Posted on 02/27/2008 6:12:38 PM PST by Kay Ludlow
NYT: MCCAIN'S BIRTHPLACE IN CANAL ZONE RAISES ELIGIBILITY QUESTIONS...
So GOP superdelegates get to pick the nominee? /s
No, it wasn't.
Yes...they were onboard way before he was born.
I've heard rumors that's one of his qualifications - and why we'll have to trust HIM on original intent ;-)
Everyone was behind Dole, Mcnuts is a traitor to republican party.
Damn funny.
Interesting. What are their thoughts on anchor babies?
Here is their possible argument for what it is worth.
All persons born in the United States, except those not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. government (such as children of foreign diplomats) are citizens by birth under the Fourteenth Amendment. There is some debate over whether other persons with citizenship can also be considered citizens by birth, or whether they should all be considered to be “naturalized”. Current US statutes define certain individuals born overseas as “citizens at birth,” as opposed to citizens by birth.[4] One side of the argument interprets the Constitution as meaning that a person either is born in the United States or is a naturalized citizen. According to this view, in order to be a “natural born citizen,” a person must be born in the United States; otherwise, he is a citizen “by law” and is therefore “naturalized.”[5] Current State Department policy reads: “Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth.”
His parents were American citizens. The NYT is making fools of themselves with this.
On a side note, even the children born to US defectors in North Korea are technically US citizens because their fathers were American citizens. Some of those children (now adults) are known to still be living there.
Maybe the NYT thinks that because they regularly read posts from long time FReepers who are dissing McCain even more than they are.........
As for me, he has my vote. Like Dennis Miller says, he’s the only one willing to go after the bad guys.
Wasn’t it a US military base? If so, then it was US property. If a question about being born in the US, then perhaps Goldwater being born in Arizona before it was a state is closer .... NYT - one of these days they’ll run out of trees ....
"Was McCain around at the time of the "Adoption of this Constitution"?
No. But in that case, by your reasoning, he isn't even a ciizen at all unless he undergoes naturalization. Then again, maybe there's a reason he's so sympathetic to illegal--LOL
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us/politics/28mccain.html?ref=politics
Here’s the article in the Slimes.
Canal zone? Is this about Vicki Iseman again?? :)
Your history teacher is incorrect. But it is a common misperception. The Constitution refers to "natural born citizen" not "native born citizen" as some history texts report it.
This question has come up recently on FR, maybe a week ago and some excellent points were made. McCain is a United States Citizen, he derived citizenship from his parents, not from being born in a US territory or military base, but that may be different than “natural born” which has previously been defined.
I don't know if two years is "way before", but it was before.
You got me nervous there. Hawaii hasn't been a state for 50 years yet. You got me wondering just how young Obama was. (Still older than I am.)
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.