Posted on 08/14/2020 1:31:14 PM PDT by montag813
by Joe Callen
White liberals in the media and Hollywood are ecstatic about Slow Joe Biden's VP choice of Kamala Harris.
Thousands of words have already been printed and Tweeted gushing about the "historic," "first Black woman" on the big ticket.
Leaving aside the facts that Harris is just 25% Black, had ancestors who owned a LOT of slaves, had NO ancestors who were slaves or lived through Jim Crow, and chose to be sworn in as "the first Indian-American Senator" -- will actual Black voters show the same enthusiasm as White leftists?
Looks like the answer is a big fat "NO!"...
(Excerpt) Read more at us24news.com ...
Sounds great...if it’s accurate.
I’m having a hard time believing one in three black voters are less likely to vote Democrat because of her. Based on my observations and experience, that doesn’t add up.
A lot of black men out there are not down with a screeching sistah.
—
Who the hell is?!
Most white democrats look at her and see a half black women. Black Americans are not as easily fooled. They see an Indian women masquerading as a black women. This is cultural appropriation.
She went to Howard to learn how to act black. She could not get into a good school like her sister. You would think the daughter of two professors could do better. But she screwed around in school. Raised by an Indian women in Canada she knew nothing about being black so she had to learn it in college.
I wonder... how does KH being a childless woman married to a rich, white Jewish husband play with black women? With black men? Is it an issue that her lifestyle and life circumstances are certainly unrepresentative of the overwhelming majority of American blacks? Does her relatively small amount of African ancestry (25% seems about right) carry the day?
“The Color Purple” did a good hit piece on black men. Hopefully it’s payback.
It means when she gets on the stage with Mike Pence she will be lying through her teeth. https://t.co/IItlIPTjKh— CJTRUTH⭐️⭐️⭐️ (@cjtruth) August 14, 2020
This👇 pic.twitter.com/jA0ttdYrsm— Karli 🇺🇸 (@KarluskaP) August 14, 2020
Black women don’t like white women sleeping with their husbands.
See: her birth certificate which clearly states her mother is CAUCASIAN.
https://twitter.com/shivRnair_91/status/1293581154944053255/photo/1
She has even less a claim to being (American) black than did Obama. And he had none at all.
I hope so!!
OK, so the BLM mobsters are tearing down any statue of someone who did or MAY HAVE owned a slave. They point fingers at the whites because their ancestors owned slaves making them EVIL. What will they do about this lady?
Like Obama, she has no ancestors who were slaves in the United States. Like Obama, she has ancestors who owned black slaves.
Actually, her father was very light skinned, so we do not know what percentage black he is.
The leftists who believe in “science” do not want their anti-white racism to be scientific.
The riots have the moms coming back to the gop
And may those numbers rise by the day.
There are most likely some well-informed Freepers still paying attention. Just because the media and the two corporations, Democrat and Republican, participated doesn’t mean the law has been changed. It can only be changed by amendment or Article V Convention. It never has been changed, just ignored. None of the presidential aspirants or presumed ascendants, Kamala Harris, Obama, Cruz, Jindal, Rubio, McCain, pr Nikki Halley was Constitutionally eligible.
Before the 14th Amendment defined the who was a citizen by naturalization, only natural born citizens were defined in the Constitution. When Virginia Minor sued for suffrage rights after the passage of the 14th Amendment the Supreme Court only had jurisdiction of Minor was a citizen, which she was because she was a Natural Born Citizen. Thus this 1885 case was the first to require the common law definition of Natural Born Citizen to be clarified, and it was. The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.
Larry Tribe, Constitutional Law professor for both Obama dn Cruz admitted as much, but sneakily, in his letter to the Senate Resolution trying to claim what neither the Constituiion nor the Congress said, that were the fonders around before the 2008 election, they would have made McCain a Natural Born Citizen. The real objective to was cover for Obama’s ineligibility (Obama never was and never claimed to a NBC; he said, “I was a nartural born subject of the British Commonwealth because my father was a British Subject”.
There is a presumption that the Vice President must satisfy the Constitution requirements of the President, but this writer could find no such requirement. A guess is that in ineligible VP might take over until the Congress gets around to appointing an eligible person. The Presidency is the only government office requireing both citizen parents and birth on soverign U.S. Sooil. When McCain was born, in 1936, the Canal Zone was not yet declared sovereign soil by Congress. Everyone in Congress in 2008 knew the truth, and Obama even sponsored with Clair McCaskill to make him eligible. It would have been moot, but failed in Congress. Thus a non-binding Resolution was launched in April 2008, Senate Resolution 511.
Just as I don’t expect our DOJ to indict anyone; ineligibility has clearly been tacitly approved by both parties, but it doesn’t hurt to understand the law. Don’t be surprised by the nonsense about the 14th Amendment being confidently preached by supposed Constitutionalists, or by Larry Tribe’s ridiculous citation of the “Grandfather Clause”. (I doubt the Kamala Harris’ parents were born in 1787, but many of their foot solders won’t see the significance of 1787).
With the weakness and dishonesty of the U.S. Legal system the major media will tell everyone what the “truth” is, but the documents will survive, and some historian will write about the demise of The Constitution in some future, tracking the destruction of our foundation and the “Nature Law” upon which it is based. The oligarchs funding our propaganda machines may not like who will likely control their and their family’s futures.
What is their problem? They don’t want to let Indians pass themselves off as black?
She could call herself an AfrIndo-American. How ‘bout that?
Or IndAfro. Or JamaicaMeAnyTingYaWant,Mon.
You could be right. Looking at pics of Donald Harris, he could indeed be under 50% African.
Someone asked Trump at his news conference yesterday about the claim that Kamala is ineligible. He was unfamiliar with the claim and handled the question pretty well. I think it would be a mistake for him to become an advocate of the idea that she is ineligible—maybe she is as the term “natural born” would have been understood in 1787, but most Americans would assume anyone born on US soil (other than the child of a foreign diplomat) is a natural born citizen. There are so many other things Harris can be attacked for.
Actually, Harris is only 1/8th black. She is more Irish than black. She is more Scottish than she is black.
Her skin tone comes from being half India Indian.
Plus both Biden and Harris are descendants of slave owners. Harris is a descendant of big time slave owners.
So someone who is 50% South Asian, 37.5% British Isles ancestry and only 12.5% African ancestry claims to be “African American.” Clearly the person we need to fight systemic racism in America.
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.