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

To: iowamark; All
Less than 100 years ago we had the 1916 election of Charles Evans Hughes (R) vs Woodrow Wilson (D). Hughes' father was a Brit as well.

Hughes, Goldwater and McCain don't really matter. They didn't win.

The parties are not the infallible determiners of eligibility but it is worth noting Republicans have run presidential candidates who don't fit the most strict "birther" claims of NBC: two citizen parents at time of birth.

Hell, Hughes was a former SCOTUS Justice when he ran! Later he returned to the court as Chief Justice.

Interestingly enough, a Democrat lawyer did write a piece arguing Hughes did not meet NBC qualification. My point is, both parties are hypocrites for dredging the eligibility up only when it suits their advantage.

Now if Obama acted to take on other citizenship, that is something fresh to look at but I haven't seen credible evidence.

I support eligibility bills to prevent future candidates from playing the games Obama has.

99 posted on 05/06/2011 11:03:38 PM PDT by newzjunkey (Stay focused: Debt, Deficits & Immigration.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]


To: newzjunkey

interesting about Hughes.


102 posted on 05/06/2011 11:07:40 PM PDT by machogirl (First they came for my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies ]

To: newzjunkey
Less than 100 years ago we had the 1916 election of Charles Evans Hughes (R) vs Woodrow Wilson (D). Hughes' father was a Brit as well. Hughes, Goldwater and McCain don't really matter. They didn't win.

The parties are not the infallible determiners of eligibility but it is worth noting Republicans have run presidential candidates who don't fit the most strict "birther" claims of NBC: two citizen parents at time of birth.

Hell, Hughes was a former SCOTUS Justice when he ran! Later he returned to the court as Chief Justice.

Interestingly enough, a Democrat lawyer did write a piece arguing Hughes did not meet NBC qualification. My point is, both parties are hypocrites for dredging the eligibility up only when it suits their advantage.

Very good point, and thanks for the history lesson.

Every time a non-eligible candidate is put on the ballot, from either (or any) party, it's like a battering ram being thrust against the stout doors of our Republic. The effort (not always effective) has been made in the past.

In the cases of Chester Arthur and BO, each just happened to get his hands on a bigger and thicker tree, and the door got bashed in.

Eligibility bills are good, but public education in civics and the history of our nation is essential.

108 posted on 05/06/2011 11:17:04 PM PDT by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies ]

To: newzjunkey

I certainly think that citizenship should be derived only from legal immigrant or citizen parents, i.e. children of illegals should not have birthright citizenship. No child should benefit so greatly from the crimes of his parent.

Should children of non-citizen legal immigrants be denied the right to run for President or VP? Many would say yes, I suppose, but we should have had that debate before one was elected President.


209 posted on 05/07/2011 5:24:07 PM PDT by iowamark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | 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