Primer C. Pagunuran – some guy from UP – wrote in ‘An Anti-Climactic Presidency‘ that:
Nothing alters the fact that as soon as votes have been counted, the Americans have spoken – catapulting to power – one Democrat Barack Obama as the 44th US president. And few more days before Obama should assume office come January 20, 2009, a looming question on whether or not he is a natural born citizen to be an eligible president is gathering adherents in the internet by every tick of the hour to the point it is seen to end in a constitutional crisis.
Three things about this seemingly inocuous statement stand out:
First, that we are so addicted to crisis that even the supposedly smart guys among us tend to quickly jump on any ‘crisis bandwagon’ even if it involves other countries. And if it happens to be a ‘constitutional crisis’ as well, oboy. Yummy.
Second, that even the supposedly smart guys among us tend to be swept up unthinkingly into the latest internet fads. I’m surprised this Primer fellow hasn’t written about how George W. is a reptilian.
And third, since he’s basing his claim on what he’s read on the intartubes, shouldn’t Primer have bothered to exit his echo chamber and see what else is on?
Apart from the fact that Federal courts in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Washington state have already rejected challenges against Obama’s citizenship, Primer may want to consider:
First, that Obama was born in Hawaii and not Kenya, as claimed by a lot of conservative bloggers – echoing the ramblings of Jerome Corsi who has “been accused by the American press “of being anti-Islamic, anti-Catholic, anti-semitic and homophobic, and of exploiting racial prejudices in an attempt to ‘scare white America.’”
Second, the the claim that for a person with mixed nationality parents have to have a parent who has been a US citizen who has resided in the US for at least 10 years, 5 of which had to have been over the age of 16, does not apply to Obama.
To clarify: the claim being circulated is that Obama’s mama was 18 when he was born. This means that although she was an American citizen who had lived in America for more than 10 years, only two of those years had been after she turned 16. Therefore, so the claim goes, Obama doesn’t meet the requirements for being considered natural born.
The thing is, that requirement only applies to people born OUTSIDE the US. And since Obama was born (1961) in Hawaii (which became a State in 1959), then he is – under the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution – definitely a natural-born citizen. This jus soli regime is, in fact, the reason why heavily pregnant women have lower chance of getting US visas than single women and why Pacquiao’s wife will be giving birth in the US altho she can very easily make it home before she’s due to pop.
Now, me, I cannot believe that Primer – apparently a lawyer – could have possibly ignored the fundamental doctrine of jus soli simply on the strength of how many people on the intartubes have parroted this ridiculous claim. This fellow can’t be that dumb or gullible, eh?
The idea that confronts every average American is the simple requirement that the truth be revealed since the issue has been thrown in the intellectual landscape. And it does not have to be mired in the realm of pure legalese as when it must compel the Supreme Court to rule over the case. In the end, the internet that is largely responsible for making sure Obama wins in this presidential election might be the same vehicle that could in fact, unmake Obama. But this is full of implications in the higher scheme of things.
Ah. There you go. The reference to Obama’s citizenship troubles is apparently a tortuous way of driving home the message that the Americans might choose not to be ‘mired in the realm of pure legalese’ in pursuit of some ‘higher truth’ that has to be revealed. In other words, let’s reduce the entire question to a yes or no proposition, without regard to how the LAW draws distinctions and qualifications. Now where have we heard that before?
So, if Primer isn’t dumb (I don’t think so) or gullible (god help him if he is), then he must think the rest of us are gullible or dumb. Or both.
That’s the way it is with people like him, see? People who seek the microphone on every issue and frame the discussion for the rest of us as loudly as they can. They trickle out the information necessary to foster a certain point of view, while ignoring all other information to the contrary. And if anyone stands up to contest them, well, often it’s too late because the die has been cast and people think that the contrarians are just covering up.
Posts like the one Primer put up on this page take advantage of the general public’s relative ignorance of the issues involved and offer up a custom made conclusion: one that supports their agenda and can be trumpeted high and low to great effect.
Caveat lector.
Popularity: 1% [?]
If 1/20/09 comes and goes with a usurper in the Whitehouse with usurper enablers in Congress and the Supreme Court … God help us because many of the people will — rightfully and under our Constitution and Declaration of Independence — endeavor forcefully to take back the Government from what is nothing less than a coup d’etat.
SCOTUS now does have the power to forestall that grim yet inevitable scenario, otherwise the blood and possible loss of our Constitutional Republic is SQUARELY ON THEIR HEADS.
THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE IS A GIANT RED HERRING!
THE ACTUAL ISSUE IS THAT OBAMA IS NOT AN ARTICLE II “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN” BECAUSE HIS DAD WAS A KENYAN/BRITISH CITIZEN WHEN BARACK WS BORN.
@Rom
thanks for writing! this topic is silly,incredible waste of time…
The funny thing is I googled his name and the previous post seem to have been recycled throughout the Net. Eh?
Why, Primer? Why?
Where are the lawyers when you need them? The issue is elementary. Anyone born within US territory is a natural born United States Citizen, even if their mother and father are Martians. This is the Principle of Jus Soli (place), as distinguished from the Principle of Jus Sanguinis (blood) which the Philippines follows. In the latter, you are a natural born citizen if either of your parents is a Filipino citizen at the time of your birth, regardless of where it happens. Persons like John McCain were born in the Panama Canal Zone (not a part of US Territory) got special treatment.
Both principles were even discussed in a spectacular SCoRP case: the citizenship case against FPJ, which was dismissed. (It was the first dirty trick of the 200 campaign).
I am myself a natural born American AND Philippine citizen, a natural born dual citizen, as the US-born children of all Filipino Green Card holders also are. Lawyers tell me that such natural born dual citizens can run for the highest offices in either country.
IF Barack actually was born in Hawaii, he is most definitely a natural born citizen of the USA, no matter what other Constitutions may claim him.
Addicted to crisis?
It’s common Schadenfreude if you ask me.
-you can’t blame this clown if he desires to express his sentiments on a different venue. meaning…his case does not stand a leg in US courts under US laws.
for us pinoy’s, we have a very comprehensive record of ‘citizenship cases’ due to the erroneous application of ‘jus soli’ which was presumed to be applicable within the jurisdiction when the PH was ceded by spain to the US in the ‘treaty of paris’.
obama is a natural born US citizen. under the doctrines of both ‘jus sanguinis’ and ‘jus soli’…except the third mode which is ‘naturalization’ since there was no record of any ascendant seeking citizenship status…
rom, i will take this guy’s word that he is from u.p but what makes you think that he is a lawyer? even non-lawyer djb knows something about the principle of “jus soli”. i venture to say that primer is interpreting “natural-born” the way the term means in the philippines, i.e., born of filipino parents, or at least, of a filipino father.
if indeed he is a lawyer, he sure gives the profession a bad name. i don’t blame djb for snickering.
the issue of Obama’s non-citizenship is never discuss in legit media anymore. i believe that the issue has been settled and Obama will take his oath of office comes january without triggering any constitutional crisis..
one was right that this issue is a recycled garbage and a wastevof digital space..
Rom, Ted, Gabby D, Brian B, DJB, Phil Manila, raj, Bencard, jcc:
Rom started a sub-column on a main one, if I may say, and then Ted and the rest registered their comments in Rom’s precious digital space.
I don’t mind Rom’s rather protectionist attitude as blogger of Filipino Voices whenever they hear another voice vents a differing worldview.
Clearly, Rom missed the whole point of my article, Anti-climactic US presidency. She created a kind of bandwagon effect when in her own article about somebody else’s article, other bloggers sided with her point of view.
One thing characterized all the patronizing bloggers of Rom – they tend to feed me with comments that are ad hominem, not really to rebut certain points raised any more than attack or kill the messenger.
One jcc even calls it recycled garbage and a waste of digital space after merely saying albeit dogmatically that the issue hinted in my article has been settled.
I will be wasting my time if I have to deal with the comments individually since nothing has really been refuted. Rom’s style of writing can really mean to simply impress readers and I will leave her article without need to comment on it. In any case, this is what the so-called blogosphere is all about.
But your post has nothing. Obama, natural-born, birth certificate locked in a vault?
Nandito pala ang mga comments. Baka naman ang natural-born para kay primer/karlpopper e yung hindi delivered by caesarian section?
karlpopper: refute Rom’s argument that Barack is natural-born citizen first before you whine about her “protectinist attitude” and her writing style. I tink you’re the one
who committed ad hominem in your comment.
karlpopper, what then is the point you are tring to make in your “article”? if you make a post here and you can’t even defend it, then i suggest you take your business somewhere else.
if showing you that your idea is wrong is “ad hominem”, then why don’t you show that it is correct? it’s about your idea. it’s not about you.
edit: trying, not “tring”.
Primer,
Hahaha! Welcome to FV. Yes it can be snarling pit of pit bulls, but I must say you could’nt have chosen a less defensible topic right now. Might’ve been better too, in this particular case, to have merely presented the matter and both sides. There are a lot of fundamental principles (the two JUS rules) relating to citizenship and eligibility to run for President that would be used to discuss now that the 2010 candidates are coming out of the starting block. Someone really needs to do a good review of the FPJ citizenship dirty tricks case from 2004.
Primer aka karlpopper:
This is one thing you ought to read…
cum grano salis
Also, please google “barack obama citizenship” and please sift through the results.
You certainly need not reply on this comment…as, I’m sure, you’ll be tied up sifting…
djb,
start one and i’l comment, I mean write a contrary view – whole piece. offhand, i hate pit bulls.
the rest of the pack,
thanks for your comments but i think that we tend to lower the bar here if we as much as allow bloggers to simply say whatever their nervous state dictates.
but then again, maybe something is culture bound.
The only one lowering the bar here is you and your fallacy. I’m not proficient in stupid but the replies have been quite self-explanatory. Have you not received my Sixth Grader-son’s reply yet?
(Now THAT is argumentum ad personam)
-from one of the pack
tonguetwisted is really one such nervous wreck even freak perhaps.
in any case, the whole issue on what the article discussed has really not been settled yet, contrary to bluff – in fairness to a whole compendium of literature on the subject found in the web.
humility is a virtue so don’t be too smart as if you were to say, i am no better than a sixth grader. what email are you talking about? just post it here for everyone else to read, don’t email me.