elected, I think.
Thanks again and Merry Christmas!
December 26th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
As an American, I am so proud of Sarah Palin for what she is speaking out about. Have you read her book? I did and it is really good. Do you think she will run for President? I hope so, I would definitely vote for her. Visit my site if you’d like to read more. Thank you again for a great site. Have a great day!