EFFORT BY McCAIN, OBAMA, McCASKILL, LEAHY, CLINTON AND COBURN TO CIRCUMVENT US CONSTITUTION

The Huffington Riposte | Saturday, January 17, 2009

[icwhatudo]

I’m sorry but you are incorrect. It was never US territory. Be glad to read any info or links you think prove otherwise.

[icwhatudo]

"Being born on US soil is part of the requirement"

Link?

[icwhatudo]

"Doesn't change anything. He was born of two full-fledged American citizens -- thus is a "natural-born" American, himself. "

Agreed!

[Arguendo]

I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen… . . - John Bingham in the United States House on March 9, 1866

How does John McCain fail to meet this definition? He was clearly born within the jurisdiction of the United States (on a Naval base) even if he was not born on US soil.

The guy who wrote this sounds like a kook.

Besides, one of the most fundamental canons of legal interpretation is that you avoid an interpretation that leads to an absurd result when there are other reasonable interpretations. And an interpretation of the "natural born citizen" clause that holds a person ineligible because his father was a high-ranking naval officer who happened to be stationed abroad when he was born is clearly absurd.

[Arguendo]

That depends on the meaning of “US territory.” The US certainly exercised jurisdiction over it, which arguably makes it US territory.

[icwhatudo]

By that standard, one could argue that Gitmo is US territory and therefore the prisoners there have all the rights of prisoners kept in Washington DC and Puerto Rico.

[muawiyah]

The Leftwingtards STARTED the "natural born" issue with their attack on John McCain.

Like many other Americans over the centuries his father was stationed "abroad" (albeit in the Canal Zone which was treated as American territory by the law) with his wife and children.

The law, at the time, would have specified that any children born to his mother and father while abroad should be added to the "family visa" or "other documents" dealing with the fact of their assignment outside the US.

End of story.

What happened was the Democrats were quite upset that their own spawn, the Leftwingtards at DU, were attacking McCain on this basis when, in fact, they knew their possible candidate, Obama, had an even worse problem.

[muawiyah]

There is no such requirement in the Constitution or the law.

[Arguendo]

True, but I think it’s questionable to base rights on presence on US “territory”—whatever that means—in the first place.

[muawiyah]

And, you could make the argument the USSC originally made which is that it’s just a place rented from Cuba ~

[ckilmer]

They didn’t give obama a pass.

[Frantzie]

McCain is a useful idiot for the Democrats like Specter.
Maverick John McCain stabs conservative Republicans in the back regularly and pushes amnesty with his buddies Lindsay Graham and Mel Martinez.

McCain is a despicable human being. Not as bad as Obama but we were stuck with Obama thanks to McCain. His campaign manager was a Democrat who pretty much gave up in Sept 2008. They also attacked Palin along with the McCain clan. McCain is another Arlen Specter.

[itsahoot]

Agreed!

Not hardly. He was born in a Panamanian hospital, he is thus born a citizen of Panama, he is a citizen by virtue of his parents citizenship, but not a natural born citizen.

[KarenMarie]

That is one of the most screwed up things I have ever read.

[TigersEye]

But if these candidates were legitimate already, there would obviously be no reason for these proceedings.

There's the money quote.

[TigersEye]

He was clearly born within the jurisdiction of the United States (on a Naval base) even if he was not born on US soil.

But McCain was not born on a Naval base. He was born off base in the town of Colon.

[Arguendo]

Whatever, that interpretation still leads to an obviously absurd result.

[TigersEye]

IOWs the facts don’t matter. Thanks for playing.

[calcowgirl]

One of those links posted in the article is pretty interesting reading. It’s a compelling argument and well footnoted. McCain was born in 1936. The US, recognizing that McCain types were not citizens at birth, passed a law retroactively in 1937. So, McCain became a citizen by act of law in 1937 which means he is technically not “natural born.”

http://www.scribd.com/doc/9258498/Why-Sen-John-McCain-Cannot-Be-President

[Spaulding]

The complexity surrounding who is and who is not natural born is why Obama’s supporters felt they could get away with it. Every senator signed S.R. 511 in which the definition of “Natural Born Citizen” is repeated numerous times. Obama never hid the British Citizenship of his father. His supporters were clever, drawing the attention to McCain's not having been born on US Territory. I would be surprised if everyone didn't know the truth - McCain, unfair though that may seem, was not qualified. Now, none of our legislators will touch the issue, and may not have a remedy - they could and should have questioned Obama's credentials before the election. Let him destroy the economy, the military, free speech, 2nd Amendment, but the word is not spoken. Perhaps that Obama himself made no secret (as Chester Arthur did, burning his papers to keep the secret of his non-citizen father) of the allegiance of his father to Britain and Kenya. Now, the hate-america, anti-capitilist machine is installed and a soft coup in progress. Obama is the the law school example of why the allegiance
of parents, as specified by John Jay, George Washington, Ben Franklin, John Bingham, etc. etc. is so important.