Posted on 09/28/2010 12:43:46 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Has it been noticed that Rasmussen has Obama at 50% approval and that he’s been trending up for seven days?
Jack (yes, I'll have another, bartender!) Cafferty is about as clever as Joe Biden when it comes to letting conservatives know without a shadow of a doubt what politician the left fears in 2012 - and it sure isn't Tim Pawlenty. Do any of these media idiots on the left really believe that conservatives are going to accept their oh-so-thoughtful advice on who to run against the failed Obama in 2012? They hate Palin because she is authentic and, most of all, a real conservative, unlike, say, Mitt Romney or most of the other wannabe GOP presidential nominees that have remained practically invisible during the past year.
Yes, a handful of naysayers claiming to be conservatives will whine about Sarah Palin endorsing McCain in his senate re-election primary fight, as if she could credibly abandon the old fellow after stumping for him across the country less than two years ago, especially since McCain was doing his 'conservative' song-and-dance during the primary fight.
The fact remains that, right now, Alaska's former governor, Sarah Palin, is the only true conservative politician extant with broad national recognition. The fact that the leftmedia is frantically attempting to persuade Republicans not to nominate her simply validates the position many of us have taken that Sarah Palin is the best prospective presidential nominee for the Republicans in 2012. The media lie and put out fake polls, whatever it takes to persuade the average American that Palin is poison and to persuade Republicans that she can't win. BS. As others have noted, they tried the same line on Ronald Reagan, complete with the fake polls showing him losing or a 'very tight race'. More BS. Don't trust leftist media hacks like this drunken clown, Cafferty. If he's talking, he's lying.
I agree. Very well stated. BTTT.
“Unless he comes up with a birth certificate.
A birth certificate that shows......
Birth in the US......jus solis
AND
Birth to 2 US citizen Parents......jus sanginis
In other words.....that he is a Constitutionaly required Natural Born Citizen! (he isn’t)
LOL - if Dick Morris is right about 100 congressional seats the O might resign right then and there
“remember reagan was losing in the polls all the way up to the last week of the election, and he won by a landslide. The media were trying to help Carter.”
Great analysis. If I were Palin and I was only down 1 point to The One right now I’d be happy. As much as the mid-stream media has attacked Palin and propped up this con man from Chicago you would have thought he’d be leading her by 20 points in a hypothetical matchup at this point.
Not a chance.
He doesn't care about anybody else.
“By what means? You think any day now Orly Taitz is going to ‘have the goods’? What mechanism do you suppose will keep 0bama from being on the ballot?”
It isn’t up to anyone to “have the goods” on Obama. It is up to him to prove Constitutional eligibility once the issue is raised.
Keeping him off the ballot is one thing......failing to be eligible is another. Both the Electorucal College and the US Congress can challenge his eligibility.......Now where oh where did those guys leave their brass ones?
I suspect that though they couldn’t find em in 2008 they’ll be easy to find for many in 2012/13...... Obama will no run if advised this will be the case, because he doesn’t meet the required eligibility requirements. PERIOD! lolololol
Sarah can’t win.
Sarah’s a laughing stock.
She’s OVER.
Republicans can win... with anyone BUT her.
... say our enemies.
Sad thing is, some people on our side seem to believe them for some reason (must be habit).
Why do you suppose that the Electoral College and/or the US Congress will not accept a Hawaii COLB under the full faith and credit clause of the US Constitution?
Indeed. It was Palin that put McCain in the game in the first place. He was the drag on his own ticket.
If Obama has to survive another round of primaries vs. Hillary, he'll be an easy opponent to beat.
Unless Hillary wins the primary.
Then all bets are off.
SARAHCUDA 2012, baby!
“And what is to prevent him establishing his eligibility by submission of the COLB computer printout (presumably) from Hawaii DOH?”
Only relevant if his B/C COLB shows two things. birth in the US AND birth to 2 citizen parents.....so far his published/posted COLB is a case for his ineligibility.
“Why do you suppose that the Electoral College and/or the US Congress will not accept a Hawaii COLB under the full faith and credit clause of the US Constitution?”
I don’t. I believe that Obama won’t supply it because..... see above.
Until Obama can prove he was lying when he posted a fraudulent COLB, admits that he is lying when he uses the sur-name of Obama as that of his biological birth father, and proclaims his book “Dreams of my Father” is pure fiction, I’ll have to believe him, and take him at his word that he is ineligible to serve as POTUS.
It has previously been declared by Congress that birth outside the US, in the case of McCain, was not sufficient grounds for ruling him to not be a Natural Born Citizen.
So obviously the view of the law you put forth is not as cut and dried as you make out.
So far, no State provision for checking US birth certification prior to being allowed on the ballot has put forth the criteria you seem to think so iron clad.
So, what mechanism is going to keep 0bama from being on the ballot in 2012 again?
Still nobody willing to bet that he will NOT be deemed by any State to be ineligible for the 2012 ballot?
“It has previously been declared by Congress that birth outside the US, in the case of McCain, was not sufficient grounds for ruling him to not be a Natural Born Citizen”
Sen. Patrick Leahy, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, made the following statement:
“Because he was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind that Senator McCain is a natural born citizen,” said Leahy. “I expect that this will be a unanimous resolution of the Senate.”
SR 511 does not have the force of Law but does go a ways in explaination of what NBC means.....birth to 2 citizen parents, something that Obama does not meet.
“So obviously the view of the law you put forth is not as cut and dried as you make out.”
A USSC ruling on this term, as it applies to presidential eligibility, will reafirm the historical understanding of the term NBC.
“So, what mechanism is going to keep 0bama from being on the ballot in 2012 again?”
_______________________________________________________
Aye there’s the Rub!
Here in California the Secratary of State refused to allow the addition to the ballot of a man born in Columbia and a naturalized citizen.....So, I would guess that the SOS of each state would have similiar powers.
The way the Constitutuon is written leads one to believe that challenges to eligibility were intended to be addressed after the election....” if a candidate should have failed to quailfy....” Seems backwards to me too!
Until Obama, the US President has always met the standards understood by the words NBC....and were born on the soil to 2 citizen parents...... Historical Presidency? Obama certaintly is that.....First Usurper President!
And obviously the term is NOT understood by many to include birth on the soil (a la McCain), which is ONE of the ways citizenship by birth is established, but isn't the only way, and it has not ever been determined that anyone born a citizen was not in any way a “natural born” citizen.
In KWArk in reference to Minor they cite English precedence that would make him a “natural born subject” and then declare that he is “just as much a citizen” as one natural born to two citizen parents by that principle.
Sounds like they threw around the term “natural born” quite a bit in that one.
“Well the term as I understand it....”
Thanks for underlining the central problem....lolololol
“is one who is born a citizen as opposed to one who is naturalized,....”
The definition of naturalized citizen is one I think that we can both agree with, without further discussion.....
Initially at the founding, only persons born to citizens could be considered born citizens.....all others needed to be naturalized to become US citizens. Note that Children born overseas to US citizens are indeed born citizens in addition to those born in country to citizen parents.)
Until the 14th Amendment, making the children of slaves, born citizens, and the USSC decision.... Kim Wong Arc. KWA is the precedent setting decision expanding the legal definition of “born citizen.”
It was stipulated by the court that someone born to citizen parents were themselves citizens. The question addressed, and decided by the court is whether there were other ways to be a born citizen beside being born to citizen parents... Were there born citizens other than those born jus sanguinis? That legal question is the crux of the KWA decision.
Because KWA was not born to US citizens, and he was unable to be naturalized because of immigration laws denying that option to ethnic Chinese, he sued for citizenship (actually a US Passport) under the guidelines established by the 14th amendment granting born citizenship to the children of slaves in the post Civil War Era.
The court agreed with KWA and declared him a born citizen, because he was born on the soil and futhermore met the requirements spelled out in the Amendment, and declared he was a born citizen....ala.....jus solis.
Prior to this ruling, (and way before it, unto the founding of the nation) only persons born to citizens were born citizens.
It is a tenent in US law that all citizens, born or naturalized share equaly in the rights/responsibilities of citizenship, and your exerpt “...just as much a citizen as a Natural Born Citizen.” Is confirmation by the courts of that legal tenent. note that they did not charactorize his born citizenship as Natural Born Citizenship, nor declare him a Natural Born Citizen.
Where you fall down is in two areas....
1) you assume that being a born citizen is analgamous to being a Natural Born Citizen. It is not. The terms are not one in the same. ( we have seen previously that initially born citizens included only those with citizen parents, so that that part of the term NBC as intended by the Founders , and denied by the Obama “birthers,” is undeniably proven.)
and 2) All born citizens have the right to be President.
The Presidency is not a right of citizenship, and there are additional requirements to be eligible, including age, residency and quality of birth (NBC .....born in country to 2 citizen parents.)
You’ll note that the Founders were concerened about not only his US birthplace, but also a presidential candidate’s residency in the US, and they required that his adult life be spent as a resident of the US. 14 years residency at 35 years of age. ( all the years upon reaching his majority?)
Natural Born Citizenship is a term that combines both two qualities of born citizenship into one person. Those born to the soil jus solis, AND also born citizens by blood jus sanguinis. It should be noted that a vast majority of US citizens meet that standard for NBC. It is not an onerous eligibility requirement...just one that Obama fails to meet..... and one that his apoligists try to circumvent by spreading both mis and dis information.
NBC = Born in the country to 2 citizen parents.....its just that easy.
So WHO agrees with you, if not US law or the US Congress?
Orly Taitz? A towering legal intellect no doubt. Anyone else? Any citation from US law explicitly outlining a type of citizenship that is not either natural born or naturalized?
No. You have nothing but a definition from Vattel that you insist is US law, in contradiction of the principle that would find KWArk a “natural born subject” (yet somehow not make him a natural born citizen? How does that work, the principle is acceptable for a subject to be natural born - but extended to a citizen suddenly the birth and/or citizenship is not natural?) and in contradiction of the US Congress that found that McCain was a natural born citizen.
So obviously there is not complete agreement to the meaning of the term, despite your protestations otherwise.
This is actually the mechanism you are suggesting is going to keep 0bama off the ballot in 2012?
Really?
Care to wager a $100 donation to Free Republic on it? Or any finding within the next three years that a NBC = two citizen parents born in the USA?
Or is this just idle speculation without any actual impact upon the ballot in 2012?
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.