Senator Barack Obama qualified for U.S. President

THE MOST important crisis threatening the very existence of the United States of America as a republic is not corporate corruption, President George Bush or the deficit but the open assault and exploitation of the Constitution of the United States of America.

All publicly elected officials—U.S. Congresspersons and Senators in particular—should offer a professional explanation for their support of a presidential candidate.

Americans support Senator Barack Obama because he is a constitutional scholar. His scholarship in constitutional law earned him the presidency of the Harvard Law Review. 

Ashamedly, one senator and congressman are publicly known for carrying a copy of the United States Constitution to work: Senator Robert Byrd of South Carolina and Congressman Dennis Kucinich of Ohio. 

According to Wikipedia:  “The Harvard Law Review is a journal of legal scholarship published by an independent student group at Harvard Law School.’

‘The Review is one of the most cited law reviews in the United States and considered by many to be the most prestigious. It is published monthly from November through June, with the November issue dedicated to covering the previous year's Supreme Court Term. The review has a circulation of about 8,000, and also publishes online. In addition, it publishes the online-only Harvard Law Review Forum, a rolling journal of scholarly responses to the main journal's content.’

‘The Harvard Law Review Association, in conjunction with the Yale Law Journal, the Columbia Law Review, and the University of Pennsylvania Law Review, publishes The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation, the most widely followed authority for legal citation formats in the United States.”

With the San Francisco Examiner reporting that “Hundreds of lies led to war, study says 2 journalism groups find U.S. made 935 false statements” by Douglass K. Daniel, Associated Press Wednesday, January 23, 2008 America needs emergency care. 

President George W. Bush and his administration used constitutional lobbyist to reinterpret congressional and constitutional statutes to favor war and corporate profiteering with congressional permission.  

The present administration also appointed Supreme Court judges who approved some of these questionable modifications in constitutional law and congressional legislation. These judges and elected officials are vigorously prepared to argue their positions. 

How fluent are the presidential candidates in judicial and constitutional law?

U.S. Senator Barack Obama’s credentials in U.S. Constitutional Law are excellent. It is the body of law governing “the interpretation and implementation of the United States Constitution.” It defines the scope and application of the terms of the Constitution and covers areas of law such as the relationship between the government and state governments, the rights of individuals, and other fundamental aspects of the application of government authority in the United States. (Wikipedia)

Who has questioned United States Candidates for the presidency on their perceptivity of the original intent of the United States Constitution in presidential, constitutional, judicial, and congressional terms?

Constitutional and International Law is Senator Barack Obama’s forte qualifying him above all other candidates; in my opinion.

The fact that America, sacked in a constitutional crisis, should require high expectations in the candidates’ knowledge of:  federalism, the ability to interpret the Constitution and the authority of the Supreme Court, able to evaluate the limiting of the powers of the three branches of government; and, the system of checks and balances.   

The next president cannot afford to depend totally on his staff’s opinion of public, private, and supranational international laws.  President Barack Obama is in a position to read and understand the legitimacy of the rules of law with his own contributions.

Other examples of constitutional controversy are: the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act; the controversy with the U.S. Congress not declaring war—as required by law—and  relegating it to the president; foreign accusations of U.S. violations of international treaties, the renditions, secret prisons, and torture are all constitutional issues.

The restoration of Habeas Corpus for all citizens, etc., is legal subject matter. The repositioning of National Security Law within the U.S. Constitution are serious matters threatening American culture.

U.S. Senator Barack Obama is a constitutional scholar. That means when a decision is reached he is not going to do what the majority of Washington, D.C. elected officials do—as with the USA Patriot Act and other legislative bills—pass legislation without reading or understanding its contents. 

The problem of interpretation

I opine to say the majority of elected officials who pass unread bills are due to their inability to comprehend and interpret its meaning. 

When U.S. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in an attempt to compete with leading Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said that "Dr King's dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964…’ and ‘it took a president to get it done," this signaled her need for an upgrade in the historicity of the Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.
 
The fact is 251 years of resistance against the pernicious Peculiar Institution passed civil rights legislation, 1619-1870. The Black Power Movement, urban street revolution, and non-violent demonstrations throughout America “reinforced” the following U.S. Constitution Amendments: the 13th Amendment that abolished slavery in 1865; the 14th Amendment that guaranteed equal protection under the law and citizenship in 1868; and the 15th Amendment which guaranteed the right to vote in 1870.
 
“The Supremacy Clause establishes the Constitution, Federal Statutes, and U.S. treaties as "the supreme law of the land." The Constitution is the highest form of law in the American legal system. State judges are required to uphold it, even if state laws or constitutions conflict with it.” (Wikipedia)

 
The majority White American public, government, and their corporations after 1870 established an apartheid system of uncivilized behavior against its Negro population.
 
The permanent installation of a state sponsored network of “Jim Crow Segregation” was a terrorist operation in its application. The Congress, Supreme Court, and the clan of governors of the United States of America repeatedly violated the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution from 1865 to 1965.
 
The Congressional Black Caucus knows that the violations of the above mentioned constitutional amendments guaranteed civic and human rights for all Americans; and fail to address this well know fact.
 
African and African American lawyers are afraid to take this case before an international court of law or the United Nations.
 
When it became apparent that America was in violation of the “Supremacy Clause” the liberal bourgeois (black & white) invented a political legal spectacular act portraying the government as giving the Negro people of America something they had not earned 100 years earlier by U.S. Constitutional Law. They declared it the Civil Rights Bill, Voting Rights Act, and Affirmative Action which made some degree of progress.
 
No restitution, no reparations, and not a single day in court to answer for the above mentioned violations.

Public elected officials supporting  U.S. Presidential Candidates in both parties —and the Congressional Black Caucus in particular—are obligated to present a professional explanation on what qualifies Senator Hillary Clinton to be an enforcer of the cornerstone of American Democracy, the United States Constitution.

Constitutional literacy is the number one qualification first and foremost of any candidate for the U.S. presidency. To be or not to be qualified. That is the question.