Replies

Thanx! Yes, to the liberal mind, everything comes down to discrimination. The idea of ‘discriminating’ against, for instance, anchor babies [by denying them the right to become POTUS one day] is literally more horrifying to them than murder [or at least, the murder of a conservative—though to a liberal mind the murder of a minority or otherwise protected class might be worse]. After all, evil conservatives are into discrimination, while high-minded liberals are egalitarian above all; ‘nuff said.

In fact, even if it could be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Framers’ plan to protect and preserve the Republic involved discriminating against the babies of foreigners, it wouldn't matter to liberals. They would simply (1) deny to the death that actually *was* the Framers’ intention, and (2) work day and night to undermine any and all resulting restrictions. Better to “fundamentally change” the USA as we know it than to hurt the feelings of an anchor baby, doncha know.

The one good aspect of it all is the way liberals self-identify w big flashing neon signs in this debate. A conservative will look at original intent, and if he or she is persuaded the Framers did indeed intend to ‘discriminate’ against some in order to preserve the Republic, we will accept and support that. A liberal will look only at the inconceivably unfair concept of discriminating against [for instance] anchor babies, and go ape-poop over it.

Liberalism: it's a mental disorder.

"That was a great post, and #115 fit the narrative perfectly."

"As such, the Framers did NOT want the spawn of America's foreign enemies to occupy the one office in which they could do the greatest damage.

Any interpretation of NBC which does not act to prevent, to the greatest extent possible, the potential for divided loyalties in the person to be entrusted with wielding the presidential levers of power is contrary to the intent of the Framers who inserted that language which "at common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar" into Article II, Section I, Clause V of our founding document.

Yes, it is discriminatory, and with very good reason: to prevent someone like "Obama" from getting in there and wreaking destruction upon the Republic from within. Outside enemies can be guarded against quite effectively. Treachery from within is a much more difficult thing to stop, and is exponentially more dangerous.