Barry Soetoro is the son of a British subject. He lacks singular allegiance to the United States of America.
I believe that is immaterial IF he was born on American soil in an American hospital. Today, we confer citizenship on Mexican babies born in American hospitals on the border. Those children are the offspring of Mexicans, but we still give them all the rights of citizenship.
I believe that the British citizenship issue should have been resolved by his 18th birthdate. I believe that to be an American citizen, he was supposed to declare his citizenship by that time. If he did not do that, then his dual citizenship could, indeed, be an issue.
posted on 07/20/2009 10:46:43 AM PDT
(FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
Hmmm ... immaterial? ... We'll have to agree to disagree. A "citizen" is quite different than "natural born citizen". By law, the so-called anchor babies have been extended "citizenship", but no precedent exists granting them a claim on "natural born citizenship". If Barry Soetoro was born on American soil, I would willingly afford him, in accordance with the law, the responsibilities and rewards of citizenship. But, naturalized by law, does not equate to natural born in any legal proceedings I have read. It is wise that Vladimir Putin, for example, can not foster a child while vacationing in Hawaii and then use the wealth of the Soviet Union to acquire the office of the president for the child at a later date.
posted on 07/20/2009 1:54:24 PM PDT
( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson