Replies

The proof that the Framers thought this through (and came to the same conclusion) is written in the various qualifications for office in the Constitution. The Framers were meticulous and deliberate in crafting that document. Logic, reason, and history guided them in that task.

The problem, Windflier, is that the meaning of "natural born citizen" was clear to all of the Founders, Framers, and their entire generation. "Natural born" was a known, defined term with a specific meaning. And it simply did not mean what birthers claim it meant.

It is exactly like claiming that when the Constitution says, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed," the phrase, "the right of the people" doesn't refer to the right of individuals, but to the state governments. So therefore there is no individual right to keep and bear arms.

But it doesn't. "PEOPLE" doesn't mean "STATE GOVERNMENTS."

Likewise, "natural born citizen" doesn't mean that citizen parents are required. It never did.

But you and other birthers are determined to change the meaning of a term in the Constitution, or to pretend that it means something other than what it has always meant. And the reason is because you find it convenient to do so, and because you don't like what it actually means.

This is the exact same thing liberals do. It is, in fact, a LIBERAL approach to the Constitution and to law. It is an approach that says, "It doesn't matter what the law meant when it was written. Today it means what I say it means."

Jeff, you and other contenders on this thread are really jumping from A to Z by conflating the present discussion of the forgeries with constitutional eligibility.

What is on the table before us is quite a simple question: Are the documents real or not? Some of the facts are also simple. For example, each of these BC documents has been claimed ... at differing times and places ... to have been the real deal BC.

Next question: Has the Cold Case Posse marshaled enough solid evidence of forgery to warrant the courts, or another investigative body such as a Congressional Committee, to evaluate it?

So far, this is a forgery case. The Alabama court hasn't even gotten that far. The defense is really saying "forgery or not, this is none of Alabama's business."

Longfellow said it: "Though the mills of God grind slowly, yet they grind exceeding small; Though with patience He stands waiting, with exactness grinds He all."

Now while the mills are grinding, can we please work on the elections of '14?