Barack Obama's Legacy -- How strong of a President is he historically?

nmoore63
Posts: 1881
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm

Re: Barack Obama's Legacy -- How strong of a President is he historically?

Post by nmoore63 » Sat Dec 01, 2018 2:16 pm

So you don’t think the constitution granted Congress the power to determine who is a citizen at birth?

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: Barack Obama's Legacy -- How strong of a President is he historically?

Post by Speaker to Animals » Sat Dec 01, 2018 2:18 pm

nmoore63 wrote:
Sat Dec 01, 2018 2:16 pm
So you don’t think the constitution granted Congress the power to determine who is a citizen at birth?
The Constitution granted to Congress to determine how to naturalize citizens. Citizenship at birth was assumed when your father was a citizen. You confuse two separate things. Naturalization is the process of making a foreign national into a citizen. A naturalized citizen can never be a natural born citizen. A natural born citizen, in the context of the Constitution, is a citizen whose father is a citizen. A natural born citizen is a person born to a father who is an American citizen. That's all it means. They did not want people with other allegiances to become president.

nmoore63
Posts: 1881
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm

Re: Barack Obama's Legacy -- How strong of a President is he historically?

Post by nmoore63 » Sat Dec 01, 2018 2:27 pm

Nope.

You’ve somehow convinced your self that congress needs to amend the constituion to change something that isn’t even there.

This is what the amendment looks like to remove corverture from the constitution.
The constitution granted congress the power to determine who is a citizen at birth.

Sorry you don’t like their definition.

heydaralon
Posts: 7571
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 7:54 pm

Re: Barack Obama's Legacy -- How strong of a President is he historically?

Post by heydaralon » Sat Dec 01, 2018 2:35 pm

I didn't like Obama's spying, social justice affirmative action banker cabinet hires, his wars, or any of his supposed achievements. However, I read that he deported at least 5 million illegals. Assuming this is true, that is a noble accomplishment and does deserve some recognition. The DREAMer stuff was a travesty, but 5 million sent back to where they rightfully belong should have been the reason he got that Noble prize. Removing 5 million future potential murderers and criminals from the United States is a noble act indeed.
Shikata ga nai

User avatar
Fife
Posts: 15157
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:47 am

Re: Barack Obama's Legacy -- How strong of a President is he historically?

Post by Fife » Sat Dec 01, 2018 2:55 pm

Congress doesn't have any say about what Article II, Section 1 has to say or means. Or the 14th amendment either, for that matter.

I lean more towards the Art II natural born definition meaning a person was a US citizen from birth, wherever born. SCOTUS could have a different take.

If Ted Cruz, John McCain, or Barry Goldwater were ever eligible to be president, it seems Soetoro was as well. Whatever Soetoro is, he's no anchor baby.

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: Barack Obama's Legacy -- How strong of a President is he historically?

Post by Speaker to Animals » Sat Dec 01, 2018 3:04 pm

nmoore63 wrote:
Sat Dec 01, 2018 2:27 pm
Nope.

You’ve somehow convinced your self that congress needs to amend the constituion to change something that isn’t even there.

This is what the amendment looks like to remove corverture from the constitution.
The constitution granted congress the power to determine who is a citizen at birth.

Sorry you don’t like their definition.
I just quoted the damned thing. It explicitly states only natural born citizens. If magic soil was not even a God damned thing until a judge invented it more than a century later, how the fuck are you going to argue they meant "born here" and why the fuck would they not use the more commonly understood "native born" to describe that?

Do you even think this through? Seriously. Libertarianism is NPC liberalism at its worst.

heydaralon
Posts: 7571
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 7:54 pm

Re: Barack Obama's Legacy -- How strong of a President is he historically?

Post by heydaralon » Sat Dec 01, 2018 3:09 pm

If I knock up a girl and she has a baby on Warren Buffet's lawn, does that make the baby a billionare? Does Buffet include the infant in his will?
Shikata ga nai

nmoore63
Posts: 1881
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm

Re: Barack Obama's Legacy -- How strong of a President is he historically?

Post by nmoore63 » Sat Dec 01, 2018 3:49 pm

Speaker to Animals wrote:
Sat Dec 01, 2018 3:04 pm
nmoore63 wrote:
Sat Dec 01, 2018 2:27 pm
Nope.

You’ve somehow convinced your self that congress needs to amend the constituion to change something that isn’t even there.

This is what the amendment looks like to remove corverture from the constitution.
The constitution granted congress the power to determine who is a citizen at birth.

Sorry you don’t like their definition.
I just quoted the damned thing. It explicitly states only natural born citizens. If magic soil was not even a God damned thing until a judge invented it more than a century later, how the fuck are you going to argue they meant "born here" and why the fuck would they not use the more commonly understood "native born" to describe that?

Do you even think this through? Seriously. Libertarianism is NPC liberalism at its worst.
Natural born citizen means citizen at birth. It doesn't mean corverture.

nmoore63
Posts: 1881
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm

Re: Barack Obama's Legacy -- How strong of a President is he historically?

Post by nmoore63 » Sat Dec 01, 2018 3:50 pm

Speaker to Animals wrote:
Sat Dec 01, 2018 3:04 pm
Libertarianism is NPC liberalism at its worst.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
You seriously need to work on your obsessions dude. Maybe more therapy?

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: Barack Obama's Legacy -- How strong of a President is he historically?

Post by Speaker to Animals » Sat Dec 01, 2018 3:53 pm

nmoore63 wrote:
Sat Dec 01, 2018 3:49 pm
Speaker to Animals wrote:
Sat Dec 01, 2018 3:04 pm
nmoore63 wrote:
Sat Dec 01, 2018 2:27 pm
Nope.

You’ve somehow convinced your self that congress needs to amend the constituion to change something that isn’t even there.

This is what the amendment looks like to remove corverture from the constitution.


The constitution granted congress the power to determine who is a citizen at birth.

Sorry you don’t like their definition.
I just quoted the damned thing. It explicitly states only natural born citizens. If magic soil was not even a God damned thing until a judge invented it more than a century later, how the fuck are you going to argue they meant "born here" and why the fuck would they not use the more commonly understood "native born" to describe that?

Do you even think this through? Seriously. Libertarianism is NPC liberalism at its worst.
Natural born citizen means citizen at birth. It doesn't mean corverture.
OMFG

How do you think they determined citizenship at birth, genius?