Posted on 05/14/2010 3:21:18 PM PDT by bushpilot1
Meandering through my 1928 Edition of Bouvier's Law Dictionary on page 833, Native, Native Citizen is defined:
Those born in a country, of parents who are citizens.
If Obama does not meet the standards of a native citizen how can he be a natural born citizen.
I don’t believe you, given your repeated use of tactics straight out of Rules For Radicals, and your endless sycophantic defense of the affirmative action fraud-in-chief.
“As the President is required to be a native citizen of the United States…. Natives are all persons born within the jurisdiction and allegiance of the United States.” James Kent, COMMENTARIES ON AMERICAN LAW (1826)
And as BP2 pointed out, do you get paid by the biscuit for your regurgitation of obot propaganda? Here is the correct reference to Kent (1826-27):
http://constitutionallyspeaking.wordpress.com/2010/01/16/did-common-law-really-grant-automatic-us-citizenship-upon-birth-regardless-of-parentage-part-ii/
Kent citing that the very liberal progressives want you to see and uses adnausium.
“As the President is required to be a native citizen of the United States…. Natives are all persons born within the jurisdiction of the United States.” James Kent, COMMENTARIES ON AMERICAN LAW (1826)
The actual text of Kent’s commentary on the qualifications for president taken from Kent’s original works, not cites from unknown sources and taken out of the original context, state something quite different.
(2.) The constitution requires that the President shall be a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the constitution, and that he shall have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and shall have been fourteen years a resident within the United States. Considering the greatness of the trust, and that this department is the ultimately efficient executive power in government, these restrictions will not appear altogether useless or unimportant. As the President is required to be a native citizen of the United States, ambitious foreigners cannot ; intrigue for the office, and the qualifications of birth cuts off all those inducements from abroad to corruption, negotiation and war, which have frequently and fatally harassed the elective monarchies of Germany and Poland, as well as the Pontificate at Rome… (James Kent, Commentaries on American Law, Part II: Of the Government and the Jurisprudence of the United States, 1826)
Lets break it down:
As the President is required to be a native citizen of the United States, ambitious foreigners cannot; intrigue for the office ( here he is speaking of the grandfather clause ( a citizen at the time of the adoption of the constitution),
Then he goes onto part II:
and the qualifications for birth (natural born citizen) cuts off all those inducements from abroad to corruption, negotiation and war,
There you have it. As the President is required to be a native citizen AND the qualifications for birth. Kent was talking about each qualification respectively, not inclusively.
This is the actual text of the above mention cite the progressives had you believe was under qualifications for president, when in fact it is found under immigration & naturalization.
James Kent, Commentaries 1:397–98; 2:33–63(1826-1827)
We are next to consider the rights and duties of citizens in their domestic relations, as distinguished from the absolute rights of individuals, of which we have already treated. Most of these relations are derived from the law of nature, and they are familiar to the institutions of every country, and consist of husband and wife, parent and child, guardian and ward, and master and servant. To these may be added, an examination of certain artificial persons created by law, under the well known name of corporations. There is a still more general division of the inhabitants of every country, under the comprehensive title of aliens and natives, and to the consideration of them our attention will be directed in the present lecture.
(1.) Natives are all persons born within the jurisdiction of the United States. If they were resident citizens at the time of the declaration of independence, though born elsewhere, and deliberately yielded to it an express or implied sanction, they became parties to it, and are to be considered as natives; their social tie being coeval with the existence of the nation.
Yes, I've noticed that.
Whining? is that the best adjective you can come up with? Whining that the Constitution isn't being adhered to? Wow.
Yes. And for the record, I’ve taken more action against Bin Laden than you have, and been stationed within sight of Tora Bora.
Apparently not as you defend him, I don't.
Are you kidding, you would say that obama would still be eligible if it turned out that osama him self is his father?
You are a desperate man defending an illogical argument, one that you cannot admit that you are wrong about or a complete traitor to your Country.
Most likely that he does.
I posted it here but I can’t take credit for finding it. Another FReeper sent me the link. :) Found another too. Should I post it?
I’ll reply to your post tomorrow, but thank you for actually addressing the ARGUMENT rather than just name calling.
We know who's side he's on, he's made that abundantly clear.
Why, so you can start your lies and tail chasing all over again?
Moreover, you'll notice there is about 20 instances Mr Rogers in his slobbering lamentation are about money and how hard work is and other related issues. Yeah, it is a good chance he is paid by the biscuit.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2513818/posts?page=340#340
Well hell ya!
Yes, do it.
Official Report to Congress of the census records of the 1st 100 yrs of the country:
Congressional testimony from 1892 on the US population from 1790-1880, who were the natives and who were the aliens/foreigners and the natives were not the immediate offspring of alien fathers. This is directly from automated text so the spelling may be a bit off.
Mr Schade: Now, these figures were published at that time in various magazines, and I dare say they have been accepted by European statisticians as most trustworthy in ascertaining as to what this country has gained in population through immigration.
Now, I have made another calculation. I have gone up to 1890. Taking 1.38, which annual rate has been recognized by the census of 1870 as correct, I have found that the population of this country in 1890 would have been—that is, if there had been no immigration since 1790— 12,726,033, instead of 56,000,000, leaving out the 8,000,000 colored people. I intend to be as liberal as possible. Having added the 8,000,000 of negroes to those 12,726,000,1 will add another 5,000,000 thereby increasing the population to 25,000,000. Every fair-minded man will concede that I am as liberal as I possibly can be. I am, therefore, justified to claim that of the 64,000,000 people who inhabit this country at the present time 25,000,000 are such as have a right to say that they descend from the people who were here at the time of the First Census in 1790, and the balance (about 40,000,000) are either foreign immigrants or are descendants of those who came here since 1790.
Now. I want to give you some proof, taken also from the census of 1880, showing that this assertion of mine, this calculation is correct. In 1880 the foreigners and their children (not grandchildren) outnumbered the natives in the following States(see chart in the records)
The CnAirman. Are you allowing the natives any childreu or only the foreigners?
x Mr. Schaue. I repeat again that this statement is taken from the census of 1880. The census stated, for instance, that the foreigners number so many and those born in this country of foreign parents were so many. By adding them together I construed the above table.
The Chairman. You compare those with the native born?
Mr. Schade. I give the foreigners and their children. I do not add their grandchildren, because I give them to the natives.
Representative Geissenhaineb. You do add the children?
Mr. Schade. Yes, sir.
Mr. Deily. I should like to ask the gentleman a question. There are about (35,000,000 people in the country to-day. Now, how has he figured the ratio of increase of the immigrants during that time, and does he mean to say that the ratio of increase of the immigrants and their children is over 40,000,000, while that of the natives is only 25,000,000?
Mr. Schade. Certainly.
Mr. Deily. Will the gentleman inform me how many immigrants have lauded in this country and what the ratio of increase has been, at the same rate he is figuring there?
Mr. Schade. Do you want me to answer?
Mr. Deily. Yes, sir.
Mr. Schade. I have taken the official 3,231,000 of 1790 as a basis for my calculation, giving them an annual increase of 1.38 per cent, the most favorable of any country. By that calculation I have shown you that our population, had there been no immigration since 1790, would. in 1890, have been about 25,000,000 instead of 64,000,000.
Senator Hale. Your figures, from 1790 to 1890, would show the native population, including the blacks, to be 25,000,000?
Mr. Schade. Yes, sir.
Senator Hale. And as the whole population of the United States is 65,000,000, you conclude from that that the other 40,000,000 are foreigners and their increase.
Mr. Schade. Yes, sir; foreigners and their children since 1790.
“NBC doesn’t mean that the parents have to be legally married. AFAIK.”
I don't pretend to know how SCOTUS would rule on this, but what we do know is that George Washington inserted the NBC clause immediately after the John Jay letter advising to protect against foreign influence.
A father of an illegitimate child cannot pass the most dangerous foreign influence of dual citizenship to the child even if he acknowledges the child and even if the father appears on the BC.
In Obama’s case the 1948 BNA explicitly excludes passing UK citizenship to illegitimate children (presumably of bigamous marriage) even if acknowledged on the BC.
The founders were explicit on the point that if the parents were married citizenship passed to the child from the father, and if unmarried then citizenship came only the mother.
Our society and attitudes have evolved extensively but there have been few amendments to the constitution and limited new case law. McCain, Obama, Jindal, Goldwater and George Romney all have presented NBC issues that SCOTUS has never addressed directly.
See 427. Looks like Drew68 found his way over there too. Parsifal signed up and never posted again. Possibly he got scared when milspec was busted. He introduced himself and never posted again, weird.
One of those loony websites that “Milspec” aka MilSpecRob posts at is ObamaCONspriracy.com...
So Moonbat Drew68 found Politijunk where to park his leftist butt.
Don’t feed the trolls.
So Drew joined the ranks.
A marriage proposal. That’s a great catch, lol!
Like we reallllly fear them - LOL.
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.