CNN's Anderson Cooper seated by one
of his favorite things in the whole world.
Posted on 04/21/2010 8:28:03 PM PDT by MrChips
OK, so I have read a little, listened a little, and figured that the question of Obama's citizenship and birth would never be answered, so why dive into it. But just now, I listened to Anderson Cooper on CNN (I know, I know, why am I watching PRAVDA?) blabber on and on in a very assertive, denunciatory tone to someone from Arizona over that state's recent passage of a bill requiring presidential candidates to prove their citizenship. Cooper went on ad nauseum about how stupid anyone is who questions Obama, how the birth certificate has been PROVEN to be authentic, that the matter should be settled. But the adamancy in his voice bothered me. Why is he so exercised about it if that is really true? He'd be calm, or so I said to myself. Anyway, anybody else watch this?
??
Leftists love to paint Hitler as being “rightwing” when he wasn’t. It was explained more clearly by someone else up the thread.
Have you ever wondered what the natural habitat of a hamster or gerbil is?
Uhm, actually no. You can believe whatever you want but until it is proven in a court of law I am right. I am not misinformed. I have read the arguments. I know what by right of blood and right of land means whether in English or Latin. However, there has never been a case which defines natural born by the Supreme Court, and since the 14th Amendment, you can't use the old citizenship cases.
I don't disagree that the birthers could in theory be correct. However, there is no court precedent. And there is ZERO PERCENT CHANCE the Supreme Court will take the case. And even if they do take the case, they will most likely side with Obama. The birth certificate is the motherload of fool's gold.
I forgot to include you in my response at #96.
A Natural Born Citizen is born in the United States to citizen parents.
Both parent’s must be citizens. Parents citizenship can be: naturalized, by-statute, or native born.
Natural Born Citizenship is not defined by legal statutes because it is NOT a form of citizenship. It’s only purpose is as an eligibility requirement, per Article II, for the U.S.Presidency.
All citizens have equal rights. Civil rights statutes don’t apply in the case of Natural Born Citizenship, as no one has the right to be President.
CNN's Anderson Cooper seated by one
of his favorite things in the whole world.
Is that true? I have never heard that angle
I believe that any person is eligible who is (a) born in the U.S. or its outlying possessions (with parents of any nation's citizenship), or (b) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person.
The first case is the definition of being natural born, the second case is described at the Dept. of State website
Since President Obama's father was not a U.S. citizen, he would have to have been born in the U.S. to be a natural born citizen.
The insults aren’t necessary. I completely agree with you, I was just referring to how they categorize themselves in the countries where Hitler lived.
So if Obama's birth certificate has been PROVEN to be authentic...then Arizona is not asking for anything new, and not already made public, right?
So To Mr Cooper, why get hot over a new AZ law that you say is irrelevant to Obama because you say he already compiled to the condition of the new law
You Mr Cooper, getting mad about it instead of just laughing it off tells a lot about what you really think
14th Amendment. Like it or not, it is the law.
The term ‘Natural Born Citizen’ was derived from “Law of Nations”:
http://i477.photobucket.com/albums/rr131/stevesharp2918/VattelsNBC-LawofNations-citizenS.jpg
This is where the term originally came from.
The author’s credentials:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerich_de_Vattel
Is that true? I have never heard that angle.
And which Supreme Court case confirmed that? Was the case law before or after the 14th Amendment? Just wondering...
The Supreme Court has NEVER definitively defined the term "natural born citizen". The closest they ever came was in Minor v. Happersett [88 U.S. 162] in 1875 after the 14th Amendment was ratified [1868]. It said, in part:
" ... 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 ..."
So, a child born on US soil to two parents who are themselves US citizens IS DEFINITELY a natural born citizen. However, the Supreme Court has NEVER made this determination as to a child born on US soil of alien parents - it has merely ruled whether this other type of child is a citizen [he is].
In fact, in Minor v. Happersett, although the Supreme Court acknowledged that a child born on US soil to US citizen parents was a natural born citizen, it DID NOT declare Minor [the plaintiff] to be natural born in the decision. The Supreme Court sidestepped this issue, saying that a natural born citizenship determination was not germaine to the case [which was a voting rights case].
Give it a rest.
What is "it"?
The term ‘Natural Born Citizen’ was derived from “Law of Nations”:
http://i477.photobucket.com/albums/rr131/stevesharp2918/VattelsNBC-LawofNations-citizenS.jpg
This is where the term originally came from.
The author’s credentials:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerich_de_Vattel
Ah, a budding Nostradamus who can see the future.
Defeatist, for one reason or another.
Known only to yourself.
WRONG! He was a socialist. Wake up and read what the term NAZI stands for.
My sediments exactly. Can anyone explain the left's argument against the "Natural Born Citizen" definition requiring TWO (2) U.S. Citizen parents? Has there ever been a court case that decided exactly what "Natural Born Citizen" means? Even if we accept the argument that his mother was old enough to pass her citizenship onto zero, that still leaves the messiah one U.S. Citizen short.
“I know. I feel like I subjected myself to unnecessary torture.”
Hahahahahahahahaha...funniest thing all night....thanks for the laugh....
Same people believed Clinton and thought Flowers/Jones/others were lying.
Faith in God...
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.
