Cinga Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Like many of you, I really like Marco Rubio.... BUT!!!!! He is not qualified by birth, to be POTUS.... A natural born citizen of the US, by the Constitution, are the only people qualified to hold the office of President. Meaning, both parents have to be US citizens at the time of birth. Rubio's parents did not become official citizens until he was 4 years old.... This was determined many moons ago, I think it was in about 1870ish (Minor vs. Happersett) the Supremes defined a natural born citizen as one born of parents, that held NO ALLEGIANCE to any foreign government... I know... brings up a few other questions huh?? Like.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 1, 2012 Author Share Posted February 1, 2012 Like many of you, I really like Marco Rubio.... BUT!!!!! He is not qualified by birth, to be POTUS.... A natural born citizen of the US, by the Constitution, are the only people qualified to hold the office of President. Meaning, both parents have to be US citizens at the time of birth. Rubio's parents did not become official citizens until he was 4 years old.... This was determined many moons ago, I think it was in about 1870ish (Minor vs. Happersett) the Supremes defined a natural born citizen as one born of parents, that held NO ALLEGIANCE to any foreign government... I know... brings up a few other questions huh?? Like.... Cue DC Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Cue DC Tom Why bother? !@#$ing retards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 I'm actually surprised that Buftex took the "car insurance" position. That's an Alan Colmes position; a position that gets repeated by the extremely lazy-minded. So, you're saying Buftex isn't a Kool-Aid kind of person and thinks on his/her own and puts real thought into his/her positions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Like many of you, I really like Marco Rubio.... BUT!!!!! He is not qualified by birth, to be POTUS.... A natural born citizen of the US, by the Constitution, are the only people qualified to hold the office of President. Meaning, both parents have to be US citizens at the time of birth. Rubio's parents did not become official citizens until he was 4 years old.... This was determined many moons ago, I think it was in about 1870ish (Minor vs. Happersett) the Supremes defined a natural born citizen as one born of parents, that held NO ALLEGIANCE to any foreign government... I know... brings up a few other questions huh?? Like.... Ooooh, a birther. Tell me. Why do you hate minorities? Have you always hated minorities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) Like many of you, I really like Marco Rubio.... BUT!!!!! He is not qualified by birth, to be POTUS.... A natural born citizen of the US, by the Constitution, are the only people qualified to hold the office of President. Meaning, both parents have to be US citizens at the time of birth. Rubio's parents did not become official citizens until he was 4 years old.... This was determined many moons ago, I think it was in about 1870ish (Minor vs. Happersett) the Supremes defined a natural born citizen as one born of parents, that held NO ALLEGIANCE to any foreign government... I know... brings up a few other questions huh?? Like.... I should be taking the DC Tom route on this... BUT!!!!! Have you read Minor v. Happersett? Do you know what natural-born citizen means? Edit: woops, looks like you already answered my second question. Meaning, both parents have to be US citizens at the time of birth. For those of you who are slower, the answer is "no." Edited February 1, 2012 by LeviF91 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) I'm actually surprised that Buftex took the "car insurance" position. That's an Alan Colmes position; a position that gets repeated by the extremely lazy-minded. Actually, I was being sarcastic...hence the eye-roller Chef (I think) was trying to imply that liberals/Democrats have some sort of obsession with dictating what people must do, ignoring a the whole other side to things. I only mentioned the auto insurance issue, because it is one that all (or most of us) participate in, understanding it's merits, even if we, personally, have never had to use them. It just seems like conservatives want government out of their business, unless it comes to one of their pet issues. The hypocrisy is mind-boggling, from all sides...on most any issue. BTW- Good one, though, on the Alan Colmes reference...I will remember that the next time you profess your admiration for Ann Coulter. Edited February 1, 2012 by Buftex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Actually, I was being sarcastic...hence the eye-roller Good one, though, on the Alan Colmes reference...I will remember that the next time you profess your admiration for Ann Coulter. Oh, Ann Coulter, jerk, jerk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Actually, I was being sarcastic...hence the eye-roller Chef (I think) was trying to imply that liberals/Democrats have some sort of obsession with dictating what people must do, ignoring a the whole other side to things. I only mentioned the auto insurance issue, because it is one that all (or most of us) participate in, understanding it's merits, even if we, personally, have never had to use them. It just seems like conservatives want government out of their business, unless it comes to one of their pet issues. The hypocrisy is mind-boggling, from all sides...on most any issue. BTW- Good one, though, on the Alan Colmes reference...I will remember that the next time you profess your admiration for Ann Coulter. Example? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) Example? Gay marriage, abortion come to mind...although I am sure you will be able to find some way of making those into different issues. Oh, Ann Coulter, jerk, jerk. So, you and LA jerk it to Ann Coulter? Whatever floats your boat. Edited February 1, 2012 by Buftex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 How about letting him prove himself in the Senate before annointing him. Last time we tried that with a fresh faced and dare I say "Clean and articulate" Senator fresh out of the State Legislature, look where it got us. Senator / candidate Obama told everyone exactly who he was and what he wanted to do. But the trouble is no one listened or asked him tough questions in our rush to wipe away our "white guilt" to elect an eloquent speaking black guy who Hollywood and the media loved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 So, you and LA jerk it to Ann Coulter? Whatever floats your boat. As opposed to those of you who jerk it to Alan Colmes, I guess? I explained that I like Ann Coulter much like the Detroit Lion fans like Ndamukong Suh. That you would distort it makes me think you really DO believe that car insurance is just like health care insurance. Try to play smarter, Buf. Even if it hurts the noggin. We have enough DINs right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 More on the original post in this thread and why Sen. Rubio's stand against this administration's ant--religious freedom policy is so needed. Town Hall First, They Came for the Catholicsby Michelle Malkin President Obama and his radical feminist enforcers have had it in for Catholic medical providers from the get-go. It's about time all people of faith fought back against this unprecedented encroachment on religious liberty. First, they came for the Catholics. Who's next? This weekend, Catholic bishops informed parishioners of the recent White House edict forcing religious hospitals, schools, charities and other health and social service providers to provide "free" abortifacient pills, sterilizations and contraception on demand in their insurance plans -- even if it violates their moral consciences and the teachings of their churches. NARAL, NOW, Ms. Magazine and the Feminist Majority Foundation all cheered the administration's abuse of the Obamacare law to ram abortion down pro-life medical professionals' throats. Femme dinosaur Eleanor Smeal gloated over the news that the administration had rejected church officials' pleas for compromises: "At last," she exulted, the left's goal of "no-cost birth control" for all had been achieved. As always, tolerance is a one-way street in the Age of Obama. "Choice" is in the eye (and iron fist) of the First Amendment usurper. Like the rising number of states who have revolted against the individual health care mandate at the ballot box and in the courts, targeted Catholics have risen up against the Obamacare regime. Arlington (Va.) Bishop Paul Loverde didn't mince words, calling the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services order "a direct attack against religious liberty. This ill-considered policy comprises a truly radical break with the liberties that have underpinned our nation since its founding." Several bishops vowed publicly to fight the mandate. Bishop Alexander Sample of Marquette, Mich., asserted plainly: "We cannot -- we will not -- comply with this unjust law." It's not just rabid right-wing politicos defying the Obama machine. Pro-life Democratic Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania denounced the "wrong decision." Left-leaning Bishop Robert Lynch threatened "civil disobedience" in St. Petersburg, Fla., over the power grab. Lefty Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne wrote that Obama "botched" the controversy and "threw his progressive Catholic allies under the bus" by refusing to "balance the competing liberty interests here." White House press secretary Jay Carney blithely denied on Tuesday that "there are any constitutional rights issues" involved in the brewing battle. Yet, the Shut Up and Hand Out Abortion Pills order undermines a unanimous Supreme Court ruling issued just last week upholding a religious employer's right to determine whom to hire and fire. And two private colleges have filed federal suits against the government to overturn the unconstitutional abortion coverage decree. Hannah Smith, senior counsel at the nonprofit law firm The Becket Fund, which is representing the schools, boiled it down for Bloomberg News: "This is not really about access to contraception. The mandate is about forcing these religious groups to pay for it against their beliefs." . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 That's not a pro-life bill he's pushing, that's a separation of church and state bill. Makes far too much sense. Almost like he's read the Constitution. hmmm doesn't this backward hic know that the Constitution isn't relevant anymore? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 I can't believe someone's making a First Amendment challenge against the health care bill. Who would could have predicted that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) I can't believe someone's making a First Amendment challenge against the health care bill. Who would could have predicted that? Thanks for bringing that up again Tom. Not so much the topic for reminded me of Celtic_soulja. I wonder how his plan to buy and give houses to poor people worked out. That was him right?? Edited February 1, 2012 by Chef Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) As opposed to those of you who jerk it to Alan Colmes, I guess? I explained that I like Ann Coulter much like the Detroit Lion fans like Ndamukong Suh. That you would distort it makes me think you really DO believe that car insurance is just like health care insurance. Try to play smarter, Buf. Even if it hurts the noggin. We have enough DINs right now. This doesn't even make sense...I have never mentioned Colmes...actually, I think he is kind of a dip-****. The fact that he "retired" from the Hannity & Colmes show, just so he could play the part of light-weight liberal on all the Fox shows says enough about him. Now, maybe I am missing something...I am not a Detroit Lions fan. But, I assune, if I was, Suh would be one of my favorite players. What am I distorting? For a tough talking conservative, you are really hyper-sensitive. Edited February 1, 2012 by Buftex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Thanks for bringing that up again Tom. Not so much the topic for reminded me of Celtic_soulja. I wonder how his plan to buy and give houses to poor people worked out. That was him right?? That's the name. Guy thought he was going to fix up gutted houses for pocket change. Apparently never priced a window or a hot water heater in his life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 That's the name. Guy thought he was going to fix up gutted houses for pocket change. Apparently never priced a window or a hot water heater in his life. I have a feeling his current occupation is "Professional OWS Protester." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 This doesn't even make sense...I have never mentioned Colmes...actually, I think he is kind of a dip-****. The fact that he "retired" from the Hannity & Colmes show, just so he could play the part of light-weight liberal on all the Fox shows says enough about him. Now, maybe I am missing something...I am not a Detroit Lions fan. But, I assune, if I was, Suh would be one of my favorite players. What am I distorting? For a tough talking conservative, you are really hyper-sensitive. Dear Juror#8, I now accept your apology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts