Posted on 09/20/2011 8:28:54 AM PDT by Ordinary_American
The critical issue for the 2012 election is whether or not a government of the people, by the people and for the people, shall perish from the earth.
The US Government has been hijacked by a self-serving, permanent political class, which considers itself above the law and elections as bothersome formalities temporarily interrupting their plundering of the nation’s wealth.
Having become comfortable with ignoring the will of the people, American politicians have created a culture of corruption in Washington, D.C., while they steadily whittle away at the Constitution to remove any remaining obstacles in their pursuit of personal power and affluence.
The rule of law has deteriorated to such an extent that it is now possible for Barack Hussein Obama to present a forged Certificate of Live Birth on national television, to use a stolen Social Security Number and forge his Selective Service registration without a single member of Congress raising an objection.
In 2012, these same politicians will ask voters to ignore Obama’s crimes like they have and endorse their endemic corruption.
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
It needs to be zotted. It is the silliest thing i've seen in a long while. I feel the "stupid" descending on me just from reading it.
Do you have ANY proof or reference from the Founding Fathers that they chose to explicitly change from English Common Law to Vattel regarding just this issue? Any at all?
If spreading lies and disinformation is what gets you zotted, then you better run go hurry and hide your lamp under a bushel basket before the lightning strikes. Tee Hee!!! Tee Hee!
The founders merely set forth a standard that within their understanding could be regarded as a reasonable bar to foreign influence in American government. That they could not foresee the absolute mess that would occur years later was not their fault.
In any case, in accordance with constitutional principles, a law stands until it is repealed. It may be a technicality, but I wouldn't give Obama the slightest break on a technicality. He used technicalities to win his first two elections to office. (And I think the third as well.)
But I understand your point. Rubio would make a far better and loyal president then the idiot we have now.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union... and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Whom else was the Constitution established to secure, if not the citizen People and their citizen children?
-PJ
More ignoring facts and posting crap. The constitution also does not mention that there are male and female citizens. That it is not specifically mentioned does not make it untrue. Grow up.
The shadow of the truth has not fallen on you.
Don’t care. When there is a hole in your ship you shouldn’t worry about the deck chairs.
The “Shadow of Truth”??? Is that what you were doing when YOU left off the important part of the paragraph in the Minor case thingy sooo that it would read the way you wanted it to, which is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what it really said??? Is that what you were doing, trying to “shade” everybody form the truth??? OH, I just sooo have your number!!!
OK, I'm not sure I follow your connection. How does that say anything about what a natural born citizen is? It says they are writing a Constitution for themselves and their children - but it doesn't say "only our children and ourselves". In fact, the Constitution explicitly states how we can add more people to Ourselves corporately!
The site is shut down? How?
That’s a relief. Leo has got a lot of good arguments and information there.
I see you only like part of the Constitution - you hate those pesky Amendments, don't you?
“Do you have ANY proof or reference from the Founding Fathers that they chose to explicitly change from English Common Law to Vattel regarding just this issue? “
No, the Bilderburgers covered it up, at the same time they used the Knights of Columbus to buy all the artifacts that PROVED Mary Magdalene was wife of Jesus. But in a small barn in Texas, right next to the engine that gets 25,000 mpg that was covered up by Big Oil, is a box with a hundred court cases showing George Washington wasn’t a natural born citizen.
If you get your decoder ring from WND, you will understand it all...
If you ever get out of the looney bin we’ll try to help you understand why the founders wanted real Americans in the presidency.
Obviously, Squeeky, you are more knowledgeable of what the Framers meant and upon what the relied concerning the law of citizenship that either Chief Justice John Marshall or Mr. Jusice Joseph Story. You must have considerable credentials to know that your opinion outweighs theirs. What are they? Were you like they familiar with the Framers? Did you know them as well as St. George Tucker, the foremost authority on the English common law at the time of the founding, whose views were precisely those which you ridicule? How about Daniel Ramsay? They were all, in your veiw, crazy, right?
LOL!!! Oh, that was very good!!!
“Naturalized or native born are different from natural born.”
Are you so sure that is crystal clear. Listen to the oral argument in Nguyen and think again. Perhaps so..perhaps not.
Or perhaps you should just READ the transcript and let it sink in as they discuss the law in another SCOTUS case.
That's right. When you add to Ourselves via naturalization, you are adding to We the People. Once you are of the People, your Posterity are natural born People, too.
The Preamble says that the Constitution was established to secure the liberty of the People and their Posterity. That does not exclude foreigners from coming to the United States, nor from living here among the People. But, foreigners are NOT We the People, and their posterity was not meant to be secured in the same way that We the People's Posterity was being secured.
You can argue that foreigners enjoy the protections of the Bill of Rights just like We the People, and I'd say that you are right.
However, foreigners do NOT enjoy the rights in Article I or Article II, in that they do NOT get to vote for Representatives in Congress or for Electors for the President.
Therefore, securing liberty to Ourselves and our Posterity also refers to granting voting rights to citizens only. Again, the posterity of citizens is what is referenced in the Preamble, or the citizen children of citizen parents.
-PJ
ANY court decision you can point to that says a person born on US soil is not a US citizen? Anything at all?
Sure, the one that was changed by the Civil War. Scott v. Sanford. Prior to that, ever court decision involving Slaves and Indians.
You guys simply cannot get it through your head that these two groups of people blow your theory all to h3ll. They fit the "born on the soil" requirement, but were NOT CITIZENS.
Both Slaves and Indians COULD become citizens, and thereafter pass down their citizenship, but I don't expect you to be knowledgeable enough to be familiar with these cases.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.