Obama Citizenship

The Rights of Citizens and the Powers of the State

By Phil

At the end of October I had written an original posting entitled, “We the People.” Among other things in that posting, I wrote about the fundamental principles of the American republic, whereby it is only the People (or the several States) that have any rights (as given to them by God, not the government), and that the government only has certain enumerated powers and authority, but no rights.

Yesterday, blogger Mario Apuzzo, Esq., wrote a phenomenal piece about how Barack Hussein Obama’s right to privacy with respect to his birth certificate is trumped by the right of the People to know who their next President is to be (excerpts below):

The whole reason the AMERICAN PUBLIC cannot get credible information as to whether Obama was born in Hawaii along with other information revealing his past experiences seems to be Obama asserting a privacy right over his personal information. This right to privacy comes from State law and maybe could also have a basis in Federal law. But how can someone running for President of the United States, a public position to say the least, have any reasonable expectation of privacy over his or her personal information regarding who he or she is or what he or she has done in the past. How could any person running for President not reasonably expect to have to satisfy the Constitutional requirement that he or she is a “natural born Citizen?” How could any such individual reasonably expect to put legal blocks up which prevent the public from learning whether he or she is in fact a “natural born Citizen?” …

The public officials who have so far managed to keep Obama’s personal information secret need to really understand the consequences of their actions. This is not some little “frivolous” political game (sour grapes, etc.) that concerned Americans are playing in wanting to know who Obama is. Other than President Chester A. Arthur, I do not know when in American history such an ongoing debate about where the President was born came up. Which leads me to the next question as to why then all the alleged “sour grapes” in this Election? Some people argue that today’s birth place issue exists simply because Obama is the first African American who stands to become President and that the losers just cannot get over having to have a “Black” President. First, McCain is “White” and the birth place issue was raised by his political opponents without much public fanfare. Also, President Arthur was “White” and the issue was also hotly contested when he ran for Vice President. Additionally, I do not believe that so many truly concerned Americans would be giving this issue so much importance simply because Obama is “Black.”

In my view, if Barack Hussein Obama were simply an American citizen, then I would fight for his right to not have his personal information divulged. In that case, nobody has an inherent right to know about his personal affairs.

However, we’re not talking about a private citizen. We are talking about someone who is on his way to officially becoming President-elect (once Congress counts and subsequently certifies the Electoral College votes). Guess what? The following trusim now applies:

The onus of eligibility is on the nominee for the office of President to show his credentials.

Granted, there is no explicit law that says, “The People have a right to any and all documentation establishing the candidate’s  eligibility for office.” However, there is also no law that says, “The People cannot ask for documentation…”

Bottom line: Just as the Greek in Matthew 7:7-8 speaks of “ask [and keep asking], seek [and keep seeking], knock [and keep knocking],” so, too, must the People do the same when it comes to holding our leaders accountable.

Remember “The Art of Conservative Political War:” the conservative activist must be consistent and persistent at all times. That’s the only way to win.

-Phil

Full post as published by The Right Side of Life on December 27, 2008 (boomark / email).