You're a BIRTHER!..............
Posted on 08/28/2013 8:45:24 AM PDT by Nero Germanicus
From beginning to end, the debate over Senator Ted Cruz and his birth certificate has been silly. Like the "birtherism" debate surrounding Barack Obama, it shows that many Americans think our Constitution is a Harry Potter book of spells ("Mandamus! Habeas Corpus! Nullus indviduus mandatus!"). The "natural born" citizen clause in particular appeals to the mythological imagination.
The clause is found in Article II § 1 cl. 5, which contains three and only three requirements for a potential president: He or she must be 35 years old, must have lived in the U.S. for 14 years, and must be "a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution."
What was the reason behind this third requirement? Many people are convinced that the "purpose" of the Clause was to bar Alexander Hamilton (born in Nevis in the Caribbean) from the presidency. But the provision above says in so many words that anyone who is a citizen "at the time of the adoption of this Constitution" can be president. Hamilton had become a citizen of New York by act of the legislature in 1782. He didn't become president largely on account of the whole being-shot-to-death-by-Burr thing.
In fact, in 1787, no one over 11 -- not George Washington, not John Adams, not Thomas Jefferson -- was a "natural born citizen" of something called "the United States of America." The first "natural born citizen" to enter the White House, by my count, was Martin Van Buren in 1836 -- who was born in 1782, five years before Philadelphia.
I don't think that the Framers were even thinking about potential presidents born to American parents abroad. Their concern was naturalized citizens, and it was a lot more immediate and urgent.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
Yes They had foresight and the very reason they designed it that way - was because of what we have now. O is not loyal to America/The Constitution. Once unwilling to follow it, it is always easier to never followed what they layout for us. And the results are - obamacare, illegal immigration, o not adhering to Congress and Congress doesn’t give a flip. One big circle downwards and we are reaping what liberals/commies/low level Americans sowed for us. Not enough voice and commitment from the good to overcome this evil that is allowed. I’m a believer in rules are rules and you don’t break them for ‘convenience’. Only pieces of s*** try to break them.
Nah, different websites. And I was in need of caffeine.
“a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution.”
In other words, there was an exception for George Washington and the other Founders, who were born before the Constitution was written and confirmed. No one was born an American before then.
I presume you know that, and were joking.
I didn’t say he was a good man, just a bad man with a spine. Could you really see Charlie Crist challenging someone to a duel with pistols, even one where the men were expected to miss on purpose?
Thomas Jefferson had Burr arrested and charged with treason but he was acquitted.
You're a BIRTHER!..............
I'm afraid I don't agree. Ideally, IMHO, a candidate needs three things to be highly qualified:
1) A clear understanding and devotion to the principles of the American founding, commitment to preserving and protecting the U.S. Constitution, and a fierce loyalty and determination to protecting America's interests as a free, safe and prosperous nation.
2) Political Experience: Necessary to understand and navigate the political environment both in terms of the electorate and also in terms of the administrative functions and the political realities of working with the other 2 branches.
3) Executive Experience: Necessary skills for managing a large organization, selecting talent, team building, delegation and oversight.
I submit that there is no potential candidate currently on the Horizon that has all three of these qualifications.
Cruz has #1, probably more so than any other potential candidate I can imagine (with the possible exception of Sarah Palin)
Cruz has #2 (see his Wikipedia bio
Admittedly, he lacks #3, whereas, say, Chris Christie or any other governor has that. But Christie lacks #1, as do most sitting governors. (Herman Cain had #1 and #3 too, but he lacked #2).
So please name one other single individual on the political scene who is more qualified.
I understand the NBC issue, and that needs to considered, although there is some legitimate room for interpretation of what that means.
But Cruz is a demonstrably brilliant guy, who clearly understands the Constitution, loves the USA as it was designed, has strong political/legal experience, and as far as I can see, so far has shown that he is 100% conservative on the issues that count.
So maybe he'll disappoint with some position, as so many others have done before him.
But name me anyone -- ANYONE -- who would be a better candidate and a better president.
Well, to be fair, some of them are just plain being stupid......
:-)
Yes, they would.
I told you to disregard the post, but noooo, you just had to throw some bait in the pond.
;^)
5.56mm
The Framers didn’t number the clauses. Numbering them is for convenience of location. It has become a tradition that when a clause is rendered moot by subsequent amendment, the clauses below the moot clause move up in the numbering system.
So the natural born citizen requirement is in clause five of the original constitution but it’s in clause four of modern versions.
The original clause three was rendered moot by the adoption of the 12th Amendment in 1804.
Flip that around and look at our current Commander-in-Chief. He has dual loyalties to Kenya (uner the British Commonwealth at his time of birth) and the United States.
We now learn that his Kenyan half-brother is a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood. Funny thing, our president supporting the brotherhood!! I say it is a problem, I want no person who is beholden to anyone but the United States of America.
See, possibly, Barack Hussein Obama Jr. Does he qualify as a natural-born citizen? Even if he does, he definitely does NOT love America. He has repeatedly shown his true colors, and they are not red, white, and blue. If the idea was to prevent anyone from being president whose loyalty is other than to America, Barack Obama is living proof of the failure of that clause.
Nope...sorry... One gets US citizenship from a single US citizen parent (under most conditions) but it takes BOTH parents as US citizens to confer “Natural Born Citizen” status.
Nope...sorry... One gets US citizenship from a single US citizen parent (under most conditions) but it takes BOTH parents as US citizens to confer “Natural Born Citizen” status.
..........
cite reference please.
Nope. But Burr had been accused of things by Hamilton that affected his "honor," not they he really had any. For a "gentleman" of the time to allow such a insult to go without challenging to a duel was essentially agreeing to the truth of the insult, and meekly allowing the insult would utterly destroy his standing in public opinion.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/duel/sfeature/dueling.html
One of the most creative duels ever was (not) fought in Louisiana.
http://www.anvilfire.com/article.php?bodyName=/21centbs/stories/blacksmith_duel.htm
AT the time, electors voted for two people without specifying for whom they were voting for President and for whom they were voting for Vice President.
The clear intent of the Federalist electors was to elect Jefferson President and Burr VP, but all of them voted for both, so they tied in the Electoral College. Under the Constitution, that meant that the election went to the House of Representatives, which was controlled by the Federalists.
Jefferson and Hamilton were bitter political enemies, but they had served together in Washington’s Cabinet. Hamilton told the Federalists, that while he disagreed with Jefferson, Jefferson was an honorable man, “which is more than I can say for Mr. Burr.” The Federalists went out and voted (reluctantly) for Jefferson, or cast blank ballots, allowing Jefferson to be elected. Burr never forgave Hamilton.
Remember, Hamilton and Burr were both New Yorkers and knew each other well. Hamilton read Burr’s character well.
Burr should have been prosecuted for killing Hamilton, but wasn’t.
While that is most certainly true, such exceptions do not invalidate the rule.
The Constitution mandates that the nation select one person to be President each four years. Given that divided loyalties were a concern, especially after a bloody revolution, it makes sense that the Founders would want to eliminate that one concern. That some foreign born citizens might be eliminated, despite their loyalty, would have carried no weight whatsoever.
The Founders would not have viewed being elected President as a RIGHT. It is a privilege bestowed upon one person by the Electors. Constraining the Electors to a subset of the entire population would be viewed as prudent, not punitive.
Where is the outrage that a President must be at least 35 years old? This was a prudent measure to eliminate at least some of those whose experience and maturity would be inadequate for the job. Were our Founders at all concerned that some deserving 30 year old would be barred from the office? Of course not.
It might be a shame to eliminate McCain or Cruz, but it simply doesn't matter if eliminating them will insure that we don't elect someone who has a non-citizen parent and was raised to maturity in a foreign land.
“From beginning to end, the debate over Senator Ted Cruz and his birth certificate has been silly. Like the “birtherism” debate surrounding Barack Obama,”
I don’t believe in double standards. It seems this author doesn’t either. Bravo. Then again, he seems to think that one verdict fits all. I believe in evaluating each case on its merits. The topic of eligibility is not silly, IMO.
The eligibility standards should be applied uniformly to everyone, including George Romney, McCain, Cruz, and Obama. That does not mean that all these men were, or are, eligible.
“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 ...”
This is not the easiest text to evaluate. The Heritage Guide to the Constitution discusses several positions on “natural born.” They seem to favor the inclusive view that either being born here, or being born of US parents, makes you “natural born.”
It is possible (likely?) that the birth certificate that Obama has posted is fake? Was he ever a US citizen? Was he born in Kenya of a Kenyan father? Was (is) he a citizen of Kenya? If Obama is a US citizen, did he lose his citizenship while in Indonesia? It is OK to ask these questions. I don’t know the answers.
I’d like to know the truth on these matters. Still, I see little impact either way. Let’s say that the Democrats stole the 1960 Presidential election. To me, the lesson is that we should not let this happen again. But JFK was, and Obama is, President. The bell can not be unrung.
On the other hand there is nothing wrong with tarnishing JFK’s and BHO’s reputations. There is nothing wrong with tarnishing the reputation of the Democratic party. If that party feels entitled to steal elections, the American people should know. If that party only has a selective interest in eligibility, the American people should know. Unfortunately, the US gets tarnished also. Well that is OK, if that is what is required to get the Republic back on track.
Yet there are tens of millions of indisputably natural-born citizens of this country who despise it and want to see it brought down. Arguably including our present Leader.
Meanwhile, there are many millions of naturzlied citizens who ARE loyal to this country.
So while the Founders may have had ensuring loyalty to USA as the reason for this provision, it has most certainly proven to be ineffective.
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.