Posted on 09/29/2011 8:43:31 AM PDT by Politics4US
Mark Levin says Rubio is a natural born citizen, and threatens to ban birthers on his social sites.
I most certainly do, you just surrender simply because the current collection of statists say something is true regardless of whether it is or not. You probably are ok with roe wade, and apparently according to your logic, you will be ok with Obamacare should the SCOTUS uphold it.
Enjoy your slavery fool....ROTFLMAO!
Argument from ignorance. You do not know what we know, yet you derive a conclusion from your lack of knowledge. My advice to you is to not take anyone's word for anything. Do your own research and come to your own conclusions. Unless you can find different documents than I have found, I cannot conceive of how you will come to a different conclusion from mine, et al.
I have grown up.
You simply refuse to see or accept my point.
If you want to win, then implement a winning strategy. As far as I can tell, birthers lose. But hey, you know what they say about insanity...
“Well, as much as I would like to say foreign enemies of the US should not be able to father the POTUS, I can’t. It troubles me a bit, because, to be perfectly frank, I can be xenophobic, and I can also be discriminatory.”
Maybe you can be xenophobic, but the Founders couldn’t. They were far more concerned w preserving the rights of foreigners than w anything else. For instance, suppose King George wanted to send for an American wench, impregnate her, send her back to give birth on Am. soil, and then bring the brat home to raise as a good loyalist/monarchist. Do you think the Founders would have put up for one minute w discriminating against that? Heck no! They WANTED such enemies of the Republic to qualify for POTUS! Everybody knows they put the rights of foreigners above all others, and the concept of xenophobia simply had no place in their thinking.
maybe according to your interpretation however I'm not going to belabor on the small details of personal opinions & interpretations. There is a very important lesson YHVH is giving us when He starts speaking the Laws in Ex 34 & it is not in the same order He spoke them in Ex 20 & Jewish midrash tells us why. What IS important is that the LAWS & the COVENANTS are one in the same forever into eternity. Our country WAS founded on Judea-Christian principles & laws & the archives of Congress are testimony to this fact. And the fact is, according the the Laws of Nature, provided to us by YHVH the Creator, you can not make something natural out of something that is foreign.
And you can’t move forward unless some statist judge says you can move forward, but then that statist judge will be overruled by a higher statist judge, and you’ll be right back where you started.
Seems like we are in the same boat, but you are still waiting for a judge to back you, whereas I’m going to use my vote to back me.
Anyway, keep calling me names if it makes you feel better about yourself...
Well, it’s fine with me if they wanted such enemies of the republic to qualify, because we as voters need to be smart enough to identify and prevent such threats from attaining power.
If we aren’t, then eventually, someone is going to slip in and kill us from the inside, just as someone has done and is doing right now.
We weren’t smart enough to see, and that is the root of this problem.
Absolutely boys and girls! That is why Slaves and Indians were American Citizens! Even though they had no blood from American citizens (unless they had killed some) they were still citizens because they were BORN HERE!
What's more, British Tories that were born here and fled to Canada were STILL American Citizens! You know why? Because they were BORN HERE! You see, Natural law does not give them a choice. They are American citizens because they were BORN HERE! Even Russian Ambassador's children are American citizens because they were BORN HERE!
Loyalty has nothing to do with it. What determines your citizenship is Location, Location, Location! All the Abortion supporters know this. Till you are BORN HERE, you aren't even a human being!
Pro-lifers see the status of a person as being inherent in their existence, but Abortion supporters and anti-birthers think your characteristics are entirely decided by when and where your head emerges.
Just remember boys and girls, you ain't nothing until you are BORN HERE! Sometimes not even then.
You really shouldn't post about thing you know little or nothing about. It's an embarrassment to FreeRepublic. An "Hebraic perspective"? What other perspective would you suggest? Maybe an Islamic one?
Let us know how you would "sum up" shatnaiz (prohibition of mixing wool and linen) into whatever "10" you choose or maybe even the commandment to observe Passover.
And I notice you didn't even comment again about your absurd suggestion that there is some "second set" of commandments after I quoted Ex 34:1 to you. You might at least have said, "I'm sorry. I didn't know what I was talking about."
ML/NJ
The Framers didn’t care if voters were smart or stupid. All they cared about was not discriminating against the rights of foreigners/foreign enemies of the Republic. They didn’t want to hurt foreigners’ feelings. They were very PC, and considered bigotry (against foreign enemies) one of the biggest threats the Republic faced. Hence they used the Constitution to protect the rights of foreign enemies.
Yes. By omission. In article II, they simply add two words to change the entire meaning; "Natural born". The term "citizen" without those two adjective qualifiers does not mean the same thing. If they omit those two words, then they draw a distinction between the one class and the other.
Well, alright then, so I suppose Obuttstain is good to go until we vote him out.
“ANY Cuban citizen could rightfully claim American citizenship.”
Rubio’s parents were born Cuban citizen. Did they ever claim US citizenship????? Was it prior to Marco’s birth?
BTW citizenship is not the Article II requirement, Natural Born Citizenship is........
No. The court was quite specific. They noted that some people regard only people born in the U.S. of citizen parents as natural-born citizens, while others believe that any person born in the U.S. is a natural born citizen. And while noting that those adhering to the first definition doubted the validity of the second, the court also specifically said that they were not saying which side, if either, was incorrect. The Minor case does not settle the matter.
Obama is exactly the kind of POTUS the Framers wanted! In their foresight, they envisioned a time when *only* a half-foreign, foreign-raised man w economic views antithetical to capitalism and a profound hatred for the Republic as founded, could sufficiently “transform” the country. He is the Won they were waiting for! He is the very reason for the NBC clause! They ***wanted*** a foreigner [half in heritage, one-hundred percent in mindset] to occupy the highest office and remake the Republic in his image! Yes, Obama is A-Okay—He’s the WON!
You grant them "ex cathedra" infallibility. Since it took them 200 years to figure out what the obvious intent of the Second Amendment was, (McDonald v Chicago) I would not be so quick to draw conclusions regarding their lack of interest in this issue. Even were they to take the issue up, it would go like this.
After presentation of evidence and deliberation... Scalia, Roberts, Thomas, and Alito Would all vote that Obama wasn't eligible...
Sotomayor and Kagan, refusing to recuse themselves would vote that he WAS qualified...
Bryer and Kennedy might go either way, but most likely they would rule he was eligible. Kennedy always screws up when it really counts.
So yeah, if you think that's a good system for figuring out what the truth is, then you can worship those black robed high priests all you want. I do not believe something which is false to be true just because some one says so. That is why I pay scant attention to your rantings.
Taliban women at Gitmo ?
Slaves were considered property. See Dred Scott.
Indians were considered members of independent nations inside the USA. See Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884).
“Even Russian Ambassador’s children are American citizens because they were BORN HERE! “
You again show your stupidity, since you’ve been explained this before. The children of invading armies and ambassadors are both excepted, since they are not under US jurisdiction.
See Wong Kim Ark.
“They are American citizens because they were BORN HERE!”
That part is correct.
“This section contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two sources only: birth and naturalization. The persons declared to be citizens are “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The evident meaning of these last words is not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction and owing them direct and immediate allegiance. And the words relate to the time of birth in the one case, as they do to the time of naturalization in the other. Persons not thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at the time of birth cannot become so afterwards except by being naturalized, either individually, as by proceedings under the naturalization acts, or collectively, as by the force of a treaty by which foreign territory is acquired.
Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States, members of and owing immediate allegiance to one of the Indiana tribes (an alien though dependent power), although in a geographical sense born in the United States, are no more “born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” within the meaning of the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment, than the children of subjects of any foreign government born within the domain of that government, or the children born within the United States of ambassadors or other public ministers of foreign nations. ...”
Elk.
Let me repeat, since you are stupid:
“This section contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two sources only: birth and naturalization.”
You will notice the Supreme Court does not give THREE sources, to include parentage!
That is not what either document says.
I wish the ambassador’s children all the best.
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.