For lack of any other, better term.
Look, Berg BELIEVES Obama is not a NBC. He has no proof, but he believes it. So does Orly, only she also BELIEVES that you need two citizen parents to be a NBC. So do many here, despite the facts that have been presented over and over again — the Supreme Court cases, the U.S. Code, etc.
Should the Supreme Court rule specifically on NBC? Yes, but it needs a case presented to it. Only a fellow-candidate has standing to do that.
We blew it last year. The Republicans blew it. They cudda, shudda told McCain to file a lawsuit. But the trouble was that HE had his own NBC issue. I don’t know whether he is a NBC or not. His case is quite complicated. I think it has to do with which of two laws governs his citizenship.
There is nothing wrong with a statute clarifying who is and who is not a citizen at birth; what’s prohibited is a statute that makes aliens into citizens. Those citizens cannot be NBC, by definition. But people here refuse to accept the U.S. statute that defines who is a citizen at birth (in other words, a NBC). Why? That is unreasonable. That is clinging to a belief that is not based on fact.
SO SAYS my ninety year old dad, who is a genius, graduated at the top of his law school class, clerked in the Federal court system and practice law for over 50 years.
SO SAYS my high school government teacher, born in US, parents born in Russia, spoke four languages, career air force,worked for the CIA and was a teacher extraordinaire.
SO SAYS Hoosiermama....don't argue with her she's your elder show some respect kid.
"But people here refuse to accept the U.S. statute that defines who is a citizen at birth (in other words, a NBC)." You are now asserting that all citizens at birth are natural born citizens. That is not proven but you spittle it like it's settled law.
"I was hoping the KBC was real. Alas, it was not." And you assert that like the original paper Orly has has been exposed as a forgery. It has not, yet you assert that like it is settled. I'd say you're working for the Axelgreasy side, pretending to be a neutral Freeper ... and ridiculing freepers all along the way, you are.
All I can say is you don’t sound too upset about all this. And awfully sure with all kinds of assertions like only a candidate has standing to present a case, and so on.
“Word jugglery” comes to mind when I read your responses.