Posted on 05/30/2011 7:40:28 AM PDT by Ordinary_American
The United States is in a Constitutional and political crisis without precedent.
What can ordinary Americans do when a large number of politicians are corrupt and an even larger portion of the national political leadership is complicit in a cover-up of that corruption?
Do we petition those leaders to investigate and punish themselves?
(snip)
The evident bewilderment displayed by Will is prima facie evidence of the depth of denial now prevalent in Washington, D.C.
It is an equivalent to writing an article after the Pearl Harbor attack entitled “The Japanese might not like us.”
(snip)
Having been born in Panama and not eligible to run for the Presidency, McCain obviously doesn’t recognize the Constitution either.
For me, the uncertainty about McCain’s ineligibility was resolved by the bogus, non-binding Senate Resolution 511, co-sponsored by Obama, which declared McCain a “natural born citizen” and, therefore, eligible for the Presidency.
The fact that Congress has no authority to do such a thing was apparently completely irrelevant to that majestic body. Maybe I’m a cynic, but it sounds to me like just another crooked, backroom deal.
If McCain and Obama both didn’t need the “cover”, why go through that elaborate Senate charade?
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
The Republican's give us nothing! we, the people are the ones who chose.
It's high time to take back what the Republicans have stole!
I didn't say that eligibility is not an important issue, but a practical process needs to be established to enforce it. An idea being considered by some states.
There has been no interest in pursuing this by any official who might be able to do something about it. "No controlling legal authority," being the modern state of this country. Only an overwhelming popular uprising can correct the situation - and that would have scant chance of being successful. In this time, we do not have the rare confluence of staunch, honorable, God fearing, patriotic statesmen who established this unique country. We live in a decadent time.
“True, but either way, de Vattel’s definition (swiss, french or otherwise) was wholly consistent with the commonly accepted definition of the term, “natural-born-citizen” at the time of the Constitution’s writing, was it not?”
No, it was not. The phrase ‘natural born subject’ had a well established meaning and was found in most of the colonial laws involving citizenship. With Independence, the new states modified their laws to replace subject with citizen, making the phrase NBC a known legal term PRIOR to the Constitution.
That known legal meaning including everyone born in the jurisdiction a NBC, except the children of ambassadors and invading armies.
My position is whatever was the intent of those who wrote the Constitution. And the voluminous reserach threads on FR have proved what that was without a shred of doubt.
Maybe one of the gentlemen so involved can kindly provide a link or two to one of the threads.
You said that my position is that babies born on US soil to foreign parents are NBC? Come on! It’s “born on the soil to parentS who are themselves citizens! I learned because I read up on it.
Placemark for (partial?) list of Zero’s crimes. It should be added to as necessary and posted all over the place.
Interesting that you post the 1790 version and not the 1795 version which changed the wording in the specific area you appear to seek dissemble.
Appreciate your posting that. I’m going to make it the body of my next letter to my feckless Republican’t representative, Dr. Roe. Of course, it will meet with the same fate as previous appeals ... but I must keep trying to get through to the slug.
I notice your little team has chosen that mischaracterization as the current approach to obam apologetics. allmendream made that same deceitful assertion just yesterday. Is that the main talking point now, that Vattel based NBC solely on jus soli? You people are disgusting, but then people seeking to subvert truth usually are disgusting.
You are truly a paranoid conspiracy freak. At least, that is what we Army psyops specialists paid by Obama think...
And of course, Vattel never, ever addressed what a NBC is. He died years before anyone mistranslated his works.
I have mentioned this, only partly tongue-in-cheek, also. It seems ridiculous that Obama could ignore the 20th Amendment if re-elected. But how ridiculous would it have sounded five years ago that someone born a British subject (and entitled by birth to automatic Kenyan citizenship until age 18) would be elected President of the United States?
I’d take Netanyaho over Obama any day.
Netanyaho = Netanyahu
A lot of Americans would.
Nice try!
bite me ass hole
You've got it backwards. It is a fruitless pursuit because there is no evidence against his eligibility, and decisive evidence in favor of it.
From WKA:
“The question presented by the record is whether a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States by virtue of the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution,
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
They decided that Wong Kim was a US citizen.
Smith V Alabama is about regulations imposed on Railway engineers.
None of these cases was about the unique issue of Article II Presidential eligibility, i.e. is Obama a Natural born citizen.
Article II does not require only “US Citizen” status, it requires Natural born citizen status. Cutting text from cases that do not address the key issue does not help. English common law does not define "Natural born citizen," and saying "Natural born subject" is the same does not help, because Natural born subject status is the same as citizen. The framers didn't use only the word Citizen in article II.
To your level of communication no further response is needed.
>>...It is a fruitless pursuit because there is no evidence against his eligibility...<<
Then you would have no problem with Bobby Jindal’s eligibility, correct?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.