John McCain NOT a natural-born U.S. Citizen - INELIGIBLE to run for President

[jflack]

http://www.theamericanvoice.com/

by Francis Steffan
AmericanVoiceRadio.net 

John McCain was born August 29, 1936 in the Panama Canal Zone, to two U.S. citizens. It's a common misunderstanding that the zone was a U.S. territory - in fact, the U.S. had lease rights, but not territorial rights. 

The US Constitution states, "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."   

"Natural Born Citizen" - "is where ONLY the natural act of one being born in a place determines the status of ones citizenship with no additional stipulations necessary to influence that status"

No law or court ruling has ever established the precise definition of a natural born citizen. It is generally agreed that a natural born citizen of the United States is any person born in one of the 50 states or the District of Columbia.............................

I've never read anything from this source but I thought it was quite interesting. 

[Theo42]

Where was Obama born?

[speeders r murderers]

This subject gets mentioned on usenet occasionally. Is McCain an american citizen???.  It's a legitimate question but the corrupt M$M won't touch it just like they don't talk about McCain's wife and her drug crimes.  McCain is a 100% israel firster and that's why the media protects him.

[Dig]

Sweet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OMFG - this is insane, please post more info about this.

first time I heard of it.

[jflack]

In 1998 the Washinton Post seems to think that McCain is a natural born citizen.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/junkie/archive/junkie070998.htm

"John McCain has more pressing worries than eligibility on the road to the Republican presidential nomination in 2000."

[Dig]

Ron Paul 4409 is running with this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (these guys kick so much ass, they could take over the entire USDA tenderizing industry!)

RON PAUL 4409 -- John McCain is NOT a natural born citizen

1 min - Jan 16, 2008 -  (242 ratings)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MtHZImuQvg

[jflack]

According to our, oh so favorite friends at Wikipedia they had this to say.

"Children born outside the United States to American parents
Three major candidates have sought the Presidency who were born outside the United States: Barry Goldwater (ran in 1964) was born in Arizona while it was still a U.S. territory, George Romney (ran in 1968) was born in Mexico to U.S. parents, and John McCain (ran in 2000 and runs in 2008) was born in the Panama Canal Zone to U.S. parents. Barry Goldwater's case among these three is unique in that although Arizona was not a state, it was a fully incorporated territory of the United States, making it debatable whether or not he was born "outside" the United States. The Panama Canal Zone, though controlled by the United States and partly under its jurisdiction, was part of Panama. None of these candidates was elected, so it has never been fully addressed whether children born to Americans overseas are "natural-born citizens" and thus eligible for the Presidency. However, McCain is currently seeking the 2008 Republican nomination for President."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born_citizen

[AmericasPatriot]

According to his biography, John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936 which was leased to the United States but WAS NOT a U.S. Territory at the time.    According to the U.S. Constitution;

http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Constitution.html

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5: 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.
------

Therefore according to the U.S. Constitution, John McCain CANNOT run for President.    If this has any merit, this needs to be exposed massively, big time.      Ron Paul's legal staff and Constitutional lawyers need to look into this as well.

With McCain out of the race, the only two candidates left on the Republican side will be Ron Paul and Mitt Romney.

[trixi1]

Well, look at it this way. This information isn't coming out by accident. Someone out there is trying their hardest to get this info out.

Run with it and use the US constitution to back it up. He has/should be disqualified for this very reason alone.

The truth will set you "US" free.

[IridiumKEPfactor]

Where was Obama born?

Hawaii

[Amishism]

Hillary must be the offspring of Lenin or Stalin

[IridiumKEPfactor]

Well, look at it this way. This information isn't coming out by accident. Someone out there is trying their hardest to get this info out.

Run with it and use the US constitution to back it up. He has/should be disqualified for this very reason alone.

The truth will set you "US" free.

If so let's make sure that it goes in our favor because we would'nt want Arnold Schwarzenegger to be his VP and become president.

[Optimus]

If so let's make sure that it goes in our favor because we would'nt want Arnold Schwarzenegger to be his VP and become president.

Maybe that's why Anuld is backing McCain.

[Anti_Illuminati]

Was McCain's Dad in the military, at a military base there when John McCain was born?  If so then he would be considered natural born.

[superfender]

thats funny, because if he's the nominee, then, maybe they'll bring it up right before the election, ushering Hillary in, with no questions asked.

[Optimus]

McCain does not qualify as being a natural born citizen and therefore CANNOT run for the presidency. Read the 14th Amendment, it defines a "natural born" citizen.

14th Amendment

 Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

McCain was NOT born "in" the United States, therefore he is NOT a "natural born" citizen. So that means the only category of citizen he falls under is "naturalized".

As stated earlier in this thread, ONLY a "natural born" citizen is eligible to be a candidate for the presidency. "Naturalized" citizens cannot run.

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5: 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.

Here's more
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/31019

[Dig]

Was McCain's Dad in the military, at a military base there when John McCain was born?  If so then he would be considered natural born.

I think that is true with embassies (embassy land is the land of the country it represents), but I am not sure about military bases.

I am also not sure about leased property.  The area in question was leased property and thus not owned land by the USA.

[Dig]

I think this part from Daily Paul says it best:
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/31019
John McCain's father "Jack" was born in Council Bluffs, Iowa. McCain graduated from the United States Naval Academy in 1931. Like his father and son, he graduated near the bottom of his class. He married Roberta Wright, a wealthy oil heiress, on January 21, 1933, in Caesar's Bar, Tijuana, Mexico.


Was his parents' marriage ever acknowledged in the US?  Why weren't they married at a military base?  No wonder why the MSM won't touch it, this thing opens up such a can of worms.  The gift that keeps on giving.

[Dig]

Shit, that does not look like the good old USA to me:

[Optimus]

I think that is true with embassies (embassy land is the land of the country it represents), but I am not sure about military bases.

I am also not sure about leased property.  The area in question was leased property and thus not owned land by the USA.

Yes, embassies are sovereign territory of the country they belong to. If McCain had been born at an embassy it would be considered as in the US. However, a military base that is being leased from a foreign, sovereign nation is just that, leased. It's still belongs under that nations sovereignty.

[shirteesdotnet]

I say we send John McCain to see the sheriffs over in Stark County Jail in Ohio. Only a full strip search will do.

[David Rothscum]

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html
Natural-born citizen

Who is a natural-born citizen? Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?

The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.

Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"

    * Anyone born inside the United States
    * Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
    * Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
    * Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
    * Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
    * Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
    * Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
    * A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example.

Many parts of the world have law to provide them with special status, to allow children born in those places to be considered natural-born. This allows families with a long history of working in these areas without ever returning to the U.S. to be considered natural-born. For example, the Panama Canal Zone had been in U.S. possession for a full century, and some families lived there for generations. 8 USC 1403 handles the Zone specifically, stating that anyone born in the Zone on or after 2/26/1904, to at least one citizen-parent, is a natural-born citizen. Similar law is in place to handle the acquisition of territories, such as Puerto Rico, Alaska, and Hawaii.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1403.html
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like this law applies to Mccain.

[Optimus]

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1403.html
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like this law applies to Mccain.

You are assuming this law is saying they are natural born citizens. It does not say that. It is simply declaring under certain circumstances where a child is born to US citizens on foreign soil that the child is considered a national and a citizen of the United States. Therefore they are "automatically naturalized" by law (unlike immigrants who have to go through a process to become naturalized citizens), not natural born. There is a big difference to being a citizen by law and a citizen by birth. If it was the intention of this law that US citizens children that were born overseas are to be considered "natural born" it would state that. So "natural born" according to the Constitution is being born inside the United States, exactly as the founding fathers intended. So McCain is a citizen by law (automatically naturalized) but is not "natural born" and therefore is not eligible to be a candidate for the presidency.

[Sub-X]

Wouldnt it be ironically funny if they played this at one of his rally's 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5g2yyvdjrE

[Div]

this is BIG! we need to get some articles written on this fast, provided mccains birth wasnt in a hospital on embassy land. theres still plenty of time for us to get him disqualified over this and knock the NWO shill out of the race, which would REALLY help paul more than any donation.

[otero1]

VERY BIG! Get this fraud out of the race!

[larsonstdoc]

  HIM BEING BORN TO A GI MAKES HIM ELIGIBLE TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT.  BESIDES IF THE ELECTIONS ARE RIGGED, DO YOU THINK A LITTLE RULE LIKE THIS WOULD STOP THEM?  I'M SURPRISED THEY DON'T RUN ARNOLD THE TERMINATOR.

[David Rothscum]

You are assuming this law is saying they are natural born citizens. It does not say that. It is simply declaring under certain circumstances where a child is born to US citizens on foreign soil that the child is considered a national and a citizen of the United States. Therefore they are "automatically naturalized" by law (unlike immigrants who have to go through a process to become naturalized citizens), not natural born. There is a big difference to being a citizen by law and a citizen by birth. If it was the intention of this law that US citizens children that were born overseas are to be considered "natural born" it would state that. So "natural born" according to the Constitution is being born inside the United States, exactly as the founding fathers intended. So McCain is a citizen by law (automatically naturalized) but is not "natural born" and therefore is not eligible to be a candidate for the presidency.

If that law doesn't apply to McCain, how about this: http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html
Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"

    * Anyone born inside the United States
    * Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
    * Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.

[Optimus]

I'm starting to think we are all looking at this from the wrong angle here. Obviously everyone has a different opinion on what a natural born citizen is and debate it until the cows come home. Maybe we should be looking into whether or not McCain has dual-citizenship of Panama and the US. Even if he is considered to be a natural born citizen of the US, might Panama also consider him a citizen since he was born there? To me, a president has to be 100% committed to the country he holds office in. It seems that having dual-citizenship would be a conflict of interest. This is a new idea to me so it might be worth researching into although it may not bear fruit. But it would be worth a shot if it can disqualify this scumbag.

[Dig]

If that law doesn't apply to McCain, how about this: http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html
Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"

    * Anyone born inside the United States
    * Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
    * Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.

Actually Section 1403 speaks to John McCain specifically:

TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER III > Part I > § 1403
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001403----000-.html
§ 1403. Persons born in the Canal Zone or Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904
How Current is This?
(a) Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States.
(b) Any person born in the Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States employed by the Government of the United States or by the Panama Railroad Company, or its successor in title, is declared to be a citizen of the United States.

However, this has nothing whatsoever to do with Natural Born Citizen.  This is simply clarification under immigration and naturalization laws and NOT under Article II of the Constitution as far as a definition of a "Natural Born Citizen."

The website you posted does not take the verbage of the constitution, but rather interprets the verbage onto Article II which is absurd.

You can find the entire breakdown as follows (also, please remember that the constitution cannot be altered without a constitutional convention no matter what bills or clarifications are agreed upon by majority legislative votes).

Here is what Article II defines as eligible candidates for president:

"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"

So under TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER III > Part I > § 1403, John McCain is in fact a citizen of the United States, but not by being a naturally born citizen.  He is a citizen by be being naturalized a citizen under leases/treaties/post constitutional immigration legislation.  The reason for this is that only someone born on this land can serve as president of this land.  It is very simple, clear cut, obvious, and blacked out by all MSM.

Title 8 is clearly defined as ALIENS AND NATIONALITY.  It has nothing to do with Natural Citizens but clarifies ways in which a non-"natural citizen" may be deemed a US citizen:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sup_01_8.html

In addition, this entire section is part of US Code, which is something the legislature bickers about concerning enacting laws (their function), but is not in any way the constitution.  It is simply a code of advice on how do deal with shit.  It is seperate from the Constitution and does not represent an agreement with the people and the government.  It is a strictly legislative document that carries some specifics regarding the electoral process itself (as defined by the constitution, the legislative branch can do this), and the compensation of the president (again under the constitution, the legislative branch is responsible for this):

Welcome to the United States Code.

This version is generated from the most recent official version made available by the US House of Representatives. For exact information about the currency of any particular title as it is published by the House, see the listing on the House server. The date of any text appearing on this site appears in italics at the upper right in every Code section.
Each section in the framed version is dated at the upper right corner of the text frame; these date the text itself as we receive it from the House, and are not the date on which we loaded the text. At this point we are not sure how often the House will issue new versions of this information to the public. Any new version issued by the House will in turn be mounted here within 24 hours. (This is not an absolute guarantee. From time to time, and without warning, the House makes changes in the format and structure of the text they make available for download. This can and does cause us to rewrite our own formatting software, hopefully with minimal delay.) In the meantime we suggest the use of the update feature available in each section.
Our convenient update service (available onscreen as you look at each section) integrates the services of the House servers and of the Library of Congress Thomas service to supply you with accurate updates to any section which has changed.

SO you will find in US Code (a strictly one branch of government document whereas the constitution represents 3 branches, thus the entire gov/people relationship) the following:

Article II of the Constitution:

Section 1. The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term, be elected, as follows:

Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.

[...]

The Congress may determine the time of choosing the electors, and the day on which they shall give their votes; which day shall be the same throughout the United States.

Then in the US Code you find the following:

TITLE 3—THE PRESIDENT
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode03/usc_sup_01_3.html
CHAPTER 1—PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS AND VACANCIES
CHAPTER 2—OFFICE AND COMPENSATION OF PRESIDENT
CHAPTER 3—PROTECTION OF THE PRESIDENT; UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE UNIFORMED DIVISION
CHAPTER 4—DELEGATION OF FUNCTIONS
CHAPTER 5—EXTENSION OF CERTAIN RIGHTS AND PROTECTIONS TO PRESIDENTIAL OFFICES

In other words US Code only applies to the legislative branch further carrying out their constitutional responsibilities. The legislative branch has no authority to change the constitution itself (i.e. the eligibility requirements of a President) and that is why you do not find a Chapter called "eligibility" under Title 3 of US Code.

[shirteesdotnet]

Slightly off topic here... my wife doesnt like the AMA or hospitals here... she is a legal resident with a green card and I am a US citizen. We are considering having our kids born in her country in europe (free as opposed to $15k in southern california). Would our child be a citizen since im a citizen ans she is legally here or do we have to some process for the child to become a citizen?

[Dig]

Slightly off topic here... my wife doesnt like the AMA or hospitals here... she is a legal resident with a green card and I am a US citizen. We are considering having our kids born in her country in europe (free as opposed to $15k in southern california). Would our child be a citizen since im a citizen ans she is legally here or do we have to some process for the child to become a citizen?

That is a question that should be answered within US Code:

US Code TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER III > Part I > § 1401
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001401----000-.html
(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;

I think a green carded person might be deemed a "national" but you should check with an expert on immigration.

Also, this probably would require proper filing of paperwork and that may end up costing more than 15k anyway.

[Mr Grinch]

Ive been digging into this for an hour or so and it seems to me he is a Citizen based on....

US citizenship vs. US nationality

US law makes a distinction between "citizenship" and "nationality." All US citizens are also US nationals; however, some US nationals are not US citizens.

The term "national of the United States" is defined in Section 101(a)(22) of the INA [8 USC § 1101(a)(22)] as "a person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States".

Section 308 of the INA [8 USC § 1408] says (more or less) that a person born in an "outlying possession" of the US -- or a foreign-born child of such a person -- is a US national, but not a US citizen. At the present time, the only "outlying possessions" of the US, as defined in 8 USC § 1101(a)(29), are American Samoa and Swains Island (in the South Pacific).

Note that people born in the following places are defined in Sections 302-307 of the INA [8 USC §§ 1402-1407] to be US citizens: Puerto Rico; the Canal Zone; Alaska and Hawaii (before they became states); the US Virgin Islands; and Guam.

Although most references in this FAQ to US "citizenship" should, for the sake of completeness, technically refer to US "nationality", I have chosen in general to use the more common term in the interests of clarity.
http://www.richw.org/dualcit/law.html

But I think the important issue is the definition of the term "Natural Born Citizen" as of the time of the constitutions drafting.

I think that could be reasonably litigated.

Gentlemen break out your oldest reference book finding skills and crunch that!

[Optimus]

It is important here to consider what our founding fathers definition of "natural born" is. When the Constitution was established, the United States government did not have a empire builder foreign policy. The United States military was for defensive purposes only. As a matter of fact, the U.S. is not to have a “standing Army” and all the documents evidencing the intent of the authors of the Constitution, warned against becoming involved in foreign entanglements. The U.S. had zero foreign based military forces and certainly did not approve of, envision, or condone having babies and raising families on foreign based U.S. military installations. The intent of the authors of the Constitution is exactly opposite the policy twentieth century U.S. government has pursued. The Constitution of the United States, Article 1, Section 8, vests in Congress the power “to establish an uniform rule of naturalization.” “Naturalization” is NOT synonymous with “Natural Born Citizen.” In order to come to a Constitutional definition of “Natural Born Citizen,” one must look to the common meaning and understanding of the phrase at the time it was written. The Constitution has been called a “living document” by liberal progressives who think they know better than the authors of the Constitution and want what they want with disregard for The Supreme Law of the Land. In one way, and one way only, is the Constitution a living document. The authors of the Constitution gave a specific process to add to or subtract from the Constitution and that is by amendment. The Supreme Court, the U.S. Congress nor the President of the United States are granted the authority to define or change the Constitution in any way, they only have an obligation and duty to obey it. There were no foreign based US military forces at the writing of the U.S. Constitution, therefore, it is impossible that the intent of the Constitution was to have babies born to civilian wives of military personnel be considered “Natural Born Citizens.” The only authority the government may lawfully exercise, through the U.S. Congress, is to declare these children to be “naturalized Citizens” at birth based upon the U.S. , Congress’s authority “establish an uniform rule of Naturalization.” I must reiterate, not the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Supreme Court nor the President of the United States is “authorized” to define or change the meaning, definition, or intent of “Natural Born Citizen” as prescribed by the authors of the Constitution.Therefore a natural born citizen can mean ONLY one thing, those who are born WITHIN the United States.

McCain is NOT, I repeat, NOT a natural born citizen, he is a NATURALIZED citizen and is NOT eligible to run for president. You can quote laws at me all day, but they do not change the fact that the Constitution only gives power to NATURALIZE citizens that are not natural born.

[Dig]

Natural Born Citizen is a Citizen Born in any state in the US.  It is the same definition in 1760 as it is today (that is why they included a naturalized citizen at the time of the constitution as well).

We did have people overseas during the time of the constitution.

We obviously had spies and places they rented.

How is this any different than renting land in the panama canal?

And the purpose was to keep out people from the presidential proces that disd not have their roots since birth in a state within the US (makes sense to me).

the guy is not eligible to be president, there is no debate.  this is nonsense.

it only ads to the understanding of the whole thing being a play.

they start illegal wars and engage in illegal survailance, prisons, etc.

the got rid of habeus corpus.

you think they care about this clause?

it is their hubris that will do them in.

[chris jones]

If this nation at this period in time was constituional, you maybe correct. However, the constitution has been put on a back burner. The elite bloodsukers make the law now.
If they can walk away from treason, deception, lies, banruptsy, theft, human sacrifice for profit, we can be certain this item to them is of no importance whatsoever. Though it would be nice if true and if this was still America...

[EchelonMonitor]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born_citizen

The origin of the natural-born citizen clause can be traced to a July 25, 1787, letter from John Jay to George Washington, presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention. John Jay wrote: "Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen." There was no debate, and this qualification for the office of the Presidency was introduced by the drafting Committee of Eleven, and then adopted without discussion by the Constitutional Convention.

If this is correct (it's wikipedia, after all) it seems to me the intention is clear--John Jay did not want people born outside the USA to be Commander in Chief.

[Dig]

If this nation at this period in time was constituional, you maybe correct. However, the constitution has been put on a back burner. The elite bloodsukers make the law now.
If they can walk away from treason, deception, lies, banruptsy, theft, human sacrifice for profit, we can be certain this item to them is of no importance whatsoever. Though it would be nice if true and if this was still America...

Correct!  This is why it has to be pushed.  It has to be exposed.  Tarpley and others have said, The best way to topple a dictator is to show everyone that they are a dictator.  We are obviously under dictatorial rule (how else does a 700 Billion war budget get approved and we are still in Iraq 2 years after changing Congress).  So we need to let everyone know that the supposed maverick american hero is not abiding by the constitution that he swore to defend.  The more times the constitution is mentioned, the quicker people wake up.  It is such a precious document.  It is beyond reproach and has all of our needs clearly expressed.  We can call them out on their BS.  Hopefully Romney will cut his losses.  Then we have McCain (Unqualified according to a document he swore to uphold) and Huckabee (a man that want the constitution changed to be more like the bible).  I think even with mind control, greed, apathy, extortion, fraud, and worse....Ron Paul wins by a landslide.

[chilicooker]

How about a McCain/Arnold ticket? A total rape... no, sodomy of The Constitution.
Then, McCain can have a "nutty", (have his guns confiscated of course) be placed in a rubber room and be removed from office (forceably), then Arnold can begin his rule over the world.
After all, Arnold is more qualified to be a dictator than G.W.

I wonder how the Bush-munchers would praise that scenario.
As Alex says over and over... "you ain't seen nothin' yet".
Stay tuned. Total fascism is coming to a town near you, so GET DRESSED!!!!

[aerborne]

Um... I'm sorry but being born abroad to two US citizens serving abroad makes you a natural born citizen under the law. I know because i am one and I like any other citizen can serve for president.

You're barking up the wrong tree on this one. i didn't read the article thoroughly but i didn't see anything that would make me assume that McCain born in Panama in '36 is any different then me being born in england in 81 as far as natural born citizenship is concerned.