[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Who Killed Charlie Kirk? the Case Against Israel

Sen. Grassley announces a whistleblower has exposed the FBI program “Arctic Frost” for targeting 92 Republican groups

Keto, Ivermectin, & Fenbendazole: New Cancer Treatment Protocol Gains Momentum

Bill Ackman 'Hammered' Charlie Kirk in August 'Intervention' for Platforming Israel Critics

"I've Never Experienced Crime Of This Magnitude Before": 20-Year Veteran Austrian Police Spox

The UK is F*CKED, and the people have had enough

No place for hate apeech

America and Israel both told Qatar to allow Hamas to stay in their country

Video | Robert Kennedy brings down the house.

Owner releases video of Trump banner ripping, shooting in WNC

Cash Jordan: Looters ‘Forcibly Evict’ Millionaires… as California’s “NO ARRESTS” Policy BACKFIRES

Dallas Motel Horror: Immigrant Machete Killer Caught

America has been infiltrated and occupied Netanyahu 1980

Senior Trump Official Declares War On Far-Left NGOs Sowing Chaos Nationwide

White House Plans Security Boost On Civil Terrorism Fears

Visualizing The Number Of Farms In Each US State

Let her cry

The Secret Version of the Bible You’re Never Taught - Secret History

Rocker defames Charlie Kirk threatens free speech

Paramount Has a $1.5 Billion South Park Problem

European Warmongers Angry That Trump Did Not Buy Into the ‘Drone Attack in Poland’

Grassley Unveils Declassified Documents From FBI's Alleged 'Political Hit Job' On Trump

2 In 5 Young Adults Are Taking On Debt For Social Image, To Impress Peers, Study Finds

Visualizing Global Gold Production By Region

RFK Jr. About to DROP the Tylenol–Autism BOMBSHELL & Trump tweets cryptic vaccine message

Elon Musk Delivers Stunning Remarks At Historic UK March

Something BIG is happening (One Assassination Changed Everything)

The Truth About This Piece Of Sh*t

Breaking: 18,000 Epstein emails just dropped.

Memphis: FOUR CHILDREN shot inside a home (National Guard Inbound)


Dead Constitution
See other Dead Constitution Articles

Title: 10 reasons why some don't care about eligibility
Source: WND
URL Source: http://www.wnd.com/2012/05/10-reaso ... e-dont-care-about-eligibility/
Published: May 21, 2012
Author: Joseph Farah
Post Date: 2012-05-21 08:27:22 by ndcorup
Keywords: None
Views: 167
Comments: 13

>

10 reasons why some don't care about eligibility

Exclusive: Joseph Farah outlines arguments against pursuing truth about Obama

by Joseph Farah

1) Some people don’t care about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility because they value his presidency higher than they value the Constitution.

2) Some people don’t care about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility because they believe it would be dangerous to the stability of the country to pursue it.

3) Some people don’t care about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility because they understand it is dangerous to do so.

4) Some people don’t care about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility because they simply don’t believe a national fraud of this magnitude could have been pulled off.

5) Some people don’t care about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility because they don’t care about the integrity of the Constitution. Period.

6) Some people don’t care about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility because pursuing it means damaging your personal reputation due to ridicule by the political and cultural establishment.

7) Some people don’t care about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility because they have in mind future candidates of their own who might not qualify if the provision is taken seriously.

8) Some people don’t care about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility because they don’t care about politics. Period.

9) Some people don’t care about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility because they don’t believe “it’s a winning issue.”

10) Some people don’t care about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility because they think this particular provision is “an anachronism.”

It’s this last group I want to discuss today.

Do you think this debate started in 2008?

You’re wrong. It started way back in 2004.

On Oct. 5, eight years ago, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a long-forgotten hearing on the subject of “Maximizing voter choice: Opening the president to naturalized Americans.”

This was two years before Obama was even elected to the U.S. Senate.

One of the advocates for the plan was Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass. When WND revisited this hearing in 2009, his comments were still are available in an audio file posted at Talk Radio News. That posting, like so many others involving this issue, has since mysteriously been scrubbed.

Here’s some of what he said on the subject: “I believe in the right of the people to choose as they wish. People say, ‘Well you’re amending the Constitution.’ The fact is in 1789 the notion of direct democracy was not the one that governed. Clearly in terms of world history the people who came to the American continent … they went for the first time to self-governance, but they didn’t go all the way. We have evolved substantially since that time, I think in a good direction. We do have now this major obstacle in the way of the voters, and we say to them, ‘We don’t trust you, you could get fooled, I mean, they might, some foreign country might sucker you by getting some slick person and mole him into the United States or her and get that person citizenship and then years later have that person get elected president and you’ll be too dumb to notice.’ I don’t think that’s accurate and I don’t think that ought to be the governing principle. I really believe that the people of the United States ought to have the right to elect as president of the United States someone they wish.”

It should surprise no one, of course, that Barney Frank is wrong about this. He’s wrong about everything.

But take a look at what others had to say at that hearing so long ago:

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah: “What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen. But a child who is adopted from a foreign country to American parents in the United States is not eligible for the presidency. Now, that does not seem fair or right to me. Similarly, it is unclear whether a child born to a U.S. serviceman overseas would be eligible. This restriction has become an anachronism that is decidedly un-American. Consistent with our democratic form of government, our citizens should have every opportunity to choose their leaders free of unreasonable limitations. Indeed, no similar restriction bars any other critical members of the government from holding office, including the Senate, the House of Representatives, the United States Supreme Court, or the president’s most trusted Cabinet officials. The history of the United States is replete with scores of great and patriotic Americans whose dedication to this country is beyond reproach, but who happen to have been born outside of our borders.”

Keep in mind, these comments were being made by a Republican four years after a fellow Republican senator born overseas to an American serviceman overseas had sought the nomination of his party for the presidency. Sen. John McCain would seek the presidency again four years later – and face a barrage of hostile media raising the issue of constitutional eligibility, culminating in a unanimous Senate vote of approval of his qualifications. Sen. Barack Obama voted in the affirmative, but avoided any media scrutiny of his own credentials except for WND.

MORE ----- http://www.wnd.com/2012/05/10-reasons-why-some-dont-care-about-eligibility/

>

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: ndcorup, 4 (#0)

3) Some people don’t care about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility because they understand it is dangerous to do so.

Ask Andrew Breitbart or his postmortem doc.

Break the Conventions - Keep the Commandments - G.K.Chesterson

Lod  posted on  2012-05-21   9:01:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Lod (#1)

"Ask Andrew Breitbart or his postmortem doc."

Back to Clinton!

"If we don’t adhere to the Constitution on matters as significant as presidential eligibility, then the Constitution ceases to be a meaningful document for guiding our nation."

ndcorup  posted on  2012-05-21   11:40:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: ndcorup, Lod, shroona (#2)

I vote she-ra is most likely a fiver.


If either Moromney or Mammyjammyobammy win the November (s)election peoples with common sense will pray that December 21 2012 will indeed be the end of the world!

IRTorqued  posted on  2012-05-21   11:48:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: ndcorup, 4 (#2)

Where's alamo-girl.com/ when she's needed?

What a researcher back in the day...

Break the Conventions - Keep the Commandments - G.K.Chesterson

Lod  posted on  2012-05-21   12:26:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: ndcorup (#0)

Back about 7 years ago it was REPUBLICANS telling us we should repeal the "natural born citizen" requirement so Arnold Schwartenegger could run for President. At the time they said that the natural-born restriction no longer served a useful purpose.

But, in the here and now, a great many people ignore the birther fuss about Obama, not because they are indifferent to the Constitution, but because they uphold it strongly and strictly, when it says (Article IV, Section 1) "Full faith and credit shall be given in each State to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other State", they sincerely believe that the birth certificate issued by the State of Hawaii, as well as the public attestations of its authenticity by the previous Governor, the current Governor, the Director of the State Health Dept and the supervisor of the office of vital records, are entitled to "full faith and credit."

Shoonra  posted on  2012-05-21   13:07:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: ndcorup (#0)

Do you think this debate started in 2008?

You’re wrong. It started way back in 2004.

Actually the debate was going on as early as 1787.

I found the following quotation from Madison's account of the proceedings of the constittutional convention in the book "American Aurora":

Thursday August 9, 1787. Today at the Federal Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia James Madison records:

Mr. Govr. MORRIS moved to insert 14 instead of 4 years citizenship as a qualification for Senators: urging the danger of admitting strangers into our public councils....

Doct. FRANKLIN was not against a reasonable time, but should be very sorry to see any thing like illiberality inserted into the Constitution... We found in the course of the Revolution that many strangers served us faithfully and that many natives took part against their Country. When foreigners, after looking about for some other Country in which they can obtain more happiness, give a preference to ours, it is a proof of attachment which ought to excite our confidence and affection.

strepsiptera  posted on  2012-05-21   15:15:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: Shoonra (#5)

So should Ohio recognize the legitimacy of a gay marriage performed in New York even though Ohio has not legalized gay marriage?

strepsiptera  posted on  2012-05-21   15:43:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: All (#6) (Edited)

Note on sources.

The footnote from the book in which that quotation is reproduced reads JMAD II, 363-368
JMAD stands for The Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 Which Framed the Constitution...Reported by James Madison

strepsiptera  posted on  2012-05-21   15:56:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: ndcorup (#0)

Some people don’t care about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility because they ...

... are stupid and short sighted. They do not "get" that either we are a nation of laws, not men, which protects our liberty or for whatever "justification" they are willing to trade their freedom and the rule of law and justice for some imagined Shang-ri-la.

Stupid.

Shortsighted.

And wrong.

Perseverent Gardener
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha

Original_Intent  posted on  2012-05-21   16:00:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Shoonra (#5)

Back about 7 years ago it was REPUBLICANS telling us we should repeal the "natural born citizen" requirement so Arnold Schwartenegger could run for President. At the time they said that the natural-born restriction no longer served a useful purpose.

But, in the here and now, a great many people ignore the birther fuss about Obama, not because they are indifferent to the Constitution, but because they uphold it strongly and strictly, when it says (Article IV, Section 1) "Full faith and credit shall be given in each State to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other State", they sincerely believe that the birth certificate issued by the State of Hawaii, as well as the public attestations of its authenticity by the previous Governor, the current Governor, the Director of the State Health Dept and the supervisor of the office of vital records, are entitled to "full faith and credit."

Except that the State of Hawaii has never certified Oh'bummer as being born there. The weasel wording used was that they have his "vital records". That is not the same and you damn well know it. They were afraid to tell the truth and afraid that a false statement could come back to haunt them - so they side stepped it while mouthing words that the weak minded accepted as verifying Oh'bummer's legitimacy.

Perseverent Gardener
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha

Original_Intent  posted on  2012-05-21   16:03:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: ndcorup (#0)

Opening the president(cy) to naturalized Americans.

This is the greatest damage to be done to the Constitution since it was written. Naturalized Citizens are NOT Natural Born Citizens.

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke

BTP Holdings  posted on  2012-05-21   16:40:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: Original_Intent (#10)

At the time they said that the natural-born restriction no longer served a useful purpose.

The Repukes are wrong about this, of course.

Being a Natural Born Citizen gives one the duty to be loyal to your country of birth. Being a Naturalized Citizen is not the same thing. If you were born outside the United States, you could have loyalties to other nations (such as the nation of your birth) and not to the U.S. ;)

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke

BTP Holdings  posted on  2012-05-21   16:45:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: strepsiptera (#8)

The footnote from the book in which that quotation is reproduced reads JMAD II, 363-368 JMAD stands for The Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 Which Framed the Constitution...Reported by James Madison

Madison's Notes are the best way to interpret the U.S. Constitution.

It matters not that the Constitution is well over 200 years old.

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke

BTP Holdings  posted on  2012-05-21   16:49:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]