Alert! Alert! Birther Attack!

from conservativebyte.com: ‘Rand Paul PAC runs birther ad attacking Ted Cruz’ - June 1 

(A poster, name of Shamas, posted a good post on the true take on the 'natural born citizen' issue.  Others disagreed; esp. this guy.)

• MikeInMaine Shamas • 11 hours ago (June 1)
• 
  You are an IDIOT. Your theory has been completely discredited by constitutional scholars who understand these matters a helluva lot better than you ever will. How sad that you are such a retard.
  
• 1
• •
• Reply
• 
  
• Shamas MikeInMaine • 10 hours ago 
• 
  Hey IDIOT....you don't need to be a "scholar" to understand the US Constitution. It's written in English. Duh! 
• I suggest YOU read it for yourself and stop listening to the biased ....and unconstitutional ....opinions of others. It's clearly states, only "Natural Born Citizen's" are eligible for the US President's job. There simply is not debate or argument about it.
  
• 
  
• 2
• •
• Reply
• 
  Oleo Ranch Shamas • 4 hours ago 
• 
  You keep talking about the Constitution. The Constitution calls for the president to be a natural born citizen, and I never hear anyone denying that fact. Can you please give us and EXACT QUOTE from the Founders or the Constitution defining the requirements for natural born citizen?
  
• Reply
• kibitzer3 Oleo Ranch • a few seconds ago (June 2)
•                   I don't know what happened to the first part of my post. I said            
•                   something like:
•         The Constitution is not a dictionary. They were going by what  they in their time understood the term to mean. For which there is ample evidence:
•         1) John Jay, who was such a respected statesman of the day that he ended up being the first Chief Justice of the new U.S. Supreme Court, wrote a letter to G. Washington, in his role as Chair of the Constitutional Convention, in which he noted that the presidential office occupant would also become the Commander in Chief of the nation's military forces, and urged consideration by the constitutional Framers as to that office being filled only by a "natural born" citizen; with the intention being that the person would have NO DUAL/CONFLICTING LOYALTIES OR ALLEGIANCES in that sensitive position - i.e., was one born on the soil (jus soli) of two (U.S.) citizen parents (jus sanguinis). And to drive that intention home:
•       2) A. Hamilton, as a delegate to the proceedings, proposed that the person need only be a "citizen" - and his proposal WAS SPECIFICALLY TURNED DOWN, in favor of the more stringent citizenship requirement.
•       3) They were going by E. de Vattel's definitive tome 'The Law of  Nations or Principles of Natural Law' on the subject.
• 
  if any of them wasn't sure what they were voting on, all they had to do was ask their respected elder mentor, Benjamin Franklin, who was sitting right there amongst them as a delegate to the proceedings, and had three copies of said reference book in his possession.
• 
  There is no getting around it, by expedient people in our day: THEY KNEW what they were voting on. And so does anybody in our day who has an open mind to the subject. In short: Cruz is not eligible for the job. And nor is, nor was, Obama. Who simply needs to be removed from the office, as a Usurper (impeachment proceedings being only for legally sitting presidents). And all of the legislation that he signed into law, and all the executive orders that he issued, and all the appointments that he made, go with him. Into the trash bin.
• 
  Because two wrongs do NOT make a right. And we either set this wrong right. Or the Constitution is a dead letter. And we are under the rule of men. Another word for which is tyranny.

Oleo Ranch kibitzer3 • 39 minutes ago (June 2) You seem to be repeating something you saw on some of these sites when you say “Obama. Who simply needs to be removed from the office, as a Usurper (impeachment proceedings being only for legally sitting presidents). And all of the legislation that he signed into law, and all the executive orders that he issued, and all the appointments that he made, go with him. Into the trash bin.” While in office, the ONLY way to legally remove the president is after a conviction in an impeachment trial. To prove he isn’t eligible would take a court trial, and the ONLY court he is subject to is a trial in the Senate, with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. So your statement that an impeachment isn’t for BHO is incorrect. Where did you get the idea that all his orders and laws and appointments would be no good? When someone has a position in this country, legit or not, they are in the office, in this case he IS the president, so everything and anything would have to be undone individually by the next president or the courts.  Are you aware that President Chester Arthur’s father wasn’t a U.S. citizen, and there isn’t so much as an asterisk by his name, let alone something that he did being challenged? Reply kibitzer3 Oleo Ranch • 4 minutes ago  (June 2) "To prove he isn’t eligible would take a court trial, and the ONLY court he is subject to is a trial in the Senate, with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court." Incorrect. There are cases pending which challenge him on this very issue, brought by individuals with bona fide 'standing' because they were candidates for the same office, and he should never have been on the ballot against them. As the Supreme Court will HAVE to recognize, if one of the cases ever comes to them, because the historical record for the original intent meaning of the term is so transparently clear. And that must be why SCJ Thomas was caught saying once, to the issue, that they 'are hoping to avoid it,' or words to that effect. Because it would make for a constitutional crisis. Which we may go into beforehand anyway, if this tyrant helps orchestrate a 'national emergency' into declaring a state of Martial Law. When it will all become moot.

..

Nancy Clark · Top Commenter · Hutchinson Senior High School Cruz was BORN to a mother that was an AMERICAN CITIZEN. Cruz IS ELIGIBLE. Reply · Like · 1 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago (June 1) Stan Stanfield · Top Commenter · Stanford University (June 2) No. Read other posts on this thread. To be a "natural born" citizen, one must be born on the soil (jus soli) of TWO (U.S.) citizen parents (jus sanguinis). The whole POINT of the exercise was to make sure that the person holding the presidential office - who would also become thereby the Commander in Chief of the nation's military forces - had NO DUAL/CONFLICTING LOYALTIES OR ALLEGIANCES. As a naturalized citizen would be subject to. And as a DUAL citizen would be subject to. Like Cruz. And like Obama.  Who is a common thief, and needs simply to be removed from the office (impeachment proceedings being only for legally sitting presidents), and held for trial, on a large number of criminal charges by now. And we thereby return to the rule of law. Not the rule of men. Which will be our downfall, as a federal constitutional Republic, if we don't RIGHT THIS WRONG. And please note: Two wrongs do NOT make a right. They only make a terrible muddle.