[Red Steel]

I've handled plenty of cases where I've ditched a weaker argument so as not to detract from the appeal of an argument much more likely to succeed. From what is being argued in this thread, all nine members of the Supreme Court, including Thomas, Scalia, Roberts, and Alito, and the entire Republican contingent of the U.S. Congress, is complicit in covering up this birth issue despite people banging on it for years.

We've seen Alinsky tactics do work. I suspect most congressman especially the Dems are just ignorant of the laws or are lying. As for the Supreme Court, they are not immune to criticisms, they want to be liked and lauded by the liberal press; to be able to wined and dined in Washington DC. They are political creature and do not always do the right thing. Taking a president down, even an usurper, takes much intestinal fortitude and integrity, which appears to be lacking in our society. Mark Levin has heaps of criticism for former and contemporary jurists on the Supreme Court and I agree with him.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

But if you're right, and I don't think the criticisms of all the Supremes are exactly fair but forget that for a second, then doesn't pushing an argument that even your normal allies run from almost guarantee that you are going to be isolating yourselves rhetorically?

And I get the argument that fighting for a principle is important even if you lose. But that sort of makes sense only if you're Leonidas at Thermopylae, and your only choice is dying in place or surrendering/running away.

But Obama is so vulnerable to criticism on so many different levels that complete victory is still possible if you switch up the tactics. But right now, it just looks to me like you guys are Joe Hooker at Fredrickburg. No matter how many times you send those boys up the Heights, they're just going to keep dying in droves.