Perhaps now we can deal with real issues in the campaign, like how John McCain actively sought out and obtained the endorsement of Pastor John Hagee, an anti-Catholic bigot?

Why hasn’t McCain denounced Hagee for his anti-Catholic views where Pastor Hagee calls the Catholic Church a “great whore,” the “anti-christ,” and a “false cult system?”

http://www.catholicleague.org/chatterbox.php?#135

The real issue isn’t Rev. Wright, It’s John McCain and John Hagee, who are two peas in a pod. McCain so far has been given the “softball express” by the media, and its about time someone, somewhere challenged him about Pastor Hagee. 30 million Catholics in America want to know, including this one here in St. Louis.

To change the Constitution you need to amend it . This is clearly defined in Article V…
1. The 14th Amendment and matching policy limit citizenship to either natural born or naturalized, but not both.
2. John McCain was born in 1936 in the Canal Zone to citizen parents.
3. 8 USC 1403(a) declares naturalized citizenship in 1952 on persons born in the Canal Zone to citizen parents.
4. Therefore, 8 USC 1403(a) applies to John McCain at age 16.
5. Therefore, John McCain is a naturalized citizen.
6. By treaty, the Canal Zone was not part of the United States.
7. Therefore, John McCain was not born in the United States.
8. Therefore, John McCain is a citizen not born in the United States.
9. Therefore, John McCain is not a natural born citizen.
10. Article II of the Constitution states to be President a person must be a natural born citizen.
11. THEREFORE, John McCain is not eligible to be President of the United States under Article II of the Constitution; he should be decertified and removed from all present and future Presidential ballots; and his past results should be disallowed, including unbinding all of his committed delegates.

jus sanguinis has no basis in U.S. law. Now if the Senate takes their oath to the Constitution seriously they need to change the constitution.

Law enforcement pledge to uphold the constitution should arrest the ones that disobey the law.

The Senate S. Res. 511 is unconstitutional and the legal reasoning wrong. Now my agenda on this issue is very clear I have children that I want to love the country but do not want them to be involved in an unjust war as defined by Thomas Aquinas. McCain says anything and seek supports anything to get elected. THE LAW IS THE LAW YOU NEED TO GET 2/3 OF THE STATES VOTES TO CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION. If you ignore law and let the fear/war mongers rule you do have any basis to complain.

The Senate has claimed that the Naturalization Act of 1790 (26 March 1790) covers his status as a “natural born” citizen. That is entirely not true. A close look at that Act indicates that it only covered “admission as a citizen”—meaning naturalization—and in any case, that Act was repealed in part on 29 January 1795, and the rest was repealed on 14 April 1802. So that argument does not work, because it was repealed long before McCain was born, and because it created naturalization instead of natural born citizenship were it still in effect.

Could it all be a trick?

http://grandoldpartisan.typepad.com/blog/2008/05/the-john-mccain.html

According to the Constitution, the President must be a “natural born citizen.” John McCain was born, not in the United States, but in the Panama Canal Zone. Is Senator McCain eligible for the presidency? Of course he is.

Since 1790, federal law has defined “natural born citizen” to include the children born abroad to U.S. citizen parents. Senator McCain’s father, a U.S. Navy admiral, and his mother were U.S. citizens.

Today, the U.S. Senate passed S. Res. 511, asserting the fact that McCain is a “natural born citizen.” The resolution was written by a Democrat Senator, Claire McCaskill, and co-sponsored by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Why are Democrats seeming to help a Republican? Because they are thinking several steps ahead, that’s why. Are they just being nice? Not at all!

Right before Election Day, the Democrats will likely find a Carter- or Clinton-appointed federal judge to strike down the resolution. Voters will then head to the polls while Democrats and their media allies shout that McCain is not eligible for the presidency. Any appeal to a higher court will decided after the election. Score one for the Democrats!

The legalities are not the point. A lawsuit ahead of time alleging that Senator McCain is ineligible for the presidency would go nowhere and could probably not be filed in the first place. However, this resolution now gives some Democrat judge something to rule against. Of course, the Supreme Court would rule in McCain’s favor, but not until months after the election. Voters would go to the polls with the issue legally undecided, thus hurting McCain’s chances with undecided voters, who might fret about voting for someone who the Democrat media says is ineligible.

The really clever part is that the author and all but one sponsor of the resolution are Democrats, enabling them to express outrage — OUTRAGE !!! — that a judge ruled against their resolution, which, they will claim, had been intended to help John McCain, and so on and so forth….

Republicans should at least warn voters about the trick Democrats plan to play on them in November.

I can see it from both Billary and Obamessia, but I really expected more from Claire (not really)

This bit of silliness hearkens back to when Senator Barry Goldwater ran for President. He had been born in Arizona when it was still a territory, not a state. The Congress immediately passed a similar law to declare him a US born citizen.

Yes, I am old enough to remember that election. Goldwater lost to Lyndon Johnson in an avalanche.

I have been a Republican and with the exception of a Perot vote have voted that way since Nixon. It is not Democrats that dislike McCain but conservative Republicans. The Pennsylvania primary showed that the many Republicans believe McCain has no political convictions or moral compass. The whole housing bubble is a repeat of the S&L mess and McCain has neither the temperament or intellect to lead. There are many Republicans who do not support McCain and lots of Vietnam MIA activist who are repulsed by McCain’s action. If you remember during the Perot/Bush/Clinton election Stockdale felt compelled to write a letter to defend McCain. Now I am not a chicken hawk republican but have core ideals. We really don’t have much choice in this elections. What is the difference? My goodness McCain is campaigning with Gore’s VP.

He was born to a member of the military serving his country. He is an American citizen whether you agree with his politics or not. If you contend that he is not, then any child born to a serviceman stationed in Germany or any other country where we have military bases, is also not and that would be grievously wrong.