MCCain is not a Natural born U.S. Citizen.

page: 6
11
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnmike
 


All of the stuff in your posts has been discussed already.

The act of 1790 was repealed by the act of 1795.
National is not the same thing as Natural born citizen.




posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


You've cited no example that even suggested that the the children of military members deployed abroad were not considered to be citizens at birth. You're talking out of your rear. Again.



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mad_Hatter

I find that statement very disturbing. Not because of the fact that it is Dale Gribble making that statement, but because it makes me wonder how many people are thinking just like him. This statement is spoken from a person that truly has no understanding of politics....its really sad.


just curious hatter, what makes you think i have no knowlege of politics?
is it because i dont agree with you. or is it because ill be voteing aginst Hussein Obama? if its just a sad atempt to get me upset, you will have to try much harder my friend.
i believe there a lot of people thinking my way.
let me quote rush for a second.
"when your team isnt playing, you go for the less evil"
sorry my opinion isnt the same as yours. i might just try to give a damn in the future although i wouldnt count on it.




To end up with McCain as president simply because people didn't want to vote for Barack. Its quite scary when you think about it.


and it is my opinion that to end up with Hussein is pretty scary when you think about it. its my vote and ill do with it what i damn well please..

so when you are ready to step off of your liberal high horse and join the rest of the world. i personaly will welcome you with open arms..

[edit on 15pmu22007 by DaleGribble]



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Johnmike
You've cited no example that even suggested that the the children of military members deployed abroad were not considered to be citizens at birth.


They ARE citizens. But not "Natural-born" citizens, as the Constitution requires for POTUS.

In this post, I showed that the Naturalization Act of 1790, which DID make children of military members deployed abroad natural-born citizens, was REPEALED by the Naturalization Act of 1795, which made children of military members deployed abroad citizens.

The words natural born were removed.



You're talking out of your rear. Again.


I am not that talented.

And I don't know why you have to be insulting. I'm really trying to get to the bottom of this. I know you don't believe that, but I'm not sure why.



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaleGribble

just curious hatter, what makes you think i have no knowlege of politics?
is it because i dont agree with you. or is it because ill be voteing aginst Hussein Obama? if its just a sad atempt to get me upset, you will have to try much harder my friend.
i believe there a lot of people thinking my way.
let me quote rush for a second.
"when your team isnt playing, you go for the less evil"
sorry my opinion isnt the same as yours. i might just try to give a damn in the future although i wouldnt count on it.




To end up with McCain as president simply because people didn't want to vote for Barack. Its quite scary when you think about it.


and it is my opinion that to end up with Hussein is pretty scary when you think about it. its my vote and ill do with it what i damn well please..

so when you are ready to step off of your liberal high horse and join the rest of the world. i personaly will welcome you with open arms..

[edit on 15pmu22007 by DaleGribble]


Oh silly Dale....no one is singling you out in order to get you to jump to conclusions and make blind assumptions as you have. I am not trying to tell you what to do with your vote, or attempting to get you upset. I'm merely just pointing out the lack of knowledge in your statements. You seem to have that "I'll do what I damn well please, regardless of how intelligent it is" attitude...there is no arguing with someone like that. I merely wanted to present a logical perspective to anyone else who may be reading this so they know there are alternatives to what you are saying. You obviously don't like either candidate...so why vote for either one if you don't have to? That's all I'm trying to say.



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 



They ARE citizens. But not "Natural-born" citizens, as the Constitution requires for POTUS.
In this post, I showed that the Naturalization Act of 1790, which DID make children of military members deployed abroad natural-born citizens, was REPEALED by the Naturalization Act of 1795, which made children of military members deployed abroad citizens. The words natural born were removed.


You have explained it perfectly, Ms B/H! It does seem very hard for some people to get their head around what "NATURAL BORN" and "CITIZEN" mean in the POTUS context.

It is only persons born on US soil that qualify as NATURAL BORN. The Congress has the power to make anyone it sees fit a CITIZEN. By Act of Congress. Panama was under US jurisdiction when McCain was born. Like Guantanamo Bay today. But Panama was never America and neither is Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Congress can make persons born there US citizens, but it can't make them natural born.

The simple fact the issue of natural born versus naturalized or legal citizenship does not come up often but when it does and it is AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH, many people shut out reality when the fiction better satisfies their needs. It would be perceived as disingenuous or even desperate for the Dems to raise this issue in court. Typical of the GOP, to muddy the waters on issues you do not want clarified.

See the following from the US Constitution.

US Con. Article 2, Clause 4. “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President . . “

US Con. Article 1, Section 8. “The Congress shall have power . . . [Clause 4] To establish a uniform rule of naturalization . . [Clause 18] To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers . . “


[edit on 7/12/2008 by donwhite]



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Mad_Hatter
 


fair enough.

i just wanted to know what made you feel that way.

you are right. i dont have to vote for either one. however i feel my vote will best serve my intrests by voteing for McCain, and helping to keep this country from becomeing a socialist state.



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Now that we've, for the moment, settled the issue that both men are indeed eligible to run for POTUS, can we move on to the flippin' issues that need to be discussed?

Foriegn Policy Issues? How are the two candidates differentiating themselves? Let's try that one...

Or Maybe? Domestic Spending? How are the two candidates going to try and curtail and control spending?

I'm sure other issues will occur to some of you with a little thought...



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 04:01 PM
link   
Does anyone else detect that putrid stench of desperation?

This is low even for Obama and his attack dogs, but not surprising - just history repeating itself. Obama cannot win a fair fight. He has to get his opposition thrown out on some technicality. Just ask Alice Palmer or Jack Ryan... (If you haven't heard of them in the MSM, here's a couple links to get you started -

www.chicagotribune.com...
www.chicagotribune.com...

- then of course feel free to do your own homework and find the ones that fit your paradigm.)

One poster commented, "im making the "educated guess" here that this whole "obama has a faked birth certificate" was actually just a shaky argument started by McCains internet squad in order to pull attention away from the geezer himself..."

Or vice versa. From my perch, McCain is standing on firm ground. It is Obama who is on shaky ground; according to my research, Obama's posted certificate of birth is an application for a "Late" certificate of birth, merely recording that the application was filed - but not accepted as fact (as is allowed in Hawaii). In other words, his birth was not properly witnessed and documented at the time of birth to be given an approved certificate of birth. Then again, there are claims of a Kenyan birth certificate for Obama, reporting his birth in Mombasa, Kenya. It is also well documented that the posted certificate of birth has been photoshopped; perhaps just to hide the birth certificate number (or lack thereof). If so, there were better ways. Once photoshopped, we cannot be sure exactly what and how much was actually altered/modified... except Obama's supporters, of course, who know that he is without fault and can therefore trust him implicitly.

But hey! Really, don't let me crash your little party. I'm loving this. And it must really be helping Obama heaps in the polls - just imagine how far behind McCain he'd be otherwise. So I say GO FOR IT! Keep questioning McCain's right to be President - no matter if logic, reason and common sense gets in the way. And - whatever you do - don't stop attacking a bonafide decorated war hero's service, not to mention a Senator and statesman well respected on both sides of the aisle in Congress and around the world, who has committed his life to serving our nation.

Yeah..... that'll teach us!



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 04:37 PM
link   
One thing about US elections is they bring out worst in everyone. It is the one time we get to see just low people will go to get their candidate elected. Any bets on who this Professor is voting for or who put him up to it?

Born to US Citizens in the service of their country on a military base and some would actually second guess his citizenship? If anything he is more of a citizen than those born to people who never served their country.

Refused a chance to be released from a Vietcong prison camp early and stayed an extra five years out of loyalty to his country and fellow servicemen and this is how they treat him? I say they because I'm not a fool enough to believe this Professor acted alone to dig this up. It was probably the NYT's idea in the first place.

For anyone to follow up on this they would have to be a person so low they would have to get a ladder to tickle a snakes belly. I'm sure Howard Dean is up to the task. Watch this one blossom behind the scenes. If McCain wins you can bet the Democrats in the Senate will forget that unanimous vote and challenge the election.

This thing is going to get really dirty before it is over. The Clinton's, Jackson, Dean, Gore, Pelosi, Kennedy and their servants in the DNC are not going to go down without a fight. Their generation is ending and they can smell it coming. It's their last chance at power and their last hoorah so to speak. They totally blew it after taking over Congress and they know the hammer is about to come down. The lowest approval rating in history so get ready to hear every little detail about McCain including how many pimples he had as a teenager. Nobody gets dirty quite like the Left can. They are the Kings and Queens of dirty politics. The floodgate will open any moment now. I wonder what they have for us next?



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaleGribble

Hussein Obama


Don't get me wrong, I am niether "for" any particular candidate, nor am I of any party, as I think the party system is a MAJOR problem of our government (ie: I don't like what he/she does, but that's my party, so I have to vote tha way), but jeez man, the "Hussein" bit is just childish.


[edit on 12/7/08 by Misfit]



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 05:36 PM
link   
It's funny.. I've been watching the news for a couple of days now, and not a peep about McCain's citizenship status from anyone. Barack isn't going to make an issue of it for sure, nor will anyone else who has a little commonsense or decency.



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Misfit
 


A lot being said in this thread is pretty childish.


Just something for you who are so emotional and angry
about this to consider...

Playing Constitutional Scholar



Nearly everyone, including the least qualified among us, likes to play constitutional scholar every once in a while. It’s a fun hobby and generally harmless.
...
While it’s unlikely in the extreme that this will go anywhere, the article is an intriguing mental exercise and well worth a read. One of the assumptions which the majority of people seem to make runs along these lines: “The founding fathers would surely have never meant to exclude a man like John McCain, the son of citizens serving abroad, from serving as president.” As I wrote in my Independence Day column, however, we tread upon dangerous ground when we attempt to infer what the founders would or would not intend. It is highly tempting to ascribe enlightened, 21st century mores and values to them, but they lived in a very different society.
...
Yes, Congress passed a non-binding resolution earlier this year saying that John McCain was eligible to serve, but a non-binding resolution isn’t exactly a law. They can pass them all the live long day, but no law is truly final until it has been challenged in court and passed constitutional muster.


I have very much enjoyed researching this subject. I have found it to be a challenging and intriguing mental exercise.

For those who are making assumptions about what the founding fathers intended, just remember how defensive you get when people go interpreting the 2nd Amendment and talking about what "the founding fathers must have intended" for use of firearms by a militia. It seems to me that when the shoe's on the other foot, you're a nasty bunch to deal with. :shk:



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
For those who are making assumptions about what the founding fathers intended, just remember how defensive you get when people go interpreting the 2nd Amendment and talking about what "the founding fathers must have intended" for use of firearms by a militia. It seems to me that when the shoe's on the other foot, you're a nasty bunch to deal with. :shk:


I agree BH.. I think Barack Obama should make a big issue of the matter! Then they can both slap down their real birth certificates and passport records, and let a judge decide if either of them are indeed Natural born Citizens and qualified to run for President.



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
They ARE citizens. But not "Natural-born" citizens, as the Constitution requires for POTUS.

In this post, I showed that the Naturalization Act of 1790, which DID make children of military members deployed abroad natural-born citizens, was REPEALED by the Naturalization Act of 1795, which made children of military members deployed abroad citizens.


Read the title of the Act again. See that word "Naturalization"? The whole Act defines/clarifies what is considered a "naturalized" citizen.

Section 3 states, "... children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered citizens of the United States ..."

So this Act, by its title and text clearly indicates that you are a naturalized citizen at birth if you are born outside the U.S. to citizen parents; aka "natural-born".

Works for me.



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
The words natural born were removed.

Yes. From everywhere. It is in no consecutive act, nowhere else, including the constitution, gives any clue as to the meaning of a "natural-born" citizen. So, the closest we have is what I cited from the U.S. Code, which states that you're basically one if you become a citizen at birth. That's the closest to the term "natural-born citizen."



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 11:59 PM
link   
This has nothign to do with Obama. In fact this was by the New York times.

The Democrats are not going with this because it is a non-issue. Also consider that we are the party the mostly protects immigrant rights and such, so you know, I would expect more of a Republican outcry than anything else. Oh well.

I was going to vote for McCain if hillary was nominated, but thankfully Obama won. I respect McCain dearly for his service and sympathize dearly for the suffering he has gone through, I just do no wish to go through another term of irresponsible fiscal policies.

As so many Reps on C-span have said, we need to elicit a policy of pay as we go, not borrow trillions from foreign entities and force my children to continue paying for today's irresponsibilities.

Frankly, I am open for immigrants who have been naturalized running for President considering how global and far reaching Americas policies are. If American policies are affecting a candidates home country and have been for years/decades, I think they should be allowed to have some part in the government that dictates such policies.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 12:09 AM
link   
(I probably am rehashing a lot of things here, but I just want to add my $0.02)

I am a law student, and I know that having TWO parents who are U.S. Citizens does mean he is a citizen, no matter where he was born. Whoever thinks otherwise is really ignorant, and is simply trying to cause trouble. The argument over the words "natural" and "born" are moot, not to mention stupid to argue over, especially in light of people calling for this rule to be overturned to give the Governator a chance to run some day...

In some of these citizenship cases, the situations are somewhat sticky, depending on whether the father of the child is a soldier, and whether or not other particulars are involved...anyway, back to the topic...

It doesn't matter where his certificate was issued, it's a piece of paper and doesn't really reflect anything but what his name, weight, sex, and hand and footprint were like when born. Whether the nation of his father and mother accepts him as a citizen (it does, legally) is what is important. He could have been born in Russia to Mrs and Mr. McCain, and still would be considered a U.S. citizen, as a result of his parents' citizenship.

Furthermore, your bickering over the difference between natural born citizens and citizens is ridiculous, considering some of the interpretations of the Constitution that have been created and thus upheld by the Supreme Court. Their suggestion that that the Constitution suggests a "separation of Church and state" through a penumbra, or "shadow of a shadow" (see the official ruling) somehow holds water today. While the original meaning of the founders is not upheld (the amendment really means no official "Church of the U.S." can be established), yet it still is a court precedent today. The difference between natural born citizens and citizens is more detailed, and not a shadow of a shadow, as through the laws of the time he was born, McCain was a citizen. Natural born? Yes, otherwise the feds would have already pulled him from running, anyway, despite the legal rules that already make him an American citizen, red blooded, natural born, etc, just like the majority of you bickering here. There really is no difference there. A U.S. citizen is a U.S. citizen. They don't really have to be born on U.S. soil, as "natural born" really just implies that the USA is the country of origin, they speak American English, and are the creation of at least one American parent, in a marriage.

Stop trying to substantiate your political hatred towards the conservatives of the world through the use of more penumbras.

Substantiation of my claims (find the church/state ruling case brief yourself, you lazy bum!):

From law.justia.com...
Federal law states that "Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States".

[edit on 13-7-2008 by joesomebody]



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555

lowest approval rating in history so get ready to hear every little detail about McCain including how many pimples he had as a teenager. Nobody gets dirty quite like the Left can. They are the Kings and Queens of dirty politics. The floodgate will open any moment now. I wonder what they have for us next?


Thank You! I'm not a republican by any means but this is typical liberal strategy - use the judicial system to keep the decision away from the people. The democrat led Congress hasn't given the libs the answer they want so they go find some liberal judge to tell them what they want to hear.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 10:22 AM
link   
I'm no lawyer but I would imagine any reasonable judge would say that anyone who becomes a citizen the moment they are born is by definition a "natural born" citizen.





new topics
top topics
 
11
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join