WSJ/NBC Poll: A Donald Trump Surprise

[Berzerker]

McCain was born at Coco Solo Naval Air Station. And regardless of where he was born, both parents were citizens of the United States, so no problems their. Same case for Goldwater.

No one made a fuss about them not being born in the USA, no one demanded this or that birth certificate.

Incorrect. It does matter. Obama wasn't born to two U.S. parents, and so far, he has failed to prove that he was born in the U.S. And frankly, I don't know where you are going with this voters and "all men are created equal" stuff. They have nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

It matters because his dad wasn't a US parent? Washington's parents weren't US parents, or Jefferson, Madison.... And the authority of the Prez comes from the consent of the governed, not where the Prez was born - read the Declaration of Independence, it states principles that are at odds with a law telling people they cant vote as they please.

territories/zones/military bases(?), including guam, PR, etc are not governed by foreign powers, thus it really does not matter what YOUR opinion of the law is, the law is the law, and the criteria exists

They aint states either, and I know my opinion dont matter - does that mean you never express your opinions on the laws?

 

[JollyRoger]

so Squarg claims obama was born in kenya, and u produce a document that lists his religion....

"4. Agama (religion) : Islam"

mmmmmm.....

Birthers use it as proof that he was adopted and became an Indonesian citizen. I am merely using it to provide additional evidence of place of birth. I think it is fairly irrelevant what brand of Abrahamism his parents claimed he followed as a child.

 

[Squarg]

so Squarg claims obama was born in kenya, and u produce a document that lists his religion....

"4. Agama (religion) : Islam"

mmmmmm.....

When did I say that he was born in Kenya?

 

[civver_764]

Donald Trump is honestly one of the worst people who could become president. Talk about a symbol of the bourgeois.

 

[NickyJ]

No one made a fuss about them not being born in the USA, no one demanded this or that birth certificate.

Correct, and that is because both of McCain's and Goldwater's parents were United States citizens. It doesn't matter where you are born because both parents are citizens of the United States. Also, both of them were born in United States territories. States, territories, zones, and whatever else, if under the flag of the United States, are considered U.S. land. That is why you can't arrest a criminal who is in a foreign embassy. That embassy is considered a part of the country that owns the embassy.

It matters because his dad wasn't a US parent?

Correct.

Washington's parents weren't US parents, or Jefferson, Madison....

Correct, but that was because the country didn't exist when they were born.

And the authority of the Prez comes from the consent of the governed, not where the Prez was born - read the Declaration of Independence, it states principles that are at odds with a law telling people they cant vote as they please.

U.S. Constitution - Article 2 Section 1 reads:

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

According to Wikipedia's article:

The Oxford English Dictionary defines "natural born" as "[h]aving a specified position or character by birth". They list this definition as going back to the 16th century. So in English the phrase refers to anyone who is a citizen from birth.

I think that covers your post. If you have any further problems, I suggest you contact Constitutional Convention of 1787.

They aint states either, and I know my opinion dont matter - does that mean you never express your opinions on the laws?

Like I said before, states, territories, zones, and whatever else, if under the flag of the United States, are considered U.S. land.

 

[JollyRoger]

Under English law a "natural born subject" was one born in England or naturalized by statute at birth. It says nothing about needing both parents to be a citizen or about dual citizenship disqualifying one from being a natural born subject. The birthers blow off English law regarding getting a handle on "natural born citizen" and instead favor of a translation of Vattel that was not published until the mid-1790's.

This article may help you get a better handle on the term:

http://yalelawjournal.org/images/pdfs/pryor_note.pdf

If you want to be an originalist in the Scalia sense of the word, then no one is currently eligible to be President:

Now the key issue for an original meaning originalist, as Sandy Levinson, Jordan Steiker and I pointed out back in 1995, is whether "at the time of adoption of this Constitution" refers only to "Citizen of the United States" or also to the antecedent clause, "a natural born Citizen. We found out that, according to accepted grammatical rules as they existed in 1787, the use of commas marking off the words "or a Citizen of the United States" means that the phrase "at the time of the adoption of this Constitution" refers to both preceding clauses, i.e., both to "natural born Citizen" and to "Citizen of the United States."

In other words, the original public meaning of the clause says that to be President you either have to have been a natural born Citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, or otherwise a citizen of the United States at the time of adoption, i.e., 1789. That means that persons born after 1789 aren't eligible to be President of the United States. And that includes not only John McCain, but Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama.

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2008/03/who-cares-about-john-mccain-george.html

 

[NickyJ]

Under English law a "natural born subject" was one born in England or naturalized by statute at birth. It says nothing about needing both parents to be a citizen or about dual citizenship disqualifying one from being a natural born subject. The birthers blow off English law regarding getting a handle on "natural born citizen" and instead favor of a translation of Vattel that was not published until the mid-1790's.

This article may help you get a better handle on the term:

http://yalelawjournal.org/images/pdfs/pryor_note.pdf

If you want to be an originalist in the Scalia sense of the word, then no one is currently eligible to be President:


http://balkin.blogspot.com/2008/03/who-cares-about-john-mccain-george.html

Here is a section from U.S. Constitution.com. An excerpt:

Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution. 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.

* There is an exception in the law — the person must be "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.

 

[JollyRoger]

Here is a section from U.S. Constitution.com. An excerpt:

Yep - no requirement that both parents be U.S. citizens - nothing about dual citizenshio being a disqualifier.

 

[NickyJ]

Yep - no requirement that both parents be U.S. citizens - nothing about dual citizenshio being a disqualifier.

Did you even read it? Again:

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.

What was that about "no requirement that both parents be U.S. citizens"?

 

[Aegis]

Did you even read it? Again:


What was that about "no requirement that both parents be U.S. citizens"?

Hooray for Selective Reading!

Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution. 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.

* There is an exception in the law — the person must be "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.

 

[JollyRoger]

Did you even read it? Again:


What was that about "no requirement that both parents be U.S. citizens"?

That is one of many options.

These options on your list do not require two citizens as parents:

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, 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.

 

[NickyJ]

Hooray for Selective Reading!

Hooray for doing what you just cried about!

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

According to the IRS:

An individual who owes his sole allegiance to the United States, including all US citizens, and including some individuals who are not US citizens. For tax purposes the term "US national" refers to individuals who were born in American Samoa or the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

Surely you don't think that you know more about this than the IRS?

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)

Let me point something rather important out to you: "(with military and diplomatic service included in this time)" I didn't know Obama's parents served in the U.S. military. What were their ranks? Did they get any medals?

That is one of many options.

These options on your list do not require two citizens as parents:

Correct, and Obama meets 0% of that criteria. Your point?

 

[JollyRoger]

Correct, and Obama meets 0% of that criteria. Your point?

1. Anyone born inside the United States

2. (Assuming he was not Born in the USA) - 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

 

[NickyJ]

1. Anyone born inside the United States

Which is something Obama has failed to prove, hence the discussion.

2. (Assuming he was not Born in the USA) - 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

Again, rather important fact: "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)" Again, Barry 'Bama doesn't meet the criteria listed.

 

[JollyRoger]

Which is something Obama has failed to prove, hence the discussion.


Again, rather important fact: "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)" Again, Barry 'Bama doesn't meet the criteria listed.

The plain meaning of your red stuff is that military service and diplomatic service (outside the country) can qualify as part of that 5 years. If you have the five years already (Mrs. O' Bama did), you do not need to tack on military or diplomatic service.

So for example, if I became a U.S. citizen, lived in the U.S. for 3 years post-citizenship, joined the military and got shoipped off to a foreign base for 2 years, I qualify just the same as if I had lived in the U.S. for 5 years. The military and diplomatic service is a substitute for physical location, not a requirement to meet the 5 years.

 

[Arakhor]

Nicky, are you really arguing an obvious point like this? If Mrs Obama was a US citizen and had lived in the United States for at least five years prior to her son's birth, Barack Obama is a US Citizen. Don't deliberately misread the text to suit your own prejudices.

 

[NickyJ]

The plain meaning of your red stuff is that military service and diplomatic service (outside the country) can qualify as part of that 5 years. If you have the five years already (Mrs. O' Bama did), you do not need to tack on military or diplomatic service.

So why doesn't it say "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 (military and diplomatic service time qualifies as time in the U.S.)"?

 

[Arakhor]

Unless there is a highly specific legal meaning, "with military and diplomatic service included in this time" and "military and diplomatic service time qualifies as time in the U.S." mean identical things when "this time" is being defined as "US residency".

 

[JollyRoger]

So why doesn't it say "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 (military and diplomatic service time qualifies as time in the U.S.)"?

with military and diplomatic service included in this time = military and diplomatic service time qualifies as time in the U.S.

Your reading would require a primary requirement to exist in a parathetical. Wouldn't the better way to reach your meaning be: "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 served in the militay or diplomatic service for at least five years"

 

[NickyJ]

Unless there is a highly specific legal meaning, "with military and diplomatic service included in this time" and "military and diplomatic service time qualifies as time in the U.S." mean identical things when "this time" is being defined as "US residency".

When it says "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)", it transfers the message that it is required that "if one parent is an alien etc.... (with military and diplomatic service during this time)."

with military and diplomatic service included in this time = military and diplomatic service time qualifies as time in the U.S.

Your reading would require a primary requirement to exist in a parathetical. Wouldn't the better way to reach your meaning be: "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 served in the militay or diplomatic service for at least five years"

I figured that that was basically what they were saying, only in slightly different form.