Skip to comments.(Vanity) GOP-e Blames Romney’s Troubles on Newt’s Ego
Posted on 03/15/2012 3:24:06 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
The GOP-e is starting to blame the GOP Primary and Newt Gingrich for what they see as a weakened Romney going into the General Election.
BLAME the GOP Establishment!
Newt Gingrich is the only conservative still running in the GOP primary!
By employing a drumbeat of damaging headlines, using misleading delegate counts and by calling for him to leave, the GOP-e and their friends in the MSM have hurt Newt but they have not succeeded in knocking him out or silencing the base.
Amazing that they whine about “Newt’s ego” and are blind to their own hubris at pushing Romney on us - makes them the same as the Dims who pushe Obama care on us.
The GOP elites just cannot accept that we are just not that into Mitt.
Those fireworks are confined to the birther basement. The real world yawns.
In the separate Birther Convention, behind the Denny’s, you guys can nominate someone else.
Just can’t give it up. It has been shown to you. You are getting old and transparent. I predict a ZOT in your future.
OOh, like I’m scared.
Maybe you are drinking too much. Out of control type of behavior. Maybe you should step away and sleep for awhile. You seem a bit crazy.
Natural Born Citizenship is NOT defined in the Constitution. While the Framers may have meant that consistent with the then understanding of international law that a person must be born to US citizens for such an individual to be considered a natural born citizen, that understanding is no longer valid following the election of Obama and the courts refusal to hear and interpret that provision of the constitution. The Courts have left that issue to be decided by the political branches of government. In constitutional law, this is known as the “Political Question Doctrine” (Go check it out). In short, the House gets to ratify the electoral vote and the candidate’s eligibility. The election of Obama set a constitutional precedent. He is running for re-election. This is now a straw man issue and bringing this kind of stuff is worthless and its the kind of material you’d find on Moveon.org and Huffington Post websites. Yes, huff, puff, and move on.
No, Obama’s election is fraud, pure and simple. There is no precedent, there wasn’t with Chester A. Arthur over a hundred years ago, and there isn’t one now.
Furthermore, Obama was born in Kenya and is still a citizen of Indonesia when he was adopted as a child. He never naturalized as a U.S. citizen; Janet Napolitano possesses his immigration file. That big-mouthed governor of New Mexico, Bill Richardson, gave away that secret in a Spanish language speech.
I have a good idea why the courts and government are behaving the way they have, and it has to do with national security. It trumps everything.
There is no reason for definition of natural born citizen in the Constitution. There are many expressions therein without definitions, and lawyers know, like I know, what the definitions mean, or they would if properly educated.
I learned in civics class in grade school about natural born citizenship. And the definition was given by the SCOTUS in a holding in 1874.
MINOR v. HAPPERSETT (1874)
the only time the US Supreme Court ever did define the class of persons who were POTUS eligible under Article 2 Section 1 was in Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), wherein it was held:
The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 168.
Theres a quote for you. It really exists. And it tells you exactly who are natural-born citizens; those born in the country of parents who are citizens. The words are plain-spoken and self-evident. There are two classes of persons discussed in the above quotation. Those born in the country of citizen parents were labeled by the Court as natives or natural-born citizens, but these were also further identified as being distinguished from aliens or foreigners. The distinction is crucial.
So, have you started using the Constitution for toilet paper, as well?
If you continue to have problems with this subject, let me know. I’ll call up my reserves. We’ve all been working on this issue since, at least for me, March of 2008.
If this is true, then BO never met the Constitutional requirement to become a United States senator (must be a U.S citizen) either.
This man had all kinds of weird things in his record.
A selective service card that was forged, multiple SSNs associated with addresses all over the nation, and yea, the FBI would have had to know about these thing due to a background check.
First go read up on the doctrine of Political Question. For example, the Constitution requires that Congress declare war when we fight one. Neither the Vietnam nor Korean wars were “wars” declared by Congress. These issues were sought to be litigated in the Courts and were turned down. Because using the political question doctrine, the Courts ruled these were for the other political branches of government to resolve NOT the judiciary. So regardless of what or how the Framers viewed the meaning of “natural born citizenship” (And yes, there is support in Vattel’s Law of Nations, to conclude that such a person must be born to parents of US citizens), the Courts have used the PQ doctrine to have this matter resolved by Congress. This is left to the Electoral College. Precedent is very important and persuasive in legal interpretation. The Obama precedent now settles this issue. So try stop beating a dead horse.
NBC is know to be born to two citizen parents..if not why did Chester Arthur hide and burn his records? Why did Congress recently try and pass 8 bills changing the definition of NBC? You don’t change something or hide from something that is not in force.
So the child of two illegal aliens or a foundling of unknown parentage is eligible to be President of the US????Because its politically expedient???
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.