Skip to content

The “Birther” Issue

August 26, 2012
Lynn M. Stuter

Many probably saw the news clip last night concerning Romney’s quip about no one asking to see his birth certificate as everyone knows where he was born.  Or they heard about it.

NBC news went on to expound on the quip, claiming that Romney was pandering to a “fringe element” in the Republican party who believes Obama was not born in Hawaii.

The mainstream media has consistently misrepresented the truth, regarding the origins of Obama and his eligibility to the office of president of the United States.

The issue has never been about whether Obama was born in Hawaii, even though we don’t really know for sure that he was, given the fact that the documents he has produced to prove he was born in Hawaii have now been proven to be forgeries.

The issue is the fact that Obama, whether born in Hawaii or not, is not “natural born” as required by Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, United States Constitution, which reads —

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; …

In defining “natural born” we need to heed the words of Thomas Jefferson, one of the framers of the U.S. Constitution, written in 1823 —

On every question of construction, carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.

Carrying ourselves back to the time of the framing of the United States Constitution, studying the history that has been written about the framing, the words of the framers themselves, what did they mean by “natural born”?

What we find is that the framers, in writing the United States Constitution, in using the term “natural born”, relied on Vattel’s Law of Nations, Section 212, which defines the term as having two parents who are citizens of the nation and born on the soil of the nation.  This particular book was made available to the framers by Benjamin Franklin.

We all know that Obama claims Barack Hussein Obama, Sr, as his father.  We also know that Obama, Sr, was a British subject on August 4, 1961, the day Obama II claims he was born.  No matter where Obama was born, he is not “natural born”; he does not meet the requirements of Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, United States Constitution.  His father, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr, was not an American citizen.

Some will undoubtedly point to the laws at the time and claim that Obama became a citizen of the United States via his mother.  That is also erroneous, even if he was born in Hawaii.  Under the laws, in force at the time, Ann Dunham had to be at least 19 the day Obama was born, to automatically confer her citizenship to him.  She was not old enough.  Beyond that, the fact that the father was a British subject on the day of his supposed birth, still precludes Obama from being “natural born.”

That the mainstream media continues to claim that Obama’s birth in Hawaii (even though not proven) makes him eligible, shows their ignorance of the history of our nation, and of our U.S. Constitution.

That they continue to hold fast to this lie, in the face of the growing understanding of the populace, sends a clear message that the mainstream media is not to be trusted.

And, of course, the other lie they hold fast to is the claim that the courts have settled the issue.

Not so.

To settle the issue, the courts would have to address the merits of the various lawsuits that have been brought.  That has not happened.  Instead, the courts have steadfastly claimed that the plaintiffs did not have standing to bring the suit in the first place, thereby refusing to address the facts of the case.

In truth, every American has standing as this is our nation, our Constitution.  And when an man who is not eligible to the office of president is allowed to sit in the Oval Office, we are all adversely affected, as we have been adversely affected by the Marxist ideology to which Barack Hussein Obama holds fast and that is counter to the freedom, liberty and justice afforded us by our U.S. Constitution.

For the mainstream media to claim this, instead of exposing the fraud that is being perpetrated, brings to light the fact that the mainstream media is not the defenders of “freedom, liberty, and justice” but rather are advocating the enslaving of the American people under the totalitarianism that is always the hallmark of Marxist ideology.

Only mentally deranged people advocate for their own enslavement!

2 Comments leave one →
  1. August 26, 2012 6:18 pm

    Vattel was used by the Founders as one of SEVERAL references on TREATIES, COMPACTS & INTERNATIONAL LAW & he did NOT use the term “natural born” in his treatise. He said “naturels ou indigenes”, which translates as “natives or indigenes” & it was NOT until AFTER the Constitution had been ratified that later editions translated it as “natural-born”. Vattel said NOTHING about both parents having to be citizen & even he acknowledged that different countries have different rules on citizenship that must be followed & points out that in England, the children born of aliens there were BORN as English citizens. NATURAL BORN is the OPPOSITE of being foreign born, i.e. an ALIEN. NATURAL BORN are people that are CITIZENS by virtue of there BIRTH in the United States. Foreign born people are ALIENS that can ONLY become citizens by NATURALIZATION.


    The age requirment in the citizenship law referred to ONLY applied to FOREIGN BORN children of Americans.

    The courts have addressed the MERITS of the Birther lawsuits & found their so-called legal “arguments”, “evidence” & “experts” to MERITLESS, FRIVOLOUS & LACKING CREDIBILITY.

    REALITY vs. the birthers

    And the FACT that the Birthers continue their JIHAD & continue to IGNORE these FACTS speaks volumes about them & their IDEOLOGY.


    “It ain’t what ya don’t know that hurts ya. What really puts a hurtin’ on ya is what ya knows for sure, that just ain’t so.” — Uncle Remus

  2. Ellen permalink
    August 26, 2012 5:25 pm

    The meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law and refers to the PLACE of birth, not to the parents.

    “Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

    “What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.” (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)–Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT).

    Here are sources to turn to for further research:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: