Don't start a thread saying that the Constitution defines "natural born citizen" as "having two American citizens for parents" and then call us hypocrites for ignoring the Constitution.
You fail again.
"Terrorism is the war for the poor and powerless. War is the terrorism for the rich and powerful."
confirm that definition. Next month Mario Apuzzo, esq will present his case to the Supreme Court. Then we will all know for sure.
If the Supreme Court rules according to the historical definition, will you defend the constitution or the President?
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
Imagine a constitutional lawyer abused a loophole in the law to get elected president of the USA. The conservatives will have a field day with that. Should have nominated Hillary, at least we would have known what we were getting.
Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.
True or false, mcamelyne:
Your dumb ass just implicitly accused others of hypocrisy for ignoring the "Natural born citizen" clause of the Constitution, in which defines it as "having two American citizens for parents"
I want a true or false answer so all answers other than "False" will be marked for the record as "True"
Now that that matter is settled, we can say that the hypocrisy between the issues you presented does not actually exist.
Thanks for playing.
P.S. You have access to a site called "Google". Remarkably, using this site and others like it (known as "Search Engines"), you can easy find access to various documents, including but not limited to The U.S. Constitution and The Bill of Rights.
your imagined brilliance, take a hard look at what Mario has written. He is not comical like Orly or bumbling like Berg. He has actually written some good stuff that will be going to the supreme court next month.
Which are you a constitutionalist or a liberal hypocrite?
You haven't even read the Constitution. I have. The whole thing. Including the Amendments. Even the boring parts. I carry it with me everywhere I go.
Are you a Constitutionalist?
How could you be? You haven't even read it.
I think it is time to revise it. It served us well for 200 years, but the America of the founding fathers no longer exists.
On a point of order, I have read it several times. It is an inspired document but is not the Bible so should be changed, updated or amended on a regular basis.
Ironically, the Bible has had as many if not more changes made to it that the Constitution.
So once again, you fail.
