Given your replies on this thread I don't see how that was possible.
"Anyway, Vattle is a 300 year old French person from France"
* He wrote Law of Nations in French.
* He spent no significant amount of time in France...let alone being "from France."
... "so who cares what he thinks about anything!!!"
* Colonists (i.e. not necessarily just framers or founders) thought Vattel a "Genius" as early as 1764.
* Earlier that year, patriot and advocate of the political views that led to the American Revolution, James Otis Jr wrote: The Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved (1764). This pamphlet sets down another important philosophy underpinning the Revolutionary debate: it asserts that rights are not derived from human institutions, but from nature and God. Thus, government does not exist to please monarchs, but to promote the good of the entire society. His arguments are clearly based on natural law concepts. He quotes the law of nature and Vattel, specifically.
* In the early 1770's, Boston revolutionary leader, founding father and one of the architects of the principles of American republicanism, Samuel Adams begins using natural law principles, and Vattel in particular to make arguments against the British Common Law position that every man owes a perpetual allegiance to the crown, and that the British Parliament can not change their "Constitution" by themselves (without the peoples consent)...thus helping to solidify the groundwork for the movement for Independence.
* John Adams begins to make similar arguments in 1773.
* In the mid 1770's, we see members of the 2nd Continental Congress begin to refer to the authority of Vattel's work.
* In 1775, Benjamin Franklin writes to Charles Dumas: "I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel, It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising State make it necessary frequently to consult the law of nations. Accordingly, that copy which I kept (after depositing one in our own publick library here, and sending the other to the College of Massachusetts-Bay, as you directed) has been continually in the hands of the members of our Congress now sitting, who are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained a high and just esteem for their author."
* All of this happens prior to the Declaration of Independence, which is filled with references to natural law.
* Even John Adam's wife, the erudite Abigail, reads Vattel's work.
* The framers of the Constitution read and reference Vattel's Law of Nations during the penning of the Constitution.
Etc.
"(I don’t spell Vattel right on purpose because it just seems so stupid to me.)"Do you think the founders and framers were stupid to read, reference and rely upon Vattel's legal treatise Law of Nations covering natural law?
"Then we have the British Vattle Birthers who think Obama is British because his father was British, but that seems stupid, too, because the Queen of England ain’t the Boss of Me!!!"
* “When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children."http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate.html
* "In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii)# and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC." http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/does_barack_obama_have_kenyan_citizenship.html# Assumes yet to be proven HI birth
* There is no law in the United States, that would (or could) deny Barry from inheriting his foreign fathers British citizenship even if he were born on the steps of the Lincoln memorial. To suggest otherwise, is to suggest that U.S. law reigns supreme over a British subject and effectively nullifies their British rights and laws simply because that British subject is here as a visiting student (as Barry's father was). See the Jay Treaty for further information. Barry's father was a British subject. Barry inherited, by birthright, his foreign fathers foreign citizenship.
Interestingly, you then seem to do a complete 180 and quote the ridiculous Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana case and essentially suggest that our American common law is British common law. Fascinating the turn of events there.
However, James Madison (father of the Constitution) and George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights) disagreed with that notion.
Will you be issuing corrections to your blog?