Skip to comments.
McCain's Canal Zone Birth Prompts Queries About Whether That Rules Him Out
New York Slimes ^
| February 28, 2008
| Carl Hulse
Posted on 02/27/2008 8:24:39 PM PST by Kaslin
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-96 next last
To: Kaslin
"... his birth in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936 are reviving a musty debate..." Poster #3's U.S.C. post knocks the "musty debate" in the head. Forget about it. McCain is a U.S. citizen.
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
I don't see the part about needing to have been born United States soil.
61
posted on
02/27/2008 9:13:50 PM PST
by
FlingWingFlyer
(In November, we're going to be able to elect politicians who say they can change the weather. YAY!)
To: FlipWilson
62
posted on
02/27/2008 9:16:02 PM PST
by
ncalburt
To: Kaslin
He was posted there on orders from the United States government, Mr. Graham said of Mr. McCains father. If that becomes a problem, we need to tell every military family that your kid cant be president if they take an overseas assignment. Note well that Senator Graham is far too busy telling foreign nationals that if they break our immigration laws, they get a nice reward: their kid is not only entitled to government benefits but even the right to become President of the most powerful State in the world.
63
posted on
02/27/2008 9:45:53 PM PST
by
rabscuttle385
(Admin Moderator for President. The lesser of two evils is still evil.)
To: FlingWingFlyer
If McCain didn’t have to do anything to gain citizenship rights (the way a person who becomes naturalized does) then he must have been a natural-born citizen and this article is even stupider than the last one.
Which I would not have thought possible.
64
posted on
02/27/2008 9:51:42 PM PST
by
freespirited
(All great truths begin as blasphemies. -- George Bernard Shaw)
To: Jeff Head
Obama was born in Hawaii.
65
posted on
02/27/2008 10:01:41 PM PST
by
FocusNexus
("Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing." -- Vince Lombardi)
To: Kaslin
Haven’t we been here before?
66
posted on
02/27/2008 10:17:06 PM PST
by
Salvation
(†With God all things are possible.†)
To: Jeff Head
I’m looking at this whole thing from a different aspect.
The NYT couldn’t give a rip about McCain. They and the ACLU see this as an opportunity to apply the US Naval Base in the Canal Zone as part of the USA. They will then twist that same ruling to declare Gitmo is legally USA. They will then attempt to change the status of the Gitmo prisoners so that they will get access to US Judicial courts vs Military Tribunals.
Just a theory for what it’s worth. Call me crazy.
To: LdSentinal
I just picked up the profile from the web.
I've heard and read the statements about Islam but I don't know it to be true.
Given your reply:
Please prove it or back off!
The only thing I favor BO is that he is pushing HRC off the map, and nothing more.
Just wondering from where you are coming from?
68
posted on
02/27/2008 10:57:08 PM PST
by
jws3sticks
(Hillary can take a very long walk on a very short pier, anytime, and the sooner the better!)
To: Kaslin; Bender
And Ohio --SEVEN presidents were born there, starting with Useless Grant-- was not offiically ratified for admission to the union until 1953. It was BACKDATED to the old date. Legally, until 1953 it was [maybe] a TERRITORY, then suddenly was declared to have been a state since 1803, via the
Bender Act.Legal error? Undoubtedly, people go to (or stay out of) jail every day due to legal errors.
They really would not want to open this question, if it were a real question, rather than simple $h!t-stirring.
The 1 March 1803 date of Admission to Statehood has only been official since the adoption of the Bender Ohio Statehood Act of 7 August 1953; the rest of the [specious?] story
69
posted on
02/27/2008 11:05:17 PM PST
by
ApplegateRanch
(Islam: a Satanically Transmitted Disease, spread by unprotected intimate contact with the Koranus.)
To: Kaslin
70
posted on
02/27/2008 11:10:47 PM PST
by
ApplegateRanch
(Islam: a Satanically Transmitted Disease, spread by unprotected intimate contact with the Koranus.)
To: Jeff Head; t2buckeye
This is easy stuff, and the NYT knows it. McCain was born at a US military base of two American citizen parents...that makes him a natural born American citizen. Yes, the NYT knows it. I get the feeling that this is setting up something completely outside the bounds of the context of this story. Perhaps trying lay a foundation for a challenge that any US citizen should be able to run for president. Ahnold? or someone else? Thoughts?
To: Kaslin
Martin Van Buren was the first president born in the United States. All previous presidents were born on British territory.
72
posted on
02/27/2008 11:33:11 PM PST
by
Brad from Tennessee
("A politician can't give you anything he hasn't first stolen from you.")
To: Kaslin
This has got to be bogus. If John McCain were not an American citizen, the North Vietnamese would’ve let him go after they fished him out of that lake in Hanoi.
To: Kaslin
McCain's Canal Zone Birth Prompts Queries About Whether That Rules Him OutIf only...there was a momentary flash of hope but,...NEXT!
74
posted on
02/28/2008 1:52:24 AM PST
by
Caipirabob
(Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
To: Kaslin
The NYT’s attacks on McCain must be coming from the McCain campaign. They are galvanizing him against anything serious that might be coming down the road, possibly something they know about already. This stuff is just too easy, too Clintonesque in nature, setting up a straw man to knock down. Everyone has gone on the assumption that the NYT is just leading off the inevitable MSM assault on McCain, but the opposite seems more likely. McCain may be their choice of Democrats.
75
posted on
02/28/2008 2:32:21 AM PST
by
pallis
To: Kaslin
Desperate or not I’m hoping he is disqualified.
76
posted on
02/28/2008 3:08:03 AM PST
by
Joe Boucher
(An enemy of Islam)
To: Jeff Head
8 U.S.C. § 1403. Persons born in the Canal Zone or Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904 (a) Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States. (b) Any person born in the Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States employed by the Government of the United States or by the Panama Railroad Company, or its successor in title, is declared to be a citizen of the United States. Nowhere does this state specifically "natural born citizen"...it states citizen. Arnold Schwarzeneger is a citizen...but NOT a Natural Born Citizen....
77
posted on
02/28/2008 3:39:42 AM PST
by
cbkaty
(I may not always post...but I am always here......)
To: Kaslin
78
posted on
02/28/2008 4:01:43 AM PST
by
Grampa Dave
("Ron Paul and his flaming antiwar spam monkeys can Kiss my Ass!!"- Jim Robinson, Sept, 30, 2007)
To: zeestephen
If Obama (b. 1961) had been born 2 years earlier, he would have exactly the same problem as McCain.He probably wouldn't qualify then because his mother was a civilian and his father was from Kenia
79
posted on
02/28/2008 5:00:46 AM PST
by
Kaslin
(Peace is the aftermath of victory)
To: cbkaty
He was born of US parents...he is a natural born citizen. Arnold was not, therefore he is not. If you are born of a US citizen parent then you are a nAtural born citizen.
Congress first extended citizenship to children born to U.S. parents overseas on March 26, 1790, under the first naturalization law:
"And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond sea, or outside the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens."
80
posted on
02/28/2008 5:14:38 AM PST
by
Jeff Head
(Freedom is not free...never has been, never will be. (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-96 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson