“Birtherism” is the greatest Alinsky ever perpetrated.
They have gotten the American people to reject one of the most valuable safeguards bequeathed to us by the founders.
The natural born citizen clause served us well until we ignored it.
Barry Soetoro/Barack Hussein Obama should be proof enough of the wisdom of the founders when they tried to prevent him from being President by requiring someone who could only be a US citizen and nothing else.
Born here of citizen parents.
Naturally a US citizen because there is no other possibility.
One cannot be anything else and also be a natural born citizen.
It does not matter if he was born in Hawaii if his father was a foreign national.
Children of foreign nationals inherit the nationality of their foreign national parent(s).
Natural born citizen means born here of citizen parents.
No other possible citizenship(s).
Only when one cannot be anything else can one be a natural born citizen.
No foreign birth.
No foreign parent(s)
No foreign citizenship(s)
No foreign influence on the Presidency is what John Jay stated in a letter to George Washington as the reason for insisting on a natural born citizen.
Obama told us he was born a British subject.
Who believes Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Jay, Monroe, Madison, etc. would have found him to be a natural born citizen?
Usurpation Day, January 20, 2009, happened with the complete cooperation of both parties.
They want the Constitution changed without the hassle of amending the Constitution.
Confuse people about the clear meaning of a three word phrase and voila, every anchor baby and Winston Churchill is eligible.
The bench was the reason the GOP went along with the fig leaf resolution for McCain that was used by the Democrats as cover for Obama.
Jindal, Rubio, Haley and Cruz were all up and comers and the future of the party and ineligible.
The truth of the Kenyanesian Usurpation will never see the light of day because both parties cooperated in the violation of the Constitution
Well, history has a lot of twists and turns about what an NBC is. The Constitution doesn't define it and court cases have been few and not on point with Obama's or Cruz's case.
This is a situation where a federal court must take an INDIVIDUAL CASE or CONTROVERSY, like they're supposed to (Art III, Sec 2), and apply the best good-faith understanding of the original meaning and purpose of NBC to the case at hand.
And that decision applies ONLY to the case at hand or any other case with the same facts and questions of law. The Constitution never contemplated the Judicial Branch to make national law. The scope of a SCOTUS decision is constitutionally LIMITED to individual cases and controversies (id.).