I’m sure that most readers here are familiar with Mario Apuzzo’s blog: A Place to Ask Questions to Get the Right Answers at the web address http://puzo1.blogspot.com. That blog is a closely controlled discussion where it has been difficult to get a critical comment through moderation. (I haven’t tried lately.)
However there appears to be another blog with the same name: A Place to Ask Questions to Get the Right Answers at the web address http://puzo1.wordpress.com. This blog contains articles signed “Mario Apuzzo” and articles signed “Charles Kerchner” with familiar Obama denialist content. The difference: this blog is not moderated.
I left a couple of on-topic, respectful comments:
When Dr. David Ramsay presented his petition to the US House of Representatives to unseat William Smith on the grounds of ineligibility (the purpose for which the pamphlet discussed in the article above was written), he lost on a 36-1 vote. It is likely that the House was persuaded by James Madison who said during the debate of the Ramsay petition:
It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth, however, derives its force sometimes from place, and sometimes from parentage; but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will, therefore, be unnecessary to examine any other.” Madison then said: “I conceive that every person who owed this primary allegiance to the particular community in which he was born, retained his right of birth, as a member of a new community; that he was absolved from a secondary allegiance that he had owed to a British sovereign.
The Ramsay/Smith controversy makes fascinating reading. Archives of the printed broadsides and newspaper letters are included in The Documentary History of the First Federal Elections 1788-1799 Vol 1, pp 176 ff, The University of Wisconsin Press.
This debate contains the only reference contemporary to the founding of the US of which I am aware that directly cites of Emerich de Vattel’s Law of Nations as defining citizenship. William Smith, writing in defense of his eligibility published in a broadside titled “William Smith to the Citizens of the Charleston District” 22 November 1788:
The Doctor [Ramsay] says the circumstance of birth does not make a citizen–This I also deny. Vattel says, “The country of the father is that of the children, and these become citizens merely by their tacit consent.” I was born a Carolinian, and I defy the Doctor with all his ingenuity, arithmetical or political, to say at what moment I was disenfranchised–at what moment I lost my citizenship. [Emphasis in the original.]
So when John Jay wrote to Washington suggesting that the commander in chief must be a natural born citizen, would you claim that Jay intended to exclude George Washington himself?
George Washington’s father, Augustine Washington, lived a British subject and died a British subject in 1743, long before there even was a United States.
We”ll have to wait and see what happens.
Update: They’ve been deleted.