Posted on 09/29/2011 8:43:31 AM PDT by Politics4US
Mark Levin says Rubio is a natural born citizen, and threatens to ban birthers on his social sites.
Out of curiosity, do you have a link to a post you’ve made that is harshly critical of Obama? If so, I would be appreciative of the link. It would be interesting to see what you’ve said (negatively) about him in the past.
Also, if it’s not too much trouble, could you point me to your most spirited defense or promotion of conservatism and/or evisceration of liberalism? That too would be of interest to read.
Clarification..when I say lib, I am NOT being party specific as we know all parties are fraught with them.
What part of "...place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States..." are you missing?
“the US Govt NEVER used Vattel as a reference for defining US citizenship..”
They do not. Citing an amicus filing which discusses Vattel’s ideas - along with Daniel Defoe - and claiming the courts use Vattel to determine what citizenship is about is stupid.
Vattel said citizenship was determined by parentage. This case rejected that, although the argument was that US naturalization law is sexist. But the citizenship of the father does not determine US citizenship - which means we do NOT use Vattel.
Vattel is not irrelevant. He is often used on matters of international law - which is why he was cited in this case anyways. He is NOT authoritative on US citizenship. Deal with it. Learn to read paragraphs, instead of relying on parts of sentences.
SoJo is just repeating the talking points from such premier Obama-defense sites as FactCheck, ObamaConspiracy and TheFogBow. You should visit one or all of them sometime. The idea that NBC could possibly mean anything beyond a passing association w a particular piece of dirt is unfathomable to the Obot-moonbats. The only absurdity I haven’t read over there is the idea of digging up a patch of American dirt, hauling it to Red China, and having a bunch of women give birth on it [for the purpose of hatching a future POTUS]. Anything short of that is religious dogma to them.
The fact that Obama is the direct result of that reasoning could not please them more. He is the end goal of soil-only purists. They WANT anti-Americans to hold the highest office. It’s the only way to (1) prove we’re not racists, and (2) speed the fundamental transformation of the US.
If a husband punches his wife in the nose, breaks it, crushes her zygomatic archers, and and shatters her eye sockets, should she go back to live with this jerk because in some things he is OK?
Well,... For me, Levin's position on Obama’s eligibility and his handling of Obama’s past from the beginning has been DESPICABLE and unforgivable. It is a deal killer. The man is a coward and phony, and completely untrustworthy!
If true tyranny comes to the U.S. Levin, and the other yappers, will sell their talents to propaganda machine. They will lick the fascist boots crushing our necks. Count on it!
Change subject, rinse & repeat
And it is only going to get worse as the 2012 elections draw nearer. I quit visiting those sites over a year ago as I am not in this debate for amusement, but rather for the restoration of our Constitutional Rule of Law.
Yes, it will only get worse. Obama’s supporters are getting desperate, and one way they relieve tension is by trying to patch the leaks in their sinking ship. [The Titanic, I believe Axelrod called it.] Believe me, you miss nothing by boycotting the sites I mentioned. I pay them a roughly once mo’ly visit, though, just to make sure someone or other has mentioned me by name. If they ever stop, it means I’m doing it wrong. ;)
You got me there. I guess if the SCOTUS thought or thinks it’s an issue they will hear it. And why do you use the word dishonesty? I’m throwing out all I know. I have said, I’m not an expert in this. Maybe you are. If so, please, by all means, clear it up. I honestly believe this was all begun because of the Obama BC stuff (legit maybe in the beginning, not so much later in my opinion, worth not much since as I have said, I am not an expert with no more knowledge than most of those who expound here). However, I really really get the feeling a lot of this is being driven by the left who would NOT want Rubio, Jindal or Haley anywhere near the Presidency. BTW Obama’s father wasn’t grandfathered by the Constitution and the SCOTUS did not appear to think that was an issue. Does this not set precedent?
If everyone who disagrees with you is ignorant then you must come across a lot of ignorant people here.
This from the poster who called me “rude” for daring to ask if he/she is for or against RU486.
Mustn’t let conservatives start getting uppity on the subject of when life begins.
I don’t really know about Levin (as I think I said I don’t listen to him). Maybe he doesn’t really have an answer, or maybe he’s spoken about it and doesn’t feel he needs to do it again?
At any rate, IF the court feels they have already set it to rest with Obama (and in the past with other Presidents) I simply don’t see how there is not already a precedent set.
However those who want that to be wrong will be along in a moment to call me stupid and evil or whatever. I WOULD like them to rule on it. I’m curious.
I don’t think that the biggest worry we have is whether or not Rubio could be President. I do think that if Obama were removed from office today over it, for instance it would be very damaging (yeah, I know I will get flack over saying that, but I really do believe that).
We are far better off to have an excellent candidate, elect him or her, and go about fixing the damage he has done. (and maybe having some civil discussions on FR. I’m not sure why we can’t do that anymore—and yes, I’m guilty too, I’m not sure why we’re all so angry these days—can we blame Obama?! :)
And apparently unfathomable to people like James Madison, William Rawle, and James Kent. I'll take their opinion over your ramblings any day.
How can the left raise an issue about Rubio without the same issue being raised about Obama? This is where I have a problem.
Not to mention the poster who criticizes others for not answering questions while refusing to answer questions themselves.
Heaven forbid anyone should imagine NCB means more than a chunk of dirt.
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.