Harris, Haley, and Ramaswamy Cannot Be President

The Post Email ^ | August 29, 2023 | Don Frederick

[Macho MAGA Man]

Kamala Harris, Nikki Haley, and Vivek Ramaswamy are not eligible to serve as president of the United States. Nor are Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz. Why? They are not “natural born citizens,” which is one of the presidential requirements outlined in the U.S. Constitution. Making that claim, of course, immediately prompts a response of, “Of course they are natural born citizens! What are you, a racist?” But those who are eager to ridicule and condemn such a statement of ineligibility are merely demonstrating their ignorance of the term natural born citizen. What is important, however, is not what television pundits (or “pundints,” as they often incorrectly refer to themselves) believe the term means, but what the Founding Fathers understood the term to mean when they decreed the following:

“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

Probably close to 100 percent of Americans alive today believe the term natural born citizen simply means born in the United States of America. But that is not what the term meant to the authors of the U.S. Constitution.

[DiogenesLamp]

In Obama’s case I think he purposefully played up the issue to make his opponents look like conspiracy theorists who were crazy so the real crazy stuff he was doing went undetected

You give him too much credit for intelligence. He was a moron. If you look at his employment and activities before he became famous as a black democrat, his life was a failure and a mess.

His handlers played up the crazy talk about "birthers", and the media-lie-system helped them do it.

[DiogenesLamp]

You are so full of crap a response is not indicated.

I like you too brother. :)

[odawg]

“It did not “define” it, it alluded to it...”

When it “alludes” to it and then defines it, to me and most people that is a definition.

“...but that language was stripped out in the next version which they created in 1794, if I recall correctly.”

That matters not at all. It was not stripped out of the Constitution.

“You cannot define natural citizenship by law.”

Then why did the Founders, who debated over every jot and tittle that was written, put it in the Constitution, if it cannot be defined by law. The Founders consulted Blackstone’s works, it is in his writings. The Founders used the term “citizen” quite frequently, but “natural born citizen” only once in a very critical place. That is asinine.

“It is like trying to claim an adopted child is an actual child of your blood. It is not, and it cannot be. It can only be an adopted child.”

That is also an asinine comparison. Nobody, but nobody, would ever think to claim that. Hasn’t anything to do with citizenship of parents.

[odawg]

By the way, when I was in college in the 70s and the professor in American History 201, Dr. Bittle I believe, mentioned that, he said natural born citizen was one born of citizen parents. Why was that?

[DiogenesLamp]

Maybe instead of worrying about where Obama was born, the Republicans could have nominated someone other than McCain and Romney to run against him, for a skilled politician like Obama that was like a layup for him over those two clowns.

The only skill Obama had was being black. He was the color that gave white liberals Org@sms, and so they promoted him endlessly.

He was stupid. He believed stupid things, and his policies were disasters, but because the media-lie-system spun them as great successes, the public was fooled.

I still say, there wasn’t and still isn’t any credible evidence that Obama was born outside the USA.

There is no credible evidence he was born in Kenya, but there is some pretty good circumstantial evidence that he was born in Canada.

How does your mother get from Hawaii August 5th, to Seattle, August 19th in an era in which planes didn't allow infants to fly?

Stanley Ann's Aunt Eleanor lived in Blaine Washington, which is right on the border of Canada, with the only hospital nearby being right across the border in White Rock Canada.

It was common thing in 1961 to send embarrassing pregnancies off to live with a relative, and Eleanor was Stanley Dunham's sister.

Barack Obama Senior even wrote in a letter that it was his and Stanley Ann's intention to give up baby Barack for Adoption, and a very prominent home for unwed mothers was right there in White Rock Canada.

There are a few more bits and pieces, but it does make it reasonable to question where exactly this guy was born, especially when he made such a stink about producing a birth certificate, which is something anyone else could do easily.

[Dilbert San Diego]

There’s a problem with what you are saying

And that is, nobody seems to be able to agree, on the definition of natural born citizen

In order to enforce the meaning of that term, there has to be agreement and understanding of the meaning of a legal term, in order for a law on any subject, to be enforced.

[DiogenesLamp]

That matters not at all. It was not stripped out of the Constitution.

The definition was never put into the constitution.

Then why did the Founders, who debated over every jot and tittle that was written, put it in the Constitution, if it cannot be defined by law.

Precisely because it is a product of natural law, and not man made law. It was not subject to meddling by congress.

The Founders consulted Blackstone’s works, it is in his writings.

It is absolutely *NOT* in Blackstone's writings. Some years ago someone posted a link to the complete works of Blackstone, and I did word searches for the word "citizen."

If I recall correctly, "Citizen" was in there about 5 times, and it was always used in the context of a "citizen of London" or some other city.

"Citizen" was not a common word in the English of 1776. The normal word was "subject", which is what does actually come from English common law.

Our modern meaning of the word "Citizen" comes from Switzerland, which was the only Republic in the world in 1776.

Here is an English dictionary from the 1768s. See how it defines "Citizen."

A dictionary of the English language. by Samuel Johnson, 1768.

[Dilbert San Diego]

Well, of course, we Republicans voted for those guys in primaries. Not you personally, but collectively ,we Republicans voted for them to oppose Obama.

[DiogenesLamp]

By the way, when I was in college in the 70s and the professor in American History 201, Dr. Bittle I believe, mentioned that, he said natural born citizen was one born of citizen parents. Why was that?

Because it was before the time period when people wanted to play games with the meaning?

I don't know, but I think he is correct.

[DiogenesLamp]

And that is, nobody seems to be able to agree, on the definition of natural born citizen

I have researched this topic for many years, and I believe much of the problem with the meaning of this term was created by William Rawle, who wrote a popular and widespread law book called "A View of the Constitution", in which he goes into great detail about constitutional law.

He spread the idea that "natural born citizen" is based on English Common Law, and he did this despite the fact that he was unanimously rebuked in this view by the entire Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in 1801,(I think) in the case of "Negress Flora vs Joseph Gainsberry".

He was also informed what was the correct understanding by the publication of the book "Digest of Select British Statutes, Comprising Those Which, According to the Report of the Judges of the Supreme Court Made to the Legislature, Appear to be in Force in Pennsylvania"

This very popular law book for Pennsylvania makes it clear that Citizenship is based on Vattel's writings, and not English common law.

His career was spent in Philadelphia Pennsylvania, and there is no way William Rawle could not have been informed of what is the correct origin of "natural born citizen", yet he persisted in spreading something he knew was wrong.

I believe I know why he did it, can you guess?

[woodpusher]

Those who wanted to abolish slavery felt that if a person could not vote (i.e. a slave), then that person should not be "counted" towards the total population of the state.

For representation, they counted more people who could not vote, than people who could vote. Women could not vote. Minors could not vote. The census is a head count not based on citizenship or voting eligibility. Today, aliens cannot legally vote, but they are counted for representation, legal and illegal aliens alike. California gets a few representatives just based on its alien population.

In the early days of the republic, slaves were counted in the census. Representation was based on the census head count except for slaves. A state with slavery was assessed a 40% penalty in representation on its slave population. They were counted in the census. Take away the 3/5ths rule and they would have counted at 100%, just like an alien.

[odawg]

I will never comprehend why people like you get your panties in a wad over this subject.

I have talked with people in my grandparents generation. They say, yes, they were taught about a natural born citizens, the offspring of citizen parents. It was taught nationwide. I was taught that in college by tenured college professor with Phds in the 70s.

Can you not comprehend you blockhead. The FOUNDERS of the nation, the ones who wrote the Constitution, wrote it in. If if were freaking meaningless, why in hell did they put it in there as one of only three critical qualifications to be president of the United States.

Can you explain that to me?

And yes, natural born citizenship was mentioned in British law, which is where the writers of the Constiution got their understanding of law.

[odawg]

“I don’t know, but I think he is correct.”

Who is “he”?

[DiogenesLamp]

Who is “he”?

Your professor. I think we are on the same side of this issue. I believe "natural born citizen" requires a citizen father.

In 1787, the mother automatically acquired the father's citizenship upon marriage, so they were both citizens.

[Dilbert San Diego]

Then again, if this subject were so clear and straightforward, there would not be ongoing discussions on Free Republic, with hundreds of replies, discussing what natural born citizenship means .

[mmichaels1970]

I apologize for any perceived disrespect. I tend to get overzealous on this topic because this is the topic that actually led me to join Free Republic, which was about the only place on the internet that would allow discussion of this topic.

All good. I’ve read your posts and can tell your knowledge is beyond mine on the subject. And being able to learn from others away from the media is why I joined.

I do tend to be a tad over sensitive on the site as of late because I’ve seen a big increase in using intimidation and name-calling to shut down discussion. So I do get a bit in the jumpy side.

I’m good if you are.

[woodpusher]

Let me tell it right and show the uncited book from which page 26 was shown:

A Digest of Select British Statutes comprising those which According to the Report of the Judges of the Supreme Court, made to the legislature, appear to be in force, in Pennsylvania, with some others, with notes and illustrations.

by Roberts, Samuel, 1763-1820; Great Britain. Laws, etc; Pennsylvania. Supreme Court

https://archive.org/details/digestofselectbr00robe

[FreedomForce]

FWIW, I think the Framers intended natural-born to mean born of two citizen parents, but I also think that definition carries no weight anymore and never will. I’ve decided to not let it affect my choice of candidates. Trump will be the nominee, and I will vote for him in the general election even if he picks someone like Ramaswamy or Haley as his running mate.

[DiogenesLamp]

Let me tell it right and show the uncited book from which page 26 was shown:

Thanks. Saved me the trouble. It's a pain to grab an image out of that book with this browser. I have to "inspect element" and then do some ju-jitsu to get it into a format where I can post it.

[DiogenesLamp]

FWIW, I think the Framers intended natural-born to mean born of two citizen parents, but I also think that definition carries no weight anymore and never will.

That's where i'm at.

I’ve decided to not let it affect my choice of candidates.

Me too. I decided this back in 2016 with Ted Cruz. I figure if Obama got away with it, it doesn't matter anymore, so there is no reason why we should reject a good candidate because of a law no one is willing to enforce.

Trump will be the nominee, and I will vote for him in the general election even if he picks someone like Ramaswamy or Haley as his running mate.

At the moment, I am okay with Ramaswamy, so long as no further bad information comes out about him, but I do not like Niki Haley, and if he picks her, that would give me pause.