Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Windflier
A citizen, yes, but that child would not be a Natural Born Citizen. You're as dense as the libs on this subject. No one's arguing what the law says about citizenship. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Well first, what exactly are you arguing about the subject if not what the LAW says? That's the only thing that counts. Further you and others profess to know what the founders would have believe though you obviously have never read anything about what they believe.

If we are talking about what your opinion is on "natural born" then you are right I'm dense. I'm far from a liberal, but I'm not an arrogant blow-hart who doesn't have a point as you appear to be. You are either arguing law on the matter, which you obviously know little to nothing about, or you are arguing a worthless, meaningless opinion. The second is a total waste of time.

I'm sorry you don't like the law as it stands. I'm sorry it doesn't seem to fit with your world view, or your view of justice. If you want to say that, I'm all with you. But don't harangue me with your BS about how we aren't talking about law when you run out of anything brilliant to say. The definition of Natural Born is NOTHING BUT LAW. What an idiotic thing to say.

201 posted on 07/24/2009 11:04:51 AM PDT by politicalmerc (NObama: more arrogant than Bill Clinton, more naive than Jimmy Carter, and more liberal than LBJ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies ]


To: politicalmerc

Speaking of “blowhards”, that’s a pretty furious rant for someone who acts as though he’s only quoting “the law”.

Here’s the thing. Way back before November 4th, the Obama bc controversy became an issue of enormous interest here on FR. Probably hundreds of thousands of people were glued to hundreds of threads on the topic, me included.

Tens of thousands of posts were generated in just a short time on that topic here, and an incredible amount of high quality information was shared. I ingested most of it, and retained the essence of the central arguments and revelations of fact that were laid out over, and over, and over again.

I didn’t study all of that information the same way that one would do to pass a bar exam, but I paid attention and learned a great deal. No, I don’t remember every exact case law, or historical precedent that underlie the full case against Obama’s eligibility. But, it’s all still here. Anyone, including you, can look it all up on this very site.

The Obama eligibility case has been hotly debated on FR by thousands of intelligent people, using known facts, and in the end, Obama was found to be ineligible to hold the office of President.

Honestly, I’m really not into fighting this issue all over again. As far as I’m concerned, the case was proved against Obama on FR before he was even sworn in.


228 posted on 07/24/2009 8:16:49 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 201 | View Replies ]

To: politicalmerc

Aren’t the designations

“native born citizen” (born on our dirt)

and

“naturalized citizen” (born off of our dirt but with qualifications)?


233 posted on 07/24/2009 8:54:38 PM PDT by bannie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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