Replies

in before the birther mob...

The Heritage Guide to the Constitution

The governing phrase from Art. II, Sec. 1 of the Constitution.

Do you have to be born within the territorial limits of the United States to be such a citizen?

No, said the Founders.

The Heritage Foundation’s Guide shows how the First Congress in 1790 provided that “the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born.” This was our first naturalization statute (1 Stat. 104).

Now, consider Marco Rubio. His parents were resident aliens when he was born in 1971, seeking and soon to receive their status as naturalized U.S. citizens.

Under the Fourteenth Amendment, “all persons born...in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the states wherein they reside.”

This “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” clause shows why Rubio is — and, very likely, why children of illegal aliens are not — a “natural born citizen of the United States.”

“To say that Rubio, Jindal, and Haley are forever barred because of a strained interpretation of the Constitution’s eligibility clause would condemn conservatism to minority status for the foreseeable future. Surely, that is not what we want.”

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/the_good_news_rubios_eligible.html

Now, consider Marco Rubio. His parents were resident aliens when he was born in 1971, seeking and soon to receive their status as naturalized U.S. citizens.

WEASEL WORD WARNING!

"soon to receive" didn't happen before Marco was born. More explicit: his parents WERE NOT CITIZENS when he was born. Ergo, HE IS NOT a natural-born citizen, and NOT ELIGIBLE. I will not vote for any such candidate, and neither will millions of others.

Republicans who seek to subvert the plain meaning of "natural born citizen" in the Constitution just show their contempt for the document. This is why the country is in the shape it's in: the elites in BOTH major parties despise the Constitution, and only use it, Alinsky-style, when it suits their ends.

A pox on you all.

I am so sick of the “tortured wording that tries to eliminate the simple words “natural born citizen” from “citizen” and “naturalized citizen”.

Read those sentences. It is a worse description than the meaning of the word “IS” from the past!

The thought does not follow but the words try to make them the same.

Read the history of attempts to change the wording. Those members of congress knew what it meant and wanted to change it!

NOT ELLIGIBLE...and I am from Fl and like Marco Rubio!

It is not an interpretation, it is a fact arising from the fundamental definition of natural law as practiced for thousands of years. It is not “strained” in anyway whatsoever, because being a natural born citizen has been a practice among many nations for many centuries. The Fourteenth Amendment says nothing whatsoever about the definition of a natural born citizen, because it only refers to persons acquiring statutory citizenship, meaning a statute was required to confer citizenship rather than citizenship being the natural consequence of being born the child of native born parents who constitute the body of the nation’s citizenry.

This “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” clause shows why Rubio is — and, very likely, why children of illegal aliens are not — a “natural born citizen of the United States.”

TWO WORDS: Bovine Excrement.

Or in the more acceptable vernacular: BULL SHIT!

SEE: "Why They Still Call Him President"

(http://www.rightsidenews.info/2012050316169/editorial/us-opinion-and-editorial/why-they-still-call-him-president.html?utm_source=Right+Side+News&utm_campaign=4ceb0ddcd0-daily-rss-newsletter&utm_medium=email)

As for me , I am not afraid of anyone being barred from POTUSA because there is a misdirected interpretation as strained as it could be of the more evident intent of the Founding Fathers to make a special designation of NBC for POTUSA as apart from a BC designated for other offices of the USA government. I reflect as to my own personal siuation as a WWII vet and that of my brother who was killed on Okinawa. Think about the consequences of just birth of a person on the soil of USA without any parent responsibility for allegiance to the USA in any form or at any time. Rubio’s parents were not citizens with any allegiance to the USA when he was born. There could have been a provision made by the Founders that parents who subsequent to the child’s birth had a period of time to become naturalized to give the child status as NBC. This was not done in/by any form. I can only guess as to why the Founders chose not to make such a provision in the Constitution. The 14th Amendment does not remedy this choice of the Founders.

This “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” clause shows why Rubio is — and, very likely, why children of illegal aliens are not — a “natural born citizen of the United States.”

"Subject to the jurisdiction" means whether or not you are obligated to obey American law. Illegal aliens are subject to American law (whether it's actually enforced is a separate question). Illegals are supposed to pay their parking tickets. They are "subject to the jurisdiction".

However, not all foreigners have to pay their parking tickets.

If you have funny tags like the double-parked Caddy, you don't have to pay your parking tickets.
But your kids born here are not automatic citizens.

Basically, the only aliens in the US who are not subject to its jurisdiction are diplomats — that's what diplomatic immunity means — and members of foreign forces on US soil (last seen in 1812, I believe).