Posted on 01/18/2010 8:50:34 PM PST by RobinMasters
Yep, that’s the long version.
:>)
You pinged me to this thread.
I would like to see all 50 states implement a requirement for proof of qualification(s) for any position any candidate is running for. That goes not only for the federal level, but state and local as well. No certified proof? No ballot access. No excuses. No exceptions.
Political positions should be no different than the myriad of other jobs out there that require proof of various kinds (i.e. school records, b.c., prior employment, age, etc. etc. etc).
Barry continues to hide his past under lock and key. People concerned about the country should wonder why that is.
“I haven’t figured out how any of the thugs in this Administration actually got a top security clearance. Any guesses?”
Obama sidestepped advise & consent . He just hired ultra radicals. Almost none of his Czars could pass a background check.
"Mustata v. US Dept. of Justice,"
Where, in that court decision...did the court find that the children of foreigners are in fact Natural Born Citizens?
true words by you but my opinion of your mindsets has not changed because I forgot to take you off my list last time you appeared to me to troll. Now done.
cheers,
You also forgot that I asked you to take me off your list.
Now done.
Thank you!
Amazing how two different people can look at the same thing - a flower or Internet information - and see two VERY different things. In this context, I wonder if you need another pair of glasses to see reality as it is and NOT as you gather from sites which are intentionally misleading but you accept them as absolute truth and quote them to bolster your supposition.
There is NOTHING on the Internet that shows, let alone PROVES Obama is eligible to be in the Oval Office. Lots of DISinformation you swallow too readily.
But this is my opinion and not a summary judgment on your right to your opinion.
obumpa
About time bump
Until there is a SCOTUS ruling on this specific issue, or a Constitutional amendment spelling out what a NBC is with respect to A2,S1,C5, then the issue remains unresolved.
Barry continues to hide his past under lock and key. People concerned about the country should wonder why that is.
Constitutional amendments are very hard to come by and they can take a long time to get ratified (the longest time for ratification was the most recent Amendment, the 27th which was written and proposed by James Madison in 1789 and was ratified in 1992, 203 years later).
Congress could have investigated the eligibility issue before certifying the Electoral College vote. All it would have taken is any one Congressman and any one Senator to lodge a written objection to the certification of the Electoral College vote. No Congressman and no Senator filed a written objection with the President of the Senate at that time, Dick Cheney.
I still maintain that the quickest and most efficient way to resolve the issue is via a Grand Jury investigation in any jurisdiction where Obama’s name was on the ballot and votes for him were recorded. District Attorneys, US Attorneys and state Attorney Generals have subpoena power.
Its obvious to me after 62 failed attempts that civil litigation is not going to resolve this issue.
Amazing how two different people can look at the same thing - a flower or Internet information - and see two VERY different things. In this context, I wonder if you need another pair of glasses to see reality as it is and NOT as you gather from sites which are intentionally misleading but you accept them as absolute truth and quote them to bolster your supposition.
There is NOTHING on the Internet that shows, let alone PROVES Obama is eligible to be in the Oval Office. Lots of DISinformation you swallow too readily.
But this is my opinion and not a summary judgment on your right to your opinion.
I don’t need opinions or web sites to simply count the 62 lawsuits which have challenged Obama’s eligibility with no victories for any plaintiff; the statements verifying his Hawaiian birth from the Director of the Hawaii state Department of Health; the 7 rejections of Obama eligibility cases without comment by the US Supreme Court; the swearing in of Obama by Chief Justice John Roberts and the fact that his Electoral College votes were certified unanimously by 534 members of Congress (Al Franken had not been seated yet) with Vice President Cheney presiding in his role as President of the Senate. Those are facts not opinions and those facts are documented in the public record not by web sites.
Short version> Deal with It.
Is that what you meant?
Thinks we are much too polite and nice neighbors to take that step first. But whatever it takes.
Yes and those laws need to be specific in listing the acceptable forms of documentation. Texas election law requires that the presidential nominee of a political party be Constitutionally qualified to hold the office of POTUS. A lot of good that law did us. The TX SOS accepted the Texas Democratic Party’s notarized statement that Obama met the Constitutional requirements.
Additionally Texas law requires that a political party’s nominee for POTUS win the majority vote in that party’s primary election. Another fail. Hillary won the primary vote in Texas. Obama gained the nomination via caucus delegates.
Thanks for the ping!
"Short version> Deal with It.
Is that what you meant?"
LOL - I was referring to my earlier statement:
"Being Texan is a unique state of mind."
But yours works, too. (especially with libtards, heheh.)
The right case hasn't made it to SCOTUS...yet. Two examples, Leo's and Cort's, wrong defendants. Therefore, of course SCOTUS isn't going to hear it.
It took just over 2 years for the Watergate scandal to bring Nixon down. It may take that long to finally expose the usurper.
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.