Replies

First, I am not frustrated with you, because I have always known what you are doing, which is playing sophistry word games and silly sentence construction stuff. I am like Clarice, and you are either Dr. Lecter, or the guy who ate his own brains. I am not sure which. Either way, nothing I say is going to change your mind. But, I get to learn about twisted up logic and stuff.Here is, AGAIN, the MENTAL THINKING that keeps you messing up. You said:

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."

Then you stop. Why don't you go to "elsewhere: and see WHERE elsewhere is. And at ELSEWHERE, what the judges find. Then see what they say about what they find, and how it related to the case and the issue. But you don't. You just skip down 50 pages, find a sentence with some language you like and take it out of context to support your theory.

That is why YOUR theory does not seem to be shared by anybody but a few other Vattle Birthers and why the wonderful case you think decides what NBC is, gets less than 2 lines in the book from 1876, under women not having a right to vote. It is why Jerome Corsi didn't say a word about the two citizen parent stuff in his 2008 book,Obama Nation. Because the whole theory was made up AFTER that date. It is recycled losing cases from 1844 and 1898. so, that is why the case that this whole thread is about, the immigration case posted by YOU, has federal judges calling the kids of illegal aliens "natural born citizens." Not to mention a whole lot of other problems.

Sooo, maybe you don't think people notice these holes in your theory, but I bet a lot do. If you are the guy who is eating your own brains, then stop now, and quit being a Vattle Birther.

Why don't you go to "elsewhere: and see WHERE elsewhere is.

Elsewhere was explained in Post #237.

Now, I challenged you earlier, because Gray says Minor used common law as an aid in the construction of the citizenship provision of the 14th amendment. Show us the common law that Minor cited and how it was applied to the citizenship provision. Hop to. The heart of your misconception relies on you being able to find the common law citation(s) from the Minor court. Get to it.