Supreme Court Cases that Cite "Natural Born Citizen" as One Born on U.S. Soil to Citizen Parents -

The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)
Shanks v DuPont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)
Dred Scott v Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857)
Minor v Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875)
United States v Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)

John Jay was an avid reader and proponent of natural law and particularly Vattel's codification of natural law and the Law of Nations. In his letter to Washington he said that the Citizenship requirement for the office of the commander of our armies should contain a "strong check" against foreign influence and he recommended to Washington that the command of the military be open only to a "natural born Citizen". Thus Jay did not agree that simply being a "born Citizen" was sufficient enough protection from foreign influence in the singular most powerful office in the new form of government. Rather, Jay wanted to make sure the President and Commander In Chief owed his allegiance solely to the United States of America. He wanted another adjective added to the eligibility clause, i.e., 'natural'. And that word 'natural' goes to the Citizenship status of one's parents via natural law.

Below is the relevant change to Hamilton's proposed language detailed in Jay's letter written to George Washington dated 25 July 1787:

"Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen."

"Wealth we employ less for talk and ostentation than when there is a real use for it." Thucydides, Peloponnesian Wars

Hello my friend, thanks for reading my Bulletin and commenting. I must disagree, even though I like Newt, I want Romney to win. There are many reasons Romney will get more votes in the general election than Newt. But the biggest one is probably that Romney can get the women's vote. Newt simply can not. You must see this. Take into account their looks (yes, superficial, but we are talking about the gum-chewing masses, women, and the mob mentality), and the falsehoods surrounding Newt's last divorce, which he won't be able to correct in the public's mind. I wouldn't be against a Newt Presidency, but I just don't think he can win against The Annointed One.

NICE CHANNELL>>>>>>>>>> I DO WORKOUT FOR 10 YEARS NOW

Nice Channel.

Merry Christmas to you too Buddy.
Working on a new Jihad song, lol

Hello, my Friend!
Thanks for having stopped by. Yes, I despise the new changes also, and have/am considering leaving also. I felt I had a purpose here before, but now, I am not allowed to make any decisions for myself with this dastardly new format, and feel that my hands are tied. I, too, have a number of old Friends who are considering leaving. I wish there were a similar site to which we could all migrate, but am unfamiliar with any. I am very unhappy. Thanks for your comments about my channel page--I do love Christmas. Take care, and stay in touch, please.
Gary

IDK bro, the women had been paid off already by the restaurant assn; usually, part of a pay off is a requirement to keep your mouth shut. I haven't posted a preview to YT yet, but the latest episode of my show has gone semi-viral It's a SHOCKING look at what REALLY happened in Libya:

http://media.abovetopsecret.co­m/media/7955/The_Truth_Is_Vira­l_-_Libya_The_Real_Story/

The next episode focuses on the 20,000 heat-seeking missiles stolen from Libyan armories by AQ and the Muslim Brotherhood, who promptly gave them to Hamas, which has already used them against Israeli civilians in Gaza. I'm on fire brother!