A Perpetual Opinion of "nbC" Fact

A Perpetual Opinion of "nbC" Fact

vs.

"nbC" New Meaning Neo-Birther Theory

This post is modified with corrections from a similar post on BirtherReport.com on February 4, 2015

>> http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/02/report-article-ii-presidential.html#MUtv3KiVOPiJkzIL.99

<<>>

A Definition of "natural born Citizen"...

From the 3rd paragraph -

"Mrs. Fair continued: 'That phrase 'natural born Citizen' has yet to be defined by the Supreme Court. ..." '

With all due respect to Mrs. Fair, "natural born Citizen" does NOT need to be defined by the Supreme Court.

What the Court does need to do is simply affirm the 1875 Minor v Happersett unanimous decision that a child is a "natural born Citizen" when born to parents, plural, who are citizens of the nation in which the child is born. An 1868 14th amendment "citizen" is not relevant to Article II Section1 Clause 5.

If the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice John "call it a tax" Roberts, considers and then adduces original birther John Jay's 1787 ONLY "original genesis original intent" implicature, his ONLY meaning, his ONLY purpose for underlining the word "born" in "natural born Citizen," there is ONLY one simple statement that the Court will make: John Jay meant ONLY singular U.S. citizenship by ONLY being born on U.S. soil to ONLY two U.S. citizen parents who are married to each other BEFORE their child is born.

Simple, right? Not dual U.S./foreign citizenship, ONLY singular U.S. citizenship.

THAT would be a perpetual opinion for the history books that would never be overturned by another Court decision for the same reason that the 1875 Minor v Happersett Court dictum has never been refuted by any federal or state court "opinion" or dicta, or by Congressional statute--there is ONLY one original intent, and that is ONLY singular U.S. citizenship--which can ONLY be derived by being born on U.S. soil--ONLY to two U.S. citizen parents who are married to each other BEFORE the child is born.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Singular U.S. Citizenship

vs.

Dual U.S./Foreign Citizenship

This post is modified with corrections from a similar post on BirtherReport.com on February 15, 2015

>> http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/02/obama-litigants-epic-response-to-berk.html

<<>>

From Tracy Fair's last sentence:

"Full allegiance is required for citizenship and the Naturalization Oath and Civil Rights Act prove that the Founders did not recognize dual citizenship and required full allegiance in return for citizenship."

Using John Jay, the author of "natural born Citizen," as the seminal original intent guide and the framer's original intent language in Article II Section 1 Clause 5, we can see that, in addition to the Naturalization Oath and the Civil Right Act proof as Tracy stated it, we have internal language "proof" of ONLY singular U.S. citizenship and NOT dual citizenship.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Obama neo-birther 2000s theory, the myth of the 21st century expressed with definiteness of purpose by 2000s neo-birthers like Dr. Conspiracy, aka Kevin, about the meaning of "natural born Citizen," the theory is simple to articulate: to be eligible to be POTUS, the child must be "natural born" and the child can have dual U.S./foreign citizenship by being born on U.S. soil, some say either U.S. or foreign soil, to only one U.S. citizen parent, married or not married to the foreign citizen parent.

According to the 2008-2015 neo-birthers like Kevin, dual U.S./foreign citizenship obviously fulfills John Jay's 1787 original genesis original intent reason for underlining the word "born" in "natural born Citizen"" in his note to George Washington.

Why obviously?

Well, only one U.S. citizen parent is all that Obama had, so, ipso facto, dual U.S./foreign citizenship obviously fulfills Jay's original genesis original intent.

Simple, right?

See how simple it is to state the neo-birther theory, and to be a neo-birther?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Ok, neo-birthers, here are three simple original genesis original intent questions for you.

In Article II Section 1 Clause 5, the distinction is made between a "natural born Citizen" and an "...or a Citizen of..." the Union.

When John Jay underlined the word "born" in "natural born Citizen," what do you think he meant? Not what do you "know" he meant, simply what is your informed opinion, your 2015 perspective, what do you "think" that Jay "may" have meant?

Did Jay mean ONLY singular U.S. citizenship?

(hint: "only singular" implies original intent)

Did Jay mean ONLY dual U.S./foreign citizenship?

(hint: "only dual" implies confusion)

Did Jay mean ALSO dual U.S./foreign citizenship?

(hint: "also dual" implies schizophrenia)

Maybe this will help you gather your wits.

What was the original intent of the framers?

When the framers, the authors of A2 S1 C5 wrote and then adopted the words "...or a Citizen of...at the time...," on September 17, 1787, only 11 years, 2 months, 13 days after the naturalization date of July 4, 1776 from British subject to American citizen, was their original intent to suggest singular U.S. citizenship for the "citizen" grandfathered into POTUS eligibility, or where they suggesting dual U.S./foreign citizenship for the "citizen" grandfathered into POTUS eligibility?

The framers were obviously suggesting ONLY singular U.S. citizenship for the "citizen" grandfathered into POTUS eligibility from the cutoff date of July 4, 1776.

The framers were obviously NOT suggesting that the "citizen" could have dual U.S. AND British citizenship.

Right?

Right, uh, yeah, right.

The "...or a Citizen of..." phrase is the original birther way to determine John Jay's original genesis original intent for underlining the word "born" in "natural born Citizen" as meaning ONLY singular U.S. citizenship by being born ONLY on U.S. soil ONLY to two U.S. citizen parents ONLY married to each other BEFORE the birth of their child.

The common law understanding of 1787 America was simple to understand then and it is still simple to understand today in 2015 America: ONLY the singular U.S. citizenship of the husband determined the singular U.S. citizenship of the wife, AND the singular U.S. citizenship of BOTH parents determined the singular U.S. citizenship of their "natural born Citizen" child.

As it was in 1787 America, so it is today in 2015 America.

ONLY U.S. soil

ONLY both parents

ONLY both parents U.S. citizens BEFORE the child is born

ONLY singular U.S. citizenship for the child

Art

U.S. Constitution: The Original Birther Document of the "Union"

( http://originalbirtherdocument.blogspot.com/ )