You remember your old argument in post 217 - right?
Here it is again,
- - - -
“There are some around here who see this as inadequate, as it doesn’t say ‘natural born,’ so he must not be a natural born citizen.
Which is hooey.”
YOU - Exactly. They weren’t deciding presidential eligibility in the Ark case, so of course they didn’t say whether he was or not.
- - - - -
Well as you should recall, I obliterated your point above by showing you that Ms. Elg was ruled (affirmed) to be a natural born citizen because her parents were US citizens when she was born and she was born in the US of A. Ms Elg's case had nothing to do with presidential eligibility, but nonetheless the Supreme Court ruled her as an NBC. And...and Wong Kim Ark was only affirmed by Gray to be a citizen - and not a natural born citizen.
One day, you may get out of the denial stage and get to the acceptance stage.
“Well as you should recall, I obliterated your point”
I certainly don’t recall that.
“by showing you that Ms. Elg was ruled (affirmed) to be a natural born citizen because her parents were US citizens when she was born and she was born in the US of A”
Once again, this tells us nothing of the Ark case.
“Ms Elg’s case had nothing to do with presidential eligibility, but nonetheless the Supreme Court ruled her as an NBC. And...and Wong Kim Ark was only affirmed by Gray to be a citizen - and not a natural born citizen.”
But they didn’t say he wasn’t, because they didn’t address it. And for pete’s sake, just because they addressed it in Elg does not mean they had to in Ark.
“One day, you may get out of the denial stage and get to the acceptance stage.”
Blah, blah, blah, same thing back at you.