West speaks to a crowd of about 400 at Tuesday night's town hall meeting in Jupiter.
Posted on 03/16/2011 5:38:50 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
West speaks to a crowd of about 400 at Tuesday night's town hall meeting in Jupiter.
“Who is going to tell us who this man is? Is he legally there or not?” said Karch. “What are we going to do to ensure that, if he isn’t legally there, it doesn’t happen again?”
Said West: “I will tell you this: That is the dog chasing its tail. The most important thing is, it’s the policies. That’s what we have to be standing on.”
The crowd of about 400 applauded, but Karch wasn’t satisfied.
“But if he’s not, it’s treason,” Karch said.
Said West: “You will waste more time worrying yourself to death about that instead of making sure that you expand the majority in the House of Representatives, you win back the U.S. Senate so that you can stand against the policies that are emanating out of the White House…
“What is your objective? Your objective is getting back to a constitutional republic principles and values. If you spend your time worrying about someone’s citizenship, you will never get to that objective.”
West didn’t offer his own opinion on Obama’s citizenship during the public forum. So PostOnPolitics asked him after the meeting.
“He is a citizen. He’s the president. I mean, that’s all I know. I am concerned about his policies,” West said.
You didnt insult me, but you tried to use an insult as an argument. Saying you feel sorry for someone you are debating is a way of trying to insult their intelligence. But all it did is show that you when you run out of ideas, you wrap yourself in indignity.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..." -- The Declaration of Independence"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." -- The Preamble, or Statement of Purpose, of the United States Constitution
"No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law." -- The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
"No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." -- The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
"The appellee and certain amici argue that the fetus is a 'person' within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. In support of this, they outline at length and in detail the well known facts of fetal development. If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment." -- Justice Harry A. Blackmun, Roe vs. Wade, 1973
"God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever." -- Thomas Jefferson
Yes, and until it is proven that something has been violated, there is nothing you can do Constitutionally.
But to the point I made, it does not address who is responsible for determining the President’s eligibility.
Have you considered that I'm just giving you the rope to hang yourself?
Bullcrap.
Ive considered that you have given up.
Freedom doesn't include the right to butcher the innocent. The commission of one heinous crime doesn't give you a right to commit another heinous crime against a third party who never did a single thing to you or to anyone else.
Oh, so those "all"s and "every"s in the Constitution apply only to those you deem worthy of protection. I see.
Nonsense. The natural rights of man do not include experimentation to shove an egg up your rear end and have Elton John forcibly fertilize it to see if it might be the first male mother.
You didn't read the 10th amendment??
I’d rather have him in a proper US prison.
That’s just nonsense.
Bang your head on someone else’s wall. If forcible abduction and rape is OK with you so Charlie Manson can procreate with your daughters, that’s your business, I guess.
Oh , you mean evil scientists aren’t allowed to abduct you and try to have Elton John make you the first male mother?
...and until it is proven that something has been violated...
Well public admissions as to your Father being a British citizen proves that something has been violated, doesn't it?
...there is nothing you can do Constitutionally.
I'm assuming you can back up your assertion with something more substantial than just "take my word for it", correct?
But to the point I made, it does not address who is responsible for determining the President’s eligibility.
You've made an assertion, not a point.
If the Constitution doesn't address who is responsible for determining the President’s eligibility then who is responsible for ensuring that any office holder is eligible? Members of Congress have requirements too so somebody has to determine if someone running for that office is eligible, don't they? Do they just assume that responsibility of their own accord?
Is it the political parties who bear the responsibility that their candidates qualify or is it someone else?
But the child has committed no capital offense. They are innocent, and our Constitution explicitly protects all innocent persons.
Or at least it did before Blackmun and company dehumanized the child, and the other officers of government in the other branches began to abrogate their own oaths in subservience to a now all-pwerful judiciary.
"No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.""No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
So the 10th Amendment addresses who is responsible for determining the President’s eligibility? Who does it say does it?
If you are saying this should be an issue left to the states to determine, then I agree. But it doesnt say that Congress can do it. The 20th says how Congress will replace a President, but only after he has been shown ineligible.
Grow up pissant. Another five thousand or more little babies were tortured to death in the abortuaries in this country today.
And it won't stop until we re-clarify the self-evident truth upon which this free republic was founded.
It won't stop until Christians and conservatives stop compromising with evil, and countenancing the violation of the first requirement of the oath, the primary purpose of government - to secure the God-given, unalienable rights of the people.
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.