Palin to Romney: Time to 'Quit Preaching to the Choir'

Newsmax ^ | August 31, 2012 | Greg McDonald

[commonguymd]

They have to tell themselves what they want to hear. They will be wringing their hands trying to explain 2012 being 2010 on steroids. Oh, we didn’t account for PBS, cspan, and online streaming enough , blah blah. That will be after they accuse us of voter fraud and of disenchanting votors and calling us racists. 2010 redux times 2.

[SatinDoll]

The reason why Marco Rubio is a citizen, not a natural born Citizen, is that his parents were not U.S. citizesn when he was born here in the U.S.

Three types of statutory citizenship are recognized by our government: native born; naturalized; and citizen-by-statute. All have equal rights. All can serve in Congress, either as a Representative in the House, or as a Senator in the Senate.

The following link will take you to the government’s own Immigration Service web page describing the three types of citizenship.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=a2ec6811264a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=a2ec6811264a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD

Natural born Citizen is NOT a type of statutory citizenship. Natural born Citizen is ONLY an eligibility requirement for the U.S. Presidency per Article II, Section 1, clause 5, of the U.S. Constitution, and requires that the President be born in the United States (jus solis) AND of citizen parents (jus sanguinas).

The definition of natural born Citizen appears in the holding of SCOTUS’s unanimous decision of Minor v. Happersett (1874). Virginia Minor sued to be included as a candidate for U.S. President based on her eligibility under the 14th Amendment to the U.S.Constitution. SCOTUS rejected her argument and examined her eligibility, concluding that she belonged to the class of citizens who, being born in the U.S. of citizen parents, was a natural born Citizen, and not covered by the 14th Amendment. This holding has been used in 25 consequential SCOTUS decisions since 1875.

No one has the RIGHT to be President. The eligibility requirement of Natural Born Citizenship (jus solis + jus sanguinas: born in the U.S. of U.S. citizen parents) must be viewed as a means to prevent split allegiance for any President of the United States.

[itsahoot]

She’s getting rich spouting what tea party members and conservatives want to hear,

Heck any one can do it, so why not give it a try? Maybe you can get rich, then you won't have time or inclination to slum here.

[Christie at the beach]

She was giving him advice before he spoke.

His choir (as we know and she knows) is the moderate and bed solid republican voters. She is probably referring to Libertarians and of course trying to pick off Reagan democrats. She was very nice to offer help to the guy who came on after Clint :) The woman has a good heart. She is not a Gop-er. I'd trust her more than any of them and my buddy, Newt because he is smart and knows what it takes for reforms.

[trebb]

Good grief, it is obvious, wait maybe not to those who have elevated Romney to something he is not.

Don't see any similarities to those who have made Romney out to be baser, viler, eviler than he really is? Or those that are so focused on hating Romney that they ignore Obama's threat?

[WVKayaker]

This note appeared yesterday, with pic attached...

From Facebook/SarahPalin:

Last night wrapped up a convention that was very encouraging; so, thank you to all who worked hard to provide needed inspiration while focusing on the U.S. economy. And for all the great speeches we heard at the convention this week and those we’ll hear next week, I sincerely hope we as Americans, despite our political disagreements, will respectfully remember our brave men and women in uniform – for they are still in harm’s way so that we can sleep in peace. Our troops in Afghanistan have suffered terrible casualties this year. We don’t hear much about this lately. You never hear our troops complain though, even when it seems like some of us safely back home enjoying the freedoms they protect too easily forget their sacrifices. But the moms wearing blue and gold stars remember. The wives and husbands raising kids alone while their spouse is in a war zone remember. The kids whose mom and dad can’t be there for birthdays and school plays and skinned knees and graduations remember. Every American who loves freedom should remember.

To our U.S. troops over there, please know that we remember your sacrifice. We support and honor you, and we pray for your safe and speedy return home where you are loved and belong.

- Sarah Palin

(She's not irrelevant to the 3,470,365 friends on her FaceBook page... of which I am 1!)

[RKBA Democrat]

I’ll continue to keep my eyes open but here in Va, a so-called battleground state, there isn’t much enthusiasm. Maybe that’ll change.

While I continue to dislike both major party candidates, the apathy towards the election in a state that is addicted to politics is not encouraging.

[PapaNew]

Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), was a case about a woman who wanted to vote. It had nothing to do with qualifications for POTUS. It does, however, address the issue of what a natural-born citizen is, but leaves open the question of children born in a U.S. jurisdiction to non-citizen parents. In my quick search, I don't see any subsequent cases that shed any more light on the subject. Relevant part of the opinion below:

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. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [88 U.S. 162, 168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens. Minor, 88 U.S. 162.

Nevertheless, there may be an issue because Rubio's parents were not citizens at the time Rubio was born. WorldNetDaily's research shows a native-born citizen born to non-citizen parents may not be what is meant in the Constitution as a "natural-born citizen." http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/rubio-autobiography-proves-hes-not-eligible-for-vp/

There are also those who assert that a native-born citizen IS a natural-born citizen. It almost certainly would have to be decided at the SCOTUS level, if Rubio were to run for POTUS. (What the Immigration Service says is not a deciding factor.)

It seems to me to be a minor point that his parents became citizens two or three years after Rubio's birth in the United States. I guess more research will need to be done to find what was the the intent of the framers was in their use of the term "natural-born citizen". I believe in strict construction of the Constitution by ruling as close as possible to the original intent of the framers, not what a judge or Justice WANTS their intent to have been. My guess is SCOTUS would most likely allow Rubio to be a natural-born citizen for purpose of Article II Section 5 of the Constitution. This may in fact be what the framers intended, but SCOTUS is generally not strict in constructing textual Constitutional meaning, which is why I think they would probably rule in favor of Rubio.

[svcw]

I do not hate Romney, never said that.
People need to understand what he believes, which is liberalism.
Vote for him fine, don’t twist yourself into a knot trying to make him a conservative.

[WOSG]

“That will be after they accuse us of voter fraud and of disenchanting votors and calling us racists. 2010 redux times 2.”

That’s the setup. Just like saying SCOTUS picked Bush and blaming Bush for Katrina, they have their excuse ready-made ... the GOP will have ‘disenfranchised voters’ when Obama is tossed out of office.

[WOSG]

“Reagan got the Reagan Democrats to come over in 1980 not because he went liberal....he did it by focusing on the economy, pro-life, and conservative values”

Well, we saw a lot of that at the convention this week.
Romney is, a Buchanan would put it, a ‘conservative of the heart’, someone who has led his life the way we conservatives say Americans should lead their lives. He’s laid out an agenda that is starkly different from Obama’s big spending socialism, and wants the private sector to succeed by liberating it.

This convention had the same message for everyone in America who wants America to succeed and prosper. It was at its root a basic patriotic and conservative message that freedom works, and our prosperity comes from economic freedom not government control and spending.

[redshawk]

so true. so true.

[redshawk]

Reagan's best trait was that he truly believed in the greatness of this country.

Old Navy man, thank you! What you say is what my Dad said to me .We worked hard. Never a hand out. My knuckles bled. I was ten then. Dang, those Navy Men are really great. God Bless you, yours and mine. Dang, thank you for protecting me. Dang, Thank Youl

[rodeo-mamma]

Before you start blasting Romney for only being up by 15% with the Independent vote then Obama, remember, McCain lost the Independents, Obama had 10% more then McCain. By contrast, Romney is GETTING 15% MORE of the Independent vote then Obama. Is that sinking it yet? Palin can talk it, but she can’t walk it, they lost the Independent vote, BIG, it’s how we ended up with O. Imagine that, Romney is talking to the conservative base, and he still gets the Independents up 15% from Obama, that’s powerful stuff, and suggests all the negative Romney talk around here is nothing more then Anti-Romney propoganda.