Posted on 08/10/2010 10:33:09 PM PDT by stevenl77
MSNBC's fast-talking Chris Matthews went off the deep end last week over those who question the constitutional eligibility of the one who sends thrills up his leg.
You've got to see it to believe it.
I don't normally recommend anyone watch MSNBC or Matthews, but the beauty of the YouTube age is that gems like this are saved for future generations who may want to redeem the profession of journalism some day and need reminders of how far the standards of the news industry plummeted early in the 21st century.
Matthews took it very, very personally when commenting on the latest CNN poll showing only 42 percent of Americans believe Barack Obama's birth story.
In the world of Chris Matthews, when Americans want proof that politicians are telling them the truth this means they "harbor a suspicion that he was not born here and that the president is an illegal alien, never went through the naturalization process and therefore is a potential subject for deportation."
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
I went through a longer vetting process to work at JFK airport than he did to run for President.
It’s a longer vetting process to enter a casino!
It’s a longer vetting process to buy a beer.
What’s the problem here? Barry is not a natural born citizen - as required to be president - because his father was not a US citizen. It doesn’t matter where barry was born.
Chris, if it’s that important to you, why don’t you prove beyond any doubt that your president is a natural born citizen of this country, and no, a .jpeg of a short form doesn’t mean squat.
In fact, Chris, why don’t you explain to us how a person whose father is a british subject qualifies under our constitution to be president.
It really isn’t that hard to understand if you shut your mouth long enough to consider what’s going on here.
I once had a vetting process to see a movie.
Like you are pointing out, it’s all smoke screens, red herrings, and straw men. The truth is right in front of everyone’s nose - on the _resident’s own campaign page!
I once got vetted when claiming a prize!
It’s a longer vetting process when I get home at 2am.
It’s a longer vetting process to buy a Corvette.
He knows...they all know. They’re so deep in it they have to keep it quiet to save their own skin. Foreign newspapers lauding then-Senator Obama as “Kenyan-born.” His grandmother’s testimony. The Kenyan parliament recently acknowledging his Kenyan birth, with a “if he can do it, anyone can!” rah rah speech. The “open secret” in Kenya.
And that’s before you even realize that it doesn’t matter where he was born - his Dad was a British national, and his mother was too young to confer citizenship on him. Obama confessed to having dual-citizenship, which immediately disqualified him in the first place.
You win.
Beat ya to this story this past Saturday :-)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2566401/posts?page=121
You all got that right- If I deviate from schedule 15 minutes its the Spanish Inquisition. Everyone else is free to do as they please.
A fact I wish the birthers were pushing instead of this Kenyan birth theory... The natural born citizen argument is one that nobody can dispute, and there is 200 years of US Supreme Court case law to back the argument.
But, yeah, this issue smells pretty bad.
I can’t stomach watching spittle-boy even in clips on you-tube.
The dreams of his father were for a Communist Kenya.
“A fact I wish the birthers were pushing instead of this Kenyan birth theory... The natural born citizen argument is one that nobody can dispute, and there is 200 years of US Supreme Court case law to back the argument.”
Actually, Taitz and Apuzzo call that their primary argument.
You are correct in principle, although the case law you speak of is non-existent. Dicta in an opinion doesn’t count as anything binding or stare decisis. But given the fact that everyone knew his father wasn’t a U.S. citizen before he ever got nominated to begin with, and afterwards was elected, there’s zero potential of him being impeached or prevented from running again because his father wasn’t a U.S. citizen. Congress has discretion in impeaching. It’s just not going to happen. Also, the term needs to be defined in the Constitution itself, or the only definition that really counts is that one adopted by the Supreme Court in a binding fashion in a published opinion. All the evidence collected by Mario Apuzzo and others is persuasive, but the Court is free to reject it. Also, if Congress drafted something that defined the term without amending the constitution, the Court is free to find that more persuasive than evidence of what was originally intended.
In practicality, what could get him removed is uncovering fraud of some sort like his lack of birth in the U.S. or loss of citizenship. That’s why the focus should be on where he was born and whether he retained his citizenship, and also investigating the rest of his shady past. That would get him impeached in the event it was uncovered he wasn’t born in the U.S. or lost his citizenship and covered it up.
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.