“Since you make no contention of my assertion that he’s liberal I guess I’d go with what you wrote as well to deflect attention away from who the man really is.”
I cited Amar as an eminent constitutional scholar. He is.
“It’s sad that you don’t comprehend that liberal >ahem...spit< ‘scholars’ interpret the Constitution as it suits them, not America.”
Did I miss where you cited a conservative scholar who says that the native-born child of a foreigner is ineligible?
I don’t know that Black’s Law Dictionary is either liberal or conservative. It’s the standard desk reference for terms in American law, and it defines “natural-born citizen” so that native-born citizenship is sufficient. If you don’t like Black’s, please cite your favorite law dictionary that says different.
“BTW, do you have the text of Apuzzo citing Amar’s book so that it can be seen in context? I’d like to see if his book was cited in a positive or negative light. You didn’t mention it so...”
It’s in Apuzzo’s brief in reply to the motion to dismiss Kerchner v. Obama, dated 03 Aug 2009, page 14.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17519578/Kerchner-v-Obama-Congress-DOC-34-Plaintiffs-Brief-Opposing-Defendants-Motion-to-Dismiss
I think he also cites Amar, similarly, in one of his filings on appeal.
Did I miss where you cited a conservative scholar who says that the native-born child of a foreigner is ineligible?
Why bother? All you'll do is throw Amar up as the "official" repository of knowledge and everybody else isn't qualified.
I don’t know that Black’s Law Dictionary...blah, blah, blah...
What was that quote? Something along the lines of only using Black's in civil law?
Yep, you just keep on using your liberal sources. I'll pass.
Have a nice day.