Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Spaulding

Was it FDR or was it Teddy Roosevelt?

parsy, who isn’t sure


142 posted on 04/09/2010 6:54:47 PM PDT by parsifal (Abatis: Rubbish in front of a fort, to prevent the rubbish outside from molesting the rubbish inside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies ]


To: parsifal
I know this is from someone who knows more than I, and am flattered to provide a reference:

This remarkable fact was uncovered by Sharon Rondeau writing in the Post and Email, a blog about which I was initially cautious. Hughes was an impressive man, appointed associate justice in 1910 by William Howard Taft, he resigned to run for president in 1916. Here is a bit of the Rondeau article:

“During his presidential campaign, Hughes’s eligibility for the presidency was questioned because his father remained a British citizen. Breckenridge Long, an attorney and graduate of Washington University Law School who later served as Secretary of State as well as U.S. ambassador to Italy under FDR, examined the issue in an article entitled “Is Mr. Charles Evans Hughes a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ within the Meaning of the Constitution?” Published in the “Chicago Legal News,” Vol. 146, p. 220 in 1916, the article begins:

Whether Mr. Hughes is, or is not, a “natural born” citizen within the meaning of the Constitution, so as to make him eligible, or ineligible, to assume the office of President, presents an interesting inquiry.

He was born in this country and is beyond question “native born.” But is there not a distinction “native born” and “natural born”? At the time he was born his father and mother were subjects of England. His father had not then been naturalized.”

Here is the URL for the entire article, including the pointer to the Breckenridge Long article.

http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/04/05/obama-not-the-first-to-have-presidential-eligibility-questioned/

As an aside, it is sad to see trolls dominating Internet discussions, preventing those who can help educate the public from being heard. The major media figures have been silenced, perhaps by threats involving the penalties for incitement, since violence will probably be employed by the left when the threat of exposure becomes great enough. Some of us have seen most of the polemical arguments, but when an issue such as Dr. Lakin, involving eligibility arises the wave of birth certificate responses hits first, suggesting very active monitoring of this site. Then, because of the integrity of the FR owner, measured responses begin to come. To anyone who is interested in the facts, look for succinct citations. Read the Apuzzo blog. Read The Post and Email, or Undeadrevolution.wordpress.com.

Sites without clear management, like Greta Van Sustern’s blog, have been destroyed by name calling, and by design. This is about our Constitution and, while the administrators tolerate trolls who simply interrupt serious examination, it has taken me a while to see the extent to which it dilutes discussion here, still a relative sanctuary for freedom of speech.

202 posted on 04/09/2010 8:25:55 PM PDT by Spaulding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies ]

To: parsifal; All

Was it FDR or was it Teddy Roosevelt?

parsy, who isn’t sure

Come on, parsi ... your memory is failing you a lot lately.

Where was it that you enjoyed that ribeye with the JimRob?

Fleming's, Ruth's Chris, or Joe's Steak House?



213 posted on 04/09/2010 8:50:44 PM PDT by BP2 (I think, therefore I'm a conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson