Posted on 02/04/2012 7:39:14 AM PST by Hotlanta Mike
Wait and see. You may be proved wrong quite soon.
You appear to be willing to accept that when it overrides your “arrogantly” (smile) IMPOSED condition that parentage does not matter. Which is correct ONLY after the changes made way after Obama’s birth and ignores those conditions prevaltn at that time as law.
It’s like insisting that a new version of software was in effect when that software version had not been released at a certain past date. And which references (according to your parentage posit but not in reality) what was there and vallid in a past time frame.
Misleading misinformation!
cheers,
I never get tired of birthers saying that. :-)
"You appear to be willing to accept that when it overrides your “arrogantly” (smile) IMPOSED condition that parentage does not matter. Which is correct ONLY after the changes made way after Obama’s birth and ignores those conditions prevaltn at that time as law."
See, birthers juts can't accept that they are wrong about anything. Nothing changed. Birthers like to believe it did, but that's exactly what the courts have been saying you are wrong about. But of course, any birther knows the law better than any silly old judge. Naturally.
Yes it was reported and no it was not unprecedented:
Here is the LA times report of that meeting from 15 January:
“WASHINGTON — President-elect Barack Obama paid a visit Wednesday to the Supreme Court and chatted in front of a fireplace with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., a fellow Harvard law graduate whose confirmation he opposed three years ago.
Twice in recent decades, incoming presidents have paid a pre-inaugural visit to the court. President Reagan and Vice President George H.W. Bush did so in 1981, and President Clinton and Vice President Al Gore in 1992.
No such visit was arranged for President Bush in 2001. Since the Supreme Court had cleared the way for Bush’s victory a few weeks earlier in a 5-4 ruling, a friendly visit was seen as awkward.
Last month Roberts wrote Obama and extended an invitation. Noting the past visits, he said, “The associate justices and I would be pleased to see that sporadic practice become a congenial tradition.”
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jan/15/nation/na-obama-roberts15
I say this Psalm almost incessantly!
Really?
And WHAT was reported??
And was that what you claim “reported” not done by his State-Run Dung Head Media???
Did GWB and Cheney go there???
No such visit was arranged for President Bush in 2001. Since the Supreme Court had cleared the way for Bush's victory a few weeks earlier in a 5-4 ruling, a friendly visit was seen as awkward.
This quote just make my point, first Alito protested and stayed away likewise he expressed his opinion "speaking" out when scolded at the SOTU address. Second, Clarence Thomas has publicly declared: "We are evading that" as reference to the NBC issue and their ruling in Florida 2000 recount!!
So mister or miss, tell us WHAT else were reported. There still room here for more trolls at their own peril!!!
Just pointing out that you were wrong about it being unprecedented and not reported.
Do you deny that Reagan made an identical visit?
”I’m still waiting for the [court decision] on whether or not a Puerto Rican can run for president of the United States,
“Oh really?” asked Serrano. “So you haven’t answered the one about whether I can serve as president, but you answer this one?”
“We’re evading that one,” answered Thomas, “We’re giving you another option.””
Hey newcomer smart Alec. Just tell us in plain language WHAT was reported at that meeting except for one single photo op withou Alito, who was protesting to be among the cowards!!!
Believe in fantastic conspiracy theories all you want. I am more inclined to believe that birthers simply misunderstand the law.
A new SP?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.