This remarkable fact was uncovered by Sharon Rondeau writing in the Post and Email, a blog about which I was initially cautious. Hughes was an impressive man, appointed associate justice in 1910 by William Howard Taft, he resigned to run for president in 1916. Here is a bit of the Rondeau article:
“During his presidential campaign, Hughes’s eligibility for the presidency was questioned because his father remained a British citizen. Breckenridge Long, an attorney and graduate of Washington University Law School who later served as Secretary of State as well as U.S. ambassador to Italy under FDR, examined the issue in an article entitled “Is Mr. Charles Evans Hughes a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ within the Meaning of the Constitution?” Published in the “Chicago Legal News,” Vol. 146, p. 220 in 1916, the article begins:
Whether Mr. Hughes is, or is not, a “natural born” citizen within the meaning of the Constitution, so as to make him eligible, or ineligible, to assume the office of President, presents an interesting inquiry.
He was born in this country and is beyond question “native born.” But is there not a distinction “native born” and “natural born”? At the time he was born his father and mother were subjects of England. His father had not then been naturalized.”
Here is the URL for the entire article, including the pointer to the Breckenridge Long article.
As an aside, it is sad to see trolls dominating Internet discussions, preventing those who can help educate the public from being heard. The major media figures have been silenced, perhaps by threats involving the penalties for incitement, since violence will probably be employed by the left when the threat of exposure becomes great enough. Some of us have seen most of the polemical arguments, but when an issue such as Dr. Lakin, involving eligibility arises the wave of birth certificate responses hits first, suggesting very active monitoring of this site. Then, because of the integrity of the FR owner, measured responses begin to come. To anyone who is interested in the facts, look for succinct citations. Read the Apuzzo blog. Read The Post and Email, or Undeadrevolution.wordpress.com.
Sites without clear management, like Greta Van Sustern’s blog, have been destroyed by name calling, and by design. This is about our Constitution and, while the administrators tolerate trolls who simply interrupt serious examination, it has taken me a while to see the extent to which it dilutes discussion here, still a relative sanctuary for freedom of speech.
Thanks. It was the Woodrow Wilson thing that threw me.
Honesty and candor requires me to inform you that I am somebody who, because of his superior logic and argumentative skills, has been called a “troll” quite frequently on the birther threads, to the point where JR told me to shut up or get zotted. So, since I’ve been here nearly 12 years, I pretty much shut up. Occasionally I pop off, but not much.
On the issues of “trolls”, I am somewhat sensitive, because I feel I have been unjustly accused of a crime that I didn’t commit. I am looking around for a screenwriter to do a television series, like BRANDED, or maybe THE FUGITIVE. I kind of like BRANDED, because the theme music is kewler.
Branded, scorned as a OBOT Mole-doo doo doo dooooo.
What do you do when you’re branded?
And they call you a TROLL....
So far, no one is interested.
However, I have written a poem, which should apply to those unjustly accused of being Trolls, whoever and wherever they might be:
The Troll Poem
by parsifal
If you don’t agree with ME,
You surely are a TROLL, you see.
It all works out so LOGICKLY,
YOU are a Troll, if WE don’t agree.
And if you disagree with ME,
I’ll tell the MODS, just wait and see!
That’s how I’ll WIN my victory.
By TANTRUMS from my nursery.
I’ll save the MENTAL energy
Defending MY absurdity,
From ANY who might disagree
By crying “TROLL” quite frequently.
I have no sense of DECENCY.
It’s all about my VANITY.
The Center of the Universe is ME!
And you’re a TROLL if you don’t agree!
Optional T.S.Eliot type ending, for high class web sites:
This is how the argument ends...
This is how the argument ends...
This is how the argument ends...
Not with a bang. . .but a Simper.
parsy, who thanks you for the info