Posted on 08/24/2011 12:34:43 PM PDT by rightwingintelligentsia
Despite my hopes, Sen. Marco Rubio will not run for president in 2012. But that doesn’t mean he won’t soon be within a heartbeat of the presidency. As the New Yorker’s Ryan Lizza asked on Twitter: “Is it time to rename GOP primaries ‘the contest to become Marco Rubio’s running mate’?”
Indeed, despite his protestations, Rubio has to be on the short list of potential GOP running mates.
But the downside is that there is already a movement afoot (led by some on the fringe) to disqualify him from serving as president (which would presumably disqualify him from serving as vice president). That’s right — some are arguing that Rubio is not eligible because he is not a “natural born citizen.”
Here’s how the logic works (according to World Net Daily’s Joe Kovacs): “While the Constitution does not define ‘natural-born citizen,’ there is strong evidence that the Founding Fathers understood it to mean someone born of two American citizens.”
Kovacs (and he is not alone) goes on to reason that Rubio’s “eligibility is in doubt” because — though his parents were legal U.S. residents when he was born — they were not yet naturalized citizens.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
It actually needs to be set in stone. The Supreme Court has abdicated its responsibility here and allowed the tyranny of the majority, aka, obama voters, to rule and we have had no right to redress our grievance. Maybe if Rubio is tested this way, we will finally get that ruling which might kill two birds with one stone.
As much as I like Rubio, this question needs to be settled once and for all.
As far as I am concerned, obama is an enemy combatant and belongs in Gitmo.
If that is true, then why are Cubans who are trying to escape to the US turned back?
Just asking.
‘all persons born or naturalized in the United States’
Rubio was BORN IN THE USA! What about that sentence don’t some of you understand? He was BORN ON AMERICAN SOIL. He is AN AMERICAN. Period.
There were questions about the place of birth (about McCain directly, and rumored about Obama) and IIRC Congress actually passed a resolution affirming that McCain was an NBC, although technically he had not been born on US soil. It was thought at the time that this was something done to protect Obama. I believe it was a Dem who sponsored it, so that seems pretty likely.
It is true that on FR there were many arguments one way or the other about the citizenship of a candidate’s parents, but in terms of US officialdom, the only thing I remember is that they were concerned about the place of birth.
A good pair would be Cain and Rubio.
I can't remember exactly when this started, but I think it was under either Carter or Clinton. At any rate, while they said it was to discourage Cubans from attempting a risky voyage, it was really to suck up to Fidel.
Obama Sr. was never a resident alien. He was here on a student visa only.
Thats right. The rules is the rules. Rubio and Jindal are both fine guys and they can serve their country as senators and governors but not VP or POTUS.
I've never heard the notion that Cuba was still an American Protectorate after Fidel seized power.
Not that that applies to Rubio as his parents were born before Fidel came to power.
Once a candidate vets Marco Rubio, he’ll not be asked to run as their VP candidate.
I stand corrected. I was unaware “legal resident” is a specific legal status.
I thought it just meant he was here legally, under whatever category.
I give no credibility (and read no further) for writing as offensive as what you posted.
When the truth is not on your side, all you can do is keep repeating the lies.
The spiritual leader of all socialists told them that if they repeat it loud enough and long enough it becomes the truth.
Nice try.
It was only after the election that the Vattel “born in country of two citizen parents” became the standard that everybody had to accept and the definition of which was given with their mother's milk and anybody who didn't accept was a traitor.
For myself I have long held that the Constitution only covers two subdivisions of U.S. citizen - ones who are naturally born into that condition and those that must be “naturalized”.
Cuba was a protectorate at the time Fidel took over and remained so for some time. That’s the reason we still have Guantanamo.
Marco Rubio was born here in the US, and his parents were both legal US citizens or immigrants at that time.
My point is that regardless of what certain people on this forum think, it has already been formally determined, both by Congress and by precedent, that the only thing necessary for US citizenship (as things are and have been up to this point) is birth on US soil.
“...Rubio is an American citizen under the same legal definition that Barack Obama is. The Supreme Court ruled that’s good enough, and precedent has been set.”
The Supreme Court ruled this when?
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.