Wonderful. By now it should be patently clear to anyone that the natural born status of President Obama (or, to personalize it for me, my friend Kevin who was born in Seattle WA to two green-card carrying Canadians who had resided in the US for a decade before he was born) hinges on the definition of natural born citizen.
There are basically two different definitions at odds here:
1. Vattel's definition where location AND citizenship of the parents is required
2. English common law where location is the key factor
We have the first citizenship statutes passed in 1790 and the Supreme Court decisions tending towards the English common law, not Vattel.
Barring a definition such as Vattel, how would a person like my friend Kevin (born on US soil to legally present foreign parents) not be a natural born citizen?
So first, we need to establish either statute or case law that supports Vattel. That is what is always lacking. Yes, there are writings by some of the founders that support Vattel, yet we see their actions - that of the first Congress - run counter. They were divided at best!
So, rather than casting aspersions and hurling insults how about presenting actual facts showing that the US - as a legal, functioning Government - supported the definition of natural born citizen proffered by Vattel?
I read and draw my conclusions; and one of the factors is peoples’ motivations. How many lawyers can dance on the head of a pin may interest some people; people can obscure the simple truth with smart-sounding legalisms; done in courtrooms every business day.
I think your comments are obfuscation on purpose, so after I read comments from someone who is doing that, after a while I don’t bother to read them any more.
The vast amount of research here on FR into documentats that informed the men who wrote the Constitution is incredible. You pretend it’s unimportant, or don’t read it, or something. So your motivation is the pivot.
Someone who wants to know the truth spends a lot of time reading and considering. You and others like you on FR keep pushing the same fetid tripe over and over and over again. Never learning, never trying to.
That’s why your motivation is suspect, that and your attitude also generates suspicion. It is a wellknown fact that the administration hires people to troll on conservative websites and other forums to push the message supporting 0bama, causing doubt, putting forward arguments, etc.
This is not conjecture; it is fact. So it is natural for people on FR to wonder what peoples’ motivation is.
Case closed.