Also, his parents did not live on base. They lived in Colon, Republic of Panama. Colon was not part of the Canal Zone in 1936.

There is a good deal of information available at http://PanamaJohn.dominates.us including McCain’s birth certificate with affidavit, and more.

http://panamajohn.dominates.us/articles/McCain_Certificate_1_1936x2.gif

http://obamacrimes.com/index.php/component/content/article/1-main/1-philip-j-berg-esq-files-federal-lawsuit-requesting-obama-be-removed-as-a-candidate-as-he-does-not-meet-the-qualifications-for-president

I wouldn’t put it past our ‘shadowy overlords’ to flip the bird at us and show us how feeble our laws are by running two completely ineligible candidates, so if it ever turned out to be true … =/

Do you think it was the Original Intent that army brats born outside of the several states — as foreign occupiers — would be eligible for president?

There are a lot of real reasons for libertarians and conservatives to oppose McCain but a lot of people seem focused on only the most bizarre and desperate ploys.

I don’t think there’s any real doubt that McCain is a citizen, but there is doubt as to whether he is a “natural born” one.

I’ve read the arguments made against Obama’s “natural born citizen” status. They are VERY weak and based on incorrect data.

It’s extremely unlikely, though, that either of them would be ruled ineligible. Courts would try very hard to find an argument against doing so. Even in McCain’s case, there are reasonable arguments that he is a “natural born citizen.”

As someone who supports open ballot access, I would prefer that candidates never be disqualified due to qualities over which they had no control (e.g., their places of birth).

“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.”

According to: http://supreme.justia.com/constitution/amendment-14/03-citizens-of-the-united-states.html , this means, among other things:

“The requirement that a person be ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof,’ however, excludes its application to children born of diplomatic representatives of a foreign state, children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation, or children of members of Indian tribes subject to tribal laws. In addition, the citizenship of children born on vessels in United States territorial waters or on the high seas has generally been held by the lower courts to be determined by the citizenship of the parents.”

I would think that being born to U.S. parents would place McCain as having been born under U.S. jurisdiction.

Or maybe it was low poll numbers.

To be really facetious, one could say that “natural born citizen” might refer to someone that was NOT born caesarean.

PEACE
Steve

It says:

“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.”

The legal question is whether McCain’s foreign birth makes him not a “natural born citizen.”

There is a good argument to be made that it does. The law is just not settled on that point.

Besides the usual counter-arguments, though, there is another one in this case:

The November election is for the choosing of presidential electors, not the president. Even if the Electoral College would be prohibited from electing McCain, that would not mean that California voters were prohibited from considering a McCain slate of electors (unless there is a state law that denies ballot access to a slate associated with a candidate who is not constitutionally eligible to be president).

If Americans in France or Russia give birth to a kid, that kid is born under U.S. “jurisdiction.”