Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: McCain not eligible for White House

  1. #1

    McCain not eligible for White House

    [quote]
    Professor Gabriel J. Chin of the University of Arizona wrote the analysis suggesting that McCain's birth in the Panama Canal Zone while his father was on active military duty qualified him as a citizen under a law later enacted by Congress, but didn't make him a "natural-born citizen," which is what the Constitution requires for the presidency.

    This issue has been kicking around constitutional circles for a while, and Chin's opinion is decidedly a minority view. Indeed, earlier this year "the Senate approved a nonbinding resolution declaring that Mr. McCain is eligible to be president. Its sponsors said the nation's founders would have never intended to deny the presidency to the offspring of military personnel stationed out of the country."

    That's almost certainly true. But it may be a tougher argument for McCain to make now that he's devoted to "strict constructionist" interpretations of the Constitution.

    After all, if you start messing with the language of the Founders, next thing you know, you've got a constitutional right to privacy, and we can't have that, eh?

    [url]http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/07/11/mccain_eligibility/[/url]
    [/quote]

    a bit of a non issue but still interesting...

  2. #2
    If there are only 37 views of this post hours after it originated with NO replies besides this one, who exactly gave this a 5-star rating??? Cripes, Bitonti, you usually are solid. I'm completely on the other side politically, but you usually are more solid than this.
    Last edited by LyonMtJet; 07-14-2008 at 09:06 PM. Reason: add comment

  3. #3
    Of course this is a non-issue but the funny thing is that McCain is in favor of appointing "originalist judges" and if an originalist judge was true to his priniciples and had to rule whether he could be President the answer is NO!

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    On some beach... somewhere...
    Posts
    3,735

    Equally stupid... but interesting.

    CAN OBAMA BE PRESIDENT?
    It seems that Barack Obama is not qualified to be president after all for
    the following reason:

    Barack Obama is not legally a U.S. natural-born citizen according to the law
    on the books at the time of his birth, which falls between "December 24,
    1952 to November 13, 1986? Presidential office requires a natural-born
    citizen if the child was not born to two U.S. citizen parents, which of
    course is what exempts John McCain though he was born in the Panama Canal .
    US Law very clearly stipulates: ".If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at
    the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States
    for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of
    16." Barack Obama's father was not a U.S. citizen and Obama's mother was
    only 18 when Obama was born, which means though she had been a U.S. citizen
    for 10 years, (or citizen perhaps because of Hawaii being a territory) the
    mother fails the test for being so for at least 5 years **prior to** Barack
    Obama's birth, but *after* age 16. It doesn't matter *after* . In essence,
    she was not old enough to qualify her son for automatic U.S. citizenship. At
    most, there were only 2 years elapsed since his mother turned 16 at the time
    of Barack Obama's birth when she was 18 in Hawaii. His mother would have
    needed to have been 16+5= 21 years old, at the time of Barack Obama's birth
    for him to have been a natural-born citizen. As aforementioned, she was a
    young college student at the time and was not. Barack Obama was already 3
    years old at that time his mother would have needed to have waited to have
    him as the only U.S. Citizen parent. Obama instead should have been
    naturalized, but even then, that would still disqualify him from holding the
    office.

    *** Naturalized citizens are ineligible to hold the office of President. ***
    Though Barack Obama was sent back to Hawaii at age 10, all the other info
    does not matter because his mother is the one who needed to have been a U.S.
    citizen for 10 years prior to his birth on August 4, 1961, with 5 of those
    years being after age 16. Further, Obama may have had to have remained in
    the country for some time to protect any citizenship he would have had,
    rather than living in Indonesia. Now you can see why Obama's aides stopped
    his speech about how we technically have more than 50 states, because it
    would have led to this discovery. This is very clear cut and a blaring
    violation of U.S. election law. I think the Gov. of California would be very
    interested in knowing this if Obama were elected President without being a
    natural-born U.S. citizen, and it would set precedence. Stay tuned to your
    TV sets because I suspect some of this information will be leaking through
    over the next several days.

    Thomas Sowell
    Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow
    The Hoover Institution
    Stanford University
    Stanford, California 94305

  5. #5
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=JetFanTransplant;2627445]CAN OBAMA BE PRESIDENT?
    It seems that Barack Obama is not qualified to be president after all for
    the following reason:

    Barack Obama is not legally a U.S. natural-born citizen according to the law
    on the books at the time of his birth, which falls between "December 24,
    1952 to November 13, 1986? Presidential office requires a natural-born
    citizen if the child was not born to two U.S. citizen parents, which of
    course is what exempts John McCain though he was born in the Panama Canal .
    US Law very clearly stipulates: ".If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at
    the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States
    for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of
    16." Barack Obama's father was not a U.S. citizen and Obama's mother was
    only 18 when Obama was born, which means though she had been a U.S. citizen
    for 10 years, (or citizen perhaps because of Hawaii being a territory) the
    mother fails the test for being so for at least 5 years **prior to** Barack
    Obama's birth, but *after* age 16. It doesn't matter *after* . In essence,
    she was not old enough to qualify her son for automatic U.S. citizenship. At
    most, there were only 2 years elapsed since his mother turned 16 at the time
    of Barack Obama's birth when she was 18 in Hawaii. His mother would have
    needed to have been 16+5= 21 years old, at the time of Barack Obama's birth
    for him to have been a natural-born citizen. As aforementioned, she was a
    young college student at the time and was not. Barack Obama was already 3
    years old at that time his mother would have needed to have waited to have
    him as the only U.S. Citizen parent. Obama instead should have been
    naturalized, but even then, that would still disqualify him from holding the
    office.

    *** Naturalized citizens are ineligible to hold the office of President. ***
    Though Barack Obama was sent back to Hawaii at age 10, all the other info
    does not matter because his mother is the one who needed to have been a U.S.
    citizen for 10 years prior to his birth on August 4, 1961, with 5 of those
    years being after age 16. Further, Obama may have had to have remained in
    the country for some time to protect any citizenship he would have had,
    rather than living in Indonesia. Now you can see why Obama's aides stopped
    his speech about how we technically have more than 50 states, because it
    would have led to this discovery. This is very clear cut and a blaring
    violation of U.S. election law. I think the Gov. of California would be very
    interested in knowing this if Obama were elected President without being a
    natural-born U.S. citizen, and it would set precedence. Stay tuned to your
    TV sets because I suspect some of this information will be leaking through
    over the next several days.

    Thomas Sowell
    Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow
    The Hoover Institution
    Stanford University
    Stanford, California 94305[/QUOTE]

    Thomas Sowell most certainly did NOT write this. This is an internet fraud. Dr. Sowell has explained this ([url]http://www.creators.com/opinion/thomas-sowell.html[/url]).

  6. #6
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan;2627358]Of course this is a non-issue but the funny thing is that McCain is in favor of appointing "originalist judges" and if an originalist judge was true to his priniciples and had to rule whether he could be President the answer is NO![/QUOTE]

    Yea, lets all play the stupid game!

    If what you say is true, then those same "Strict Constructionists" would also rule any person born via Cesarian section would not be elligible either, as it was not a "Natural Birth". How can one be "Natural Born" if they were not delivered via "Natural Birth"?

    I'm sure those Constructionists will make this change the second they get in, right?

  7. #7
    All League
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    It's all relative
    Posts
    4,072
    [QUOTE=Warfish;2627601]Yea, lets all play the stupid game!

    If what you say is true, then those same "Strict Constructionists" would also rule any person born via Cesarian section would not be elligible either, as it was not a "Natural Birth". How can one be "Natural Born" if they were not delivered via "Natural Birth"?

    I'm sure those Constructionists will make this change the second they get in, right?[/QUOTE]

    Let me take it one step further! What if one was born from invetrofertilization, or some other form of fertility enhancements? Invetro, surrogates, artificial insemination, etc. certainly wouldn't be considered natrual, eh?!

  8. #8
    [QUOTE=LyonMtJet;2627230]If there are only 37 views of this post hours after it originated with NO replies besides this one, who exactly gave this a 5-star rating??? Cripes, Bitonti, you usually are solid. I'm completely on the other side politically, but you usually are more solid than this.[/QUOTE]

    I didn't rate this thread myself if that's what you are implying.

    the reason I posted this isn't b/c of McCain actually being eligible

    it's the irony that Contructionist constitutional beliefs would limit McCain

    the belief, shared by Scalia and other justices that the founding fathers meant what they said in the constitution, and the only acceptable interpretation is a literal one would bar McCain from running.

    If mccain were consistant and a REAL constructionist he'd pull out of the race, siting a strict interpretation of the consitution.Yes warfish maybe test tube babies and c-sections shouldn't be president - that's how an originalist thinks!!



    It's sad that people interpret the consitution they way they want when they want to, depending on the situation.

  9. #9
    All League
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Forked River, NJ
    Posts
    4,741
    OK, so both Obama and McCain are not eligible to be president. What will we do now??? :eek:

  10. #10
    I hate when these foreigners come in here and take our jobs. :rolleyes:

  11. #11
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Troop 16H MEMBER
    Posts
    2,517
    I vote for Ross Perot

  12. #12
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    8,421
    [QUOTE=Jet Blast;2627680]OK, so both Obama and McCain are not eligible to be president. What will we do now??? :eek:[/QUOTE]

    Four More Years!

  13. #13
    [QUOTE=Warfish;2627601]Yea, lets all play the stupid game!

    If what you say is true, then those same "Strict Constructionists" would also rule any person born via Cesarian section would not be elligible either, as it was not a "Natural Birth". How can one be "Natural Born" if they were not delivered via "Natural Birth"?

    I'm sure those Constructionists will make this change the second they get in, right?[/QUOTE]
    The words of the Constitution state:
    [QUOTE]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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.[/QUOTE]
    To talk of Ceasarian section is just absurd. The writers obviously thought it important that the President be born in the US and that's what McCain was not.

    What your real point though is a good one. Being a strict constructionalist or originalist is a fraud. The Constitution is an evolving document that evolves to the society it serves.

  14. #14
    flushingjet
    Guest
    [quote=Queens Jet Fan;2627799]
    What your real point though is a good one. Being a strict constructionalist or originalist is a fraud. The Constitution is an evolving document that evolves to the society it serves.[/quote]


    just like conferring Constitutional rights by liberal Judicial fiat on enemies and illegals serves our society

    good, then when Gay Marriage and Abortions are banned via State and Federal Constitutional Amendments no one will run crying to the Supreme Court-society will be well served

  15. #15
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan;2627799]The words of the Constitution state:

    To talk of Ceasarian section is just absurd.[/quote]

    Why, because it doesn't fit your agenda here?

    What is absurd is that this thread exists at all.

    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan;2627799]The writers obviously thought it important that the President be born in the US.[/quote]

    Federal Law does not agree with you.

    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan;2627799]The Constitution is an evolving document that evolves to the society it serves.[/QUOTE]

    Sure it evolves, any time it is amended.

    I love how you want it be "evolving", but only if it evolved the way youw ant on issues you want.

  16. #16
    He may not be eligable, but is he eligible?

  17. #17
    [QUOTE=SanAntonio_JetFan;2628003]He may not be eligable, but is he eligible?[/QUOTE]

    i noticed the error but can't edit topic titles :(

  18. #18
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairfield County, CT
    Posts
    6,870
    [QUOTE=bitonti;2628090]i noticed the error but can't edit topic titles :([/QUOTE]

    Season Ticket Holders can. ;)

  19. #19
    [QUOTE=bitonti;2628090]i noticed the error but can't edit topic titles :([/QUOTE]

    Why didn't you just ask bro?:D

  20. #20
    [QUOTE=Warfish;2627944]Why, because it doesn't fit your agenda here?[/QUOTE]
    And what is my agenda? I said this is a nonissue and should not disqualify McCain.



    [QUOTE]Federal Law does not agree with you. [/QUOTE]
    Oh yes it does. The statute making Canal Zone residents citizens of the US upon birth was passed a year after McCain was born so therefore he was not a naturalized citizen at birth.

    [QUOTE]Sure it evolves, any time it is amended.[/QUOTE]
    Or the Supreme Court makes a decision like it did in the DC gun control matter. That decision totally changed the meaning of the second amendment.

    [QUOTE]I love how you want it be "evolving", but only if it evolved the way youw ant on issues you want.[/QUOTE]
    And you my friend just pointed out the hypocricy of originalists. They cloak their decision on the original or strict constructionalist view of the Constitution to decide the issue the way they want it to be decided.

    Let's all recognize the the Constituion evolves and get off this originalist bs.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us