Posted on 11/05/2010 10:19:53 PM PDT by chatter4
With all the talk of many conservatives hoping that Mark Rubio could one day run for President, I have a few questions. From the information available on the Web, It is said that Mark Rubio's parents were here in exile from Cuba. That would imply that they had hopes of returning there one day. Did his parents ever become US citizens? Did they become US citizens prior to Mark's birth?
I wouldn't want a teacher at Spaulding school to have to deal with the left - though New Hampshire has many who believe the Constitution is critical to our freedom, and have a great slogan to go with their beliefs. I've spent lots of time in New Hampshire, but don't live near there now.
In Truth, I'm one of you, and was guided to our framer's and founder's writing by you, rxsid, Patlin, El Gato, Bushpilot, as well as some persistent trolls, James777 and Mr Rogers, whose attempts at distraction actually help to clarify the truth, if you read them carefully. Of course Mario Apuzzo and Leo Donofrio, Sharon Rondeau of Post&Email who published the Breckenridge Long story revealing Charles Evans Hughes attempt to sneak around Article II, and pointed to Long's lengthy 1916 Legal essay absolutely consistent with Vattel, Waite, Marshall, Bingham, etc, have written lots, and sometimes brilliantly, about this seldom questioned aspect of our foundation. The UConn team, who must have braved serious retribution for their “Undeadrevolution” tutorial on natural born citizenship, which pointed to Dr. David Ramsay, as well as to Washington's and Jay's very public concerns about foreign intrigue and profiteering.
The far left are vicious. I was in their midst for more than a decade, and while frustrated, understand why public figures have had to leave the exposure to those of us who are anonymous. The battle must be waged by citizens. That is the genius of “The People's House.” Our framers knew that too.
Donofrio’s discovery of Chester Arthur's father's naturalization papers (Arthur's father naturalized when Chester was 14, and was a British subject, like Obama's father, when Chester was born) has been suppressed by the media, who are clearly much closer to Pravda than most of us realized two years ago. But it was a brilliant revelation; it seems highly possible that he had a suspicion, causing him to chase down Arthur's history. The probability that Donofrio proved the ineligibility of the only other occupant of the White House to hide his birth certificate, a politician who kept silent, and even lied to distract, about his childhood circumstances, and who concealed his personal papers, burning them shortly before his death, without suspecting the truth is tiny.
Obama’s adviser at Harvard, Larry Tribe, specializes in Constitutional law. He may have engineered this distraction, hiding all the papers, but will certainly not own up to it at this point. His silence and perhaps cooperation was insured when Elena Kagen buried Tribe's admitted plagiarism in committees of Ruling Class colleagues at Harvard until most had forgotten. He copied verbatim major portions recent book he published. Kagen probably saved him from public trial, and may have prevented his removal from the faculty.
Mario Apuzzo, apparently a journeyman lawyer, has shown the perfidy of our academic “Constitutional Scholars,” by clearing away the clutter to expose the only citations that count, the words of our framers and justices. This case has become a war between originalism and judicial cronyism. It is also about money; and money may explain the behavior of most of those afraid to step in. Though his case was not heard, it is a virtual certainty that every justice read it carefully. He “nailed” every issue, some have said too many; but he provided the court with a means of pinning the failure to invalidate Obama on Congress. After all, every Senator Signed Senate Res 511 in 2008. No Senator can deny the “citizen parents” component of Article II Section 1. They put their heads down, evading, as the court has done, and counting on the short memories of voters.
My background is mathematics. So the connection to Leibniz was fascinating. Lately, most amazing is my discovery of the blueprint for our Constitution - Vattel’s Law of Nations. Rather than look for supporting citations my family is actually plowing through the whole book, and far from being tedious, as James Wilson sometimes is, almost every section specifies the objective to be achieved to create a constitutional foundation for a civil society.
Most important to the design of complex computer systems is the specification. Many specifications are written as afterthoughts, and well over half of big system projects fail to achieve their objectives. Vattel’s (there were more than half a dozen other judicial philosophers who compiled the Law of Nations, based upon “the natural law,” Leibniz, Grotius, Pufendorf, Wolff, Groetendyke,... Law of nations is the specification for our system of government, including its constitution. It is surprising, but fitting, to think that the document was assembled over only a bit more than one year.
Vattel anticipated judical review. He defined limitations upon the powers of “the sovereign.” He explained why altering the Constitution must be possible, but required mechanisms that insure consensus. He outlined what today would be deemed a libertarian position on involvement with the internal affairs of other nations.
It remains to be seen when legal scholars, many of whom certainly know the importance of Vattel, will step in and support our Constitution. It seems possible that too many are afraid of the power of the left. Scientists who wouldn't go along with the clever nonsense designed to justify more taxes on the productive sector by taxing what is essentially the air we breath, lost their senior jobs, in and out of faculties. That has always been a weakness of government sponsored science. What has been needed is an informed electorate, and the crew here at FR, some whom I didn't name, but who weigh in when we can't unravel the history. Apuzzo, Paralegalnm, jbjd, Mitchell Langbert, and others, who host discussions, are informing those who don't have the time or interest, but who still care about freedom and truth.
Would that we had a ally with the voice of a Mark Levin, but it has become more clear that were he to weigh in, presuming he holds the same respect for John Marshall, John Bingham, John Jay, Hamilton, Jefferson, Waite, his sponsors would be forced to drop him. His law practice went through a bankruptcy not long ago. There can't be much money in prosecuting civil cases against the government. We are adults, and the insight into the true meaning of the framers has probably not been better presented for lay readers than by Levin's Liberty and Tyranny.
Thanks again, but my too lengthy response is to reiterate that FR, and the very bright non-professionals including yourself is what the 1st Amendment is all about. The left doesn't trust the “stupid citizenry” to guide themselves. That is why central management of governments, and the economy always fails. That is why John Holdren (Presidential Energy Adviser) and Paul Ehrlich, small eathers and Marxists, lost every bet with population economist Julian Simon, whose book The Ultimate Resource, challenged the whole population bomb, diminishing resources cabal. Holdren will go back to Cape Cod, comfortable spending the money made by conservative Heinz, but dispensed by goofball Theresa and husband, war hero, John Kerry. It is up to us to expose the truth of our foundations which established the trust in The People's House to right attempts to redirect our productivity to the enrichment and security of The Ruling Class.
Excellent post, worthy of dissemination, my FRiend.
Doesn’t matter... I won’t ever vote for Rubio.
I lived in Miami from 1988-94. I attended some Brigade 2506 cookouts out off Krome twice with Cuban patriot pals. One of whom was killed reentering for saboteur work in 1991 or 1992. I don't agree...respectfully. Most of the originals are dying off or have passed away. The Jorge Mas Canosa generation. Great people. The Pre Marielitos...gone mostly. Their kids and grandkids are now Americanized thoroughly.
The Marielitos?...hell who knows they came with nothing. The old wave that came first left everything behind but the big players recovered long ago. Some may want to go back for business opportunities or what not but the old days of going back and getting back where they were are gone. I doubt even 10% would go back and claim Cuban citizenship. We have a close friend here who is a 32 year old Cuban descended gal...comely and sweet as all get out. Her grandparents came..we have talked about this. She looks at me and laughs as if I would wish to go back to Ulster or Wessex or even Huguenot France in the same context.
God bless them. I like the early Cubans...anyone names a street Ronald Reagan Blvd is ok with me.*
if they just don't annoy me with being pro-amnesty as a latin thing...average Canary Island or Spanish descended Cuban who came here in the 50s and 60s has much more in common with my Southern butt than some Mexican or Guatemalan illegal Spanish speaking or not..hell I speak Spanish too.
Cuba today is about as mulatto as the Dom Rep...the whites who had the m,ost to lose under communism and the means to leave mostly did except those who ascribed to the revolution
if Cuba reverts to freedom it will never be the same place...demographically it is now an AfroCaribbean nation where as once it was along with Argentina and Chile the nation with the highest concentration of European blood with prominent families going back 100s of years.
Outstanding posts.
good read and ping
That still doesn’t qualify him. If his parents were not citizens then he can not be President.
My guest is they were not us citizens so he is cannot be president. Neither can Jindal for that matter.
No matter how many times you say it, people purposely ignore the “natural born” portion of the eligibility question.
If his parents were not US citizens, he is not eligible to be president, even if he was born in the white house!
Ron Reale
realetybytes.com
You left out the part that the founders cared about: “Child of citizen parents.”
Rubio has failed to show that his parents were naturalized before he was born.
Besides that, Cuba claims his surviving parent(mom) and Marco himself as citizens, which would make him a dual citizen.
Rubio has been very coy about running on the GOP ticket. Reason? He knows he has an eligibility problem. And WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH OF ELIGIBILITY CONTROVERSIES!
And don’t think the ‘rats won’t be all over him if he tried to run. They will make everything we said or did about O’Bummer look mild.
I was one of Marco’s earliest supporters against Crist for the Senate but the Senate and the presidency are two very different things.
Nope...he has failed to prove his parents had been naturalized by then.
“Born in the country of citizen parents.”
Rubio has not documented that they had been naturalized after much prodding. That tells me he knows he will be a walking, talking eligibility controversy if he runs.
And, having supported Rubio and worked for his senatorial campaign, I can tell you that he wants the ECONOMY and OBAMA to be the focus of attention, not himself.
He won’t try to run-—he knows better.
To exclude foreign diplomats.
IMO opinion Rubio qualifies.
Sorry, didn’t mean to reply to such an old comment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.