[mkjessup]

And you would trample the rule of law in your haste to take down one man. And once you've done that and made a mockery of the Constitution in the process - something you accuse Obama himself of doing - then what will you turn to for protection for yourself or the next person?

I've not made a mockery of the Constitution whatsoever. I demand, as any sensible American demands, that the Occupant of the Oval Office prove they are qualified to serve in that Office. Nothing more and nothing less. And if the Kenyan Usurper is unable to establish his eligibility, then he must resign or be removed from Office by any means necessary.

This is bigger that Obama or any single man or woman. This is the law, the foundation of our society. All I want is for it to be held to the strict letter. All you want is whatever it takes to cram your agenda through. By my way of thinking you're the pathetic one.

Your way of thinking does nothing except to empower and enable an illegal Usurper, aka one Barack Hussein 0bama.

You prattle on about the 'Law' but you mock and ridicule those who seek to see that Law upheld. In Charles Dickens' "Oliver Twist" the phrase was originated "the law is an ass", and in your case that applies not only to your view of the 'Law', but to you as well, Monseuir Chinslurp.

[Non-Sequitur]

I demand, as any sensible American demands, that the Occupant of the Oval Office prove they are qualified to serve in that Office.

He's done that, you won't accept it. He's provided what he claims is evidence he was born in Hawaii, you call it a forgery. No law requires he do any more than he's done so far. An unfortunate fact but a fact never the less and one that will continue unless changed at the federal or state level. The problem is that you refuse to believe him, and I've read the Constitution forwards and backwards any number of times and nothing in there states that the president must satisfy mkjessup's demands.

There is a loophole in the law that no presidential candidate is required to prove his or her qualifications to any one person or agency. That's the unfortunate fact that we're currently facing. The solution is to close that loophole - probably by legislation at the state level since the Democrats control Congress. Why aren't you pushing for a solution instead of trying to twist existing laws to suit your desires?

And if the Kenyan Usurper is unable to establish his eligibility, then he must resign or be removed from Office by any means necessary.

I'll take that to mean any means, legal or illegal. That's where you and I part company.

Your way of thinking does nothing except to empower and enable an illegal Usurper, aka one Barack Hussein 0bama.

And if you ignore the law in you haste to bring down someone you claim is ignoring the law, then where does that make you any better than him?

You prattle on about the 'Law' but you mock and ridicule those who seek to see that Law upheld.

No. You want the law to be what you want it to be. You want a trial regardless of whether Taitz's plaintiffs meet the qualifications for legal standing or not. You want a trial regardless of whether there is evidence or not. If the judge does grant the motion to dismiss you will be the first one out there on your hind legs screaming 'Conspiracy" and claiming the judge is crooked or an idiot or an Obama supporter or some such nonsense. You don't want the law upheld. You want your way regardless of what the law says.

[Non-Sequitur]

I demand, as any sensible American demands, that the Occupant of the Oval Office prove they are qualified to serve in that Office.

He's done that, you won't accept it. He's provided what he claims is evidence he was born in Hawaii, you call it a forgery. No law requires he do any more than he's done so far. An unfortunate fact but a fact never the less and one that will continue unless changed at the federal or state level. The problem is that you refuse to believe him, and I've read the Constitution forwards and backwards any number of times and nothing in there states that the president must satisfy mkjessup's demands.

There is a loophole in the law that no presidential candidate is required to prove his or her qualifications to any one person or agency. That's the unfortunate fact that we're currently facing. The solution is to close that loophole - probably by legislation at the state level since the Democrats control Congress. Why aren't you pushing for a solution instead of trying to twist existing laws to suit your desires?

And if the Kenyan Usurper is unable to establish his eligibility, then he must resign or be removed from Office by any means necessary.

I'll take that to mean any means, legal or illegal. That's where you and I part company.

Your way of thinking does nothing except to empower and enable an illegal Usurper, aka one Barack Hussein 0bama.

And if you ignore the law in you haste to bring down someone you claim is ignoring the law, then where does that make you any better than him?

You prattle on about the 'Law' but you mock and ridicule those who seek to see that Law upheld.

No. You want the law to be what you want it to be. You want a trial regardless of whether Taitz's plaintiffs meet the qualifications for legal standing or not. You want a trial regardless of whether there is evidence or not. If the judge does grant the motion to dismiss you will be the first one out there on your hind legs screaming 'Conspiracy" and claiming the judge is crooked or an idiot or an Obama supporter or some such nonsense. You don't want the law upheld. You want your way regardless of what the law says.