Posted on 09/29/2009 8:10:23 AM PDT by kellynla
“Actually, yes, if their loyalty was to the US. The original voting eligibility laws were fairly strict.”
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I don’t understand, why do you believe they would have said a woman could be president when they wouldn’t allow her to vote? The constitution uses the pronoun he to refer to the president in several instances and even uses it in referring to other offices in some instances. The first paragraph of article II begins, “The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. HE shall hold HIS office.... I am aware that they didn’t like using the laborious “he or she” back then but they didn’t have to use either, they could have said, “The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America who shall hold office......
To change the subject I think someone should file a case stating that the president is NOT the commander in chief of the United States Air Force on the grounds that the constitution only says that he is commander in chief of the Army and the Navy and of the militia of the several states when they are called into the actual service of the United States. This will immediately be lampooned by the left as illustrating the screwball thinking of conservatives. The reply then should be that it makes more sense than finding a right to abortion which is clearly not in the constitution and not being able to find a right to bear arms which clearly is in the constitution. Of course I am just ranting, I need to read my own tagline.
AMEN and AMEN!
alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.”
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Are not illegal aliens in hostile occupation?
You speak of cherry picking but you are citing one court opinion, I don’t intend to get involved in exchanging references, there are plenty to support either view. I fully expect that a modern court decision would go more along the lines of your view than mine but there are plenty of court decisions that seem faulty to me, the most recent one concerning the use of eminent domain to take property from the owner and deliver it to someone else for business usage. I suspect there will be many more in the near future. The most recent appointment to the supreme court bench leaves me little hope.
As far as this line goes, “ Believe it or not, not every word that every author ever wrote, is accurate”, don’t be patronizing, please, I am trying to be civil. I am off to bed now, have a good night.
All right! Full employment for lawyers.
Hit with an ash tray for kissing Carla Bruni.
The sun don’t shine on the same dog’s ass every mornin’
We all knew what the definition of ‘is’ was, until a politician got involved.
******
Who did you say is a nutcase?
In my opinion, the true "nutcase" in this Obama eligibility issue is Obama himself, because he---the President of the United States, for goodness sake---won't allow Hawaii to release his 1961 long form birth certificate, and he won't allow Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard to release his college records.
Talk about a real nutcase.
In fact, it is quite evident that nutcase Obama is spending thousands of dollars---some of the money is taxpayer money---to keep the public from examining his Hawaii long form birth certificate, a birth certificate that would cost the President of the United State about $20 when he ordered the birth certificate from Hawaii.
Indeed, it would probably cost nutcase Obama nothing, because I believe that Hawaii would release Obama's long form to the public at no cost to Obama once Obama said to do so, because Hawaii, in my opinion, would do it as a courtesy to the President of the United States.
You claim to be a lawyer. So why don't you give us an estimate as to how much it is costing President Obama or the Democratic Party or the taxpayer to defend Obama in court against all these Obama eligibility lawsuits.
Thanks. Have a nice day.
And a fifty dollar bill at least!!!
Uh. Oh. Google doesn't share your enthusiasm today.
What is the current listing status for orlytaitzesq.com?
Site is listed as suspicious - visiting this web site may harm your computer.
Part of this site was listed for suspicious activity 3 time(s) over the past 90 days.
What happened when Google visited this site?
Of the 269 pages we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 33 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent. The last time Google visited this site was on 2009-09-30, and the last time suspicious content was found on this site was on 2009-09-30.Malicious software includes 37 scripting exploit(s). Successful infection resulted in an average of 2 new process(es) on the target machine.
Malicious software is hosted on 5 domain(s), including cybercrime-protection.cn/, mcafee-malware.com/, security-alerts.cn/.
2 domain(s) appear to be functioning as intermediaries for distributing malware to visitors of this site, including security-alerts.cn/, protection-malware.cn/.
This site was hosted on 1 network(s) including AS6245 (NETWORK).
Has this site acted as an intermediary resulting in further distribution of malware?
Over the past 90 days, orlytaitzesq.com appeared to function as an intermediary for the infection of 3 site(s) including freerepublic.com/, zillr.com/, tinyurl.com/m2vs9p/.
Has this site hosted malware?
No, this site has not hosted malicious software over the past 90 days.
How did this happen?
In some cases, third parties can add malicious code to legitimate sites, which would cause us to show the warning message.
Next steps:
I think I understand very well what is means but when I try to define it in words it doesn’t seem so easy. It seems much easier to define a long word of many syllables.
So you are an “After-Birther”???
Marxism is moral insanity. Obama is clinical.
“In some cases, third parties can add malicious code to legitimate sites, which would cause us to show the warning message.”
Thanks for posting this. I suspect Obots are trying to deny access to birther sites by adding “malicious code to legitimate sites” as these are where I get infected with things getting worse this week.
“If you are taking flack, you must be over the target!”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.