Comments on: Another day, another non-troversy invented by the New York Times to attack McCain http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/ Beating Them With Their Own Sickle And Hammer Sun, 22 Nov 2009 18:50:16 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2 hourly 1 By: NewtownMark http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/comment-page-1/#comment-76801 NewtownMark Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:07:28 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/#comment-76801 WHO CARES?! No one actually reads the NYT WHO CARES?! No one actually reads the NYT

]]> By: lostgull http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/comment-page-1/#comment-76749 lostgull Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:24:31 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/#comment-76749 Clearly a non-issue, kind of like Obama's dad being Muslim. Clearly a non-issue, kind of like Obama’s dad being Muslim.

]]> By: golden phoenix http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/comment-page-1/#comment-76613 golden phoenix Fri, 29 Feb 2008 05:29:28 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/#comment-76613 The NEW YORK SLIMES, one of america's most vile news rags, not even a vulture would want this scum sheet in his cage. The NEW YORK SLIMES, one of america’s most vile news rags, not even a vulture would want this scum sheet in his cage.

]]> By: Oblogatory Anecdotes http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/comment-page-1/#comment-76559 Oblogatory Anecdotes Fri, 29 Feb 2008 02:20:17 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/#comment-76559 <strong>McCain In-Eligible, How about Hillary?...</strong> While we are discussing presidential eligibility, if you take the same contorted view of the constitution that the Times is then it could also be argued that Hillary Clinton is also in-eligible because she is a woman. There are several clauses in the C... McCain In-Eligible, How about Hillary?…

While we are discussing presidential eligibility, if you take the same contorted view of the constitution that the Times is then it could also be argued that Hillary Clinton is also in-eligible because she is a woman. There are several clauses in the C…

]]> By: Jeff Molby http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/comment-page-1/#comment-76557 Jeff Molby Fri, 29 Feb 2008 02:12:29 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/#comment-76557 <blockquote>Are you really prepared to argue that the legal status of children of servicemembers born on US military installations or while at sea is undetermined? If their legal status is not clear, what do you imagine it could possibly be?</blockquote> Like I said, such people are clearly citizens. The question is whether or not they are "natural born" or have been naturalized pursuant to Congress's Article 1 Section 8 authority. The distinction is completely irrelevant on all other matters, but this isn't all other matters.

Are you really prepared to argue that the legal status of children of servicemembers born on US military installations or while at sea is undetermined? If their legal status is not clear, what do you imagine it could possibly be?

Like I said, such people are clearly citizens. The question is whether or not they are “natural born” or have been naturalized pursuant to Congress’s Article 1 Section 8 authority.

The distinction is completely irrelevant on all other matters, but this isn’t all other matters.

]]> By: Ken Bingham http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/comment-page-1/#comment-76555 Ken Bingham Fri, 29 Feb 2008 02:07:14 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/#comment-76555 If he's not eligible lets get Mitt Romney back. If he’s not eligible lets get Mitt Romney back.

]]> By: G.F. http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/comment-page-1/#comment-76523 G.F. Fri, 29 Feb 2008 01:09:07 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/#comment-76523 You are correct NoGuff. Jeff -- I stand by my point. Some things are not as hard to figure out as the NY Times pretend they are. Are you really prepared to argue that the legal status of children of servicemembers born on US military installations or while at sea is undetermined? If their legal status is not clear, what do you imagine it could possibly be? This is a non-issue that NY Times is using to pump up the Democrats. Nothing more. You are correct NoGuff.

Jeff — I stand by my point. Some things are not as hard to figure out as the NY Times pretend they are. Are you really prepared to argue that the legal status of children of servicemembers born on US military installations or while at sea is undetermined? If their legal status is not clear, what do you imagine it could possibly be?

This is a non-issue that NY Times is using to pump up the Democrats.

Nothing more.

]]> By: NoGuff http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/comment-page-1/#comment-76514 NoGuff Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:26:08 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/#comment-76514 "It’s quite possible you’re wrong" --Places overseas like military bases & embassies are considered sovereign US territory. And to my knowledge, which could be wrong, the Panama Canal Zone was US territory back then because we owned the canal. It would be like being born in Guam or the District of Columbia today. “It’s quite possible you’re wrong”

–Places overseas like military bases & embassies are considered sovereign US territory. And to my knowledge, which could be wrong, the Panama Canal Zone was US territory back then because we owned the canal. It would be like being born in Guam or the District of Columbia today.

]]> By: NoGuff http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/comment-page-1/#comment-76511 NoGuff Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:22:10 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/#comment-76511 RE: McCain's birth place & eligibility. I love how they planned the release of this "query;" after he become the presumptive Republican nominee. What is their "dirt of last resort?" Renewed calls of "baby-killer" from his Vietnam days? The ACLU makes me sick. RE: McCain’s birth place & eligibility.

I love how they planned the release of this “query;” after he become the presumptive Republican nominee.

What is their “dirt of last resort?” Renewed calls of “baby-killer” from his Vietnam days?

The ACLU makes me sick.

]]> By: Jeff Molby http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/comment-page-1/#comment-76487 Jeff Molby Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:16:55 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/02/28/another-day-another-non-troversy-invented-by-the-new-york-times-to-attack-mccain/#comment-76487 <blockquote>Just like every baby born today at Ramstein, Okinawa or Kunsan — he is a natural-born citizen of this country. Case closed.</blockquote> It's quite possible you're wrong. Various laws passed by Congress make it very clear that he's a citizen; that's absolutely not in doubt. But the definition of a "natural born citizen" is found in the Constitution and such a definition cannot be change by acts of Congress. Thus, additional grants of citizenship are something other than "natural born". Personally, I don't care if McCain becomes President, so I would support an amendment to clarify the matter, but in the absence of one, it is a sticky matter could end up in court. Sadly, the court would probably take a consequentialist approach anyways; you see, legislating from the bench isn't unique to leftists.

Just like every baby born today at Ramstein, Okinawa or Kunsan — he is a natural-born citizen of this country. Case closed.

It’s quite possible you’re wrong. Various laws passed by Congress make it very clear that he’s a citizen; that’s absolutely not in doubt.

But the definition of a “natural born citizen” is found in the Constitution and such a definition cannot be change by acts of Congress. Thus, additional grants of citizenship are something other than “natural born”.

Personally, I don’t care if McCain becomes President, so I would support an amendment to clarify the matter, but in the absence of one, it is a sticky matter could end up in court. Sadly, the court would probably take a consequentialist approach anyways; you see, legislating from the bench isn’t unique to leftists.

]]>