Senator Marco Rubio, please stand up!

By J.B. Williams
January 20, 2013

If so-called “constitutionalists” were better acquainted with the Constitution (Charters of Freedom), they
would not be supporting Marco Rubio for an office he is not eligible to hold and they would have already removed Barack Hussein Obama from the office he currently holds fraudulently. Marco Rubio is in the unique position to solve our nation’s greatest problem, to remove a foreign agent currently assaulting America from within the Oval Office and set the nation back on a constitutional course towards freedom and liberty. Rubio has an opportunity to be a true American hero. Will he be?

Because Rubio was dragged into the political spotlight by Tea Party folks in desperate search of new conservative leadership, and because he shares in common with Obama, constitutional ineligibility for the
offices of president and vice president under Article II requirements, he is uniquely positioned to bring down the most anti-American regime to ever hold political power in the United States.

Unlike “birthers” who are trying to disqualify Obama on the basis of his unconfirmed place of birth (native born
status), which is still in question due to Obama’s fraudulent efforts to hide his real past and true identity, using nondisclosure and forged documents to remain a total mystery, -- true “constitutionalists” who have studied the matter completely and allowed the facts to emerge without partisan purpose, know the whole truth.

1) The foundations for America are stated in the preamble to the Declaration of Independence. Pay particular attention to the parts highlighted.

CONGRESS, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

Contrary to contemporary teachings by revisionists, the legal precepts for everything our Founders created is NOT "British common law" which we separated from via the Declaration and the American Revolution. It is "The laws of Nature and of Nature's God," as stated in the preamble to our nation’s founding document, The Declaration. Just as freedom and liberty are “natural rights” inalienable by men, so is the right of Natural Born Citizenship.

2) Revisionists claim that Natural Born Citizen is not defined in the Constitution. However, the US Constitution does not have a definitions section; therefore, it provides no definition for any of the words or terms used in that document. Of course, as the Charters of Freedom were written in plain simple English so that any citizen could read and comprehend their rights and the limited functions of the government bodies they were to form, no definitions were needed. Everyone alive at the time knew the true meaning of every word and every term, including Natural Born Citizen. But 236 years later, dumbed down by revisionist propaganda, Americans may have to do a little homework to rediscover basic truths.

3) During that period in history, the framing of the Charters of Freedom, our Founders left a perfect record of their concerns and intents in the Federalist Papers. Anyone not able to comprehend the simple English carefully crafted in the Charters of Freedom can study the thoughts behind those words in the Federalist
Papers. If you do not know the Federalists Papers, you do not know the Constitution.

4) There is no guess-work or ambiguity… We know from reading the correspondences of our Founders, that they borrowed the concepts for the Charters of Freedom (Natural Law - Laws of Nature - God's Law - inalienable Law of Nations) -- from the internationally recognized authority on the subject at the time, Vattel, recorded in French and later translated to English, The Law of Nations, written on the inalienable laws of nature respected by all nations and inescapable by man. [Most of the Founding Fathers were as fluent in French as they were
English.] Included, was the term Natural Born Citizen, a citizen by the laws of nature, not the laws of man, in fact, inalienable by the laws of man.

In Vattel's Law of Nations, he defines the term Natural Born Citizen, not in one sentence, but in several sections, 211 – 233 of Book One. One truly seeking the truth about our Charters of Freedom and Natural Born Citizenship should read the entire Law of Nations, it is a brilliant work on Natural Law and it is in fact the cornerstone of the Charters of Freedom created by our Founders.

But in short, Vattel defines Natural Born Citizen as follow;

NOTE: "Birthers" mistakenly (or intentionally) cherry-pick a single sentence from several sections on the subject, discarding all else, including the actual definition. - "The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens." - This is NOT the definition of Natural Born Citizen. It is only a general statement affirming that natives are born in country and naturals are born of citizen parents.

Vattel goes on to define Natural Born Citizen and the reasoning behind it...

* "As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights."

** "The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent."

*** "I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country."

This is why Barack Hussein Obama is a total fraud, constitutionally ineligible for office. Unfortunately, so is Marco Rubio, among others.

If Marco Rubio is the great “American Son” he portrays himself to be, the great young constitutionally conservative leader that so many Tea Party folks hope that he is, he must take a stand for the U.S. Constitution
and America right now, as only he can do. Because many of his loyal followers have such high hopes for his political future, Marco Rubio can secure that future by taking the stand that only he is positioned to take right

Unless and until so-called "constitutionalists" get Article II right, they can forget every right they think they have....because if Article II does not exist in force or affect, neither does any other part of those founding
documents that protect the Natural Rights of all American citizens.

I call upon Marco Rubio to stand and become the great leader he wants to be, the leader so many believe him to be. I call upon Marco Rubio to stand and tell ALL Americans that he is ineligible for the offices of president and vice president, as the natural born son of a Father who was a citizen of Cuba (not the United States) at the time of his birth.

Man-made statutes generously gave Rubio and many others like him, American citizenship, via the 14th Amendment, our immigration and naturalization amendment governing the citizenship rights of immigrants through naturalization, or native born rights.

Rubio is a citizen of the United States by way of man-made laws, not Natural Law. Likewise, no matter whether Obama was born in Hawaii or Kenya, his natural birth Father was at no time in his life a citizen of the United States. Therefore, Obama’s Father could not confer to Barack Hussein Obama II that which he did not possess, U.S. Citizenship.

Marco Rubio can solve this entire issue and much more. He can stop Obama’s Marxist march off the cliff and save the country he claims to care about deeply, as well as freedom and liberty in America. He can do so by standing up before the nation and the world, proclaiming himself ineligible for high office and demanding that Barack Hussein Obama be immediately removed from office and charged with high treason for the most horrific fraud ever perpetrated on the American public and the world.

If Rubio refuses to do so, he is NOT what so many had hoped. He will be nothing more than just another political fraud seeking personal gain at the expense of the U.S. Charters of Freedom and the future of freedom and liberty, not just here, but throughout the free world.

If Article II no longer matters, nothing in the Charters of Freedom matters anymore. I call upon Marco Rubio to take a stand and end this nightmare. Stand and tell the people the truth Mr. Rubio, or become just another disappointment to the people, pandering to the captive Tea Party audience but no less complicit in the massive

DO IT NOW… Before a second fraudulent inauguration!

I have sent this call for action directly to Marco Rubio and I call upon you to do the same.

JB Williams is a writer on matters of history and American politics with more than 3000 pieces published over a
twenty-year span. He has a decidedly conservative reverence for the Charters of Freedom, the men and women who have paid the price of freedom and liberty for all, and action oriented real-time solutions for modern challenges. He is a Christian, a husband, a father, a researcher, writer and a business owner. He is
co-founder of action organizations The United States Patriots Union, a civilian parent organization for The Veteran Defenders of America. He is also co-founder of The North American Law Center, a citizen run investigative legal research and activism organization preparing to take on American's greatest legal battles. Williams receives mail at:

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center


  • Mrs. Diane Logan,   If you are born on foreign soil to parents that are not naturlized as American Citizens, then they are not American Citizens.  Same as children of Illegal trespassers.  To be an American Citizen because of birth, your parents have to be Legal American Citizens.  How can you be, "Subject to the jurisdiction" of America if you are not a Legal American Citizen.

  • Mary Gomez,  members of the Tea Party are not concerned with LEGAL foreign born Immigrants, but Millions of ILLEGAL trespassers.  And Members of the Tea Party are also concerned with following OUR Constitution.  I wonder how many Hispanics would be so concerned with Amnesty if Millions of Illegals were from Europe, or Asia, or anywhere else?   Sen. Rubio I am afraid, will push for "another" Amnesty, when that is the reason why there has been a HUGE increase in Illegal trespassing over the last several decades.   Before we even discuss any type of (comprehensive Amnesty) we FIRST have to fully secure our border and have mandatory E-verify well in place.

  • So then Rick and Antonio, if the Queen of England or the wife of  a leader of any other country, even Communist China, came to the U.S. visiting friends or came to this country on vacation, not in some governmental capacity, and it so happened she was pregnant and during her stay gave birth to a child, that child according to your selective reasoning would be eligible to be the President of the United States since born on American soil?

  • There are always bigots in a blog. I just met one that sent me to coddle with Without knowing where I come from, or if I'm a conservative or not, he shoves me to all because I do not agree with his thinking. I hate to tell you Bob, but I have a bigger stake in this country that you, and I not going to move there just because you feel so. I have to say what I want weather you like it or not that is the nature of this blog, just not shove people to another place. Is obvious that you do not want a good conservative discussion about Mr. Rubio eligibility to be a US President. For your information, I know what communist is all about, and I know what it can do to a country. If I came to this country it was seeking freedom and that is the reason I belong to this blog.

    Rick you hit it right on the nail. Thank you for your help.  Time doesn't change things just because some of you think so. Andrew Jackson's father was immigrant from Ireland and he served as a US President. That was tested back them and would be tested again. These anchor babies theories and all that crapola is man made and not in the US Constitution.  

  • The problem is liberals think the US Constitution is a living document and can be changed . Wile the US Constitution can be changed through amendment it is not a living document . The US Constitution means the same today as it did in 1776 .
  • I have no idea who you are Rick Bulow, but it would be wise of you to know the difference between "Native Born," and "Natural Born."  Rubio is native born, but because his parents were not citizens of this country when he was born.  You simply can not intertwine or substitute one for the other and be Constitutionally correct on the subject.

  • Mary, no one said Marco was not an American. What was said he is not 'natural born' as it applies to the eligibility to become president.

    Larry, the issue is not English Common Law but the discussions the members of the Constitutional Convention had and their access to intelligent accepted laws and interpretations they used in their deliberations, one of which was the 'Law of Nations' written by a man who was considered in his time a genius, Vattel. The men at the convention considered sources from many different codes of law, since none before had existed as pure American law, and they incorporated what they found feasible in application to our Republican form of government. That's what new countries do.

    Mary, My father was foreign born but he became a citizen BEFORE my birth therefore making me eligible to be classed as NBC rather than simply citizen which would apply to naturalized citizens and those born on the soil but to other than American citizens, ie, Rubio, Jindel as well as Obama.

    Rick, common sense would also make it clear that an anchor baby as an example would not and should not be considered as 'Natural Born' but only a citizen by special exception. Or would you suggest that just by being born here meant the same to the founders when they separated 'natural born' from 'citizen'? They only used the term 'natural born' in outlining the qualification to become president and it can be argued they did that for the specific purpose of clarity otherwise why use it at all and just use plain citizen.

    In regard to the Wong case: The 1898 Supreme Court case US v Wong Kim Ark  ruled that young Mr. Wong, born of Chinese parents in San Francisco, was a “citizen” — but that the Court supposedly “stopped short of” finding him to be a “natural born citizen.” The court knew that Mr Wong having been born to non-citizens could not be declared a natural born citizen and therefore did not refer to him as that.

    Rubio and anyone in support of the U.S constitution is welcome in the Tea Party because they are patriots; Ayers, an American terrorist, would not meet that standard.

  • we know more about rubio than we know about obama, and we do know that rubio is not a chicago radical, with a subversive plan to destroy this country along with its constitution.

  • This letter causes me great sadness . I wonder how many Americans like myself ,of foreign born
    Parents will not join the GREAT TEA PARTY if they so not feel welcome . SEN MARCO RUBIO
    Is as American as John Wayne . Unless folks think that BIll Ayres is more American than us .
  • The liberals try to re write the US Constitution but they know better and prof of that fact is they tried to change Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the US Constitution no less then eight times between 2003 and 2008 . LarryM is one such liberal . I have new for LarryM Marco Rubio is not US Constitutionally qualified to be US President or VP because his mother and father were not US citizens at the time of his birth . Liberals try to bring in the fourteenth Amendment to the qualifications for US President witch is another misdirect because the fourteenth has nothing to do with the qualification set fourth for US President in the US Constitution.
This reply was deleted.