Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: patlin

“They were not under obligation to discuss it in the Elg case either, but they did”

That ranks up there with saying Obama’s ineligible because he hasn’t produced his birth certificate. It’s non-evidence, nothing more. Whatever extraneous affirmations they made in the Elg case has no bearing on the extraneous affirmations they didn’t make in the Ark case.


350 posted on 11/12/2010 10:48:46 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies ]


To: Tublecane

Yes, you like to post trivial crap but won’t respond to actual references to natural law by distinguished Englishmen & the US Congress & census records. You are all the same...you can handle debating the truth. You always cut & run because you can not come back with equally substantial proof to refute it.


355 posted on 11/12/2010 10:54:37 PM PST by patlin (Ignorance is Bliss for those who choose to wear rose colored glasses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies ]

To: Tublecane

FYI...WKA has no bearing on natural born either as the court never declared WKA to be natural born. PERIOD


357 posted on 11/12/2010 10:55:39 PM PST by patlin (Ignorance is Bliss for those who choose to wear rose colored glasses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson