Browsed by
Tag: Constitution

The Obama Eligibility Issue

The Obama Eligibility Issue

Sheriff Joe Arpaio
Some people think it is a distraction. Others treat it like a discussion about big foot or the lochness monster.

I’m talking about Obama’s eligibility to be President under the Constitution. Is he indeed a natural born citizen?

If those who have made an issue of this don’t believe their own concerns and are doing this as a form of harassment they have done us all a disservice. If they believe with integrity that the question of eligibility was never properly processed than I support their right to speak out and pursue answers to their concerns.

I personally have been fascinated with the whole process. Would America have the guts, would any of it’s public servants have the guts, to actually step out and speak if indeed Obama’s eligibility were indeed a problem?

One sheriff has made this a matter of investigation. His name is Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

He is having a press release tomorrow to announce the results of the investigation that he has conducted. I believe it is the first official government investigation into Obama’s eligibility to serve as President.

(Article Continued Below)

I think you can view the press conference tomorrow (March 1, 2012) at 2pm Central Standard Time here: You can also sign up at that link to have the full report emailed to you.

Here is an article about the whole thing at

Poll after poll in recent months has indicated that Americans have a high level of concern over Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president, with one poll showing fully half of the nation wants Congress to investigate the question.

But reporters for the traditional media – networks, major newspapers, major news corporations and conglomerates – mostly have giggled when talk turns to the serious question of just what the U.S. Constitution requires of presidents.

Nevertheless, media organizations from all political persuasions are seeking admittance to a news conference to be held by Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz…  

Most of the people that I have talked to about don’t even seem to know what the issue is. Friends have said “but of course he is a citizen!” That isn’t the question. The question is this: “Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?” Those are the exact conditions given by the Constitution. Attaining citizenship does not make one eligible to be president. Being a “natural born” citizen does.

I suspect that history will record that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii to one United States Citizen and that makes him a Natural Born United States Citizen. We’ll find out more tomorrow I suppose.

You can read the actual wording of the Constitution here:

Look for Article II, Section 1., Clause 4.

The Constitution does not specifically define what Natural Born Citizen means, thus the controversy.

So tell me what you think. Is Obama a Natural Born Citizen? Was he born in Hawaii? Was he born in Kenya? What about it all?

Republican Governor Vetoes Arizona Birther Bill

Republican Governor Vetoes Arizona Birther Bill


Brewer said in her veto letter that she was troubled that the bill empowered Arizona’s secretary of state to judge the qualifications of all candidates when they file to run for office.

“I do not support designating one person as the gatekeeper to the ballot for a candidate, which could lead to arbitrary or politically motivated decisions,” said Brewer, who was secretary of state until she became governor in 2009.

State Nullification

State Nullification


According to the Tenth Amendment Center, which advocates a return to the constitutionally delegated powers for the federal government, Thomas Jefferson advised, “Whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers … a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy.”

A multitude of nullification acts already are in the works across the nation on issues ranging from firearms freedom acts that reject some federal gun laws, a rejection of Washington’s mandates on cannabis laws and even Obamacare.

Center founder Michael Boldin said the idea that states would reject a Washington demand is not radical, it’s reasonable. He said what’s radical is “the idea that the federal government can be the final arbiter of the extent of its own powers.”

So… Is State Nullification the way to go to stop the increasing invasion of Federal Government Power?

Well, you’d better be ready to back that up if it comes to blows. The last time States tried to assert “State’s Rights” didn’t go so well. The Federal Government has been established by force to be sovereign over the states.

I do like the current trend, though, to tell the Federal Government to back off. We need to elect people who will back this trend up in the U.S. Congress and Senate. We need to never elect someone who will appoint “progressive” federal judges again.

We are in this situation because of the kind of people we elected.

David Barton of Wallbuilders wrote an interesting article about how State Nullification is not the way to go. You can read that article here.

What are your thoughts? Is State Nullification the way to go?