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

To: Spaulding; Pan_Yans Wife; Danae
"For any who have any illusion that “originalist” Ron Paul is any better, he refuses to comment on the definition so absolutely clearly enunciated in Minor, and cited in over two dozen subsequent cases which confirm the court's recognition of Minor's precedent on NBC."

THIS

I want to hear a sincere Ron Paul fan, after having read just this thread articulate why a man ostensibly so devoted to the Constitution won't address the question of "Obama"'s eligibility vis a vis the NBC definition found in Minor vs Happersett.

501 posted on 01/21/2012 5:34:20 AM PST by Flotsam_Jetsome ("Obama" Eligibility: Don't let 'em (continue to) get away with it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 485 | View Replies ]


To: Flotsam_Jetsome
" want to hear a sincere Ron Paul fan, after having read just this thread articulate why a man ostensibly so devoted to the Constitution won't address the question of "Obama"'s eligibility vis a vis the NBC definition found in Minor vs Happersett. "

None of the republican candidate-cowards will address this issue. They will NOT uphold their sworn oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

517 posted on 01/21/2012 6:44:23 AM PST by Godebert (NO PERSON EXCEPT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 501 | View Replies ]

To: Flotsam_Jetsome

I don’t know why you addressed that to me. I’m not a Paul fan. It doesn’t surprise me that he hasn’t addressed this. He’s a Congressman. He’s part of the system.


525 posted on 01/21/2012 7:00:42 AM PST by Pan_Yans Wife ("Real solidarity means coming together for the common good."-Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 501 | View Replies ]

To: Flotsam_Jetsome
"For any who have any illusion that “originalist” Ron Paul is any better, he refuses to comment on the definition so absolutely clearly enunciated in Minor, and cited in over two dozen subsequent cases which confirm the court's recognition of Minor's precedent on NBC."

articulate why a man ostensibly so devoted to the Constitution won't address the question of "Obama"'s eligibility vis a vis the NBC definition found in Minor vs Happersett.

My best guesses would be:

1. He can't handle the controversy. Already has to deal with the IMF and the Fed. He has to much on his plate.

2. No Senator in the 111th Congress would have backed an objection to the election certification, so it is moot institutionally.

3. He doesn't want to alienate independents who voted for Obama in 2008. You can't tell potential voters your 2008 vote was not just mistaken but actually treasonous. Too off-putting.

4. He suspects Frank Marshall Davis is the real father and thus the issue is moot.

848 posted on 01/22/2012 7:11:50 PM PST by Plummz (pro-constitution, anti-corruption)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 501 | 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