Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: null and void; OneWingedShark; Absolutely Nobama; aragorn; Art in Idaho; Aurorales; autumnraine; ...
Eligibility?

Since the Congress, 50 states'AGs, and every court in the land from Muncie Municipal Traffic up to the SCOTUS has been unwilling to even consider the issue, constitutional eligibility has been decided by consensus. 53% of the voters say Barry Soetoro Dunham Obama Jr. (or II) is eligible .... all in favor say "Aye."

OK. So I don't agree. In fact, I have no clue right now as to what an American citizen even may or may not be. Wealthy Chinese moms combine baby delivery with San Francisco shopping and little Wank Ho becomes a US citizen? Illegal aliens Juan and María's little Pepe is born in San Diego, and he is a citizen? Just WTF is this about?

Now people on this very site are telling me that little Pepe and Wank Ho are "Natural Born Citizens?" They tell me "Native Born" = "Natural Born." Our POTUS had the choice upon reaching his majority of choosing Kenyan, UK, Indonesian, or American citizenship. Rubio could have a Cuban Passport if he really wanted one. Jindal could claim Indian citizenship. Ted could claim Canadian, Cuban, or American papers. These strike you as the attributes of "Natural Born Citizens?"

Tell you what. I'll go with what the SCOTUS says on the issue. They have gone well out of their way to dodge the issue every time the appeals reach them. They are the Court of the Constitution. What does the Constitution say about it? Tell us, you black-robèd bumkissers .... that's why we pay you.

53 posted on 05/06/2015 10:54:39 PM PDT by Kenny Bunk (Hi! We're having a constitutional crisis. Come on over!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]


To: Kenny Bunk

I get what you’re saying but there’s a lot wrong with it.
For example, that 53% of the people voted does nothing to change the facts in the case — Obama’s Constitutional eligibility is entirely discrete from public opinion.
Also, the idea that “the Constitution means what the Supreme Court says it does” is one of the single most destructive attitudes to take regarding liberty. (Consider that Roe was predicated on a Constitutional right to privacy, but the ACA mandates medical records must be accessible to the government... but by Roe there’s a Constitutional right to privacy — is anyone going to force this issue? Or are we all going to ignore this paradox, trusting that the USSC will do the right thing and strike either Row or ACA down?)


57 posted on 05/07/2015 10:07:46 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson