More on that Birth Certificate thing...
- Thread starter Bann
- Start date
This_person
Well-Known Member
Just read an article that basically says it shouldn't matter, because people voted for him, so the "technicality" of whether he's eligible or not should not matter.
In that case, we really should just throw out the Constitution, and all laws, and just go by what feels right at the time instead of the rule of law. :shrug: If we really don't care whether the laws are being followed or not, whether the words of the Constitution matter or not, then why have them? We don't even need to vote to abolish it - the new policy of "whatever feels right right now" would make that unnecessary.
Tomcat
Anytime
Link?
This_person
Well-Known Member
SouthernMdRocks
R.I.P. Bobo, We miss you!
It's a shame, it should matter but this is a loosing battle unfortunately.
This_person
Well-Known Member
I believe the Constitution is worth following. Clinton never came close to 50% of the popular vote, but won because of the electoral college - the way the Constitution requires. I'm against anything but one man-one woman marriage, but I'm against the DOMA because I think it violates the Constitution's Article 4.
I believe in the Constitution, even when I'm not great at quoting it. I think it matters.
aps45819
24/7 Single Dad
Interesting concept
Totally wrong but interesting that someone would consider following the dictates of the constitution as voiding it
This_person
Well-Known Member
I kind of understand where he's going with that... It's the basic argument used against the CA Supreme Court throwing out the law determined by California's population regarding "marriage" until that population fought back. The argument used was "how can the state Supreme Court overthrow the express will of the voters?!"Interesting concept
Totally wrong but interesting that someone would consider following the dictates of the constitution as voiding it
So, in this case, ol' Dave is arguing "How could the Supreme Court overturn the express wishes of the voters" regarding a candidate elected for president.
The clear difference, of course, is that in CA the state Supreme Court decided a state constitutional interpretation was such that the people violated that constitution, so the people changed the state constitution; and, in the case of Obama, he never should have been on the ballot IF he's not eligible, and not allowing someone not qualified to be president would be UPHOLDING the Constitution, just like the CA state Supreme Court thought they were doing.
This_person
Well-Known Member
If Obama gets thrown out, EVERYBODY in the country should file a lawsuit against the Democraic party
If there's even a good bit of truth to it, they clearly failed in a huge way.
ImnoMensa
New Member
Court won't review Obama's eligibility to serve - Yahoo! News
Supreme Court refuses to hear Obama case.
Pretty much what I thought would happen.The court did not comment on its order Monday rejecting the call by Leo Donofrio of East Brunswick, N.J., to intervene in the presidential election. At least one other appeal over Obama's citizenship remains at the court, but they probably wont hear that one either. Cowardice , pure and simple.
The court just said the hell with the Constitution. I guess they were frightened of the reaction of Obama voters, since it is hardly a great hardship to require that a candidate produce a legitimate birth certificate.
They didnt even have the balls to give a reason.
Supreme Court refuses to hear Obama case.
Pretty much what I thought would happen.The court did not comment on its order Monday rejecting the call by Leo Donofrio of East Brunswick, N.J., to intervene in the presidential election. At least one other appeal over Obama's citizenship remains at the court, but they probably wont hear that one either. Cowardice , pure and simple.
The court just said the hell with the Constitution. I guess they were frightened of the reaction of Obama voters, since it is hardly a great hardship to require that a candidate produce a legitimate birth certificate.
They didnt even have the balls to give a reason.
aps45819
24/7 Single Dad
That one was kind of weird.
Obama wasn't eligible because his father was a Kenyan which was a British colony at the time so Obama was a British citizen.
Tilted
..
I know that's what was inferred by one of the articles that was cited earlier, but that's not really the argument that Donofrio made regarding Obama. In fact, it never mentions anything about British citizenship. Nonetheless, the argument that he did make was very weak.
Tilted
..
To be fair, they almost never give a reason when they deny an application or petition for writ of cert. They just generate a list of all the orders that came out of the conference. There were probably more than a hundred orders, either denying or granting applications and petitions, that came out of that conference.
Sarah Palin never released her medical records.
Sarah Palin never released her college transcripts.
Where's Sarah Palin's birth certificate?
She did release her medical records & the transcripts are not "hidden" and sealed. Her Birthplace is not in question.
I subscribed to WND just because of this Obama court thing & just because Andy has a conniption fit anytime anyone mentions WND.
Today I received this in an email:
Dear [Bann]:
If you're like most of our readers, you're very concerned right now about the issue of Barack Obama's constitutional qualifications to serve as president. As you probably know, there are about a dozen lawsuits all over the country challenging Obama to prove he is a "natural born citizen" as required of all presidents by the Constitution. One of these cases, dealing with Obama's alleged dual-citizenship, was just turned down for review by the Supreme Court.
However, the most high-profile of these cases—featuring presidential candidate Alan Keyes as lead plaintiff—is being prepared and argued by the U.S. Justice Foundation, a public interest law firm with high principles, and which has worked closely with WorldNetDaily in the past.
Please find a few minutes to read their important message below, as it directly and profoundly impacts their efforts to assure all Americans that the next president is constitutionally qualified to occupy the White House.
Thank you for your support,
The WorldNetDaily Team
This_person
Well-Known Member
I told you I'd follow up your Palin gaffes five for one with Biden's. You came up with one valid one for Palin, here's five for Biden:
- Biden thinks that he’s not as good a VP pick as Hillary
- Thinks it’s patriotic to pay higher taxes
- Thought Franklin Roosevelt was president during the Depression
- Thought TVs were in use during the Depression
- Believes that bin Laden is in Afghanistan where his helicopter was forced down by gunfire (or, was it a snowstorm?)
Lenny
Lovin' being Texican
Oh, Andy. Be careful you don't attribute something SNL said as being something Palin said. It's really hard to avoid this trap.
PsyOps
Pixelated
I subscribed to WND just because of this Obama court thing & just because Andy has a conniption fit anytime anyone mentions WND.
Today I received this in an email:
Dear [Bann]:
If you're like most of our readers, you're very concerned right now about the issue of Barack Obama's constitutional qualifications to serve as president. As you probably know, there are about a dozen lawsuits all over the country challenging Obama to prove he is a "natural born citizen" as required of all presidents by the Constitution. One of these cases, dealing with Obama's alleged dual-citizenship, was just turned down for review by the Supreme Court.
However, the most high-profile of these cases—featuring presidential candidate Alan Keyes as lead plaintiff—is being prepared and argued by the U.S. Justice Foundation, a public interest law firm with high principles, and which has worked closely with WorldNetDaily in the past.
Please find a few minutes to read their important message below, as it directly and profoundly impacts their efforts to assure all Americans that the next president is constitutionally qualified to occupy the White House.
Thank you for your support,
The WorldNetDaily Team
I'm just not seeing the SCOTUS doing anything with this. I think they believe any decision against BO will result in national civil unrest of the likes we've never seen before.