Sometimes when I type really fast, I can get letters backwards.
Posted on 12/08/2008 7:12:24 AM PST by cycle of discernment
Grounds? Maybe for convenience they used Instant. Not as much work, no mess and no filter to catch anything.
And the other case will go the same way. At which point, the USSC will become “conspirators,” right?
It is looney because this stuff was considered and rejected over a year ago. It is looney because even IF by some extreme stretch, there was an impropriety with his birth certificate and (say) he was “born in Kenya,” it absolutely won’t matter. The majority elected him, and a very large part of those who did not vote for him would find it distasteful and childish to go back and try to “undo” an election. And that’s precisely how it would be viewed, as “undoing” a “legal” election. The public absolutely won’t stand for it.
I’m fighting right there next to you. I will never give up.
>>Did the USSC indicate WHO has the standing to ensure a candidate for office meets the qualifications stated in the US Constitution?
Or were the Founders just supposing the Constitution would be followed by gentlemen with a sense of honor?<<
This seems to be the crux of the issue IMO. I think that they are letting it go because it is not their venue tbh. Someone has to be responsible to do this, but I never thought the SCOTUS was the one to do it.
The question is WHO is? Can someone answer this question please? I have asked a couple times now. maybe I have missed the reply. Please post or e-mail me.
“Now I hope that people on FR who have invested so much time and energy on this will move on and focus on defeating Obama socialist and defeatist policies.”
Okay. I am now lookin ahead the 2012 Presidential primary because it’s never too soon to prepare.
Let’s see, for the Dems: We have Obama and no one else. So there will be no primary for them.
For the Republicans: Arnold Schwarzenegger, Mel Martinez and please feel free to list anyone else you think might qualify for this primary.
For the Independent parties: Hugo Chavez, El Presidente of Mexico (can’t think of his name), Roger Colero and anyone else you think might qualify for this primary.
Oh yes, I quite agree with you. We should move on and dream of candidates for 2012 who will lead us to victory or at the very least defeat the policies of Obama.
“I’ll fight Zero every step of the way ...”
Me too. I find it astounding that there are a few here who seem absolutely exhilarated by this result! On top of that, they insult those of us who have expressed our intention to fight him every step of the way.
They say we should “move on” and they could post their own threads on, um, more productive topics, but seem determined to linger on threads related to Obama’s constitutional eligibility for office and make annoying nuisances of themselves.
It’s NOT over. It will NEVER be over.
No birth certificate. No peace.
Because the SCOTUS lost a lot of power over Bush-v-Gore. SCOTUS really does not want to sully itself with political rulings, nor should they.
My point is that the electorate wants this guy to be president, and there are just too many Americans out there who don't care about the Constitution, as I think we both agree.
Sometimes when I type really fast, I can get letters backwards.
My understanding is that the primary relief sought by his application was for a stay, so by denying the stay, they have effectively denied the entire case.
As we say when one case is finally concluded...”next case”.
And there are other cases.
Keyes’ case has the best chance of clearing the standing threshold issue.
I do not pretend to know what the SCOTUS is thinking, but I suspect that if they do want to hear this controversy, they decided this was not the best case to do it. And if that is the case, I agree with that.
They simply weren't going to tolerate Clinton being removed for "sex" (and yes, we know it was about obstruction of justice). For the most part, elections are viewed as even more sacrosanct than the constitution, for in the minds of most people, elections ARE the embodiment of the constitution---the "will of the people." It's very, very dangerous to even try to overturn an election once it's taken place. The only time that has ever happened was when Nixon all but gave the noose to his attackers AND had a bad economy to boot.
Irregardless you took my post wrong.Calm down. I meant that if JUST the STAY was denied but the case itself was not, IMAGINE the MSM freaking on having to report this!Kapeche?
Uh, defending the Constitution IS our purpose.
***Well, it was. This place has been overrun by RINOs. Our constitutional republic just took a severe, possibly deadly, injury. And those who tried to do something about it have had our sanity questioned. The lunatics own the asylum now.
"But I won't convince you, and if the USSC doesn't take the case, that won't convince you either."
The "proof" that Obama released is a proven counterfeit document. Until that has been accepted, and until the Kenyan possibility has been disproven, nothing will convince me that he qualifies as a natural born citizen. He has spent hundreds of thousands to keep his documentation sealed. Why is that, if there is really nothing to hide?
I am calling into question the sanity of some people around here. Yep.
“January 2009 - No Rules, Just Left.”
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.