Posted on 05/02/2008 12:23:20 PM PDT by TexasCajun
As does being born in the Canal Zone. Or born in Panama to a parent who is a member of the the US Military or employed by the Panama Canal Company.
What is this even being discussed?
Way I figure it McCain and Hillary will pick each other as running mates.
Too bad the voters of South Carolina and Florida couldn't see it before it was too late.
Just ignore them. They'll be out of business in a couple ofyears.
I wonder if Karen Hughes could run for President? She, also military offspring, born in France.
Here’s my questions: what happens if MCCain dies before the convention? Before Election day?
Who is the republican nominee chosen in those scenarios?
Good question. It begs, tho, another.
My mother went into labor with me, unexpectedly early. My parents were on holiday. I ended up being born in an old CIA MASH unit, now owned by the town and operated as a clinic for the natives of the area. Since the US Government was still financially and technologically assisting the unit, years later I was naturalized but only when I arrived in the U.S.
Further complicating the matter, my mother had dual dual citizenship, when meant her "native" country's agreements with the country I was born in had to go up for examination - before I could get rubber stamped all ways around as "naturalized" in the US when I arrived here.
Therefore. I have no problem with understanding how John McCain could be born in a tin hut supplied by U.S. medicines, equipment and staff serving - as a clinic for people living in the area - being considered naturalized, but then also having his birthplace listed as X.
You see, my birth location is listed as a known (military installation) generic location, but not the specific town in which I was born. The hospital at the large "location" on all bureacrat forms is given as my "location" of birth; however, that specific location has no birth record of me. Why? Because I wasn't born in that large location.
Clearer, yet?
However, these types of situations have been called instances of "military imperialism" (by the left, those groovy conspiracy mongers) for as many years as I've been alive, when in fact, it's a matter of strict record keeping and related to fundings in connection with US Military spending and agreements.
Egads, mention I was born in an old CIA Mash Unit? The whole RIGHT BRAIN LIBERAL PLANTATION goes wild.
It's really dull and stupid and annoying when they do that. It's just superstitious ignorance (and I don't necessarily mean stupid), squawking out boldly about matters they haven't a clue about.)
Consular Report of Birth Abroad
of a Citizen of the United States of America
This is the certify that __________ born at Mons, Belgium on _____________ acquired United States citizenship at birth as established by documentary evidence presented to the Consular Service of the United States at Brussels, Belgium on _____________.
I'm not sure how much light that sheds. I'm not sure if acquired United States citizenship at birth means she was a "natural born citizen" or is considered naturalized at birth, but I tend to believe the former. I also don't know what the procedures and laws were prior to 2002, so my kids' situation may be different from yours or Sen. McCain's.
RE: “He’s the best person for this job.”
Please make the case for me. I would love to be enthusiastic about voting for him, but there’s too much garbage that gets in the way.
Even his personal experience and attributes are less than stellar:
1. He has never (to my knowledge) been an administrator.
2. The POW thing testifies to his character (in the late 60’s/early 70’s) but says little about his qualification. Admiral Stockdale would have been a much better candidate based on his military experience.
3. His temperment has always been considered a weakness, not a strength. That seems to have been temporarily brushed aside for this campaign, but I’m sure we’ll hear about it again (unless Hillary gets the Dem nomination, since she also has a notorious temper.)
4. His (foolishly confessed) limited knowledge of the economy is a problem.
5. He’s not exactly an inspirational speaker - he makes W sound articulate.
That’s all before we get to his back-stabbing, deal-cutting ... (Cutting the rant short.)
If you want to say he’s the best person for the job of those remaining, I can agree with you, but I can also tell that’s not what you are saying. I can probably name a hundred people I would rather see as president off the top of my head.
How desperate must the Dems be to suggest that the son of an American admiral and his American wife is ineligible to be President?
Consular Report of Birth Abroad
of a Citizen of the United States of America
This is the certify that __________ born at Mons, Belgium on _____________ acquired United States citizenship at birth as established by documentary evidence presented to the Consular Service of the United States at Brussels, Belgium on _____________.
I'm not sure how much light that sheds. I'm not sure if acquired United States citizenship at birth means she was a "natural born citizen" or is considered naturalized at birth, but I tend to believe the former.
Your children "acquired citizenship at birth" by the fact that they were born. Before their birth, they were deemed mere fetal tissue without any of the Constitutional rights due to a citizen and could have been legally aborted as long as the mother got some doctor to claim that the abortion was for her mental health.
Five seconds before birth: Nothing but a fetus.
Five seconds after birth: U.S. citizen with the all protection of the Constitutional rights due to a citizen.
How does a "fetus" "acquire" citizenship in time span of 10 seconds?
By passing completely out of the vagina or C-Section incision.
That is what the phrase "acquired at birth" has to do with it.
As far as what citizenship, the Naturalization Act of 1790 states that it is American citizenship, regardless of where they were born, as long as the parents were "citizens of the United States'.
*******
Naturalization Act of 1790: ...... "the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens".
*******
Once you proved that to the American Consulate, the natural born status of your childre was duly recorded for the legal record.
I'm not sure how much light that sheds. I'm not sure if acquired United States citizenship at birth means she was a "natural born citizen" or is considered naturalized at birth, but I tend to believe the former.
Yes, there is a distinction. And yes, I'm wondering too, this morning. Thanks to you that I am sitting here looking at the array of documentation surrounding my own birth and citizenship. My certificate of citizenship, issued 4 years after my birth, states I became a citizen at my birth: "is now a citizen of the US on XXXXX".
I'm glad for this thread. Yep, I think my folks were right: I cannot run for President. There's just too many dates and documents. Meaning, my being born into what "citizenship" was too complicated. Human error or whatnot, my entire campaign would get bogged down with whether or not I was a Manchurian Candidate, no doubts.
What I have is a Report of Birth" "Foreign Service of the USA" issued almost a year after my birth.
The pony express was very slow in those days....
In re your children, however, is a much cleaner, neater and forthright process.
Nonetheless, your children, having been born abroad, will also get to experience that "uniqueness" of being looked at as a foreigner despite the fact that they are US citizens, naturalized or natural born, by some, and despite the fact that their pure "natural born" birth occurred while parents were in service of duty to our country, the USofA.
Cool! Thanks for that information!
Very desperate. Par usual.
Here’s my questions: what happens if MCCain dies before the convention? Before Election day?
Who is the republican nominee chosen in those scenarios?
_________
I asked that same question a while back, and the answer left me unsettled.
I am hoping somebody else will offer their expertise about this matter to get a second opinion.
According to a State Department manual, U.S. military installations abroad cannot be considered "part of the United States" and "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." Tribe said the manual is an "opinion" with no legal status.
Many children get "born" at military installations. If the child born on a military installation is born of Parents of that country (say, Samoa) this does not automatically mean to imply automatic Citizenship.
The questionable part Mr. Tribe is trying to raise is:
A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States relates specifically to the point I just made. The child may be the child of other-country parents, citizens of that country and the military installation served in role as midwife.
This also means that a child born of US Citizens in another country is by extension also a US Citizen, and the proper documentation attestifying to this must be processed.
The key constitutional issue is whether the Canal Zone was part of the United States at the time of McCain's birth. In a memorandum, Tribe and Olson cite a 1986 Supreme Court ruling stating that the United States "exercised sovereignty" over the 10-mile-wide area between 1904 and 1979, when it was handed back to the Panamanians. Hollander and others challenging McCain's eligibility argue that the zone was never part of the United States.
Hollander is probably thinking of the NEA and its assertions that children at PUBLIC ED, while in classroom, "belong" to the teachers and administrators. The "location" thingee. That children do not "belong" to their parents regardless of where they might be at any specific time while in the U.S. But that they are "citizens" ("Wards") of the location they are "at".
Ipso, Sanctuary Cities.
However, the same type of thinking posits absolutely no troubles suing the parents, or putting them in a bad way or light, when it comes to the child in trouble or endangerment. Therein belies a MAJOR double standard and unfortunately, based upon the unholy leviathan of racial or sexual classifications devised by liberalism.
When a minority thug commits a crime, the left hollers that it's "society's fault"; not the child's upbringing, or due bad parenting. If a non-minority thug is at fault, the left hollers "bad parenting".
Leave it to liberals to screw themselves up into knots and complicate issues.
Don’t have time to get into all this right now.
1. Administrators. I work for administrators as do you. I’m more interested in doers.
2. What qualification did Bush have, really? Or Clinton, or Obama, or anyone else? Who really IS qualified to be president? By the way, I met Admiral Stockdale; I read his book, Love and War, I know someone who was one of his instructors, and I voted for him in 1992. Unfortunately, since he’s passed away, I can’t vote for him again.
3. Temperament....everyone has a bit of a temper; I have no issue with it. I think its a mountain out of a molehill.
4. Agree on the economy. I like Obama’s and Clinton’s plan for the economy.
5. Agree with you on that point. I did just read an article. He hates speeches. And I hate hearing them.
Happy voting!
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.