Article II Eligibility Facts

http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html ^

[V K Lee]

Thanks,LnL,
missed this earlier.

One injustice given light; now let’s move onto anchor babies and the fallacy there.

This article sent to those on email list.

[TheConservativeTejano]

Many thanks for this article.

It plainly lays out the fact that the America Hating Piece of Work Obama is an Imposter as defined by this article!

All Freepers know that Obama is an Imposter since he has not proven one thing that he is eligible to be our POTUS.

The sad part is that not one reporter which happens to be the right arm of the Rat party has even looked seriously into the eligibility of the Imposter Obama.

Our far left leaning press is one big joke right now.

[Yaelle]

I guess you don’t understand that Barack Obama was born in Canada and never even naturalized. When he was a US Senator he was handed a ceremonial passport for official travel on the basis of A) nothing and B) black African so PC. Someone DIED hiding this info in the Passport office.

Ask yourself if any other president or candidate would have been certified as a citizen ( screw ‘natural born’ at this point) if he hadn’t been one, ever?

[Uncle Sham]

Who cares about the nuances of natural born citizenship. I care that he’s thirty-five years old. How can he prove that he is without a valid birth certificate? A pdf won’t do. No birth certificate means no proof of age and thus ineligible.

[DiogenesLamp]

And guess what? Prior Presidents serving despite having one parent who was not a citizen is going to mean that if the Supremr Court ever does address this issue - which I doubt - they'll disagree with you. Which mean it can very well happen again.

The citizenship status of wives was irrelevant. Under the law at that time, women automatically were made citizens if they married an American Citizen male.

[Swordmaker]

That said, existing US Law governing the Panama Canal Zone (McCain was born in an hospital within the Zone that was for the use of US Military and their dependents) made McCain a US Citizen at birth. By 1934 US Law governing the status of persons born within the Canal Zone, McCain was indeed a natural born citizen and therefore eligible to be US President.

‘Actually, McCain was NOT born in a hospital in the Canal Zone. He was born in a hospital located in Panama itself because the hospital in the zone was over-crowded with patients and had no room. . . which is part of the reason why the US Senate decided to enter a resolution instead of just allowing the established law stand.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

So I assume you think the same the same applies today - citizenship of the mother is irrelevant?

[LucyT]

.

Check out article and comments.

[philman_36]

By 1934 US Law...

You fall into a trap of your own making here.
Natural law isn't positive law and is precedent._(adj) as well.
Many do the same with USC 8. Positive law, not natural law.
Uniform rule of naturalization - Article I, section 8, clause 4

[null and void]

That is the loophole that Obama exploited.
As long as Nancy Pelosi signs off no one else checks.

No shortages of overt and covert Obama supporters who fully agree, even here on FR!

[Lurkinanloomin]

Amazing how many people here at the home of Constitutional conservatism would throw away the protections of the natural born citizen clause just so their ineligible candidate can run.

[null and void]

Yeah. Suppose, just suppose McCain was elected.

Enemies of the United States stir up trouble in Panama.

No matter what McCain does or doesn't do about it becomes a political football.

No one can effectively govern under those circumstances.

That ONE position, the Office of the President, simply must be free of any hint of foreign allegiance.

[null and void]

Constitutional Eligibility

[Radix]

Agree with this.

Just, I keep in mind that at the time it was written, there were no ‘naturalized citizens’ as Congress had not yet developed the Laws guiding the process.

[DiogenesLamp]

So I assume you think the same the same applies today - citizenship of the mother is irrelevant?

My position is simple. The constitutional requirements set in place in 1787 continue to be requirements until they are amended. Changing the meaning of constitutional requirements by redefining words is not permitted.

If you want the requirements to be different, Amend the constitution.

[DoodleDawg]

And you’re dredging this up again because...?

[Lurkinanloomin]

Because the Constitution was brilliantly created document and should be revered and preserved.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

Amazing how many people here at the home of Constitutional conservatism would throw away the protections of the natural born citizen clause just so their ineligible candidate can run. And amazing how many people here don't know the difference between what they'd prefer the law to say, and what the law actually is. Also, how do you know which candidate is preferred by those who disagree with you? Or is that just a cheap (and inaccurate) attack on the personrather than the argument?

[Lurkinanloomin]

Natural born citizen has a meaning, same as it was when the Constitution was adopted.
Naturally a citizen because they could not possibly be anything else, born here of citizen parents.
People born with multiple nationalities are exactly who the founders were excluding with that phrase.
They are not naturally Americans.

[DoodleDawg]

Because the Constitution was brilliantly created document and should be revered and preserved.

And where did it define natural-born citizen?