Bobby Jindal pulls Louisiana out of Common Core

Red State ^ | June 18th, 2014 | Streiff

[mlizzy]

For those interested, a great header image (of Bobby’s family and the Duck Dynasty families): https://twitter.com/BobbyJindal

[Girlene]

Oh, I agree with you....but bureaucrats don’t care about the kids....follow the money. There are federal incentives attached to using Common Core standards/reporting.

[itsahoot]

Ping to desktop for viewing.

[xzins]

Should have pinged you and the old Haditha crew here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3169457/posts

[Uncle Sham]

The founder's grandfathered themselves in by the language of the qualifications for President in Article Two.

In addition, your definition of what constitutes a "natural born" citizen has been proven wrong many times on this forum. Natural born has been established as having two citizen parents and born under the jurisdiction of the United States. In this scenario, there is no other condition than being a natural born citizen. That is why the term "natural born" is used.

[xzins]

The only thing that’s been proven on this forum is that Congress has the power to decide what natural born means, they have never agreed with your interpretation, and by law right now (as it has been since 1790) children born overseas to a US citizen parent are citizens at birth and meet the constitutional eligibility criteria for the presidency.

It might be that some day they’ll agree with you. But, even George Washington and the first Congress ever in this country under this constitution did not agree with you.

Ted Cruz is eligible.

[Uncle Sham]

quote the law.

[Uncle Sham]

In addition, quote the law allowing Congress to define what a “Natural Born” citizen is as well as any law where they have done so.

[AllAmericanGirl44]

Thank you for that link. I just finished watching it, so much more devious then I knew. Will send it around.

[Cedar]

Jindal seems to be an excellent governor. Too bad he can’t serve another consecutive term as governor. States need great leaders. So important to help stop or at least slow down the madness happening in D.C.

[CharlesOConnell]

http://sacramento.craigslist.org/mar/4527418370.html

We are “Teaching For Apples” (teachingforapples.com), a web site (and organization) designed to serve as space where educators can go to share ideas about lessons plans and curriculum with other educators across the country. The site was created in 2013 by an educator here in Sacramento to meet the growing needs of educators, especially in the face of the changing landscape in our K-12 educational system. Teaching For Apples is now trying to work more closely with Districts across the country to better coordinate efforts to prepare teachers to adhere to new national teaching standards called “Common Core”.

We are looking for an experienced junior- level marketing professional to help us do this. The selected candidate will communicate directly with school districts nationwide to educate them about our website and to encourage them to sign up to house their District’s Common Core curriculum on TeachingforApples.com. This reduces the burden the Districts have to create their own method of housing curriculum for Common Core.

Other tasks will include managing and populating our database with various District’s information, assisting in the development of Power Point presentations and other marketing materials, and occasionally assisting in presentations to local school Districts related to the features of Teaching for Apples.

This is a part-time/on-call position now, with the potential for additional hours as needed and as the Teaching for Apples expands. A qualified candidate will need to dedicate 5-8 hours per week to start. This is well-suited for freelancers looking for extra work, or for highly-qualified recent graduates with combined educational and professional experience.

Qualified candidates will:
• Have a Bachelor’s degree (or be in their last year of their university career).
• Have at least two years of professional marketing, public outreach, or public relations experience or a minimum of two years of professional and educational experience.
• Have extremely strong public speaking abilities and display utmost professionalism and confidence. You must be able to internalize and “know” the material about which you are speaking.
• Understand how to develop strong marketing presentations to target audiences (understand what they need/want to hear to gauge their interest/be able to tell them why they need Teaching for Apples) .
• Be able to work productively individually and as part of a team.
• Have an upbeat personality.
• Have strong writing, grammar, spelling, and punctuation skills.
• Have excellent communication skills and be able to clearly and thoughtfully communicate with the public, with clients, and with colleagues.
• Be willing to learn new skills and implement them quickly.
• Be detail oriented and have a strong work ethic.
• Have excellent working knowledge of social media, Power Point, Excel and Word.
• Be able to travel out of town occasionally.

Send a resume with listed references and a coverletter telling us about yourself and how you can be an asset to our team. Hourly pay starts at $13/hour depending on experience.
We look forward to hearing from you. Interviews will begin June 30.

[CA Conservative]

I realize the founders were grandfathered in - I was just making the point that they would not have been considered "natural born" citizens.

With regard to your other comment, regardless of what may have been said on this forum, the early court cases to rule on this matter ( the ones closest in time to the actual writing of the Constitution) and the writings of those actually involved in writing the Constitution would seem to disagree with your definition. For example, in the case of Lynch vs. Clarke (1844), in a case that turned on whether or not the plaintiff, who was born in the USA of 2 non-citizen parents, was indeed a natural-born citizen, the court held as follows:

"The only standard which then existed [when the Constitution was written], of a natural born citizen, was the rule of common law, and no different standard has been adopted since. Suppose a person should be elected president who was native born, but of alien parents; could there be any reasonable doubt that he was eligible under the Constitution? I think not. The position would be decisive in his favor, that by the rule of the common law, in force when the Constitution was adopted, he is a citizen."

Even James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution" wrote in 1789: "It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other." Based on this statement, it appears that the person considered to be the most influential contributor to the Constitution considered the place of birth to be the only criterion that needed to be considered or investigated when determining if a person were a natural-born citizen of the US.

[SoFloFreeper]

thanks for sending it around.

eye opening.

[Plummz]

natural-born anchor baby?

[xzins]

This is the first law ever written on the subject in 1790 and signed by George Washington. It is significant because Washington was the president of the Constitutional Convention and many of the representatives and Senators were part of that convention:

United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790).

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States, which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer, and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed. http://www.indiana.edu/~kdhist/H105-documents-web/week08/naturalization1790.html

I've got the law saved someplace, and I'll get to it later, but in the meantime, here is the current method for getting an overseas birth certificate for your child born overseas so that they are AT BIRTH US Citizens:

Birth of U.S. Citizens Abroad

A child born abroad to a U.S. citizen parent or parents may acquire U.S. citizenship at birth if certain statutory requirements are met. The child’s parents should contact the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate to apply for a Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United States of America (CRBA) to document that the child is a U.S. citizen. If the U.S. embassy or consulate determines that the child acquired U.S. citizenship at birth, a consular officer will approve the CRBA application and the Department of State will issue a CRBA, also called a Form FS-240, in the child’s name. http://travel.state.gov/content/passports/english/abroad/events-and-records/birth.html

[SeekAndFind]

If so, can’t blame him for that... :)

[Uncle Sham]

Why the need for SR511 when McCain ran for President?

[xzins]

Because Panama was a separate situation due to the Canal Zone. I looked it up once and forget the exact details.

I think some of it is in the 2nd link I sent you about the birth certificate for overseas born Americans (CRBA)

***Individuals born in these locations during the relevant times may establish acquisition of U.S. citizenship or non-citizen nationality, based upon the applicable agreement or statute, by producing their birth certificate issued from the local Vital Records Office along with any other evidence required to establish acquisition: Puerto Rico
U.S. Virgin Islands American Samoa
Guam
Swains Island
The Panama Canal Zone before October 1, 1979***

[Theodore R.]

the first 9 presidents of the US were natural born, since there was no USA for them to be citizens OF at the time of their birth.

No, the first nine as it turned out were exempt from this reading of "natural born."

[CA Conservative]

No, the first nine as it turned out were exempt from this reading of "natural born."

I recognize that there was an exception built into the clause to cover those born before the US was a nation. I even mentioned that earlier in the thread. My point was about how narrowly the poster was interpreting the natural born clause, and also how that interpretation does not agree with how the Founders and the courts understood the term in the early days of the US. At the time of the adoption of the Constitution, the common law interpretation of "natural born" meant that the person was born within the boundaries of the country in question, and did not regard the citizenship of the parents as relevant in determining whether the child was a "natural born" citizen.