Article II, Section 1...

Below is a line by line dissection of Article II, Section 1... First, my two-cents:

Why is Barry UnConstitutional? REGARDLESS of WHERE he was born, his mother was a US Citizen & his father was a British Subject. Period. Doesn't matter if he was born in Hawaii or a village in Kenya - His allegiance can be split and if you've read any part of "Dreams FROM My Father," it will be readily apparent that Barry is an Anti-Colonialist, just like his baby daddy!

So WHY is he still in office? REGARDLESS of who became POTUS if he were removed from Office, Biden was complicite as was Nancy Pelosi who filed his paperwork for the DNC so it would most likely be Cry-Baby Boehner but the bottom line is: ALL of the Legislation (like it or NOT) that he's signed into law and ALL of the MANY Executive Orders he has issued would be NULL & VOID. Where does that leave the United States as a Country? Completely, 100% open & VULNERABLE for a coup by whomever is STRONGEST.

If you think about that for a minute, Barry has weakened our Military, allowed MILLIONS of Muslims into the US (legally or not), the dollar has been devalued by quantitative easing, the Dept of EDUCATION has enough ammo to hold off the enemy, but therein lies the rub: "We the People" have been DECLARED the ENEMY! It's all over the Homeland Security website! WE are the ENEMY, jihadist/muslim extremists/hamas et al, are NOT! They "coExist" WE are on the FRINGE!

You have to read the article below coming from a place we've never been or had to go. ALL of the Founder's were British Subjects. They came here to ESCAPE the Monarchy, formed the 13 original COLONIES and EVERYTHING ABOUT a person who is ELIGIBLE to be President of the United States came from a place of SUSPICION. EVERYTHING! Down to having to have LIVED in the US for 14 yrs & being at LEAST 35 years of age! The last President to have "a" parent, his father, that WASN'T born in the US was Wilson (#11) if memory serves.

Let's go back to WHY is Barry STILL occupying OUR White House. He has usurped the office of President. To REMOVE him is to ACKNOWLEDGE that he is, in fact, a Constitutional POTUS. The PRECIDENT that would be set is even WORSE than the PRECIDENT already set. I believe the Republicans thought Mitt was ripe for the taking... Then came Benghazi and we all know how that played out. Followed by hurricane Sandy and the "Love-fest" between Barry and Crissy - THAT played a MAJOR role in the 2012 debaucle, stir in voter fraud (125% of registered voters voted 100% for Barry with ZERO votes going to Mitt in a precinct in Ohio - that's a statistical IMPOSSIBILITY!) and voila, the incumbent gets a 2nd term.

As for the others I mentioned that raised feathers: I haven't done a TON of research on Ted Cruz, but I know that he was born in Canada. IF both of his parents (BOTH OF THEM) were US Citizens, that would be OK - but it's my understanding that only his mother was a citizen at the time of his birth. Even if his father BECAME a citizen AFTER Teds' birth, he would be a "NATURALIZED" citizen, NOT "Natural Born" (remember, NATURAL BORN as stated below is being born of TWO PARENTS who are CITIZENS at the time of BIRTH to PREVENT a "split" allegiance).

Marco Rubio: He was born in America to immigrant parents who became citizens when he was 3 yrs old making HIM "Native-Born," NOT a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. If there's an Amendment to the Constitution regarding Presidential eligibility in the future, I'm of the opinion that it will ONE DAY be OK for a person born under these circumstances to run.

Bobby Jindal: I haven't don't a lick of research on him because it's widely known that he's NOT "Natural Born" - To represent the People in Congress is OK, however he's NOT eligible to run for High Office.

I know this is long, but I was seriously tired of the 140 character crap. I started to BLOG and I got side-tracked.

Before Barry was elected back in '08 I did a SHITLOAD of research on him - quite simply because I saw him on "Oprah" & I LIKED him! After the election, everything (ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING) was scrubbed! And no matter how you slice it or whichever EO came first, Barry's records are SEALED! Why? Not because when he born his parents thought "Oh, he'll be President in 45 years so we're not going to leave a paper trail!" but because of the MANY Communists ties that his Grandpa Dunhum had, the relationships that his mother had, the classes she took, the thesis she wrote (I read it, used to be OUT THERE on the 'net!) about Communism in America, her ties to Frank Marshall Davis, Jr. who was Barry's Mentor from a VERY young age - molestation - adoption - StanAnn relinquished Barry's US citizenship when he was 8 or 9 & she moved to Indonesia. He could NOT be a US citizen & attend school there. After StanAnn remarried, Barry was adopted by Lolo Soetoro & he has a 1/2-sister named Mia or Mya Soetoro that was born in 1971. When she was 2 or 3 Barry became too much to handle so mamma shipped him back to Hawaii where he lived with StanAnn's parents. This is where it gets all weird & THIS is the paperwork that's been sealed. His name had been changed to Barry Mohammed Soetoro, he was a citizen of Indonesia. Grandma Dunham worked for the Hawai'i registrars office for many years, Barry has the Social Security of a dead man, his same age from CT named Harrison J Bounel. From here it gets all Tom Clancy/Vince Flynn but the truth will come out & you guys are gonna say: "There was CRAZY fxck'n CHICK on Twitter, I SWEAR she said ALL of this SH!IZ! And now, HERE IT IS! WoW!"

A couple things to add: I was born the same year as Barry only in California at the same hospital my father was born at. My Great Grandfather was one of the ORIGINATOR's of THE "International Alliance for Theatrical Stage Employees" (Union) that's the LOGO you see at the END of every single TV show, movie or at the bottom of ALL playbills if you're at the theatre (sans H.S. & local productions, usually!). I was raised a Democrat - BIG TIME! I.A.T.S.E. AND Teamster's, my dad was also a short-haul truck-driver so I have a view from both ends of the political spectrum. However, I am FIRMLY planted, much to my parents & brothers' dismay, on the RIGHT SIDE of the fence! Oh, my last name REALLY IS Snow (maiden name) White (2nd husband with whom I share a daughter) born "Baby Girl Snow-White" lest you look at my name and decide to strip me of any CRED! #Seriously

-------------------[end my 2cents begin the dissection]---------------
Article II, Section 1

The founders of our Nation wanted a nation for everyone, where ones status of birth would not limit their ability to succeed in almost any task that they could set their hearts and minds too.  Yet, they had put pen to paper to set aside only one aspiration from all citizens and to reserve that for a class of citizens whose members are called “a natural born citizen,” the office of the President of the United States of America.  

Article II, Section 1

“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.”

There are some interesting phrases here that all have significance to the mindset of the Founding Fathers.  The key phrase here is, “a natural born citizen,” as opposed to “a native born citizen,” “naturalized” or even “a citizen.” Before we look at what “a natural born citizen” is, let’s look at the other phrases, so the clear meaning of a Natural Born Citizen becomes clear.

Looking at the text of the Constitution there was a small window of opportunity for a class of citizens, who were just simply “a citizen” to become the President. This Grandfather clause expired with the death of the last citizen born before June 22, 1788.

or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution,

Considering that all of the Founding Fathers were at least on July 4, 1776, British subjects, they needed to include themselves as possible Presidential candidates. These “original citizen” Presidents included, George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, John Quincy Adams, Andrew Jackson and the last “original citizen” President was William Henry Harrison.

If they had not included themselves, then the age requirement included in the qualifications for President would mean that America would have to wait until July 4, 1811 for the first “natural born citizen” to come of age.

neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years,

Yet, they were not so liberal in just allowing any former British subjects to be President. Note that also the qualifications for President is included a duration of residency.

and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.

To understand why they choose 14 years, is to start to understand why they also penned the phrase “a natural born citizen.” Our Constitution was adopted on September 17, 1787 and if we subtract 14 years we come to September 17, 1773. Nothing significant happened on this date, but it creates a state where our first “original citizen Presidents” needed to be physically present at the start of and during the War of Independence, unless like Franklin they were overseas engaged in the business of the United States. This is born out in the Journal of the Senate of the United States of America (July 7, 1798), and this is also in many of the debates on ratification.

Because as stated there were no “natural born citizens” ready to be President, the age and duration of residency also created another significant point. Thirty-five minus 14 is also 21, the “age of majority.” This means that these “original citizen” Presidents would have needed to make a conscience adult decision to be an American and would have earned the right to be President, by willingly risking their lives simply by being present in the thirteen States, while this Nation fought for its independence.

Yes, there is a small window of opportunity, when someone could have come to America and became President, without having risked their live in a War of Independence. This short period was from February 4, 1783 when Britain formally declared an end to the War of Independence until September 17, 1787. Our Founding Fathers were men of the highest principles and integrity, they said what they meant and meant what they said. In the same Constitution, that holds the qualifications for President, is written Article 1, Section 9, these same men wrote,

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
 
They were not going to treat this 1783 to 1789 class of “immigrant citizens” guilty of being unfaithful to America by passing a law saying so.  A Bill of Attainder is a law that makes a group of citizens guilty of a crime without the benefit of a trial. Ex post facto law is a law passed after the fact to make something illegal or legal, at the time it happened. They chose instead to set a date, September 17, 1787 that allowed anyone who was an original citizen on that date regardless of place of birth to be President. If you became a citizen on September 18, 1787, it would have been too late for you to qualify to be President of the United States of America without being a natural born citizen.

Returning to the phrase “a natural born citizen,” you can now see that the Founding Fathers made a conscience effort to insure that the office of the President of the United States of America would have been held by only those men who were loyal to the cause of the United States of America. They selected as criteria for themselves loyalty above all else. The President of the United States must be above all else loyal to this Nation, and the principles that it was established upon.

As they pondered the Constitutional office of the President, they knew that one day their generation would pass away. Those men who proved their loyalty on the field of battle would eventually sleep under the field. This pool of men with proven loyalty to the Nation would literally die out one day. Sensing this, they knew that they could only trust the power of the office of President to a group of citizens who would have the best chance of being loyal to the country, those who only know America and only knew what it was like to be American.

On July 25, 1787 John Jay wrote to George Washington, “Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.”

The common sense of this was immediately and unanimously incorporated into our Constitution. It cannot be said that this was without debate, there were a few who initially thought that excluding naturalized citizens might limit the number of affluent people with money to come to and invest in the new country. This small minority was afraid that the rich would not immigrate if their opportunities were limited. The fact that there was debate is significant because it signifies that this provision was not slipped into the Constitution, in the late hours of the night.

If they choose as a requirement for President for themselves, proven loyalty, and what they would choose for the next generation of Presidents would be “natural loyalty.” How they determined what natural loyalty is they looked toward nature. They did not need Congressional studies for a definition, as it was self-evident to them. A persons place in life comes from ones parents. This concept is found in nature, it is self-evident. Nature claims kinship, our most primitive and natural form of citizenship, from blood, while nations claim citizens from the soil, or their place of birth. The decided that the best way to protect the integrity of the office of President of the United States was a combination of the two.

The next time the term “natural born” would be used by the first Congress. Chapter III, of the Naturalization Act of 1790 stated that “a natural born citizen” was one whose parents were citizens of the United States, regardless of where they were born. They used the plural, and not singular. The majority membership of the first Congress was made up of both members from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention. It is obvious that these men, who wrote the both the Constitution and first naturalization law seen that it was the parents who instilled a sense of belonging to their children. This sense of belonging would be deemed loyalty.

The fact that they wanted parents, in the plural to be citizens is because they wanted to limit as much as possible any political and emotional attachment to the “old world.” They wanted neither the mother nor the father to influence “a natural born” candidate for President, with a sense of foreign allegiance. They made the requirements for “a natural born citizen” to be from parents who were either born in the United States or made a conscience decision to become “naturalized citizens” of the United States. They observed in the law of nature that a child follows the condition of their parents, and if the parents were split in their loyalties, the child would be split in loyalty to America.

With the Naturalization Act of 1795, they amended the law that allowed a foreign-born child of American citizens to be called “natural born,” not because they believed they were wrong on the premise of the loyalty deriving from the condition of the parents. They were not, because they still granted “naturalized citizenship” at birth to these children. What they realized is that other nations were not following the law of nature, but were instituting feudal laws that were based on Roman law. These laws said, regardless of the parents’ citizenship, that any child born on the soil of the King, the King had the right to claim as a subject of the Crown, forever. Their intention was to insure that “a natural born citizen” would have only one natural loyalty, and could be legally claimed as a citizen of only one country.

No one can deny that it was the intention of the Framers of the Constitution to protect the sanctity of the office of the President of the United States from foreign influence, either natural or legislated. They believed that the parents American citizenship, either natural or by choice would guard against the influence of foreign cultures. That birth within the United States of America by American citizens, made sure no other world power could ever make a claim for the allegiance of our President.

At the end of the war of Independence, England wanted to give Americans dual citizenship. In correspondence between David Hartley an British negotiator for the Treaty of Paris, and Benjamin Franklin, in which Hartley writes, “Neither shall the independence of the United States be construed any further than as independence, absolute and unlimited, in matters of government, as well as commerce. Not into alienation, and therefore the subjects of his Britannic majesty and the citizens of the United States shall mutually be considered as natural born subjects, and enjoy all rights and privileges as such in the respective dominions and territories in the manner heretofore accustomed.” While some may have considered this a good thing, the Founding Fathers reject this “last minute” act of generosity for the Trojan horse it was, that tried to subvert our Nation into a nation of dual citizens, whose citizens were ultimately subjects subservient to the Crown.

Article II, Section 1 is not about simply being born in the USA, it is about having only a complete and total loyalty to the United States of America, and no other. Any President who puts the interests of the United States of America second, has demonstrated that he is not “a natural born citizen” of this Nation, but is merely a puppet of worldly powers. Imperfect as some may believe, it is our legacy. A heritage paid for by the blood of patriots that is ours to either, guard and protect or to abandon for the always-changing temporary passions of the multitudes.

http://birthers.org/USC/ArtIIS1.html