Posted on 12/03/2008 11:43:31 PM PST by BP2
That does not say 'citizens of the United States’ cannot be President.
It just limits the Presidency to the subset of citizens who are natural-born. Like Barrack Obama. Or Mr. Ark (but not citizens like me, who were naturalized).
The class of citizens includes both natural born citizens and naturalized citizens. Only the former can serve as President.
I've asked you several times- please show me where it says that in the COTUS, Federal law or case law.
There doesn’t need to be a law.
All of our Presidents have met the criteria:
All of our Presidents were either citizens of the United States at the time the Constitution was adopted (doesn’t apply to Obama since he’s not over 200 years old)
OR
They were born on US soil to US citizens.
Please take a few minutes to see some information on our past Presidents citizenship at:
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/
So show me where it says that in the COTUS.
All of our Presidents were either citizens of the United States at the time the Constitution was adopted (doesn’t apply to Obama since he’s not over 200 years old)OR They were born on US soil to US citizens.
So what?
Well said. The left's default consideration of the right is entirely false. We don't hate them. We simply vehemently disagree with them.
All I want to know, is that Obama is at minimum, an American in blood and in law. That is all.
It's a foregone conclusion that we will be opposed to practically every ounce of his agenda, because we're conservatives. That's not even at issue, and doesn't equate to hatred of the man on our part.
What the left does not want to recognize, and what they will refuse to see, is that Obama has given our side (and theirs) every reason to suspect that something is amiss with his basic qualification to be President.
Obama himself is responsible for this growing controversy. Not us. Our side has always graciously accepted our election losses, unlike the Democrats. But, they overlook this too.
Our demand that he satisfy the simple requirements of office does not equal extremist hatred for the man.
It most certainly does say that.
“No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President;”
This means you cannot be President UNLESS you are a natural born citizen, UNLESS, of course, you were a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution.
The Framers were ‘citizens of the United States’. They were not natural born citizens of the United States. They had to grandfather themselves in.
The clause, ‘or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution’, expired by the time James Buchannan was running for President.
Are you kidding?
So what?
So, it doesn’t matter that ALL of our Presidents have met the criteria up until Obama?
We should just toss the requirement aside for him?
Of course. We are not in disagreement on this.
The Framers were ‘citizens of the United States’. They were not natural born citizens of the United States. They had to grandfather themselves in.
Sure, again, we are not in diagreement.
The clause, ‘or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution’, expired by the time James Buchannan was running for President.
Again, no disagreement.
Under the Constitution, only a citizen from birth/natural-born citizen, can be President. People who became citizens through the naturalization process cannot.
Becuase of his being born in the US, Barrack Obama was a US citizen from birth. He is therefore a natural-born citizen and is qualified to be President.
All our Presidents were natural-born citizens, as is Barrack Obama. He meets the requirements the same as George Bush, Bill Clinton and any other President.
Citizen Blade keeps asking for a law.
The Constitution IS THE LAW.
It clearly states the criteria to be President.
“No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States. “
Obama is not a natural born citizen. He is a citizen of the United States.
Arnold is not a natural born citizen. He is a citizen of the United States.
Wong Kim Ark is not a natural born citizen. He is a citizen of the United States.
Citizen Blade is not a natural born citizen. He is a citizen of the United States.
Unless born at the time of the Constitution’s adoption, none of the above can serve as President. Why? Because they are only citizens of the United States. Not natural born citizens of the United States.
Why is this so hard to understand?
Again, please show me how, under COTUS, Federal law or case law, Obama is not a natural born citizen. He did not become a citizen through the naturalization process but by birth- how is he not a natural-born citizen?
No, he does not meet the requirements. One does not MERELY need to be born on US soil to be President.
ALL of our Presidents have been born on US soil to US citizens (plural).
Obama has ONE parent that was US citizen. He is not naturally born.
If Obama’s dad was naturalized and became a citizen of the US BEFORE Obama Jr. was born, this wouldn’t be an issue.
He doesn’t have to go through naturalization to be a ‘citizen of the United States’.
He can be a citizen of the United States by being born on US soil.
Please read the 14th Amendment.
Fortunately for us, they can't do that. It's called "Ex Post Facto", or "after the fact", and isn't legal under US law.
The laws on the books at the time of Obama's birth control his status.
Show me where the added requirement of two American citizen parents is in COTUS, Federal law or case law.
ALL of our Presidents have been born on US soil to US citizens (plural).
Sure. So what?
Obama has ONE parent that was US citizen. He is not naturally born.
Show me where the added requirement of two American citizen parents is in COTUS, Federal law or case law.
If Obama’s dad was naturalized and became a citizen of the US BEFORE Obama Jr. was born, this wouldn’t be an issue.
Show me where it says this in COTUS, Federal law or case law.
Fourteenth Amendment framer, Rep. John A. Bingham said the following:
“[E]very human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.”
You assume much. I understand Leo Donofrio's case perfectly.
...what's your real intention here?
>>> "My intent is to get a question answered..." <<<
Bullsh!t. You're either trying to pick a fight, have a chip on your shoulder, or you're attempting to bully me.
Now, go ahead and blow up. I know your type well.
And this is why we need the Supreme Court to handle this. The law is mostly too arcane and esoteric for the average citizen to easily grasp, although the effects of the law impact us in ways that are real and solid.
It's no wonder that so many people despise lawyers and courts. They rightly see these entities as surreptitiously subverting their natural rights through trickery of words, and I believe that is so.
Then answer the question. I assumed you would know enough about Donofrio's position to do be able to do that. I assumed too much it seems.
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.