Posted on 03/26/2009 7:10:06 AM PDT by ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY
Nope. You did not specifically answer it yet again. Your above statement implies that you agree with my question, but then you restate that proof is not required in your view which then refutes your above statement. You can't have it both ways.
You either believe that "anyone running for public office should have to provide basic proof..." or you don't. You don't get to claim a statement that you agree it should be required then do a 180 and then claim the opposite. Are you being intentionally obtuse or were you just born that way???
As for your reading of the 20th amendment, perhaps you should consider the notion of failing to qualify as meaning not having garnered enough electoral votes. The eligibility information is clearly stated in Article 2 Section 1.
Yes it is and Article 2 section 1 clearly states 'natural born'. Says nothing about electoral votes. Perhaps you should consider the notion of failing to qualify means providing proof you meet the qualification of Article 2 section 1.
As for your name calling...
Now its my turn to go LOL! Calling you an obama supporter is now name calling?!? All you have to do is follow your posts on this birth certificate issue and you defend him every single time. Res Ipsa Loquitur.
Grandma Dunham worked at the Bank of Hawaii and did volunteer work in a probate court where SS#'s of the deceased flow freely.
A guy can dream, can't he? :)
While we are at it I think that if the above was the case....Sarah Palin and her choice should become President and Vice President ASAP...we all have our dreams.
;)
Why would you do volunteer work at a probate court? I thought she worked more in mtgs at the bank. Thanks for the update. Something very strange about the family.
Frantzie,
I traced back the origin of the probate court info. It came from Orly’s interview on G. Gordon Liddy’s radio show.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2212605/posts
Keep in mind Ann Dunham and Madelyn Dunham worked with loans. You need to put down your social on your loan applications. Madelyn Dunham volunteered in probate department of the Oahu Circuit Court House (how sweet and noble). You can get all the vital statistics of the deceased from the probate court, if you are a volunteer there.
http://drorly.blogspot.com/2009/01/from-birthdatabasecom-more-info-we-are.html
You’ve called me an obamabot and referred to my insane posterings. Yes, you have engaged in the ancient art of the ad hominem. But I won’t take the bait. You can keep trying if you wish, or deny that you’ve done it. I don’t care either way.
Let me try again.
I am in full agreement that anyone seeking public office should have to supply proof of eligibility. By the same token, I see nothing in the Constitution of the US that says someone MUST do so. There is no contradiction in holding those two positions, despite your notion to the contrary.
You are not a consitutional scholar, nor am I. My reading of the 20th amendment, and a few articles about it refer to it as the lame duck amendment. None of the articles I have read address the ‘fail to qualify’ issue, eligibility issue. I am very open to the opinions of those who know more than I do about the amendment, but I don’t think you are the person to educate me.
Enjoy the rest of your day.
Please explain as to why Governor Schwarzenegger has publicly acknowledged his own stated ineligibility to run for Office of the President
_______
Because we all know he’s Austrian? I feel like I’m missing something from your question, ‘cuz the answer is so clear.
With all due respect to Orly Taitz, she's neglecting a fact: the requirement for your social security number on loans is relatively new. Before the mid-sixties or so, most institutions obeyed the Social Security Act and DID NOT use the numbers for identification.
Thanks. This is insane. This family makes the Sopranos look normal.
At least biden was born in the U.S.. My guess is he is owned by the credit card companies versus Hussein who is owned by the Saudis and probably Indonesia (the largest muslim country in the world).
He traveled on an Indonesian passport. Soetoro legally adopted him (hence 0bama’s name is legally Soetoro) and moved to Indinesia. 0bama atended a grade school for Indonesian citizens only. He visited Pakistan for a summer during college and had to have used an Indonesian passport. He enrolled at Occidental College under the foreign student scholarship program (why do you think he won’t release his transcripts).
I've seen speculation about this, but not that we have evidence. Do you have evidence that
1. 0bama traveled on an Indonesian passport?
2. Soetero legally adopted him? (in which case there would be a legal name change, and would have to be a legal change back or he's using a false name!)
3. He was enrolled under the foreign scholarship program at Occidental?
Section 3 of the Twentieth Amendment DEMANDS that he "qualify" and it places this burden squarely on HIM.
3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
In addition, this is written into U.S. Code 3USC19
TITLE 3--THE PRESIDENT
CHAPTER 1--PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS AND VACANCIES
Sec. 19. Vacancy in offices of both President and Vice President; officers eligible to act
(a)(1) If, by reason of death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify, there is neither a President nor Vice President to discharge the powers and duties of the office of President, then the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, upon his resignation as Speaker and as Representative in Congress, act as President.
As to the question of "who" has standing to challenge this it's written into the U. S. Constitution, Article Six Oath of Office for elected officials:
” The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
Anyone who takes this oath has standing to challenge the eligibility qualifications of Mr. Obama because they are REQUIRED to support the Constitution or they would be breaking the law. No court can force a person to break the law in order to protect the law. Those "with standing" include many more officials than at the Federal level and include those in the state ranks as well. All we need is one of THEM to step forward.
See my post above.
LOL.
Orly has contacted the FBI in AZ. to investigate. Here is a report: http://defendourfreedoms.org/letterHolder.htm
When someone hides something, they have something to hide. I see Obama being removed from the Presidency before Christmas.
Sorry, I think I sent you the wrong link
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.