President Barack Obama and US Senator (FL) Marco Rubio
(Photo credit: Associate Press)
I live in a municipality in a Miami area for which Marco Rubio used to be my district Representative to the Florida House. He once spoke about his 100 Innovative Ideas for Florida's Future (few of which have come to pass, that's for sure) at one of our Miami Child Advocacy Network meetings, back in the day. I wrote to him on several occasions and before he was Speaker of the House, he sometimes wrote back either handwritten notes or clearly self-written e-mails. In person, he's a really pleasant guy, although clearly pretty conservative. Yeah, I have to say that in recent times, he's not exactly been my cup of tea. *coughgagomqfmarziethatwasbad* Yet, this morning I awoke to such a wad of crap in my Miami Herald that I was shaking my head. Poor Marco. He is just as unnatural as my ineffectual friend Barack is!
It turns out that Marco Rubio, hailed as the poster boy/wunderkind/future presidential candidate of the GOP, is not a natural born American Citizen. Now I know, since he was born in Miami in 1971, that this will shock many of my readers, even the Republican ones, who think the Tea Party is the party of the righteous. But just like Barack, Marco's US birth certificate has grave, grave defects. You see Marco's parents didn't become US Citizens until 1975. They actually came to the US from Cuba in the 1950's but tried and tried to deal with Fidel's Cuba and gave up, moving here permanently in 1961. They applied for and were finally granted US Citizenship in 1975. Four years too late!!!! (Why Marco's situation at birth is even worse than Barack's whose mother was at least a US citizen [praisethequantumfield], but whose father [darklooksabound] was Kenyan.)
Nope, Marco's out of the running say the Birthers. That's because Marco Rubio is not a natural born citizen of the United States of America and therefore, under Article 2 of the United States Constitution, Marco is not eligible to run for president, anymore than Barack Obama was.
The basis for this determination? In part a phrase from The Law of Nations by the Swiss diplomat and philosopher Emmerich de Vattel (yep, he's a haole, a gaijin, a ferengi... what are they thinking letting him determine US policy about such an important thing, I wonder?) which reads: "The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country of parents who are citizens." And hey, there is a load of historical cred for this view, since de Vattel lived from 1714 to 1767 (in Neuchatel, Switzerland) and so the Founding Fathers clearly had factored in his assessment when they wrote that whole Article 2 thingy back in 1787. Clause 5, the part that is in question, reads:
First off, I think we need to look at what we should do if someone was adopted by natural born US citizen parents. This could be tricky, especially if the person was adopted as an infant, you know like from Russia or China or something. They might look like they are American when they're really not, you know? And now they have a birth certificate that says the person is American, but we all really know that geography is thicker than upbringing, culture and documents from the US State Department or any circuit court. Definitely, you're out if you're a foreigner who is adopted. And because of this deep dark concern, I advocate for unsealing all records of any adopted candidates, just to be, you know, on the safe side.
But secondly, I've been giving this whole natural thing a lot of thought. Frankly, I think we should go a few steps further. Now, since I'm a woman and since, you know, women are always obsessed with home and family and children and babies and such, when I think natural, I think natural childbirth. So just to be sure, really sure, that we are dealing with natural born citizens, I propose that a person can only be elected President of the United States of American if they were born by natural childbirth. No caesarian sections, no in vitro fertilizations, no artificial inseminations, no inductions of labor, no pain meds. All of those are un-natural. I am sure that the Founding Fathers would disapprove of their unnatural birth. Gosh knows all that stuff wasn't even really available in 1787 when they came up with the whole Article 2 business. I'm sure they would be appalled to find out that it was possible to be an un-naturally natural born citizen. Yep, taking the strict constructionist view, I think we can say that we had better start perusing those hospital birth records of our candidates. There are going to be a lot of very disappointed people. Sigh. But you know, this stuff is really important. We need to avoid, at all costs, what Alan Keyes describes as: “Now you’ve got Republicans talking about Marco Rubio for president when it’s obviously clear that he does not qualify. Regardless of party label, they don’t care about Constitution. It’s all just empty, lying lip service.”
Step right up... get your share of natural born idiocy...