Is Rubio Eligible?

Fred Thmpson America ^ | 07.31.12 | Sen Fred Thompson

[Perdogg]

I would like to address an issue that is apparently of concern to a significant number of people. In my “Ask Fred” column, several people have expressed concern (some have been adamant and angry) that Marco Rubio should not be selected as the Vice Presidential nominee because he would not be eligible to be President, if the need arose. They contend that at least one of his parents were required at the time of his birth to have been a citizen for him to fulfill the constitutional requirement of eligibility, even though he was born on American soil.

[Kansas58]

Ask any group of 100 Republican attorneys selected randomly, in every group of the country.

In every case, they would vote that I am kicking your ass on the legal arguments.

My lay opinions are not perfect, they would tweak me a bit, I am sure.

However, your legal abilities are so pathetically inept that I would win in every State, in such a survey or vote.

[longtermmemmory]

Apparently Apuzzo is associated with Orly whats-her-name and not to be taken seriously.

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/02/mario-apuzzo/

one of the comments reference a judge describing his pleading skills, paraphrasing, as marginal.

[GregNH]

I think Obama’s Daddy is Frank Marshal Davis, which makes the Birther argument against Obama a waste of time, money and resources.

LOL I think it makes the case for fraud. Much better in my book.

[Red Steel]

I am using LIVE great men, today.

You think DEAD great men, of yesterday, are more important.

Live men who will trade on their integrity to sing the dogma of the Establishment Republican party or for whatever reason only known to them, but not for that it is correct or the truth. They are no where near perfect in any sense of the word.

At least dead men can't tell no lies.

You stepped into a trap, all of you, and you don't realize it.

No LoL. Unlike you who has been stepping in poop all over the place.

Regardless of how you look at this issue, all the radical birthers have are the isolated opinions of “great men” who do not always agree with each other, and who do not always say what you think they have said.

Regardless, this issue is not going away. It now transcends more than Rubio or Obama. The Radical in government are the ones are going to get changed over time.

[GregNH]

Ask any group of 100 Republican attorneys selected randomly, in every group of the country.

In every case, they would vote that I am kicking your ass on the legal arguments.

What a load of ultra crapola. 1st of all there are no "republican attorneys" there are BAR members who uphold an oath, not a political viewpoint.

Second they argue points of law that so far I have not seen from you.

[Kansas58]

There is not one immigration attorney in the country who agrees with you.

If you can find one, he should be disbarred.

[GregNH]

There is not one immigration attorney in the country who agrees with you.

Site ONE who disagrees with me!

[Kansas58]

Greg
Don't be so pompous and arrogant.

IF I had said “attorneys” you nutty birthers would tell me that lots of attorneys are liberal Democrats.

I am telling you, HONESTLY, that even among Republican attorneys, you could not assemble 5,000 attorneys, 100 x 50 States, and find very many who agree with you.

In fact, I would win a majority vote in all 50 States.

NOBODY agrees with you folks, yet you tell me that I am stupid?

[Red Steel]

Apparently Apuzzo is associated with Orly whats-her-name and not to be taken seriously.

Apparently, you cite the kook(s) at Dr. Conspiracy's website? Dr CONspiracy is a total Obama-Bot loon. LoL.

Dr Con, the know liar and zot:

http://www.freerepublic.com/~drconspiracy/

[Kansas58]

Many of them used to post here, frequently, against you Birthers.

They have given up.

Birthers are unteachable, they do not understand the law or legal processes.

And I do believe that Mark Levin counts, he is an attorney and agrees with me. And I do believe Fred Thompson counts, lol. If you had an attorney on your side, why don't any of them post here in your defense?

[DiogenesLamp]

I specifically looked it up in my pocket Constitution that I got from the Lions Club, before posting anything. I’ve got it right here by my computer. It’s got the Declaration of Independence printed before the Constitution, and it says “unalienable”. If there’s a typo, it’s from the Lions Club’s printing.

Butter, the man is a fool. Paying attention to him only makes us dumber. Disregard anything he has to say as not worthy of response. The only exception should be efforts to shoo him away.

This literary usage by Jefferson is correct, and has been remarked on for centuries, and leave it to this fool to attempt to correct what is actually on the document.

I wouldn't waste one nanosecond thinking anything he says might be correct. If it's coming from him, it is likely to be dead wrong. You just can't get that stupid without willful determination.

[Red Steel]

Man you are stupid.

[DiogenesLamp]

I believe that, at this point, every single member of the Supreme Court would interpret the term "natural born citizen" so as to make Obama qualified. I think it would be too humiliating for them to say that they just sat there for nearly four years watching an illegal presidency without doing or saying anything about it. They will not do that.

You have this exactly right. They take the attitude of General Custer in "Little Big Man."

Your misreable life is not worth the reversal of a Custer decision.

There is no power on earth which will make them face the truth, so we need to give up on that theory until we fix the ignorance among the public as to what "natural citizen" correctly means. We would get an Amendment through congress and the States before we could get them to admit they were wrong.

[Kansas58]

Every qualified expert on the subject disagrees with you, yet you call ME “stupid”?

Arrogance, pure arrogance.

[nonsporting]

Once Congress did act, Congress became the “elsewhere” -—And James Madison, Father of the Constitution, clearly stated that Congress had the authority to act on Citizenship matters.

According to Article 1, Section 8, para 4, Congress is authorized to establish uniforn rules of "naturalization." And they have done so. Foreigners and aliens who are not natural-born become citizens through the processes Congress has defined.

The Court in Minor established the meaning of "natural-born", setting precedent which Congress is not free to change. Here are the options (as explained by Donofrio) open for changing that understanding.

• a Constitutional amendment which specifically defines “natural-born Citizen” more inclusively than Minor did, or;
• a Supreme Court case which overrules the definition of natural-born citizen in the Minor case

Neither has happened.

[GregNH]

The NBC issue was never an issue until Chester Arthur and now Obama. It is not something that has been talked about, taught, argued. or adjudicated because there has been no need. You are letting political correctness and recent discussions cloud the definitions that were solid for the last 200 hundred plus years!

There are several attorney’s that post here. My first post on this thread was quoting one. Mark Levin is part of the media and of course I take issue with his stance on this issue, albeit undefined with legal precedence.

On another note, I have not made any of my post personal.

[DiogenesLamp]

The only way to settle it would be a case to go to the Supreme Court and we all know even they can be wrong and would also surely be split in their opinions as are we.

No, that is not a way to settle this. The current court is defective. Till the court is repaired it will only produce a garbage ruling. The problem is not currently correctable because the incorrect understanding of the term of art "natural citizen" is too widespread. All that can be accomplished at present is to acquaint more and more members of the public with the Historical evidence which clarifies the correct meaning.

How do you feel about "Anchor Babies"?

[Kansas58]

First, CONGRESS has the absolute, Coequal authority as the Courts, to interpret the Constitution.

Check some of Newt Gingrich's writings, or those of other conservative writers, if you do not understand this point.

It is an EXTREMELY Liberal position to claim that only the Courts can make these determinations.

Next, in the case I spoke of, Madison clearly states that the CONGRESS has the power to determine who qualifies as a Citizen at Birth.

There are two types of Citizenship: Natural Born, or Naturalized. There are no other forms.

[Red Steel]

Every qualified expert on the subject disagrees with you, yet you call ME “stupid”?

I doubt it. They either play dumb or ignore the issue or they think they can come up with some "plausible" rationalization.

And I answered you here at 244

[DiogenesLamp]

To: TexasVoter Listen carefully, read carefully:

Yes, but not to him. He is a bountiful source of wrong information.