patrick.net

I can't speak to the UK angle, but the Constitution of the United States is clear - any President preferentially needs to be born on US soil or of US citizens living abroad, then at least living in the US for at least 14 years before his /her election.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S1-C5-1/ALDE_00013692/

The Qualifications Clause set forth in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 requires the President to be a natural-born citizen, at least thirty-five years of age, and a resident of the United States for at least fourteen years.

The Framers appear to have adopted the requirement that citizens be natural born citizens to ensure that the President’s loyalties would lie strictly with the United States. By barring naturalized citizens from the presidency, the requirement of being a natural born citizen, as Justice Story explained, protects the United States from ambitious foreigners, who might otherwise be intriguing for the office; and interposes a barrier against those corrupt interferences of foreign governments in executive elections, which have inflicted the most serious evils upon the elected monarchies of Europe.

stereotomy says

Constitution of the United States is clear - any President needs to be born on US soil.

Actually, this is not true. Legally speaking, it has to be a natural born US citizen which in this case is Jus Sanguinis, by blood. I know that historically, American women weren't able to pass their citizenship to a child, which was the whole Barack Obama 'Birther' thing but today, due to clearer guidelines, any child of any American citizen is a natural born citizen whether it's born in Norfolk VA, the US base in Germany, or some town in Wales.

Since many Americans believe what you're saying then it is imperative that Claire and I use our resources to get our potential future kid born in VA instead of Wales, if he/she wants a shot at the Presidency w/o having to fight legal battles w/ the detractors of the future.

FYI, the other reason why I picked VA over my home state of MA is that I know that outside of Jack Kennedy, NO Massachusetts leader will ever be elected to the Presidency as he'll always be viewed as some radical liberal than a moderate. Norfolk VA is right on the line between North and South and thus, makes for a better story. I'll let Claire Jr's campaign manager deal with the specifics in 2070. Hopefully, I'll be dead by then.

You are as american as anyone who migrated after columbus discovered it. Discovery is also questionable given many already lived here. He got lost in the world when ppl thought world was flat.

Find good school district in usa where they won't turn your child into lgbtq n u be all right.

What's happening to your doll. Is Clare OK with it.

KgK one says

What's happening to your doll. Is Clare OK with it.

Claire and I have been doing dolls 'threesome style' together ...

https://patrick.net/post/1381600/2024-07-06-someone-needs-to-take-over-rin-wah-law?start=2#comment-2081925

KgK one says

Find good school district in usa where they won't turn your child into lgbtq n u be all right.

I'm not sure if this is a feasible solution these days. If one tries 'too hard', then you're labelled a child abuser. In a world like ours, parents need to be in charge and raise their kids to be citizens of a western world which came to an end, somewhere between 1970 and 1995.

Just avoid Portland. You don't want a child born with purple and green hair.

Congratulations on the Rin bouncing baby of the future.

@Rin and Claire will be loaded as fuck - they can live anywhere and pay anyone anything to do whatever they want (and set up the cams to make sure it's done).

At this point it's about finding an appropriate environment for socializing any spawn (here I'm making a hopeful but completely unwarranted assumption). The things kids learn in their first five years are both incredible and immutable.

Rin says

I'm not sure if this is a feasible solution these days. If one tries 'too hard', then you're labelled a child abuser. In a world like ours, parents need to be in charge and raise their kids to be citizens of a western world which came to an end, somewhere between 1970 and 1995.

You're overthinking it. Don't live in a city. You clearly haven't raised a child. I'm right leaning, but you're taking the right LGTBQ crap hook line and sinker. Rural public schools are fine and is not like that at all. Hell I was in on half their classes during covid. YOU also parent and tell them that's bull shit.

If you've got so much money get a chopper or jet if you need to be somewhat near a city and live in the middle of nowhere and fly in. Small town schools are not like yuppie suburbs. I'm talking America. Or home school as you said. I don't think that's a good route though. 80% of school is being able to socialize with other humans. No one that's in the school wants to hang out with home schoolers. Private school is even worse.

Earlier this year some former friends moved because their kid sucked at socializing. They thought Ohio would be the solution. Ultimately everything is on the parents. Mom for nurturing and dad for discipline and fun. I label myself as hight IQ brash personality. I'd tread lightly if you have a kid with the sex doll in the house as well. That's as bad as LGTBQ crap. Both are not normal at all.

WookieMan says

with the sex doll in the house

It's well hidden, otherwise, Claire and I would never have guests over. The average person would call mental health services on us.

If we have a child, it'll be locked up in case the kid decides to play Sherlock Holmes, searching through our hidden chambers. I believe many British kids were influenced by 'Lion, Witch, and Wardrobe' and look for hidden portals to magical places. And apparently, every other person in Wales believes in some sort of magic.

WookieMan says

Rural public schools are fine

Once you're out of Cardiff, Newport, and Swansea, much of Wales is rural and thus, is a good setup. Unlike rural northern VT, which looks and feels a lot like Wales (apart from the rocky, amazing Welsh coastline), people are a lot friendlier and you don't see the Boston/NYC type of ex-burb crowds ruining the place. Plus, for any reliable connectivity, one will need satellite internet in rural Wales.

And I'm also slowly learning Welsh, as I've learned from a French-American couple that the mother speaks her native tongue and the dad responds in English around the kids. Today, both of their children are bilingual. FYI, everyone in Wales speaks English so it's not like entering some medieval festival with Dreigiau a Swynwyr (Dragons & Sorcerers) role players.

Ceffer says

Congratulations on the Rin bouncing baby of the future.

Stop acting like my trader friend and his wife in London. It hasn't happened yet.

It's what's known as a feasibly reasonable "future reality".

Here's the issue with northern Vermont, between Dec and Mar, it's fricking cold (10-20 degrees colder than Boston), snowy, and miserable. Then, when it does warm up, the following Lake which has doppelgangers in rural Wales ...



Turns into the Bostonian-NYCer meetup waterfront club ...



Sure, crowds pick up in the summer time anywhere, but in VT, it's almost like the ex-burb mosquitoes show up in droves.

Plus, the fact that it does periodically rain in Wales, doesn't encourage the urban crowds to pitch tent. And thus, between downpours, you can have the entire place to yourself or with a small no of ppl.

And then, after you've had your outdoors fun, you can enter the nearly town and have a meal/drink at the local pub and meet some ppl whereas in VT, it'll be some motel/hotel where the people mainly talk w/ those they'd already arrived with.

I forgot one thing which is important ... neither Claire nor I play soccer (international football). Apparently, the skill level of that sport in Britain is so high that it makes it tough for the regular person to get to any competitive level.

What's strange is that both of us play basketball as a team sport, and she's on a local women's club where apparently, she seems "to know" a lot about Gregg Popovich as far as executing continuous pick n roll offenses w/o Pops coaching her. And yeah, she's watched Olajuwon coach the jump hook w/ the Dream Shake and uses that when she can't roll off the pick. In effect, the defense knows she's a better player than the person for whom she's helping with the screen.

Part of this discrepancy likely stems from the fact that b-ball isn’t very popular in Britain, allowing anyone who plays to feel like a bit of a star, even if it’s just for fun and not taken too seriously.

So now ... it looks like we need to add soccer (sorry, football) training to our list of things to do. Claire agrees and now, we have to get embarrassed by everyone in town. Meanwhile, in kickboxing, she can just beat up the opposing girl or do some Brazilian Capoeira moves and scare the girl out of the dojo.

I guess that's balance ... suck at one thing, excel in another.

Go to whichever place has the most favorable divorce/alimony/ child support laws and practices.

The Obama qualification issue was not about whether a mother would pass citizenship, but whether he was born on US soil. (Until some legal opinions in the past decade or so) the legal concensus regarding POTUS qualification included requiring the person to be born on US soil. That was an issue raised also regarding McCain, who was born in the Panama Canal Zone, which many thought was in a foreign country but was resolved as at the time of his birth was a US exclave (similar to US embassy overseas) as his father was one of the top US Navy officers holding a navy command in the Panama Canal Zone. In terms of passing citizenship (not POTUS qualification), the historical US precedence was giving more credence to maternal parentage than to paternal parentage (largely due to the children allegedly fathered by US troops stationed in overseas bases with local women outside marriages).

Virginia recognizes common law marriage, whereas Wales and MA don't. OTOH, I know someone in a state that does not recognize common law marriage but having the state supreme court judges deciding a marriage existed because the two had filed joint tax returns for a couple decades before the woman filed for divorce. Wales also requires marriage to last at least one year before filing divorce, and a divorce in Wales takes at least 6 months due to procedural requirements.

IMHO, the most advantageous way / safest way to have a baby is through a birthing contract: you the man pay a cash prize or a stream of monthly cash flow for many years after birth (or a combination of both) in exchange for the woman to give birth and give the child's custody to you. That way you can avoid a lot of the hassles that mother's right-to-change-mind / emotional instability will have on the child in the future. Your making the lady independently wealthy before the child is born gets in the way of that as most women would use your help getting her where she is as negotiating leverage against you instead of being appreciative like a man usually would assume.

Reality says

which many thought was in a foreign country but was resolved as at the time of his birth was a US exclave (similar to US embassy overseas) as his father was one of the top US Navy officers holding a navy command in the Panama Canal Zone. In terms of passing citizenship (not POTUS qualification), the historical US precedence was giving more credence to maternal parentage than to paternal parentage (largely due to the children allegedly fathered by US troops stationed in overseas bases with local women outside marriages).

I believe that that's changed, as Ted Cruz was most definitely born in Canada to a US parent. But still, in terms of giving a potential offspring of mine a chance, being setup at a pre & post-natal care facility in VA will do the job, as being born abroad means 'less American' and being born in MA means being a 'radical liberal'.

Reality says

That way you can avoid a lot of the hassles that mother's right-to-change-mind / emotional instability will have on the child in the future. Your making the lady independently wealthy before the child is born gets in the way of that as most women would use your help getting her where she is as negotiating leverage against you instead of being appreciative like a man usually would assume.

Unfortunately, I will take a chance on her right to change her mind, etc. I still have a country to run back to. I've avoided 100% of women for the past decade plus and finally see one who does, in many ways, have the mind (or soul, if you want to get metaphysical) of a male brother than a histrionic sister, which BTW ... describes my biological sister. And I do feel sorry for my brother-in-law. Interesting to note, TurtleDove took exception to that, when I brought it up. I knew that she was living in a glasshouse, some time before the tragedy.

All and all, I'm not inspired to have a kid, for the sake of expanding the Rin lineage into the future. I would only want one with a mother who's also my lifelong companion even if something goes wrong down the road. Children should view their parents as allies, not warring psychos.

Love is blind.

Lifelong companion is tantamount to an aspiration that someone else' priorities/preferences will always coincide with one's own. That is do-able with a dog, as a dog (and its wild ancestor the wolf) is an eusocial animal: only the alpha-male and the alpha-female in a pack get to reproduce, all the others in the pack are betas and omegas serving the alphas related by blood/genetics to themselves. So long as you treat the dog as your beta/omega, he/she will arrange its affairs according to your priorities/preferences. Human females are not like that in most cases (unless you are willing to be a monster like Ghenghis Khan, putting her under extreme duress, which then likely get you into legal trouble with DV laws); most husbands contort themselves into fitting the wives' priorities/preferences, to which the wives would only foster contempt not respect, consequently dead-bedrooms for the husbands.

Parents should indeed be allies (not just in how Children view them), however allies have to have coinciding interests to stay allies. Post-modern marital laws have made women into "psychos" when they optimize for their own benefits (with complete disregard for the others, which women are prone to do due to evolutionary reasons) under the post-modern marital legal framework. You have to make it in her own self-interest to accede to your wishes/demands. It's much easier doing that outside post-modern marital laws (say, via a birthing contract) than inside a western post-modern marital legal framework.

Having a child is mostly a voluntary tax payment (about half a million over 22 years, from conception to college graduation) and similar to adopting an animal from the shelter. One can derive a lot of pleasure from taking care of a pet animal or a child, if cost is well within one's affordability. Adopting a pet animal with a woman as joint owner makes the situation much more complicated and more costly. Adult humans usually don't want to be owned; that applies to both children and women, and rightly so if the society can afford freedom for all ("husband" had its origin in ownership, as in "animal husbandry"). Tall fences make for good neighbors; IMO, keeping distance and giving the woman freedom make for better reproductive partnership. The woman will also admire you more when you continue to prove to be able to attract other women younger and hotter than herself . . . something you can't do in a marriage without hurting her feelings and making her look bad in the eyes of her family.

Reality says

Parents should indeed be allies (not just in how Children view them), however allies have to have coinciding interests to stay allies.

Since Claire is a home body, only the addition of being 'flush with cash' will change that dynamic, as money turns women in psychos faster than it does for guys. For the most part, guys just spend on a Lamborghini, act out their 'fast & furious' fantasies on the highways, get bored of it, and go back to their old ways. For women, they become diabolical and sociopathic if they can spend a million dollars and re-coup it in a year or less. That's Claire's litmus test of her true nature. And given the issues she's had with women in the past, I'm hoping that she can pass that test.

Reality says

Lifelong companion is tantamount to an aspiration that someone else' priorities/preferences will always coincide with one's own.

In today's time, a lifelong companion will more likely look like an AI-bot, through a RealDoll chassis. And that's the future for a slew of men who're burned through palimony/alimony and all that jazz.

Yes, I'm also talking about my brother in law, circa 2035.

Reality says

The woman will also admire you more when you continue to prove to be able to attract other women younger and hotter than herself

As an American in finance, who also works out, I'm considered a top tier catch by a majority of British women. I think I'll be able to garner attention of plenty of Welsh birds w/o having to make it look like I'm flirting w/ them. Realize, the British know how to have conversations; in contrast, American women sound like some cacophony of the Ellen show.

Reality says

keeping distance and giving the woman freedom

This is why I'm 100% against being with local American women. When that occurs, nevermind the phone/internet, but there's no physical distance whatsoever and they're always in your face. Sure, Claire can visit Uncle Sam whenever, but it's not her home base and a 'home body' type always needs to be in or around Wales.

So my expectation is that her nesting instincts will upgrade her to a more snazzy flat in Cardiff, along with a homestead in either Vale (that's the snazzy 'burb), a/o a more quiet cottage in the rural countryside.

FYI, Claire has a solution to a problem if our potentially 'future child' runs for President of the USA.

Basically, her and I build an underground bunker in the Welsh countryside and hide out from the press/media, stocking 3 months of food at a time, and sending out couriers to do our food shopping.

This is how the segment on Fox & CNN will look ...

"Breaking News: Last known location of Rin Sr & Claire Sr"



This is Claire having some fun with the notion.

Rin says

So my expectation is that her nesting instincts will upgrade her to a more snazzy flat in Cardiff, along with a homestead in either Vale (that's the snazzy 'burb), a/o a more quiet cottage in the more rural countryside.

You don't know her nesting instinct at all dude. If you have a kid it's a different game. Not a knock on Patnet users that are active, but most don't seem to have kids. I wouldn't take child advice from them. If you ever conceive the woman changes is all I'll say.

Having a child is a complete game changer. If you go for it, don't just have one. Only child syndrome is a thing. You need a companion to grow up with besides your parents. The oldest becomes the babysitter and you get your free time back. So my advice is to shoot the good juice twice.

My wife basically raised her 4 sisters. My in laws are not the sharpest knives in the drawer, but as a child my wife did a fucking pretty good job and it taught her a lot. My older sister was a big influence on me. Only time I'll type this, but my parents sucked. Successful and didn't have a need, but they sucked. So did my wife's parents. Probably why we got along.

Do your thing in Europe/UK. Give a Wisconsin chick a chance if you ever have 2nd thoughts. Sneaky hot and wholesome. This is coming from a non-religious guy. They won't leave you if you have money and won't take it either. You sound like you have money, prenuptial all the way. I'm doing a postnuptial before we break ground on our house.

NEVER trust anyone. Create a tiered system. 1 being good, wife is the only one on that list. Have some good 2's, maybe 5-6 people. 3's I trust, but not really. 4-5's I'll be polite and hang out, but I legit don't trust you at all.

Wish you luck with the lady. I do think you need to get out of the Northeast which it seems like you're doing. Don't discount midwest women. You don't seem to be the stateside traveler. Something to think about.

In Britain, having a live-in governess/nannie is not entirely unheard of, especially if the couple has the means.

So it's not just a 'Sound of Music' or 'Mary Poppins' thing even though Julie Andrews seems to dominate those roles.

I wouldn't trust a nanny with my kids I guess. I worry about sleep overs. I don't stop it, but there are sick fucks out there. Even in laws will diddle kids.

Like I said, my trust circle is extremely small. I've witnessed my fair share of liars in my life.

You're arguing with the void in an advanced state of oxytocin intoxication. There is no control of the future, and reproduction is a side effect of behavior. You can't control the alien you create as much as you want and never will, it'll be a ride.

Gotta toss a Zen anchor more in the present rather than a fickle future. Planning is not necessarily a prequel to event.

I never heard of anybody who had learned everything before they had the kid. In fact, having the kid is a learning experience by fire and parents just adjust as they go along. I have heard in Britain you have to sign them up for certain schools when they are born, but not in USA.

Ceffer says

You can't control the alien you create

Now that brings back some classic Sci-Fi/horror movie tropes ...



Ceffer says

In fact, having the kid is a learning experience by fire and parents just adjust as they go along.

It's always good to plan ahead and be ready for any changes (a/o challenges) along the way.

Ceffer says

You're arguing with the void in an advanced state of oxytocin intoxication

Well, the drugged out state is slowly coming down and thus, I'm actually having a rational discussion about giving my potential kid a chance at being POTUS. I fully expect the political machine, either parties, to keep a un-corrupted person out of the White House. But still, no one can say that I didn't at least try to give the potential kid a shot.

All and all, the thought of having to hide during my golden years, thanks to the Paparazzi, isn't something that I'd look forward to.

WookieMan says

I've witnessed my fair share of liars in my life.

Same here.

If we go the route of a governess/nannie, Claire will definitely be on the hunt for Julie Andrews and not Mrs Doubtfire.

I bet Claire will hire a different nanny than a Rin nanny. She'll make them wear underwear and make sure they are exotically unattractive. A big hairy mole on the nose will do nicely, and goatskin perfume.

Ceffer says

I bet Claire will hire a different nanny than a Rin nanny. She'll make them wear underwear and make sure they are exotically unattractive. A big hairy mole on the nose will do nicely, and goatskin perfume.

I think what you're referring to ... was our Sex Slave Maid service, where Miho was giving Claire massages and performing cunnilingus on her. Yes, the governess/Julie Andrews is going to be a prude & will probably look a bit like Judy Dench.

Rin says

about giving my potential kid a chance at being POTUS.

I never had kids, but it seems they are pleasing and distracting pets up until about eight. When hormones hit, it seems they go from loving you to hating you and thinking their criminally inclined and heedless sociopathic peers are lifestyle geniuses.

As they get older, they can be an exotic and never ending curse, or they can blossom, self educate and turn into an excellent source of parental Narcissistic Supply, but nobody knows which polarity will turn out I gather. They also might conspire to murder you when you are in your cups so that they can squander your fortune.

There is also the mother child bond which means that if Mom decides you are old chattels and it is time to cash in on you, she can often indoctrinate the child against you, often with bizarre lies about things you may or may not have done. Momkins pup defensive urges, possessiveness and emotional hegemony urges apparently never bode well. Usually, you can depend on that eight years of so of reinforcement from the kiddies until being forced onto the brink of the disaster or bliss lottery in the longer run, all pivoting around the presumed continuing good relations with the mother.

Rin,

Your thought of giving the kid a chance at being POTUS was remarkably similar to the thoughts that went through my mind when I was getting married and then a few years later having the first child around two decades ago. The thoughts of being able to escape the entanglement and just put up money for the mother to raise the child in the worst case scenario are very similar to my understanding of the issue a little over a decade ago after my divorce.

Ceffer's message above at 2:47pm is very insightful; I don't know how he gained such insight without ever having kids. In my experience, the 8 years honey-moon period with kid can be extended to perhaps 12yo or even 16yo. Before having kids, I thought corporal punishment would be inevitable; then seeing that the 10 month old was able to follow calm rational instructions, I realized corporal punishment would be quite unnecessary. So my daughter always treated me as the source of rational advice for the first 16 years of her life (her mom and I were divorced when she was 4yo; physical custody went to mom by default in the US at that time). However, somewhere between 12-18yo, adolescence brought her close to her mom. There was a time when she was around 14, she wanted to move out of mom's house to live with me due to her contention that Mom was emotionally unstable and getting angry too often. I regret very much I did not take up the offer, at the time happening to be in the middle of the Covid chaos and the ex-wife would have to keep receiving full child support (more than her own full time job income after tax) despite transfer of physical custody to me, and the daughter would have to make new friends in a different school district (both districts were among the top in the country) in the middle of lockdowns. I should have taken the custody transfer despite all the potential problems. Within a few years, it got to the point where the ex-wife would embezzle the money I sent for the daughter's SAT training courses, to spend on their summer trip to Europe (which I also subsidized but in a separate trounche of money), and was completely hidden from me until it was too late to correct the problem. The daughter eventually did get into one of the top-30 or top-20 colleges/universities in the US, but could probably have gotten her into one of the Ivy+2 / top-10 if I had taken over custody 3.5 years earlier. More importantly, I have been detecting manipulativeness and lack of transparency in her behavior and conveying of important information necessary for critical decision advice. Maternal influence during 12-18yo makes the kid narcissistic. Obviously, if a kid is not successful (whatever the template of success in her own eyes; i.e. narcissistic tendencies can be very bad), it can be a real problem for a wealthy parent (whose death would benefit an unsuccessful offspring) who doesn't have numerous kids to check-and-balance the failures. This is not meant as criticism for my ex-wife, whom I think is about as good as a wife/ex-wife/woman can be in raising child; at least she didn't have to be convinced jabbing the child would be bad.

Jokes about governess aside, hiring full-time someone with a master's degree in early childhood education can be quite helpful in the first couple years for new parents. The qualify of care is quite a cut above the run-of-the-mill nannies etc.. The key is, you the dad have to take physical custody after 8-12 as adolescence starts to arrive. Maternal contribution is indispensable during pregnancy, highly advantageous during nursing years, but after that the rational and stable influence of a high quality father is far more important. For that reason, Rin, you should push for having full custody after birth if there is to be any children (giving her visitation rights and financial benefits) while you are still in a position to negotiate.

There is something about paternal influence - what it probably comes down to is accountability. The maternal influence is the opposite in most cases. All this is in the context of teen/highschool.

Exactly! Stereotomy. Maternal influence during kids' teen years seems to be a constant game of how to get away with things; i.e. as bad as teenage peers who are party animals. The key reason is likely due to women being more concerned with how popular herself is with the kids at the moment than how the kids will turn out in the distant future. The combination of short-sightedness and obsession with current opinions of others make most women unsuitable to be the primary care-giver to children during the latters' teen years.

Reality says

I don't know how he gained such insight without ever having kids

Maybe just a lucky guess.

It is posited by some behavior observers that the positive polarity of filial love often turns to a negative polarity when hormones hit and the pups ignore the acquired wisdom of parents, rebel and rely instead on the whatever current daft fashions of their peer groups. The peers become their trusted advisors and references while the parents are relegated to dumb hump status.

Some think this is to inspire genetic diversity. However, the mom unit often will continue through insecurity to emotionally or financially blackmail the pups. Parents blackmailing children with money and even paid for homes is pretty common around my hood, or the phenom of parents uprooting to move to wherever their chilluns have chosen to go, following their genetic investments as servants and annoying hang around appendages. Sometimes these kids like the money and help, but don't really like the needy parents always hanging around.

This is a generalization, of course, and many families have lots of variations from the 'turn them out at 6 with their own beer and cigarettes' to torturing them into psychopathic compliance with family and world dominating goals.

I think the intersection of polarity reversal to peer immersion means that the best thing to do for kids at that point is to give them a healthy and rational peer group with stealth guidance from supposedly healthy and rational adults. Mom is always a kind of wild card.

It's well observed that girls are easy in the beginning. They hardly ever need a spanking, they usually potty train very fast and can sit calmly and color or read. Anyone who had boys without ever stronger strongarming, whooping or otherwise restraining them didn't actually have boys, or they are extremely feminine. When they're young they are so much work, but as soon as they get into reasoning age, as young as 4 or 5, but for sure by age 7 or 8, they are a delight and much much easier than girls once approaching puberty. It totally depends on whether you're having a boy or a girl wrt what the sweet years are. Fatherhood is more important than ever today, in fact a single Dad will most of the times do better for their kid than a single mom. Do not parent boys and girls the same, as they surely aren't