web analytics
≡ Menu

Obama gives reason to question his legitimacy

WASHINGTON (March 30, 2010)–President Barack Obama said in an interview broadcast Tuesday that he believes the Tea Party is built around a “core group” of people who question whether he is a U.S. citizen and believe he is a socialist,….

Speaking with purposefully deceitful inaccuracy, Barack Obama takes aim in this NBC interview at the participants in the Tea Party gatherings around the country. Their actions highlight the deep opposition to his socialist agenda that his lickspittle propagandists in the so-called “mainstream” media would otherwise just belittle or ignore altogether. Nothing better indicates the decisive impact the Tea Party efforts are having than the fact that the Obama faction is desperate to find a way to slow their momentum. With the help of Congressional leaders as fanatical as themselves, the Obama faction has hijacked the Democrat Party. They are forcing the rest of its increasingly reluctant passengers and crew to move toward socialism along a vector that is generating a massive headwind of opposition. At present, the craft looks very likely to be blown out of the political skies in the November midterm elections, even despite whatever arsenal of dirty tricks the Party’s leadership deploys to decoy angry voters. They are fearful enough to trot out the Decoy-in-Chief to divert and dissipate the Tea Party’s damaging political barrage.

There is something pathetic about Obama’s apparent belief that his faction has succeeded in its vicious effort to discredit those whom its media lickspittles contemptuously dismiss as “birthers.” Does he actually accept the laughably superficial notion that the issue is all about his birth certificate? If so, that raises doubts about the truthfulness of his claim to be an expert on constitutional law. If Obama released his Hawaiian birth certificate tomorrow, that would just be the beginning of the process needed to heal the damage that has been done to the authority of the U.S. Constitution.

Every word of the U.S. Constitution must be taken seriously. The words concerning eligibility for the Presidency involve the branch of government especially charged with defending both the law and the physical existence of the United States. Prudence dictates they be taken very seriously. In the actual circumstances of his case, this means collecting and weighing all the evidence that has a bearing on the question, “Is Barack Obama a natural born citizen of the United States.” We can have no right arbitrarily to ignore the word “natural”. Therefore, this is not the same as the question “Is Barack Obama a citizen of the United States.” Naturalized citizens are citizens of the United States, but they have obtained their citizenship by satisfying requirements and following procedures established by positive acts of human legislation. The term natural refers citizenship to a source in nature itself, without reference to any positive act of human legislation (positive human law.)  Its meaning depends upon what America’s founders referred to in the Declaration of Independence as “the laws of nature and of nature’s God.” In this respect the claim to be a natural born citizen is no more dependent upon a positive act of human legislation than the claim to be endowed with unalienable rights.

In order, therefore, to arrive at a reasonable understanding of what it means to be a “natural born citizen” we have to consider what it means to be born with any natural quality or trait whatsoever. It is commonplace to refer to people as “natural blonds” or “natural redheads.” We easily understand the difference between someone whose eyes look naturally blue, and someone using tinted contact lenses to mimic that appearance. The provisions of inheritance law in vastly different parts of the world have been based on the difference between a parent’s “natural children” and their adopted children, in whom the kinship with their parents is recognized to be the result of a choice ratified by the provisions of positive human law. With no disparagement intended, the naturalized citizen is like a “bleached blond”, for whom the appearance of blond hair required intervention by a human agent (a barber or hairdresser, for example.) Only where citizenship is the result of a fact true at birth and without reference to the intervention of any human agency (the legislature, for example, or the courts), can it in like manner be ascribed to nature.

Once the facts are established and documented, it is for the duly established branches of the U.S. government to reach a conclusion about the citizen status of Barack Obama at the time of his birth. It requires a bare minimum of common sense to realize that this conclusion must in some way be a function of his naturally existing (i.e. biological) relationship to one or both of his parents.   There can be no doubt that, as the supreme law of the land, the Constitution’s words compel action; in this case an informed, authoritative decision.  All public officials in the United States are required by the U.S. constitution to swear their support for it.  Failure to take positive steps to arrive at such a decision, on the part of any official at any level of government in the United States, is a clear and palpable dereliction of duty. In this case, the main burden of that duty falls on Barack Obama himself, who has several times sworn that oath in one form or another. Instead of doing everything in his power to make sure an accurate and informed decision can be and is arrived at, he has spent large sums on lawyers who are working to withhold evidence without which such a decision is impossible. He has even used employees of the U.S. government to thwart implementation of the provisions of the U.S. Constitution.

More than anyone else, therefore, Barack Obama himself is responsible for the doubts more and more Americans have about the legitimacy of his claim to the Presidency. He is also responsible for the impossibly difficult burden of conscience his failure to resolve this issue places on all those sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution, particularly those in our armed services.  According to just breaking news reports, a high level active duty army officer has been moved by his strict sense of duty to risk court martial in order to seek the answer Obama so strenuously seeks to obfuscate. I and others seeking resolution of the constitutional issue predicted that actions of this kind would occur. I believe that more will follow.

All Constitutionally sworn public officials in the United States who have failed to speak out on this question must shoulder their responsibility for the consequences of continued failure to address it.  I accuse them of gross dereliction. I accuse every Republican and every Democrat, every U.S. Senator and every Representative who has failed to insist that it be authoritatively address.  I accuse every judge who has failed to act so that the facts may be ascertained.  I accuse every state official who approved and without protest used ballots that presented a candidacy whose lawfulness they had never diligently verified. By their actions they degrade the authority of the U.S. Constitution. They contribute to the distrust and demoralization of the people.  They undo the work of every previous generation of Americans who gave talent, resources, livelihood and life itself so that government of, by and for the people would be strong and never falter in these United States.

It is fitting that conscientious people who wear or have ever worn the uniform of our armed services, are giving the example of courage and devotion to duty that these other officials lack. But in different ways we all are sworn to the same courage and the same devotion, if only upon the graves of so many generations come before us. They did for us what we are failing to do for our posterity. The fundamental challenge of our time, emerging on every front and with respect to every issue, is the deadly assault now underway against the constitutional government of the American people. The first salvo of that assault was the almost casual contempt too many of our leaders displayed toward the words of the Constitution’s eligibility provision. What better first step toward defeating the assault than to act on the inspiring example of our nation’s sworn defenders?  We cannot all go to court, but we can all speak out, write, twitter and text and call, expressing to our elected officials, to the media and to one another our united support for the demand that the simple facts be established and the duty to act on them be fulfilled. We are not yet called, as previous generations were, to risk life, and fortune and honor and all. But if we are faithful in this lesser way, we will grow in the confidence that should the need arise, we will act. We will prove equal to their example; and no one of us will hesitate for fear that we stand alone.

Series Navigation

Does elite refuse to clear Obama eligibility doubts so as to exploit “affirmative action” resentment?The eligibility case Obama wants no one to hear

{ 6 comments… add one }
  • IONU May 1, 2010, 11:14 am

    There are many “bums to throw out” in addition to Obummer. We all know Obama is an illegitimate POTUS, what bothers me more is the conspicuously treasonous behavior of everyone in an official capacity who participated in one of the greatest frauds executed in human history. Namely, Congress (down to the last Rep. and Senator), SCOTUS, the Secretaries of State, DNC, RNC, and even the Electoral College.

    Shame on all of those who knew and did nothing. As I see it, getting rid of Obummer will not save our republic, the fix is in, he will be replaced with another globalist puppet President.

    Without once again understanding that our authority is not man-made, but God-given, and embracing and defending to the death our constitutional principles, we are indeed doomed.

  • Chiu Chun-Ling April 7, 2010, 11:49 pm

    Well…I suppose that depends on how you interpret, “The fundamental challenge of our time, emerging on every front and with respect to every issue, is the deadly assault now underway against the constitutional government of the American people.”

    I think that Dr. Keyes has a point about the Obama presidency being a new and more deadly challenge to America’s continued existence as a nation.  Yes, it arose after decades of malfeasence and corruption in the government, but it is a different beast.

    For all that, I believe it is a challenge that America has some will to face, which is not true of the slow decay of creeping consolidation of power which has heretofore gone uncontested.  In resisting Obama, you may yet find salvation that almost none would have sought if not for his sudden assault on you.

    I had thought America doomed, not just as a nation, but as a people.  Obama has changed that with his ineptitude.  I am grateful, not to him, but to God, who made the enemy stumble in their final charge.  Rouse yourselves and fight, for you have been granted the chance to avoid being slaughtered as you slumbered.

  • Dawg-em April 7, 2010, 11:30 am

    “The first salvo of that assault was the almost casual contempt too many of our leaders displayed toward the words of the Constitution’s eligibility provision.”

    I must respectfully disagree with this statement. Dr. Keyes knows full well the assault on the Constitution has been ongoing for decades and the contempt shown is not “almost casual”, but is blatantly shown to be a position arrogantly held by members of both parties. One can disagree as to the exact moment this slippery slope was first trod, but there can be no doubt this particular issue is a direct result of ignoring so many other elements of that once revered document.

  • Sarah April 2, 2010, 2:45 pm

    Alan Keyes for president in 2012. He is the right man for the job. Respects our constitution, does not want to control our lives. He has my vote. 

  • atcojti April 2, 2010, 5:32 am

    Bobby Jindal 2012.

    “Replace the ineligible Democrat with an ineligible Republican.”

  • Chiu Chun-Ling April 2, 2010, 4:14 am

    Hmmm…on the one hand, I think that the gross abuse of the Constitution, with particular attention to the current prominence of the Tenth Amendment, is more of a ‘winning issue’ at the moment.  On the other, it is certainly true that we should not let fresh offenses make us forget the history of contempt and insults America has suffered.

    And then there is the need to seriously prepare to defend what is left, real defense against open and deadly assault.

Leave a Comment

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

Copyright Regulations

All original material on Loyal To Liberty is copyrighted and you will need to observe these regulations when you plan to distribute or use content from this blog. Copyright Regulations for Content on Loyal To Liberty You are free to share, distribute or transmit any work on this blog under the following conditions: * Attribution: You must attribute any content you use to Loyal To Liberty by including a link back to the specific content page. You must not suggest that Loyal To Liberty endorses you or your use of the content on this blog. Even with attribution, you do not have permission to republish the entire blog post on a website. Only excerpts of less than 500 words from each blog post may be published on other websites. A link back to the specific blog post must be included. * Noncommercial Usage: You may not use this work for commercial purposes unless authorized to do so by Alan Keyes. * Derivative Works:Within the limits heretofore specified, you may build upon the contents of Loyal To Liberty as long as proper attribution (see above) is made. If you want to syndicate or distribute the full blog post on your website, permission must be obtained before you do so. For permission, please email alan@loyaltoliberty.com.
%d bloggers like this: