Citizenship

Today on the Post It's 2012 at Maggie's Notebook, the following was posted as a comment by ljcarolyne:

One question a little off subject but very important to all here on Maggie’s Notebook:
Georgia citizens today delivered sworn testimony to a court that Barack Obama is slam-dunk disqualified from having his name on the 2012 presidential ballot in the state, because his father never was a U.S. Citizen, which prevents him from qualifying as a “natural-born citizen” as the U.S. Constitution requires for a president.

Can anyone answer the question of whether Obama is eligible to appeal? Or did he loose that right once he failed to appear and the court defaulted the court case? I would guess it depends on the laws in Georiga, and or if Obama a can request a contested hearing to determine if he committed an infraction. How could he say he did not show up because of his duty as president? With something like a national security issue, when he was on the tarmac in Las Vegas for his re-election campaign, when he was supposed to be in court!

An excellent question. First we must define what is a citizen and what is the difference between Naturalized, Native and Natural Born Citizen.

Naturalized Citizen: A person who immigrated to the United States legally, remained here working, living, paying taxes etc... for 5 years, didn't commit a crime, took a citizenship test and passed, took an English proficiency test (and passed), and was sworn in as a citizen.

This is John Doel of Our Big Fat Short Underbelly being sworn in:

John was originally from New Zealand and is now a very proud citizen of the United States preparing to vote for the first time in an American election. John is a Naturalized Citizen.

Native Born Citizen: Is a person who was born in the United States but one or both of his or her parents were not citizens at the time of his or her birth. My grandparents were NOT citizens when my father was born (New York City, NY 1910) he was considered by the US government as a Native Born Citizen. He was considered a citizen but his parents weren't citizens at the time of his birth. When my Aunt Marie was born, my grandparents were citizens and she was considered a

Natural Born Citizen: A person who was born in the United States and both of his or her parents are citizens. I am a Natural Born Citizen since both of my parents were citizens when I was born. Further, if a child is born to 2 American citizens (who had lived in the US for at least 14 years beforehand) and is born outside the US, he or she is considered a Natural Born Citizen.

Now for President Obama's problem:

The Constitution is very explicit on this:

Article II - The Executive Branch Note
Section 1 - The President

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 President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

A Natural Born Citizen is written, Barack Obama is a Native born citizen. Legally he can argue that idea but he has lost all credibility with the Georgia court. He was issued a subpoena from a valid of US court, higher courts ruled that he cannot ignore the subpoena, and he did not show. He had no valid reason not to show, if he had been ill, death in the family, etc...he could have been excused. But by ignoring the subpoena he has in effect committed contempt of court. The judge in this case can issue a Bench Warrant for his arrest, and/or ignore all arguments from his attorneys, or both. I have no idea if a Bench Warrant has been issue, and I don't believe he has legal representation in the court. Thus the Plaintiffs will win by default and the Judge will order the name of Barack Hussein Obama and Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. off the ballot in the State of Georgia. If this happens, other states will follow suit.

If that happens you can bet that President Obama will have his attorneys file suit in Federal Court and appeal the decision. It will be interesting to watch this unfold. Especially if many other states follow suit.

The ramifications can be far-flung. Everything from treaties he has signed, laws he has signed, appointees to the courts, etc... could be removed from the records due to Obama being declared an invalid President.

Joe Biden would become the 45th President of the United State:

Article 2 - The Executive Branch
Section 1 - The President

In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.

Why didn't he show up in court instead of shaking hands on the Tarmac in Las Vegas? You are talking about the most narcissistic President we have ever had. A man who believes the laws of the land do not apply to him. I do hope that judge issued a Bench Warrant for him. I'd love to see his face when they lead him away in handcuffs.

Honduras Defending Democracy and Constitution

by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

In researching the events taking place in Honduras, I see President Obama immediately cited the outster of President Manuel Zeyala as "not legal." Another "gird your loins" moment for the American President. The question is: was this a coup d'etat or a constitutional succession?

Roberto Micheletti

Why did the Supreme Court rule that ousted President Manuel Zelaya was subverting the rule of law in Honduras? Why did Congress rule the same?

Zelaya's term of office ends in 2010. He called for a "controversial referendum" to take place on June 28th. The referendum, if approved, would have made changes to the Honduran Constitution to allow Zelaya to run for office for another term, an action the Supreme Court says is not lawful.

While Honduran law allows for a constitutional rewrite, the power to open that door does not lie with the president. A constituent assembly can only be called through a national referendum approved by its Congress.

But Mr. Zelaya declared the vote on his own and had Mr. Chávez ship him the necessary ballots from Venezuela. The Supreme Court ruled his referendum unconstitutional, and it instructed the military not to carry out the logistics of the vote as it normally would do.

After the Supreme Court declared the referendum not lawful, Zelaya vowed to hold a vote on the referendum anyway. Zelaya dismissed "the military chief," Romeo Vasquez, who opposed Zelaya's position on the referendum. The Supreme Court asked that Vazquez be reinstated. Zelaya refused.

So on Thursday he [Zelaya] led a mob that broke into the military installation where the ballots from Venezuela were being stored and then had his supporters distribute them in defiance of the Supreme Court's order.

The attorney general had already made clear that the referendum was illegal, and he further announced that he would prosecute anyone involved in carrying it out. Yesterday, Mr. Zelaya was arrested by the military and is now in exile in Costa Rica.

The Supreme Court voted to remove Zelaya "to defend the rule of law."

The Honduran Congress later swore in its leader, Roberto Micheletti, as the new head of state after voting to remove Mr. Zelaya for "manifest irreuglar conduct" and "putting in present danger the state of the law."

Micheletti said that the orders carried out as issued by the Supreme Court and the Congress "was not a coup d'etat, but a constitutional succession."

The new government's foreign minister, Enrique Otez Colindres said the new government looks forward to meeting with OAS officials:

...so they can realize that this is a government that respects all laws and the only thing it did was to remove a president for systematically violating the constitution.

Manuel Zelaya was elected as a conservative. He has progressively moved away from that position and cemented relationships with Cuba's Castros, Venezuela's Chavez and Bolivia's Morales. As Wall Street Journal writer, O'Grady said, it is not "about left-right politics."

It is about defending the independence of institutions that keep presidents from becoming dictators.

So how do the Honduran people feel about the ouster? The Latin Business Chronicle says that Honduran business support the Supreme Court and Micheletti's new government:

It is extremely popular,” says Jacqueline Foglia Sandoval, former president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Honduras. “I don’t know of any one who isn’t celebrating."

[The attempted referendum] followed three years of Zelaya policies that were seen as arbitrary and often hurting business, Foglia Sandoval says.

Over the last three years, our ex president had created political and social chaos,” she says. “He [was] very unpredictable and many times [imposed] arbitrary actions that …affected the business climate.

The Latin Business Chronical reports that wage hikes smacked of socialism and resulted in the loss of 150,000 jobs.

[Zeyala] in December to raise the minimum wage by 60 percent despite that unions had demanded 20 to 30 percent and employers had countered with zero to 10 percent.

Not only did he exceed the union demands, but also imposed the new laws as companies already had their 2009 budgets ready, Foglia Sandoval points out. As a results some 150,000 jobs were lost during the past six months, she says.

Another concern was his talk about implementing socialism of the 21^st century, modeled on Venezuela. “People associate socialism with ration cards, with lines, with the things we do not want,” Foglia Sandoval says. “It’s a poor country, but we don’t have rationing, or lack of mobility, or have to ask permission for moving.” Further issues raised by the business community is the lack of security, which Sandoval said Zelaya completely ignored. Drug trafficking is growing and people fear for their personal safety. Foreign investment has diminished, and Zelaya's treatment of foreign oil companies was considered "hostile."

In January 2007, Zelaya announced plans to temporarily assume control of oil terminals and restrict imports of oil to one company in an effort to reduce fuel prices. However, after the US Embassy in Honduras warned that the takeover would have serious consequences, the government reversed its position on the terminals.

Fogliz Sandoval said relations with the U.S. were "worsening."

The people of Honduras are standing to protect their Constitution. This is a hallelujah moment for Democracy.

President Obama has said that the ouster of Manuel Zelaya was "not legal." Obama has said the U.S. will "stand on the side of democracy." He has said nothing about the legality of Zelaya subverting the Honduran Constitution. That is the issue. If a democratic election is held, and then the one democratically elected attempts to take over the government illegally - then why are we not talking about that?

Rudi Stettner at Rant Rave looked at the differences in Obama's handling of the Iranian election and the Honduran succession and summed it up this way:

One thing that was established in the Honduran coup. When there is a "progressive" consensus, Obama will quickly find his voice. Since Islamic radicals are the fascists that liberals love, a blind eye will be turned to their sins.