Where YOU can be a squeeky wheel!
Squeeky Wheels
March 28, 2024, 06:27:56 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to SMF For Free
 
  Home Help Search Staff List Login Register  

The Demonization of Birthers (Or, How the Obots Dull Occam’s Razor!)

Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: The Demonization of Birthers (Or, How the Obots Dull Occam’s Razor!)  (Read 79 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Nick_A
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 76


View Profile
« on: January 03, 2011, 10:10:02 am »

Nick,
Possibly I should have been more clear. I do not agree that Birthers and their opponents hold the positions you stated. I also believe there is the third [and in my opinion the correct one] position. That the Constitution clearly States the US House has responsibility to vet and either approve [certify] or disapproved President Elects.
No where in the Founding documents is the requirement that Candidates pass a "litmus test". And for good reason. If there was Candidates would be challenged by opponents on frivolous issues and it would destroy our Electoral system.
 The Founders wisely placed the veting of Presidential Elects in the "Peoples House", the Members of which we choose by direct Election every 2 years.
Birthers IMO were opposed to Obama from the start and chose the best issue to challenge him on after his Election. After all the Bush bashing including the charge that The SCOTUS "choose" Bush in 2000 I really do not blame them at all. And it is good Propaganda to help defeat Obama in 2012.
Opponents to birthers realize how potent the charge is and concentrate on attacking the messenger hoping to marginalize the Birthers and to make them look like fanatics in an effort to defeat the effective "propaganda.
I hope this makes it clear what i meant in my other comment.

Quite true Ross.  But as it turns out the "Peoples House" didn't do their job.  It has been revealed that its leaders didn't sign their name to anything.  It is not a matter of a litmus test but simply determining constituional eligibility.

These "leaders" are ultimtely responsiblle to the people if it truly is the "People's House."  This means that if it is believed that the people are still respected as "We the People" and  worthy of the vote then they have the right to this basic information on what basis Obama is considered constituaionally eligible.  If they are now considered only as "We the Great Unwashed" then of course they are too stupid to have the standing of those worthy of the vote.

It is simply a question of if the government works for the people or if the people are slave to the government.  If the government works for the people, a voter is entitled to know on what basis a candidate has been declared eligible.  If the voter works for the government, it is none of their business.  I believe tht the government works for the people so consequently believe the voter has the right to know on what basis a candidate has been declared constitutionally eligible.  It should be a matter of public record.
Report Spam   Logged

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum


Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy