Your statement that all is required is that a person be born a citizen, is patently incorrect.
Sorry about that.
No, it isn’t. See post 106.
Birthers come up with some stupid damn THEORY that sounds good, and then proof-text it from history, all the while suppressing the best historical evidence as best they can.
Sane people don’t start with some theory. Sane people go and look at what history actuallY SAYS.
I apologize for sending you such a short answer.
I really don’t have time to get into a long discussion right now, and this is why I’ve bowed out of this thread.
But... I owe you more than just saying your statement was wrong.
The Founders were quite concerned that any future (after their generation) President should be loyal to USA. The way they had to do this was to set constitutional qualifications for the job. Two of these, age and residency, we needn’t discuss here (Other than to note that they do exist, and by themselves they invalidate your statement that only citizenship at birth is required).
The third constitutional qualification is something called “natural born citizenship” .. this differed then, and differs now, from simple American “citizenship.”
Please see any good treatise on American constitutional or political history, or review the Supreme Court cases I posted earlier in this thread... to see that indeed, NBC status is different than mere citizenship.
Beyond that, about all I have time to say...is to restate my initial intention ... which was to point out that we would run a POLITICAL risk if we were to nominate the good Senator. Namely, that the “main stream media” would (as they are already showing signs of doing) “discover” this constitutional issue or problem. That the media would do this despite their ignoring it almost assiduously for the past several years, is, to me anyway, very likely.
Add in the fact that we KNOW the Senator fails the usual NBC criteria on two grounds (Daddy’s citizenship at Son’s birth......and place of birth), whereas we only know that the MSM’s favorite politician fails the criteria on one ground (Daddy’s citizenship, with his place of birth in dispute).
No, I do really really like or respect what I see with the Senator. I am neither against him politically nor a “birther idiot (at least, I don’t consider myself such).
All I am saying is that we would run a clear risk in nominating him for this particular position. And I think (matter of opinion, I have no inside info) that the MSM would just love us to do it.
I wish, hope I were, am wrong.
And with that, I really do have a ton of work here that has to get done, so I respectfully regret I have to sign off this discussion thread for awhile. All my best and thanks so very much for understanding that I really must get some work done in the next few days
Best regards,