Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

'Birthers' begin to turn on allies

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-11 10:21 AM
Original message
'Birthers' begin to turn on allies
:spray:

Dana Milbank | 'Birthers' begin to turn on allies
7:31 PM, Oct. 23, 2011 |

Dana Milbank


WASHINGTON — Say what you will about the birthers, but don't call them partisan.

The people who brought you the Barack Obama birth-certificate hullabaloo now have a new target: Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, a man many people think could be the Republican vice presidential nominee. While they're at it, they also have Bobby Jindal, the Republican governor of Louisiana and perhaps a future presidential candidate, in their sights.

Each man, the birthers say, is ineligible to be president because he runs afoul of the constitutional requirement that a president must be a “natural-born citizen” of the United States. Rubio's parents were Cuban nationals at the time of his birth, and Jindal's parents were citizens of India.

When I heard of the birthers' latest targets, from a comment this week from a washingtonpost.com reader in my online chat, I figured it was a joke. But, sure enough, Alex Leary of the St. Petersburg Times reported that various bright lights of the birther community — Mario Apuzzo, Charles Kerchner, Orly Taitz and Alan Keyes — were casting doubt on Rubio's eligibility.

“Sen. Marco Rubio is not a natural-born citizen of the United States to constitutional standards,” Kerchner writes in his blog. “He was born a dual citizen of both Cuba and the U.S.A. He is thus not eligible to serve as the president or vice president.” A few months ago, Kerchner used the same logic to proclaim that “Jindal is NOT a natural-born citizen of the United States. His parents were not U.S. citizens when he was born.”

more...

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20111024/OPINION04/310240025/Dana-Milbank-Birthers-begin-turn-allies?odyssey=nav|head
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Turbineguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-11 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
1. But I would think
That Rubio's and Jindal's lack of qualifications would overcome any objections the Birthers might have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FSogol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-11 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
2. But they are not racist.
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ehrnst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-11 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Of course not. Herman Cain's colored, right? And he supports everything that
the baggers about the rest of the coloreds...

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-11 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
3. dual citizen of the U.S. AND Cuba?
I didn't know there were "halfunists" ... Half communists ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
damonm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-11 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. These would be known as "pinkos" back in the day. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Politicalboi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-11 02:03 PM
Response to Original message
4. So the Founding Fathers parents
Were American citizens. Who knew. LOL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-11 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. The clause didn't apply to anyone who was a citizen at the time the Constitution was adopted
Edited on Mon Oct-24-11 03:29 PM by jberryhill
The birthers have their heads up their asses, but someone brings this same irrelevant point up in just about every thread:

"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

At the time the Constitution was adopted, there was no 35 year old who was born in the United States since, duh, the United States had not been around for 35 years.

They weren't that dumb.

Of course, there is no currently living person to whom the clause applies, and I think the last president to qualify under that clause was Van Buren (off the top of my head).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 11:45 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC