Posted on 10/06/2009 7:12:21 PM PDT by kellynla
And on top of that is the murky waters of adoption and his Indonesian citizenship, that the SRM refuses to acknowledge. See how they are saying that SNL has it all wrong about the usurper, while they were all right about Palin. Gitmo is the perfect place for all the traitors and enablers!!!
They are BIG facts and could not have been said louder!!!
See post # 60!!!
It did no such thing. But that's not the point.
"SR511 disagrees with you. It incorporates Vattel's and Bingham's definition of "natural born citizen"."
No it did not. There is no such reference in it, and it doesn't create any definition at all. You are misreading it.
And yet the have no worries about vigorously criticizing Obama on every other issue. Right. Make a lot of sense.
It did too and that is the point. It was a determination aka decision aka resolution based upon the stated facts -- one of which was that he was born of "American citizens" [plural].
There is no such reference
Baloney, their use of the term "natural born citizen" follows the same meaning of the phrase as used by Vattel and Bingham.
it doesn't create any definition at all.
And why should it create anything??? It simply used the same old standard historical definition used by Vattel and Bingham that the Founding Fathers understood when they penned the words into the Constitution.
That's funny. When I have read the 14th Amendment, I did not see where Bingham included those words in the text of the amendment.
No, you are getting confused. The point wasn't about whether it bound the Senate not to object.
"Baloney"
OK. I say there is no reference to Vattel and you say "baloney". Great. Show me the reference and prove me wrong.
"And why should it create anything?"
Well, your entire point is that it establishes a definition, even if only for its own purposes. So now you are contradicting yourself.
"It simply used the same old standard historical definition used by Vattel and Bingham that the Founding Fathers understood when they penned the words into the Constitution."
No, it didn't use any of that. It simply recited the *facts* of McCain's birth, then declared him to be a natural born citizen.
I notice you avoided my point about the implications of your position. Go back and reconsider. If what you say were correct then only people born outside the country on military duty could be natural born citizens. Because that's what it says about McCain.
Also, the "standard" your are arguing for was NOT what was understood by Bingham or the Founding Fathers, and Vattel specifically noted that the rules in England were different.
And that doesn't help the birthers at all, because "under the jurisdiction" has a defined meaning, and it doesn't mean two citizen parents.
Well then, that means that the ‘birthers’ will have to construct a scenario where Obama Sr. was not a student, but rather the Kenyan Ambassador to Hawaii.
But Damn, there is still that Mama Obama Problem!
Okay, just maybe there was a problem with the way Kansas was admitted to the Union.
If Kansas was not correctly admitted to the Union, Kansas is not a state and Mama Obama was not an American but rather a subject of the Republic of Kansas.
Treason?
Among other unsubstantiated nutbag beliefs, yes.
So Art Bell, like, Dick Cheney, John Roberts, the entirety of the Electoral College, the entire House and Senate believes that Obama was born in Hawaii?
Thanks.
Your comrade Art Bell is a master of disinformation.
As usually we can't expect that the DoJ employees and moles here would be able to make sense of anything presented to them, especially to an "After-Birther" that is either discarded to the garbage can after birth, or being ground up for cosmetic purposes. Listen to ALL the tapes, then maybe, MAYBE you will get it and makes sense to you, but I wouldn't hold my breath???
I guess we can’t expect a rational non-abusive answer from you either.
You just hereby confirmed you are working as a paid mole for the DoJ, LOL!!!
You just confirmed you are a troll working for the DNC.
Can you back that up???
"Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a `natural born Citizen’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States."[SR511]
Enlighten us as to just what definition the Senate was using in that resolution???
Perhaps along with Vattel and Bingham, they also relied upon Justice Waite:
"The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first."[Chief Justice Waite in Minor v. Happersett (1875)]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.