To: HANG THE EXPENSE
RIF, sir. Notice I differentiated between the two. The Colonel was given a LAWFUL order by his chain-of-command and chose not to follow it for the most flimsy of reasons. He now realizes he was played by the "birther" crowd.
Regardless of Obama's eligibility for service, he had no place to refuse a lawful order. He either obeys it or resigns his commission.
So who's full of what now?
13 posted on
12/16/2010 7:41:04 AM PST by
OCCASparky
(Obama--Playing a West Wing fantasy in a '24' world.)
To: OCCASparky
NO ORDER WAS LAWFUL BECAUSE BARRY WAS BORN A BRITISH SUBJECT. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WHERE HE WAS BORN. THAT THE MEDIA’S FALSE PORTRAYAL OF THE ISSUE.
To: OCCASparky
NO ORDER WAS LAWFUL BECAUSE BARRY WAS BORN A BRITISH SUBJECT. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WHERE HE WAS BORN. THATS THE MEDIA’S FALSE PORTRAYAL OF THE ISSUE.
To: OCCASparky
NO ORDER WAS LAWFUL BECAUSE BARRY WAS BORN A BRITISH SUBJECT. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WHERE HE WAS BORN. THATS THE MEDIA’S FALSE PORTRAYAL OF THE ISSUE.
To: OCCASparky
“... The Colonel was given a LAWFUL order by his chain-of-command and chose not to follow it for the most flimsy of reasons. He now realizes he was played by the “birther” crowd.
Regardless of Obama’s eligibility for service, he had no place to refuse a lawful order. He either obeys it or resigns his commission.”
It is not a lawful order if Obama is not eligible to be President, according to the Constitution.
It would be a simple thing for Obama to prove, yet Obama and “his crowd” refuse.
To: OCCASparky
26 posted on
12/16/2010 7:53:48 AM PST by
HANG THE EXPENSE
(Life is tough.It's tougher when you're stupid.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson