Justice Kennedy rejects 2 more challenges to Obama

AP via SFGate ^ | 12/17/8

[SmithL]

WASHINGTON, (AP) -- Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy has rejected two more efforts to get the court to consider whether President-elect Barack Obama is eligible to take office.

Kennedy on Wednesday denied without comment an appeal by Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania attorney, that claims Obama is either a citizen of Kenya or Indonesia and is ineligible to be president . . .

[RC2]

I agree. The good Lord will have His way...won’t He? I only hope that our Judges in the Supreme Court don’t retire until Obama is out of office. The only thing about this is that it is my understanding that the President can appoint as many Judges as he pleases. Is this your understanding? I have heard that he can appoint 15 if he desires.

Are you of the Catholic Faith? Don’t answer if you don’t want to.......Just curious. I am but not practicing.

[Lurking Libertarian]

I have heard that he can appoint 15 if he desires.

The size of the Supreme Court is fixed at 9 Justices, by statute. Unless Congress votes to change that, Obama cannot appoint anyone to the Supreme Court unless there is a vacancy.

What you are probably thinking of is Franklin Roosevelt's proposal to expand the Supreme Court from 9 to 15, which was defeated in Congress.

[Star Traveler]

You said — “I agree. The good Lord will have His way...won’t He? I only hope that our Judges in the Supreme Court don’t retire until Obama is out of office. The only thing about this is that it is my understanding that the President can appoint as many Judges as he pleases. Is this your understanding? I have heard that he can appoint 15 if he desires.”

Well, you can do some reading of the following and see what you come up with...

http://teachinghistory.org/history-content/ask-a-historian/19442

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_switch_in_time_that_saved_nine

—

And — “Are you of the Catholic Faith? Don’t answer if you don’t want to.......Just curious. I am but not practicing.”

No, a conservative Protestant Evangelical, who is pre-trib, pre-mil and dispensational... I think that about covers it...

[Gemsbok]

Thanks,

it’s ping-worthy!

[Star Traveler]

You said — “In the meantime, you need to stop acting like a troll, brother in Christ, and keep silent.”

Did you see my posting count... :-) I don’t think that’s possible.

But, have you ever wondered about the governmental make-up of the United States under the rule of Christ, on the throne of David, ruling from Jerusalem, in Israel?

You know, at that time, the actual and physical government of the United States will no longer allow any other religions to exist here (or elsewhere in the world...). Will that require a change in the Constitution or will the Constitution be totally scrapped at that time?

Will you be one of the ones appointed to oversee the government in the United States, acting on direct orders from Jesus Christ, as he maintains his “rod of iron” rule over all nations?

That won’t be too far away, as the “timeclock” gauging when it will happen is what is happening to Israel. God has said that Israel being back in the land means that it will never be removed from there again. If the Muslims have their way (in human terms) they will have the ability to physically remove Israel from existence as a nation in not too many years if not totally destroy it by nuclear weapons.

They can’t last there, in the land, too much longer (in conventional and human terms, especially the way the Muslims are absolutely rabid about destroying every last single Jew and removing it from being a nation).

But, since this is not decided in human terms, that means the closer the Muslims get to achieving that goal, that’s how close the return of Jesus Christ is — on this earth — to return to do battle and war with the Muslims and Islamic nations and kill every last single one of them that has joined with Islam and wants to destroy Israel and Jews.

After Christ comes and kills about a billion Muslims (plus a lot of other dead people in the world), then Christ will be physically present in Jerusalem setting up his rule and reign over the nations — including the United States.

That’s what we’re looking forward to, shortly...

[curiosity]

Have you explained why the eligibility issue is “nonsense”?

Numerous times on many threads. I'm getting tired of it, however.

I think from now on I will just be content to send people to the following link, which pretty much refutes all the birther crap.

[little jeremiah]

MHG and Kevmo - click the link curiosity (a misnomer if I ever saw one) posted to debunk the tinfoil hattery nonsense.

Here is his link, and it does not say who pays for this blog or writes it (that I could see):

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/

The blog has five “debunking” sites listed:

Media Matters

“Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.”

FactCheck

And

Fight The Smears

So it’s crystal clear that curiosity is an 0bama pimp and nothing more. My question for you, curiosity: Are you an obama volunteer, or are you paid? If paid, is it by the hour or a salaried position? Are you connected with ACORN, or are you part of his transition team?

[curiosity]

Why is the person who funds the site relevant?

The site doesn't attempt to any expert analysis.

It merely presents arguments backed up by evidence evidence that is easily verifiable by any lay reader. None of its arguments are premised on the site's trustworthiness, nor does it make an argument from authority or claim any expertise.

[little jeremiah]

Obama team. Simple.

[Star Traveler]

You said — “And one more thing: the actual proofing of eligibility is a federal function, not a state function. It may be/it is the job of SoS and election commissions in the various states to vett candidates for federal office. BUT it is a federal function to force proof of eligibility based upon the Federal Constitutional provisions. This is done via the Congressional reception of the electoral votes and SCOTUS verification of the Constitutional requirements.”

I would say that since individual states have control over their Electoral votes for President and Vice President of the United States — that means each state has complete control over who makes it on the ballot or off the ballot. I believe it’s a “states rights” issue and it should be *totally* under control of that state and its own citizens — exclusively.

In light of that, the state can have complete control over how they want to vet a candidate for President of the United States (and Vice President) and be able require proof of whether a candidate qualifies under the Constitution and whether they get Electoral College vote[s] from that particular state.

That’s why we need state laws to vet the Presidential Candidate in that they have to *prove* that they meet the Constitutional requirements for office.

—

And then you said — “If this particular fraud, Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, aka Barry Obama, is exposed as ineligible in such a way that we may assume he knew himself ineligible and went ahead soliciting hundreds of millions of dollars, then he may also be exposed to the Federal Executive branch via the Justice Department.”

I don’t like Obama and I didn’t vote for him and I didn’t want him in office but it’s obvious that the majority of the voters did and they “outvoted me”...

But, having said that — so far no one has proved any fraud on Obama’s part. If they had proved fraud, he would have already been prosecuted. Have you noticed that there are no prosecutions of fraud for Obama. Perhaps there will be in just another couple of weeks — but they had better *hurry* because once he is President, it will take impeachment by Congress to do that and we know how well Clinton’s went...

—

And finally, you said — “It is telling that obama’s sycophants/defenders/apologists have to resort to lies, ridicule, condescension, and dissembling to deflect the truth of this man’s blatant ineligibility! Now we can expect Non Sequitur, curiosity, allmendream, xlib, Drew68, Star Traveler, tublecane, zarodinu, CitizenBlade, and a host of other trollish brutes to take aim at this exposition. The behavior will be instructive of Axelrod astroturfing, if nothing else.”

Well, I see my name in there... LOL...

The problem that a lot of people have is *with the facts* on the matter of Obama’s eligibility. There is no proof for the non-eligibility of Obama, which is why people are having no progress with it. And there is no proof of fraud, which is why no prosecutor is bringing a case forward.

You can’t convict someone without proof and that’s what you’re trying to do.

The thing to really do is *fix the defective vetting process* and get the states to require proof (by law) of a candidate’s eligibility under the Constitution (or else they can’t be placed on the ballot)....

That’s the only solution that you’re going to have, at the present time.

[RC2]

Ahhhh.....nine it is. Thanks again. I enjoy speaking with you.

[Star Traveler]

Thanks..., you’re one of the few... :-)

[MN Doc]

For what it's worth, it only takes four votes for the court to hear a case. The four conservative justices could force a hearing on the issue if all four agreed. Given that there've been no leaks of dissension from the Court, I suspect (without proof) they've all decided they don't need to hear these cases. I'm confident that if Justice Scalia thought there was a Constitutional issue at hand, we'd know about it.

[El Gato]

What will happen later when we find out it's true, the Obamination was ineligible to serve ... what are these judges going to say then ?

Nothing, they serve for life. Except on "bad behavior", but the 'Rat Congress wouldn't do that even if a certified copy of the Certificate of Birth shows BHO to have been born in Havana of Fidel and some dark skinned Cuban groupie.

[El Gato]

Or, there could genuinely be nothing to this stuff

How would SCOTUS know one way or the other? They have ordered no documents, taken no testimony. They have not ruled on the merits. They haven't even examined them.

[El Gato]

Never can be that there is no substance to a charge.

AFAIK, no court has ruled that way though. They've thrown out cases based on lack of "standing", on "time is not ripe", on "Not the job of whover is being sued" etc, and other essentially procedural grounds. Not one has request it's own certified copy of the Certificate or Certification of Live Birth, which they could do as courts of competent jurisdiction.

[television is just wrong]

“12/18/08 - URGENT NOTICE – False rumors are circulating – Justice Kennedy denied our Application for an Injunction to Stay Electoral Vote Count by Congress on January 8, 2009. However, our Writ of Certiorari is still pending and is now scheduled for Conference before U.S. Supreme Court on January 9, 2009.”

This just posted on obamacrimes.com website.

[television is just wrong]

“12/18/08 - URGENT NOTICE – False rumors are circulating – Justice Kennedy denied our Application for an Injunction to Stay Electoral Vote Count by Congress on January 8, 2009. However, our Writ of Certiorari is still pending and is now scheduled for Conference before U.S. Supreme Court on January 9, 2009.”

This just posted on obamacrimes.com website.

[television is just wrong]

“12/18/08 - URGENT NOTICE – False rumors are circulating – Justice Kennedy denied our Application for an Injunction to Stay Electoral Vote Count by Congress on January 8, 2009. However, our Writ of Certiorari is still pending and is now scheduled for Conference before U.S. Supreme Court on January 9, 2009.”

This just posted on obamacrimes.com website.

[El Gato]

If it's discovered that Zero is constitutionally ineligible, are all of this Executive efforts thereby invalidated?

Probably, certainly there will be no end of defendants arguing that.

But since nothing like that or this has every happened before:

No Body FReeking Knows