[Mr Rogers]

Vattel’s NBC is a “phrase found in a poorly translated philosophy book”.

As for the Original Intent, see WKA

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZO.html

and the Indiana courts

“Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States [] natural-born citizens.”

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11120903.ebb.pdf

You may not LIKE their decision, but it is based on the law, not Vattel and not conspiracy nuts who think Rush, Palin, Coulter and others are a bunch of sell-out traitors!

[danamco]

who think Rush, Palin, Coulter and others are a bunch of sell-out traitors!

Your postings here classify you to fit right into that mole, Ms. Rogers!!!

[rolling_stone]

Well you refuse to answer if you believe the President should have to qualify according to the Constitution. I believe so. I also believe that it is imperative that the People of the United States are Entitled to know who exactly and clearly qualifies as a Natural Born Citizen for Article II purposes. I further believe since this issue is being debated at length including McCain, it is imperative that the issue be resolved by the Supreme Court now and for the future so We The People can Amend the Constitution if need be.

I further believe that all the past cases were not on point as to NBC for Article II purposes so the case would be a case of “first impression”. As such it would involve more research than just a few similar but off point USC cases.

As for your one state case, that is exactly that one state case that has little or no precedential value.

While we are discussing NBC can you tell me who qualifies as an “inhabitant” of the United States?

[danamco]

You may not LIKE their decision, but it is based on the law, not Vattel and not conspiracy nuts who think Rush, Palin, Coulter and others are a bunch of sell-out traitors!

A friend send this e-mail!!!

"Listen here good looking, I screw anybody, anytime, anywhere, your place, my place, in the car, front door, back door, on the ground, standing up, sitting down, naked or with clothes on, dirty, clean . . .

it doesn't matter to me. I've been doing it ever since I got out of college and I just love it."

Eyes now wide with interest, he responded,

"No kidding. I'm in congress too. What state are you from?"

[BP2]

> Vattel’s NBC is a “phrase found in a poorly translated philosophy book”.

Bwa-ha-ha!

You do realize that Vattel's "Law of Nations" — your so-called "poorly translated philosophy book” — is cited in hundreds of SCOTUS and Federal court opinions, INCLUDING the recent DC v. Heller case in 2008 ... which has not a thing to do with International law:

I told you that I was just giving you an opportunity to embarrass yourself ... and behold, you did!

I'm starting to wonder about you Mr Rogers. If your real intent is to discredit the Obama-supporting After-Birther movement ... sweetie, you're doing a bang-up job!

[Lmo56]

You may not LIKE their decision, but it is based on the law, not Vattel and not conspiracy nuts who think Rush, Palin, Coulter and others are a bunch of sell-out traitors!

Inferior courts only count in horseshoes and hand grenades. Thats why we have courts of appeals and SCOTUS.

In the Indiana decision, they decided not to appeal, feeling sure that they would be shot down on the same basis - NO BASIS OF CLAIM.