Replies

is a pejorative epitaph describing the tactic Obama used to circumvent the clear eligibility requirements of Article II of the Constitution. Today, even here on FR, many people think that mere birth in the US enshrines (natural born) citizenship, and therefore eligibility to hold the Office of the President. Others think mere birth to one American parent is sufficient. is the rejoinder Obama often used when answering questions about his eligibility, even though a causal reading of Article II shows that isn't enough to meet the eligibility requirements. Remembering that Article II is a restriction on the persons seeking the highest office in the land..... It..... exempts persons born before the Article was ratified from the pedigree requirement. The pedigree requirement is that the Presidential candidate must be 100% American. He must be born in the United States to American Citizen parents i.e. A Natural Born Citizen. He must have reached the maturity of at least 35 years old. He must have spent at least 14 years after reaching his majority living in the US. (21 years majority + 14 years in the US = 35 years old.) The Founding Fathers were heavily influenced by the writings of Locke, Rousseau, Aquinas, De Vattel, etc. In defining the Pedigree they used a centuries old term, Natural Born Citizen, as defined and it's importance explained in De Vattel's book "Law of Nations" published in 1757. Given their recent experience with English King George III and his mixed English/German heritage, we can see how important being without question 100% American was for them. No I'm NOT a "Birther," I'm a Constitutionalist.