Crunch
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2009
- Messages
- 4,063
- Reaction score
- 890
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
No, truthers are just as wrong as birthers.
So Bush did bomb the World Trade Center? :shock:
:lamo
No, truthers are just as wrong as birthers.
Well in my terrible humble opinion the 9/11 "conspiracy theory" is still a viable theory. While this story regarding Obama's birth right, is complete trash from the gutter. I don't blame bush for 9/11 .. err not explicitly. I actually think he was just a dupe puppet of the vice president and the pentagon. I wouldn't draw moral equivalency between these arguments. No not ever.
This is still a very good argument. It's not been refuted in full, it certainly can’t be, given the overwhelming empirical data supporting it. Just because it is an old story these days it doesn't mean that it has gone away.
Omg, I quit. You win. Obama was born in Kenya, and Bush bombed the world trade center. Biden is actually a genius and Ted Kennedy was a conservative. I'm Santa and you're the tooth fairy. You happy? You win.
Oh I thought that one was obvious!You forgot that Cheney is Darth Satan.
Omg, I quit. You win. Obama was born in Kenya, and Bush bombed the world trade center. Biden is actually a genius and Ted Kennedy was a conservative. I'm Santa and you're the tooth fairy. You happy? You win.
Well that was easy .. of course the defence was weak on your behalf. Clearly birthers are out there while any reasonable person who watched the documentary would certainly have reason to doubt. Clearly the evedence to the contray on the issue with 9/11 is pretty good while the evidence of birthers is .. nothing.
Nothing you say?
Page 126, Dreams of my father.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_1lGFYYNkw.../!!dreamsfrommyfather-pg126-returntokenya.jpg
Kenyan National Assembly, March 25th, 2010, page 31
Member of the Kenyan Assembly on March 25th, 2010, admits that Obama was born in Kenya.
Michelle Obama 2008 speech...
Kenyan Ambassador admits Obama born in Kenya.
:lamo
Claims regarding Kenyan birth certificate
On August 2, 2009, Orly Taitz released and attached to court documents what she alleged to be an authentic Kenyan birth certificate. Legal documents submitted describe the document as an "unauthenticated color photocopy of certified copy of registration of birth".[52][53] The document was almost immediately revealed to be a forgery. It purports to have been issued by the "Republic of Kenya", when in fact, such a state did not yet exist at the time of Obama's birth as indicated on the document (Kenya was a Dominion of the British Crown until 1963).[54][55] Subsequently, evidence was unearthed that the alleged Kenyan birth certificate is a modified version of a 1959 Australian birth certificate found on an online genealogy website.[56][57] The Washington Independent website cited an anonymous blogger[58] as having taken credit for the forgery and posting four photos substantiating the claim.[59] Examples of actual 1961 Kenyan birth certificates have also been revealed, which look substantially different from the document Taitz submitted to the court.[60]
One of the disagreements I see is as to what, precisely, a "natural born citizen" is.
As I currently understand it, anyone born to a US citizen, no matter the location of the birth, is a US citizen, and I thought also, a "natural born citizen".
Am I incorrect?
Is it any one (1) US citizen?Anybody born in the United States for any reason and any person born to an existing United States citizen is, by consequence, a United States Citizen.
Is it any one (1) US citizen?
Or are two required?
What parameters apply to the other participant?
However indirectly, like, say, a sperm bank?\
Edit: And BTW, it's "natural born citizen" that this question involves, not simply "citizen".
The two are different.
Correct, I should have specified "Natural" born citizen. There are different rules for when there is one parent or two parents. If there is one, the parent must also have lived in the USA for five consequtive years as well. It is not a simple process, but not complicated either in most cases.
The Mark, if you want the correct definition of ‘natural born citizen’ then please see the following; Crunch, post #121.
A natural born citizen is a person born in the country, of parents (plural) who are citizens.
There is a difference between natural born citizen, native born citizen and US citizen.
6.U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark said:"It thus clearly appears that by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country, and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, and the jurisdiction of the English sovereign; and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject, unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign state, or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born. The same rule was in force in all the English colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continues to prevail under the constitution as original established.
This shows pretty clearly that the Supreme Court considered anyone born in the United States, even to non-citizen parents to be natural-born citizens...
Originally Posted by 6.U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
"It thus clearly appears that by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country, and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, and the jurisdiction of the English sovereign; and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject, unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign state, or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born. The same rule was in force in all the English colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continues to prevail under the constitution as original established.
The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.
I clearly pointed to post #121.Source of said definition?
1. If you continued to quote the final decision paragraph you would see that Wong was considered a US citizen which is different from a natural born citizen.This shows pretty clearly that the Supreme Court considered anyone born in the United States, even to non-citizen parents to be natural-born citizens...
From what I can see in post 121…I clearly pointed to post #121.
I already defined it in post #137!Is that acceptable to you?
I'm going to research this myself.I already defined it in post #137!
To be eligible for the position of POTUS you have to be a natural born citizen.
A natural born citizen is a person born in the country, of parents (plural) who are citizens.
If we want to change the rules, then we need to amend the US Constitution.
Good choice!I'm going to research this myself.
I'm going to research this myself.
If you are correct, I cannot see why it would not already have been changed, considering that multiple thousands of US citizens have been born outside the US, to US citizen parent(s), and denying them the possibility of a job as POTUS or VPOTUS just because of that fact seems completely unreasonable
So, a link I’m reading atm: Natural born citizen of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good choice!