Gosh, talk about making assumptions. What are my personal ideologies, exactly? Other than striving for precision in language?
I'm applying consistent logic and asking if it's valid and, if so, why not.
You say an African-American is someone of sub-Saharan African descent. I note in the dictionary that "African-American" is "an American of African and especially of black African descent."
So we can quibble about how important that "especially" is, but I'll just note my sincere if futile objection to the broad term "African" applying to just a subset of people who are born in raised in Africa, citizens of an African country, ergo literally "African." You'd think.
But going by that logic, "British-American" would refer to an inhabitant of British descent, presumably exclusive of people of color, right? I mean, if we use the same logic. I wouldn't do that, but it would be consistent.
And yes, I know what an Arikaner (or Afrikaaner) is. Descendants of Dutch settlers of South Africa. Cajuns are descendants of French settlers. They're still Americans.
I have heard some argue that President Obama is not "African American" because that implies a culture that is based on the slave population, their struggles and their ancestry, whereas Obama does not share that culture.
Mike Kelcher wrote: The immigration and Nationality Act of 1940 is what is the governing law pertaining to PART of the question regarding to Obama's citizenship, or lack thereof. Unlike Romney or McCain, Obama's father was never a US citizen. Barack Obama Senior was a citizen of Kenya when the POTUS was born. Kenya was under British rule at that time. So, if he was born in Kenya, it really does make a difference.
Additionally, Obama's stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, was never a US citizen, just his mother (Stanley Ann Dunham), was. When Stanley Ann and Lolo were married and moved to Indonesia, Barry was adopted by Lolo, making Barry a citizen of Indonesia, regardless of where he was born.
If Barry was born in the US, that's one thing, but if he wasn't, that would make him ineligible to serve as POTUS.
One cannot take the laws of today and apply them retroactively....as the OP seems to have done.
It doesn't matter where he was born. He was born a US citizen and that's the end of it. It also doesn't matter what other citizenships he holds. Nothing in the Constitution says you can't be a citizen of another county. Nothing in the Constitution says he can't be born outside the county.
Besides, he was born in the U.S.
The arguments about being born in Africa are codeword arguments about racism. Is is because he was black. This was not an issue for McCain and it was not an issue for Romney's father. In fact, Romney's father was born outside the US and still ran for President. If Obama was white and born in Canada, no one would care. Even if he was born in Panama, no one would care. But he's black and therefore racists care.
Not by the Latinos I know. Not in the often embarrassing heritage of this part of the country, either.
Here is the Census for that asks about race. You filled one out 2 years ago.
Question 8 asks about being Hispanic and Question 9 asks about race.
So you could say in Question 8 you were Puerto Rican and in Question 9 say you are Korean. How that is possible is beyond me, but the form allows for the possibility.
Mike Kelcher
Posts: 11,626
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
The Signature Image wrote: Uh, excuse me but when Obama's Father married his Mother did not that make him a US citizen? I.e., when an American citizen from Ohio marries a woman from Japan is she not a US citizen?
Obama's father was never a US citizen. Today's laws don't apply retroactively. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1940 required a person to be a resident of the US for a number of years before becoming a US citizen through marriage. Barry's father never lived in the US long enough.
Mike Kelcher
Posts: 11,626
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
ArtisticPhotography wrote: It doesn't matter where he was born. He was born a US citizen and that's the end of it. It also doesn't matter what other citizenships he holds. Nothing in the Constitution says you can't be a citizen of another county. Nothing in the Constitution says he can't be born outside the county.
Besides, he was born in the U.S.
The arguments about being born in Africa are codeword arguments about racism. Is is because he was black. This was not an issue for McCain and it was not an issue for Romney's father. In fact, Romney's father was born outside the US and still ran for President. If Obama was white and born in Canada, no one would care. Even if he was born in Panama, no one would care. But he's black and therefore racists care.
I believe you are stating the to be POTUS, you could also be a citizen of China. I believe you are wrong since the president cannot have an allegiance to any other country. http://politicalcenter.newsvine.com/_ne … ted-states
Isn't the Presidents mother a U.S. citizen so that alone makes him an U.S. citizen no matter where he was born.
Example my son was born in Okinawa, Japan in a Japanese hospital to a Japanese woman. But because I am an U.S. citizen he is also. He doesn't have a "state" birth certificate, he has a consular report of birth abroad but he is still an U.S. citizen.
Now he is also a Japanese citizen but Japan requires someone who holds dual citizenship to chose by age 21. So at 21 my son has to chose which citizenship he wants to keep.
I don't see the debate about the Presidents citizenship, if his mom is an U.S. citizen then he is. It doesn't matter that his dad is/was a Kenyan citizen.
I believe you are stating the to be POTUS, you could also be a citizen of China. I believe you are wrong since the president cannot have an allegiance to any other country. http://politicalcenter.newsvine.com/_ne … ted-states
Yes, you could be a duel citizen and President. The qualifications of President are:
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.
No more, no less. Nothing about being a citizen of another country.
It does not state you must be born in the US and it also state that you don't even have to have lived most of your life in the US.
Obama's father was never a US citizen. Today's laws don't apply retroactively. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1940 required a person to be a resident of the US for a number of years before becoming a US citizen through marriage. Barry's father never lived in the US long enough.
So????? It doesn't matter who his father is.
Here's an interesting hypothetical for you. What if a person was born from artificial insemination and doesn't know who her father is. Does that mean that she cannot be President because she might be a duel citizen or might have a father who is not a US citizen?
A Lester II wrote: Isn't the Presidents mother a U.S. citizen so that alone makes him an U.S. citizen no matter where he was born.
Example my son was born in Okinawa, Japan in a Japanese hospital to a Japanese woman. But because I am an U.S. citizen he is also. He doesn't have a "state" birth certificate, he has a consular report of birth abroad but he is still an U.S. citizen.
Now he is also a Japanese citizen but Japan requires someone who holds dual citizenship to chose by age 21. So at 21 my son has to chose which citizenship he wants to keep.
I don't see the debate about the Presidents citizenship, if his mom is an U.S. citizen then he is. It doesn't matter that his dad is/was a Kenyan citizen.
If your son was born in Japan and lived there until he was 21, then he chose US citizenship and moved to the US. At 35, it's "A Lester III For President", even though he was born to a Japanese national, in Japan and lived there for most of his life.
Mike Kelcher
Posts: 11,626
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
Mike Kelcher wrote: Obama's father was never a US citizen. Today's laws don't apply retroactively. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1940 required a person to be a resident of the US for a number of years before becoming a US citizen through marriage. Barry's father never lived in the US long enough.
ArtisticPhotography wrote: So????? It doesn't matter who his father is.
Here's an interesting hypothetical for you. What if a person was born from artificial insemination and doesn't know who her father is. Does that mean that she cannot be President because she might be a duel citizen or might have a father who is not a US citizen?
(Here's a hint: the answer is it doesn't matter)
You are grasping at straws. Regardless of how an egg is fertilized, one still must meet the requirements of the office. In order to do that, one needs to be a citizen. When Obama was born, his citizenship needed to originate from somewhere and it had to come from his parents. His father couldn't bestow US citizenship upon him due to the fact that his father was never a US citizen. His mother was a citizen, but, his father never was. It was possible for his mother to convey citizenship upon her son, even if he wasn't born in the US, if she met the necessary requirements. One of those requirements was that she would have needed to reside in the US for a number of years after Barack's birth. However, she moved to Indonesia before meeting that requirement.
Things are different now, but today's laws are not retroactive, so the issue must be looked at in the context of what the laws were in the 1940's.
Additionally, the Constitution is merely the "framework" for our laws...not the entire story. While you keep insisting that one can have dual citizenship and still be POTUS, Constitutional scholars will argue that you are wrong, because being "natural born" had a specific meaning to the framers of the country who structured things to be certain that the POTUS's allegiances weren't divided between two (or more) countries.
If your son was born in Japan and lived there until he was 21, then he chose US citizenship and moved to the US. At 35, it's "A Lester III For President", even though he was born to a Japanese national, in Japan and lived there for most of his life.
I don't understand what you are saying. He holds dual citizenship right now. Japan requires that one chose which to keep.
I'm betting they will choose Marco Rubio. He's perfect the GOP, he's not white and he's not Mexican... The GOP may not have a problem with Hispanics per se, but they are hell bent against Mexicans. At this point for the GOP, any brown person that isn't Mexican and isn't black probably is what they are looking for. Bobby Jihndal is probably on the short list too...
does that really help romney? i'm thinking he needs a more teabaggy rw white guy to pull in the rw base. santorum? paul?
Mike Kelcher
Posts: 11,626
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
Mike Kelcher wrote: One of those requirements was that she would have needed to reside in the US for a number of years after Barack's birth.
ArtisticPhotography wrote: It's before birth, not afterwards.
That's not exactly what the law says. The United States Nationality Act of 1940, Chapter ll (g), says if one parent is a US citizen and the other is not, in order to bestow citizenship on the child, the citizen parent must reside in the US for a period of at least 10 years, 5 of which must be after the citizen parent reaches the age of 16.
In other words, Stanley Ann Dunham would have to live in the US a total of 10 years. She did. Unfortunately, 5 of those 10 years would have had to be after the age of 16. In other words, until she was 21. She moved to Indonesia and married Lolo Soetoro before she was 21 and therefore did not meet the residency requirements of the law and therefore her son could not be a citizen...unless he applied for citizenship later, after he was 18, and even then, he'd be a naturalized citizen (not a natural-born citizen) and naturalized citizens aren't eligible to be POTUS.
.jpg)
| 
| 
| edu