29 April 2011
This is a universally agreed upon concept which has been enumerated in laws in every nation, since the beginning of human civilization.
However, for those who deeply examine the United States and
how it has drifted from a constitutional republic to the corporate-financier
oligarchy it is today, they might realize the futility of arguing over
"President" Obama’s qualifications for an office that has long been
ceremonial, if not entirely theatrical.
The corporate-financier agenda transcends presidencies.
From Reagan to Obama, US foreign and domestic policy has moved in a continuously linear direction toward increasing corporate-financial monopolies and eroding the role and sovereignty of the US Constitution and the people who are supposed to execute it.
In 1991, "Neo-Conservative" war monger
Paul Wolfowitz stated
the Middle East would be turned upside down and reordered in America’s
favor - ironically, this operation which has been piecemeal planned and
executed year-by-year since then, is finally unfolding in its entirety under
the supposedly "liberal" Obama administration. 
Of course, the blueprints for the SPP  or the geopolitical reordering of the Middle East weren’t drawn up by presidential administrations nor committees amongst America’s elected representatives, but rather by unelected corporate-funded think-tanks  like the Council on Foreign Relations or the Brookings Institute.
These think-tanks represent
the collective interests of the largest corporations and financial
institutions on earth and are the real, often obscure architects of both
American and European foreign and domestic policy.
But even upon examining each presidential administration, we
are struck with names and affiliations of members who directly represent
these corporate interests.
and Attorney General Eric Holder
To illustrate how entirely ineffectual and meaningless "Obama" is as a president, let’s examine some key members of his administration and what their affiliations are.
Who amongst Obama’s administration can we honestly presume has the people’s, or even America’s best interests at heart? Goldman Sachs bankers? JP Morgan bankers? Corporate lobbyists?
Indeed, these are the same banking, corporate, and political interests that guided the agenda under Bush, Clinton, Bush Sr., Regan and so on.
While there is some debate over which US president was
in fact the last "real" president who exercised an agenda it genuinely could
claim ownership over, there is no doubt that over the last two decades the
same corporate interests have been entirely steering America’s people and
their destiny with but the veneer of "democracy."
fact, McCain is one of the key players who has helped fund and organize the
current unrest sweeping the Middle East, along with a myriad of other
"Republicans" and "Neo-Conservatives." The "Arab Spring" itself was planned
and being staged before Obama even took office.
Realistically, they are a red herring, as is his entire presidency. He is in charge of exactly nothing, most likely not even the tie he puts on in the morning and surely not the words that come out of his mouth. His entire function is to perpetuate the facade that America is still run by an elected government and not an illegitimate oligarchy of corporations and financial institutions.
his birth certificate
engenders him with legitimacy in and of itself - suggesting that if he had
proper qualifications he would be a "legitimate" president. But he, like his
predecessor Bush, are both entirely illegitimate, as is the system they
purportedly preside over.
For it is not whose hands we think hold the power, it is in whose hands that really hold the power that shapes US policy. Definitively, US policy does not favor the people, definitively the power is not in the people’s hands. As long as we grasp to the illusion that through the futile exercise of elections we are somehow "in control," it will remain this way perpetually.
The fact that our president is in charge of absolutely nothing and that his duties have long been shifted to an unelected corporate-financier oligarchy is the issue, not his dubious qualifications.