BY David Ortez on July 12, 2008 - 3:18pm.
The last two days have produced intresting stories about John McCain's past. The New York Times entertained the possibility that, technically, McCain may not be eligible to be a Presidential Candidate. Even though he went to the extreme lengths to draft the legislation to create a law so that he would not have any trouble becoming a candidate . . . the law does not side with him. Then . . . . on the other side of the country, The Los Angeles Times releases a story that digs into McCain's and reveals his adulterous background. You would think that the media would have something to pick up and decide to go with but sadly the big story of today is that Bret Favre is un-retiring and does not want to play for the Green Bay Packers.
University of Arizona Law Professor Grabriel J. Chin has conducted extensive research in McCain;s eligibility to be president. He concluded that, "neither Mr. McCain’s birth in 1936 in the Panama Canal Zone nor the fact that his parents were American citizens is enough to satisfy the constitutional requirement that the president must be a “natural-born citizen.”
It is unlikely that anyone will challenge this but it is intresting to note that the Senate passed "nonbinding resolution declaring that Mr. McCain is eligible to be president." They claimed that, "the nation’s founders would have never intended to deny the presidency to the offspring of military personnel stationed out of the country." Although I concur with this, I have to side with the law and the law does not favor McCain.
There are only two ways one can be a natural-born citizen. One, specified in the Constitution, is to be born in the United States. The other way is to be covered by a law enacted by Congress at the time of one’s birth. Unfortunately, McCain does not meet either requirement. According to Chin, "At the time of Mr. McCain’s birth, the relevant law granted citizenship to any child born to an American parent “out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States.” The Canal Zone was beyond the limits of the United States but not beyond its jurisdiction, and thus the law did not apply to Mr. McCain."
Furthermore, it is noted that "In 1937, Congress addressed the problem, enacting a law that granted citizenship to people born in the Canal Zone after 1904. That made Mr. McCain a citizen, but not one who was naturally born." It is intresting though that "some people born in the Canal Zone when it was under American jurisdiction have been deported from the United States or convicted of being here illegally."
According to the L.A. Times, "McCain, who is about to become the GOP nominee, has made several statements about how he divorced Carol and married Hensley that conflict with the public record." Steve Benen states it best, "McCain turned his back on his wife after she was seriously injured in a car accident, committed adultery, and left the mother of his children when he found a younger, wealthier woman."
It is none of my concern what mistakes and flaws certain people may have had in their past . . . as long as they have taken steps to rectify their faults. The actions that Bill Clinton committed during and before his tenure as President should not have mattered. Then again, he was not proclaiming to run on his background and was no hypocrite at the same time. Even though I do not think it should matter there is one part of me that sides with Benen's conclusion.
Benen breaks it down rather nicely, "If investigative reporters at the LA Times had discovered that Barack Obama had been divorced, cheated on his first wife, left her after she was injured in a car accident, pursued a younger woman while still married, and then lied about the circumstances of his marriages in his memoir, does anyone seriously believe that news outlets would blow off the story completely?"
Digg
StumbleUpon
Technorati
