Politico Drops Race Card on Donald Trump

I voted for Ralph Nader in '08, believe it or not. I am in the market for another interesting candidate in '12.

major bean wrote: I voted for Ralph Nader in '08, believe it or not. I am in the market for another interesting candidate in '12.

I did too.....and Ross Perot.....as for another interesting candidate, that would be great. Trump, however, isn't it.

PrintSmith wrote:

poubelle wrote: His mother after all was a US citizen, no?

Indeed she was, but his father was not. No one has yet commented on this post of mine from earlier in the thread, perhaps you would like to discuss it?

PrintSmith wrote: What did those who penned the words mean by that language and does the child of a non-citizen, even if born here, rise to the level that those words encompass?

In his 1758 book entitled "The Laws of Nations" (recognize that phrase from somewhere?) Vattel, whose influence upon the authors of the Constitution is widely known (it was the book that Washington had borrowed from a library in 1789 and never returned), had this to say on the subject:

I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.

Is this what was meant by "natural born citizen", and does the 14th Amendment change that in any way?

So exactly what are you saying/asking? Are you inferring that because only his mother was a citizen, by your arcane interpretation(s) of whatever seems to back up your beliefs, Obama, IF he was born on foreign soil, would not be a natural born citizen? His mother was a citizen, he is a citizen, regardless of where he may have been born.

What I am saying poubelle is that there is a constitutional difference between one born on American soil and a natural born citizen of the United States of America. What I am saying is that the phrase "natural born" does not simply mean born on this soil; that it has today, and has always had, a much richer and deeper meaning than simply being born on the soil of the nation. I am saying that from my particular POV, that designation belongs solely to those born to parents who are both citizens of this nation, regardless of whether they are naturalized, regardless of whether the child is born on American soil or not. I am saying that it doesn't include the anchor children of illegal aliens born on American soil. I am saying that it doesn't include the child of a citizen and a non-citizen.

As Vattel wrote 200+ years ago, there is more to being a citizen of a country than the happenstance of where one emerges from the womb. There are immigrants who have become naturalized citizens that have a deeper love for, and fidelity to, the United States of America than those who were born here have, yet they can never hold its highest office, they are not natural born citizens. Had Barack II been born in Kenya to two citizens of the United States of America, he would be more of a natural born citizen of this nation than he is as a result of being born to a citizen and a non-citizen. If his father had been a naturalized citizen of this nation, and his mother also a citizen either by birth or naturalization, I would not question Obama II's ability to qualify for the office of President regardless of where on this planet he had been born; that his parents were not both citizens removes him from being included among those that are distinguished as natural born according to the understanding of the term at the time it was included in the Constitution. Vattel's writings were instrumental in shaping the views of those who created the government of this nation. The Declaration of Independence was written as an appeal to the other nations of the world as to why the colonies were dissolving their ties with Great Britain and deserving to be recognized, according to the Laws of Nations, as sharing the same separate and equal station among them that Great Britain did. George Washington took this book with him when he was chosen as the union's first executive because he knew that much of how the government was organized was to be found within its pages. Washington was a military man, not a political theorist as so many of the others were. When we look at that phrase, natural born citizen, to understand what was intended, we must first understand what it was understood to mean when it was chosen as being a necessary inclusion within the organizing principles.

PS, while you and I share reservations about the concept of "anchor babies", I'd rather just be honest and above-aboard and say right out that it might be time to amend the Constitution to insist that ALL citizens must either be born to parents of whom at least one is a citizen, or else become citizens by naturalization. I just don't find the argument that just because your mama had one foot over the border when she gave birth you should be entitled to citizenship. I know that's not politically correct, and I don't much care.

But the theory your'e going on here, that there are citizens who were born as citizens, but then there are citizens who are born as somehow "better" citizens, well, that doesn't make any sense to me either. I understand why it might make sense to limit the office of Presidency to those who were "born" citizens rather than naturalized citizens. Yes, indeed, I can think of more than one or two reasons why that makes very good sense indeed.

But I just can't quite buy that some citizens who were born citizens, ie, born to one or both parents who are citizens, should have some kind of caste system whereas they might not all be quite "equally" citizens. Just can't stomach it, as an American. To me, you were either born an American citizen or you weren't and if you were you are just as good as any other citizen, yes, even for the office of President, and I don't much like the idea of some being born somehow"more" American than others.

You can split hairs all you want, it won't change my gut feeling that that is the kind of thing we got rid of (or should have) when we tossed the British royalists the heck out of here.

neptunechimney wrote:
" If you voted for Obama in 2008 to prove you're not a racist, you'll have to vote for someone else in 2012 to prove you're not an idiot. "
~ unknown.

I didn't vote for Obama to prove I'm not a racist...I voted for Obama because voting for Geezer and Gidget was not an option...

I do not believe that.

so, you're saying, that the blacks that voted for obama messiah are racists, interesting!

I didn't vote for either Bush or Gore, because I thought they were both equally bad.

I voted for Bush/Cheney and McCain/Palin because I thought they were the lesser evils.

It sure would be nice to have someone I could vote FOR for a change!

LJ:

That happens to be my new signature line. I posted it about two hours ago and as far as I know NeptuneChimney hasn't unless he was referring to my signature line. It doesn't say if you voted for Obama for any reason that we want to know what that reason is. Just pointing it out. No need to be so damn defensive!!!