1 posted on
02/03/2009 11:52:39 AM PST by
dascallie
To: dascallie
I work in NYC, on the 12th floor of a 20 story building and if I go up to the roof I should be able to see them: thousands and thousands of pigs flying by, belatedly migrating south for the winter.
2 posted on
02/03/2009 11:54:13 AM PST by
samtheman
To: dascallie
This Court must recognize that its duty to the nation and to the lawIf only it were true......
3 posted on
02/03/2009 11:55:05 AM PST by
Puppage
(You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
To: dascallie
To: dascallie
This is now in the hands of the people. Court has punted unfortunately.
6 posted on
02/03/2009 11:57:30 AM PST by
o_zarkman44
(Since when is paying more, but getting less, considered Patriotic?)
To: dascallie
At least Bill Anderson satisfies the “standing” issue.
7 posted on
02/03/2009 11:58:10 AM PST by
reagandemocrat
(Roe v Wade = Dred Scott and Korematsu.)
To: dascallie; All
For those of us who don’t understand much legalese, what does this mean?
Anyone?
9 posted on
02/03/2009 11:59:24 AM PST by
Monkey Face
(Corduroy pillows: They're making headlines!)
To: dascallie
It’s been two weeks now, copy machines have been cleaned and granny’s notes carefully shredded and Hawaiian clerks paid off.
11 posted on
02/03/2009 12:00:59 PM PST by
bgill
To: dascallie
To: dascallie
I Barry O’bama were a white Irishman, the courts would pursue this case. However, since he’s black (at least partially), they won’t touch it with a 10 foot pole for fear of nationwide rioting. End of story.
15 posted on
02/03/2009 12:04:32 PM PST by
Sig Sauer P220
(There ought to be one day -- just one -- when there is open season on Senators --- Will Rogers)
To: dascallie
"This Court must recognize that its duty to the nation and to the law in the instant case is far greater than that duty which Chief Baron Pollock faced in Byrne v. Boadle. "
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm wondering about this argument; i.e. the tone of it. Does this kind kind of hectoring, "stamp-foot like a spoiled child and pay attention to me" rhetoric take you very far in front of a bank of judges?
To: dascallie; All
20 posted on
02/03/2009 12:16:13 PM PST by
ALOHA RONNIE
("ALOHA RONNIE" Guyer/Veteran-"WE WERE SOLDIERS" Battle of IA DRANG-1965 http://www.lzxray.com11)
To: dascallie; pissant
22 posted on
02/03/2009 12:19:06 PM PST by
ShadowAce
(Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
To: dascallie
Oh, Great.
And then.....
President Biden!
23 posted on
02/03/2009 12:20:08 PM PST by
grobdriver
(Let the embeds check the bodies!)
To: dascallie
Keep the heat on this issue. It’s far too important to be swept aside carelessly, and without proper adjudication.
30 posted on
02/03/2009 12:25:55 PM PST by
PubliusMM
(RKBA; a matter of fact, not opinion. 01-20-2013: Change we can look forward to.)
To: dascallie
I've had the same question almost from the beginning of this. Why would someone spend millions to prevent having to produce a $24 document?
----
Send treats to the troops...
Great because you did it!
www.AnySoldier.com
42 posted on
02/03/2009 12:54:22 PM PST by
JCG
To: dascallie
Kind of strains credibility to accept references to websites like:
“But the flaws in this birth certificate are
so substantial, and so obvious, that it strains credibility
to accept it as such. See the petitioners web site:
http://www.obamacrimes.com/ and the Petition for a
Writ of Certiorari at pp. 16-17.”
being used to make the point in a brief to the SCOTUS! I wonder if any lawyers in the crowd can comment of the “professionalism” of using references to the Internet to base one’s legal arguments upon?
To: dascallie
ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzz..........
123 posted on
02/03/2009 5:44:52 PM PST by
Poser
(Willing to fight for oil)
To: dascallie
254 posted on
02/04/2009 6:35:41 PM PST by
Dajjal
(Obama is an Ericksonian NLP hypnotist.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson