Good, then there should be no question as to whether a Candidate
should be made to "prove" his Citizenship, right?
Or is it only "Law" when it doesn't interfere with your Loony Liberal
Agenda?!?!?!?!?!?
On Nov 3, 11:26 am, "Mark Kahle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> unlike you and your fearless leader georgie girl (read your post), i
> consider constitutional provision as law. not, to paraphrase him (and you),
> 'just a piece of paper'.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 3, 11:17 am, "Mark Kahle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > ONLY a republican would think it necessary to ("having to write LAWS that
> > > will prevent") bypass legislation and laws that are in place.
>
> > When such Laws don't support the Constitution, you bet.
>
> > Please provide a LINK to ANY Law that currently has a President
> > "proving" he is Constitutionally eligible?
>
> > I'll wait here.
>
> > Or don't you think Constitutional requirements are important to the
> > process?
>
> --
> Mark M. Kahle
> Blessed are the bewildered for they don't know the difference.... Me- Hide
> quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
