Posted on 04/12/2011 5:27:44 PM PDT by Politics4US
well he could still be a “documentor”....
seems to me if the ‘bamster could be found a fraud....at minimum we could nullify the 2 SCOTUS he appointed....
with Obama-care being a bonus.....
Actually the media itself should prevent an ineligible candidate from becoming president. Unfortunately their love for Obama wasn’t going to allow them to ask tough questions.
Roger Calero was the socialist party candidate who was on ballots in some states and not others. He isn’t even a citizen.
I think people need to understand where Levin is coming from. In his opinion you want to defeat Obama and the rats you want to defeat them on issues about what the role of government, getting rid of Obama ins’t enough their ideas need to be defeated/discredited.
Given the amount of time until the election and the budget battles this is a distraction, no matter how true, defeat him in 2012 get the senate and put more Tea Party Pols in office. Yeah he is hiding stuff, but it isn’t the ground to fight the battle on in 2011.
The ruling wouldn’t be based on the colb not being sufficent. They would examine everything invoved, as was donw with John McCain, including the law at the time for the requirements to be a natural born citizen. Candidates are supposed to show it during the primary season, but I meant that I didn’t have to prove it, he did, in the context of the discussion. The federal law at the time is what the courts would rule on.
And if this Calero ever won, someone with standing to sue could take him to court and force him to prove his eligibility. If he couldn’t, he would be kicked out of office. If Obama took a state to court over them not accepting his COLB for ballot eligibility, courts would find the COLB is sufficient.
You certainly can disagree with him, and of course you can criticize him but sorry, if you criticize Mark levin in general over this, you are imho an idiot. I don’t believe I’ve ever heard a more powerful conservative than Mark Levin. People posting rino and the like are absolutely wrong.
Why was it grounds to go after Kerry’s service in 2004?
Exactly. You don’t have to be eligible to run, you only have to be eligible if you win. Seems bizarre but thats the way it works...usually.
In 1968 the Peace and Freedom Party candidate, Eldridge Cleaver was removed from the ballot based on the fact that he was 34 years old. In 1984 the Peace and Freedom Party candidate Larry Holmes was removed from the ballot. Both were handled within the state of California.
Truth is not always pragmatic.
Georgia got bought-off....
Fed $$$ for Savannah Port dredging...
Dredge the Port, F*CK the country.
...WHORES, in other words....
HI was a state at the time of Obama’s birth, and his COLB is an actual record from the state saying he was born there.
We will lose the election if this is our central issue, and we will probably deserve to, considering his putrid record.
There are problems with his COLB, and you didn’t have to be born there to get one.
There are problems with his COLB, and you didn’t have to be born there to get one.
I’ve been hoping you would give the definition of a “natural born citizen”.
Disappointing that you have chosen not to address the question.
The GOP has one central issue. That issue is why a weak putrid person like Obama could easily win. The birth certificate issue is probably the only honest issue we will deal with in the next 18 months.
We have crappy candidates that we can’t get a majority of anyone to get behind. It is like picking from a lineup of defective products.
The GOP will put up a whole bunch of candidates with a couple picks who the party guys prefer.
They will knock each other out until a couple are left standing.
Whoever it is, we will be expected to vote for them to get rid of Obama, except it will generate the same level of revulsion we had with McCain. Even if we hold our noses we will lose.
The 2008 scam all over again.
I think Mark is a fantastic conservative, but I strongly disagree with him on this matter. He is one of the strongest voices for our side.
I agree, but I also believe it's a huge mistake -- and a completely unnecessary one -- for Levin and other prominent conservatives to outright ridicule those of us who are passionate about this issue. Look, we're talking about basic Constitutional requirements here. You know, those things that are near and dear to every conservative. Good grief, Levin is a constitutional attorney, you'd think he'd be a little more sensitive to this.
IMO, if Levin and others keep up this attitude, they will be at least as much a cause as a 3rd partier for splitting the vote in 2012 and foisting another four years of the Communist on the nation.
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.