Mr Rogers subscribes to the theory that spamming a thread with a massive stream of verbage renders his opinion correct, even though nothing in said verbage means anything even close to his opinion.
He depends on the obvious fact that to respond to his spam will effectively render the thread useless, thus he wins by supressing the truth.
AmericanVictory wrote, “...Wong Kim Ark, which, of course, did not even treat of Article II’s eligibility requirement which is evident from that case.”
I posted about half of the WKA decision, showing anyone who wants can read that AmericanVictory doesn’t have clue one about what he is writing.
It is hardly my fault that editor-surveyor & AmericanVictory lie in hopes that those who haven’t read the decision will believe them - which is what WorldNutDaily and Canada Free Press do as a matter of habit. And yes, it takes some room because WKA discussed the issue at great length, quoting many opinions going back to before the Constitution was written.
That is why the Indiana court used it in ruling that Obama DID meet the requirements of the Constitution. Because they can read...
I don’t even read Mr. Rogers, except perhaps when his message is really short. Even then, I usually just ignore it. I wish we could get a Mr. Rogers filter.