Native-born Foreigners & Foreign-born Natives

(an unnatural Pina-Colada President)

The legitimacy of the Presidency of Barack Obama is dependent on whether or not he is constitutional qualified for the office.  And that depends on the meaning of two words, which are: Natural, and Native.

Two strong misconceptions surround the Constitution’s terminology of what kind of citizen is eligible to be President.  The Constitution declares; “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 the President.”

That language shows that they were describing two different but overlapping groups of American citizens.  One was the sons of the citizens of the colonies who were born onward from July of 1776.  They were the natural born citizens the United States, made up of the sons of naturalized foreigners and the sons born to the colonial natives who together were  “mass-naturalized” by the Declaration of Independence, -which turned all British-American subjects from being British to being Americans only.
Those children were natural citizens because they were born to citizens of the new nation, -they were natural Americans because they were born to Americans.
The other group was the adults and fathers who were born as native inhabitants of the British colonies, as well as all foreign men naturalized in their new American colony/state by the time of the ratification of the Constitution.

Any free white male who had come to America from a foreign land, including Great Britain, who wished to become a citizen of the state to which he emigrated, still had to undergo a naturalization procedure.
Any naturalized foreigner who had lived in America for 14 years before the adoption of the Constitution could be President if he was 35 years old.  Some of that group of foreign-born citizens had endured the hardship, danger, and sacrifices of the Revolution and proven their loyalty to their adopted country, and so were deserving of the public trust.  The honor and opportunity that they had earned was not unjustly denied to them.
But what of those born in exceptional circumstances; -what was to be their status and were they to be eligible to be the President?  The answer depends on the definitions of “natural born”, “native”, and “native-born”.

Many, including some “experts”, erroneously conflate those terms even though they actually carry separate distinct meanings.
To understand the misconceptions by which a constitutionally ineligible candidate was allowed to run for and win the presidency we must look at the meanings of those words in order to understand who is a natural American citizen.
NATIVE: -it has many descriptions, the main ones being;  Innate, belonging to a country or locality by birth, -not a foreigner or immigrant; of or characteristic of the indigenous inhabitants of a region; a person born as an indigenous inhabitant of a region, as distinguished from an outsider, invader, colonist; a permanent resident as opposed to a visitor; belonging to one’s nature or constitution, -not artificial or acquired.
Nature/ Natural: Those words are defined in the many ways with which everyone is familiar and one of them is synonymous with that which is native.
A definition not found is “native-born”.  While its meaning is rather self-evident, it’s been incorrectly conflated as synonymous with native and natural when it isn’t since its meaning, while closely related, omits one of the two main meanings of Native.  As a result, a human could fit one description but not the other, and therefore could be a native-born person who is not a native as well as a native who is not native-born.
One can be one without being the other because they convey two distinctly different meanings.  One is related to territory, geography, boundaries and borders, while the other is related to one’s nature, one’s ancestry and heritage.  An unusual hypothetical example will serve to demonstrate the difference.

Let’s assume that the native population of the wilderness of North-western Canada is Eskimo.  Across the western border is Alaska and the isolated city of Fairbanks.  A Canadian census worker is sent to record the native population in that area and she hears of an unusual occurrence.
A pair of Eskimo twin sisters were pregnant at the same time.  One had a complicated pregnancy and so she was flown across the border to the Fairbanks hospital where her child was safely delivered by an obstetrician who was also pregnant, along with her twin sister.
The doctor flew to Canada with the new mother and baby in order to deliver her twin sister’s baby also.  While there she went into pre-mature labor and gave birth herself.  Later that day she heard that her own sister also gave birth that day in Fairbanks.

So you have four babies, each with a unique birth circumstance.  From the perspective of the census worker, one is a native-born native while its cousin is a foreign-born native.  The doctor’s child, from the Canadian perspective, is a native-born foreigner, while her sister’s child is a foreign-born foreigner.
Which one is eligible to be the Chief of the Eskimos?
Answer: only the native.  Natives are Eskimos by blood and are natural members of the tribe.  One who was merely “native-born” is not eligible because being an Eskimo is not the result of artificial abstract constructs involving imaginary borders.  Instead it’s purely a result of one’s native nature, -not one’s birth location.

If a child’s parents are not natives, can the child be a native?  If a child’s father is a foreigner, can the child be a true, natural native based simply on his native-birth location?  Clearly not.  The obstetrician’s child was not an Eskimo although born in their territory.

If the doctor had been an Eskimo also, but the father, her husband, were an American, would his off-spring be a pure-blooded natural Eskimo, or something else?
Clearly, something else. That something else is known as a hybrid.  It is neither this thing nor that thing but is half-and-half.  As a result it cannot be described as either one.

If someone asks for a glass of pineapple juice, and someone else asks for a glass of coconut juice, and the two get mixed up, it will be quickly noticed because they are distinctly different.  But if someone combines both juices together what do you have?  Coconut juice, or pineapple juice?
You get neither.  The result is neither this nor that but is a hybrid mixture.  That mixture is unnatural because it wasn’t produced by nature.  It’s artificial, -it’s man-made.  It’s humans combining things of distinctly different natures.  That’s the nature of the citizenship of Barack Obama.
It is neither the natural product of this thing (Kenyan/British), nor that thing (American); instead it’s a man-made-combination hybrid of two distinctly different nationalities.  In the political realm of national membership it’s an unnatural thing and can’t produce a natural native of either nation.
Not being born in the Kenya does not result in Obama being fully non-Kenyan; -he is partially Kenya via inheriting the political heritage, -the political status of his father.  Being born within the abstract political boundaries that define the entity known as the United States does not make him a natural native of America, especially since his father was not even an American immigrant, but was merely a Visa Card student.

The only accurate way to describe and define him are as: a native-born hybrid, or, if born outside of U.S. Borders; a foreign-born foreigner.
The one way that he can’t be described is as a natural born American because his father was not a member of the American nation.
He wasn’t a citizen, and only citizens can produce natural citizens, and that is something that Barack Obama was not born as, nor can ever become.

That is why he’s an unconstitutional President operating with unconstitutional authority after being swore into office with an Oath of Allegiance to the Constitution which he took knowing full well that he was in violation of that charter on which our republic is established and which prohibits him from serving in as President.

by A.R. Nash Feb 2012


About arnash
“When you find yourself on the side of the majority, it’s time to pause and reflect.” - Mark Twain - Politicians and diapers - change 'em often, for the same reason. "Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other." Ronald Reagan "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley, Jr. “The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell The people are the masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it. Abraham Lincoln “Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell “Satan will use a lake of truth to hide a pint of poison”.

One Response to Native-born Foreigners & Foreign-born Natives

  1. arnash says:

    Nat Act 1790 …and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens:

    Nat Act 1795: Sec 3. And be it further enacted, that the children of persons duly naturalized, dwelling within the United States, and being under the age of twenty-one years, at the time of such naturalization, and the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as citizens of the United States:
    Naturalization Act 1795: “Sec 3. And be it further enacted, that the children of persons duly naturalized,…and the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, *shall be considered as citizens* of the United States:”

    “Justice Gray…concluded that the English common law jus soli rule survived the American Revolution and adoption of the Constitution.”

    It’s pretty likely that he was from a state, perhaps Virginia, which naturalized children of its immigrants at birth, making them sons of Virginia via jus soli. His mind may have been so suffused with jus soli from his whole life background that he just presumed it was the same else where.
    My sister recently handed me a fingernail clipper when I asked for one but it was curved outward instead of inward. I was astonished that such a thing existed, and she was surprised to hear that I’d never seen such a thing in my life, while she didn’t know there was any other kind! And she’s live 60 years. We presume things because of our experience or lack thereof, our assumptions coloring our conclusions. AN

    “Considered as” is directed at the persons assigned the posts of doing the considering. Every entry port officer would ask himself; “Is this person or child from abroad an American or an alien? If they are an American do I care at all what kind of citizen they are? Why should I, -ingress into the country has nothing to do with Presidential elections. I don’t care if they are a naturalized citizen or a natural born citizen. It’s all the same when it comes to being allowed in. I only care whether or not they are a citizen. Congress has told me that they are. That’s all I need to know.” And so that is all that they were told when it was rewritten. AN

    “Publius told us that it did not matter where a child was born.”

    President Madison understood the principle of natural law by which children of Englishmen, though American born, were natural born Englishmen by patrilineal descent, proven further by this:
    “…eventually declared McClure alien born. He then ruled that he became a “Citizen of the United States,” not because he was born in South Carolina…but because a few months after he was born, his British father naturalized as a “citizen of the United States.”
    He went from being a natural English born subject to being an American via derivative citizenship. Whatever the father is, so is also the son. In nature paternity is everything. Location is an element of law, not nature; -an element of legal citizenship, not natural citizenship.

    The truth about the 1790 Nat. Act: ” …and thereupon such person shall be *considered as* a Citizen of the United States. And the children of such person so naturalized,…shall also be *considered as* citizens of the United States.”
    Notice the language: “considered as citizens of the U.S.”, which means that they *ARE* citizens of the United States. Their citizenship is not a fiction of law. It is real.

    Similarly: “And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be *considered as* natural born Citizens:”
    Considered as natural born citizens meant that they in fact actually were natural born citizens, and not a fiction of law, -pseudo natural born citizens.

    There was only one reason to declare them citizens and that was as an order to all port authorities and magistrates that they were never to treat their fellow Americans as aliens.
    Bear in mind also, that foreign women who married American men could become American citizens before ever stepping foot on American soil. They would enter the country as new Americans even though they were also foreigners. Why would they be allowed in?

    Because of the authority of Congress and the declarations made either by its Act or by federal officers who controlled federal policy. Such authority was what was being exercised by those declarations.
    But in adding the words “natural born” they went a big step further, and there is no explanation on earth for having done so other than the one that I presented previously. Silence should not be misconstrued as disagreement because disagreement is impossible without an alternate explanation, and there is none.
    Congress wanted the world to know that place of birth was irrelevant as long as an American son lived in his country for 14 years. Then, if 35 years of age, he would qualify to be President. Thus the Paris-born hypothetical or real son of T. Jefferson, and the London born hypothetical or real son of J. Adams were eligible to be President just like their fathers. No real-world reason on earth could justify denying them their birthright. AN

    dick head wrote: “if an alien father was a criminal then it would be hard for me to believe the child of such aliens would automatically be granted citizenship by virtue of us birth. I am struck at how highly educated, moral, wise..the Founders were.”

    I’ll bet that no one who was illiterate would have applied for citizenship, and that it wasn’t granted to one who was. Being informed and being able to read the Constitution and the Bible are primary elements in maintaining public morality and an honest free republic, though there were probably exceptions, as well as corrupt highly literate people (Federalists who passed the Alien & Sedition Acts). AN

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 )

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: