Replies

“You cannot be both a NBC and a foreigner simultaneously. A man cannot serve two masters.”

Surely you are not suggesting Obama has any loyalty to the British government...Saudi, maybe, but that is a religious thing. Not the Brits.

If Russia (or the British, or anyone else) declared me a citizen, that would NOT give me divided loyalties. NBC has legal meanings that would have carried over from natural born subject, and the ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark discusses those:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZO.html

Surely you are not suggesting Obama has any loyalty to the British government...

From the UK Telegraph:

Barack Obama’s top 10 insults against Britain

One of the first things he did was send the bust of Winston Churchill back to Britain.

From a senior US State Department official:

“There’s nothing special about Britain. You’re just the same as the other 190 countries in the world. You shouldn’t expect special treatment.”

And after his constant attacks on BP, the UK pensioners who depend on the health of BP stocks are none too happy with our "boot on their throat" President. Obama has made it clear, by his actions and words, that he has no allegiance to the crown. Quite the contrary.

Politically speaking, this divided loyalty argument is silly, and demonstrably false.

No, I think we all know that Obama is not much of a friend to the British. Loyalty to Kenya, might be a bigger problem than loyalty to the UK because of his family/legal citizenship connections to that nation through his father. I think that we can all probably say that Obama thinks of himself more as a "Globalist" than an "American" anyway. So even without the dual citizenship problem their would be problems that the NBC clause can't protect us from.

The main thing that the NBC clause is trying to prevent is divided loyalties OR the ability of another country to exert undue influence over the POTUS. This can happen both through voluntary allegiance owed by POTUS to a foreign power or through the ability of a foreign government to use coercion against the POTUS by threatening his non US relatives, or even using the POTUS's non-US citizen relatives to influence him to act contrary to the US's best interests. So you see, its not just the possibility of voluntary allegiance that is a problem, its the possibility for foreign powers to coerce POTUS if he still has blood connections still resident in a foreign nation that is a problem.

So if a country to whom you have no blood connection, such as Russia grants you citizenship that you have not solicited, then that is less problematic because you have no real connection to the country. However, if you have kin in that country, it is definitely a potential problem. The Founding Father's wanted to minimize the risk of this danger.