Rush Limbaugh predicts: Marco Rubio will be president

World Net Daily ^ | Sept. 7, 2011 | Joe Kovacs

[Free ThinkerNY]

PALM BEACH, Fla.

[itsahoot]

Fortunately for Rubio, his Florida birth certificate will be the only document he needs to get on the top ticket.

Fortunately? Drew do you care nothing for the Constitution? You really want to say, well they did it first?

I suppose it is possible that no one really cares for the rule of law in this country, but if that is true, this isn't really the Country the Founders created anyway.

You want to live in that kind of world, just go South a few miles.

I personally think highly of Rubio, but if he is not qualified, he is not qualified. Remember how many idiots on this forum actually lamented that Arnold couldn’t run for President?

[El Sordo]

We shall see.

Remember the Truthers?

[itsahoot]

Not any anchor baby. Just outstanding conservative ones.

Do you realize the gravity of that statement?

Stealing is wrong, can you think of a time when it might not be?

When we join with the thugs that regularly flaunt the law, then what makes us any different?

I want no part of the movement you seem ready to create.

[Drew68]

Drew do you care nothing for the Constitution?

I have a great deal of respect for our Constitution. It's made-up birther nonsense that I have little patience for.

[itsahoot]

Do you know what Barbara Streisand means?

[itsahoot]

You remind me of a friend i made while in the Army, from Texas. He said to me once, I am not hard to please, just give me what I want.

Has our Republic really been reduced to this kind of quibbling over right and wrong? Where if we like the outcome, the Constitution and the Law, be damned, full speed ahead?

I am glad I am old, and if this continues, I will be sorry I ever served just to lose the Republic to our spoiled children.

[buccaneer81]

It's made-up birther nonsense that I have little patience for.

Made up? Vattel, Bingham and Minor v, Happerset are "made up?"

Here's a promise...If there is an ineligible VP candidate on the ballot I will sit out the election, regardless of who heads the ticket. And I'm not the only one who will.

[El Sordo]

“Vattel, Bingham and Minor v, Happerset are “made up?””

Those things are real. But the Birther interpretations of them are made up.

[edge919]

The eligibility of those born *outside* the U.S. depends on citizen parents, as Gordon explains:

“It is clear enough that native-born citizens are eligible and that naturalized citizens are not. The recurring doubts relate to those who have acquired United States citizenship through birth abroad to American parents.”

Gordon is not saying that native-born means jus soli only. His point is simply that naturalized citizens are not eligible for presidents, which he supports in footnote by citing several cases:

The naturalized citizen's ineligibility for the Presidency is mentioned Schneider in v. Rusk, 377 U.S. 163, 165, 177 (1964) ; Knauer v. United States, 328 U.S. 654, 658 (1946) ; Baumgartner v. United States, 322 U.S. 665, 673 (1944) ; Luria v.United States, 231 U.S. 9, 22 (1913).

Further in his essay, Gordon explains:

"The common law, as it had developed through the years, recognized a combination of the jus soli and the jus sanguinis. A similar combination has always been embraced by the laws of the United States, except for the possibility of an inadvertent hiatus between 1802 and 1855."

"In Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court found some comfort in its earlier decision in Minor v. Happersett."

"The court mentioned the presidential qualification clause and stated that it unquestionably included children born in this country of citizen parents, who "were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.""

[itsahoot]

Yep I can plainly see what respect you have for the Constitution, you like the parts that fit your agenda.

We really don't need Courts and lawyers to tell us what we should know by reason of common sense.

What we really need is for 9 people to stare at a picture of Mona Lisa and tell us what the Painter was trying to say to us. It is a picture, nothing more.

You sir are an offense to the Constitution, and to sensible people everywhere.

[buccaneer81]

Pathetic. Keep up the name calling. It speaks volumes.

[buccaneer81]

Excellent post!

[edge919]

I don't see Gray saying the two types are different ...

You need to read all the words in the decision. Gray is clear.

In Minor v. Happersett, Chief Justice Waite, when construing, in behalf of the court, the very provision of the Fourteenth Amendment now in question, said: "The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that."

Are you comprehending this?? The Constitution does NOT define NBC. Later, Gray says:

But citizenship by birth is established by the mere fact of birth under the circumstances defined in the Constitution. Every person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States, and needs no naturalization.

The "circumstances" Gray is referring to is the citizenship clause in the 14th amendment, which is IN the Constitution. Read it again. When construing the 14th amendment, the Minor court said that NBC is NOT defined by the Constitution. What Gray calls "citizenship by birth" is a type of citizenship that IS defined by the Constitution, specifically by the 14th amendment. It is dependent on satisfying the subject clause, which is accomplished when the parents have permanent residence and domicil, which he explains here:

It necessarily follows that persons born in China, subjects of the Emperor of China but domiciled in the United States, having been adjudged, in Yick Wo v. Hopkins to be within the jurisdiction of the State within the meaning of the concluding sentence, must be held to be subject to the jurisdiction of the United States within the meaning of the first sentence of this section of the Constitution, and their children "born in the United States" cannot be less "subject to the jurisdiction thereof."

NBCs are not dependent on the 14th amendment for citizenship, which is what the Minor decision said and Gray affirmed, when he said the Supreme Court was:

.. committed to the view that all children born in the United States of citizens or subjects of foreign States were excluded from the operation of the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment ...

The first sentence of the 14th amendment is the citizenship clause. NBCs are EXCLUDED from the operation of this clause.

[El Sordo]

Namecalling?

What namecalling?

You boobyhead.

[buccaneer81]

"Birthers" is a slur used by the left.

And you know it.

[DRey]

I didn't know Sarah ran for president in 2008. Guess I should have penciled her in, too.

I understand your birther argument. That argument was never an issue until the Obama birthers were shown his birth certificate, then moved on to the "intention" of the framers...like the framers were to stupid to actually write in plain English their intentions in the Constitution, we now have to try to read their minds. The Constitution is what matters, and Rubio will be our next VP, thank God.

[El Sordo]

Nerf herder.

[buccaneer81]

Nerf herder.

So, I'm a douchebag for defending the Constitution?

What a scummy tool you are.

[El Sordo]

Earlier in this thread someone commented that “...name calling speaks volumes.” Do you disagree with that now?

[edge919]

The Constitution was pretty clear that this country was formed by those who fought for its independence and their children (”ourselves and our posterity”). The Constitution does not say for “ourselves and the babies born of those who wander into the country and knock up a local girl.”