Posted on 12/17/2008 9:33:30 AM PST by SmithL
WASHINGTON, (AP) -- Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy has rejected two more efforts to get the court to consider whether President-elect Barack Obama is eligible to take office.
Kennedy on Wednesday denied without comment an appeal by Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania attorney, that claims Obama is either a citizen of Kenya or Indonesia and is ineligible to be president . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
You said — “You don’t what’s going on. You speculate and state it as fact.”
That’s odd..., it’s the same situation that I see for some other posters regarding Obama. They cannot say (either), without speculating — that Obama is not qualified.
I guess we’re all speculating here, then..., aren’t we... LOL...
Obama being president has no bearing on the cases. They appear to be going forward since they have not been denied.
What Congress does afterward after the court actions is up to them.
LLS
“Now, if he and the party and the voting public all say that they agree with him, in that he said he was qualified — that pretty well answers it.”
Honestly, Star Traveler, you seem to become quite hung up on having “fellow travelers” along with you. Those of us intent on right and wrong and principles don’t need lemmings lopping along. We know right from wrong when we see it...regardless of the idiocy of others.
“I don’t see that the “proof” is required, only that he’s qualified.”
What.
“What this last election with Obama has shown is that it’s the *process* that is defective and wrong. That’s why the process must be corrected.”
What we’ve seen is that Obama simply refuses to be reasonable about the matter.
“I don’t know why you can’t see that one...., that *yes* in this case of vetting a candidate, we do, indeed, need a law to that effect.”
Why don’t you go write some more laws then. Come back when you’re done. You can probably look at the DMV for examples on where to start writing your new laws.
ANd yet the MSM continues to say the cases have been denied......Tank
To be expected. SCOTUS wants the issue DOA. SCOTUS has been given their goose step orders, i.e., “nothing, I repeat, nothing must impede obama’s progress towards taking office in January.”
You said — “Good grief! Now you’re actually getting on track with what we are talking about here and it is NOT politics, elections, OR Bush and Cheney!”
So, does that mean that you’ve finally identified the “real problem” as the process being defective? And if so, does that now mean that you’re going to work on getting that process enacted in your state to vet the candidates?
If so..., then that’s exactly what I’ve been talking about...
—
By the way, you will note that you’ve shifted in your position, from the post that you made before, to now...
Before you said that you “knew” [ your quote — “Knowing that he is not qualified and defrauding the DNC and ultimately all of America isn’t wrong.”]
Now you’re admitting that you don’t know... I would say that you’ve made some progress in the meantime.
That is the most insane post/argument I have ever seen, you must be smokin some good stuff.
I guess next time I apply for a job, I'll just tell the employer my qualifications, when he asks for me to back up what I say, I'll just say, I don't need no stinking proof!!
Is that a lie or is it speculation?
Won’t be heard in CA until March.
“Before you said that you “knew” [ your quote — “Knowing that he is not qualified and defrauding the DNC and ultimately all of America isn’t wrong.”
I’ve said no such thing and defy you to find otherwise. You have no idea what the hell you’re talking about!
Oh...and LOL!
There is a difference between what one knows, and what one can prove.
http://www.daylife.com/photo/07PedrudtW0Dk
You have to be careful of these AP reports... look at this picture.... notice anyone?
Yeah then tell them that since they didn’t have an entire set of laws put in place detailing the procedure before hand, that it’s fine, and their fault.
You said — “What we’ve seen is that Obama simply refuses to be reasonable about the matter.”
“Reasonable” is not a Constitutional matter...
—
And then, “Why don’t you go write some more laws then. Come back when you’re done. You can probably look at the DMV for examples on where to start writing your new laws.”
I won’t be writing any new laws, but I will be petitioning my state legislators about them writing a law to vet candidates and for them to prove their Constitutional qualifications to be legally on the ballot.
Then, when that is done, it will correct the “process” that is defective, right now, which is what allowed this current issue to come about with Obama. After that, it won’t happen, any more, on a state-by-state basis.
It's only fair that they lock and load, place barrel to head and pull trigger.
Well said!
Ok. Good for you.
Step 1- Show your birth certificate.
Done
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.