Posted on 03/28/2010 10:09:01 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
I don't know about that. Didya see how pissed he was when his MudSlime brother failed on Christmas Day? Compare that to the shout outs he wuz givin at Ft. Hood after his MooseSlime brother succeeded!
Not going to happen, get used to it.
You are delusional. The SC has no authority over whether a president is duly elected. As I stated, that is the House and the House already ruled. No SC (except perhaps a liberal one overstepping its boundaries) would entertain the issue.
If you are proposing we have a SC overreach its authority and act outside of the constitution, then no I fully disagree with you and would not support such a move by our courts. We would lose any remaining respect for our constitution and all bets would be off.
It also know we ain’t gonna cry no more (sic9/11), we’re jus’gonna get madder than we are already now, and that’s mighty mad, mighty mighty mad!
Enough. Stick with the issues and leave your immaturity and insecurity out of this.
The SC has no authority over whether a president is duly elected.
I'm not talking about the court ruling whether he's duly elected. You agreed if he was a fraud, his policies shouldn't stick. Likewsie, if a law is challenged in court and he's known to be a fraud, then they would have authority to make that determination and establish whether the law is valid. They don't have to overturn the election to overturn the laws.
Fellow travelers. . .useful idiots. . .blackmail. . .fear of 'truth to power'; explains a good bit of the power MO and as well, the disempowered and incompetent, coming into their own. . .and into a power structure that heretofore; they could NEVER access on their own merits- a tactic of Leftist necessitythat insures loyalty to the cause.
And beyond this; an incredible unfolding that challenges any fiction.
Regardless, what is the law on this issue? Has it been established what, as a legal matter, constitutes “natural born citizenship”? Is “natural born citizenship” determined solely by PLACE of birth? Does the citizenship of BOTH parents affect whether a person is a “natural born citizen”?
I understand and, to large extent, agree with the fact that the Court will not reach these questions unless brought to them in a legally cognizable way. However, that still leaves me wondering as to what the law actually is on the merits and whether it is settled.
I did a little reading on it a year or so ago and did not find anything definitive.
They're already trying - in Texas, where the content of the country's text books are decided.
And then there's this - a chilling precedendent in England:
“Even Winston Churchill no longer merits a mention after a drastic slimming-down of the syllabus to create more space for “modern” issues.”
http://joshuapundit.blogspot.com/2007/07/sir-winston-churchill-dropped-from.html
I corresponded, at the time, with Churchill's grandson, MP. He said we Americans seemed more upset than his countrymen. Very disheartening.
You are delusional and illiterate. I never said that.
I went to Google and put in this: Linda Bentley birth certificate Obama. At last Linda had got what followers of this subject had been waiting for. 17 actual registrations for selective service about that period. Two registations at the same post office designated as the Barack Obama location. Both showed a FOUR DIGIT figure for the year 1980. The Barack Obama certificate showed two figures offset from where they should have been.
There is evidence that further tampering has occured in this instance. Of course it has been rebutted that there is no requirement in the Constitution to register for selective service. Still the March 3rd last information does raise questions.
You seem to question everyone else's conservative street cred when they don't jump on board the BC bandwagon...and yet...I decided to peruse your posting record on FR and found that, other than a mild defense of Sean Penn on a first ammendment thread, your views on many other conservative issues are virtually unknown.
Page after page after page of an obsession with this one issue...2nd amendment? Abortion? Government run Healthcare?
It would be great for you to spread some of your zeal to other worthwhile conservative causes...there are many.
You are delusional. The SC has no authority over whether a president is duly elected. As I stated, that is the House and the House already ruled. No SC (except perhaps a liberal one overstepping its boundaries) would entertain the issue.
while the SC probably would not rule on the legitimacy of the administration, it could,, and probably would,agree to hear separate cases challenging particular bills passed and signed into law by him....easily done, several in a day perhaps.
I think there are separate legal issues. The first is what exactly does natural born citizen mean when applied to a president. I have my thoughts and they are much more narrow than others to the extent that I even doubt McCain’s eligibility but I don’t believe there is much on this as it applies to a president.
Second, assuming he is not a natural born citizen what happens? It is this question that I believe is up to the House. I further believe the question is divided into two parts, first is whether he is eligible to be president and second what happens when president is ineligible.
My opinion is that the eligibility question only applies to a president elect and not to a sitting president. At the time of the election, when the House counts the votes it is implicitly approving the eligibility. If the SC got involved on this part they would be extending their power over an issue that is not given them by the constitution. The House approved the vote and therefore Obama is our duly elected president, flaws and all.
This is the only logical conclusion. Lets assume the results if the delusional view were true. This would mean that laws on our books for years could be overturned if it is later proved that a prior president was ineligible, perhaps too young. Would every law be unenforceable? Would every treaty be void? Would a war result be reversed? If it were ruled that Washington was not eligible, how much of our foundational laws do we overturn? The only logical answer would be that once we have elected a president his eligibility is no longer an in question. He could be a six year old golden retriever from India so long as he signs the bills into law and if the House approved the vote we are stuck.
An impeachment would and should occur if it is shown he is not eligible. Again, this is the House’s jurisdiction. In the current environment this is a waste of time. Again, if the SC began to veto laws because of a president’s lack of authority we would have a SC that would be claiming authority of a power reserved solely to the House.
So, back to my original statement. This question could have an affect on the next election but it would have zero effect on anything that has transpired.
Federal law requires a male born after December 31, 1959 (Mr. Obama was supposedly born in 1961) to have registered with Selective Service within a certain time after their 18th birthday to be eligible for ANY federal position, loan, grant or employment, etc. I was born in February 1960 and had to register AFTER I left the service.
(Well, I dunno. Obama is hiding something. Of that I’m certain. What if that something would have made him ineligible? After Obama gets his 4 years and then the truth comes out. Will we ever know the truth? I go back and forth on that one.)
(Probably most people reading this will cry racist or religious bigot and dismiss the birthers out of hand. Doesn’t help the cause.)
(Does it matter? I know some of you are adamant about the Constitution. Please don’t think I don’t get that. But if McCain had won all things being equal this issue would not matter to me. But it does matter to me. I consider it one of many arrows in my quiver. Because of Obama’s ideology and because of his success. And besides I hope he has to go on the rest of his life paying exorbitant sums to keep “something” hidden. Why? For putting our nation through this. That’s why.)
Several birther old-timers here at FR are keeping their powder dry.
Oops! Now I’ll be accused of inciting violence!
see 53
So the SC can ride the bench while our Country and Constitution are dismantled - they might as well be sent home unemployed. So much for the “checks and balances” parts of my long ago government classes.
You falsely said that raycpa supported Obama without any evidence to support your statement.
His opinion that the BC isn’t an option for follow up is an opinion with which we may disagree but I’m getting real tired of freepers accusing others of all kinds of things without any more evidence than a disagreement.
He didn’t say anything that remotely suggests support for Obama and your accusation is off base.
Wow. I’m a very conservative Republican, but this is a bit much even for me. I didn’t know some people were still going on about this!
Troll alert.
Welcome to FR if you can prove you aren’t simply a troll.
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.