A better understanding
Some of your readers have written about the question of President Obama's legality to be President.
Maybe this article can help clear it up?
Herb Titus is a well-known and respected Constitutional scholar. His discussion of the topic of what is a natural born citizen is must viewing to understand the Obama eligibility controversy.
The question of Obama's birth, where he was born, is an important question. But the more important question is whether or not he is a natural born citizen because he was born in Hawaii. The conventional wisdom is that if he could produce a birth certificate showing that he was born in Hawaii, which would make him a natural born citizen. That's not true. That only makes him a citizen by birth.
And there's a distinction between the two terms. The "citizen by birth" is a person who becomes a citizen because he was born in the geographical limits of the United States and he was here lawfully or his parents were here lawfully, and therefore by birth, he's a citizen.
This is because the first sentence of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states specifically that a person who is born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, is a citizen.
Now, most people think that's a definition of a natural born citizen, but people forget that was put into the Constitution not for the purpose of defining what a natural born citizen is as it applies to the President of the United States, but it was placed in to the Constitution for the specific purpose of declaring that people who were part of the newly freed slave class were citizens of the United States and of the state in which they resided because the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled in the Dred Scott case that a person who had been brought over to the United States against his will could never become a citizen of the United States much less a citizen of the state.
So the place of birth that gives rise to citizenship by birth was addressed to the question of what to do with this entirely new group of people who would otherwise be stateless because they couldn't under the Dred Scott rule become a citizen having been born in the United States.
Robert Van Istendal
The fall of America?
For almost three years we have seen President Obama changing this nation with his own ideology and transforming it to become like another socialist state.
If that is so, why then aren't there more Americans opposing what he is doing to this country or worried that he may get another four years of dismantling our nation? Worse than that, why are there so many supporting Obama's ideologies and his reelection? Do we have a divided nation at a time we are at war on foreign lands and the threat of nuclear war from Iran is looming?
President Obama's transformation of our government is not intended to be just temporary. He wants to transform our free nation to become subservient to the government. If he gets his way it will become permanent and devastating to all freedom loving Americans. It will flip-flop our republic where the people will be subservient to the government. If that happens we will have a dictator or king at the helm of our nation.
Our Founding Fathers formed our government with the constitutional provisions of not having a king ruling over its citizens. They even considered not allowing anyone in government from having a nobility title. The Federal Nobility Clause is a provision in Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution that forbids the United States from granting titles of nobility and restricts members of the government from receiving gifts from foreign states without the consent of the U.S. Congress.
Obama claims the middle class has been hampered by big business, when it is big business that provides the jobs. The government doesn't provide jobs that result in making money and yielding profits, profits that are used to reinvest or grow the business. It is not the government's business to know what a CEO makes or what he does with his money, so long as it was done legally. If the lack of jobs is hurting this nation it is because this government has done everything to impede business from being successful and competitive here and abroad.
Recently, Obama was promoting his progressive agenda by chiding the Republicans by saying that "their philosophy is simple: that people are better off when everyone is left to fend for themselves and play by the Republican rules."
The Republican rule is simple: keep the government off your back so that you as an individual are free to fend for yourself and seek opportunities in order to pursue your inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. On the other hand, Obama's philosophy is simple but very un-American: "more big government – less freedoms."
What Obama overlooks is that America has been the land of opportunities and free people that need to be responsible for their own actions, and take pride on what they do that is good. When the government provides everything to individuals they become indebted to the government and ultimately become as slaves. There is nothing the government does that doesn't have "strings" attached.
Problems are better solved by individual efforts than through government programs. The real point of progressivism is not to solve problems at all, but to create chaos. Obama's ideology is not looking out for the freedoms of the people; he is looking out for big government and the subjugation of the people it rules.
Electing a new president may not be enough to save the United States from socialism. Our prosperity doesn't deserve this kind of ideology or inheriting a $15 trillion national debt. The people cannot depend on the Congress to fix things alone; they are part of the problems. It is going to take the people to become informed and involved, follow the Constitution and its provisions, and take back the government that has been hijacked by progressives and Marxists.
So what is the point on all this? If Obama wins the presidential election in 2012, America will fall from within like the Roman Empire. If elected, he will continue to push for socialism and more government control over our lives. In doing so he must ultimately trash the U.S. Constitution and our Bill of Rights, since that is where the government is supposed to get its powers and the people get their rights and liberties. Can this really happen to America? Yes!
The fall of America may come, not because of only one man's ideology, but because God and His absolute moral values are being removed from our everyday existence and being replaced with human values such as greed and humanism. Remember, our national motto reads: "In God We Trust."
Our Declaration of Independence reminds us that our Founding Fathers did acknowledge that God's providence did have a hand in creating this nation:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed – That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness."
Do we need a Declaration of Independence from our own Obama styled government? We must stand our ground and fight for our rights and our American heritage. If we don't, who will? Our pledge of allegiance to the American flag says it best:
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.