Posted on 08/09/2011 6:10:13 PM PDT by rxsid
Edited on 08/09/2011 6:11:45 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
“including two American citizen parents.”
______________________________________
I am not trying to start an argument here.
I am just asking for clarification.
I have read on here, as well as on other internet sites,
that the “natural born citizen” clause is ambiguous.
For example: “two citizen parents”
Both parents may be citizens, but one, or either both them were not born in the USA.
Others claim that not all presidents have had both parents
that were born in the USA.
The lefties made a big deal of McStain being born in an
off base hospital, not in the canal zone.
These are just a few examples of what I run in to.
What I was merely asking is there some official
documents that clearly states that BOTH parents MUST have been born on American soil?
I am just trying to get our ducks in a row, before running down a dead end road, or looking silly.
I am of the opinion that Ron is saying this because he wants the real forger to come forward to challenge him. It is sort of a self-sacrifice he’s playing.
World Nuthouse Daily
We now have several 2009 sign-ups wortking the birther threads. Ron Polarik is not a complete fraud, but I can see why your handlers want you to spread that notion far and wide.
That would be me.
Ah yes, another 2009 sing-on. Give your source, obot so we can make sure you’re not misquoting to serve axelsleazy’s talking points.
He hurt us bad, MHG. REAL bad.
You were not alone.
Bump!
You should know if you'd been on the countless eligibility threads on FR. If nothing else, the usurper himself agreed and signed his name to the TWO US CITIZEN PARENTS definition in SR511.
From the article:
Polland, a frequent Internet poster under the username “Polarik,” has published a series of videos on YouTube summarizing his three-year investigation seeking to prove the Obama short-term birth certificate was a forgery.
Polland’s expertise is in computer graphics and the use of computer peripherals, such as printers and scanners to input digital images.
He earned a Ph.D. in Instructional Systems from Florida State University in 1978 and a masters degree in Educational Research and Psychology from Florida State in 1972.
It's very simple. To be a NBC, both parents must be citizens of the US at the time of the person's birth. It doesn't matter if the parents were born here or went through legal naturalization just as long as they are US citizens when the person is born. The only exception was made clear in the Constitution for those citizens back during the signing of the Constitution meaning the founding fathers were eligible.
http://stat.fsu.edu/techreports/M641.pdf
http://stat.fsu.edu/techreports/M641R.pdf
http://stat.fsu.edu/techreports/M695.pdf
So Tired old crab, now that your done attacking the messenger, why don’t you elaborate on the message?
And well they should have. McRINO isn't eligible. Sure, his parents were US citizens but he wasn't born on US soil. If he'd been born on the US military base in Panama, then there wouldn't have been a question, but he was born in Colon which was not US soil. So, you're looking at the RAT ticket being ineligible and the GOP ticket also being ineligible, but guess what! The Independant ticket, which had the third largest general votes (yes, Electoral College decides the POTUS but play along) of Nader/Gonzales wasn't eligible because of Gonzales. Truth be told, if everyone had followed the rules we would have President Barr and VP Root who came in 4th but first in eligibility.
Wow both Tex, sometimes_conservative and tired_old_conservative battling on the same thread? The target must be very near...
The quote was a reply to #10: At the time of the drafting and ratification of the United States constitution, the definition of natural born citizen, combined both the principles of jus soli and jus sanguinis. This opinion is contradicted as the Father of the Constitution obviously felt that Jus Soli was the more important, and said so.
Composition fallacy, yet again.
I and others have given this citation numerous times. Have you not been reading the threads, or are you just trying to play ignorant?
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_2_2s6.html
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.