Thursday, August 27, 2009

Soros Cult Behind Crushing Birth Certificate Issue

Why is it that Americans need to rely on foreign news media - like the Canadian Free Press - to get some of the most important information that is seriously affecting our nation?

Author Joan Swirsky has been on the trail of the Obama birth certificate issue for quite some time. In her latest article, she helps answer Who Is Behind Quashing the Birth Certificate Issue?

In the age of article scrubbing, I feel it necessary to copy and paste large portions of the article here. But before I do, I wanted to mention a brief chat that I had with an Internet Christian friend, Neil, via Facebook yesterday. We started our discussion talking about Neil's latest post called How to Spot a Theological Liberal Go read it! It's excellent!

During the chat I told Neil that I thought he made a very powerful point with the following phrase within his essay:

Their (theological liberals) unspoken mission statement is: "Sending people to Hell, un-offended and full of self esteem"

I wrote to Neil:
"Sending people to Hell, un-offended and full of self esteem" - that is a great line! Bold, to the point and so true!

thanks! I saw your posts about Glenn Beck. Glad to see he is fighting back. People seem to be getting better informed about how they were tricked last Fall.

10:32am Christine:
Yes. It's scary but we need to know the truth. I think George Soros is the puppet master behind it all.

Agreed, but he has many willing accomplices.

Oh yeah - I'm sure. Sometimes I wish that Obama was a CIA agent doing a huge job to get these people. Pipe dream.


I'm with Rush Limbaugh and what he stated during his interview with Glenn Beck yesterday. He mentioned that he doesn't want to think the worst about our current president and government. But seeing what is happening right before our very eyes brings him - and me - to no other conclusion.

Obama is obviously out to destroy America as we know it. He has stated this in his own words. When elected, he said "we are on our way to transforming America."

The trouble is, back then many were not listening or paying any attention to the criminals and commies that Obama hung out with. Those who refused to believe the warnings of conservative bloggers didn't have any idea WHAT he meant by "transformation." The "change" that Obama vaguely spoke about on the campaign trail is now being revealed for what it is: a change towards Totalitarianism and Marxism. He has surrounded himself with communists, thugs, former criminals, tax cheats - you know the rest - to do his dirty work. It is happening right now.

Don't pay so much attention to the smoke and mirrors that they are putting up in their "fun house." Pay close attention to what people like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, and Michael Savage are saying about this horrible administration and the unconstitutional, un-American Thug-czars that are being inflicted upon us by this bogus POTUS ObamaFRAUD!

When Neil wrote in the chat that, [Soros] "has many willing accomplices," he was exactly right!

The following article contains some of those "accomplices" that Neil spoke of.

Soros and his evil cronies are also behind the attempt to hide the birth certificate issue. As you will find out through the article - more and more Americans are learning the truth about this issue. One thing that I would add to this discussion is what I have permanently placed in the sidebar of this blog:


At Barack Obama’s web site, the following admission:

“ Clarifies Barack’s Citizenship

‘When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…’

“Read that last line again.

“That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…”

That’s an admission that Great Britain “governed the status” of Barack Obama, Jr. He has chosen to highlight this on his own volition.

And this leads to the relevant question:


A natural born citizen’s status should only be governed by the United States.

Hat Tip: Natural Born Citizen blog

I STILL think that if this fact could be brought before a judge, Obama could be removed from office because he is ineligible according to Article II Section 1 Clause 5 of the United States Constitution.

Here are portions of Joan Swirsky's article:

Who Is Behind Quashing the Birth Certificate Issue?

By Joan Swirsky Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Back in October of 2008, when the subject of Obama’s Constitutional eligibility to be president of the United States was just a blip on the radar screen of public awareness, I wrote an article about how easy it was to find my then -92-year-old mother’s birth certificate.

Frankly, I didn’t think finding my mother’s birth certificate was possible, given the fact that she had been born in a farmhouse in Storrs, CT, along with nine of her 10 siblings, to parents who didn’t speak English. Despairing that she would never be “qualified” to receive the care [in a nursing home} that she desperately needed, I set about to find the document, which I was sure had vanished in the unreliable record-keeping of 1913. When I called the third number, I explained to the woman who answered the phone that I was “asking something impossible.” I gave her my mother’s first name and her father’s last name. Within four minutes, she said, “Here it is!” When I expressed my amazement, the woman said: “That’s nothing…we’re routinely asked to find birth certificates from the 1800s, and we do that all the time!” Total time it took me to find my mother’s 1913, born-in-a-farmhouse birth certificate: 10 minutes!

Obama was born not in 1913, like my mother, but in 1961—or perhaps in 1957, according to his MySpace page, which would make him 52, born supposedly in Hawaii before it became a state in 1959. So it was quite curious that not one cyber-sleuth could find an authentic, verifiable copy of his original vault copy birth certificate. I’m not talking about the faux version Obama posted on his website, which was deemed the real thing by, a “truth”-detecting site that is sponsored by the Annenberg Foundation, the same foundation that hired Obama and his terrorist pal William Ayers and gave them millions of dollars for a research project in Chicago. In other words, the least credible source!

Even more significant is that no one in the media thought Obama’s missing birth certificate worth even casual mention. Their thinking seemed to be: If we’re not going to check on his eligibility to be president, then why question why the other crucial documents were—and continue to be—sealed? For instance: his baptism certificate; elementary, high school, college and graduate school transcripts; visa(s); selective service record; alleged multiple Social Security numbers; Illinois attorney’s license; Illinois State Senate records; law practice client list; Univ. of Chicago scholarly articles; financial records while a community organizer in Chicago; and medical records. I’m also curious about why Michelle Obama’s law license was suspended in 1993 by the Illinois Supreme Court, but then again she wasn’t running for president.

Instead, the media were frantically busy trying to divert public attention away from those pesky things known as credentials with gossip-driven tabloid reportage of Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber in order to avoid the bigger-than-Watergate potential scandal of whether or not Obama was eligible—according to the U.S. Constitution—to become President of the United States!


In an explosive interview by Dr. Laurie Roth on her syndicated West Coast radio show on August 7th, Douglas Hagmann—a respected journalist, director of the Northeast Intelligence Network and longtime private investigator, and Judi McLeod, a prolific journalist and the managing editor of Canada Free Press—the reason for the media blackout about the birth-certificate issue was nothing less than organized Mafia-like dire threats to members of the media issued not only from the heads of major TV and radio stations but also from Federal Communication Commission officials!

According to Hagmann and McLeod, who conducted a nine-month investigation and documented their findings scrupulously, after Obama was elected but before he was inaugurated:

A major TV talk-show host reported that he was ordered not to raise the birth certificate issue or risk losing his job.
FCC officials threatened to yank broadcasting licenses, break up conglomerates, and make the enactment of the Fairness Doctrine “look mild” in comparison to other consequences.
In at least one corporate TV headquarters, memos were circulated to all on-air employees not to mention the birth certificate issue, as well as other specific subjects like Obama’s Illinois lawyer’s license, his college records, etc., under both implied and explicit threats.
During the interview, Hagmann and McLeod—who never mentioned a particular network by name—alluded to e-mails and other evidence in their possession, copies of which, they said, were secreted in several locations. But they did tantalize listeners with descriptions of meeting with “sources” outside of St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City, a high-placed contact looking nervously over his shoulder, references to directives and warnings given by “those at the top,” and the undisguised threat of one executive to his underlings: “This is serious, and so will the consequences be if anyone chooses not to be a team player with this.”

This comes as no surprise to Fox watchers who have noticed that the Stalinist-style censorship of the Obama regime is already here. This couldn’t possibly be because of the healthy shares of stock the Saudis bought in Fox, could it? If so, why would the Saudis care so much about quashing potentially damning revelations about Obama? Have they also bought shares in Obama?

Come to think of it, who exactly paid the tuition for Obama’s stint at Harvard Law School? What role did Obama’s long-time friend, Khalid al-Mansour, a key advisor to a Saudi billionaire, play? Writer Kenneth Timmerman describes al-Mansour as “well known within the black community as a lawyer, an orthodox Muslim, a black nationalist, an author, an international deal-maker, an educator, and an outspoken enemy of Israel.” This is not to omit that al-Mansour was originally contacted to intervene with Harvard on Obama’s behalf by Percy Sutton, former Manhattan Borough President and the lawyer of Malcolm X. Ah…the tangled web of it all!

Then there is the question of what role was played by Saudi Prince Alwaleed, the nephew of King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia? You remember Prince Alwaleed, who offered then-Mayor Rudy Giuliani $10 million after September 11 if he would only blame America for the terrorist attacks of which 15 of 19 perpetrators were Saudi Arabian—a “gift” the mayor promptly and with appropriate contempt rejected!

In short, what influence have the Saudis exerted on Fox to muzzle the issue of Obama’s birth certificate? I don’t ask this about the network TV channels or cable channels like CNN and MSNBC, which are still issuing daily hagiographies of Obama.

Just who has been sending “the message”? And how did it permeate not only the media, but also the once-respected U.S. Congress and the courts of our land, including the once-incorruptible Supreme Court? And what menacing forces made the once-courageous conservative media abandon their mission to expose rank corruption and collusion?

Two words: Money Talks!

If you’re a media mogul and you get word from the FCC that your license will be pulled immediately and irrevocably if you mention only three words—Obama’s birth certificate—poof! You send that word to your employees and tell them that their mega-salaries—in fact, their employment—are on the line.

If you’re a conservative talk-show host and you get your boss’s directive not to dare to mention only three words—Obama’s birth certificate—poof! Lips sealed; curiosity zero!

If the money thing doesn’t work, there’s always the threat thing, i.e., “going public” about tax records, health status, or family secrets. Or be audited by the IRS. Or be investigated by any number of regulatory agencies.

And if the money thing and the threat thing don’t work, how about being reminded of all those “accidents” and “unfortunate incidents”—broken kneecaps, missing children, “falls” from buildings, punctured tires—that resulted not in joblessness or embarrassment but in death?

We know that’s how the Mafia works. It’s also how political machines work. It’s also how community organizers work. Wasn’t it Obama himself who in 2008 said ’‘If They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun’‘ and in 2009 advised his followers to “Get in Their Faces!”?

So determined are Obama’s handlers to keep the facts of his parentage and place of birth out of the public domain that, as writer Chelsea Schilling has scrupulously documented, ¬†“the Federal Election Commission shows Obama’s campaign has made regular payments to Perkins Coie since Jan. 1, 2007—the month he formed a presidential exploratory committee and only weeks before he formally announced his candidacy for president—[and up to the present]—has paid Perkins Coie, a single law firm, $2.3 million…to crush eligibility lawsuits.”




Continue reading article here

You can read about the additional culprits that Joan Swirsky reveals in her article at the link above. However, note how Joan points the finger at Soros for being the head honcho of it all:

The kind of money that “talks”—that can buy people off, finance revolutions, launder money, pay to rig voting machines, manipulate allies into positions of power (czars, anyone?), conveniently crash markets (as George Soros did in England in 1992, Asia in 1997, and, I believe, the U.S. in September 2008), make people disappear, make birth certificates and other vital records disappear and then make sure that an entire media, Congress and court system is terrified of “going there.”

We all know of the many multimillionaires and billionaires—including Soros, the Saudi royal family, et al—who contributed to Obama’s presidential campaign and continue to fund his leftist agenda, all of them with an ideological, religious, or personal stake in his remaining in power. And all of them part of a larger, more ubiquitous conspiracy—yes, conspiracy!—to conceal Obama’s origins and true parentage.

Among them, as JB Williams has documented, are “international socialists working through CPUSA - SPUSA and DSAUSA, funded by literally hundreds of leftist front-groups operating as special interest 527 organizations. Here’s a short list of the BIGGEST leftist front groups: America Coming Together - Joint Victory Campaign 2004 - Media Fund - Service Employees International Union - American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees - - New Democrat Network - Sierra Club - EMILY’s List - AFL-CIO - League of Conservation Voters.”

Further, Williams asks: “Who spends an obscene $1-billion dollars to win a lousy $400,000-per-year job, and why?”

Joan answers her own question. Because George Soros has been trying to take over the Constitutional Republic that is the United States of America and turn it into his twisted minded vision of a Communist "utopia," we have all the chaos, manufactured financial crisis, Crap and Trade, ObamaScare Hellcare, and all the other communist generated unconstitutional nonsense going on within our nation today.

As Bill O'Reilly commented in his book "Culture Warrior" - "we ignore him [Soros] at our own peril."

Please don't ignore this. Educate others and show them that there is a dire need for them to share this extremely important information with others.

Hat Tips:

Eternity Matters

Canada Free Press


Kevin said...

Hi Christine,
I am surprised you are still going on and on about this. After you copied from your source: "that same act governed the status of Obama Sr.'s children: then states:

"Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”

I'm not sure why your source didn't bother to copy this (other than to leave out the facts).

Also, even if both parents of President Obama were not U.S. citizens, he would be a citizen by the fact that he was born in Hawaii.
See (

"In the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), the Supreme Court ruled that a person who

-is born in the United States
of parents who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of a foreign power
-whose parents have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States
-whose parents are there carrying on business and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity of the foreign power to which they are subject

becomes, at the time of his birth, a citizen of the United States, by virtue of the first clause of the 14th amendment of the Constitution."

Besides, his mother is undoubtedly from the U.S. That makes him a U.S. citizen at birth. There is absolutely no question at all that President Obama is a U.S. citizen. It is time to move on and accept the fact that there is a Democrat in the White House...

Christinewjc said...

Well hello again Kevin. It's been a long time.

Whether or not Obama is a U.S. Citizen or not is irrelevant. The relevant question is whether or not he is a natural born citizen as is required for POTUS according the the United States Constitution Article I, Section 2, clause 5.

If his citizenship status has EVER been governed by Britain due to his father, Obama Sr. never becoming a U.S. Citizen (which he did not), then Obama cannot be a natural born citizen of the U.S.

Some questions.

Why won't he show the following documentation if he has nothing to hide?

Mr. Barack Hussein Obama -

The American People want to know, who sent you?

Obama has lived for 48 years without leaving any footprints -- none! There is no
Obama documentation -- no records -- no paper trail -- none -- this can't be an

Original, vault copy birth certificate -- Not released

Certificate of Live Birth -- Released -- Counterfeit

Obama/Dunham marriage license -- Not released

Soetoro/Dunham marriage license -- Not released

Soetoro adoption records -- Not released

Fransiskus Assisi School School application -- Released

Punahou School records -- Not released

Selective Service Registration -- Released -- Counterfeit

Occidental College records -- Not released

Passport (Pakistan) -- Not released

Columbia College records -- Not released

Columbia thesis -- Not released

Harvard College records -- Not released

Harvard Law Review articles -- None (maybe 1, unsigned?)

Baptism certificate -- None

Medical records -- Not released

Illinois State Senate records -- None

Illinois State Senate schedule -- Lost

Law practice client list -- Not released

University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None

"Twitchy" says it better:


Barack Hussein's dual citizenship with the Britain and the United States
disqualifies him from serving as President of the United States according to the
Constitution and the our Founding Fathers. (Kenya was a commonwealth at the time
of Obama's birth.) The question is not whether he is a citizen. The requirement
in question is "No person except a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN...shall be eligible to
the office of President." Obama's father was Kenyan and his mother was to young
to confer citizenship at the time of birth according to the federal laws.
Holding true to the importance of being a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN why did Democrats
hold hearings on McCain's eligibility ridiculing him being born in the Panama
Canal Zone? The conclusion of that hearing is that McCain is a natural born
citizen because both his parents were US citizens and the birth occurred in a US

So, the bottom line we have to ask our selves is do we follow the constitution
or do we allow despotism creep upon our shores?

I affirm we follow the constitution and keep our freedoms.

Christinewjc said...

Article on why natural born citizenship matters for POTUS:

New Media Journal article & link:

Frank Salvato, Managing Editor

Why the POTUS Needs to
Be a Natural-Born Citizen
December 3, 2008

The Founders and Framers were incredibly intelligent people. In fact, they
operated, intellectually, at a grade 24 level, grade 12 equating to the senior
year in high school. Therefore, it shouldn't come as any surprise that each
Article and Amendment – each tenet – in The Charters of Freedom was
painstakingly examined, debated, reviewed and, finally, included. Article II,
Section 1 of the United States Constitution – the Article that clearly states
the qualifications for holding the office of President of the United States – is
no different.

To be clear, I have no decided position on whether or not President-Elect Barack
Obama is a natural-born citizen or otherwise. I believe that we – as a people –
need to base our understanding on any and every issue on the facts. But in the
case of Mr. Obama’s status of natural-born citizenship there are too many
unanswered questions and not enough transparency where the facts are concerned.
For a candidate who ran his presidential campaign on the promise of
transparency, Mr. Obama has proven in the earliest moments of his executive
tenure that transparency is subjective.

The most troubling of the troublesome questions is why Mr. Obama didn’t
immediately release his vaulted, original birth certificate for examination.
This act would have not only eliminated a potential stumbling block for his
campaign, but it would have certified his eligibility for the office of
President of the United States and saved the taxpayers the cost of judicial
intervention. Instead, under the pretext of visiting an ailing grandmother in
Hawaii just days before the 2008 Presidential Election, Mr. Obama had his
vaulted, original birth certificate sealed by Hawaii’s governor, Linda Lingle

On Friday, December 5th, 2008, the full compliment of the United States Supreme
Court will hold a Rule of Four Conference hearing on the issue of Donofrio v.
Wells; a lawsuit alleging that New Jersey Secretary of State Nina Mitchell Wells
was delinquent in disqualifying ineligible candidates for President of the
United States from the November 4th, 2008 General Election Ballot. The US
Supreme Court Rule of Four states that before a case is put on the docket, four
out of the nine Supreme Court justices must agree in conference to hear the
case. If four out of the nine Supreme Court Justices agree, Donofrio v. Wells
will be heard by the full United States Supreme Court and our nation will stand
on the brink of a Constitutional Crisis.

There are many reasons why someone running for the office of President of the
United States should be a natural-born citizen but four come to mind as the most
immediate: Allegiance, Sovereignty, Foreign Intervention and the Safeguarding of
The Charters of Freedom.

Christinewjc said...


It is important that anyone aspiring to the office of President of the United
States have a steadfast allegiance to The Charters of Freedom and the country,
without reserving any allegiance to any foreign power, entity or potentate.

Because the President of the United States serves as Commander-in-Chief of the
United States Armed Forces it is essential that the person holding this
position, and the authority to unleash the power of the US military, not be
compromised of allegiance. And because the President is the Chief Executive --
the administrator to all Executive Branch authorities and departments -- it is
paramount that this position be limited to those who would dedicate themselves
to "country first."

A person holding dual allegiance – or dual citizenship – would be put in the
position of having to choose between those allegiances and would, therefore,
compromise his oath of preserving, protecting and defending the United States

In an age when there exists a substantial number of federally elected officials
who believe the United States should take its seat as an equal in a one-world,
globalist order, it becomes critical that the person elected to serve as
President of the United States have an unwavering dedication to our nation’s

With the advent of organizations such as the “World Court” and an ever-advancing
encroachment of United Nations authority upon our sovereignty, it is important
that our national sovereignty be protected at all cost. Allowing someone who
does not satisfy Article II, Section 1 of the US Constitution to ascend to the
office of President facilitates an opportunity for globalist ideologues to
position themselves to do harm to the Charters of Freedom at the hand of world
opinion and at the expense of the Rights as enumerated in The Charters of

When one takes into account many of the extreme laws governing free speech,
property rights, taxation and personal and religious freedom that exist
throughout the world it becomes clear that to bow to the will of the world
community, to trade our sovereignty for universal national equality, serves to
diminish the freedom and liberty mandated by The Charters of Freedom, liberties
and freedoms paid for with the blood and treasure of patriots.

Foreign Intervention
In the youthful existence of the United States of America our nation has come up
against many individuals, nations and organizations who would revel in our
demise. To permit a non-natural-born citizen to rise to the office of President
would be to invite nefarious forces to manufacture a Little Nikita in the hope
of bringing about the actualization of Nikita Khrushchev’s declaration that the
United States will fall with nary a shot being fired.

Christinewjc said...


To believe that organizations like al Qaeda, ideologues like Hugo Chavez and
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or nation states like Russia or China wouldn’t embrace the
chance to – through the legitimate means of our electoral process – install an
operative in the Oval Office is to be naïve. Each of these entities devote
resources to affect the demise of the United States of America including
military, economic and ideological (read: propaganda) resources.

Because the President of the United States is entrusted with the execution of
authority of all Executive Branch departments and the command of the US
military, it is vital that anyone aspiring to the office have a complete
appreciation and devotion for the American way of life. Failing to vet those who
do not possess natural-born appreciation or our uniquely American philosophy is
to invite an ideological siege upon our nation and to compromise the ability to
bequeath Americanism to future generations.

Safeguarding of the Charters of Freedom
Chief among every American President’s duties is to safeguard the Charters of
Freedom. The Oath of Office of the President of the United States reads:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of
President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Some add, “So help me God” to punctuate their commitment.

Without a solid, unwavering dedication to preserving The Charters of Freedom the
President of the United States is ill-prepared to advance the freedoms and
liberties mandated therein to future generations. Those who would usurp the
genius of our Founders and Framers by diminishing the importance of natural born
citizenship as a requirement for President do so at the expense of generational
safeguards. Those who engage in this national apostasy should be thoroughly
scrutinized for any ulterior motive.

Today, as we await the decision of the United States Supreme Court on the issue
of President-Elect Obama’s requirement to satisfy Article II, Section 1, our
nation stands at a crossroads that runs adjacent to the abyss. Today, there is
no provision in the US Constitution for a mechanism to enforce Article II,
Section 1 but for US Supreme Court action. On Friday, should the US Supreme
Court abdicate its responsibility to the US Constitution, the full Charters of
Freedom and the American People, we will stand smaller in the eyes of our
Founders and Framers and in the eyes of all who died in pursuit of the
preservation of our freedoms and liberty.

While it is true that many who have come to be naturalized American citizens
exhibit a deeper love of our country than many who take citizenship for granted,
one of the few ways to assure that Americanism and The Charters of Freedom
survive for future generations is to stipulate that those aspiring to become
President of the United States be American. When we “rationalize” that
requirement to the ash heap of history we can all rest assured that our freedom
and liberty will soon follow.

Christinewjc said...


Natural Born Citizen for POTUS is written in Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the United States Constitution.

Sorry about that error in my previous comment.

Kevin said...

Hi Christine,
Thanks for all of that. One of your sources states: "Obama's father was Kenyan and his mother was to young
to confer citizenship at the time of birth according to the federal laws." My question is: Where in federal law does it give an age a woman has to be, when giving birth, to confer citizenship? She was born in Nov. 1942, President Obama was born in Aug. 1961. This makes her 19 years old when he was born in Hawaii. What age, according to federal law, does a U.S. citizen have to be to confer citizenship? If under 19, does that mean that all babies born to U.S. citizens under 19, who gave birth in the United States, are not U.S. citizens according to federal law?

Christinewjc said...

I would need to do some research to answer your question about the mother's age being a factor in her ability to transfer naturalized citizenship to her infant child.

However, it doesn't even matter when questioning Obama's ineligibility for POTUS because he can't possibly be a natural born citizen (NBC) since his father was Kenyan and never because a U.S. Citizen. Only if he was fathered by someone other than Obama Sr. (which is also rumored) could he be a NBC.

This website has a LOT of information on the topic:

A Place to Ask Questions To Get the Right Answers: The Law of Nations as U.S. Federal Common Law and Not English Common Law Defines What an Article II "Natural Born Citizen" Is

I have several questions for you. Does it matter to you - personally - at all, that Obama isn't a NBC? In other words, despite the fact that you are an obvious supporter of Obama, if this were eventually proven in a court of law and Obama is found to be a usurper and not eligible for POTUS due to Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of our United States Constitution, would it bother you that he violated our laws and Constitution to be president? Would you support his removal from the office if found not eligible? Or would political affiliation and ideology cause you to continue to support him anyway? Just curious.

Kevin said...

Hi Christine,
According to what I can find, if a parent is a U.S. citizen, then the child is a natural born citizen. If he were not a natural born citizen would I still support him? Not sure what the answer would be to that because I can't imagine him not being a natural born citizen. The founding fathers put that clause it to make sure that 'foreigners' didn't take over the country. This was a problem for them since they just broke away from Great Britain. Just because a person was born, say, in Japan, doesn't mean he/she can't be the president of the United States. A place of birth doesn't automatically give a person a certain political outlook. I keep thinking of those poor Japanese United States citizens who were thrown into camps during WWII just because they had Japanese ancestry.
But the Constitution is the Constitution, and I am obligated to live under it...