Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MHGinTN
"Um, Wong wasn't running for president..."

Don't tell me, I'm not the one that complained about the ruling not using "natural born citizen".

"You've tried to argue that there are only and have been only two typesd of citizenship. This is false since we know--for example--that at one time Black people were considered at least a third type of citizen."

I am telling you that there are only two ways to acquire citizenship. Not that there are two types of citizenship. The two ways are birth and naturalization.

"Additionally, you purposely deminish the Constitutional eligibility issue by trying to deminish the meaning of natural born as the framers used and understood the term."

It is not the way the framers understood the term. That's only what you allege now. They understood it to mean just what most people today understand it to mean. Citizen by birth.

"That there is a major confusion on this is exactly why the SCOTUS needs to address the issues."

There isn't major confusion on this.

"That is your obamanoid cue to demand someone cite..."

Ah, there it is. We couldn't get through an entire post of yours without a personal attack, could we? Nothing your insult is worth reading, let alone responding to.

99 posted on 01/08/2009 11:52:05 AM PST by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies ]


To: mlo
"Nothing your insult is worth reading, let alone responding to."

Should have read:

"Nothing after your insult is worth reading, let alone responding to."

100 posted on 01/08/2009 11:53:14 AM PST by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson