Skip to comments.Time To Draft Rubio For VP
Posted on 01/31/2012 9:49:41 PM PST by reformedcrat
Forceful, unapologetic articulation is a new requirement for Republicans: it is not only a good track record or voting record, conservatives also demand the ability to forcefully articulate conservative principles. Just ask Texas Governor Rick Perry.
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
That case is interesting, but a “default judgment” will not actually get to the merits, will it? And the other 49 States can all come up with their OWN decisions on this matter.
You make so many leaps in your arguments against me, why would anyone listen to you on citizenship law?
How am I “anti-sovereignty”? Who died and made you ruler of this issue?
You are wrong.
NOBODY with any authority under the law agrees with you on this matter.
The Court cases your small choir comes up with were all decided BEFORE the various acts of Congress defined citizenship for us. (Look at a Passport application).
The Court rulings you rest your very weak case upon, therefore, had to use Common Law and Natural Law definitions, as Congress had not provided guidance. (YES, Congress interprets the Constitution all the time, that is part of the job of Congress, to ENACT provisions of the Constitution.)
Your case is very, very weak.
again, Natural Law and Common Law can be and often are over ridden by LEGISLATION!
You have no case.
BTW, I think Obama deserved a default judgment for his arrogance in refusing to answer the Court.
Marco is not as conservative as you might think and he’s not eligible to be VP. Drafting him this year will just result in a bunch of lawsuits and bad press. Its a bad idea. Allen West is a much better choice for VP.
I find it rather unlikely he will be a VP choice.
Texas is in the bag.
Perry provides little other than a good record of job creation in a major State - his ethics personality and intellect seem to be major drawbacks.
He isn't much as far as ideological balance - rock ribbed conservatives don't seem especially enamored - and he provides little in the way of swaying the electoral map.
Not a likely choice.
As far as Rubio - and those on this thread that maintain he is not a NBC - the U.S. Constitution only mentions or envisions two types of U.S. citizen going forward - those who owe natural allegiance to these United States via conditions of birth and are “natural born” - and those who must undergo a legal process of “naturalization” to shift those natural allegiances.
“conservatives also demand the ability to forcefully articulate conservative principles”
Yeah, like illegals are illegal and need to be deported. And we don’t need to import millions of foreigners here, particulary when we have high unemployment as it is.
Rubio, speak out on these issues—conservatives demand it.
ABO...Rubio is paying back Willard because he supported him in his senate run.
Look, in any battle, there might be arguments with the General over strategy. A smart General will listen to the concerns of his officers.
I do not like Obama, but the radical birthers on FR are far too quick to call everyone in disagreement over strategy the “enemy” when we point out the weakness of their arguments.
Your shouting that “NOBODY with any authority blah blah blah...” is like global warming’s settled science. Shout it often enough and maybe the easily fooled will believe you. But your opinion on settled law means nothing and your shouting about it means even less.
The Constitution is what it is and only liberal sovereignty destroyers like you want to change the original intent of those who created the law. Shout all you want. Rubio is not a natural born citizen and he never will be.
By your standard, you would claim the child of our worst enemy, Iran’s Pres. Ahmadenijad, was eligible to be President of the United States if said child was born on U.S. soil and met the other qualifications listed in Article 2, Section 1 of our Constitution. This is why “born on U.S. soil of U.S. citizen parents”, the standard unanimously supported in Supreme Court case Minor vs Happersett, is critical in protecting the American people from foreign dominance.
And yet you would claim the child of America’s worst enemy, Iranian Pres. Ahmadinejad, would be eligible for the office of U.S. President if said child were born on U.S. soil and met the other qualifications listed in Article 2, Section 1 of our Constitution.
The founders used the term “natural born citizen” because they didn’t want a person with a natural allegiance to foreign countries serving as president or commander in chief. No court or legislature has provided a lesser standard than that found in Vattel’s “The Law of Nations” (born on U.S. soil of U.S. citizen parents at the time of birth) because a lesser standard would obviously permit the child of our worst enemies to become our president.
You are looking for a “magic wand” to get rid of Obama.
I am very much a Constitutional Conservative, and I object to anyone who distorts the meaning of that document.
I believe that you are guilty of just that.
You are playing semantic games and I outed you!
Now you’re showing yourself to be a full on Alinsky-ite.
The country doesn’t need your type of ‘debate’.
And when house democrats officially legislate that anyone can be president, instead of ‘certifying’ illegal candidates like in the last election, then you’ll be happy.
I see very little respect for the Constitution and the founding of this nation in your posts.
Only the globalists want the natural born clause erased from America’s cultural memory, citizens don’t. Its a very Stalinist of the globalists, don’t you think?
We should know as early as tomorrow (or possibly even late today) what the administrative judge’s recommendation to the GA Secretary of State will be.
The deadline for the written briefs is today.