Skip to comments.Rick Sanchez to Ann Coulter: Why Was Cheney Applauded at CPAC?
Posted on 02/20/2010 5:59:10 PM PST by FreeAtlanta
SANCHEZ: Not true, Ann, not true.
COULTER: So not surprising they will give it to the American company.
And point two, Halliburton was losing money in Iraq. So I think that the liberal hysteria over Halliburton was equivalent to, and you don't see this that much on the right wing, you see a few nuts, often liberals, complaining about Obama's birth certificate. That is the credibility of the Halliburton hysteria has.
SANCHEZ: First of all,
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
....too much media...
Well debated by both.
Coulter is a Constitutional lawyer.. she knows what shes talking about..
Speaking as a birther.
The problem as I see it is that we’ve made it too personalized. We need to take Obama’s name right out of the issue and look at the flaw exposed and fix the flaw.
The flaw is that we require nothing more than the word of a few that a candidate was vetted properly. The case of Roger Calero was a far more blatant example of the problem. He was the socialist candidate and a resident alien. Worse yet he was on the ballot in several states.
This is something that needs to be taken up in the state legislatures so we can have laws that will require absolute and standardized proof of eligibility.
When you think about it, Dick Cheney is the only Vice President we’ve had since 1988 that wasn’t a total fraud or farce, including the present one.
Biden is more of a court jester.
Why would Ann Coulter waste her time with Dirty Rick Sanchez?
He takes potshots but has nothing to back up his contentions and so abandons each talking point for the next cheap shot. Whadda putz!
Your post is 100% correct and I wish more birthers were as logical as you. Obama’s in office until 2012 - there simply is no way to remove him at this point. What needs to happen is clarify the requirements, get it nailed down what each candidate must do before being placed on a ballot, and dealing with it then.
Even doing it in one State will accomplish the goal. I suggest we choose Texas or another very conservative State and get the Secretary of State to require a long form birth certificate from each candidate to be on the ballot. Drop the issues over who is or isn’t a natural born citizen (there are valid interpretations and case law supporting one or two citizen parents), just make it about proving you have at least one citizen as parent and were born on US soil or US possession, and a long form BC is required to prove that.
Either President Obama presents his long form birth certificate for the 2012 election, or he drops out.
But for now, well, we have 3 more years to go and I don’t see him being removed from office any time soon, especially with a Democrat stranglehold on Congress. Even if the GOP retakes Congress, they will not have the 2/3rds majority in the Senate to remove him from office.
Stop personalizing it. You’re 100% correct.
These people are idiots. Fluor is the company with the life support contracts that deserve some real scrutiny.
I agree, but as long as Obama is in office, the argument is publicly and unavoidably attached to him, and, unfortunately, he will still be in office until a) he is sworn in for a second term (ugh!); or b) his successor is sworn in. No court will touch this until Obama is out of office and the current POTUS is indisputably, by any definition, a natural born citizen.
It would be nice to settle this issue once and for all, but it will have to wait, so I hope those who argue this issue somewhat interminably here continue to pursue it when that happens, for their own sake, if nothing else. And if the issue is litigated, and a decision made, I hope that will end the argument, and not result in accusations that the court was corrupt because they may not rule in the manner wished for here.
On the issue of the long form, a state may be able to demand a valid birth certificate (preferably supplied directly from the issuing authority, as transcripts are, to preserve the chain of custody), but I believe the requirement for the "long form" will be shot down legally, since the short form, which is being issued exclusively by more and more states, is sufficient and legal proof of birth. I think a court would rule that if a valid short form BC is sufficient proof of birth for a passport, for instance, it is sufficient proof of birth for anything else, including the Presidency.
Some of the state draft legislation I've seen doesn't distinguish between short and long forms, so if passed, the short form will have to be acceptable. None of the drafts I've seen specify that the BC must come directly from the issuing authority, either, which would leave room for accusations by conspiracists that it was tampered with along the way.
MAO-bama was a Constitutional lawyer so be careful using that defense for Coulter, who seems to be exposing her RINO colors including dismissing normal Americans (incl Tea Party supporters) who are asking questions about MAO-bama.
What good is new law when those in power violated the old one and got away with it. If crime paid dividends by violating the old law with impugnity, then the precedent is set.
And what good is filing repeated court cases when no court in the land will ever remove him?
Except for the fact he was from Texas just as Bush was, which is unconstitutional.
It makes people feel good. Unfortunately much of the birther movement is motivated more and more by emotions rather than logic and reason. Of course, it does make a nice little industry for some of the professional birthers out there...
Push for one State to require proof of birth on US soil and/or possession, and proof that at least one parent was a US citizen. Then let the chips fall where they may.
Because there is a court wherein the Documenters and American Constitutionalists do have standing despite all attempts to deny them. And that is the Court of Public Opinion and the judges on that Court are becoming more and more convinced every day that he is unlawfully occupying the office of POTUS.
Obviously you don’t want to do anything that might actually be effective. Instead you choose to convince yourself that the court will do what you want any minute now.
Might as well add holding mock impeachment hearings in the basement of the capitol to your repertoire like clown pink.
First you say that the courts won't do anything, so let's quit. Now you say that public opinion is not important, so let's quit????
Well -- I think you are right. You just need to quit.
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.