Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is Marco Rubio eligible to be president?
The Miami Herald ^ | 04/18/2012 | Alex Leary

Posted on 04/18/2012 2:29:47 PM PDT by TexasVoter

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-137 next last
To: TexasVoter

Short answer is no and the long answer would be no.


21 posted on 04/18/2012 3:14:41 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

“a tea party that demands absolute fealty to the Constitution”

Have you genuflected and recited the preamble in the direction of Philadelphia yet today? Don’t forget to fast all summer in remembrance of the Founders’ sacrifices. September 17 is Constitution Day! Pick the virgin you’re going to sacrifice today.


22 posted on 04/18/2012 3:14:47 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

Don’t waste your time. They are as bad as 9/11 truthers.


23 posted on 04/18/2012 3:15:41 PM PDT by EEGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

“Rawle, apparently was the first in a long line of idiots, that can not understand plain English”

What, praytell, does “natural born citizen” mean in “plain English”? Two citizen parents and born on U.S. soil? That’s not very apparent. What about the plain language of the 14th amendment? Or is that trumped by obscure comments on the intent behind the words?


24 posted on 04/18/2012 3:18:29 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
William Rawle, A View of the Constitution of the United States of America (1829)

This guy was a commentator and a DA for PA as appointed by Washington. Prosecuted the fomenters of the Whisky Rebellion

There is no record of his participation in either the drawing up of the original Articles of Confederation, nor do I have any knowledge that he was ever in any way associated with writing of or contributions made to the Federalist Papers. I do not believe he was in attendance at the Constituional Convention.

I think it's a stretch to name him among "The Framers."

So, like a good many who have confused the meaning of The Framer's" intent for the term "natural born citizen" this fellow is no different, just 175 years removed than those who are just as confused about it today.

FReegards!


25 posted on 04/18/2012 3:21:13 PM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter

“Do you further mean to suggest that a foreigner should be able to father a child on US soil, raise the child abroad as an enemy of the state, and reintroduce that child into the US in time to meet the 14-year residency requirements of Art. 2 Sec. 1? You think that’s what John Jay and George Washington intended?”

I’ll see you that question and raise you another one: how about I leave out the “foreigner” part and replace it with a citizen? Is that what the Framer’s intended, either? No, but they didn’t stop it.


26 posted on 04/18/2012 3:21:25 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Not all native born citizen are natural born citizens, and those who are only native born are US citizen because of a constitutional amendment, which purpose was to make former slaves US citizens. You can’t make non citizens into natural born citizens. The OBots and other fools think there is no difference.

There is a difference between laws of man and natural law. Natural law was the intent and meaning written in the US Constitutional by its authors.


27 posted on 04/18/2012 3:23:26 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: All

Yes, period.

do we want to elect him?
does he want to run?

those are different issues.


28 posted on 04/18/2012 3:25:22 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Michael.SF.
“The “Birther’s” have missed the entire point as it DOES NOT MATTER were zero was born.”

Yes it does! If he wasn't born in the U.S.A., he's not an NBC. (He was born in Kenya)

I think you meant that his father wasn't a citizen so he's not NBC. How do you determine who his LEGAL father is? The only document that proves that is his LEGAL (not forged), original birth certificate. Without that, we don't know who his LEGAL father or mother are. We don't know how old he is.

The birth certificate is the first step. Without it, you can't prove anything.

29 posted on 04/18/2012 3:25:58 PM PDT by faucetman ( Just the facts, ma'am, Just the facts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter

No period. Intellectual dishonesty reigns supreme in US culture and the news media.


30 posted on 04/18/2012 3:28:15 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

The law holds only two types of citizens, period.

all this nbc tinfoil stuff was born of obama and his communist father.

The law has never changed or has the constitution ever been reinterprited to mean ANYTHING other than there are two types of citizens.


31 posted on 04/18/2012 3:29:18 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane; All
Citizenship adheres to the status of your carnal self at birth, not your psyche. “Old souls” wandering the heavens for millenia, for instance, could be born, or reborn as it were, as U.S. citizens.

While that's technically true [after all, Hindus & certain New Agers can claim to be reincarnated over & over again as various "citizens" of distinct nations]...
... I can't help but think if it was any, ole cultist other than a Mormon,
...the thought that a mainstream POTUS candidate confesses to originating from another planet in another galaxy is a lil' mind-boggling...
...given that this pretense-front exists as predicated by the RINO GoP-establishment: "Oh, all's normal Election Cycle 2012!"

"Oh, Mitt. You're were spirit born somewhere else???"
"...Then you came to Earth to inhabit a body?"
"...That's nice."

"We, too, want ALL our kiddies of the U.S. & world to emulate you as POTUS and grow up just as you did you..."
"...so that they, too, can embrace this worldview for all..."
"...in which our kiddies in exactly the same way" [Which, btw, is what MR believes] "have traversed from the far galactical reaches from that little hamlet in the sky, Kolob..."
"...all the way to Planet Earth..."
"...and then...donned the White House like a glove..."
"...before progressing to some Great White Throne as 'god' of his own planet..."

Boy...What a narrative Lds, Inc. PR agents will have to work with to hand off/peddle to the kids of America & the world!

Mormon priesthood workers of the various galaxies, unite!

***********************************************

MiddleAmerica, U.S.of A., 1950s: "Mommy, when I grow up, I want to be like Ike."
MiddleAmerica, U.S.of A., 2013: "Mom, when I grow up, I want to a god from Kolob like Mitt."

32 posted on 04/18/2012 3:32:57 PM PDT by Colofornian (Mom when I grow up, I want 2B like Ike. Mom when I grow up, I want 2B a god from Kolob like Mitt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: faucetman
No, I stand by what I said. But let me be more precise.

Obama is not eligible to be President regardless of place of birth, Hawaii or Kenya. The BC the WH released names his father as a Kenyan, thus a British subject. That alone makes him ineligible.

33 posted on 04/18/2012 3:33:58 PM PDT by Michael.SF. (When you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

“are only native born are US citizen because of a constitutional amendment”

Oh, “only” because of some amendment, huh? I guess that means we can ignore it.

“which purpose was to make former slaves US citizens”

Ah, but it didn’t say that, did it? They could have written “all persons born on U.S. soil who used to be slaves and have rich, dark molasses skin,” but they didn’t. We tend to let “original intent” run away with itself. Intent is in line after plain meaning. If the intent says more than or contradicts what the text itself says, the text controls. We can’t assume the Framer’s didn’t mean it the way it is.


34 posted on 04/18/2012 3:34:01 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
Rawle admits in this same essay that his opinion is not universal.
It is an error to suppose, as some (and even so great a mind as Locke) have done, that a child is born a citizen of no country and subject of no government, and that be so continues till the age of discretion ...

If what Rawle believed were actually true, there would have been no need for the 14th amendment. Rawle also quotes Vattel and the Law of Nations in the book, but fails to explain why he doesn't prescribe to Vattel's definition of natural-born citizens. In the end, Rawle's opinion is overruled by a UNANIMOUS Supreme Court opinion in Minor v. Happersett.

35 posted on 04/18/2012 3:35:04 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
William Rawle

Rawle and his family were British sympathizers.

Why on earth would you quote him or his works?

36 posted on 04/18/2012 3:35:36 PM PDT by Las Vegas Ron (Rush Limbaugh = the Beethoven of talk radio - http://www.istandwithrush.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

Tinfoil is the people with their heads where it is dark and where the OBots reside. After 4 years of amassed information and data that Obama, and to include Rubio, are both not natural born citizens. Any honest study of who are natural born and who are not, you cannot honestly conclude that those two are natural born citizens. The information amassed would fill 10 volume years of Encyclopedia Britannicas.

Hey, the Repubs can go ahead and pick Rubio for VP, but don’t expect the Dems to play along since hypocrisy is not in their dictionary.


37 posted on 04/18/2012 3:38:02 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: faucetman

“How do you determine who his LEGAL father is?”

We could dig his father up and do a DNA test, which I assume various birthers have already suggested on various blogs. Have you heard the one about how he might be Malcom X’s son?


38 posted on 04/18/2012 3:38:18 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Michael.SF.
The "Birther's" have missed the entire point as it DOES NOT MATTER were zero was born. (Presumptively alluding to the alleged non-citizen father, Kenyan Barrak Obama Sr)

Following that logic then, those patriots who didn't miss that important point are not "birthers".

39 posted on 04/18/2012 3:39:02 PM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate Republicans Freed the Slaves Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: edge919

“In the end, Rawle’s opinion is overruled by a UNANIMOUS Supreme Court opinion in Minor v. Happersett.”

No it isn’t. Why do people say such things?


40 posted on 04/18/2012 3:41:32 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-137 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson