Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is Marco Rubio eligible to be president?
The Miami Herald ^ | 04/18/2012 | Alex Leary

Posted on 04/18/2012 2:29:47 PM PDT by TexasVoter

[B]irthers are focusing on U.S. Sen Marco Rubio, the budding Republican star from Florida.

“It’s nothing to do with him personally. But you can’t change the rules because you like a certain person. Then you have no rules,” said New Jersey lawyer Mario Apuzzo.

Forget about the alleged Photoshopped birth certificates; the activists are not challenging whether Rubio was born in Miami. Rather, they say Rubio is ineligible under Article 2 of the Constitution which says “no person except a natural born citizen … shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

(Excerpt) Read more at miamiherald.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: birther; establismenttype; gop; moonbatbirther; moonbatobots; naturalborncitizen; obama; rubio
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-137 next last
THIS IS THE TICKET, CITIZENS! (Notice how a MSM paper printed this story about Rubio, while Obama has had a free skate for four years.)

We can do an end run around the Obama Complicity Cabal and still attract proper attention to the Constitutional national security issue of POTUS eligibility by denying Rubio the kind of free pass that Obama got.

And if Rubio is not eligible (and he most definitely is NOT, since his parents were not US citizens when he was born) then neither is Obama.

1 posted on 04/18/2012 2:30:00 PM PDT by TexasVoter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter
I believe that Rubio knows this, too, which is why he has said that he won't accept the nomination if offered.

He has integrity, for now.

-PJ

2 posted on 04/18/2012 2:32:43 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you can vote for President, then your children can run for President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter

Answer to question in headline: No.


3 posted on 04/18/2012 2:34:04 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

He is “ native “ born , and not “ natural born “ ( both parents citizens ) , so is ineligible . So is Obama for that matter , assuming Obama Sr., a Kenynan , was his father .


4 posted on 04/18/2012 2:36:26 PM PDT by sushiman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sushiman

Unlike Obama, Rubio meets the Supreme Court criteria for 14th amendment citizenship, but neither of them are natural-born citizens.


5 posted on 04/18/2012 2:40:03 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sushiman

short statement...

IF BRACK HUSSEIN OBAMA is eligible then
MARCO RUBIO is also...


6 posted on 04/18/2012 2:40:13 PM PDT by haircutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sushiman

short statement...

IF BRACK HUSSEIN OBAMA is eligible then
MARCO RUBIO is also...


7 posted on 04/18/2012 2:41:12 PM PDT by haircutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: edge919

Precisely!

The entire House of Representatives must campaign for reelection, plus a third of the Senate. Every time some career politcian steps up to a microphone between now and November, each and every one of these (I say traitors, but you pick your own perjorative) needs to have this issue hit them like a pie in the face:

“I have a question about a national security provision of the Constitution, Congressman/Senator. What was the Framer’s intent when they used the phrase, ‘natural born citizen?’”

More on this subject at this blog - The Steady Drip:
http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2011/08/my-email-to-marco-rubio-are-you.html


8 posted on 04/18/2012 2:43:50 PM PDT by TexasVoter (No Constitution? No Union!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter; All
From the article: the activists are not challenging whether Rubio was born in Miami. Rather, they say Rubio is ineligible under Article 2 of the Constitution which says “no person except a natural born citizen … shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

Well, let's see: Rubio was a Mormon as a kid for several years...which, if what Romney says about the "faith of his fathers" is true, then both Romney & Rubio were "spirit born" on a planet near the star Kolob.

That would make both as originating not only beyond the United States, but Planet Earth as well.

So...we're going to have TRUE "aliens" from another planet be THE leaders of the free world???

Hmmm...wonder if a new movement will crop up...called 'Spirit Birthers'...

9 posted on 04/18/2012 2:51:12 PM PDT by Colofornian ( The Romneybots are political descendents of Esau: Trading a FR inheritance for a 'lentil soup' guy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter
Rubio, whose national ascent has been propelled by a tea party that demands absolute fealty to the Constitution, shrugged off the issue.
In other words, treating the US Constitution as the law of the land is demanding "absolute fealty to the Constitution"?

Liberals are cockroaches.

10 posted on 04/18/2012 2:53:50 PM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter
What was the Framer’s intent when they used the phrase, ‘natural born citizen?’

"Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity."-- William Rawle, A View of the Constitution of the United States of America (1829)

11 posted on 04/18/2012 2:55:25 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter
Yes, but such small details as Eligibility pale in comparison to the GOP-elite's need to engage in latino ethnic pandering.

The original American ethnic stock is no longer important. It's time to replace them with La gente del futuro.

Viva la Raza.

12 posted on 04/18/2012 3:01:30 PM PDT by Pelham (Marco Rubio, la raza trojan horse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter

If the Repubs put Rubio on the ticket it is for sure they lose my vote and perhaps anyone I can convince why. Principle and concience does matter to some people.There are questions about Romney without mudding the water with Rubio’s eligibility. Attitude goes for any Repub candidate.


13 posted on 04/18/2012 3:02:08 PM PDT by noinfringers3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter

One thing is for certain that you can bet your entire family’s net worth on:

If he gets to a position where this matters, the media will apply EVERY scintilla of their power to investigate him and every member of his family in as an extreme and thorough fashion as they can possibly muster, twist every finding and opinion they can, and repeat in unison till hell freezes over that he is ineligible for that office.


14 posted on 04/18/2012 3:02:48 PM PDT by Eccl 10:2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

Rawle, apparently was the first in a long line of idiots, that can not understand plain English, and by association that would include you.


15 posted on 04/18/2012 3:04:42 PM PDT by itsahoot (I will not vote for Romney period, and by election day you won't like him either.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter
Some say don't insult our best like Senator Rubio by suggesting them for Romney's VP instead..

they say Romney should keep Biden as VP -- well in terms of usefulness that's like saying Romney should garner a warm bucket of piss for VP.

16 posted on 04/18/2012 3:05:54 PM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sushiman

“He is ‘ native ‘ born , and not ‘ natural born ‘”

For the umpteenthiest time, there is no such category of citizenship known as “native but not natural born.” There are only two types: natural born and naturalized.


17 posted on 04/18/2012 3:06:33 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter
Too much of a risk to do an end run. I say we hand the ball off and drive it right up the middle.

Put Rubio's name into the hat and do it with a fanfare.

Then when the media goes after him the Native born vs. Natural born issue will get the play it deserves.

The "Birther's" have missed the entire point as it DOES NOT MATTER were zero was born.

18 posted on 04/18/2012 3:08:29 PM PDT by Michael.SF. (When you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

“That would make both as originating not only beyond the United States, but Planet Earth as well.”

Citizenship adheres to the status of your carnal self at birth, not your psyche. “Old souls” wandering the heavens for millenia, for instance, could be born, or reborn as it were, as U.S. citizens.


19 posted on 04/18/2012 3:09:32 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
"Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity."-- William Rawle, A View of the Constitution of the United States of America (1829)

Are you suggesting that Rawle was a Framer of the Constitution?

Do you further mean to suggest that a foreigner should be able to father a child on US soil, raise the child abroad as an enemy of the state, and reintroduce that child into the US in time to meet the 14-year residency requirements of Art. 2 Sec. 1? You think that's what John Jay and George Washington intended?

20 posted on 04/18/2012 3:12:47 PM PDT by TexasVoter (No Constitution? No Union!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter

Short answer is no and the long answer would be no.


21 posted on 04/18/2012 3:14:41 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

“a tea party that demands absolute fealty to the Constitution”

Have you genuflected and recited the preamble in the direction of Philadelphia yet today? Don’t forget to fast all summer in remembrance of the Founders’ sacrifices. September 17 is Constitution Day! Pick the virgin you’re going to sacrifice today.


22 posted on 04/18/2012 3:14:47 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

Don’t waste your time. They are as bad as 9/11 truthers.


23 posted on 04/18/2012 3:15:41 PM PDT by EEGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

“Rawle, apparently was the first in a long line of idiots, that can not understand plain English”

What, praytell, does “natural born citizen” mean in “plain English”? Two citizen parents and born on U.S. soil? That’s not very apparent. What about the plain language of the 14th amendment? Or is that trumped by obscure comments on the intent behind the words?


24 posted on 04/18/2012 3:18:29 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
William Rawle, A View of the Constitution of the United States of America (1829)

This guy was a commentator and a DA for PA as appointed by Washington. Prosecuted the fomenters of the Whisky Rebellion

There is no record of his participation in either the drawing up of the original Articles of Confederation, nor do I have any knowledge that he was ever in any way associated with writing of or contributions made to the Federalist Papers. I do not believe he was in attendance at the Constituional Convention.

I think it's a stretch to name him among "The Framers."

So, like a good many who have confused the meaning of The Framer's" intent for the term "natural born citizen" this fellow is no different, just 175 years removed than those who are just as confused about it today.

FReegards!


25 posted on 04/18/2012 3:21:13 PM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter

“Do you further mean to suggest that a foreigner should be able to father a child on US soil, raise the child abroad as an enemy of the state, and reintroduce that child into the US in time to meet the 14-year residency requirements of Art. 2 Sec. 1? You think that’s what John Jay and George Washington intended?”

I’ll see you that question and raise you another one: how about I leave out the “foreigner” part and replace it with a citizen? Is that what the Framer’s intended, either? No, but they didn’t stop it.


26 posted on 04/18/2012 3:21:25 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Not all native born citizen are natural born citizens, and those who are only native born are US citizen because of a constitutional amendment, which purpose was to make former slaves US citizens. You can’t make non citizens into natural born citizens. The OBots and other fools think there is no difference.

There is a difference between laws of man and natural law. Natural law was the intent and meaning written in the US Constitutional by its authors.


27 posted on 04/18/2012 3:23:26 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: All

Yes, period.

do we want to elect him?
does he want to run?

those are different issues.


28 posted on 04/18/2012 3:25:22 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Michael.SF.
“The “Birther’s” have missed the entire point as it DOES NOT MATTER were zero was born.”

Yes it does! If he wasn't born in the U.S.A., he's not an NBC. (He was born in Kenya)

I think you meant that his father wasn't a citizen so he's not NBC. How do you determine who his LEGAL father is? The only document that proves that is his LEGAL (not forged), original birth certificate. Without that, we don't know who his LEGAL father or mother are. We don't know how old he is.

The birth certificate is the first step. Without it, you can't prove anything.

29 posted on 04/18/2012 3:25:58 PM PDT by faucetman ( Just the facts, ma'am, Just the facts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter

No period. Intellectual dishonesty reigns supreme in US culture and the news media.


30 posted on 04/18/2012 3:28:15 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

The law holds only two types of citizens, period.

all this nbc tinfoil stuff was born of obama and his communist father.

The law has never changed or has the constitution ever been reinterprited to mean ANYTHING other than there are two types of citizens.


31 posted on 04/18/2012 3:29:18 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane; All
Citizenship adheres to the status of your carnal self at birth, not your psyche. “Old souls” wandering the heavens for millenia, for instance, could be born, or reborn as it were, as U.S. citizens.

While that's technically true [after all, Hindus & certain New Agers can claim to be reincarnated over & over again as various "citizens" of distinct nations]...
... I can't help but think if it was any, ole cultist other than a Mormon,
...the thought that a mainstream POTUS candidate confesses to originating from another planet in another galaxy is a lil' mind-boggling...
...given that this pretense-front exists as predicated by the RINO GoP-establishment: "Oh, all's normal Election Cycle 2012!"

"Oh, Mitt. You're were spirit born somewhere else???"
"...Then you came to Earth to inhabit a body?"
"...That's nice."

"We, too, want ALL our kiddies of the U.S. & world to emulate you as POTUS and grow up just as you did you..."
"...so that they, too, can embrace this worldview for all..."
"...in which our kiddies in exactly the same way" [Which, btw, is what MR believes] "have traversed from the far galactical reaches from that little hamlet in the sky, Kolob..."
"...all the way to Planet Earth..."
"...and then...donned the White House like a glove..."
"...before progressing to some Great White Throne as 'god' of his own planet..."

Boy...What a narrative Lds, Inc. PR agents will have to work with to hand off/peddle to the kids of America & the world!

Mormon priesthood workers of the various galaxies, unite!

***********************************************

MiddleAmerica, U.S.of A., 1950s: "Mommy, when I grow up, I want to be like Ike."
MiddleAmerica, U.S.of A., 2013: "Mom, when I grow up, I want to a god from Kolob like Mitt."

32 posted on 04/18/2012 3:32:57 PM PDT by Colofornian (Mom when I grow up, I want 2B like Ike. Mom when I grow up, I want 2B a god from Kolob like Mitt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: faucetman
No, I stand by what I said. But let me be more precise.

Obama is not eligible to be President regardless of place of birth, Hawaii or Kenya. The BC the WH released names his father as a Kenyan, thus a British subject. That alone makes him ineligible.

33 posted on 04/18/2012 3:33:58 PM PDT by Michael.SF. (When you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

“are only native born are US citizen because of a constitutional amendment”

Oh, “only” because of some amendment, huh? I guess that means we can ignore it.

“which purpose was to make former slaves US citizens”

Ah, but it didn’t say that, did it? They could have written “all persons born on U.S. soil who used to be slaves and have rich, dark molasses skin,” but they didn’t. We tend to let “original intent” run away with itself. Intent is in line after plain meaning. If the intent says more than or contradicts what the text itself says, the text controls. We can’t assume the Framer’s didn’t mean it the way it is.


34 posted on 04/18/2012 3:34:01 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
Rawle admits in this same essay that his opinion is not universal.
It is an error to suppose, as some (and even so great a mind as Locke) have done, that a child is born a citizen of no country and subject of no government, and that be so continues till the age of discretion ...

If what Rawle believed were actually true, there would have been no need for the 14th amendment. Rawle also quotes Vattel and the Law of Nations in the book, but fails to explain why he doesn't prescribe to Vattel's definition of natural-born citizens. In the end, Rawle's opinion is overruled by a UNANIMOUS Supreme Court opinion in Minor v. Happersett.

35 posted on 04/18/2012 3:35:04 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
William Rawle

Rawle and his family were British sympathizers.

Why on earth would you quote him or his works?

36 posted on 04/18/2012 3:35:36 PM PDT by Las Vegas Ron (Rush Limbaugh = the Beethoven of talk radio - http://www.istandwithrush.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

Tinfoil is the people with their heads where it is dark and where the OBots reside. After 4 years of amassed information and data that Obama, and to include Rubio, are both not natural born citizens. Any honest study of who are natural born and who are not, you cannot honestly conclude that those two are natural born citizens. The information amassed would fill 10 volume years of Encyclopedia Britannicas.

Hey, the Repubs can go ahead and pick Rubio for VP, but don’t expect the Dems to play along since hypocrisy is not in their dictionary.


37 posted on 04/18/2012 3:38:02 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: faucetman

“How do you determine who his LEGAL father is?”

We could dig his father up and do a DNA test, which I assume various birthers have already suggested on various blogs. Have you heard the one about how he might be Malcom X’s son?


38 posted on 04/18/2012 3:38:18 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Michael.SF.
The "Birther's" have missed the entire point as it DOES NOT MATTER were zero was born. (Presumptively alluding to the alleged non-citizen father, Kenyan Barrak Obama Sr)

Following that logic then, those patriots who didn't miss that important point are not "birthers".

39 posted on 04/18/2012 3:39:02 PM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate Republicans Freed the Slaves Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: edge919

“In the end, Rawle’s opinion is overruled by a UNANIMOUS Supreme Court opinion in Minor v. Happersett.”

No it isn’t. Why do people say such things?


40 posted on 04/18/2012 3:41:32 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Ron

“Rawle and his family were British sympathizers.

Why on earth would you quote him or his works?”

Some of the Founders had slaves, therefore we shouldn’t trust anything they ever said about anything.

By the way, why are his sympathies relevant? Did he lie about the Constitution in order to effect a takeover of the U.S. via British anchor babies?


41 posted on 04/18/2012 3:44:17 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

the law is clear. Denial is not just a river in egypt.

It is re judicata. The birthers lost loooooong before obama.

the only chance they ahd was to argue some document or adoption papers made obama naturalized.

Rubio is a US citizen by birth. (btw ever see a white US passport? it was for cuban refugees in the 60’s. just trivia fun)

Birther can yell and scream and go hysterical until they are blue in the face, the fact of law and constitution (vatel is not law or relavent) is there are only two types of citzenship.


42 posted on 04/18/2012 3:44:21 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter
Is he eligible? No.

Does it matter? No.

zero has already proven that

43 posted on 04/18/2012 3:54:41 PM PDT by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER
I guess it depends on how we define "Birther's".

I take the term to mean those who believe that he is ineligible BECAUSE he was born in Kenya. These are the ones I believe have missed the point.

If you want to include those who believe he is ineligible because he was born in America and his father was not a US Citizen, thus he is not "Natural Born", then my comment regarding "Birther's" would exclude the second group.

44 posted on 04/18/2012 3:56:09 PM PDT by Michael.SF. (When you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane
Ah, but it didn’t say that, did it?

Ah it didn't have to say it was about making former slaves into citizens. There wouldn't have been any reconstruction amendment for that matter if the civil war was not fought. No civil war no "Reconstruction Amendments" like the 14th Amendment.

Until you guys acknowledge that there is a distinction between natural law and positive law, we will just go around and around.

45 posted on 04/18/2012 3:59:16 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane
Some of the Founders had slaves, therefore we shouldn’t trust anything they ever said about anything.

Is that supposed to be sarcasm?

By the way, why are his sympathies relevant?

Hmmmmm, I think I'll await an answer to the my fist question.

46 posted on 04/18/2012 4:00:46 PM PDT by Las Vegas Ron (Rush Limbaugh = the Beethoven of talk radio - http://www.istandwithrush.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Ron

“Is that supposed to be sarcasm?”

Yes.

“Hmmmmm, I think I’ll await an answer to the my fist question.”

That was yes, now I’m waiting.


47 posted on 04/18/2012 4:06:08 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
the law is clear. Denial is not just a river in egypt.

What's unclear is your conclusions.

It is re judicata. The birthers lost loooooong before obama.

You can't expect honesty from the courts and in the media who live on the river banks of the 'Denail' river. Heck, they live in their own world of delusions and tell themselves lies everyday because it makes themselves feel good.

The proof is here daily on FR. Obama and the media, lie every day, all 365 days in a year, ...but they are telling the truth in this matter that Obama is a natural born citizen? LoL. We all know what's going on.

48 posted on 04/18/2012 4:08:44 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

“it didn’t have to say it was about making former slaves into citizens. There wouldn’t have been any reconstruction amendment for that matter if the civil war was not fought. No civil war no ‘Reconstruction Amendments’ like the 14th Amendment.”

Perfect example of what the internet calls “insane troll logic.”

“Until you guys acknowledge that there is a distinction between natural law and positive law, we will just go around and around.”

I recognize the distinction. Aristotle was thousands of years ago. The Constitution, by the way, is positive law, as ought to be obvious. It is positive law that makes for U.S. citizens, for without the positive law that is the U.S. Constitution there would be no U.S. to be a citizen of.

The word “natural” in natural born citizen throws you guys. “Natural” is like “nature,” and therefore we must look to Natural Law. God makes Natural Law, and God didn’t write the 14th amendment, therefore only children of two citizen parents can be natural born citizens. Whatever. I admit this line of thought is beyond my experience.


49 posted on 04/18/2012 4:11:23 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

“The proof is here daily on FR”

Written in code on invisible ink, inscribed on the shell of a turtle hidden deep beneath the earth in a treasure chest guarded by a minotaur.


50 posted on 04/18/2012 4:14:01 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-137 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson