Dr. Conspiracy

Dr. Conspiracy

107p

2,847 comments posted · 3 followers · following 1

3 days ago @ http://www.gerbilrepor... - Explosive: Arpaio Admi... · 1 reply · +1 points

No, Lupin gets it. I had an email exchange with him and based on the clarification (which he himself originally made and then forgot), he has changed his translation of pere to be father rather than parents. The updated version is on my blog in the featured comments section. We incrementally improve. Birthers dig in their heels and get left behind.

4 days ago @ http://www.gerbilrepor... - Explosive: Arpaio Admi... · 0 replies · +3 points

You're all about lining up ideological clones, and shunning anyone who fails to correctly espouse the right-wing politically correct doctrine. I could care less about such things. I have the freedom to think independently, to debate ideas, and even to make mistakes. Not only do I reject your conclusions--I reject your way of thinking.

You really should read the book about yourself:

http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer/drbob/TheAuthoritarians.pdf

4 days ago @ http://www.gerbilrepor... - Explosive: Arpaio Admi... · 3 replies · +1 points

Well, you just proved your were wrong with your own dictionary: "relations & kinswoman". In case you didn't know, you can't translate by substituting words from a dictionary--the results are absurd. You have to consider the context.

4 days ago @ http://www.gerbilrepor... - Explosive: Arpaio Admi... · 13 replies · +1 points

No, I don't agree with TR. I believe that loyalty to God transcends loyalty to country.

I would point out that Roosevelt made that comment in the context of naturalization. Roosevelt would have been the first one to deny that the US should pay any attention to the British Nationality Act when deciding who is eligible to be President.

I'm not caught between anything. People who refuse to criticize their country when it is wrong are the ones who line up to follow the next Hitler. I am not an authoritarian follower (got a 77 on the RWA scale). I believe in health debate. You apparently believe in self censorship.

Feh.

4 days ago @ http://www.gerbilrepor... - Explosive: Arpaio Admi... · 0 replies · +1 points

That's a pretty pathetic list of racist decisions, inapplicable cases, and misrepresented sources. No wonder you lost your Obama eligibility cases. What did that judge say to you? Oh yes, here it is (Purpura v. Obama, New Jersey 2012).

“No court, federal, state or administrative, has accepted the challengers’ position that Mr. Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” due to the acknowledged fact that his father was born in Kenya and was a British citizen by virtue of the then applicable British Nationality Act. Nor has the fact that Obama had, or may have had, dual citizenship at the time of his birth and thereafter been held to deny him the status of natural born. It is unnecessary to reinvent the wheel here. … The petitioners’ legal position on this issue, however well intentioned, has no merit in law. Thus, accepting for the point of this issue that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a ‘natural born Citizen’ regardless of the status of his father.”

And please spare us your out of context Mikey Mouse reply.

As for the list on the other side, I need go no further than the 1844 decision in Lynch v. Clarke, or the majority decision of the US Supreme Court in US v. Wong.

Justice Story (you've heard of him?) wrote:

"§  79.    And so has been the uniform doctrine in America ever since the settlement of the colonies.  The universal principle (and the practice has conformed to it) has been, that the common law is our birthright and inheritance, and that our ancestors brought hither with them upon their emigration all of it, which was applicable to their situation.  The whole structure of our present jurisprudence stands upon the original foundations of the common law."

There are these resolutions of the Continental Congress:

<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1.2em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 16px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: normal; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 1.5em; font-family: Georgia, serif; color: rgb(85, 85, 85); background: transparent;">"Resolved, N.C.D. 2. That our ancestors, who first settled these colonies, were at the time of their emigration from the mother country, entitled to all the rights, liberties, and immunities of free and natural-born subjects, within the realm of England.
<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1.2em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 16px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: normal; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 1.5em; font-family: Georgia, serif; color: rgb(85, 85, 85); background: transparent;">"Resolved, N.C.D. 5. That the respective colonies are entitled to the common law of England, and more especially to the great and inestimable privilege of being tried by their peers of the vicinage, according to the course of that law.
<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1.2em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 16px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: normal; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 1.5em; font-family: Georgia, serif; color: rgb(85, 85, 85); background: transparent;">"Resolved, N.C.D. 6. That they are entitled to the benefit of such of the English statutes, as existed at the time of their colonization; and which they have, by experience, respectively found to be applicable to their several local and other circumstances."

<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1.2em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 16px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: normal; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 1.5em; font-family: Georgia, serif; color: rgb(85, 85, 85); background: transparent;">I could dump a lot more, but you're not worth the trouble.

Dr. Conspiracy Searching for gold coins in a bucket of mud

4 days ago @ http://www.gerbilrepor... - Explosive: Arpaio Admi... · 0 replies · +1 points

Just wow! You cite one justice in a decision that is openly racist, that misstates the historical record, and is recognized as probably the worst decision in the history of the Supreme Court.

4 days ago @ http://www.gerbilrepor... - Explosive: Arpaio Admi... · 0 replies · +1 points

How does someone born under the British occupation of New York have any relevance here? It has always been recognized that persons born under the sovereignty of an invading army is an exception.

4 days ago @ http://www.gerbilrepor... - Explosive: Arpaio Admi... · 0 replies · +1 points

Typical Apuzzo. Argue against what your opponent never said.

5 days ago @ http://www.gerbilrepor... - Explosive: Arpaio Admi... · 0 replies · +1 points

I knew Socrates. He was a friend of mind. You, Mario Apuzzo, are no Socrates.

5 days ago @ http://www.gerbilrepor... - Explosive: Arpaio Admi... · 9 replies · +2 points

There is no support in the historical record for the proposition that the Framers used Vattel for their definition of natural born citizen. If they read Vattel in English, then the phrase "natural born citizen" was not even there. If they read it in the French, they would have understood, as the expert French attorney and editor of Vattel has so ably shown, there is no "two citizen parent" language in Vattel. Vattel strictly considers citizenship as deriving from the father.