Natural Born Citizen — The Four Cases

The Obama File

Many citizens of this country fail to meet the “natural born citizen” classification and yet have no divided loyalties.  At no fault of their own, they are disqualified from pursuing the position of President of the United States of America.

Loyalty lies within men’s hearts and minds and not their birth circumstances.  One’s birth circumstances could have the possibility of, but not a guarantee of, promoting divided loyalties and that is the reason for the “natural born citizen” clause/language within our constitution.

There are many that will argue the logic, because to them it will seem unfair.  Maybe it is unfair, but that is what the constitutional amendment process is for.  Personally, I don’t think it’s unfair, because the “natural born citizen” language was wisely and intentionally installed in the U. S. Constitution as a national security measure or safeguard.  It was put there to protect our country from a Commander in Chief with divided loyalties.  This is the exact situation that we find ourselves in now as Barack Obama has, on more than one occasion, proclaimed that he is a “citizen of the world.”  That is how he sees himself.

Read “natural born” citizen, the four cases:  Reagan, Obama, McCain, and Schwarzenegger here .

Where is Obama’s Nobel Prize money?

Washington Examiner

There’s some buzz going around the net over the question of what President Obama has done with the $1.4 million he won as part of the Nobel Peace Prize. Well before Obama accepted the award, the White House announced he would give the money to charity. Yet it’s been two months since the president went to Oslo, and there’s no word of him giving it away.

Some commentators have speculated that Obama is hanging on to it himself. But the White House says the president hasn’t yet received the money, so it follows that he hasn’t yet given it away. “I know they continue to talk about it,” spokesman Robert Gibbs said at a January 19 briefing. “I think he has not received any money yet. But as soon as they — as he makes those donations, we will let you guys know.”

The situation seems a little odd. If you win the Nobel Prize, don’t they just give you the money? Why doesn’t Obama have it yet? It turns out there’s a reason.

“He hasn’t received it because they haven’t asked to have it transferred,” says Geir Lundestad, director of the Norwegian Nobel Institute. “It is up to the laureate to decide. My understanding is that they are looking into certain legal questions, and once those legal questions are settled, it will be done…once they ask for it, the money will be transferred immediately.”

Prize winners can have the money without delay, but Lundestad says it is not unheard of for a laureate to leave the cash with the Nobel Foundation for some period of time after winning. “The most difficult cases are with laureates who are in prison,” he says. And there is no time limit for Obama to receive the money. So for the moment, the money remains deposited with the Nobel Foundation in Stockholm. “The money is in the bank,” Lundestad says. “We are leaving this entirely to the White House.”

To some in the White House, and to many of the president’s supporters, the Nobel was almost an embarrassment, the symbol of the too-much-praise that has been heaped on Obama in the last couple of years. In an effort to de-emphasize the whole thing, Obama made short work of his trip to Oslo to receive the award. And now, it appears he’s in no hurry to deal with the money he won, either.

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

Mail Online

The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.

Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers.

Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.

The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory.

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

The admissions will be seized on by sceptics as fresh evidence that there are serious flaws at the heart of the science of climate change and the orthodoxy that recent rises in temperature are largely man-made.

Professor Jones has been in the spotlight since he stepped down as director of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit after the leaking of emails that sceptics claim show scientists were manipulating data.

The raw data, collected from hundreds of weather stations around the world and analysed by his unit, has been used for years to bolster efforts by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to press governments to cut carbon dioxide emissions.

Obama’s misleading jobs rhetoric

Washington Examiner

February 16, 2010

There he goes again. In the latest Economic Report of the President, Obama repeats his claim that the $787 billion economic stimulus program “has saved or created roughly two million jobs so far.” Administration officials stopped saying that last year after journalists and think tankers across the political spectrum examined the supporting data posted on the official Web site and found it full of factual holes.

Thousands of jobs were claimed to have been saved or created in phantom congressional districts and ZIP codes. Thousands of raises given to public employees were counted as jobs saved or created. The Examiner‘s David Freddoso and Mark Hemingway examined media investigations and found nearly 100,000 phony positions. In other words, the claim that 2 million jobs were saved or created by the Obama economic stimulus program was exposed as being about as trustworthy as the used car salesman’s assurance that the clunker on his lot was owned by a little old lady who only drove it to church on Sunday.

The fiasco prompted Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag to issue new “simplified guidelines” for how to measure the effect of the stimulus program on employment. But, as Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., wrote in a Jan. 8 letter to’s inspector general, the new guidelines actually raised additional credibility questions about White House assertions on the stimulus program’s effectiveness.

Said Issa: “The new guidance counts every job that is funded using stimulus money — even if it existed before the Recovery Act, and was not in any danger of being eliminated — as ‘created or saved.’ This definition ignores the plain meanings of the words ‘created’ and ‘saved,’ and makes’s ‘JOBS CREATED/SAVED’ label a falsehood, further eroding the confidence of the American people in their government.”

Some of the president’s closest economic advisers also made some startling claims in connection with the new Economic Report. Council of Economic Advisers chairwoman Christina Romer, for example, said the economic stimulus program saved millions of Americans from “destitution.” The dictionary defines destitution as “utter poverty” and the “lack of the means of subsistence.” Who could have imagined that wasting money on fake jobs would yield such miraculous results?