I fully realize this issue of whether Barack Hussein Obama is qualified to be President of the United States based on the natural born citizen clause of the U.S Constitution causes much confusion among the hope and change fingers-in-their-ears-while-loudly-singing-LA-LA-LA nitwits in this country and in fact all over the globe. Could it be due to the frustrating inability of millions of people to apply any critical thinking to damn near anything let alone something as important as the office of our president? Sure, why not?
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.
I don’t understand why so many folks just don’t get it. Few if any people I know of are disputing the fact that Barack Hussein Obama is in fact a citizen of the United States. Fine, so stipulated.
What many people seem to have a remarkably difficult time understanding is that in order to qualify to hold the office of President of the United States one must be a natural born citizen. There lies the big difference, citizen versus natural born citizen.
It was not specifically laid out by the framers of the Constitution exactly what a natural born citizen was so years ago SCOTUS justices had to refer to other means, in order to settle cases, such as common law that was widely accepted around the time our Constitution was conceived. Common law such as the preeminent treatise on international law “The Law of Nations” written by Emerich de Vattel, a treatise which in fact was known to have influenced the drafters of the original Constitution.
Continue reading
