Posted on 12/03/2008 4:31:59 PM PST by hamboy
It just occurred to me; think about the age provision for a second. Our founding document, written by those who spilled their blood to found this nation, includes a requirement that any liberal worth his salt would ordinarily brand as "discrimination." This alone should make crystal clear the fact that liberals are completely at odds with the very principles that undergird our Republic. Their values, such as stamping out so-called "discrimination" at all costs, are the polar opposite of the very basic Constitutional requirement that a President must be at least 35 years of age. This provision is very clearly INTENDED TO DISCRIMINATE, to ensure that only those with a certain amount of life experience and presumed wisdom aspire to the Presidency.
The only reason libs haven't yet attempted to call this provision discrimination is that their incremental destruction of American principles hasn't gotten there yet (much like the fact that "gay marriage" was unthinkable only a few short years ago). But rest assured, they will get to it eventually.
Good point.
Thank you for your response.
STE=Q
And if you ask a military recuit to swear an oath to ‘’defend and protect’’ and he says ‘well, sorta’ where do you go from there?
-first Obama pardon sidebar-
Tony Rezko to be sentenced on January 6th
hillbuzz.wordpress.com | December 2, 2008 | hillbuzz
Posted on 12/02/2008 5:20:23 PM PST by Free ThinkerNY
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2141831/posts
Thank you, SunkenCiv. It appears pressure is increasing on the president-elect.
Another Saturday Ping.
As far as I know - if Chief Justice Roberts swears him in and O is a fraud - it could be a crime. I think Roberts is a good man - I hope SCOTUS does their job so Roberts is not put in that position.
BTW - the Allan Keyes case was denied at CA Supreme Court and Orly is filing it with Kennedy at the SCOTUS. It shoulkd be there Monday or Tuesday.
Thanks,for the Ping,LucyT
Is it subpeona time for Howard Dean and others to get to the truth?
Save the Constitution.
(tic)...;0)
Since you are not interested in this issue concerning the Constitutional qualifications of McCain and Obama, perhaps you should visit the threads on other subjects. Thanks!
Thanks for the update.....WIll he be denied by Kennedy and get choice of Justices?.....Let’s see, whose turn will it be.
BTW where do you get your information on the Keyes case? I’ve been looking for days.
Alito.
Alito, you Betcha! That’ll work for me.
Concur with your assessment of pressure. Do no concur with the appellation "president-elect".
Until the Electors have decided, there is no president-elect. And as far as I am concerned, by his obstruction of the Constitution, Obama has lost the privilege of the honorific "Mister".
Obama will only receive the respect he has earned from me. I submit that we should all consider doing the same.
Thanks! I wasn’t sure what else to call him without being banned, haha.
LOL!
The Keyes case was filed by attorney Gary Kreep, and as far as I know has not been denied at the California SC as yet.
This link has the documents of the Keyes case, but I do not have a web site for updates on how the case is going.
http://www.soundinvestments.us/files/final_writ_keyes_v_bowen.pdf
The case Orley is filing with the SCOTUS tomorrow is “Lightfoot v Bowen”, and her case was denied by the California SC last night.
http://drorly.blogspot.com/
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.