The Liberal Lie That Elected A President
April 6, 2012 Leave a comment
Why birth in America is irrelevant
When I first read the requirements of presidential eligibility about 6 months ago, something seemed odd and unexplained but I couldn’t consciously identify it. But after a million words and thoughts have passed through my mind, I’ve finally recognized what it was. It was the specific number of years of required residency.
Upon reading that requirement the mind says “yes, it’s wise to have a President who has been a U.S. resident for such a period of time”, but the mind fails to ask these questions: “Why did the framers of the Constitution not require the President to be a born & raised life-long resident of the U.S.A., or to have lived at least half of his life in the U.S.? Of the 35 years of age he was required to have attained, why was he allowed to live three-fifths of them overseas? And which years did they have in mind that he might have lived overseas?” Logic’s answer changes the nature of the argument about the race for the presidency.
The requirement that the President be “a natural born citizen” is the first of three requirements, implying it’s first in importance, but what that means, while simple and straight-forward (one born a citizen — a citizen by nature — by birth to citizens) can be extrapolated not only from Natural Law, but also from the significance of the 14 year residency requirement.
That fourteen year period wasn’t picked out of thin air. The framers didn’t just flip a coin or draw straws to see how many years of residency they would choose to require. They had a structured thought behind that number. It was based on something discernible and potentially applicable in real life. It was related to a possible scenario which they deliberately intended to insure would not bar a qualified candidate from serving. What is that scenario? It’s the birth of a highly qualified American citizen to American representatives living abroad.
Governments try to send their best and brightest and most capable servants to represent them in the capitols of foreign governments. There they learn the language, the people, and the systems of government and commerce — all of which is very valuable knowledge. There they have a home, a school for their children, and connections of political, social, and religious natures.
After a long number of years in one nation, they may be transferred to another nation for a fresh start. They’re in a career-long life of foreign service. Some who served as President experienced that life to a good degree.
If they serve overseas for 10-15-20 years and then retire, it would be a huge waste for them not to take advantage of all the connections that they had made and not serve as commercial representatives for companies or nations that would seek their service and advice. As lawyers they would have a double advantage in assisting clients.
Similarly, today when federal government insiders leave office they usually are hired by big firms to serve as lobbyists, and finally then they start to make the big bucks. It would have been no different in the early years of the republic. So some of them would have remained abroad all during the up-bringing of their children, and some of their children would have been born and raised abroad. The framers knew that such servants were likely to produce children who absorbed their parents values of devotion to their country and to public service. They therefore wanted such children to not be blocked from seeking to serve their country as its President.
When those children had finished four years of college in their foreign home, and reached 21 years of age, they would likely leave their overseas life and return or emigrate to their own country in order to begin to build a life. Having never been U.S. residents, their residency clock would then start ticking. Fourteen years later they would be 35 years old, -the very age at which they would become eligible to be the President. Exactly fourteen years. Coincidence? Perhaps. But that number corresponds perfectly with the scenario described above.
There’s a major implication inherent in the logic of that scenario, and that implication is that the framer’s had no intention of having place-of-birth be included in the meaning of “natural born citizen.” It would be logical to not include place-of-birth since it’s totally irrelevant to the principle of what is transferred to off-spring from parents via conception and birth.
Never in the history of life on earth has place-of-birth conveyed anything tangible to any animal or human. All nomadic tribes produce new tribe members without any ties to the land or arctic ice that they inhabit at the time when birth occurs.
Natural members of all groups are those born to members. Place-of-birth is only relevant when it’s required by human law. Such a statutory requirement produces a statutory citizenship, not natural citizenship. The Constitution requires a President to be born a natural citizen, not a statutory citizen.
The defenders of Obama’s presidential eligibility hold high the falsehood that birth in the United States confers natural citizenship when that lie has not even one leg to stand on.
The word “natural” cannot be applied to his citizenship, nor can the word “native” since he was not born to a father who was a native citizen of America. Only natives can father native children. Foreign fathers produce foreign children unless they are legal permanent residents — then they can father American born dual citizens who are naturalized at birth via the 14th Amendment.
But foreign diplomats, visitors, and students are not legal permanent residents and therefore the 14th Amendment does not apply to them. Obama’s father was incapable of producing a child with 14th Amendment statutory citizenship. Therefore his claimed birth in Hawaii has no connection to U.S. law except though his mother.
But the point that needs to be grasped is a new point. It’s that the 14 year residency requirement implies that birth in the United States is not a requisite for presidential eligibility, nor does birth in America fulfill the requirement of being a natural citizen by birth (not at birth). Therefore birth in Hawaii is irrelevant to presidential eligibility.
The framers of the Constitution didn’t intend that the foreign-born children of American representatives to be ineligible to serve their country, including as its President, -just as we’ve seen in the case of John McCain — just as was prescribed by the words added to the first naturalization act in 1790 which mandated that those born overseas to American citizens be considered to be “natural born citizens” –not simply citizens.
Obama defenders cannot point to anything in the Constitution that supports their native = natural delusion, which is more than a delusion if they are aware of the actual truth. It is then the “Big Lie” that they must continually trumpet least anyone notice that the Emperor has no eligibility clothing.
The 14 year residency requirement also applied to the generation of adult male citizens who were “ a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution,..”. They could not be eligible natural born U.S. citizens because the United States didn’t exist when they were born so an exception was made for that generation which would supply the pool of men who would become President for several decades. They were the male citizens of the 13 States who were either natural-born or were naturalized immigrants. For the immigrant citizens, the presidency was not off-limits as long as they were 35 years of age and had been present in the U.S. before or during 1775, -the year of the first armed resistance to British rule.
From 1775 to the adoption of the Constitution in 1789 and the election of the first United States President was coincidentally also 14 years.
No immigrant citizen, nor native-born citizen, nor natural citizen had a chance of being elected first President of the United States except the one indispensable man, -the only man who all would accept and want for that office, namely George Washington.
The oldest natural born citizen at that time was 13 years old, having been born in July of 1776. He would have to mature for another 22 years before he would qualify to be President.
by a.r. nash may 2012