Is Barack Really “Slick Barry”?

Via Ann Althouse, we learn that Senator Obama will graciously co-sponsor a bill recognizing John McCain, born in the Canal Zone while his father served there in the Navy, as Constitutionally eligible to be President. Professor Althouse thinks little of this gesture, giving him backhanded credit for having “found the only possible low ground and made it look like high ground”. I won’t comment on whether that step was clever or too clever by half. What’s more significant is that it was taken by a man who frequently boasts of having taught Constitutional law at the University of Chicago. Obama the legislator has evidently forgotten some of the elementary points that Obama the teacher ought to have imparted.

The Constitution requires the President to be a “natural born citizen of the United States”, for reasons stemming from European history:

But the general propriety of the exclusion of foreigners, in common cases, will scarcely be doubted by any sound statesman. It cuts off all chances for ambitious foreigners, who might otherwise be intriguing for the office; and interposes a barrier against those corrupt interferences of foreign governments in executive elections, which have inflicted the most serious evils upon the elective monarchies of Europe. Germany, Poland, and even the pontificate of Rome, are sad, but instructive examples of the enduring mischiefs arising from this source. [Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, cap. XXXVI, §1473 (1833)]

The First Congress, in the first law that it enacted concerning citizenship, declared that “the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens”, with the proviso that their fathers must have resided in the United States at some point. I Stat. 104 (1790). That is the closest that we have to a contemporary construction of the phrase “natural born citizen”. Since it is far from definitive, an ivory tower debate has jogged along for decades over whether persons born outside any state (that is, not citizens iure soli at common law) might be ineligible for the Presidency. Whenever the issue approaches being serious, the debate vanishes. No one except a few nutcases contended that Barry Goldwater (born in pre-statehood Arizona) or George Romney (born in Mexico) could not lawfully run for President.

Any ordinary lawyer – me, for instance – either knows these non-recondite facts or can dredge them up within minutes. Moreover, lawyers know that, if the Constitution really did limit the Presidency to citizens born on American soil, Congress couldn’t enact a law to make Senator McCain eligible, any more than it could do so for Arnold Schwarzenegger or Jennifer Grantholm or Margaret Thatcher. Either Barack Obama is incompetent at his profession, or he is ignoring what he knows about the law in order to gin up a phony cloud over his probable opponent. (What would you think if Senator McCain sponsored a joint resolution declaring that Senator Obama is not a Moslem? That he was being gracious and high-minded?)

This episode jibes all too well with a couple of others. First there was Senator Obama’s claim that American troops are so ill-supplied that they often must rely on captured enemy weapons, which was a blatant distortion of a less momentous and long out-of-date complaint that his staff had heard from an Army officer.

Then there is the reported attempt by his top economic advisor to reassure Canadian officials that candidate Obama’s demand for renegotiation of NAFTA was just cynical campaign rhetoric. Although Senator Obama flatly denies the report, neither the advisor nor the alleged Canadian interlocutor will go so far. There can’t be much real doubt that the conversation did occur or that it shows, at the very least, that someone who consults with the Senator regularly just assumes that he is two-faced on trade issues.

Bill Clinton and Barack Obama don’t look much alike, but maybe they have more in common that we thought.

Addendum: Life is strange. I came back from an afternoon walk to find I’d been Instalanched. My thanks to Professor Reynolds, and welcome to all (except maybe the fellow in the comments who thinks that Dick Cheney and GE are behind the Obama campaign).

Update (3/2/08): Very disturbing – both Clintonesque and clumsy – is an instance, highlighted by David Bernstein, where Senator Obama “lies pretty blatantly” about honors paid by his church to Louis Farrakhan:

I just caught the transcript of Obama’s meeting with Jewish community leaders in Cleveland last week. Unfortunately, Obama lies pretty blatantly, to wit (referring to the award his church’s magazine gave to Farrakhan): “An award was given to Farrakhan for his work on behalf of ex-offenders completely unrelated to his controversial statements.” As I’ve noted before, the honor for Farrakhan was for his dedication to “truth,” with no mention of ex-offenders. . . . Obama thus avoided addressing the real concern, which is that his church’s magazine and his spiritual mentor state that they honoring and praising Farrakhan precisely because of his stated political and racial views, which they claim are “honest” and reflect “truth.”

Comments

[Figueroa Slim]

Check out the facts - this Manchurian Candidate needs to be exposed.

Barack Obama - Slick Barry - SlickBarry.com

[ken harkins]

elme--why don't you become part of the modern world. You can buy stock in these big companies for as little as $50 a month. You don't have to be poor if you don't want to be. I am an ordinary person, a school teacher. I own stock in Exxon-Mobile, Chevron-Texaco, Duke Energy, Progress Energy, Home Depot, IBM, Bank of America, Ford Motor Co, and others. I did it by using their dividend reinvestment programs. I use the proceeds to contribute to Christian Children's fund and other worthy causes. I say stop complaining and start doing.

[FredC]

Amazing! "a Affirmative Action derived Constitutional Law Professor" graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School.

It is not exactly a surprise that the person making this claim doesn't know enough to use pronouns correctly.

[Dave Hardy]

Prof James Lindgren has an interesting post on this over at Volokh.com. He found that "natural-born citizen" had an accepted meaning in 18th century British law. It covered any citizen who received citizenship by birth, with Blackstone specifically noted that it covered children of displomats, who were born overseas. So McCain would be a "natural born citizen" wherever he was born.

I did some research into the question of why the Framers would have wanted to rule out naturalized citizens. I think it was a concern that they wouldn't know enough of the country. Naturalization didn't have the many hurdles that it does today. The Naturalization Act of 1790 provided that any adult, resident in the US for two years, could make a motion to be naturalized by a State court (States handled naturalization until 1906). No tests, nothing but two years' residence. And if a husband/father got naturalized, his wife/children under 21) automatically got naturalized at the same time. I assume State procedures before the Constitution were along these lines. The Framers were concerned about presidential candidates who might only have lived here a few years.

[Roamin Catholic]

elme,

There is a "garbage disposer" for Radioactive Nuke Waste - it's called a breeder reactor. France has them; the Russians have them, we don't have them thank to an executive order by Jimmy Carter.

BTW, Al Gore considers buying stock in GE a "carbon offset".

[elme]

Sorry about that, I just found my meds and am taking them NOW.

[Mike G in Corvallis]

Elme, perhaps this is "The REAL NEWS" ... but wouldn't you be better off ranting about this on a blog of your own, rather than attempting to hijack a thread on someone else's blog?

And here's a clue for you: lots of CAPITAL LETTERS do not NECESSARILY indicate a PERSUASIVE line of REASONING.

[sam]

If Obama really is pro-nuclear it will be the first good thing I've heard about him.

[Major Hughes]

Barak Obama was a Affirmative Action derived Constitutional Law Professor.

So, yes, Barak probably did think his bill would "legalize" McCain.

[Matt]

Nice post, as for the wackjob in the comments, TLDNR...

[elme]

The REAL NEWS is about Cheney's latest Greedy SCAM:

Obama is the pre-packaged "New & Improved Chocolate Flavor" Presidential candidate PRODUCT - being hyped & PUSHED by GE and its WHOLLY-Owned subsidiaries NBC & MSNBC...along with Westinghouse & its subsidiary CBS...while slamming the Clintons all day every day. (Assisted by...CNN/FOX/ and a lot of newspaper & radio media dependent on advertising$$.)

GE is the 2nd largest corporation on the planet.

Obama is IN with the Nuclear Industry: Excelon Corp of Illinois has been one of his largest contributors from his entry into politics to the present. Excelon is the largest nuke operator on the planet;owns Con-Ed of NY; more nukes in Illinois than any other state.

GE, Westinghouse, Excelon & 3 consortiums of other companies are planning to build 29 new nuclear power plants. Their Wholly-Owned & Wholly Influenced "News" media are selling the Obama Product because Obama is in favor of Nukes.

In 2005 Obama Voted FOR the Cheney Energy Bill (H.R.6) which ENABLED the nuke industry to make its Plans to build 29 new nukes-by Guaranteeing Taxpayer Payback of any nuke loans that default. (No nukes were built for the past 30 years because the banks wouldn't loan the money - too risky)

Obama Voted FOR the Cheney Energy Bill-despite the fact the Congressional Budget Office rated the risk of default on the nuke loans at 50% or greater. (Does that sound like...GOOD...JUDGMENT to You?)

[NY Times has several articles about the nuke plans & a map showing all 29 locations; Wikipedia covers the subject]

Clinton Voed AGAINST the Cheney Energy Bill and said her Energy Plan does not include nuclear.

? "Its about the FUTURE...Turn The PAGE" ?

Nope. ts about Turning the PAGE BACK to the PAST: Obsloete 50 yr old nuke power plants-the dirtiest most expensive kind/centrally-controlled MONOPOLY POWER-instead of inventing New, Clean, Green De-Centralized inexpensive Energy.

An ad campaign has already begun on the TV media to re-package & re-name nuclear power plants as: GREEN & CLEAN -for-everybody too young to remember the 1970's anti-nuke movement and all the Bad News about nuclear energy.

Don't be taken in by the ad campaigns-Google:'nuclear waste dumps' & read about the hundreds of BILLIONS of gallons of nuke waste at the Hanford Washington dump; 140 tons of plutonium stored at Rocky Flats, Colorado; Barnwell, South Carolina; leaking into groundwater and rivers; plutonium released into the air around Denver from 500 instances of fires at Rocky Flats; stored on-site at every nuke reactor in America...presenting hundreds of potential "dirty bomb" targets for terrorists.

Is it true that Obama takes No Contributions/NO MONEY from Registered Federal Lobbyists?

Yes. It's a LawyerSpeak/Trick of: Speaking a Small truth covering up a Big Lie.

Nope, doesn't take money from REGISTERED FEDERAL Lobbyists.

DOES take money from STATE Lobbyists, Not Registered Lobbyists, AND the wives, husbands, law partners, aunts, uncles cousins...of Registered Federal Lobbyists. Gets money from the same big corporate donors as any other candidate.

Obama's campaign finances are involved in the prosecution (by Patrick Fitzgerald)and trial of his friend of 20 years Antoin Rezko. Some of the funds... allegedly...extorted by Rezko went into Obama's campaign coffers. Curiously, Iraqi Power Plants amd fraud are also involved in Rezko's trial. (Google: Obama -Rezko- Alsammarae-Auichi- IRAQ POWER PLANTS)

GE & the same wealthy people who sold the "new & improved vanilla flavor" Presidential PRODUCTS: Reagan & Bush/s 1 & 2 - are behind the massive ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN to sell you OBAMA.

At the beginning of this campaign season a large majority of voters were looking forward to electing Clinton. Then Obama stepped in and started the dirty campaigning that has created the DIVISION he so hypocritically decries. Obama played "the race card" so he could win in South Carolina. He was caught red-handed playing that race card-but the media blamed it on Clinton-even though they all knew they were pushing the Big Lie.

With nearly ALL "the mainstream media" pimping for Obama & slamming, smearing, and lying about the Clintons-it is truly amazing enough voters have seen thru the Media-Created Obama "movement"-for Clinton to STILL be in the race.

The only way a very small minority can CONTROL a very large Majority is: DIVIDE & CONQUER-Exactly the same Republican Strategy/Deception they have successfully pulled for most of the last century And ALL of this century, so far. . .

GE, the nuke industry/wealthy have hedged their bets & they will get Billions of your money via 29 new nukes IF either Obama or McCain is elected President.

Ladies & Gentlemen, Dads & Moms buy nothing GE & Westinghouse are selling - not Obama, not a washing machine, a dishwasher, 29 nuke power plants, or a garbage disposer .... because there is no garbage disposer for Radioactive Nuke Waste. Do not allow them to poison the earth and your children anymore.