Posted on 06/19/2012 4:12:44 AM PDT by Perdogg
Even before the Republicans chose a presidential nominee it was widely assumed that Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., would be at the top of anybody’s list of vice presidential candidates. The reasons are obvious: Not only is he young, charismatic and wildly popular with conservatives, but he could also help Republicans win a key state (Florida) and make inroads with Hispanics.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
>>Not a Natural Born American.<<
Rubio, as much as I like him, is not a NBC. Neither is Bobby Jindal, again as much as I admire the guy.
ah you are speaking of the new inovative “third version” of US citizen.
(before we only had two, thanks to aluminum foil head wear innovation we now have three)
/s
Neither side cares about the law, they figure if Obama got away with it why not someone else.
The only rule is there are no rules. At least not for the Ruling Class?
I'm thinking there is an effort to marginalize the constitution's natural born citizen clause.
Several attempts to amend this law before Obozo came onto the scene. Now Rubio, Romney, Jindal are all being groomed for higher office
Is this just me?
Rubio is a naturalized citizen.
If you have to look to a law - including the 14th Amendment - you are naturalized and not natural born.
Natural born Citizens have no law that defines their citizenship. Their citizenship is .... natural.
>> aluminum foil head wear innovation <<
Yep, a thread like this one really brings out the natural born crackpots!
Jonathan Karl of ABC on GMA this morning thinks Pawlenty is at the top of the list.
Stephanopoulos thinks Ryan is on the short list.
“Then hope Mitt doesn’t croak.”
LOL, Why? Because romney is “severely conservative”? hahahahahahahaha... No... stop.... hahahahahaah... your killing me....
Romney is a socialist. He has declared himself a “progressive” and he has proven it through his deeds as Gov of Mass.
It doesn’t matter who the prick picks as his VP candidate, Im not going to support the SOB, Im not going to vote for him and Ill most likely work against him in the general.
Our ONLY hope here is that the folks that THINK people like me are going to fold and support the bastard because hes not obama, wise the hell up and understand the when we say NO MORE RINOS. THAT is EXACTLY what we mean. The romneybots can pretend to be the “majority” all they want just like the Bolsheviks did, but folks like me are done with socialists in the GOP.
I used to be a “team” player, until I realized that the “teams” were not what I thought they were. I used to think that it was Democrat -vs- Republican but what a lot of us came to realize is that is not the case. The real “teams” are socialist/statists -vs- freedom/limited government. We allowed the GOP to be coopted by the socialists because we were blind to anything other than D -vs- R anything with an “R” after its name was deemed “good” and we followed blindly. How do I know this is true? Because we are on the verge of nominating a SOCIALIST as our candidate for president.
What is the greater danger here?
- The socialists maintaining control of the presidency but losing their foothold on the republican party and losing control of congress.
or
- The socialists maintaining control of the presidency (via their guy with an “R” after his name) and STRENGTHENING their lock on the republican party AND (because of the “team” mentality) short circuiting any opposition from the GOP in congress. Plus, this has the value added benefit of making the socialists true enemy (folks like me) HOMELESS. What homeless army ever won a war?
Understanding the nature of this war and the nature of the enemy I will take the option where socialism is dealt the most damage. This means denying them control of the GOP, strengthening the anti-socialist control within the GOP. Strengthening GOP control of congress and enabling them to oppose everything the socialists attempt to inflict upon us. This also means defeating romney if he is the GOP candidate.
>> I’d like to hear more about Governor McDonnell of Virginia. <<
A good man for Virginia. And maybe a good candidate eventually to replace Mark Warner in the U. S. Senate.
But “Bobby Mack” would be a very weak choice for GOP VP nominee. I think he’s just not ready for prime time on the national stage. Not a forceful speaker — even might be described as mush-mouthed.
Worse, IMO, McDonnell has an unfortunate tendency to commit gaffes when facing hostile interviewers. This characteristic says he probably would be bested in the VEEP debates even by such a klutz as Slowjoe Biden!
Bottom line for me:
Now that Rubio seems to have been put on the side-lines, Scott Walker looks more and more like the best bet.
You know more about politics and are probably right, but for Governor Martinez to win in NM- she has superpowers.
It is a beautiful state, has great food, etc. But I have ever witnessed so many Dems/Libs/major moonbats in my life while I lived there.
People who wanted all businesses to turn off their lights at night to keep Las Cruces “dark,” and all natural like.
I know the rural folks and ranchers were more conservative, but the libs of Las Cruces/ABQ are truly scary pro illegal immigrant dems.
She must be amazing as well to combat the voter fraud and still win.
Romney- not my choice, but my vote. Pick somebody good, and please let us be able to wake up November 3rd without the crushing sense of despair an Obama victory will bring.
If anybody here wants to stay home, please report to your nearest military post/base and look in the face of the nearest Soldier, as you will be betraying him and giving aid to his enemy.
>> we cannot even consider taking a swing-state conservative Gov (Kasich or Walker). <<
I don’t quite follow your logic with regard to Walker. Seems to me that with him on the ticket, the GOP’s chances of carrying “West Consin” would increase substantially.
jbjd | June 17, 2012 at 9:05 pm |
Gianni | June 17, 2012 at 8:41 pm |
Kelly Canon is doing some great work in Texas with regard to gaining access to legal statutes for procedures in getting names on primary and nomination ballots for presidential elections. JBJD’s reporting and interpretation of these statutes, through paperwork filed by Canon, seems to hold some real promise for figuring out why the Texas Democrat Party did not follow the guidelines clearly laid out in state statutes. Keep up the great work, and thanks for letting us know about this JBJD. For more on this, check the link below.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/lonestarteaparty/2012/06/16/deploy-the-troops
******************************************************************************
Gianni, you are welcome; but I am not just the reporter. Who do you think is directing Kelly’s efforts from behind the scenes (including writing her correspondence)? However, I am not a citizen of TX and so, unlike others in the ‘eligibility’ arena who invade sovereign states and spearhead various eligibility-related plagues, under their names; as always, I require citizens of the states to ‘rescue’ themselves. I just show them how…
Kelly has been a most apt pupil. She has worked tirelessly to understand the issues. We have spent countless hours dissecting the situation in TX, whose laws perhaps more than any other state lend possibility to resolving the eligibility dilemma. And she has amply compensated me for my time.
Now, we need ‘numbers.’ I have been banned from sites like FreeRepublic, whose Texas readers could most benefit from today’s post. (Kelly said that even when she tries to submit anything with my acronym; she is unable to post.) So, please, post links to today’s article everywhere you can. AG Abbott is more likely to exercise his discretion to pursue this (and upcoming) complaint(s), the more Texas citizens ask him to.
kjcanon | June 17, 2012 at 11:25 pm |
Gianni, jbjd is right (literally about everything), but specifically about my role in this effort. I was determined four long frustrating years aog that some how, some way, I was going to find a way to keep ANY ineligible candidate off our ballot here in Texas. She’s been right all along on several aspects of this issue. Namely: THE BALLOT. But she is also right about our laws in the Lone Star State. Follow her blog, as she has not only been guiding our every step, but also chronicling our journey at every pivotal turn. (and there’s been quite a few) Thanks to jbjd’s incredible talent for sniffing out fraud, together we’ve been able to peel ALL of the layers of this onion. I can’t believe we can finally say “we have ‘em”! The Texas Democratic party thought they could get away with side-stepping our laws by conveniently OMITTING constitutional eligibility language in the ONE document they “claim” to have used as their “basis for certifying” their candidates for the Primary election. They must have thought we were all asleep at the wheel, and tried to sneak one past us. Read her article again. Let it soak in. Then read it again! This is going to blow the lid off their little sham sky-high! But really gets me is that they have (for YEARS) been insulting our collective intelligence. That angers me. Never anger a true Texan.
http://jbjd.org/2012/06/17/will-tx-agabbott-prosecute-tdp/
And then listen to the blogtalk show we did just yesterday:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/lonestarteaparty/2012/06/16/deploy-the-troops
Buckle your seat belts… it’s gonna get bumpy!
PS: We need everyone who knows ANYONE in Texas to go to jbjd’s blog and get on board.
Disagree. By the laws at the time of the nation’s founding, Rubio is a natural-born citizen.
And, if any argument is based on the definition of natural born at that time, then those who argue in such a way must also use the same law put together by those who used that definition.
IOW, if you want the 1787 definition, then you’re also committed to the 1792 naturalization law. What did it require: 2 years residence, appearing before a magistrate (even a frontier magistrate), and an oath (or affirmation) that you’d be loyal to the US.
Rubio’s mom was a citizen before his birth. His father was here much more than 2 years before his birth and appeared before a magistrate a couple of times before his birth, which in 1792 would have been sufficient.
Ain't going to happen -- she's committed to finishing her first term in office - and getting driver's licenses away from illegals.
Mein Gott! You are right! That’s why we went without a president for almost 4 years after James Garfield died, and why Congress refused to count electoral votes cast for Charles Evans Hughes.
How so many intelligent conservatives have been fooled on this issue is beyond me.
That being said, I think that Romney should pick Sen. Rob Portman of OH as his runningmate. Portman is conservative, experienced, a good campaigner, popular with blue-collar voters, will help motivate Evangelical Protestant voters (he’s a Methodist), and will help in OH, the state that will decide the presidential election.
Born an American, with Cuban parents. Read the damn law.
In a recent column, Dick Morris urges Romney to pick Rubio for VP to offset Emperor Obama’s kiddie amnesty panderploy. (I think I just coined a new word!)
While Morris makes an interesting purely POLITICAL point, he conveniently OVERLOOKS the CONSTITUTIONAL question about Rubio’s eligibility.
Though Rubio has waffled on a few issues lately, I respect his general conservatism, which almost certainly flows from his parents having fled the nightmare of Castro’s Marxist island prison.
But therein lies the problem: Rubio’s PARENTS do not meet the necessary requirement of “natural born” for which Obama is today being challenged in a Florida court. In fact, Larry Klayman, attorney for the DEMOCRAT plaintiff in that case, made a glancing reference to the ineligibility of both Rubio and Bobby Jindal in his presentation to Judge Lewis on 6/18.
Look folks, either we HAVE a Constitution or we DO NOT. If Rubio, the son of parents who fled one form of ONE MAN TYRANNY, offers for or is tapped for VP, will he not be furthering the accelerating destruction of the very document the Founders left us to prevent our becoming a nation of men as opposed to a nation of LAWS, the Constitution being the primary exemplar?
And if the Hispanics here – legally and otherwise – help Obama to a second term on the basis that the rule of law and the Constitution are not important, they have only to look to Cuba to see where THAT will lead. They will have helped turn “here” into “there” and will no longer have a “here” to which to flee the tyranny.
Since it’s becoming increasingly clear that most of the morons on Capitol Hill don’t give a damn about any of these “details”, it appears it’s once again – as ALWAYS — up to “we the people.”
In case you haven’t noticed, we’re in the process of CHOOSING SIDES in America.
Which side are YOU on??
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.