You’ll have to see my posts on other threads...... Yes, I do understand the Constitttion’s NBC requirement, it’s underpinnings in the pollitical writtings of the 1700”s, and USSC cases, which while they did not specifically address the instance of NBC/Presidency, did in fact reafirm the NBC definition of US born to 2 citizen parents......
The term NBC was not coined by the Founders and has a long usage, with varying definitions, throughout history. The definition used by the Founders is the one contemporanious with their era......ie Law of Nations
My post was narrowly focused to contrast McCain to Obama.... McCain a son of a long line of Naval officers born to US Citizens while they were assigned to a US administered Panama Canal Zone v Obama born in an unknown place to a US citizen mother and a alien father.....
Of the two, I believe that Obama is the one that the founders sought to exclude from holding the office of the President......and that they would be unfased by an McCain Presidency, even with the minor flaw in the strict application of the definition of NBC.
Agreed. BUT, should we allow someone who is 34 years old to be president? 33?, 32? Someone who has resided here 13 years? 12?, 11? You see the problem. Well, they ALMOST qualify. It's only a little sin. The constitution is the line. If we don't like it, we can change it by constitutional amendment. Hard to do, you say? Well, if it's important enough, it should be worth the trouble. That's the whole idea behind making it hard. Yet, we have passed, then repealed, amendments before. Maybe we made it too easy. We need to uphold the constitution to the letter of the law. It has done us well for over 200 years. It is under assault more than ever now. We should not weaken it further. We need to INSIST it is the law of the land as written and amended.