Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: SnakeDoctor

True. and it looks to me like this is more about the jus sanguis prong of NBC anyway, which is why McCain is an NBC. But, it is hard to explain things to them because they are just on a “language hunt” which they pretty much screw up and get out of context.

Its like One L’s doing their first online research, and they start citing “trespass” remedies out of the Timber and Forestry section of the statutes. They can’t figure out the potential damages because there aren’t any trees involved in their fact pattern.

So they come up with, “Mary Lou is not liable to Sally May in trespass for burning down her house during an unauthorized entry onto the property to have a party because no trees were harmed during or a as a result of the entry. Had trees been damaged, then....”

But these guys are even worse than One l’s ,because even after you point out their boo boos, they don’t believe you.

parsy, who has been thru it with them


11 posted on 03/02/2010 12:13:32 PM PST by parsifal (Abatis: Rubbish in front of a fort, to prevent the rubbish outside from molesting the rubbish inside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: parsifal

>> Its like One L’s doing their first online research, and they start citing “trespass” remedies out of the Timber and Forestry section of the statutes. They can’t figure out the potential damages because there aren’t any trees involved in their fact pattern.

Haha.

I remember those people from law school. They’re the ones that would always enthusiastically raise their hand to answer questions because they’d spent hours in a library to come up with a “brilliant” answer from some random obscure source that nobody’s ever heard of.

If nobody’s ever heard of it ... its probably not the right answer.

SnakeDoc


16 posted on 03/02/2010 12:45:06 PM PST by SnakeDoctor (Do you know if the hotel is pager friendly? [...] I'm not getting a sig on my beeper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: parsifal

“...the child of citizens of the United States, wherever born, is “a natural-born citizen of the United States,” within the constitutional requirement;..”

Not true.

Natural born citizenship is based on natural law: it needs no legal statute to define it. I was born in the U.S. to U.S. citizen parents - there is no question I am a natural born citizen of the U.S.

There exist legal statutes for children born in Panama to U.S. citizens.

There exist legal statutes for children born in the U.S. or in a foreign nation, to parents one of whom is a foreign national and the other a U.S. citizen.

Neither John Sydney McCain nor Barack Hussein Obama II are natural born citizens.


63 posted on 03/02/2010 8:46:45 PM PST by SatinDoll (NO Foreign Nationals as our President!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson