Posted on 07/31/2012 2:58:34 PM PDT by Perdogg
I would like to address an issue that is apparently of concern to a significant number of people. In my “Ask Fred” column, several people have expressed concern (some have been adamant and angry) that Marco Rubio should not be selected as the Vice Presidential nominee because he would not be eligible to be President, if the need arose. They contend that at least one of his parents were required at the time of his birth to have been a citizen for him to fulfill the constitutional requirement of eligibility, even though he was born on American soil.
(Excerpt) Read more at fredthompsonsamerica.com ...
You might want to read down to the pertinent part:
The right of citizenship never descends in the legal sense, either by the common law or under the common naturalization acts. It is incident to birth in the country, or it is given personally by statute. The child of an alien, if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle. [p666]
The 'incident to birth in the country, or it is given personally by statute' is talking about naturalized citizens. This is made clear by the end of the following statement; 'is as much a citizen as the natural born child of a citizen' . He said Wong Kim was native born and just as much a citizen AS A natural-born citizen. The decision doesn't say that the court found Wong Kim was natural-born.
------
Saying someone is 'just as much a citizen' as a natural-born one is like saying a car is just as much a vehicle as a truck.
They may both be *vehicles* but it doesn't turn a car INTO a truck.
Nor does merely being born in the country make anyone natural-born.
How deep in the manure pile did you have to dig to come up with that one?
No one dropped any names. You are being rude why? I am not impressed with your debate skills. We are taught in what? Junior high that rudeness in debate means your argument lacks in substance and depth. Be rude to someone else. I do not respond to rudeness. I was raised better.
How many main stream Republicans have asked that this stop? How many disagree with you? And why you feel the need to be so smarmy and rude, I do not know. We disagree. Does not bother me. Why does it bother you so much? This is my last response to you.
You need to answer the question:
Why don't these people agree with you?
Rush Limbaugh? NO
Hannity? NO
Levin? NO
Fred Thompson? NO
Beck? NO
Any member of Congress? NO
Any sitting Judge? NO
Landmark Legal Foundation? NO
American Center for Law and Justice? NO
Jay Sekulow? NO
Newt Gingrich? NO
Rick Santorum? NO
Herman Cain? NO
Americans for Prosperity? NO
The NRA? NO
National Right to Life Committee? NO
None of the groups or individuals, above, agree with your crackpot interpretations of the law.
They are all strong conservatives, as am I.
You are wrong.
You are alone.
Please don’t resort to the leftist tactic of calling anyone who doesn’t agree worn you a crackpot. It’s a vile way to argue.
You were the one that was rude buddy. I read all of your snarky posts in this thread. Just responding in kind. So did you vote for Dewhurst today?
He is not eligible. I wish that everyone who doesn’t support the Constitution would just leave FR.
Not a single radical birther who claims that Rubio is not eligible seems to be able to debate, or understand common legal terms, or to understand history.
They have NO authority on their side at all.
NONE!
Yet they persist in their error. That IS the definition of “crackpot”!
Such crackpots hurt the conservative cause. More than a few of the crackpots, who post here, are actually Democrats and Socialists trying to make Conservatives look stupid.
“Ret. Col. Lawrence Sellin Explains Why Identity Thief Barack Obama Is Not In Jail”
http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/07/colonel-lawrence-sellin-explains-why.html
Basically I gather that if Rubio is selected to be the running mate for Romney the left will go haywire and the media will be the willing accomplices to seed doubts upon doubts and the whole thing will end up in court. Remember we fight on a playing field that is not level by any stretch of the imagination. Had Obama been Rubio, the media would have vetted in earnest and drove home the narrative. On the flip side had Rubio been Obama, the same would be true.
The courts would eat up precious time.
FR would go broke, if all of us who disagree with you, left.
This birther nonsense is NOT a conservative cause. You have not one single conservative leader in the entire country on your side.
NOT ONE!
I think the ability to guess a John Robert’s court decision is long gone. I say that as “court in general”. Roberts has been co-opted and how he decides is how he likes his bread buttered going so far as to rewrite law/arguments in the process.
I was not rude. And do you see the admonishment from Jim Robinson when you post? No personal attacks? I was not rude. And it is none of your business for whom I voted. And for your information, I happen to be female. I am NOT your “buddy”. Good night.
I agree. And Amen.
I can’t say I know that either of them qualify. In both cases I’d rather be safe in have that fact established first.
It is supposed to be from the Supreme Court decision on United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), but I am not going to read the whole case to find where.
Some people are doing some interesting vetting of the fraud:
http://sorosfiles.com/soros/2012/07/vetting-obama-conference-videos-now-posted.html
But, I don’t know if they’re RINOS, republicans or conservatives...hell, a democrat was the first to question Barry’s eligibility.
Many on your list are folks more interested in keeping their positions and wealth than are interested in “outing” Barry.
There’s some interesting info being uncovered. And, those that care about this country can walk and chew gum at the same time and couldn’t care LESS what the Republican machine thinks of them. I would hazard a guess that republicans have sunk low in the estimation of most Americans, whether you agree with that or not.
This is going to be played against Rubio if Romney picks him for VP. Much of it penny ante, but with the Dem main stream lib media, it is big in their minds.
From The Atlantic:
"The Oppo File on Marco Rubio: Why He's an Unlikely Veep Pick
By David A. Graham
May 4 2012, 12:06 PM ET Comment
Although he could be an asset to Mitt Romney, irregularities in the Florida senator's record would make him a fat target for Democrats. "
-snip-
"1. He Improperly Used a Republican Party Credit Card. In 2010, the Miami Herald and the St. Petersburg Times (now the Tampa Bay Times) reported that Rubio, a former speaker of the Florida House, had used a Republican Party credit card for thousands of dollars worth of expenses -- including groceries, wine from a store near his house, and repairs to his family minivan. Rubio says he reimbursed the non-party bills out of pocket, although a party spokeswoman said the card should never have been used for personal expenses. He was grilled about the matter Sunday on Fox News. "Obviously, in hindsight, it looked bad, right? I mean, why are you using a party credit card at all?" he said. "Some of these expenses were because a travel agent had the number -- you know, the credit card number -- and they billed it to that card instead of the other card. Sometimes it was just a mistake ... just literally reached for the wrong card." He argues the matter is closed. But National Journal's Beth Reinhard -- who broke some of the original stories -- points out that he hasn't answered all the questions or revealed all of the relevant documents yet. The kicker? One of his expenses was for $134 at a barbershop. Cue up the parallels to another young, charismatic Southern senator who was once a running mate: John Edwards."
-end snip-
On this one, the Florida Commission on Ethics dropped the charges as of a few days ago against Rubio.
Would Rubio be a distraction to the campaign besides Rubio not being a natural born citizen? It's better to look somewhere else.
Good post. I agree. Judge Malihi let Barry crap on his court by letting Barry ignore a subpoena! (I think we got the “promise” of a nuclear power plant for that pos “judgement”.)
And, why are the republicans so worried about Birthers’ concerns over Barry’s ineligibility?
The democrats certainly don’t care anymore:
snip-”In numerous previous lawsuits questioning the Constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama, Democrats have maintained that voters, not the Constitution, should be the final arbiters of presidential eligibility. “
http://times247.com/articles/dnc-voters-not-constitution-determines-eligibility
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.