I don’t know what that means, but it sounds like the petitioner has been deemed to have not provided enough of a case.
But then why should he have to? Obama (and ALL candidates) should have been screened at a very early stage, in the filing of certain requisite paperwork.
It sounds like one can run for the Presidency with less proof of who you are than obtaining a driver’s license.
Logic doesn’t prevail here, as you and I both realize.
<p?
Yes, it ought to be routine to validate one’s eligibility for office, as you would for joining the military, getting college scholarships, or applying for a passport. It ought to be a no-brainer to require that people prove their identity before casting a ballot.
But only in America can the left get away with claiming that requiring ID “disenfranches” voters. What a crock. It is merely done to hide fraud.
And only in America can the left get away without having to prove Obama’s eligibility. Mark my words, not only the left but the entire world — the U.N., European newspapers, everyone — will demand that Obama take office anyway.
Sigh ...