Posted on 07/30/2009 8:35:25 PM PDT by Edward Watson
The entire birther argument, that Obama was actually born in Kenya instead of the US, making him ineligible for holding the office of the President of the US, is a spurious argument. It plays into Obama and the liberals hands - they want this to continue since it makes regular conservatives and opponents into fringe wackos.
Not one of us would've looked harder at his legitimacy than Hilary Clinton and the entire Clinton smear machine during the Democratic primaries. That magic bullet would've given Hilary the presidency - and yet nada, bupkis.
There are many valid reasons to oppose Obama and the liberals, but his birthplace isn't one of them.
“To be a natural born citizen means to be born a citizen, “
No it doesn’t. Nice try, though.
The fact that his father was Kenyan does not preclude him being a natural born citizen.
“You could help me understand why you think a child of a non-citizen is a natural born citizen, when he is obviously not.”
It’s not obvious to me. I know to some the word “natural” itself has all sorts of connotations relating to blood and sex and such. To me, it is just the opposite of naturalized.
“If born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen…’””
Have to be a contortionist to read this as being equal to a NBC. As much a citizen, yes. NBC,nope.
“No it doesn’t. Nice try, though.”
Give me a source, at long last. And not Vattel. Give me U.S. law.
I generally do too, but only a month here and telling us to "move on" reference the birth issue gets my goat. It'd be a good idea to lay low until you're a "known quantity" IMO. Just my two cents, of course...
“He was flown to Hawaii from Kenya when 3 days old and hasn’t been naturalized as a citizen therefore he’s an illegal alien that should be deported!”
That would have required that U2 spy plane that GHW Bush used to illegally get hostages released in 1980.
Not gonna happen. He doesn't have a source or he would surely have shown it by now, if only to shut us up. :-)
And I'm going to bed, where I'm sure I'll be dreaming of "sources". I'll check in the morning and see if he or anyone else actually came up with one.
“The fact that his father was Kenyan does not preclude him being a natural born citizen. “
Actually, it does. Sorry.
“As much a citizen, yes. NBC,nope.”
How can one be denied presidential access if one’s status is equivalent to a natural born citizen (in fact, is a natural born citizen, which is saying the same thing)? Not being eligible would mean you are of a seperate class from natural borns, which automatically means you’re not “as much a citizen” as they.
“To date, no one knows WHERE he was born because he hasn’t produced the B/C.”
False premise, you can determine where someone is born by looking at a lot of other pieces of evidence. Like:
“I ... have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen,” Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino
“Actually, it does. Sorry.”
According to what?
"which means to me"
I am seeing people making interpretations of what they want "natural-born citizen" to mean rather than going back to original intent and source documents (e.g. Vattel).
I think defining NBC is an emotional issue for some, because it is "anti-egalitarian." Stick to the firm definition of NBC, and you conclude that no, not everyone can be President. Not even if you born here and were an upstanding citizen. Not even if Mommy and Daddy were good Americans but you were born overseas. Not even if you were naturalized and served in the Armed Services.
Can you imagine a modern American schoolteacher surveying her classroom and telling her pupils, "Not all of you can grow up to be President, you have to have American parents, and be born here in America"? Can you imagine the screams and the tears, the crying about discrimination and unfairness? But we seem to have come to the point where we care more about the feelings of an individual than the welfare of a whole country.
I know I was taught (long ago, ha ha) in school that only a child of American citizen parents, born on American soil, could become President. It was in our class on American history. We were also taught the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Learning about what the Constitutional requirements for President were was a sobering thought but this law is part of our nation's history.
A natural-born citizen, as stipulated in Article II, section 1 of the Constitution, is one who has an ironclad allegiance to his country through birth and parentage. He is in a sort of state of grace; he has not earned his status by law: he is at least one generation removed from statutory citizenship. Loyalty to his home country is an essential, inborn part of who he is.
The people who feel squeamish about the NBC requirement for the Presidency also feel squeamish about the need for national defense. We have firm boundaries about our country's borders and we need to remember we have these boundaries for citizenship too, though some groups have tried hard to blur or weaken them.
“He doesn’t have a source or he would surely have shown it by now, if only to shut us up. :-)”
No source would shut you up. He is not a NBC if his dad was not a citizen. Period.
Er, what ?
The Citizenship Act of 1986 seems quite clear on these points.
If a foreign passport was issued to him it does not mean that he has renounced US citizenship. One must also get the State Department to issue a statement to that effect.
And there isn’t any evidence of this at all. And of course you cannot ask for proof of the non-existence of a foreign passport.
As much a citizen, yes just not natural born.
“If he was born in the US, it is a slam-dunk that he is a natural-born US citizen.”
“Unless he gave up his citizenship of his own free will as an adult.”
There is zero evidence for that, and the fact that he has a US passport file and US passport argues against it having happened.
“Don’t you want to see his college and passport records to see if he did that? “
College is irrelevent, not relevent to US law on this, which requires and specific and affirmative renunciation of US citizenship. Passport records are relevent, but any such suit is nothing more than a fishing expedition on this point without any evidence for such a renunciation.
“I am seeing people making interpretations of what they want ‘natural-born citizen’ to mean rather than going back to original intent and source documents (e.g. Vattel).”
Vattel is NOT a source material for the Constitution, nor the intent of those who wrote it.
“A natural-born citizen, as stipulated in Article II, section 1 of the Constitution, is one who has an ironclad allegiance to his country through birth and parentage”
That is nowhere stipulated in the Constitution.
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.