Fox
News correspondent, Bret Baier, joins an increasing roster of
errant-minded media mainstreamers who have assigned an incorrect and
biased definition of Natural Born citizenship in a desperate attempt to
uphold transient political values and profiteering for a few over
constitutional sovereignty and legal protection for many.
By Dan Crosby
of the DAILY PEN
NEW YORK, NY – Fox News’ Bret Baier is the latest pundit to miss the presidential eligibility mark when writing in his Fox website blog, The Daily Bret, he attempted to incorrectly equate a “citizen by birth” with a “natural born citizen”.
Baier writes, “Many
legal analysts and scholars agree with this take-- and until the
Supreme Court weighs in.. this is how the law is interpreted: The
Constitution requires that the president be a "natural born citizen,"
but does not define the term. That job is left to federal law, in 8 U.S.
Code, Section 1401. All the law requires is that the mother be an
American citizen who has lived in the U.S. for five years or more, at
least two of those years after the age of 14. If the mother fits those
criteria, the child is a U.S. citizen at birth, regardless of the
father's nationality.
The
law lists several categories of people who are considered American
citizens at birth. There are the people born inside the United States;
no question there. There are the people who are born outside the United
States to parents who are both citizens, provided one of them has lived
in the U.S. for any period of time. There are the people who are born
outside the United States to one parent who is a U.S. citizen and the
other who is a U.S. national (that is, from an outlying possession of
the U.S.), provided the citizen parent has lived in the United States or
its possessions for at least one year prior to the birth of the child.
And then there are the people who are born outside the United States to
one parent who is a U.S. citizen and the other who is an alien, provided
the citizen parent lived in the United States or its possessions for at
least five years, two of them after the age of 14.
They're all natural born U.S. citizens…”
Unfortunately, Baier is wrong and misguided. Those he defines here are not Natural born citizens. A
natural born U.S. citizen is one born in the United States,
specifically defined as a geographic location held under the
constitutional protection of the U.S., to two U.S. citizen parents, conditions which are well defined by the tenets of natural law and national identity.
An election for President and Commander in Chief of the Military must strive to be above reproach. Our public institutions must give the public confidence that a presidential candidate has complied with the election process that is prescribed by our Constitution and laws. It is only after a presidential candidate satisfies the rules of such a process that he/she can expect members of the public, regardless of their party affiliations, to give him/her the respect that the Office of President so much deserves.
I'm afraid Baier has succumbed to the same malady that has infected the rest of the genius class in the Main Stream Media. Namely, they have been educated beyond their intelligence. Think about that for just a moment.
ReplyDeleteHow in the world can anyone with an IQ of two above plant life conclude that the pResident in the White House is constitutionally eligible given his so-called birth narrative. Except for those alive at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, name one other man who has not been a Natural Born Citizen whose parents were citizens BEFORE his birth.
The American public has been hood-winked, played for suckers, purposefully lied to by their own half-witted schnooks in D.C. (Senators and Representatives) who think that not adhering to the Constitution in this very small matter is no big deal. I will not vote for any of my current Representatives. It's time to clean house of all the rat bastards like Richard Lugar who has been in the senate since 1976. Hey Dick, its time to go!