Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The only people who are for dropping the constitutional requirement for president happen to be those that have a global mindset. This country has gone too far anyay when it comes to global thinking and one of the reasons we have so many problems here.
Yeah, who would want a Globalist Government if Greece were allowed to be a member?
Right, this article contains the arguments re: McCain in a brief, concise manner.
It will remain unsettled until there is a Constitutional Amendment or the Suprement Court rules on a definition of natural-born citizenship. Until then, the best we can do is use reason, and the founders intent. Their intent was certainly not to go by British Common Law, that is what they were leaving behind, that is why they declared independence.
Quote:
I have been getting phone calls from retired State Department types who say that McCain's strongest argument that he is a natural-born citizen is that he was born abroad to two U.S. citizens. The fact that he was born on a U.S. military base or in the Panama Canal Zone is of secondary importance, they say. Not everyone born on a U.S. military base or in the Canal Zone (during the period when it was under U.S. jurisdiction) has the right to U.S. citizenship.
Here is a more technical explanation for the different categories of U.S. citizenship:
1. Jus Soli. "Right of the land." Anybody born in the U.S. is a natural born citizen, with a clear right to be president.
2. Lex Soli. "Law of the land." People who acquire their citizenship through naturalization, such as Arnold Schwarzenegger. Experts agrees that these citizens are not "natural-born," and do not have the right to be president.
2. Jus Sanguinis. "Right of blood." Anybody born outside the U.S. to U.S. citizens has right to U.S. citizenship. My retired State Department informants believe that these children are also "natural born" and have the right to become president. So do Tribe and Olsen. But other constitutional lawyers, like Professor Duggin, say the issue is not clear cut. The constitution is ambiguous and the point has never been argued before the Supreme Court.
Normally, parents of children in the Jus Sanguinis category file a Form 240 Report of Birth to the local U.S. Consulate to establish the right to citizenship. For what it's worth, it does not seem that McCain's parents filed such a form. Looking through State Department records at the National Archives, I found numerous Forms 240 filed for children born in the Canal Zone in 1936, but no such form for Senator McCain. (The fact that his parents did not file the form does not mean that he is not a citizen, just that it could be a little more difficult to prove.)
A naturalized citizen can hold ANY other office in the US, why the office of President would be different is illogical. Drop the rule, just make it where they have to have lived here for a set amount of time, say something like 20 years.
Casper
The difference is that the President is the head of state. A Congressman with divided loyalties may be a nuisance, but a President with divided loyalties is an immediate threat to national sovereignty.
Not true. This is only the case if they would otherwise be natural-born citizen by virtue of lineage. Children born to foreigners on U.S. military bases abroad are not given birthright citizenship.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover
Wrong again, a Russian baby born to a Russian ambassador or diplomat wouldn't be a U.S. citizen even if they were born in a U.S. hospital on U.S. soil because persons born in the U.S. to foreign diplomats are explicitly excluded from birthright citizenship.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover
He would have been a natural-born citizen even if he were born on Ganymede. The fact that he was on a military base is irrelevant.
Wrong!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover
He would still be a natural-born citizen if he were born in Kenya or Indonesia or wherever the hell the birthwhacks think he was born.
The difference is that the President is the head of state. A Congressman with divided loyalties may be a nuisance, but a President with divided loyalties is an immediate threat to national sovereignty.
You are assuming that a child born in another country and moves here as a child has divided loyalties? Wow
Clue, true loyalty is not instilled at birth and there ae plenty cases where someone born in this nation have proven themself to be traitors and plenty where naturalized citizens have proven their loyalty beyond any doubt. The place of birth is not a good test of a persons loyalty.
Casper
You are assuming that a child born in another country and moves here as a child has divided loyalties? Wow
How in the hell did you impute any such assumption?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casper in Dallas
Clue, true loyalty is not instilled at birth and there ae plenty cases where someone born in this nation have proven themself to be traitors and plenty where naturalized citizens have proven their loyalty beyond any doubt. The place of birth is not a good test of a persons loyalty.
Casper
Clue, there is nothing I have said that states or implies otherwise.
How in the hell did you impute any such assumption?
Clue, there is nothing I have said that states or implies otherwise.
"The difference is that the President is the head of state. A Congressman with divided loyalties may be a nuisance, but a President with divided loyalties is an immediate threat to national sovereignty."
Ring any bells?
Casper
"The difference is that the President is the head of state. A Congressman with divided loyalties may be a nuisance, but a President with divided loyalties is an immediate threat to national sovereignty."
Ring any bells?
Casper
The only people that think natural born citizen does not mean born on U.S. soil, to U.S. citizen parents, are of the globalist mindset of no borders, no sovereigny, we are all global citizens. Try planting an American citizen in another country, to become their leader - see how well that would go. You have no sense of nationality or patriotism, if you would even consider allowing a person of questionable allegiance to lead this country. Only those working against our interest, would embrace such an argument.
The only people who are for dropping the constitutional requirement for president happen to be those that have a global mindset. This country has gone too far anyay when it comes to global thinking and one of the reasons we have so many problems here.
Precisely.
We need that requirement today more than ever!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
