Dave Neiwert Embarrasses Himself by Being Clueless About the Natural Born Citizen Grandfather Clause

In defending Obama’s citizenship and attempting to refute 'birthers', Neiwert suggests most founding fathers wouldn’t be eligible for the Presidency if they needed two American citizen parents, but completely ignores the grandfather clause which exempted those born before 1787 from needing two American citizen parents

by Larry Simons
November 30, 2010

Leave it to the Bill O’Reilly of the Left, Dave Neiwert to make his points by completely ignoring facts and embarrassing himself in a grand display of ignorance for thousands to see. In his latest article [from the site ironically called Crooks and Liars] titled, “Birthers' newest claim: Obama not a 'natural born citizen' because father was Kenyan UPDATED”, Neiwert discusses the matter of a “new” claim made by “birthers” [which is actually an old claim] that Barack Obama is not eligible to be President because his father was a British citizen [Kenya was under British rule in 1961, the time of Obama’s birth].

Then, in sheer hilarity, Neiwert says this:

“What's really funny about this theory is that these fetishists of all things from the Founding Fathers would thus have disqualified one of the leading founders, Thomas Jefferson, from the presidency.”

Actually, the thing that is really, really funny is the fact that Neiwert apparently has never read the actual section of the Constitution that exempts all Americans who were American citizens at the time of the adoption of the Constitution [in 1787] from needing two American citizen parents.

Article II, Section I, clause 5 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; 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.”

What is also equally rib-tickling is that after quoting attorney Mario Apuzzo, who is bringing a lawsuit against Barack Obama, as saying, “The courts and Congress have never changed the definition...the founding fathers understood that the commander-in-chief of the armed forces needed to have two American citizens as parents so that American values would be imparted to him.”, Neiwert says, “This is pretty odd reasoning. Especially when you consider that the same standard would have disqualified Thomas Jefferson -- whose mother, Jane Randolph Jefferson, was born in London, England.” Although Neiwert is correct that Thomas Jefferson’s mother was born in England, she would have become an American citizen anyway by marriage to Peter Jefferson if America had been formed at the time of her marriage in 1739.

Turns out, Jane Jefferson did not have to be an American citizen anyway, because the Constitution’s grandfather clause clearly states that all American citizens [even those not natural born] who were alive at the adoption of the Constitution are eligible for the Presidency. Two Presidents were automatically grandfathered in: Jefferson and Andrew Jackson. Four other presidents who were born after the adoption of the Constitution who some consider not to be natural born citizens are as follows:

James Buchanan ---father became American citizen upon marriage to Buchanan’s mother, Elizabeth Speer. The reason why Obama’s father cannot claim American citizenship status upon marriage to Ann Dunham is because he was a Kenyan national [therefore a British citizen] and the British Nationality Law of 1948 does NOT allow dual citizenship. He could not have enjoyed American citizenship after marriage to Ann Dunham while at the same time stayed a Kenyan national. [see Obama info below].

Chester Arthur---(1881-1885) Born: October 5, 1829 in Fairfield, Vermont. Father- William Arthur, when eighteen years of age, emigrated from Co. Antrim, Ireland. Father did not become a naturalized citizen until 14 years after Chester Arthur’s birth. Mother- Malvina Stone born April 29, 1802 in Berkshire, Franklin, Vermont. Chester Arthur born with dual citizenship of the United Kingdom and the United States. Chester Arthur lied numerous times about his past to obfuscate his ineligibility to hold Vice-Presidential and Presidential office. Burned all personal records upon his death.

Woodrow Wilson’s mother Jessie Janet Woodrow automatically became a US citizen upon her marriage to his US citizen father, Reverend Dr. Joseph Ruggles Wilson.

Herbert Hoover’s mother, Hulda Randall Minthorn, automatically gained US citizenship upon her marriage to Hoover’s father, Jesse Hoover in 1870.

Only one President [outside of Chester Arthur] has been questioned about the citizenship of his parents: Barack Obama.

Barack Hussein Obama II---(2009-) Born: August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, Hawaii. Father- Barack Obama, Sr. was born in Kanyadhiang village, Rachuonyo District, Lake Victoria, Kendu Bay, Kenya (at the time a colony of the British Empire) in 1936. Mother- Stanley Ann Dunham, later know as Ann Dunham Soetoro after divorce from Obama II’s father, was born at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas on November 29, 1942. Father was not a naturalized citizen at the time of his birth. Barack Obama II was born with dual citizenship of the United Kingdom and the United States. Possible adoption by Indonesian father coupled with continuance of Indonesian citizenship as an adult (travel to Pakistan, possible US college enrollment as a foreign student) could negate US citizenship or at least imply another dual citizenship. Circumstantial evidence exists Obama II born in Kenya and his parents later registered the birth in Hawaii. If born in Kenya, Obama II is not a US citizen at all due to 1952 statute not allowing mother to convey citizenship due to her age and time residing in United States past the age of 14.

Of all the comments posted under Neiwert’s story, only one [at the time of my writing] understood the grandfather clause while still dismissing that Obama is ineligible for the Presidency.

“dad23g” wrote:

Let's clarify a few things. While the Birther argument is preposterous, we should be clear on the facts on which the argument is based, for easier refutation. Article II of the US 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; 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.” As the Founders were Citizens at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, they were exempt from being natural born citizens to be eligible for the presidency. So arguing that the Birther theory would invalidate Jefferson's presidency gets us nowhere.

The Birther argument is that a "natural born citizen" must be born in the US of two parents who were citizens at the time of the birth. So someone born in the US, whose parents are citizens at the time of the birth, can be a "natural born citizen" (and therefore eligible for the presidency) even if one or both parents are merely citizens but not "natural born citizens." In other words, if you are born here, and both parents are naturalized citizens of foreign birth, you are eligibile for the presidency but your parents are not. So, if Obama's father was not a US citizen at the time he was born, their position is that Obama is not eligible for the presidency. Again, everyone born here whose parents were citizens but not born here are still eligible for the presidency, so arguing that those people are no longer eligible gets us nowhere.

The real refutation of the Birther argument is that the courts have held that the citizenship status of the parents is irrelevant. "Natural born" means born here. The rest is noise.

Whether “dad23g” is correct about the courts deeming citizenship of the parents irrelevant or not does not mean that the true definition of “natural born” does not mean both parents of a presidential candidate must be American citizens.

In my view, there would have been no need for the founders to include the grandfather clause, stating “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” if they simply meant that any U.S. citizen was eligible for the Presidency. They could have simply stated, “No person, except a United States citizen, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

Whether you believe that “natural born citizen” simply means being born in the United States or being born in the United States while having two American citizen parents, you must ask yourself why the founders chose not to make this a simplistic issue and state that any American-born citizen is eligible.

In any case, you have to come to the conclusion that Dave Neiwert is a lying fraud for omitting any mention of the grandfather clause and a complete moron for not comprehending the fact that two presidents are exempt from needing two American citizen parents. By leaving his story posted and unmolested, he also proves that he has no problem whatsoever with blatantly humiliating himself.

A screen shot of Neiwert’s omission of the grandfather clause, just incase he edits his story





UPDATE: I think it is noteworthy to add that Neiwert posted his story on Crooks and Liars on November 29 at 12:12 pm. When I posted my story this morning at 6:09 am, there were 103 comments posted under Neiwert's story. As I write this, it is now 5:06 pm [almost 11 hours later] and there are only 104 comments under Neiwert's story and there has been no comments posted after 8:49 am [on the 30th]. It is simply not believable that in the first 18 hours of Neiwert's story, 103 comments were posted and in the last 11 hours only 1 has been posted.

Seems either Neiwert or Crooks and Liars founder John Amato has frozen the comment thread because there have been too many people posting comments pointing out Neiwert's glaring error of not being aware of the grandfather clause that does not require Americans born before 1787 to have two American citizen parents.

Lifestyles of the Religious Nutball: Mere Mortal Actress Knows She Is Going To Heaven

Candace Cameron-Bure amazingly knows something that can only be known after death

by Larry Simons
November 23, 2010

On Thursday’s telecast of The 700 Club, former child star Candace Cameron-Bure [of Full House] revealed a shocking ability she has. Other than starring in lame TV shows and being equally lame at acting, she now has the ability to know she is going to heaven. I have proof she knows this. She simply said she knows.

In her interview with Michelle Wilson, Cameron-Bure says this:

"I loved God. I wanted to live for God, and yet I was completely living my life the way I wanted to and just using his forgiveness as a license to do that. It really woke me up. It was that moment where I needed to know that I’m going to go to heaven. How do I know that I’m not going to be left behind. I can’t just believe in Jesus but then do whatever I want, living my life however I think is right cause clearly that doesn’t work."

Of course, now that she is living for God, it can be assumed from the above quote that she now knows she is going to heaven. In other words, “living for God” and “knowing you will be in heaven" are synonymous to Cameron-Bure. I didn’t realize that all this time, all I had to do was live for God and somehow that would equip me with the supernatural ability to know that after I die, I will be in heaven.

Why can’t God give us give supernatural abilities that we could actually use? Like healing blind people, curing cancer, stopping insane dictators from wiping out millions of people or being able to stop planes from hitting skyscrapers? Nope. Not a chance. God is only interested in providing us with powers to know mundane pieces of information like we will be in heaven when we die if we “live for him”.

Watch mere mortal say she knows she will be in heaven


Attention all nutballs: Stop saying you KNOW you will be in heaven. You DON’T know. There is NO WAY to know if there even IS a heaven, let alone that you will be there. You don’t know that any more than I know that I will be kicked in the balls tomorrow by a mugger who then proceeds to steal the 5 dollars in my wallet. Stop it. Just stop it.

You can say, “I hope I will be in heaven [if there is one]”, or “I have faith in God that I will be in heaven with him [if there is one.....a God or a heaven]”. That would be fine. Stop saying you know. It pisses me off.

Cameron-Bure then says:

"I loved being on Full House," Bure tells The 700 Club. "It was an incredible experience for me. It was such a great group of people that I was working with."

Here is one of those “great people” Cameron-Bure is referring to: Bob Saget, who, incidentally is shown here singing the fine Christian tune “My Dog Licked My Balls”

47 Years Later, America’s Darkest Moment Still Covered Up by Government and Media

Jesse Ventura takes on the JFK assassination on “Conspiracy Theory”

by Larry Simons
November 22, 2010

The death of John F. Kennedy was indeed America’s darkest day. It was a horrific message that was sent to all future presidents that they will not challenge the establishment, be a threat to the banking elite, the warmongers and the fascists and truly be for the American people.

He was our last truly great president and we will never see another like him, simply because all politicians, as well as all Americans, know that the ones who really call the shots in this country will not hesitate [even in broad daylight] to obliterate anyone who is a threat to their agenda.

47 years later, the major media and government still serve as shit shovelers and gatekeepers for the bullshit official story: that one man [Lee Harvey Oswald] acted alone in killing JFK. Of course, anyone with at least one brain cell knows this is utter crapola from beginning to end.

In the latest episode of “Conspiracy Theory” [in which this case is conspiracy FACT], Jesse Ventura reveals on national television [for the first time?] that former CIA agent and White House “plumber” E. Howard Hunt [who was also involved in the Watergate break-in] gave a deathbed confession that he and several others [including CIA agents Cord Meyer and Bill Harvey, David Sanchez Morales as well as Lyndon Johnson himself] were involved in the plot to kill Kennedy. Hunt called the assassination “the big event”. Hunt revealed this to his son, Saint John Hunt.

Here is Jesse Ventura talking to Alex Jones about JFK and more.







Here are portions of the confession of E. Howard Hunt from "Coast to Coast with George Noory". Noory's guest is Saint John Hunt.

Real Truth Online Turns 5

by Larry Simons
November 5, 2010

We turn 5 today here at RTO. Thanks to all my readers these past 5 years and even thanks to all who have posted comments either supporting the site or sharing your views. Thanks also to Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber [TLNL and Socrates] for solidifying my views by still failing to debunk one thing I have written.

Remember, remember the 5th of November!

Rand Paul Promises To Challenge GOP Establishment

Both Democrats and Republicans have proved themselves to be untrustworthy, Senator tells CNN, as he indicates intention to build a Tea Party caucus

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Prison Planet.com
November 3, 2010

On the same day that he swept to victory in the Kentucky Senate race, Rand Paul immediately contradicted doubters who warned that he would compromise and begin to support neo-con political policies by promising to challenge the GOP establishment while also working to cut the bloated US defense budget.



During an election day interview with CNN, Paul said that he would work to change “the whole government” because “both Democrats and Republicans have shown themselves to be untrustworthy,” calling for a constitutional amendment to balance the budget and a sunset of “all regulations” passed by unelected bureaucrats unless they are approved by Congress.

Contradicting criticism that Paul would seek to prolong and expand US military operations abroad and that he was just another “neo-con,” the Senator to be promised to look at not just cutting the domestic budget, but also cutting waste in the military budget, which has ballooned under Obama as he continues the Bush-era occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq, while launching new drone attacks in Pakistan and Yemen.

“I do believe national defense is the most important thing the federal government does, but I do think there is waste in the military budget, and I will be one of those who will reach across the aisle to the Democrats and say ‘we will tackle waste throughout the length and breadth of the budget,” said Paul.

As we repeatedly highlighted, Paul’s neo-con rhetoric on Israel, Afghanistan and other geopolitical issues was just him playing politics in order to secure victory over Democrat Jack Conway. As soon as Paul knew he was in the clear and destined to be victorious, he immediately made it clear that expanding unconstitutional wars would not characterize his tenure as Senator.

When the host attempted to question Paul’s commitment to his values by pointing out that he embraced the support of establishment Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell, Paul said that he would challenge the GOP on a day to day basis.

Statists who helped to contrive smear after smear in an effort to derail Paul’s campaign were noticeably crestfallen when he was confirmed as the winner in Kentucky. MSNBC talking heads, including Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow, ludicrously claimed that Paul’s commitment to a balanced budget would cause a “worldwide depression,” lead to global anarchy and the collapse of governments around the planet.

Given Paul’s commitment to offering an alternative to the devastation wrought by decades of Democrat and Republican deal-making, it’s vital that Rand Paul forms a caucus of like-minded lawmakers who will pursue a plethora of neglected issues that are imperative if America is to be saved from total economic and political collapse.

Chief amongst them, ending NAFTA and GATT, reducing the trade deficit, pushing through massive tax cuts, ending Obamacare, reversals of gun control laws, securing the border, and a workable plan for stabilizing the dollar.

Indeed, during an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, Paul already indicated that he will start a Tea Party caucus. We as observers need to make sure that it includes the right people and embraces the right issues. This needs to be more than a Tea Party caucus, it needs to be a save the Republic caucus. We cannot afford to have a Newt Gingrich lead the whole thing down the rabbit hole as happened in 1994.



We firmly believe that Paul’s political capital needs to be spent by building a powerful alliance of limited government proponents, which of course would be headed up by Rand himself along with his father, Congressman Ron Paul.

Now that the Tea Party has got its foot in the door of Washington, its most successful leaders need to make it clear that the anti-big government movement will not be compromised by the establishment GOP, and will not be hijacked by Republican insiders.

Rand Paul’s promise that we will take on the establishment GOP and cut military spending is the first salvo in a war of political attrition that will define whether the Tea Party movement is infiltrated and deflated, or whether it goes on to become a truly dominant force for driving peace and prosperity in America.

Also, Ron Paul wins big in Congressional re-election!