. . . . Check out # 210, please.
The Democrats did that to protect Obama from criticism pertaining to his eligibility status. If the GOP candidate wasn’t a “Natural Born Citizen”, how could the Republican’s complain about Obama? (I believe Obama was born in Kenya.)
McCain was born in Panama. It was NEVER a U.S. territory. John Sydney McCain III is a U.S. citizen by statute because his parents were U.S. citizens (jus sanguinas - ‘by blood’). Our statutes covering citizenship include sections pertaining to children of U.S. citizens born in Panama.
The GOP’s candidate couldn’t be any more eligible to be president than Obama. That is why I believe Soros donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to McCain’s The Reform Institute.
It all makes me wonder if McCain was bought by the progressives. His Reform Institute sure reads like he is one of them!
. . . . Check out # 210, please.
No question that McCain served as a stalking horse for Obama. And the Democrat Senate acted swiftly to pass that vote of confidence for McCain. If they hadn’t wanted to do it, they surely would have dragged their feet. And Obama took a prominent part in pushing it, I believe.
Did the left also ensure that McCain got the nomination? Or did they just take advantage of it after he did? It could be a little of both. McCain was NOT really the choice of Republican voters, still less conservative voters. He went over the top with the help of the press and with a primary system that is frontloaded with liberal states and crossover states. That system was set up by the RNC. And he was helped at strategic moments by various figures—Crist and Huckabee in particular, but no doubt others as well.
The statutes do not really apply to those born "in the armies of the nation", per Vattel, "Law Of Nations" vol. I section 217. (5 sections after the 'born in the country of parents who are citizens' section, 212). Those born in the armies or the diplomatic corps are considered "born in the country" becaue the parents never left the country's jurisdiction.
If we are going with Vattel's definition in sectio 212 should we not also go with the exception in section 217?
Of course, he was. The fix was in from the beginning. I've said for two years that the GOP didn't want this term and did everything they could NOT to win. They ran someone they knew couldn't win and did everything they could to hand the election to the RAT candidate. The reason they didn't want the WH was they knew the housing and economic crisis was on the horizon and they wanted to lay it all (with the exception of "Bush's fault" which was inevitable) in the Dimwits' lap. At every turn, they were bowing down to Hussein. Heck, the even had McLame campaigning for him; remember him telling us we shouldn't be afraid of Hussein. Look at how Hillary was treated. Sarah was supposed to be a joke and they tried their darnedest to slam her and had her shut up. Yep, the election was signed, sealed and delivered to the RATS. Think about it, what are the odds of having both parties run an ineligible candidate?
So who is Soros backing for 2010 and 2012? We should be aware and ready.
Exactly what I think happened for exactly that reason.
There is a minor problem with your Citizen conclusion with respect to McCain--the statute under which that would have made him a citizen on that theory was adopted three years after his birth and was not retroactive by its terms. He may have gotten there by other methods.
McCain votes like a Liberal--how he got there is not completely clear. And at present, he is obviously running well to the right of his voting record.