“He’s spewing the same talking points as a noob on another thread. Must be today’s memo.”
This coming from someone whose only talking point seems to be “lol, ure a newb, shutup”.
Quite the convincing argument, I must say. </sarcasm>
But, to fortify my point, I’ll also point out the fact that my argument is also more pertinent in light of what has transpired so far—each of these cases has been dismissed. Judges are unwilling to take cases of this nature, and the evidence, while nothing to scoff at, is also not strong enough to warrant a subpoena. It is enough to arouse suspicion, but you need more than suspicion to get a subpoena; and Obummer appears to be ever-obstinate in his refusal to provide the BC.
Whereas, were we to funnel our resources into a strategy focused on legislation, in a future election—perhaps even the next—we could prevent this all from happening again, and maybe (and that’s a big maybe) get Obama to show us his BC, if we can avoid a grandfather clause.
You pick: waste time on court cases that have gone and will go nowhere, or take that time and use it to pursue a pragmatic strategy that is much more likely to achieve results. A judge is not subject to the pressures of public opinion; a democratically elected lawmaker is.
This coming from someone whose only talking point seems to be “lol, ure a newb, shutup”.
Excuse me? I have NEVER told another poster to "shut up". And I used "LOL" to a poster that was being insulting. Just how many names do you have on FR? Only one is allowed.