1. Who says YOU are a conservative??? What do we call people who make up laws to suit their beliefs??? Uh, LIBERALS!!! Like LIBERAL activist judges do. This is what YOU are doing with your Imaginary Two Citizen Parent requirement.
2. Politeness??? Yeah, I can do polite. Problem is that the two citizen parent Birthers here can’t. Disagree with them, and they start calling you names. Two citizen parent Birthers can NOT distinguish any boundary between REALITY and PERSONAL OPINION.
All this stuff is very personal to them, so that when you point out their numerous legal boo-boos they personalize it and think someone is out to get them or something. There is a profound mental disconnect for the two citizen parent Birthers so that “what I think the law should be” becomes “what the law is.” This is why two citizen parent Birthers are sooo RABID.
3. Wanna an example of Number 2 above??? Let’s look at YOUR post here. When I mentioned the Ankeny case in post number 41 above, this is what YOU replied in post number 47. Quoting YOU:
“I’ve been a part of the Birther conversations on Free Republic since Obama’s run for office first sparked them. I have spent hundreds of hours following those conversations, and studying countless references elsewhere. I haven’t read the case you refer to, but I must say that I’m surprised that few have mentioned it, until now.”
That paragraph above is what YOU said. Sooo, YOU have never read the Ankeny decision, and yet when the Georgia Judge hands down his decision, based on the reasoning found in Ankeny, what is YOUR reaction??? Is it to go and actually read the Ankeny decision so that you might understand where Malihi is coming from, to decide whether he is right or wrong??? To decide whether or not he is following the law??? Oh H*LL NO!!!
Instead, YOU do a thread called “Who Is Judge Michael Malihi?,” and fill it up with all sorts of insults against him, without ever once even bothering to actually read the relatively short and easy-to-read Ankeny case.
See. This issue isn’t about the LAW for you and your brethern here. It is some kind of weird psychological thing where you pretend the law is what you want it to be, as opposed to what it is. Then, you plop a “CONSERVATIVE” label on yourself, and set out to preach (lie) to other conservatives here how Rubio and Jindal are not eligible, when you haven’t even read the relatively few cases that apply.
Sooo, I think you need to examine your own motives and behavior and if you do, you might come to the conclusion that what I really am isn’t IMPOLITE. I am far, far worse than that. I am PERCEPTIVE.
I say this hoping you will do the right thing and get off this Imaginary Law stuff.
You, Miss Squeeky, are off your ever lovin’ rocker. Call that an ad hominem if you like, but given your behavior here, I’m just stating a fact.
I don’t know what’s going on with you, or what sort of interpersonal relationship issues you have, but one thing is certain — you can’t have a civil conversation to save your life.
I’ve tried very hard to bring you up to speed on where you are, and who you’re talking to, but apparently that’s gone in one ear, and out the other. Again — this is an established community of real people who know each other quite well — many in real life. Some relationships here go back well over a decade, and even many newer members have established themselves as decent, intelligent, and worthy individuals.
Respect here is earned - not given under duress. I’ve earned what respect and friendship I have here. And I have quite a bit, primarily because I understand the simple concepts of courtesy and manners. No one’s asking you to bow and kowtow to anyone. Simply act like an adult, and you’ll probably be alright. Keep up the nasty tongue lashing routine, and your days here will be few.
You need to get it through your head that this isn’t YouTube, or some other open forum where no one cares if you’re a trash mouth. Step out of line here too often, and the owner may bounce you off the forum.
Good riddance.