Posted on 10/21/2011 7:03:48 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
Say what you will about the birthers, but don’t call them partisan.
The people who brought you the Barack Obama birth-certificate hullabaloo now have a new target: Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, a man often speculated to be the next Republican vice presidential nominee. While they’re at it, they also have Bobby Jindal, the Republican governor of Louisiana and perhaps a future presidential candidate, in their sights.
The good news for the birthers is that this suggests they were going after Obama, whose father was a Kenyan national, not because of the president’s political party. The bad news is that this supports the suspicion that they were going after Obama because of his race.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
So could Anwar al-Awlaki...before Obama whacked him!
Al-Awlaki was exactly the sort of stealth enemy that John Jay had in mind when he proposed the NBC clause.
When did their families cross the magical line to become Natural orn Citizens. Since the arguement is that only a natural born father transfers natural born citizenship. At some point. since Rubios Father came from Cuba, the arguement is he is NOT a Natural Born citizen. So will Rubios Son?, Grandson? Great Grandson?
I still want to know how former slaves served in Congress and the Sen. The would not be Classified as Natural Born.
No. He says “birthers” are now racists.
Somehow an Hispanic of European descent, like Rubio, is of a different race than “birthers” in the same way the Jindal is of a different race. Dana is out of his mind!
Mr. obama’s mother was a citizen. His father never became a citizen. Mr. obama is Not a Natural Born Citizen.
The issue of Mr. obama’s eligibility did not disappear. Just no one reports on it. Most people don’t even know about the question of his eligibility.
I, for one, have not questioned his BC, just his eligibility. I don’t know where he was born and don’t care. His father makes him ineligible.
I am not a lawyer, but find the analysis of independent lawyer, Leo Donofrio, to be compelling. Donofrio sued to block both Obama and McCain from becoming president, so he proved that he is both non-partisan and not a racist. Donofrio took two cases up to the Supreme Court before Obama was sworn in so Milbank would know this if he had bothered to investigate notable “birther” lawsuits on the NBC issue (as opposed to the birth certificate issue).
See Donofrio’s latest analysis here:
it seems even here at FR there are people that cannot comprehend the basic language found in our founding document... or the reason the specific language was used.
if you accept the birth certificate as real... which is the only ‘official’ document showing his father’s citizenship at the time of his birth... all it proves is that 0bama is native born.
in order to be natural born, BOTH parents have to be US citizens at the time of birth. the founders put this language in the Constitution specifically to insure future presidents would not have loyalties to any other country due to parental allegiances. if not for this reason, the founders could have just used the word ‘citizen’.
if this is too much to comprehend, might i suggest going over to DU... they use smaller words and don’t bother with laws when it doesn’t suit their needs.
The Constitution sets the requirements for president. We insist that the rules be followed by Republicans as well as Democrats, or anyone else.
Are you saying that anyone anywhere in the world who receives USA refugee assisstance becomes eligible for POTUSA or just those from Cuba?
Or is there some magic line that is crossed where you finally qualify to be natural born. Since my ancestors were British Knights on one side and French Hugenots on the other side, I guess I’m not actually “natural Born”.
The Natural Born Citizen requirement for presidential eligibility is unique in the Constitution. Citizens who are not NBC are eligible to serve as Senators and Congressmen.
Without more information about your citizenship and your parents' citizenship, it would be difficult to determine whether you are a Natural Born Citizen.
However, your willful ignorance should definitely render you unsuitable for any grown-up position.
>He’s ineligible....period.<
.
Don’t tell that to our congresscritters — they’ll deny it.
Don't read more into it. Citizen parents, any kind of citizen, doesn't matter where they were born. They don't have to be natural born citizens, they can be naturalized citizens.
Natural born status is decided AT BIRTH. You can't acquire it later. You parents can't fix it by becoming citizens later.
AT BIRTH.
1. Where were you born
2. Were your parents U.S. citizens at the time of your birth.
That's it!
Your birth is a moment in time. At that moment, your natural born status is set for all time. You are or you are not. If you are not, you can not be president or vice president. Otherwise, it matters not.
If you never aspire to be president or vice president, it matters not.
I’m sorry and I don’t mean to get personal since I assume that you are getting paid to cause disruption on these websites, but you appear very ignorant to me.
To begin with a Senator or Representative do NOT have to be Natural Born Citizens, only citizens.
The families cross a magical line when they become citizens before the birth of their child, who then is a Natural Born Citizen.
But great Texans I presume...
It must be depressing to write for readers who are satisfied to know so little.
This is the Washington Post trying to get Obama reelected.
Obama is in huge trouble and they know it. He can lose on the issues to pretty much any the Republican candidate. This is why they are bringing this issue up.
So here comes the Washington Post to Obama’s rescue. They want to use this to antagonize the right. So that they say the real reason you are against Obama is because of his race.
Don’t fall for this. Just think this is coming from a dying newspaper. Ten years from now they will be out of business.
If you look at 1790's immigration law (United States Naturalization Law of March 26, 1790), that early congress defined a person born of citizen parents, outside the United States, a "natural born citizen." Yes, that phrase. That right there describes George Romney and is proof positive of founding thought on the matter of whether a "natural born citizen" had to be both Jus Soli and Jus Sanguinis born in spite of birther's treatment of Vittal as holy writ on the matter.
At the time of George Romney's birth Mexico specifically outlawed birthright citizenship for aliens. There was no Jus Soli in Mexico and both of George Romney's parents were only ever American citizens. He was never a Mexican citizen.
End of story.
Facts like these, or expert opinion (like Mark Levin's on Rubio) won't sway birthers from their pet theories.
“...The Naturalization Act of 1790...” was rescinded before 1800.
“I’ll have to check out the comments in WaPo to see how long it takes for this to be pointed out...”
SURE they’ll point all that out. Oh yeah.
And using the slur word “birther” in connection with the Rubio controversy is an obscene smear. Rubio was provably born in Miami in ‘71, so “birtherism” has nothing to do with this. CONSTITUTIONALISM, on the other hand, certainly does and Rubio finds himself in a similar predicament to Chester Arthur, who knew very well he failed the eligibility test and did everything he could think of to conceal his father’s personal history.
Marco, however, seems very aware of the trouble he would cause by entering the fray. He knows he would become radioactive overnight.
He is a bright young man and probably realizes he should stay where he is in the Senate.
And, truthfully, we need him there.
Effective and energetic conservative senators are at a premium. Marco fills the bill. Replacing wimpy McConnell eventually is a worthy goal for him.
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.