Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3
Reply To Thread

"Natural Born Citizen"Follow

#1 Aug 21 2013 at 8:01 AM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
29,332 posts
I learned something today. While reading a story about noted Canadian Anchor Baby Ted Cruz, and his comic performance art piece "Running for President," I learned that, apparently, it matters not at all where a potential presidential candidate is born so long as they are a citizen at birth. You know, for instance, if they had been born in Kenya to an American mother, that would in no way disqualify them from being president. Rare that I find out I completely misunderstood a portion of Federal law, just thought I'd share with the masses.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#2 Aug 21 2013 at 8:07 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
The difference is Ted is Republican.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#3 Aug 21 2013 at 8:12 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,332 posts
Yes, yes, hypocritical, etc, but really I had thought the interpretation was was one had to be born on some sort of US soil, a military base or embassy, etc. Not, born in another country, live their for years, etc.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#4 Aug 21 2013 at 8:17 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I was mainly aware of this since Flea's father was made a US citizen before returning to Peru and having his kids so she's a natural born US citizen despite having been born in Lima. Not that I checked her presidential credentials but I assume she'd be eligible.

I'm too lazy to look it up but the birthers were clinging to some law change in the 60's that they said would have made Obama ineligible (supposedly born overseas) despite the citizenship of his mother. I'm sure Gbaji could tell you; he's been studying up on it in preparation for the Supreme Court case.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#5 Aug 21 2013 at 8:17 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,905 posts
How could that be though?

Scheduling births is like scheduling the weather. If an American woman happens to be on foreign soil when the babe decides to drop out we can't simply deny the kid citizenship.

Or, what if an American woman is having lunch at the french embassy with a friend when she has her baby. Would or could the kid be French?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#6 Aug 21 2013 at 8:36 AM Rating: Good
*****
19,797 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Yes, yes, hypocritical, etc, but really I had thought the interpretation was was one had to be born on some sort of US soil, a military base or embassy, etc. Not, born in another country, live their for years, etc.


The requirement is that they be a "natural-born citizen," meaning they need to be a citizen at birth and, thus, have never been an alien. That means they were either born on US soil, or are the child of US citizens.

The idea that they need to be on US soil is historically absurd. Expansion into the western regions of the continent were significant at the time, and far outpaced the rate at which the government was including that land in their territorial boundaries (the government often being intentionally restrictive so they didn't reignite the French and Indian War conflicts). They also didn't wish to extend their territory too arbitrarily outward, because they didn't want to have to deal with the repercussions of native citizens (which they later addressed by... not affording them the rights of citizenship, while still considering them citizens under their domain).

Elinda wrote:
How could that be though?

Scheduling births is like scheduling the weather. If an American woman happens to be on foreign soil when the babe decides to drop out we can't simply deny the kid citizenship.

Or, what if an American woman is having lunch at the french embassy with a friend when she has her baby. Would or could the kid be French?


If you want to stretch the idea, it's not TOO weird, barring the fact that the US was tiny at the time relative to the spread of its own citizens noted above. If a woman was sailing to a foreign nation, she probably wouldn't be coming back for some time. And it might be held that her child would be culturally French (or whatever) by the time they returned.

As for the reason for it, it's because the US was extremely insular in the early years after the revolution. The leading party was wary of the French influence on the Democratic-Republican rivals, and the Democratic-Republicans were deeply concerned by the heavy English influence on the Whigs. Culture war led to an anti-foreigner agreement from both parties (restricted to the other influence, but unified in a general legislative compromise).
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#7 Aug 21 2013 at 12:04 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,681 posts
The scary part here is that dumbfuck "could" be our Prime Minister. I'm not worried about the fact that he could be your President though, as you guys are already fucked anyway.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#8 Aug 21 2013 at 12:07 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
Watch him get both and unify the USA with northern Not USA.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#9 Aug 21 2013 at 12:37 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,905 posts
Mexico might feel mightily left-out.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#10 Aug 21 2013 at 12:55 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,681 posts
Give them Texas
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#11 Aug 21 2013 at 12:57 PM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
I think Elinda is looking for suggestions to appease them, not **** them off further.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#12 Aug 21 2013 at 12:58 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,681 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
I think Elinda is looking for suggestions to appease them, not **** them off further.
Can't be. If it were appeasement, how come they get appeased and we get stuck having to merge with you cnuts.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#13 Aug 21 2013 at 12:59 PM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
You cnuts don't pick our vegetables.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#14 Aug 21 2013 at 1:17 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,681 posts
We supply gas. And electricity. Which you could use to power machines to pick your vegetables. Mexico is completely unneeded.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#15 Aug 21 2013 at 3:30 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,886 posts
Careful, we must not anger Canukistan, for they will send their mighty submarine fleet to destroy us! Maybe even with a working torpedo launcher!
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#16 Aug 21 2013 at 3:51 PM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
Canada has a navy?
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#17 Aug 21 2013 at 3:59 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,886 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Canada has a navy?


Oh yeah! one that's killed people and everything! (their own sailors, but still...)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/canadas-submarine-fleet-never-worked-its-time-to-stop-ignoring-the-problem/article12468338/
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#18 Aug 21 2013 at 4:26 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,681 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Canada has a navy?
Why would we need a navy? Having the largest coastline of any country in the world wouldn't necessitate a need for such a thing.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#19 Aug 21 2013 at 4:27 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,607 posts
Elinda wrote:
Scheduling births is like scheduling the weather. If an American woman happens to be on foreign soil when the babe decides to drop out we can't simply deny the kid citizenship.


We don't. At least not "simply". The only case in which that can happen is if only one parent is a US citizen, and that parent is too young. I don't remember the exact cut off, but in order to pass natural born citizenship off to a child not born in the US, at least one parent has to have lived for a specific number of years as an adult (adult in this case not necessarily starting at age 18 though) in the US. The assumption being that a US citizen child (for example) who grows up in say France her entire life, and then has a child, that child would have little connection/loyalty to the US because it's never lived there and it's mother never lived there as an adult and thus has limited ability to pass on the culture, ideas, etc to the child.

Why this applied in Obama's case is that his father was not a US citizen, and his mother was too young to pass it on. Where he was physically born actually mattered in his case. I'm not sure how old Cruz's parents were, so I'm not sure if this case applies at all.

I'll also point out that the need to be a "natural born citizen" only matters for the purpose of presidential qualification. The child can still be a US citizen (just apply for a social security number like everyone else and you're done). Just not a "natural born" citizen. The point is that we place a higher requirement on the person who holds the greatest amount of direct executive power in our nation. There's a need to ensure that this person does not have divided loyalties, and that he will not put another nations interests ahead of the US.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#20 Aug 21 2013 at 4:29 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,607 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:
Yes, yes, hypocritical, etc, but really I had thought the interpretation was was one had to be born on some sort of US soil, a military base or embassy, etc. Not, born in another country, live their for years, etc.


The requirement is that they be a "natural-born citizen," meaning they need to be a citizen at birth and, thus, have never been an alien. That means they were either born on US soil, or are the child of US citizens.


At the risk of repeating myself, the requirement only applies to people who want to be President of the US. So not really unreasonable or absurd at all.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#21 Aug 21 2013 at 4:30 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,886 posts
Does a clone count as a naturally born citizen? if so, can sheep run for president?
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#22 Aug 21 2013 at 4:31 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,757 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Canada has a navy?
Why would we need a navy? Having the largest coastline of any country in the world wouldn't necessitate a need for such a thing.
I think they mean ships other than ice-breakers.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#23 Aug 21 2013 at 4:36 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
See? Told ya Gbaji would have the Birther arguments down.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#24 Aug 21 2013 at 4:37 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,681 posts
Of course we have more than ice breakers. We have whalers and dinghy's as well.


In truth, I think all we have are a few ****** diesel subs the Brits robbed us on and a dozen half decent frigates. And 50 year old helicopters.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#25 Aug 21 2013 at 5:09 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,607 posts
Jophiel wrote:
See? Told ya Gbaji would have the Birther arguments down.


Those aren't birther arguments Joph. That's what the law says. It says that whether some group uses it to question Obama's qualifications to be president or not. It says it whether the person in question is a Republican or a Democrat. Remember just this week when I talked about how liberals tend to be ends oriented? This is one of those times. You care about the outcome more than the method of getting there.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#26 Aug 21 2013 at 5:19 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
gbaji wrote:
That's what the law says.
Constitutionally the law states that the mother needs to be a US citizen and she needs to live in the US long enough. Kind of the reason why Obama, Cruz, and McCain are all eligible for presidency.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#27 Aug 21 2013 at 5:37 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
See? Told ya Gbaji would have the Birther arguments down.
Those aren't birther arguments Joph.

Sure, you just happened to have US citizenship law memorized because it made you more fun at parties. But, hey, if saying Democrats/Republicans! makes you feel better about your fringe conspiracy allies, knock yourself out Smiley: laugh

____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#28 Aug 21 2013 at 6:36 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,607 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
That's what the law says.
Constitutionally the law states that the mother needs to be a US citizen and she needs to live in the US long enough. Kind of the reason why Obama, Cruz, and McCain are all eligible for presidency.


As I said, I don't know about Cruz, but Obama's mother had not lived in the US long enough. Which is why where he was born actually mattered. If his mother had been a year older when he was born, no one would have cared about what his birth certificate said.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#29 Aug 21 2013 at 6:40 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,607 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
See? Told ya Gbaji would have the Birther arguments down.
Those aren't birther arguments Joph.

Sure, you just happened to have US citizenship law memorized because it made you more fun at parties.


I've never made a single birther argument. I've never argued that Obama was born anywhere other than Hawaii as he claimed. What I have argued is against ignorant people who don't understand the law. So if I had to memorize US citizenship law, it's only because of the incredibly long list of people who repeatedly managed to "forget" what the law says every time the subject came up and I had to remind them.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#30 Aug 21 2013 at 6:41 PM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
gbaji wrote:
As I said, I don't know about Cruz, but Obama's mother had not lived in the US long enough.
So is Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Washington, Hawaii (which was a state when she and her family moved there) or California not part of the US?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#31 Aug 21 2013 at 6:49 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
2,560 posts
gbaji wrote:
that child would have little connection/loyalty to the US because it's never lived there and it's mother never lived there as an adult and thus has limited ability to pass on the culture, ideas, etc to the child.


Oh, now Gbaji is claiming Americans have culture. What are we, FRENCH? Smiley: lol
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#32 Aug 21 2013 at 6:57 PM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
The law gbaji is trying to imply is about abroad births, by the way. It requires required* the citizen parent to have lived in the US for ten years prior to the child's birth, and five of those needed to be after being 14. But seeing as how Hawaii does happen to be, and was at the time of birth, a US state and in fact not abroad, this is pure unadulterated birther conspiracy he either won't admit to or just go silent on.

* It was changed in 1986 to only require five years, and only two of which after 14.

Edited, Aug 21st 2013 9:01pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#33 Aug 21 2013 at 7:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,757 posts
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
Americans have culture



Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#34 Aug 21 2013 at 8:09 PM Rating: Good
****
6,753 posts
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
Does a clone count as a naturally born citizen? if so, can sheep run for president?


Yep, but they have to live to age 35, which is a little challenging for sheep.
____________________________
Some people are like slinkies, they aren't really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.
#35 Aug 21 2013 at 9:03 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,886 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
As I said, I don't know about Cruz, but Obama's mother had not lived in the US long enough.
So is Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Washington, Hawaii (which was a state when she and her family moved there) or California not part of the US?


Nope, we Washingtonians seceeded and forgot to tell the rest of you. All Hail Washingtonia!

Also we hijacked the pacific fleet nuclear subs. Sleep well tonight!
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#36 Aug 21 2013 at 9:07 PM Rating: Good
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
Also we hijacked the pacific fleet nuclear subs. Sleep well tonight!
All our empty missile silos here make us feel naked now.Smiley: frown
____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
#37 Aug 21 2013 at 9:09 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,332 posts
this is pure unadulterated birther conspiracy he either won't admit to or just go silent on.

No, just seems like an arcane law that would have actually applied had Obama been born in Kenya. Nothing particularly conspiracish about it. What he won't admit to is finding the insane nutbag idea that Obama was born in Kenya (and that it was covered up meticulously in all ways SINCE HIS BIRTH because someone was aware that this arcane law would preclude him from becoming the first black president 45 years later) anything but laughable, That's flat earth crazy. Gbaji found the idea terribly interesting and intriguing, made multiple posts about it, insisted it would be resolved by SCOTUS years ago, and even linked a tape in Swahili that was translated apparently without anyone who spoke Swahili listening to it. I remember the last part pretty clearly because I was laughing at the translation as I was listening to it. It was along the lines of "I love my mother" being translated as "All Father's MUST DIE!"

Edited, Aug 21st 2013 11:11pm by Smasharoo
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#38 Aug 22 2013 at 12:02 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,944 posts
gbaji wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
That's what the law says.
Constitutionally the law states that the mother needs to be a US citizen and she needs to live in the US long enough. Kind of the reason why Obama, Cruz, and McCain are all eligible for presidency.


As I said, I don't know about Cruz, but Obama's mother had not lived in the US long enough. Which is why where he was born actually mattered. If his mother had been a year older when he was born, no one would have cared about what his birth certificate said.

18 isn't long enough? Was that not the age of adulthood back in '61?
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#39 Aug 22 2013 at 1:21 AM Rating: Good
Sage
**
644 posts
Debalic wrote:
gbaji wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
That's what the law says.
Constitutionally the law states that the mother needs to be a US citizen and she needs to live in the US long enough. Kind of the reason why Obama, Cruz, and McCain are all eligible for presidency.


As I said, I don't know about Cruz, but Obama's mother had not lived in the US long enough. Which is why where he was born actually mattered. If his mother had been a year older when he was born, no one would have cared about what his birth certificate said.

18 isn't long enough? Was that not the age of adulthood back in '61?

Nah, because back when it was written, they were only considered 10-11 years old. This is because the baby has black blood, and therefore the 3/5's personage takes effect. The mother would have to be 30 in this particular case.
#40 Aug 22 2013 at 7:41 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,905 posts
gbaji wrote:
If his mother had been a year older when he was born, no one would have cared about what his birth certificate said.

Oh, here I thought people were concerned that he wasn't a us citizen, didn't represent the us, didn't think like an american, was anti-us, was a dirty foreign muslim etc etc.

But here it's only a problem with his mothers age when he was born. So, why again is it an issue?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#41 Aug 22 2013 at 7:55 AM Rating: Good
*****
19,797 posts
And how, exactly, would his birth certificate have been relevant?
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#42 Aug 22 2013 at 8:24 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
No, just seems like an arcane law that would have actually applied had Obama been born in Kenya.
Of course trying to apply the abroad laws on in-country births is a conspiracy theory attempt. It's just not a particularly good one that requires, par for the course, that the audience it's being fed to being unable or unwilling to look up the information for themselves. You know? Like our free thinking, logic loving, sensible friend here.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#43 Aug 26 2013 at 3:15 AM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,607 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
this is pure unadulterated birther conspiracy he either won't admit to or just go silent on.

No, just seems like an arcane law that would have actually applied had Obama been born in Kenya. Nothing particularly conspiracish about it.


Yet, even after the law in question is detailed we *still* have folks saying silly things like "isn't 18 old enough?". Not according to the law, it's not.


Quote:
What he won't admit to is finding the insane nutbag idea that Obama was born in Kenya (and that it was covered up meticulously in all ways SINCE HIS BIRTH because someone was aware that this arcane law would preclude him from becoming the first black president 45 years later) anything but laughable, That's flat earth crazy.


Except no cover up was necessary. Being born in Kenya would not prevent him from being a citizen. It would only mean he wasn't a natural born citizen, which, as I've explained numerous times only matters if someone's trying to become president of the US. All the places he lived, jobs he had, including in the state legislature in Illinois, and then the US senate, did not require that he be a natural born citizen. Thus, there would have never been any reason to check if he'd actually been born in Kenya and his mom later filled out he paperwork to get a birth certificate for him in Hawaii, or if he was born in Hawaii.

In precisely the same way no one checked the birth certificate of our previous governor in California to see if he was born outside the US. Because... wait for it... it doesn't matter. Unless one is running for President of the US. Which Obama was.


My problem with this issue was never based on a belief that Obama was in fact born outside the US, but the fact that we apparently have absolutely no process by which a determination of that criteria to be president can be made. In Obama's case we can all look at people who believe that he was born in Kenya and laugh at them, but those are questions of merit (is there sufficient evidence that he was not born in the US?). But because of all those judges who dismissed the cases on standing instead of merit we now have judicial precedent which says that no US citizen can challenge that requirement of a president when his name in on the ballot. And no US citizen can challenge that requirement if that person wins the election. And no US citizen can challenge that requirement once the electoral college has voted. And no US citizen can challenge that requirement even after that person takes office.

Which effectively means that because of a bunch of judges more concerned with protecting a candidate's sealed records from what could fairly be labeled a fishing expedition, we have no method to address this within our laws. Yet, it's actually written into the US constitution. IMO, the desire to make this into a political rather than legal issue did great harm to our system of laws. Sure, it's fun to yukk it up at the birthers, but sometimes even silly claims need to be taken seriously enough to at least use the law properly to oppose them. All it would have taken was one judge to simply order the documents opened, take a look at them, and then rule that the documents proved natural born citizenship, and the whole issue would have been done. That's how it should have been handled. By skirting the law in order to avoid even having to deal with the case, those judges set a horrible precedent.


When McCain's natural born citizenship status was questioned, he used an open procedure to get a finding from the US congress stating that he met the criteria. He did this deliberately and ahead of time to ensure that no such questions would come up. Obama chose to do the exact opposite. That alone speaks volumes IMO.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#44 Aug 26 2013 at 7:12 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
gbaji wrote:
Not according to the law, it's not.
It's also illegal to tie a giraffe's neck around a telephone pole in Florida. I mean, if you want to discuss random laws that are inapplicable to the situation you're trying to demonize, I'm all for that.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#45 Aug 26 2013 at 7:37 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
This reminds me of one of those "Intelligence vs Wisdom" examples from role playing games.

Intelligence allows you to write five paragraphs about how Obama supposedly should have handled the Birther situation (just stay with me on this). Wisdom would tell you that there's no way to write five paragraphs about Obama's birth certificate and how he/they did it all wrong and not sound like a kook.

Edited, Aug 26th 2013 8:38am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#46 Aug 26 2013 at 7:43 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
Failing both, he's using vitality and hoping to survive longer than the other guy.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#47 Aug 26 2013 at 9:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,757 posts
gbaji wrote:
But because of all those judges who dismissed the cases on standing instead of merit we now have judicial precedent which says that no US citizen can challenge that requirement of a president when his name in on the ballot without solid evidence.


Funny how that works. If you think someone is breaking the law, you need proof of it. What's the world coming to these days. Smiley: oyvey
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#48 Aug 26 2013 at 9:28 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
Funny how that works. If you think someone is breaking the law, you need proof of it. What's the world coming to these days. Smiley: oyvey
No, if you think someone is breaking the law, you punish everyone accordingly. Having to deal with that evidence stuff is just getting the courts involved, which means more government intervention. And we're against big government.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#49 Aug 26 2013 at 9:31 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,757 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
Funny how that works. If you think someone is breaking the law, you need proof of it. What's the world coming to these days. Smiley: oyvey
No, if you think someone is breaking the law, you punish everyone accordingly. Having to deal with that evidence stuff is just getting the courts involved, which means more government intervention. And we're against big government.
Seriously? And I just sold my extra-pointy pitchfork on Ebay too. Smiley: frown
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#50 Aug 26 2013 at 5:09 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,607 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
gbaji wrote:
But because of all those judges who dismissed the cases on standing instead of merit we now have judicial precedent which says that no US citizen can challenge that requirement of a president when his name in on the ballot without solid evidence.


Funny how that works. If you think someone is breaking the law, you need proof of it.


You have no clue how standing works in a civil case, do you? If the judge had looked at the evidence and ruled that there wasn't sufficient evidence to show that Obama didn't meet the criteria to be president, then that would be a ruling on "merit", not "standing". Seriously. Go look them up.

When you dismiss a case on standing, you aren't saying "this guy has insufficient evidence to show that his claim is true". You are saying "this guy can't show that he's harmed in any way even if what he's claiming is true". Which means that the same dismissal would be (or should be) applicable regardless of the probability that the claim is true. So if someone ran for president and everyone knew he wasn't a natural born citizen, but for some reason he was popular and a large number of people wanted him to win, the same inability to actually get him removed from the ballot, ineligible for EC votes, unable to be inaugurated, etc would apply.

That's the problem I have with those cases. They were clearly ruling on their assumption that the claims were not true, but dismissed the cases on standing instead (presumably to avoid having to actually go through the motions of proving the claims to be untrue). Which sets a really bad precedent.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#51 Aug 26 2013 at 5:40 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
19,797 posts
And funny how there needs to be sufficient evidence of a crime to try it in the first place.

It's kinda why we don't just have murder trials just because someone cried murder. You need sufficient evidence of a crime to launch a criminal investigation. It's this nice side effect of not living in a fascist state where the government just assumes you're breaking the law.

Plus, Obama had a legally issued and valid birth certificate. His "original" birth certificate was legally meaningless. My sister is in the same position - the county that issued her birth certificate reissued all certificates printed during a certain span, and hers was one. I doubt she has the original document, because the original document is legally meaningless.

And my god, is there really so little going on nowadays that we're back to the birther argument?
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
« Previous 1 2 3
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 37 All times are in CDT
JennockFV, Anonymous Guests (36)