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 ...
That does appear to be where we are at this point, though MINOR v. HAPPERSETT says otherwise.
It has been pointed out to several times on other threads (by me at least once) that is not true....yet you keep posting the same lies.
Please present a contemporaneous post citing the Vattel definition of ‘born in country of two citizen parents’ argument here on FR. I would like to see it.
Even if you can find that elusive ONE post - it was most certainly NOT the definition that everyone knew before 2008 and that was on every-body’s lips during eligibility arguments before the election.
It is revisionist history to say that the Vattel argument was in wide circulation here on FR on eligibility threads before the election.
Lets hope then he has better forgers than the Won.
You’re a liar, and a waste of time.
Ceremony = Court Opinion. Yep guess you are right.
I agree however that that ceremony brings Robert's true beliefs on the Constitution into question.
Great we have went from ceremony = Court Opinion to what we believe = Court Opinion.
Where was the mighty Vattel argument during the election?
Nowhere in what you posted.
It all had to do with 0bama’s mom being too young to confer automatic U.S. citizenship... IF he wasn't born in country (Hawaii is).
It had to do with English law granting children of citizens citizenship at birth (the dual citizenship argument).
Not one single post mentioned Vattel or said the criteria was clearly “born in country of two citizen parents”.
FAIL.
Moreover looking over the eligibility threads from that time it is easy to see that the Vattel definition (that apparently you are a traitor if you do not accept and learned at your mother's breast) is as rare as the fabled unicorn.
At least we KNOW where Rubio was born and probably would have access to an original certified HARDCOPY, unlike a certain marxist mocha man currently occupying the White House (illegally).
For those who think parentage matters, however, Obama has a much better claim than Rubio.
Based on what, a manipulated pdf file released on April 27th?
ONE.
Vattel wasn't sourced.
What is clear from those threads is that this was NOT the commonly accepted definition among those doubting his eligibility - this “consensus” was arrived at much later.
You notice the Obot after-birthers have returned to the same bs arguments they used over two years ago?
Recycled tripe, just like their marxist dogma...
Because they didn't want naturalized citizens to be President.
---------------------------
Wrong.
They didn't want someone with foreign intrigue or influence, (post Grandfather clause) as the Commander in Chief.
See Jay's letter.
There is no such "legal" definition.
Mr. Bingham must not have read William Rawle then. In his 1829, "A View of the Constitution of the United States" Rawle states: "The citizens of each state constituted the citizens of the United States when the Constitution was adopted. The rights which appertained to them as citizens of those respective commonwealths, accompanied them in the formation of the great, compound commonwealth which ensued. They became citizens of the latter, without ceasing to be citizens of the former, and he who was subsequently born a citizen of a state, became at the moment of his birth a citizen of the United States. Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity." Rawle was considered one of the foremost experts on the Constitution.
It's plainly listed as a requirement for the Commander in Chief.
| Office | Citizenship | Age | Residency (or years citizen) |
| President & Commander in Chief (1 of 1) | natural born Citizen | 35 | 14 years resident |
| Senator (1 of many) | Citizen | 30 | 9 years a Citizen |
| Represantative (1 of many) | Citizen | 25 | 7 years a Citizen |
Statement On the Occasion of Switzerland’s National Day
Press StatementHillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
July 29, 2011
On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I am delighted to congratulate the people of Switzerland on the 720th anniversary of your republic this August 1.In the seven centuries since the first Federal Charter was signed, the Swiss Confederation has played an important role in world affairs. Your rich history of neutrality gives you the ability to mediate and reconcile difficult conflicts. You have been a vital partner for over 30 years representing American interests in Iran and other countries throughout the world.
America’s Founders were inspired by the ideas and values of early Swiss philosophers like Jean-Jacques Burlamaqui and Emer de Vattel, and the 1848 Swiss Constitution was influenced by our own U.S. Constitution. Swiss commitment to democracy is an example for nations and people everywhere who yearn for greater freedoms and human rights.
As you celebrate this special day, know that the United States stands with you and we look forward to a future filled with friendship and cooperation.
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.