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.
Apparently not, but birther bills in seven states have not yet been rejected:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2690068/posts?page=10#10
Thanks to newzjunkey for the research.
It's one of the key things that separates decent, civilized people from murderous barbarians.
Read it again. It doesn't say that Congress determines whether the president-elect has qualified. It only instructs Congress how to proceed if a president-elect has not qualified ... which would most likely be in regard to not having enough of the electoral vote.
Did you read what you posted?
It says if the President fails to qualify, then the VP will act as President. It doesnt mention Congress in that line at all.
The next section says that if both Pres and VP dont qualify, Congress will declare an acting Pres.
It says nothing at all about whether Congress determines if he is qualified. It only deals with how Congress and the Executive will act if it happens.
I've read elsewhere that Oklahoma's senate passed their eligibility bill and it goes to their House next. I would anticipate that somehow this will get stymied, but if one of these bills should happen to get through, Obama is done.
When you are wiling to carry Obama and Larry Sinclairs offspring in an artifcial womb inserted up your hind end, then we’ll discuss this again.
pissant, you’re not pro-life. You do realize that, right?
But it doesnt name any institution to be the one to determine it.
I'm assuming by the first "it" you mean the Constitution, right?
And that's why I'm asking you to state who, or what, determines "it". I'm assuming by the second "it" you mean eligibility requirements, right?
So if we follow your argument to its logical conclusion then it must be concluded that the States are also responsible for deciding if the candidate for POTUS is eligible despite your claim that there is nothing in the Constitution that places the requirement on anybody or anything.
That the Constitution does not address who is responsible for determining the President’s eligibility is not an assertion, it is fact.
The 10th is part of the Constitution, isn't it?
Your attempt at a non answer isn't working in your favor.
That’s the patron saint of the atheists you’re quoting there. If that doesn’t highlight how ass-backwards things have gotten in this country, nothing does.
Keep fighting the good fight, my FRiend. Truth is on your side.
BS.
Cross off Allen West for any Presidential run
If you do not have the backbone to challenge the Obama Eligibility issue....you will go soft on the other issues
Obviously, it loks like the Tea Party has not produced REAL CONSERVATIVES. I was hoping West would be one...forget that
Not going after Obama on the Eligibility issue is just supporting Obama.
Well, obviously the Republicans in Congress agree with you, not me. No one is responsible for determining qualifications. No one is responsible for anything, especially when it comes to following the Constitution, any more. And so, the Constitution, in one of it most fundamental, and critically important, requirements, goes undefended.
But again, I assert that every single officer of government has sworn to defend and to uphold the Constitution, in all its specific requirements. Every member of Congress had a sworn duty to call for Obama’s credentials before the electoral vote was signed off on by them. They are all in breach.
Their act of ratifying the results of the electoral college is not just ceremonial and meaningless. Their oath isn’t either.
You mean he doesn’t?
Someone, or something, does check out the requirements. All you have to do is state, or find out, who does check out the candidate's qualifications.
Thank you. I really appreciate it.
Just to address something really quicky. The Constitution was established by "We the People of the United States." These were the original citizens of this country who declared their allegiance and renounced their former allegiances. This constitution was established for "ourselves and our Posterity," which means for the original citizens and the children of these citizens. It wasn't established for the original citizens and whoever happened to be passing through. It wasn't established for "ourselves and visiting scholars who have no intention of becoming citizens."
Article II, Section I refers to "natural born citizens" and "citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution." The latter is "ourselves" and the "former" is "our Posterity." Any other citizens are those who become naturalized under the authority of Congress. Once the parents are naturalized, then their subsequent would be born as natural born citizens, as that is the Posterity of citizens of the United States.
It is a possibility, and not an actuality right now. Who verifies it? Who verified any President’s credentials? Does it even happen?
Not according to the 20th Amendment, which has been explained at least 3 times on this thread.
How so? You think little innocent children can be some kind of evil "spawn," and therefore it's fine to eradicate them.
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.