Arpaio: I briefed Santorum on birth certificate investigation

CNN ^ | 02/21/12 | Jim Acosta

[philman_36]

Well? Do you need some "Think" music?

@"Think" Music - 10 minutes long

[Kansas58]

You ask stupid, convoluted questions.

You are not an expert.

You are not a teacher.

I refuse to accept your silly premises.

There are two forms of Citizenship in this country:

Natural Born
Naturalized

[philman_36]

You ask stupid, convoluted questions.
I thought them relevant and pertinent.

You are not an expert.
I never claimed to be one.

You are not a teacher.
All men are teachers.

I refuse to accept your silly premises.
You refuse to accept a simple truth.

[philman_36]

You ask stupid, convoluted questions.
They caught you.

You are not an expert.
I don't need to be one with you.

You are not a teacher.
You're unteachable.

I refuse to accept your silly premises.
Shattering your illusions isn't my concern.

Which replies do you prefer?

[Plummz]

Any person who becomes a citizen at the moment of birth is a Natural Born Citizen.,/i>

This is false. If he becomes a citizen at birth solely through the operation of a statute, he is a naturalized citizen. Congress may only pass statutes to naturalize people, and may not redefine what is a natural born citizen.

Hope this helps.

[Kansas58]

You have no authority for your stated position.

No one in any position of authority agrees with your position.

[WildSnail]

US Constitution, Article I (The Legislative Branch), Section VIII (Powers of Contress), Paragraph 4:

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

Note that it doesn't specify the broader category of "Citizenship", only "Naturalization". Congress only has the authority to pass legislation on Naturalization.

[Kansas58]

Nobody with any authority has ever agreed with you on this matter.

[WildSnail]

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Please cite any authority that can make a convincing argument that congress has any authority over citizenship other than Naturalization (contradicting the plain language of the Constitution) and I'll reconsider my position.

[Kansas58]

The Father of the Constitution, James Madison, said CLEARLY that Congress NEEDED to pass legislation defining ALL citizenship issues.

That would be enough for most reasonable people.

Also, the fact is, Congress HAS made laws concerning birthright citizenship, probably dozens of times since our founding.

Just one example of the numerous times Congress has passed laws concerning CITIZENSHIP AT BIRTH!:

http://answers.usa.gov/system/selfservice.controller?CMD=VIEW_ARTICLE&EXPANDED_TOPIC_TREE_NODES=&ARTICLE_IN_NEW_WINDOW_FLAG=&ARTICLE_ID=9694&CONFIGURATION=1000&PARTITION_ID=1&TIMEZONE_OFFSET=18000000

You are wrong.

History proves you wrong.

No Court and no Member of Congress has ever supported your warped view.

[Plummz]

You are arguing from authority, which is a logical fallacy -- an indication of poor intelligence and lack of facts. It also means you lose.

I am arguing from the Constitution, which means I have the pro-American position.

[Kansas58]

Nice try.
You fail!
The ENTIRE POINT is AUTHORITY, that it what LAW is all about.
You have NO authority on your side.
So?
YOU LOST!

NOBODY, absolutely NOBODY in history, since the Founding of our country, agrees with you.

Actual practice of our Congress disagrees with you.

Precedent is important in law, and precedent is on MY side, not yours.

In fact, NOBODY and NOTHING is on your side, at all!

[Plummz]

Congress has passed laws concerning CITIZENSHIP AT BIRTH!:

Those are rules of naturalization, as per the Constitution.

[Plummz]

NOBODY, absolutely NOBODY in history, since the Founding of our country, agrees with you.

Except for John Jay and George Washington and Benjamin Franklin, among others.

Actual practice of our Congress disagrees with you.

This is false. See post above. You should stop repeating this lie now that you have been corrected.

Precedent is important in law

My precedent is the Constitution.

on MY side,

On your "side" is Obama and the Communists and the British.

[Kansas58]

You are wrong.
Nobody that you cited ever said it was a Constitutional principle that Natural Born Citizenship required two American Citizen Parents.

Now, A person or Court could have said that, prior to Congressional action, but now we DO have Congressioal Action on the subject of Citizenship.

Quite a bit of action, in fact.

Just like Madison, Father of the Constitution, stated clearly that we needed!

No not conflate your small band of Vattel-radical birthers to be the “Constitutional Experts.”

You aren't.

The vast majority of Conservatives disagree with you.

[Kansas58]

Wrong.

We have only two forms of Citizenship:

Citizenship at birth = Natural Born

And

Naturalized.

That is IT!

[Plummz]

That is false. The Constitution is quite clear on this matter.

Why would you spread such pernicious anti-American falsehoods?

[Kansas58]

Huh?
You claim to speak for what is “American” yet you have nobody in authority who agrees with you?

You claim to speak for the “original intent” of our founders, yet you can not quote a single founder who did not believe Congress had the right and duty to define ALL forms of citizenship.

[Plummz]

I'm just quoting the Constitution. You can check for a list of members of the Constitutional convention and those who voted to ratify it.

Why do you work so hard to undermine the Constitution? Is it anti-American intent or just low intelligence on your part?