In the official statement below, I'm not seeing that claim made. Why does Baldwin make a false statement to premise his article?
Sigh. Nice try, but ‘twon’t float.
Libs are soooo transparent.
Chuck Baldwin is a low grade moron. Natural born citizen means a citizen at birth, and does NOT imply or necessitate birth within the U.S.A.. According to Chuck Baldwin's idiocy, John McCain wasn't a ‘natural born citizen’ either.
Oh, BS. Someone born to an American citizen is a natural-born citizen, be in in Panama, in Kenya, or on Mars.
LLS
“Perhaps one reason that John McCain is so uninterested in where Barack Obama was born is because he, John McCain, was not born in the United States. He was born in the country of Panama. So, let me ask readers a question: Does anyone believe if John McCain had been elected President instead of Barack Obama that any notable conservative would have been distressed about a “constitutional crisis”? Get real!”
IS THIS TRUE????
Oh...one of the baldwin’s said it...so it must be true.../sarc
He sure used up a lot of space trying to point out occasions of Republicans violating the Constitution.
His wheels are still spinning however.
Sorry pally. That dog won’t hunt.
They are starting to realize this is a real issue and not going away. So this is nothing more than an attempt to deflect the issue away from Obama.
Smoke and mirrors.
A strict interpretation of the Constitution would require that the Baldwin/Donofrio definition of natural born citizen be included in the documents somewhere. It isn't.
Absolutely! If it does not benefit the Communists,a/k/a Democrats, they ignore it. They only apply it to advance their cause or to hinder their enemies.
Most of the money spent by the Federal government (non-Defense) spent under GWB is un-Constitutional. No one seems too worked up about that.
I voted for Baldwin and have been a CP supporter since 1996, but I think he blows it here badly, with an unreasonable definition of natural-born citizen. The idea that the children of U.S. citizens who are serving our military, if born overseas, should not be considered natural born citizens is fairly ludicrous and more than a bit offensive. Chuck, I’m disappointed with you.
Ignorant fools need to be banned from publishing anything.
From his bio:
Birthplace: Coco Solo, Panama Canal Zone
The Canal Zone was a US possession and therefore, any persons born there are US citizens.
I’m not sure about non-US citizens giving birth while there, but I do know for a fact that US citizens had been having children there for decades and still are as there are many still working on the Canal. All it takes now since the Canal Zone was dissolved is a visit to the US Consulate to get the right paperwork.
My sister was born in the Canal Zone and she’s a US citizen. And I’ve never had any issue with my clearance updates because of this.
This whole thing about McCain’s citizenship is a NON-ISSUE.
He’s a true ZONIAN
SZ
Article after article keep making false statements like this. I've yet to see an Hawaiian offical say that Obama was born in Hawaii, they just verify that he has a Hawaiian BC per Hawaiian law.
I decided to see what the heck CB was ranting about. The below comes from the State Dept as best I can tell and is the policy as described by CB.
____________________________________________________________
7 FAM 1116.1-4 Not Included in the Meaning of “In the United
States”
(TL:CON-64; 11-30-95)
c. 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.
____________________________________________________________
Much has been said here about how both McCain’s parents were citizens so he is automatically a natural born citizen no matter where he was born. But that is not what the above seems to indicate.
Hopefully someone more familiar with this State Dept policy can explain?
In the official statement below, I'm not seeing that claim made. Why does Baldwin make a false statement to premise his article?
Chuck Baldwin is just another version of the left.
Baldwin wants American troops out of the war.
Baldwin is a 9/11 Truther, believes our gov. was behind 9/11.
He also states Lincoln was one of the worst presidents.
Baldwin is a Narcissist, a male who is afraid to be a man and hides behind the anti war left.
Baldwin is a self-important hypocrite.