Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: DiogenesLamp

“All that proves is that Black’s law Dictionary is wrong.All that proves is that Black’s law Dictionary is wrong.”

Let me guess: You did not say one word about Blacks having it wrong until you needed reasons why Barack Obama cannot be president. I can respect contrarians, but not people who start telling the rules different when then don’t like who is winning.

“Legal Jargon is fine, but when it conflicts with actual facts, it needs to be slapped down hard because it is misleading.”

That’s not what you did. None of the eligibility deniers spoke up when what was at stake was the principle.


50 posted on 06/21/2011 10:35:25 AM PDT by BladeBryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: BladeBryan

“None of the eligibility deniers spoke up when what was at stake was the principle”.

Word salad? Just mix em up with tongs and call it an argument.

Hey, did you hear the one about Obama and his promise to bring back civility to American politics?

Word Salad is simple. You seem to be wielding nothing but Obama tongs. Toss that salad Blade. Really, Blade?

“I can respect contrarians, but not people who start telling the rules different when then don’t like who is winning”.

Winning? Charlie Sheen winning? Are you winning, Blade?


63 posted on 06/21/2011 12:36:14 PM PDT by widdle_wabbit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

To: BladeBryan; DiogenesLamp

>> “None of the eligibility deniers spoke up when what was at stake was the principle” <<

.
Just what does that bit of blather mean to you?

We have been speaking up loudly since the spring of 2008 about O not being a natural born citizen under the definition of common usage of the time the constitution was written, and the definition (same) that was stated in four Supreme Court cases.


66 posted on 06/21/2011 1:27:17 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Going 'EGYPT' - 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

To: BladeBryan
Let me guess: You did not say one word about Blacks having it wrong until you needed reasons why Barack Obama cannot be president. I can respect contrarians, but not people who start telling the rules different when then don’t like who is winning.

When you can explain why the status of Slaves and Indians did not comport with your "Black's law" definition, let me know. Till then, you are just making noise.

“Legal Jargon is fine, but when it conflicts with actual facts, it needs to be slapped down hard because it is misleading.”

That’s not what you did. None of the eligibility deniers spoke up when what was at stake was the principle.

You are going to have to make your point more clear. It may make sense to you, but it does not to me.

Article II is all about Allegiance. Born to one Foreign Father and raised by another in a foreign country, Obama's allegiance is unquestionable.

He has none. Eligible he is not. Only idiot Democrats are stupid enough to have thought so in the first place.

Democrats: Party of lies and evil. From Racist Andrew Jackon (making the south safe for slavery) to Idiot Barack/Barry/Steve Hussein Soetoro/Soebarkhoe/Obama, or whatever his name is.

69 posted on 06/21/2011 2:35:25 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Obama hides behind the Grass Skirts of Hawaiian Bureaucrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

To: BladeBryan
Leave DiogenesLamp out of it. I have the same question and skepticism concerning Black's 6th edition dictionary.

Please subtract all motivation and address DiogenesLamp's point, or else concede.

Trolls commonly seek to make a poster the issue, especially when they are out of logic and factual ammo...

72 posted on 06/21/2011 3:12:22 PM PDT by SteveH (First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson