The "natural-born citizen" clause

Jon Meacham wants to repeal the natural-born citizen clause of the US Constitution (see video below). The fact that he wants to do so indicates that he hides his lack of confidence in the legitimacy of Obama's presidency. Probably correctly, he argues that the restriction was written into the Constitution because the founders feared a foreigner of immense wealth buying power in the United States (such as Obama backer, George Soros). Meacham somehow believes that this allegedly antiquated fear is no longer valid!

Change the Constitution when there is a good reason. Accommodating the political agenda of a Kenyan (Obama) or an Austrian (Schwarzenegger) or their supporters or their puppeteers or Zombies is not a good reason.

Here are a couple of badly needed changes to the Constitution:

● Repeal the 16th Amendment!
● Repeal the 17th Amendment!
● Restrict all political contributions to be only from individuals who can legally vote.
● Restrict all lobbying to be only from individuals who can legally vote and from the States.(The Bill of Rights was written to protect individual rights -- and in certain specific cases State rights. The guarantee of free speech was intended to protect the political and religious speech of individuals -- not the unions or "artists" with no talent or vandals or millionaire farmers and alternative energy manufacturers who want subsidies or even the NRA.)

Other than those few desperately needed changes, all we need to do is elect a Congress and a President who will adhere to the Constitution by repealing and phasing out all federal laws, rules, policies, agencies, and judicial rulings that don't comply with the restrictions imposed by the Constitution.

Our founders said it best in the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...." Just because we don't follow the Constitution doesn't mean it's outdated.

What is outdated about individual liberty and having a government that does little more than protect that liberty?