Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Windflier

You know, if you want to argue in favor of a Constitutional amendment, it’s possible you might get further. A little bit further, at least. Because I think you can rationally argue that your position is “advisable.”

But that’s not what this discussion is about. This discussion is about HISTORY and LAW. It is about what the Founding Fathers DID, and what the law IS.

And that’s clear. They made no such requirement as you claim they did.


152 posted on 05/02/2013 10:04:54 AM PDT by Jeff Winston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies ]


To: Jeff Winston
You know, if you want to argue in favor of a Constitutional amendment, it’s possible you might get further.

Don't need to. Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of the Constitution backs up my reading of the Framers' intent completely.

I'm afraid it's you who should seek a constitutional amendment to change the NBC requirement, so your boss is eligible to hold office.

166 posted on 05/02/2013 4:30:47 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson