For those who find the previously posted information
unreadable due to lack of formatting, here’s a link
to the piece:
_____________________________________
Amending the Natural Born Citizen law - an attorney’s view
Excerpt:
$$$
07.13.09
This article was written in 2005 by an attorney affiliated with the law firm of Kirkland & Ellis (that has ties to Mr. Obama) promoting the idea of doing away with the “natural born citizen” requirement for serving as president.
Chicago-Kent Law Review
2006
81 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 275
STUDENT NOTE: AMENDING THE NATURAL BORN CITIZEN REQUIREMENT: GLOBALIZATION AS THE IMPETUS AND THE OBSTACLE
NAME: Sarah P. Herlihy*
BIO: * J.D. Chicago-Kent College of Law, 2005. The author would like to thank Professor Graeme Dinwoodie, and the 2004-2005 Globalization and Its Effect on Domestic Law Seminar Class for their valuable comments and insights on this Note.
SUMMARY:
… “The natural born citizen requirement in Article II of the United States Constitution has been called the “stupidest provision” in the Constitution, “undecidedly un-American,” “blatantly discriminatory,” and the “Constitution’s worst provision. …
Additionally, considering that the Founding Fathers presumably included the natural born citizen clause in the Constitution partly out of fear of foreign subversion, the current stability of the American government and the in-tense media scrutiny of presidential candidates virtually eliminates the possibility of a “foreigner” coming to America, becoming a naturalized citizen, generating enough public support to become president, and somehow using the presidency to directly benefit his homeland. …
Even though this concern is not a legitimate reason to vote against abolishing the natural born citizen clause because many natural born Americans are Muslims, many Americans may oppose a Constitutional amendment because of the possibility that a naturalized citizen would be more likely to be a Muslim, Hindu, or some other religion besides Christian. …
Accordingly, Americans may rely on their belief that globalization is effectively eating away at “America” by lessening the strength of symbols such as the presidency to justify their decision to leave the natural born citizen requirement in place.”
~~~~
Interesting that the this piece seems to be centered on religion, at least initially, EXCLUDING the Constitutional premise for the inclusion of native citizenship:
PRIMARY ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND
HER CONSTITUTION.
So, is the argument being made that denying a presidential candidacy on the basis of native citizenship, even though completely anti-Constitutional, is discriminatory ??
Will the forces of Soros, media, bloggers, pundits, liberal law professors, think tanks and WH operatives be galvanized into another convergence of talking points, bombarding our eyes and ears with the sham argument of national bigotry ?
__________
Sarah Herlihy - Bio
http://www.spoke.com/info/p7jACJt/SarahHerlihy
This is very troubling. We laugh at Hillary’s “Vast Right Wing Conspiracy” but the Left wing conspiracy is not only vast, it is global. We partied while our country rotted from within...
McCain’s lawyer:
McCain Justice Advisory Committee
Christopher Landau - Partner, Kirkland & Ellis LLP
“Will the forces of Soros, media, bloggers, pundits, liberal law professors, think tanks and WH operatives be galvanized into another convergence of talking points, bombarding our eyes and ears with the sham argument of national bigotry..”
Of course. It has already started anew this past week in various liberal ‘opinion’ pieces. This goes way beyond our current usurper in chief and if they are successful in doing this to our country down the road..we might as well all leave for distant shores because the United States will never be ‘united’ again.
***.....and the in-tense media scrutiny of presidential candidates virtually eliminates the possibility of a “foreigner” coming to America***
This is so funny and making me sick to my stomach at the same time.
MEDIA SCRUTINY??????