Natural Born Citizen.

[ImnoMensa]

Forgery, Fraud and Ineligibility| The Post & Email

I mentioned this the other day and I believe it was Awpitt who said I was full of crap.

If I am wrong there are others who are also wrong, but right or wrong , I believe our Teflon boy will survive it.

If this article is 100% correct, it still will not matter.There is no one with the courage to do anything about it, certainly not in the Congress nor in the Judicial.

 

[philibusters]

Forgery, Fraud and Ineligibility| The Post & Email

I mentioned this the other day and I believe it was Awpitt who said I was full of crap.

If I am wrong there are others who are also wrong, but right or wrong , I believe our Teflon boy will survive it.

If this article is 100% correct, it still will not matter.There is no one with the courage to do anything about it, certainly not in the Congress nor in the Judicial.

I got a chuckle out of that article because I am assuming that it was written by conservatives and it does the exact thing that conservatives curse the Supreme Court for doing (though this case is actually worse than what the Supreme Court has ever done).

Any guess on what that article does?

 

[Ken King]

Forgery, Fraud and Ineligibility| The Post & Email

I mentioned this the other day and I believe it was Awpitt who said I was full of crap.

If I am wrong there are others who are also wrong, but right or wrong , I believe our Teflon boy will survive it.

If this article is 100% correct, it still will not matter.There is no one with the courage to do anything about it, certainly not in the Congress nor in the Judicial.

Awpitt is correct and you are full of crap and so is the article you linked. See 8USC1401 and you will note in paragraph (a) that - "a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is a national and citizen. No distinction is made as to the parents nationality.

 

[philibusters]

Awpitt is correct and you are full of crap and so is the article you linked. See 8USC1401 and you will note in paragraph (a) that - "a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is a national and citizen. No distinction is made as to the parents nationality.

I don't think the United States Code controls. The Constitution sets out the requirements for being President and Congress cannot pass any legislature that alters the Constitutional requirements. Congress defines citizenship, thats what that provision does. Even the hardcore rightest (or at least most of them) probably acknowledge Obama is a citizen, but the Constitution requires other things like you be 35 years old (hence I cannot be President despite being an 30 year old adult citizen because I am not old enough). Another requirement is the person be a "natural born" citizen. The natural born requirement is something added on to mere citizenship.

 

[philibusters]

To end the drama, the mistake that made me chuckle in the original link blatantly cited foreign law in his argument. The "Law of Nations"? Come on, conservatives criticize courts for using other countries laws in their analysis of our law, but no court case every cited another nation's law as actual binding law. The original link cites the Law of Nations as if it has anything to do with binding laws in the U.S.

What the Constitution does is gives Congress the power to make laws that are in accordance with and enforce the laws of nation (probably trading and maritime/admiralty laws). The Constitution in no way adopts the Laws of Nation and if Congress did pass a law that mirrored a law of nation law, when the Coast Guard and judicial system enforced that law, they would be enforcing the law passed by Congress not the Law of Nation, which is a foreign law of no value in the U.S. Finally nothing Congress passes can take precedence over the Constitution. The Constitution laid out all the requirements necessary to become President and only a Constitutional amendment can change that.

But again, the part that made me chuckle was the referencing of foreign laws. It seems like if a foreign law supports one argument, at least that conservative author was willing to gladly cite it.

 

[Ken King]

I don't think the United States Code controls. The Constitution sets out the requirements for being President and Congress cannot pass any legislature that alters the Constitutional requirements. Congress defines citizenship, thats what that provision does. Even the hardcore rightest (or at least most of them) probably acknowledge Obama is a citizen, but the Constitution requires other things like you be 35 years old (hence I cannot be President despite being an 30 year old adult citizen because I am not old enough). Another requirement is the person be a "natural born" citizen. The natural born requirement is something added on to mere citizenship.

And you supposedly went to law school? Care to show me in the Constitution where it defines what a natural born citizen is? And while you are searching for it stop by Article I, section 8 and then give me your thoughts on what this phrase means when Congress is given the power "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

 

[Baja28]

And you supposedly went to law school? Care to show me in the Constitution where it defines what a natural born citizen is? And while you are searching for it stop by Article I, section 8 and then give me your thoughts on what this phrase means when Congress is given the power "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

He says he's a lawyer but I'm not buying it. I find it hard to believe that any lawyer could be as stupid as Phil. I wish he'd post his real name so I could avoid him like the plague if I needed legal advice.

 

[ItalianScallion]

YOU ARE FULL OF CRAP.
STUPID TOO.
I HAVE READ YOUR GARBAGE FOR AWHILE NOW BEFORE JOINING.
YOU ARE DUMBER THAN A 7TH DISTRICT BEAGLE.
OBAMA BUSTED HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE OUT ON YOU AND YOUR BOY DONALD CHUMP AND NOW YOU ARE WONDERING AROUND IN A FOG WITH NOTHING LEFT TO CHASE BUT YOUR TAIL.

Another newbie feeling his oats...How old are you Mr(s) "d&c"? I can only imagine what that stands for...

Without the personal attacks, you should take off YOUR blinders first. Obama busted out "A" certificate, you fell for it's authenticity but very few others did. To keep his lie going, he's going to parade around like the pimp that he is and make fun of those of us who are smart enought to have figured him out.

He does this to make his lying self look innocent when, in actuality, he has been a liar from day 1 and yet YOU Mr d&c, are the one who is "dumber than a 7th district beagle" but you (and millions of other kool aid drinkers) can't see that because you're doing the same thing your daddy Obama is doing with his big mouth.

Other than that, welcome to the forums. Now be civil and stop yelling!

 

[Toxick]

YOU ARE DUMBER THAN A 7TH DISTRICT BEAGLE.

Why you gotta be hatin on 7th district beagles.

OBAMA BUSTED HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE OUT ON YOU AND YOUR BOY DONALD CHUMP AND NOW YOU ARE WONDERING AROUND IN A FOG WITH NOTHING LEFT TO CHASE BUT YOUR TAIL.

Probably 1 less cup of coffee in the morning would do you a world of good.

 

[philibusters]

And you supposedly went to law school? Care to show me in the Constitution where it defines what a natural born citizen is? And while you are searching for it stop by Article I, section 8 and then give me your thoughts on what this phrase means when Congress is given the power "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

The Constitution does not define natural born citizen. But that in now way gives Congress the power to define natural born citizen. Just like Congress cannot define the necessary and proper clause. The Constitution says what it says, but the courts not Congress decide what those words me.

I addressed briefly what that means. Congress was granted certain powers in Article I--and that clause gives Congress the power to make all laws necessary and proper to exercise those powers. For example, Congress was given the power to make copyright law, those Congress can make all laws necessary and proper to exercise those powers, for example, Congress could have gone in a different direction and prohibited VCR's for example.

The Constitution is the supreme law of the law. Congress in now way can supplement the Constitution. The Constitution alone lays out the requirements for a person to be President, Congress has no say in the matter. If there is an issue regarding what the Constitution says, the courts not Congress clarifies the ambiguity.

 

[ImnoMensa]

Why you gotta be hatin on 7th district beagles.








Probably 1 less cup of coffee in the morning would do you a world of good.

Despite the D&C newbie date in his profile I am smart enough to know it is no newbie, but just another alias being used by an old poster who enjoys being rude in his anonymity. Anonimity is a great thing and keeps people like that safe in their Mom's basement.Some people feel it is great to call people names in forums when in reality they are showing their own ignorance.

Doesn't matter to me I will continue to read and pass on items I think are interesting.

I went back and read the article again, but I didn't notice where Ken King made a comment. Why don't you Ken? Then you can call tell this author he is full of crap too. Might make your day. Maybe they will hire you since you know so much more then the full of crap person who authored this.Maybe you could set them straight.

 

[ItalianScallion]

GET BACK IN THE RELIGIOUS ROOM AND SEE IF YOU CAN FIND SOME TAIL TO CHASE IN THERE BEFORE SUNDAY.

When you have nothing left, you attack the person. Pure liberal, Democratic, leftist theology.

Despite the D&C newbie date in his profile I am smart enough to know it is no newbie, but just another alias being used by an old poster who enjoys being rude in his anonymity. Anonimity is a great thing and keeps people like that safe in their Mom's basement.Some people feel it is great to call people names in forums when in reality they are showing their own ignorance.

No doubt!

 

[hvp05]

Doesn't matter to me I will continue to read and pass on items I think are interesting.

That's a sig line in the making.

There are definitely curious things about this issue, but with all the substantive things Oblahma could be picked on about, why continue to waste so much time on this? He is definitely a socialist; definitely has sketchy relationships; definitely has subverted the Constitution at his pleasure; definitely employs faulty logic resulting in doomed plans that could touch every one of us; definitely weakening our nation. All of which are more stable grounds for opposition than the BC issue. :shrug:

 

[BOP]

Why you gotta be hatin on 7th district beagles.








Probably 1 less cup of coffee in the morning would do you a world of good.

7th district beagle gonna break out his toof an' bite d and c's hatin' azz.

 

[Mr.Steed]

Another newbie feeling his oats...How old are you Mr(s) "d&c"? I can only imagine what that stands for...

Without the personal attacks, you should take off YOUR blinders first. Obama busted out "A" certificate, you fell for it's authenticity but very few others did. To keep his lie going, he's going to parade around like the pimp that he is and make fun of those of us who are smart enought to have figured him out.

He does this to make his lying self look innocent when, in actuality, he has been a liar from day 1 and yet YOU Mr d&c, are the one who is "dumber than a 7th district beagle" but you (and millions of other kool aid drinkers) can't see that because you're doing the same thing your daddy Obama is doing with his big mouth.

Other than that, welcome to the forums. Now be civil and stop yelling!

Why anyone would believe this racist, hypocritical zealot is beyond me! Really, you need to go back to your little confessional and ask for forgiveness for your many transgressions. And while you prostrate yourself before "your" false god, why don't you ask for help in understanding that dinosaurs have been here longer than 10,000 years. Maybe you have been sippin' on Christ's blood too long!

 

[Toxick]

Why anyone would believe this racist, hypocritical zealot is beyond me! Really, you need to go back to your little confessional and ask for forgiveness for your many transgressions. And while you prostrate yourself before "your" false god, why don't you ask for help in understanding that dinosaurs have been here longer than 10,000 years. Maybe you have been sippin' on Christ's blood too long!

You are one of the most ignorant, self-righteous, smarmy, arrogant and sanctimonious horse's asses I have ever had the misfortune to see in my entire life, and I have met some whopping specimens before.

Reading your appalling spew actually sickens me. Without an ounce of hyperbole, I can honestly say that I'd rather watch a dog eat its own vomit than to read another one of your self-flaggelating posts ever again in my life.


Congratulations. You're the first person who's actually enough of a gut-wrenching douchebag to make it into my ignore filter.



Have a nice life, you useless jizzball.



PLONK.

 

[toppick08]

Why anyone would believe this racist, hypocritical zealot is beyond me! Really, you need to go back to your little confessional and ask for forgiveness for your many transgressions. And while you prostrate yourself before "your" false god, why don't you ask for help in understanding that dinosaurs have been here longer than 10,000 years. Maybe you have been sippin' on Christ's blood too long!

 

[ItalianScallion]

Why anyone would believe this racist, hypocritical zealot is beyond me! Really, you need to go back to your little confessional and ask for forgiveness for your many transgressions. And while you prostrate yourself before "your" false god, why don't you ask for help in understanding that dinosaurs have been here longer than 10,000 years. Maybe you have been sippin' on Christ's blood too long!

I don't know whether to or Dinosaurs? Way to stay on topic Mr (I'm on) Speed! Is what you're smoking or drinking, legal? Racist is your favorite word when you don't have one ounce of truth to speak. Got your Obama 2012 stickers yet?

 

[Tilted]

I don't think the United States Code controls. The Constitution sets out the requirements for being President and Congress cannot pass any legislature that alters the Constitutional requirements. Congress defines citizenship, thats what that provision does. Even the hardcore rightest (or at least most of them) probably acknowledge Obama is a citizen, but the Constitution requires other things like you be 35 years old (hence I cannot be President despite being an 30 year old adult citizen because I am not old enough). Another requirement is the person be a "natural born" citizen. The natural born requirement is something added on to mere citizenship.

And you supposedly went to law school? Care to show me in the Constitution where it defines what a natural born citizen is? And while you are searching for it stop by Article I, section 8 and then give me your thoughts on what this phrase means when Congress is given the power "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

Philibusters is correct in that Congress doesn't have the authority to change the requirements (or meaning) of the Constitution. In some regards, it is given the authority to establish regulations and make rules for the carrying into effect of Constitutional provisions - but to the extent those provisions have certain meanings or create certain requirements, it can't change or displace them.

The issue here relates to the meaning of the term 'natural born citizen', as that term is used in Article II of the Constitution (i.e. what the Constitution's framers and ratifiers meant by its use). If that term was just meant to refer to someone who was a citizen at the time of their birth (i.e. not through naturalization), then to the extent that Congress has the authority to establish rules for birthright citizenship, it has the authority to refine the meaning of the term natural born citizen. Based on that interpretation and existing law with regard to citizenship-at-birth (or, perhaps more importantly, the requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment), anyone born in the United States (other than, e.g., the children of diplomats) would be a natural born citizen, without regard to the citizenship of their parents. That seems to be how many people interpret the term now.

However, if 'natural born citizen' meant something else - if it had a more specific meaning - then Congress' authority to define citizenship (to the extent it has such) wouldn't necessarily include the authority to define natural born citizenship. Not too long ago I used Google Books to search out uses of that term from around the time of the founding of our Republic. I found many uses of the term and couldn't come to a definitive conclusion as to its meaning. But, based on all the usages I read, it seemed that the two most plausible meanings are, in essence:

(1) That anyone born in the U.S. is a natural born citizen (except children of diplomats and such); or

(2) That anyone born in the U.S. is a natural born citizen (except children of diplomats and such) and anyone born outside the U.S., but to a father that was a U.S. citizen, is a natural born citizen.

Either way, someone born in the U.S. (and not to a diplomat or such) would be a natural born citizen.

 

[Merlin99]

Philibusters is correct in that Congress doesn't have the authority to change the requirements (or meaning) of the Constitution. In some regards, it is given the authority to establish regulations and make rules for the carrying into effect of Constitutional provisions - but to the extent those provisions have certain meanings or create certain requirements, it can't change or displace them.

The issue here relates to the meaning of the term 'natural born citizen', as that term is used in Article II of the Constitution (i.e. what the Constitution's framers and ratifiers meant by its use). If that term was just meant to refer to someone who was a citizen at the time of their birth (i.e. not through naturalization), then to the extent that Congress has the authority to establish rules for birthright citizenship, it has the authority to refine the meaning of the term natural born citizen. Based on that interpretation and existing law with regard to citizenship-at-birth (or, perhaps more importantly, the requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment), anyone born in the United States (other than, e.g., the children of diplomats) would be a natural born citizen, without regard to the citizenship of their parents. That seems to be how many people interpret the term now.

However, if 'natural born citizen' meant something else - if it had a more specific meaning - then Congress' authority to define citizenship (to the extent it has such) wouldn't necessarily include the authority to define natural born citizenship. Not too long ago I used Google Books to search out uses of that term from around the time of the founding of our Republic. I found many uses of the term and couldn't come to a definitive conclusion as to its meaning. But, based on all the usages I read, it seemed that the two most plausible meanings are, in essence:

(1) That anyone born in the U.S. is a natural born citizen (except children of diplomats and such); or

(2) That anyone born in the U.S. is a natural born citizen (except children of diplomats and such) and anyone born outside the U.S., but to a father that was a U.S. citizen, is a natural born citizen.

Either way, someone born in the U.S. (and not to a diplomat or such) would be a natural born citizen.

I thought that it was the courts job to interpret what the laws definitions and meanings were.