Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Where is lying given full faith and credit in the Constitution?
"Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state...... unless some random person says they're lying then it's f*ck-all."
There has been no verification that there was no lie. No one has been permitted to verify the info.[/b]
The concept of "Full Faith and Credit" simply eludes you, doesn't it? If the Government of Hawaii goes ont he record to say "Yep, it's legit, and now stop pestering us", that's it. That's ex cathedra. That's what Full Faith means. They're not accountable to a detestable old racist sheriff from Arizona or a crazed dentist/lawyer/real estate agent/dry cleaner operating out of Orange County. Can't tolerate that? Too bad, because it's right in the Constitution you claim to defend.
Actually, it began before that, when Obama was a candidate.
Hence the "/gained momentum."
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
And the issue hasn't arisen before because the last POTUS/VPOTUS who had an eligibility issue was Chester Arthur in the late 1800's
And because the last POTUS/VPOTUS who was black was... oh... never mind...
Quote:
Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States [] natural-born citizens.”
It's nice that you are such a stickler for honesty and integrity.
How does that square with you posting a comment, which someone responded to, and then going back, editing your post, and trying to claim you never made the original comment? That really doesn't strike me as particularly honest, and I think it would be a textbook example of a LACK of integrity.
It's nice that you are such a stickler for honesty and integrity.
How does that square with you posting a comment, which someone responded to, and then going back, editing your post, and trying to claim you never made the original comment? That really doesn't strike me as particularly honest, and I think it would be a textbook example of a LACK of integrity.
You DO realize that anyone can quote a post, delete what was in it, and insert something else, no?
I'll demonstrate:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge
Blah blah blah... bluster, blather, hot air
But click on the arrow in the above quote, and you get this, what was really posted:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge
It's nice that you are such a stickler for honesty and integrity.
How does that square with you posting a comment, which someone responded to, and then going back, editing your post, and trying to claim you never made the original comment? That really doesn't strike me as particularly honest, and I think it would be a textbook example of a LACK of integrity.
You may not have noticed, but people EDIT other's quoted posts in smarmy, etc., ways frequently on city-data threads.
Last edited by InformedConsent; 08-08-2013 at 01:01 PM..
The concept of "Full Faith and Credit" simply eludes you, doesn't it? If the Government of Hawaii goes ont he record to say "Yep, it's legit, and now stop pestering us", that's it. That's ex cathedra. That's what Full Faith means. They're not accountable to a detestable old racist sheriff from Arizona or a crazed dentist/lawyer/real estate agent/dry cleaner operating out of Orange County. Can't tolerate that? Too bad, because it's right in the Constitution you claim to defend.
You're getting testy... Obama's ineligibility problem is getting too much exposure.
Revisit the example of Chester Arthur (NOT Black, by the way, this has NOTHING to do with race). He was born in the U.S., but was Constitutionally ineligible because he wasn't a natural born citizen. He didn't even become a U.S. citizen at all until he naturalized when his father did years after his own birth: GOP Rep Supports Passing A Bill To Investigate Obama's Birth Certificate
You DO realize that anyone can quote a post, delete what was in it, and insert something else, no?
i'd imagine that the mods have ways of telling if there is an intentional misquote and i'd assume it's a violation of the TOS. so, have you reported the intentional misquote to the mods?
And because the last POTUS/VPOTUS who was black was... oh... never mind...
What a shame you're so blinded by your racism.
Alien parentage has nothing to do with race. It has to do with nationality.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
