Posted on 07/03/2008 4:35:19 PM PDT by SE Mom
“He comes out with this very emphatic constitutional reference, using the self-satisfied tone of one who knows he’s nailed it... then seems to catch himself, glances down and to the side to pick up another thought to cover the too-revealing comment.”
Let me stipulate that WJC is a slimey horn-dog. That said, I think you are reading too much into his remark. It appears to me that the reporter asked him whether he thought Obama was qualified to serve as president; the self-satisfied smirk came from Clinton’s finding a way to duck the question while seeming to answer it. Implicitly his answer amounted to: “Obama is technically qualified (because the Constitution says so), but the PEOPLE decide who would be the better president. There’s now 2 choices (Obama and McCain).” Of these 2, Clinton believes Obama should win.
The sneakiness of his answer lies in that a) he never provides his personal opinion of whether Obama is qualified in more than a pure technical sense; b) he frames the answer as being a choice between Obama and McCain (and hence never has to even implicitly address whether Obama is more qualified than HRC or whether SHE “should” have won the
nomination/presidency; and c) he’s left enough ambiguity about “should” that some will interpret it as WJC’s endorsement of Obama as the better candidate while others will interpret it as I believe Clinton intended it: in light of the conditions specified—i.e., that the people will choose—Obama “should” (i.e., is likely to) win. I think it is a forecast/speculation, NOT a normative statement.
Worth repeating...
Tuesday, August 05, 2008 7:32:22 AM · 4,237 of 4,243
null and void to Grampa Dave; wtc911
Why do I get the feeling Im dealing with a cheap NY City Lawyer, which I dont believe you are.
He’s been a PITA for a long time. Always seems to end up on the left side of issues, IIRC...
Thanks. You are right.
Show me where Obama identifies that picture as a wedding picture. I told you before that I MISTAKENLY identified it as a wedding picture from the Time magazine early on this thread, . To my knowledge Obama never said it was and Time never said it was. I mistakenly said it was and later apologized on this thread for having started that idea.
If you have evidence that Obama said it was their wedding picture post the source or link to that quote.
Even an expired passport is valid proof of citizenship.
Your analysis makes sense. I tend to favor Occam’s Razor whenever an explanation is up for grabs, and this certainly fits. If it were this one comment by Bill, taken by itself, then I’d readily agree with you that I read too much into it. The only reason I felt it worth mentioning was that I DID notice it, and it’s the totality of the comments between the tagteam of Hillary and Bill that bothers me. At this point, I wouldn’t be surprised at too much. That said, your well-reasoned comments hold weight, and I’m happy to cede. Should there actually turn out to be any real subtext, we’ll find out in most definite terms anyway. Won’t have to speculate.
Thanks for your post.
Yes, but being a mere citizen is a necessary, but not sufficient, requirement to being constitutionally qualified to be president.
Aye. Never ever ever ever put anything past the clintons.
Sorry. That's the second time I have done it to you. I have not posted a response. I think I have him saying either "wedding" or "wedding dress" but I will look again and if it is only your post I will give up and post that. I'm out of the office so I can't look until tonight but will make it a point to do so.
That's not law, it is custom, and for some things it's the published regulation. Yet in any case, if there's reasonable evidence or testimony that contradicts the assumption of proven citizenship given by any document -- such as passport -- it would be unreasonable, if not actionable misfeasence of office to ignore contrary claims.
The Presidency is the most powerful office in the world. You would accept an expired passport for the Presidency?
There was no indication in post 4231 by Calpenia that Presidential qualification was once again being brought into the conversation, so I commented only on the citizenship proof issue.
As far as B. Hussein Obama's status is concerned, he apparently isn't a naturalized citizen, having obtained citizenship though his mother and possibly Birth in HI.
If He isn't qualified Hillary will make it known on day one of the Commie Convention in Denver.
If I were only 99.9% sure my brakes were good, I'd have them checked.
Is my Country worth less than my car or my life?
No she won't.
She will be floating serenely above the fray while her flying monkeys do the dirty work.
If the Obamaniacs think she had anything personally to do with his demise, they'd vote for the republican liberal instead of the democrat liberal just out of pure spite.
Perhaps. We have any number of people on FR who would cut their own throats to vote against Obama, I'm sure that a large number of democrats would do anything to "get" the one who destroyed their "Messiah"
Especially given that McCain already supports so much of their agenda...
Dead link...
The link opens for me, but that probably is because I'm on the USPS intranet.
Obama paid money to MoveOn.Org for 'Credit Card Fees'. Another company that received payment from Obama, also called 'Credit Card Fees', is listed on OpenSecrets.Org as receiving this money for 'Processing Contributions'.
My question...is there any conceivable situation where MoveOn receives $$ from Obama to process contributions?
Ah. Thanks.
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.