Posted on 12/03/2008 11:43:31 PM PST by BP2
What can be said about that, is, of the associations and alliances that we do know of, none of them are of good character, or are anything but far left-wing.
The man is absolutely surrounded by people and organizations of the most extreme sort. I can't think of one benign organization or person of any prominence that he's connected with.
“Elg was only considered a citizen, not natural born since one of her parents was still a foreign citizen.”
They didn’t discuss whether she was “natural born” or not, so fdar as I read. The issue at stake was simply whether or not she was a citizen.
“I think it is very difficult for us as laymen to really determine what the founders meant, but they did state natural born to US citizens (plural) which only could mean both parents.”
Where did they state that? i don’t remember it being in the Constitution.
“I have a problem with dual citizenship.”
That’s your perogative. Personally, I don’t think I could shirk off an entire half of my lineage, or not so easily as Obama shirked off his whiteness (according to his biography).
“I and Hussein are NOT ‘natural’ born, which requires that the two (2) parents, (father and mother) both are U.S. citizen.”
Where does it say that? Again, I am only aware of two types of citizens: natural born and naturalized. If there is a third type, why on earth would they refer to the process of making people citizens as “naturalization” (i.e. “making natural”)? The fact that we call new citizens “naturalized” implies to me that all the citizens who don’t have to be naturalized are natural born citizens.
Thanks FN!
Obama dismissed Thomas as not being smart enough to be on the Supreme Court. I believe he did this during a debate or that Saddleback forum. Obama is an arrogant punk and gets what he deserves.
“Good on Justice Thomas. I know some people don’t like him because he doesn’t look like all the other Justices...”
Sorry, but n00bies have to use sarcasm tags. Rules are rules.
I suppose that is why lots of us would like to see what the high court has to say on the matter.
And did that immigrant mother apply for citizenship or does she continue to hold citizenship in another country?
Fact: We know that the Framers recognized a difference between US citizens and natural born citizens.
We don’t need to look FOR the definition of natural born citizen. We need to be looking AT the definition of a US citizen (which would be what is required to serve as Senator or Representative but isn’t quite enough to let one serve as President).
14th Amendment:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
This gives the SAME type of citizenship to those who are either:
1. BORN in the United States
OR
2. NATURALIZED in the United States
A child BORN on US soil (think Wong Kim Ark) receives the same type of citizenship as someone that is naturalized.
Either of the could serve in the Senate or House but NEITHER can serve as President because they are only citizens. Not natural born citizens. They receive the same type of citizenship in two different ways.
I tried to post this awhile ago but it didn’t go through. I have added further clarification at the bottom.
Fact: We know that the Framers recognized a difference between US citizens and natural born citizens.
We don’t need to look FOR the definition of natural born citizen.
We need to be looking AT the definition of a US citizen (which would be what is required to serve as Senator or Representative but isn’t quite enough to let one serve as President).
14th Amendment:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
This gives the SAME type of citizenship to those who are either:
1. BORN in the United States
OR
2. NATURALIZED in the United States
A child BORN on US soil receives the SAME type of citizenship as someone that is naturalized. There are three ways to achieve the label of ‘citizen of the United States’.
A child BORN on US soil to two foreign parents is a citizen of the United States.
A child BORN on US soil to one foreign parent and one US citizen is a citizen of the United States.
A person naturalized in the United States is a citizen of the United States.
All Citizens of the United States can serve as Senators and Representatives. They cannot serve as President. Citizens under the 14th amendment cannot be President. They all have the SAME type of citizenship.
So, now that we’ve figured out who CAN’T be President, who is left that CAN?
A person with two US citizens as parents.
14th Amendment citizens (aka citizens of the United States) cannot be President.
Citizenship under the 14th Amendment is achieved in three ways:
1. Being naturalized
2. Being born on US soil to two non US citizens
3. Being born on US soil to one US citizen and one non US citizen
If Arnold can’t serve because of #1 then neither can anyone that falls under #s 2 or 3. Barry is a #3.
14th Amendment citizens cannot be President. Barack Obama’s campaign has stated he’s a citizen under the 14th Amendment.
Citizenship under the 14th Amendment is achieved in three ways:
1. Being naturalized
2. Being born on US soil to two non US citizens
3. Being born on US soil to one US citizen and one non US citizen
If Arnold can’t serve because of #1 then neither can anyone that falls under #s 2 or 3. Barry is a #3.
That’s your perogative. Personally, I don’t think I could shirk off an entire half of my lineage
Sorry about all the posts! :-(
Thank you for your well thought out explanation. I was seriously considering shooting my monitor in the same vein as what Elvis did... the over abundance of devil’s advocates >>> here at FR <<< with the demand for proof as to where natural born citizen is defined explicitly and further etched in granite within the Constitution, makes me want to pull my hair out. One way of saying it is that; some meanings have to be, seemingly ‘reverse engineered’ to get the Founders’ full intentions, and there in lies the crux of the matter. I am bailing out... off to the showers. Good night all! ;o)
And this is different from 2000 when the Gore campaign wanted to cherry-pick the counties to be re-counted. That was an equal protection argument which, contrary to what the left wants people to believe, passed 7-2 by the Nine.
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.