US Constitution: Irrelevant Concerning Obama?

US ConstitutionIs the US Constitution just a piece of paper with words scribbled on it, or does it have some significance to this country, let alone our government?

It is my understanding that our Supreme Court Justices, Congressional Leaders and President swear an oath upon entering their offices indicating their duty to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America.

But for the life of me, I cannot understand why when there are MAJOR questions concerning the “natural born citizenship” status of Barack Hussein Obama, (a) the mainstream media, (b) our current President, (c) our Supreme Court, and (d) our Congress are not up in arms demanding that Senator Obama prove he meets this Constitutional requirement to become President of the United States?

When Senator McCain was scrutinized during the campaign season over his citizenship status, he provided the necessary documents and was found eligible concerning that requirement, removing all doubt. However, when the issue was raised over Senator Obama’s citizenship status, his “campaign” provided a fraudulent document that proved nothing, leaving further doubt. And to this day, Senator Obama REFUSES to produce a vault copy of his birth certificate; he has had this birth certificate as well as all academic records sealed. What is he hiding?

A lawsuit was filed prior to the Democratic National Convention by an average citizen against Barack Obama and the DNC, demanding proof of his eligibility before he was technically nominated. However, both the DNC and Senator Obama would not provide a vault copy of his Birth Certificate (indicating he was a natural born citizen) and when it finally went through the judicial process in Philadelphia, the suit was dismissed and the plaintiff was denied the proof he sought because he “lacked standing”.

The big question at that point was, if a U.S. citizen lacks the “standing” to ask for proof that a candidate meets the Constitutional requirement to become President of the United States, then who does? According to the judge in that case, it was up to Congress to determine that.

What I find most boggling is that there is NO ONE in our whole body of government who has certified that Barack Obama was ever constitutionally eligible to run in the first place. All 50 states put his name on the ballot without ever certifying his citizenship status. How is that possible?

This citizen, Philip Berg, concerned that we were headed towards a Constitutional crisis, took his case to the Supreme Court. Another citizen filed a lawsuit in New Jersey concerning the “natural born citizen” clause from a different perspective; his was dismissed as well and he took it to the Supreme Court.

This second case was supposed to have been discussed today to determine whether the Supreme Court would hear it, but at the end of the day, there was no indication one way or the other whether it was considered. We’ll have to wait until next week to know for sure what’s going on with it. I believe the first case was scheduled to be discussed on Monday to see if that would be heard by the SCOTUS (Supreme Court Of The U.S.).

Meanwhile, on Monday December 8th, there’s a Press Conference being held at the National Press Club to discuss these cases with the plaintiffs as well as hearing from the author of an Open Letter to Barack Obama that was published (twice) as a full page ad earlier this week in the Chicago Tribune.

From what I understand the odds are that these cases will unlikely be heard given the path they took to get to this High Court (skipping over more local jurisdictions). However, I am hopeful that the LORD will move upon the hearts of these Justices and they will recognize the significance of this issue: that the US Constitution must be upheld, and act accordingly.

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;…” [SOURCE]

UPDATE 12/6/08 10:23 AM: It appears that the plaintiff in the second suit will not be present at the press conference on Monday. The original source where I obtained this information was mistaken.

35 thoughts on “US Constitution: Irrelevant Concerning Obama?

  1. Ted

    Seems the Supreme Court is waiting to hear from me before issuing a decision on Donofrio, so here goes: While the Court is more than loathe to enter this dispute, currently it has no choice (thanks to the audacious one — and I don’t mean Leo, I mean Barack) and the ONLY WAY to bring closure, knowing CLOSURE IS ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL before any Presidential inauguration, is to back the original intent of the Constitution, meaning, Obama is NOT an Article II “natural born citizen” (albeit Obama may or may not be a “citizen”, a question heated by the steadfast refusal of the DNC or any of the Secretaries of State to require his birth certificate, which the Court will now not have to confront).

  2. Carrie Wigal Post author

    The Donofrio case contends that Barack is not eligible because he held dual citizenship at birth. Provided he was born in Hawaii as Obama claims, he was also the son of a British subject (father was Kenyan and Kenya was under British rule at the time of Obama Jr’s birth)…this means he had dual citizenship at birth. Therefore, he is not a “natural born citizen” as defined in our Constitution.

    If Senator Obama wants to ratify the Constitution to allow dual citizenship, there is a process in place to do so. But as it stands right now, he is not qualified according to the Constitution.

    Personally, I am very curious about the “vault copy” of Senator Obama’s Birth Certificate and what it says along with all the secrecy in his academic records. I am also extremely concerned about this man being our next president and his true agenda. But at this moment in time, I’m most concerned about the patriotic duty of our government officials to uphold the Constitution.

    If our “president-elect” is indeed not a natural born citizen, then he must not take the office.

    The reason why all of this is so pertinent now is because the Electoral College is voting for the office of President this month. The Donofrio case is requesting a stay on this vote so that this issue will be heard (& resolved) by the SCOTUS and we can move forward appropriately.

    Please pray that God moves on the hearts of these judges to remain impartial to the politics surrounding this issue and stay true to the oath they swore in upholding our Constitution. May they consider hearing this case and rule as they deem fit.

  3. anon

    How would being a dual citizen not make him a natural born citizen?

    The State of Hawaii and newspapers clippings have already proved he was born in Hawaii to an American mother.

    You are nuttier than Michelle Malkin and the 911 truthers times ten.

  4. Helen Grace

    Donofrio v Wells is not just about Mr. Obama, and at no time does the case state the Mr. Obama is not a citizen. On the NJ ballot there
    were 3 candidates for president, and eligibility is the question concerning all three: Mr Calero born in Nicaragua, may be naturalized citizen and that alone should have kept off the ballot.

    McCain born in Panama and is a citizen by virtue of a Federal Statute USC 1403 (a). “Applicant notes that the Senate was negligent in failing to verify the candidates’ eligibility and by authoring a legally flawed and publicly
    deceptive Senate Resolution which attempted to confer, at least in the public eye, the idea that John McCain was a natural born citizen even though he was born in Panama. While that resolution may have looked like a law, it had no legal authority, but rather served to confuse and obfuscate the important Constitutional issue now before this Honorable Court. (See U.S. S. Res. 511, 110th Congress.)”

    In my opinion, If McCain was a “natural born” citizen why was did they bother with this resolution? I would like to know how someone can be “natural born” at the age of 72?? By its own definition the term BORN cannot be applied 72 years later. It is applicable only to the exact hour minute second that one was born. It also appears Sen. McCain had dual Nationality when he was born.

    According to Donofrio, Mr. Obama was a British Citizen and a US Citizen at birth. He had dual citizenship at BIRTH. Mr. Obama has never disputed this. Go to and scroll down to and this is wht it states. “When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children. Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”
    Once again one can not be “natural born” at the age of majority (21), which is when the citizenship expired. dual citizenship like dual nationality means that the US does not have sole jurisdiction over that individual. Dual citizenship/nationality is established at birth.

    In the entire constitution the term natural born is found only in Article II section1 which spells out the requirement to hold the office of president. The framers inserted a grandfather clause that enabled them to be eligible for the office, but anyone after the adoption of the Constitution had to be a natural born citizen.

    GET IT RIGHT, At no time does the Donofrio case state that they are not US citizens. The question is are they “natural born citizens?”
    Article II section 1 of the Constitution states
    “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”

    That is the question that is before the US Supreme Court. Will they address it? I don’t know. But in my opinion they should.

  5. Lila

    [Comment from anon:
    December 6th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
    How would being a dual citizen not make him a natural born citizen? ]

    What an idiotic comment, “anon” ! Read No. 1. above and educate yourself. You have at least half a brain or you wouldn’t be reading this blog– but then, you did post as “anonymous” didn’t you….. enough said.

  6. Carrie Wigal Post author

    Thank you, Helen for the above explanation. I hadn’t looked into the Donofrio v Wells case until this past weekend, so I wasn’t aware of all that it encompassed.

    I sure hope they address it…we shall see.

  7. Helen Grace

    As most are aware the SCOTUS denied the stay on the Donofrio matter. It appears that it was denied on a procedural matter, NOT on the merits of the case. There is another case that mirrors the same issue and includes Senator McCain. Cort Wrotnowzki v Susan Bysiewicz, Secretary Of The State Of Connecticut Docket #08A469. This case has an interesting history as when it was first filed it went to Justice Ginsberg and she immediately denied. It was refiled and it was to go to Justice Scalia. The following day Cort discovered that his filing had been sent to the Anthrax Containment Cente, imagine his shock. He was informed that it would 7 days before they would have it back. So Cort filed again. Today I learned that the case went to Justice Scalia and he distributed to the court. It is scheduled for conference on Friday 12/ 12/08. That is cutting it close a the electoral certifies votes on 12/15/08.
    Mr. Donofrio is assisting Cort with this case. Cort filed for an emergency stay and/or injunction as to the 2008 Electoral College meeting and alternatively as to Connecticut Electors. and a request that the application be treated as petition for writ of certiorari and/or mandamus and/or prohibition. We shall see what happens on Friday the 12th.

    In the course of researching for his case, Mr. Donofrio discovered proof of some historical information that had not been disclosed prior to 12/5/08. If you are interested you can go to his web site and scroll down to historical breakthrough proof Here is the URL

    The other case at the SCOTUS Berg v Obama docket# No. 08-570. Mr. Berg filed an injunction today. It is hoped that the case will be set for conference on 12/12/08. A response, from Mr. Obama, was due on 12/1/08, with 5 days added for mailing. Mr. Obama did not respond, and I have been informed by the legal community that he does not have to respond. There was also a press conference at the National Press Club. Mr. Berg attended the conference and so did Orly Taitz who is the attorney for the Keyes v Obama case. According to Mr. Berg “the conference went well.” “There were three TV cameras but it was unknown what station they were from.” There were also a few reporters. Hopefully,there will be some reports on the conference.

  8. Helen Grace

    Today the Supreme Court denied Mr. Bergs request for injunction. But they have NOT denied his case, JUST the injunction. The issue raised by Donofrio, Wrotnowski and Berg is something that will affect this country forever. The posting below is here to assist other Americans in understanding what exactly the Constitution is in a very simplified manner, and how we got to the crises we are in today.

    I see the Constitution as the rulebook for the game of politics. When a player has three strikes, and the crowd protests, does the umpire back off and let him bat again? NO. The American people are the umpires of this country. The President, Senate, and the Congress are the players. The teams are the Democrates, Republicans and others.

    These people run our country. Yet, I would bet that there are more Americans that have read the rule book for the sport they follow then there are Americans that have read the rule book that applies to the individuals that run our country, the Constitution.

    No one appears to be upset that our Senate was aware of the eligibility problem and passed SRS511, declaring Sen. McCain a “natural born citizen.”Not because it has “any legal effect,” or because it was Sen McCain. But because they knew there was an eligibility issue that applied to both candidates. If dual nationality is an exclusion so is dual citizenship. If they had not taken it upon themselves to define “natural born citizen” to benefit each of their parties, we would not have this constitutional crises today.

    SRS 511 received huge media coverage. The American public was placed on notice that the Senate was breaking the rules, and the public praised them. Horray,we get to keep our guy in the game.

    The eligibility issue is huge, no doubt. Leo, and Cort, stepped up to the plate with a very unpopular issue, and I THANK THEM. But, does it change what the Senate did?

    We continue to turn a blind eye when it comes to the Senate and the Congress. WHY? They get up in the morning with boo-boo breath, their bodily functions are the same as yours. They fart and scratch just like any other human being. They get paid to do a job.

    Once they are elected, in order to get the job, the only requirement is to swear an oath to follow the rules in the rule book ( uphold the US Constitution). I ask you, did they break the rules? Are you going to allow them to continue to break the rules with exemption from penalty? Your the Umpires.

    If the SCOTUS denies these cases, then anyone that is just a “US Citizen” can hold the office of the president. This includes naturalized citizens, because they are “US Citizens” after the process of naturalization. Think About That.

  9. Carrie Wigal Post author

    I just came across a passage in the book “The Law of Nations”, Or, “Principles of the Law of Nature” By Emer de Vattel, Joseph Chitty, Edward Duncan, published in 1867.

    It states, “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation ; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen ; for, if be is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.

    It has come to my attention that Justice Scalia cited this book in a recent opinion (DC v Heller) as a legal source. If that’s the case, does that mean the above passage legally defines what a Natural Born Citizen is, therefore winning the case that Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen (since his father was a foreignor) and therefore ineligible to be President of the U.S.?

    Leo Donofrio has more on this information at his blog.

  10. caffinequeen

    Actually Roger Calero, Socialist Workers Party (read; communists) is NOT an US citizen at all but is a permanent resident alien (which is a fancy way of saying he has a green card) so no, he is not eligible. He is also a convicted felon which also disqulifies him yet he managed to get on the ballot in 5 states and in 9 states in 2004.

    I think McCain qualifies not because of the Senate resolution but because he was born to 2 US citizens while his father was serving our country in the Navy. Although usually such a birth would have taken place at the base hospital making it technicly US soil and leaving no questions, the base hospital was not there yet and so he was born in a local Panamanian hospital. Children born on US bases to US citizens are given natural born citizen status. The only difference whit McCain was the fact his mother did not have that option as there was no hospital in operation on the new at the time base.

    Personally I don’t think anyone really knows for sure where Obama was born because of the strange laws in Hawaii regarding birth registration and documentation. I don’t care how many Obama supporters insist he was born in Hawaii until the actual long form document is presented to authorities NO ONE KNOWS FOR CERTAIN.

    But as pointed out above, even if he was born in Hawaii, that is not the only problem. The founders were very specific about the natural born thing because they wanted any and all presidents to have unquestioned and undivided loyalty to the United States and her citizens. In my opinion that makes it game, set, match. He himself has admitted dual citizenship which expired or not disqulifies him.

    We cannot pick and choose which laws we follow. We must follow them all or legislate changes. Democrats have apparently been attempting to change this requirement for years, including a Chicago Law firm with strong ties back to (guess who?), yup, Obama. I’m just shocked! Simply shocked!

    I too am praying the court will decide to hear these cases and do something about it one way or another. We deserve to kn ow our president is qualified and eligible to sit in that office and the court should not leave this cloud of doubt hanging over the country. It is not good for promoting faith or compliance in our laws.

    Great post Carrie! Keep up the good work!


  11. Helen Grace

    No disrespect to Sen McCain or Mr. Obama, or anybody who is a US Citizen BUT not a “natural born Citizen.” US citizenship is not diminished if not natural born. This requirement is ONLY for eligibility to hold the office of the president and vice president. The legal decisions made on this matter will govern future elections. I would challenge anyone to name a foreign nation that would NOT want to have that kind of control over our nation. Remember “equal under the law.” If it changes for one it changes for ALL.”

    As for military installations being US Territory, that is a widespread belief that is not true. I come from a military family, and my family continues as a military family. We have to be well versed with the State Department Foreign Affairs manual. I refer you to 7 Fam 1116.14(c). it deals with citizenship of children born within these intstallations.”US military installations abroad and US diplomatic are not part of the US…A child born on the premises of such a faccility and does NOT aquire US citizenship by reason of birth.” there are federal statutes that cover this. Many are specific to an area. The Panama Canal Zone (PMZ)where Sen. McCain was born citizenship is governed by 8USC 1043(a) it declares him a”US Citizen,”not a natural born citizen because he has dual nationality. U.S. Supreme Court has stated that… “a person may have and exercise rights of nationality in two countries and be subject to the responsibilities of both.”Kawakita v. United States, 343 U.S. 717

    This may seem unfair but any UNDOCUMENTED individual that serves in the military is awarded US Citizenship upon an honorable discharge.
    We were at peace before 9/11, many individuals from foreign nations were serving in our military, and many still do. Dual nationalities, at birth, would help create the conditions where a future
    President might take the office with a competing loyalty to another nation.

    Keep in mind that if it changes for one it changes for all, and presents a great danger to our nation in future elections. We cannot disregard that because we believe that Sen. Mcain is 100% loyal to the US. anymore then we can disregard the dual citizenship of Mr. Obama. This is not an issue that questions their loyalty to the US.

    By making this a political issue, the country is divided. Divide and conquer is not a new theory. Read any blog and you will find that the majority of discussions are focused on the politics and on the individual that ran for president.This is being propogated by both democrats and republicans. The real issue is being buried by political preferences.

    My anger, and disgust with the senate and BOTH candidates is due to the fact that there are checks and balances in our system of government. If one of the bodies of government does NOT perform their constitutional duty, our system of government FAILS. If Americans allow them to do this , with impunity, then the supreme law of the land will not be the Constitution, but whatever enhances or furthers their political party and/or their political careers. Please, give thought as to what that means to the future of this Country.

    SRS 511 has no legal standing. However, it paved the way for legal precedent to be established so the presidency and vice presidency would be open to individuals that could have competing loyalties as they would be “equal under the law.”

    I feel I must comment on “the will of the people.” The will of the people is to be observed IF it does NOT conflict with the Constitution.
    It has become, sadly, clear that a large number of Americans do not have any or very little knowledge of the structure of our government, and the reason it was structured in this manner. The will of the people is determined when they cast their vote. Their “will” is heard at the polls. I would submit to you that most do not have enough knowledge to know what erosion of the structure of our government their “will” may create. We depend on our Senate and our Congress to uphold the Constitution to prevent this from happening.

    As an aside, let me state WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY. The US is a REPUBLIC. “The will of the people” falls within the democracy process.
    Being a Republic provides a check and balance system, in that the “will of the people” is adheared too IF and only IF it does not go against our Constitution. If anyone doubts that we are a Republic, recite the pledge of allegiance, or read the Constitution.” I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands”…..

    SRS 511 makes it VERY clear that they knew that the candidates were not eligible as per Article II Section 1 of the Constitution. Otherwise there would have been no need for SRS 511. They also know that “equal under the law” means. The Senate, Sen.McCain and Mr. Obama chose to enhance or further their political party or agenda over the danger presented to our country, in future elections in that the presidency and vice presidency would be open to individuals that could have competing loyalties.

  12. Carrie Wigal Post author

    Thank you CQ for stopping by. And I appreciate your further explanation, Helen. I don’t profess to be a scholar in public policy or US Government but I’m learning.

    I wrote a post on America: Republic vs Democracy several months ago when we were hot and heavy into the Presidential Primary season. At the time I was getting very disgusted with the way the whole political process was playing out, not to mention the media coverage and political commentary. And it was quite irritating that so many folks around me were clueless about the upcoming election. (In March only the die-hard political junkies were really paying attention to what was going on in that arena.)

    I never seriously considered Senator McCain as ineligible to be president because…well, I thought it was determined by our government that he was qualified…that since he was born on a US military base (which I assumed was true, since that’s what I heard), he was considered a NBC. Also, how could he be considered a candidate during the primary season if he wasn’t eligible to hold the office. Obviously I see now that his NBC status is in question.

    Senator Obama’s eligibility question has been with me for several months due to all the secrecy surrounding his academic records and the whole “Vault Copy” of his Birth Certificate being locked up for no one to see. Now, that I’ve heard the case made by Donofrio I am absolutely convinced that Obama does not meet the NBC qualification as laid out in the Constitution.

    I look forward to hearing what the SCOTUS decides to do tomorrow. I pray they take the case.

  13. Helen Grace

    Today I lost a friend. She has been my friend for 23 years. Yet, today at lunch when,as a group, we were discussing this constitutional crises, my friend accused me of being a racist. My comments and the issues presented, during the discussion, were the same ones that I have presented on this blog. The ethnicity of the candidates has never been the issue for me.

    Yet, because the true issue is being distorted and hidden behind political preferences I have personally experienced what may be in store for many of us. Friends are being turned against each other. I was informed in, no uncertain terms, that “Mr. Obama won the election the only reason this is being challenged is because we did not want a n…… the White House.” I was told “obviously you feel that it is ok to be friends with us and work with us, but not ok for one of us to be president. You are nothing but a racist. All of you are racists.”

    After 23 years a person who knows me and should know better has been convinced by what she reads in the blogs making this a political and racial issue. My response to her and any other individual who is entertaining the idea that this issue came about due to the ethnicity of Mr. Obama is this:
    There is only one race, the HUMAN RACE. If there is any other race on our planet then by all means introduce me and the rest of this planet to them. We are all different, even identical twins have subtle differences. But the fact remains we are all of the human race. We are Americans our country is diverse and within it are many cultures and ethnicities, but it doesn’t change the fact that we are Americans.

    Americans are NOT challenging the requirements for eligibility to hold the office of the president. It is the opposite, both candidates with the help of the US Senate challenged Article II Section 1 of the Constitution. We as Americans are saying uphold our Constitution, and do not allow any party or individual to circumvent it for political gain or personal ambition. We are saying follow the supreme law of the land, our Constitution. Do not allow a president or vice president to have competing loyalties.

    There are those that question if Mr. Obama was in fact born in the US. But Mr. Obama is responsible for creating these doubts by ignoring the requests from a vast number of Americans that he clarify that issue. Hawaii allows parents,that are US Citizens, to register the birth of their children regardless of where they were born. That is why, many feel, the certification of live birth posted on his web site will not suffice. Regardless of where he was born it does not change his dual citizenship at birth.

    My anger toward the Senate, Mr. Obama and Sen.McCain is tenfold now. The fall out from this could have been avoided if they addressed the issue correctly before the election. If what happened to me is indicative of what is to come, and there is unrest in our country, the Senate, Mr. Obama and Senator McCain will have created it.

    My heart is very heavy,after 23 years of friendship I feel the loss. But this will not deter me, and it should not deter anyone that may experience the same thing. I will continue to share any knowledge I have that may help Americans to understand: what the real issue is; and what may result due to the senates and the candidates political ambition.

  14. Helen Grace

    Thank you for your post Carrie.
    The issue of Sen. McCain not being a NBC was presented to the Senate prior to the general election. Mr. Obama knew that if Sen.McCain was deemed ineligible for the office of the president. He would be found to be ineligible as well. The entire senate worked to quiet the matter and quickly. Since the resolution has no legal weight, it was designed specifically to quiet and fool the public, and it was done in record time.

    This is where it gets completely disgusting.This resolution passed with a unanimous vote. Both parties voted to pass this resolution. Neither party was willing to give up their candidate. Regardless at what was at stake. Joe Biden voted for it but attempted to cover his behind by not signing the signatory sheet.

    Not one senator stood up and objected or even suggested that they should seek direction from the SCOTUS, who would be the proper legal body to direct them and/or decide the matter. Instead they requested that the head of homeland security, Mr.Chertoff, offer his opinion as to what is a natural born citizen. He is a former federal judge(long time ago) who never had a case before dealing with this issue. Not even The SCOTUS has, previously, had this issue before them.
    They called it a judiciary committee, but the “committee” consisted of one person, Mr.Chertoff. His statement is the totality of the senate investigation. No other judges were present,and no other judicial opinions were sought. This is Chertoff’s statement, “My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen.” As a former judge he was fully aware of the precedent of law that would be set when either candidate was elected. How does that further the safety of our country?

    If you have not become nauseous yet, you will.

    Senator McCain is a military man from a career military family. He knows the family affairs manual. He knew he had dual nationality.He knew he was not eligible for the office of the president before he threw his hat in the ring. That SRS 511 carries no legal weight is not a defense. He knew that if he was elected it would set precedent for future presidential elections.

    The Congress approved the SRS511. There was no congressional discussion, no debate no questions asked. It was presented and it was approved. They knew they were opening the door to the presidency of the US to individuals with competing loyalties, and foreign ties. Yet, without hesitation they passed it.

    Because the senators of both parties knew that both the candidates
    were ineligible, and because of the action they took they must now remain silent as to Mr. Obamas dual citizenship. We cannot expect any help from them. If 4 of the justices don’t agree to hear the matter, Congress would have to challenge the election, after the electoral votes have been certified.

    Given their action on SRS 511 I don’t see any help coming from them.

    They need to know that there are going to be HUGE political consequences if they do not challenge the election. If the Congress does challenge the election, they, and the Senate should still feel the Consequences for their actions. They did not just allow this to happen they designed a way to assure it would happen. Every American citizen should be e-mailing their senator and congress person and letting them know that they will be held accountable.

  15. Carrie Wigal Post author

    I’m sorry to hear about your friend, Helen. I pray that you two will be able to reconcile over time. Hopefully she will come to realize the truth behind your convictions and see that it was not a racist sentiment you have been expressing…give it some time.

    I encourage you to continue speaking the truth in love as you are doing here and hopefully others will have their eyes/ears opened to see/hear it.

    As for the Senate decision…I’ve got to mull that over a bit. I find what you’re saying very sickening, but I’d like to look into it some more before commenting further. Thank you for sharing about it.

  16. caffinequeen

    Wow Helen that’s a lot of information! I was always told the children of US citizens born on a base were natural born. I think many people were and are under that impression but it sounds like we were wrong about that.

    I am sorry too about your friend and I know what that is like because it’s happened to me too. Not only the “racist” thing but the “sore loser” and “fake Democrat” thing as well. Actually I have decided after many. many years that I no longer want to be associated with the party that I saw act deplorably during the primaries and the general election.

    I believe now that unaffiliated or Independant is the way to go. I will no longer put up with any party telling me I have to vote any particular way nor will I be associated with people who have completely gone over the cliff into “The ends justifies the means.” land.

    I hope and pray that the court will hear the case and do something to uphold the law and the constitution that has served us so well for so long.

    Carrie I totally agree with you on the senate decision. It is disgusting to look at it from this new prospective. It certainly makes me think that this issue was known and they chose to go around it not caring about the consequences.

    Bottom line is that if the court will not hear the case and not. If anything Pelosi and the gang will change the requirements rather than risk upset. it is in the hands of the court now all we can do is hope and pray.


  17. Helen Grace

    Cort Wrotnowski’s case was denied. According to a friend that works there I understand that Scalia, Alito and Thomas wanted to hear the case. four justices have to agree, and that did not happen.

    On 12/12/08 Phil Berg filed a request for an injunction to stay electoral votes until such time that Obama proves he is qualified (eligible) to be president as a Constitutional crises is coming. He has called for Obama to withdraw his name.

    Please, write to your congress person. Ask them not to certify the election. Point out to them that if the requirement of “natural born US Citizen” is disregarded, historical/legal precedent will be set. This opens the door for individuals that may have competing loyalties to foreign countries to become eligible to hold the office of the president. We are talking about future elections and the future of our country. They are our last hope, and that is a very slim hope. I understand that Ron Paul is concerned about the situation. Perhaps you could also fax him a letter asking him to object to the certification of the election. Also our VP Dick Cheny, he is after all the president of the Senate and was not involved in the SRS 511 mess.

    If this fails our Constitution is dead. May God help us.

  18. Charles Jones

    What every Judge does not figure into this critical question is that there are classifications of Citizenship rather than a clean cut truth behind a Birth Certificate which is forged for the benefit of non-exposure of certain information while a original may not be available to document such critical data as the name of the doctor and address etc of that individual which is where judgement makes no legitimate sense, there is no Great Seal on the faked document presented by the Hawaiian Legal Statistics Government Division. Neither his mother nor his father had a Hawaiian Citizenship and his father divorced two years after they were married (Key to having a Citizenship being construed as a legal document in another nation – Kenya, Africa). His second father of Indonesia

    Classification of Citizenship:

    (1) Traditional
    (2) Honorary
    (3) Ceremonial

    Obama’s U.S. Citizenship which could have been the Traditional was forfeited when he went to a Muslim School because you cannot get into a Muslim School in Indonesia as a U.S. Citizen. This then turned the Traditional Citizenship of the U.S. into a Honorary Citizenship but he nor his mother could speak of it else they be persecuted if doing so by Muslim’s whom are militant and terrorists. The Ceremonial Citizenship is the one which he obtained when he accepted his father’s original birth place in Kenya, Africa And that is documented as a Traditional Citizenship as well but due to changes in Kenya’s procedural accounting of Citizenships that Traditional one which also liens on the American Honorary became a Ceremonial Citizenship. Obama clearly has amongst other aspects two additional Citizenships since his marriage to a Black female his daughters U.S. Citizenships which are Traditional.

    With this in mind we only see the real issue of Certification as a irresponsible way to present a truth if a truth is the facto evidence which we must have to represent a document which replaces originality. Where are Judge’s minds when this can only be the legal method of looking at a document not simply by a missed eyesight of what is really being shown on the document and it is OUT OF ORDER to represent a document without originality to support the claim of duplicate issuance, see the fact.

    Hawaii changes the border design every year, and the border shown on this certification of live birth is the border used in 2007. However, the Hawaii state seal and the stamp are from a certification of live birth issued in 2008.

    Therefore, Obama lost his Traditional Certification in Indonesia, but his ancestry in Kenya, Africa still uphold he is a Kenyan at heart and treat him as if he is a Traditional Kenyan regardless of his past because they want to Ceremonially recognize Obama as a true Kenyan.

    In Conclusion:
    See the site Barack Obama is probably not a citizen of the US [Originally Posted by zephyr Barack Obama is probably not a citizen of the US] and read the full page all about this matter and you then tell me that Obama has a right to reclaim his U.S. Citizenship formerly or not just by pulling up a issue that he cannot find a document that he believes Hawaii has which shows he was born in Hawaii and neither can they find a original and they make him a reasonable facsimile of what he instructs them so he can publish it. They then admit that it is created by them and is the truth as they know it to be, not that they have a original document which shows all the information as it is suppose to.

    “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.” (US Constitution, Article II, Section 1.)

    The other problem in this entire event is that Obama claims he is a Adopted Son in Kenya. If this then is a answer who’s baby actually is Obama. If another child came from Hawaii and was killed or otherwise died and was replaced by the mother as a adopted baby then Obama is that adopted baby and is not allowed in any legal sense of meaning to change his original place of birth from Kenya, Africa to Hawaii based on being a replacement baby of American birth to be a U.S. Citizen, he never then has been asked to do a DNA Test to attest to the claim that he is a Kenyan nor to attest he is a Hawaiian Natural born U.S. Citizen. When Judge’s claim he is and do not follow up on the attestment of a DNA Test to make a positive verification of his relatives and determine his mother and father origins they themselves are violating the U.S. Constitution when there are objections to the ways and means of which Obama is claiming to be a U.S. Citizen.

    Hey, this is not such a ancient matter, my friend also born in Hawaii on January 14, 1957 at Hickam Air Force Base, Honolulu Hawaii was leaving Hawaii on a military plane heading to the states when Obama was being born. My friend may not be so smart to keep himself up but he occasionally has a job and owns a home and feeds and cloths himself. A Judge has no right to neglect these issues boiling against Obama, DNA Testing is a necessity. There is no excuse to be ignorant of a situation which has been boasted by Barrack Obama himself, Produce Barrack Obama’s Embossed Great Seal Hawaiian Birth Certificate or face consequences of violating the U.S. Constitution – Laws of Law prevails not a Judge’s opinion of a certified copy, if it is in Microfiche it must be brought to the case and this is a issue which will not go away likened to a Illinois Governor that refuses to resign the Office of the Governor of the State of Illinois.

  19. Helen Grace

    A congressional representative that recognize that allowing individuals that are not natural born citizens place our country in danger of giving control of our country to foreign nation, is willing to challenge this election. It has been requested that we e send emails requesting that this matter be looked into by the congress. This is necessary because
    she needs to show that she has been bombarded with requests for the challenge not only by her own constituents but Americans from other states. This becomes public record. Please send an email and request she challenge this matter. The email address and the name of the representative is:

    Representative Fessler /

    Please, help. The only safeguard we have is the requirement of being a “natural born US citizen”. Setting precedent by allowing an individual with dual citizenship or dual nationality to be eligible to hold the office of the president opens a door that we will never be able to close again.
    We are not saying that Senator McCain or Mr. Obama pose a threat to our nation, but what about candidates in future elections?

    One would think that there would be a system of checks and balances to ensure that only Constitutionally-eligible candidates be placed on the ballot. However, the system has failed us as there is no such system in place. We have been deprived of a Constitutionally sanctioned presidential election. Furthermore, nobody wants to claim responsibility for the proper vetting of candidates.

    We are asking a Us Congressional Representative to honor the oath they took to uphold and protect the Constitution.

  20. Helen Grace

    This is the e mail that I sent to Representative Fessler. Feel free to copy it and send to Rep. Fessler.

    Dear Representative Fessler:

    I am a concerned American, witnessing our country enter into a Constitutional crises. Please assist me, and our country.

    The framers of our Constitution inserted a specific requirement for eligibility to hold the office of the president. This was done to safeguard our country from any form of control from a foreign country. They were ensuring that future presidents would not have competing loyalties to any foreign nation. The requirement that a person be a natural born US Citizen to be eligible to hold the office of the president was the safeguard for all future elections.

    Article II Section 1 clause 5 of our Constitution states, “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;”… it appears to me that they made a distinction between a US Citizen and natural born US Citizen. They made it clear that a US Citizen was only eligible up to the time our Constitution was adopted in 1786. Future eligibility was restricted to natural born US Citizens.
    Our Constitution does not offer a direct definition. However, in 1866John Bingham of Ohio , who is considered the father of the 14th Amendment, wrote…”every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.”

    I am not questioning Mr. Obamas or Senator McCains loyalty. This is not the last election we will ever have. What about the future candidates? We cannot just look the other way this one time, because one is a war hero and one is popular. If we do, we will set a historical/ legal precedent. Once that safeguard is removed it cannot be utilized again.

    I cannot name one foreign country that would not want to have control of our nation. If we remove this safeguard, the question is not if it will happen, but when will it happen.

    Adding to this distress is the fact that our Senate knew that there was an eligibility problem. It was first raised about Senator McCain. He was born in Panama and acquired dual nationality at birth.
    Mr. Obama, by his own admission, had dual citizenship at birth. Neither party wanted to let go of their candidates.

    The senate issued a resolution (SRS 511) on April 10, 2008 recognizing Senator McCain as “a natural born citizen.” Mr. Obama co-authored the resolution. Senator Leahy asked one question of Mr. Chertoff, a former federal judge. Did he have doubts that Senator McCain was eligible to serve as president? “My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen,” Chertoff replied. “That is mine, too,” said Senator Leahy. This resolution is not legally binding. The Senate does not have the authority to supersede or override the US Constitution. The American public was informed that there had been a senate investigation and Senator had been declared a natural born citizen. Most of the American public, assumed that the investigation had discovered he was a natural born citizen. Most were was not aware of what had actually transpired.

    The system has failed us. We have been deprived of a Constitutionally sanctioned presidential election. Furthermore, nobody wants to claim responsibility for the proper vetting of candidates. It appears that they are on the honor system. That would explain how Mr. Roger Calero, who was born in Nicaragua, got on the ballot in various states. Please, help me and all Americans with this very serious and disturbing matter.

    Thank You

  21. Helen Grace

    Here is another letter that can be copies and sent to rep. Fessler

    Dear Representative Fessler:

    We have been deprived of a Constitutionally-sanctioned presidential election. Three Constitutionally-ineligible candidates were placed on the 2008 national presidential ballot. Roger Calero a citizen of Nicaragua, Barack Obama, by his own admission, had dual citizenship at the time of his birth, and Jon McCain had dual nationality at the time of his birth.

    One would think that there would be a system of checks and balances to ensure that only Constitutionally eligible candidates be placed on the ballot. However, the system has failed us as there is no such system in place. We are now facing a Constitutional crises,

    The Senate was aware of the eligibility problem when it became an issue about Senator McCain. Neither party would give up their candidate. They chose to issue a resolution (SRS 511)which has no legal bearing. Thus, it appears this was done to fool the American public and circumvent Our Constitution.

    Senator McCain and Mr. Obama may not pose a threat to this country, but what about future candidates in future elections? What safeguard do we have that a candidate in a future election will not have competing loyalties? If we allow historical precedent to be set we will open a door that we can never close again. SRS 511 is incorrect in stating, “Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to be President;”… Our previous presidents were all born in the US and they did not have dual nationality or dual citizenship.

    Further, by stating in SRS 511 “It is interesting to note that another previous presidential candidate, George Romney, was also born outside of the United States. He was widely understood to be eligible to be President. Senator Barry Goldwater was born in a U.S territory that later became the State of Arizona so some even questioned his eligibility…” makes it evident that the system for determining eligibility to hold the office of the president is either non-existant or flawed, and has been for some time. SRS 511 states that millions of Americans who voted for these individuals could not be wrong. Voters assume that the candidates have been vetted correctly. This election and SRS 511 has proven that this is not the case.

    The framers of our Constitution did not give an ABC definition of “natural born US Citizen. However, they distinguished “US Citizen, from “natural born US Citizen in Article II Section 1 of our Constitution.
    The correspondence to the framers prior to the ratification of our Constitution in 1788, cautioned them as to the danger of allowing any individual owing allegiance to any foreign nation. (see letters from John Jay the first Chief Justice1787 and Representative John Bingham of Ohio 1866).

    Our representatives are sworn to uphold and protect the Constitution. I beg of you, to please honor that oath. Please, do not allow our country to be placed to the danger presented by eliminating the safeguard of requiring that the office of the president can only be held by a natural born US Citizen, that is to say individuals that are born to parents that are both US Citizens, born on US soil so that the US has sole jurisdiction at the time of birth. Thus, eliminating competing loyalties to a foreign country.

    Thank You

  22. Helen Grace

    Please send an email to Representative Fessler.


  23. Charles Jones

    To be adopted is not being a Natural Born Citizen of a state in America anytime. Is that what the question is?

    In referring to my previous comment: December 16th, 2008 at 9:35 am. I failed to mention that in the federal Court case of ‘BERG v. OBAMA’ that the question of adoption never was a issue and had no relevance to the issue which was only resultant of a Birth Certificate. Lawsuit against Obama dismissed from Philadelphia, Federal Pennsylvania Eastern District Court ‘Honorable R. Barclay Surrick’, Plaintiff Philip J. Berg whom has appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court.

    You can see that I have a doubt of Obama the President-elect as being a ‘Adopted Son in Kenya’. This question is as serious of moreso than a quest to oust Obama as a Non-Natural Born U.S. Citizen based on a piece of paper. In recognizing this further we should resort to how Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) does not pertain to American Citizen’s foresay but turns more toward illegal’s within our country and fake documentation. If this is true that a mother used a Hawaiian address as a legal residence for the birth of a child without regard to the actual truth that the address was a grandmother of her’s and the father a Kenyan then the question of being adopted is unfounded, there is the extension of the question of DNA if that child does not possess genes of the mother or the father and would lien moreso towards the validation that the child either is not the child born on the date shown in newspaper clips or on a birth certification of the State of Hawaii origin and indeed is not connected genetically to either parent and could be a adopted son but if that is the issue then the entire matter of legal representation by a birth certificate in the U.S. Constitution has a flaw and that flaw is not stating a adopted son of another nation. Atop this we have another document in Indonesia where it is stated Barack Obama attended a Muslim School, his other father’s legal residence was used to allow Obama admittance as a citizen of Indonesia while his first father did not leave the marriage of his mother by death but was divorced two years following the birth of Obama which was one year after marriage following their courtship at the college they both attended using the same mother’s grandmother address as a legal residence. In most states legal residence is required by law of two year residence within a state to qualify to become a college student but only one individual was a U.S. citizen and the father a Kenyan never had a U.S. citizenship at all. Atop all this we then see the adoption papers as not existent or lost and have to then decide the validity of the issue of whether Barack Obama is the real Barack Obama or a impostor whom by ways and means became the so called adopted son while in Kenya after both parents had went there and determine whom Barack Obama really is because without legal adoptive paperwork the issue of claiming a U.S. Citizenship betrays every American’s Trust esp. because Obama has entered as a candidate for President of the United States and merely asked Hawaii to back him on the issue of the claim of birth certification, that has nothing to do with Adoption Procedures.

    Why should anyone complain further about Birth Certificates, if the individual is not whom is suppose to be being represented then what we have is
    You can read ‘The Constitution of Kenya‘ it is in English. See Chapter 6 link. Here we see that this can relate to Obama’s “sense of identity” as an African-American. Later in life Obama’s sense was strengthened by Frank Marshall Davis, a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA). The Commission on Subversive Activities to the Legislature of the Territory of Hawaii identified Frank Marshall Davis as a CPUSA member belonging to a party subservient to the Soviet Union, Obama was in Hawaii from 1971-1979. Frank Marshall Davis, was Obama’s Marxist Mentor. I would also like to say that the Communist Party whether its influence was strong or weak had Charles Taylor of Liberia as a member and Rev. Pat Robertson can attest to how changed Charles Taylor was affected by his presence and the Jesus attitude he obtained yet still hiding criminal aspects within that country and others. That is where the wealth is, African diamond and lithium mines.

    Now we look at Rev Jeremiah Wright and his marriage ceremony of Barack Obama and Michelle (Oct 8th 1992), at Trinity United Church of Christ. Where was the Birth Certificate which was suppose to be a requirement and how come it simply was not a submittal in copy form to the Federal Court instead of parading the idea of Obama that of a publication facsimile copy from The Bureau of Vital Statistics at the Hawaiian Health Department that drove the issue of a Birth Certificate into the ground? I could assume that both Rev Jeremiah Wright & Obama plotted the use of the Birth Certificate and Wright took a vacation knowing Obama has a problem he did not truly have faith in but Obama did give Wright some faith and Wright returns it with, The Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Policy. I do not think I am not clear enough on this issue.

    Heritage Foundation, Paul M. Weyrich died 12-18-08

  24. Carrie Wigal Post author

    I was so distraught this past Sunday over Leo Donofrio’s reaction to the impending denial, I wrote an email to Governor Mike Huckabee…it took me a really long time to compose it. But then I didn’t send it…I wanted to wait and see how the SCOTUS would act.

    When I read Helen’s comment over which justices wanted to hear the case, I was encouraged that at least somebody was willing to take this issue on. Thank you so much, Helen for sharing that with us.

    But to be honest, this whole “natural born citizenship” eligibility issue has been the defining moment in my mind over the state of our government. If SCOTUS wasn’t willing to step in and all Conservative national media sources refused to touch this subject, I felt like all was lost; what more could I do?

    Thank you again Helen for coming back and encouraging us to write Congresswoman Fessler. I went ahead and used the email I wrote for Governor Huckabee as the skeleton and sent it a few moments ago.

    I believe writing in your own words is much more effective than using form letters, but having examples of what others wrote help tremendously when trying to construct your own letter. I encourage folks to use letters like the ones provided above as well as mine below and write something from the heart and please use intelligent argument in your persuasion. Do not resort to name-calling as it negates whatever message you are trying to convey.

    Here is what I wrote:

    Dear Representative Fessler,

    I’m very concerned for our country. I’m concerned over the state of our Constitution and the folks who have sworn an oath to uphold it. There havebeen a few cases (one in particular this past week) Wrotnowski v. the Secretary of State of CT [SOURCE] questioning the eligibility requirement in the US Constitution regarding the Natural Born Citizen clause before the SCOTUS. The case indicates that both John McCain and Barack Obama are NOT natural born citizens.

    There is a passage in the book “The Law of Nations”, Or, “Principles of the Law of Nature” By Emer de Vattel, Joseph Chitty, Edward Duncan, published in 1867.

    It states, “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation ; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen ; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”


    It has come to my attention that Justice Scalia cited this book in a recent opinion (DC v Heller) as a legal source. If that’s the case, I believe the above passage legally defines what a Natural Born Citizen is, therefore making the case that Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen (since his father was a foreigner) and therefore ineligible to be President of the U.S…of course, this would mean McCain is not eligible either since he was not born in this country.

    This is not an attack on either Senators’ patriotism…but there is a law of the land and it’s the US Constitution. It states that “Natural Born Citizen” is a presidential requirement. If we want to redefine or amend the Constitution, there is a way to do that legally. But to interpret it anyway we want or completely ignore it is wrong. By Obama’s own admission his father was not a US Citizen at the time of Barack’s birth…it’s on his own website, (scroll to the bottom of the page under the heading “”)

    My concern is that there is reason to believe that SCOTUS is closing their eyes to this issue. See: (Read the words in bold print that look like “[ed. …]”. That is written by the author of the blog, who happens to be the attorney behind the plaintiff in the above referenced court case. His name is Leo Donofrio.)

    If you read the previous posts on his blog (don’t read the one posted most recently…it’s like he fell off his rocker when he wrote that), you’ll find this man is very intelligent and explains his case very well. There are links to the two most recent court cases in the sidebar on the home page. He has been very hopeful that the SCOTUS will “do the right thing”…up until this past weekend, that is. Today, he believes without a shadow of a doubt that there is corruption in that branch of our government…at first he thought it was a rogue court clerk, but now he believes that there are orders coming down from on high doing whatever they can to make these cases disappear. I don’t know what to think.

    NOBODY in the media (not even FOX News or any of the Conservative Radio Talk Show hosts) are covering these stories…fair and balanced. Instead, any coverage that does take place just paints this case as conspiracy theory or some kind of a joke.

    I’m no history buff or lawyer, but I am an educated woman and this case has gotten my attention in a big way. A recent discovery shows that past President Chester Arthur was a usurper…his father was not a US Citizen at the time of Chester’s birth and he HID that knowledge from the public. He knew that in order to be a Natural Born Citizen it would have required having both parents be US Citizens. He lied about his family history and there is proof of it. His father’s Naturalization papers surfaced a week and a half ago and shows he became a citizen 14 years AFTER Chester was born. This information was supplied to SCOTUS on Monday of last week as a supplemental brief to this Wrotnowski case.

    I’m frustrated because all this talk about corruption in Illinois has been the focus in the media this past week…and everybody is talking about the bailouts and the economy. Meanwhile this eligibility issue is being completely ignored…by EVERYBODY in government and the media…why? It smells like there is more corruption than just what we’re seeing in Chicago politics.

    Why is it that not a single Secretary of State has been held responsible for certifying the candidates on each ballot. Why was a Senate Resolution passed earlier this year (SR 511) indicating that McCain was considered a “natural born citizen”? They arbitrarily decided this without any law backing it up. Since there was no definition in the Constitution, they took it upon themselves to define it and it passed unanimously. (Unanimously? That seems odd…don’t you think?) Why didn’t a case get made and brought to the Supreme Court to decide what “Natural Born Citizen” meant according to the Constitution back then…in APRIL?

    SCOTUS had a case before them (in DECEMBER…before the Electoral College votes) with the golden opportunity to stay the election and issue an opinion on the NBC clause, and they passed it up. They just looked the other way…at least 5 of the Justices did. I don’t understand how they can possibly look the other way. This is supposed to be their job. Will you please help do something? We are truly in a desperate state.

    Please, look into this issue for me…well, for all of us. If SCOTUS will not uphold the Constitution, turning a blind eye to a legitimate question for political reasons, then our last resort is Congress. Please don’t let politics rule out over the future of our Country. What are we without the Constitution?

    The Media is not doing their job…this issue is NEWS and it’s being distorted or swept under the rug. I understand that there is reason to believe there may be HUGE repercussions in this country should Obama not get sworn in as president, but imagine the repercussions of disregarding the US Constitution in this fashion. (What’s worse: civil unrest or a revolution?)

    This is the first time in history that a president will be sworn in who was born without both parents being US citizens at the time of his birth…except for the grandfathered-in early presidents and Chester Arthur who went to his grave knowing he was a usurper, deceiving all of America until just recently.

    Please prayerfully consider what I’m writing about. Patriots like myself who care about this country are being scoffed at as “racist” or “sore losers”, when all we’re trying to do is save our country by upholding our Constitution.

    Thank you for your time and consideration.

  25. Helen Grace

    Below is the “Senate Investigation” and the basis for Senate Resolution 511.
    I must first point out that they are incorrect in stating that Senator McCain was born in a military base, he wasn’t he was born in Colon Hospital, city of Colon, Panama. As explained in prior posts,he still would not have been a natural born citizen if had been born on a military base. They are only alluding that he was born on US Soil. NO one bothered to actually check the law on that.

    They also state”Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to be President;… This is NOT True after the adoption of the constitution.
    Most importantly is that they define “natural born US Citizen” as:
    “if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen.”

    You may want to write to your Senator and ask them: If both parents must be US Citizens to be a natural born citizen, why haven’t they challenged the election? Obama by his own admission had dual citizenship at birth.

    Both parents Us Citizens are their words. Perhaps, if they hear from sufficent numbers of the voters in their districts, their desire to keep their seats may prompt them to either challenge, or support a challenge. Please, read it for yourselves at

    U.S. SENATOR PATRICK LEAHYCONTACT: Office of Senator Leahy, 202-224-4242 VERMONT

    Senators: McCain Is A ‘Natural Born Citizen’ Senators Introduce Resolution To Make Clear Senate’s Position On Candidate’s Status WASHINGTON (Thursday, April 10, 2008) – Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) today introduced a resolution expressing the sense of the U.S. Senate that presidential candidate and current Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) is a ‘natural born Citizen,’ as specified in the Constitution and eligible to run for President. In February, The New York Times published a report calling into question the legality of McCain’s presidential run. McCain was born to American citizens stationed on an American Naval base in the Panama Canal Zone. He has since served in the U.S. Navy, and, since 1983, has served in the U.S. Congress.

    “Because he was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind that Senator McCain is a natural born citizen,” said Leahy. “I expect that this will be a unanimous resolution of the Senate.”

    “It is silly for anyone to argue that Senator McCain is not eligible to become president,” said McCaskill. “I would hope that this is something we can all agree on, for goodness sakes.”

    At a Judiciary Committee hearing on April 3, Leahy asked Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, himself a former Federal judge, if he had doubts that McCain was eligible to serve as President.

    “My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen,” Chertoff replied. “That is mine, too,” said Leahy.

    S. Res. 511

    Whereas the Constitution of the United States requires that, to be eligible for the Office of the President, a person must be a “natural born Citizen” of the United States;

    Whereas the term “natural born Citizen”, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;

    Whereas there is no evidence of the intention of the Framers or any Congress to limit the constitutional rights of children born to Americans serving in the military nor to prevent those children from serving as their country’s President;

    Whereas such limitations would be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the “natural born Citizen” clause of the Constitution of the United States, as evidenced by the First Congress’s own statute defining the term “natural born Citizen”;

    Whereas the well-being of all citizens of the United States is preserved and enhanced by the men and women who are assigned to serve our country outside of our national borders;

    Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to be President; and

    Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a “natural born Citizen” under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.


  26. Carrie Wigal Post author

    Thank you again, Helen. I wrote my Senator (Jim Webb) this evening and just sent the email. Here is what I wrote:

    Dear Senator,

    It has just recently come to my attention what you and your colleagues did in passing Senate Resolution 511 resolving that John Sidney McCain, III is a “natural born citizen” under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution of the US. Clearly there was a concern over the Constitutional eligibility requirement for the Presidential office, when this resolution was introduced. The Senate believed there was a need to pass this resolution quickly and in a bi-partisan manner, and they did so unanimously.

    In this resolution Senator McCain was deemed a “natural born citizen” because he “was born to American citizens on an American military base…”. My question is what about Senator Obama? By his own admission his father was not an American citizen…he was a Kenyan in America on a student visa. Based on the resolution that was made concerning the Constitutional term “natural born citizen”, it appears that Senator Obama does not meet the same basic criteria…being “born to American citizens”.

    Senator Leahy heavily relied on the fact that both of Senator McCain’s parents were US Citizens, contributing to the definition of the term “natural born citizen”. In fact Michael Chertoff, a former Federal judge indicated, “my assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen.” In light of these arguments and the Senate Resolution passed unanimously earlier this year, I urge you to challenge the electoral vote concerning Senator Obama’s eligibility as he is clearly not a “natural born citizen” having been born to a foreigner.

    By your speedy bi-partisan effort to resolve the citizenship status of Senator McCain, I believe you understand the urgency and importance of this Constitutional eligibility issue concerning Senator Obama. Thank you for acting on behalf of this great nation by upholding her Constitution in a bi-partisan manner back in April and again now. I look forward to your response.

    Carrie Wigal

    My other Senator (John Warner) is retiring in January and has left no way to contact him via email.

    I encourage others to contact their Senators as well asking they challenge the electoral vote. The fact that they publicly saw fit to address this Constitutional requirement earlier this year indicates to me that it would be perfectly reasonable to expect them to address it again NOW (before inauguration day) when it is clear that the other candidate who has been voted in does not meet this specific requirement.

    While it is late in the game, it is not too late. While there will likely be horrible consequences by having such a turn of events take place, the consequences of turning a blind eye to this Constitutional dilemma would be far worse.

  27. Helen Grace

    Thank you Carrie. May I borrow phrases from your letter to assist others who have asked help composing their letters?

  28. Carrie Wigal Post author

    Yes, Helen, you may…I shared the letter with the intent of giving folks an idea of the points I covered when contacting my Senator.

    I also just sent an email to Joe Scarborough as well. I don’t know if he’ll do anything about it, but I contacted him. And I contacted Governor Mike Huckabee earlier this week as well. He has a show on Fox News now called Huckabee. Consider writing him as well at either or

    And don’t forget to pray to God!

  29. Helen Grace

    I have not posted for some time as my email was hijacked. BUT I have not stopped fighting for our Constitution.

    A NEW case has been filed now that we are out of the political arena and in the legal arena. The attorney has issued an appeal to all citizens that wrote to their representatives to, please, supply him with a copy of the responses from their representatives, if they received a response. Posted below is the email address and his website. You may want to email him and find out if he wants you to mail, fax, or attach to email. I have not posted his personal info as I have not requested his permission to do so. Thank you for your help and God bless you all. his website is His case is summarized below.

    Kerchner v. Obama: Complaint, Petition Filed in NJ Federal District Court
    Thu, Jan 22, 2009

    Mario Apuzzo, a New Jersey attorney, filed a case early Tuesday morning, a Complaint for Emergency Injunction, Declaratory Relief, Mandamus, and Petition for Quo Warranto:

    On early Tuesday morning, January 20, 2009, at about 3:00 a.m., I filed a Complaint for Emergency Injunction, Declaratory Relief, Mandamus, and Petition for Quo Warranto on behalf of my clients, Mr. Kerchner, Mr. Patterson, Mr. LeNormand, and Mr. Nelsen, against defendants, Barack Hussein Obama II, United States of America, United States Congress, United States Senate, United States House of Representatives, Richard B. Cheney, and Nancy Pelosi. I filed the complaint in the Federal District Court of New Jersey and is now pending in Camden. It bears Civil Action No. 1:09-cv-00253. The complaint seeks to learn the truth about whether Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen” and eligible to be President and Commander in Chief. On January 21, 2009, I filed an Amended Complaint for Emergency Injunction, Declaratory Relief, Mandamus, and Petition for Quo Warranto. The Complaint and the Amended Complaint can be accessed and viewed at the District Court of New Jersey and Pacer web site. I will also be uploading a copy of the documents at this blog site as soon as possible so that they may be more easily viewed.

  30. Helen Grace

    Oklahoma Representative Mike Ritze is presenting a bill to ensure that all candidates meet the eligibility requirements before being placed on the ballot. It is my hope the bill will pass and that other states will follow suit. However, it does need a bit of amending, in the wording. I have written a letter and I am, humbly asking that you please support me and copy and send the letter to Rep. Ritze or write your own letter and send it to him. Thank you any and all help is appreciated.

    Representative Mike Ritze

    2300 N. Lincoln Blvd.
    Room 327
    Oklahoma City, OK 73105

    Re: HB 1329

    Dear Representative Ritze:

    I have had the opportunity to review HB 1329. It has 3 requirements: the birth certificate (1. Must be state government issued. (2. Have a raised seal (3. Must come directly from the issuing agency.

    I humbly suggest that HB 1329 be amended to add the word(s) vault or long form and to read: A state government issued vault/ long form birth certificate. At present it reads “A state government issued birth certificate.”…This omission of wording could result in having individuals on the ballot that do not meet the eligibility requirements, but have met the legal requirements of HB 1329.

    The copy of a vault birth certificate has the individuals’ information and also where their parents’ were born, and has a raised seal. Meeting all of HB 1329 requirements and supplying the information necessary to ascertain if the eligibility requirements for federal office, including the presidency, have been met, prior to placing them on the ballot.

    An abstract, which is considered a copy of a birth certificate, lists the date and place of birth, and only the parents’ names and it has a raised seal. When submitted by the issuing agency in the state government the abstract meets the requirements set forth in HB 1329.

    For example, an individual born in the US where both parents are citizens of a foreign country, and the abstract is submitted by the state government agency. His/ her abstract will meet the requirements set forth in HB 1329, and he/she will be placed on the ballot. Yet, that individual does not meet the eligibility requirements to hold the office of the president, and may not be eligible for a seat in the US Senate and perhaps other governmental offices.

    Kindest Regards
    your name


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *