Thread: Defining Natural Born Citizen

Originally Posted by Flanders

To BullsLawDan: Aside from Judge Lewis:

Judge Lewis will decide against the birthers, period. I'll take any bet you'd like to place to the contrary.

there is this:

How long can Supremes avoid eligibility?
Newest challenge set for conference in days

So what? The Supreme Court doesn't need to rule on "eligibility," it is well-settled law that anyone born in the United States is a natural-born citizen. What's there to decide?

A person almost has to admire ostriches who think they’ve already won in spite of the challenges that just keep coming.

LOL.... Wow, frivolous challenges "keep coming." Mosquitos keep coming, too, but I'm still going camping this summer. When a challenge is so worthless it doesn't deserve a one-hand brush off, there's nothing to worry about.

Tell you what: Make any bet you want to with me regarding this. I will bet you whatever you want that the Supreme Court will never even hear this "issue."

Originally Posted by smokey~888x2

The Original Birther is none other than Hillary Clinton

Stick that in your birther rants against birther's!!

Actually, that's not true. The birther business started on a racist forum, and then was picked up by the "PUMA" Hillary Clinton fans.

Title 8 of the U.S. Code's Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"

- Anyone born inside the United States

- Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe

- Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.

- Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national

- Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year

- Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21

- Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)

- A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

Originally Posted by BullsLawDan

Tell you what: Make any bet you want to with me regarding this. I will bet you whatever you want that the Supreme Court will never even hear this "issue."

To BullsLawDan: Back in the Roaring Twenties a well-known gambler went to a (*)(*)(*)(*) fight but never made a bet. When he was asked why not? he replied “Never bet on anything that walks on two feet.”

Originally Posted by smokey~888x2

The Original Birther is none other than Hillary Clinton

Stick that in your birther rants against birther's!!

Birthers- lol

Still just repeating Birther lies without checking on them....

There are lies, (*)(*)(*)(*)ed lies, and Birther lies....

Originally Posted by Flanders

To BullsLawDan: Back in the Roaring Twenties a well-known gambler went to a (*)(*)(*)(*) fight but never made a bet. When he was asked why not? he replied “Never bet on anything that walks on two feet.”

Well, I'm willing to. I'll bet any amount that the Supreme Court will never, ever, hear a case regarding Obama's citizenship. They will decline cert every single time. And birthers will whine and cry and stomp their feet.

For legal purposes, regarding individual rights in the US or for being a recognized citizen, the requirements are one thing and should be liberal, IMO. HOWEVER for being the Commander & Chief of the United STATES armed forces and President the INTENDED requirement by those that wrote the Constitution were much more concerned with foreign influence of the person.

The delegates at the Constitutional Convention were deeply concerned about foreign influence on the national government, and in particular on the President. .. they wanted the Legislature to select the President, and they tried to limit foreign influence on the President by devising time-of-citizenship requirements for members of the Legislature. Ultimately, however, the Convention decided that a President elected by the Legislature could not be insulated from foreign influence and it turned, instead, to the Electoral College.

In one sense, the switch to the Electoral College lowered the need for explicit presidential qualifications because it minimized the line of potential foreign influence running through the Legislature. In another sense, however, this switch broke the clear connection between the citizenship requirements of legislators and the selection of the President, and therefore boosted the symbolic importance of a citizenship requirement for the President. This change in context, along with the Convention's decision to make the President the commander-in-chief of the army, gave new weight to the arguments in Jay's letter, and in particular to the suggestion in that letter that the presidency be restricted to "natural born" citizens.

http://www.worldandi.com/subscribers....asp?num=26823

Those of you, that feel Obama is qualified based on Citizenship, honestly believe his political philosophy is consistent with what YOU feel was that of the founders or even the majority of American's today?

Please don't use the 2008 election as an answer, which was arguably a referendum against Bush 43 and use the policy/actions over the past four years, to judge.

So all the birthers here agree Romney isn't natural-born either, right?

Originally Posted by jackson33

For legal purposes, regarding individual rights in the US or for being a recognized citizen, the requirements are one thing and should be liberal, IMO. HOWEVER for being the Commander & Chief of the United STATES armed forces and President the INTENDED requirement by those that wrote the Constitution were much more concerned with foreign influence of the person.


Those of you, that feel Obama is qualified based on Citizenship, honestly believe his political philosophy is consistent with what YOU feel was that of the founders or even the majority of American's today?

Please don't use the 2008 election as an answer, which was arguably a referendum against Bush 43 and use the policy/actions over the past four years, to judge.

Well the answer is that in 2008, the voters did indeed elect Barack Obama and that is how our system works. And in November, the voters have their opportunity once again to decide whether they believe Obama is the better person or whether Mitt Romney is the better person to be President.

And that is exactly what I think the Founders of our Country intended.

Let me help define the natural born American citizen. A natural born American citizen is someone who was born in the United States by 2 parents, who were in the prime lineup for god AND his church, as we define it. That means that nobody who is not white and with blond eyes is natural born, let alone an American. Those 2nd class mongrels are in the US only to steal our money and offices, they corrupt our daughters, and clearly they got too big for their breeches the moment they swam across the Rio Grande. So what we need to do is to send them back quickly to India, before their muslim terrorist communist nazi president takes our virginity all away.