Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

meegbear

(25,438 posts)
Fri Feb 24, 2012, 09:19 AM Feb 2012

"Mulattos" Can't Be President

A lawsuit has been filed to keep Barack Obama off the Alaska 2012 ballot. Because the Constitution clearly forbids mixed race persons from being president.

As stated above, for an Individual to be a candidate for the office of president of the United States, the candidate must meet the qualifications set forth in the United States Constitution and one of those qualifications is that the Candidate shall be a "natural born citizen" of the United States. As Barack Hussein Obama II is of the "mulatto" race, his status of citizenship is founded upon the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Before the (purported) ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, the race of "Negro" or "mulatto" had no standing to be citizens of the United States under the United States Constitution.


They aren't even pretending any more.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/
12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

HopeHoops

(47,675 posts)
7. Some libruls fuckin' up the foundin' fathers with their librul bullshit.
Fri Feb 24, 2012, 11:12 AM
Feb 2012

That is sort of the way they think.

dragonlady

(3,577 posts)
9. They subscribe to the notion that the amendment was adopted invalidly
Fri Feb 24, 2012, 11:56 AM
Feb 2012

I had never heard of this until just now. It's a theory that the 14th Amendment is invalid supposedly because southern states were denied representation in the Senate when it was passed and the legislatures in the southern states that ratified it were not validly elected. (Lots of anger over Reconstruction.) Apparently this was brought up during the sixties during the civil rights struggles. However, if there was anything to this it seems that it would have been acted upon sometime in the last 140 years. Obviously they are desperate.

lunatica

(53,410 posts)
2. They love them the Constitution and the Bible because
Fri Feb 24, 2012, 10:23 AM
Feb 2012

both are open to interpretation so they can invent stuff up and claim it's in both. They can pick one sentence out, divorce it of it's intended context and just make shit up about it. Nifty, huh?

stuntcat

(12,022 posts)
3. maybe it'll even go to the Supreme Court!
Fri Feb 24, 2012, 10:27 AM
Feb 2012

( )

wow, what an incredibly shameful waste of time and energy.

 

rdking647

(5,113 posts)
5. well this was the state that elected the quitter
Fri Feb 24, 2012, 11:05 AM
Feb 2012

there are a lot of idiots up there.
i guess in some people the lack of sunlight causes their brain to shrivel up and die.Its only a few hardy souls that can survive up their and keep their minds intact

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
8. I can guarantee that the judge that gets this case
Fri Feb 24, 2012, 11:12 AM
Feb 2012

will NOT be amused in the slightest. This klown will get shot out of a judicial cannon and sanctioned up the ass.

NoGOPZone

(2,971 posts)
10. The "purported" ratification of the 14th
Fri Feb 24, 2012, 12:00 PM
Feb 2012

I've heard the crazies ask for its repealment, but now they're bringing up for the ancient argument that it was never valid to begin with. Some things never die, even over a century later.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"Mulattos" Can'...