Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RegulatorCountry

Do you REALLY think the US Supreme Court, knowing about Obama’s father, refused to take a case because...it was trivial? Uninteresting?

Why do you think no member of Congress - not ONE! - has objected that Obama is ineligible?

Why do you think Rush and Malkin & Coulter refuse to make the claim - too politically correct? Cowards? Traitors?

Why do you think no state AG, no state legislature, McCain and Palin all refuse to object?


325 posted on 05/02/2010 10:23:54 AM PDT by Mr Rogers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 324 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers

I think SCOTUS declined because of the explosive nature of the matter, combined with a suspicion that it is a political question.

I think Congress is largely a bunch of self-serving, go along to get along collegial types, and even those who aren’t are largely ignorant of Constitutional law.

I think Rush declines to make the overt claim, but continues to hint around about it, because he is a businessman and does not see sufficient upside to going all in. Coulter, gotta love her snarky wit and ability to completely gut opposition in debate, but she’s a northeastern clubber Republican at heart and thinks the whole thing is too lowbrow. Malkin I cannot say, she’s winged off on a few genuinely tenuous issues in the past, I suspect she’s afraid of being labeled a heretic ... I mean communist ... errr, I mean racist. All of the above are afraid of that career ending slander.

I don’t think anyone at the state level was fully aware of the controversy, and to the extent that they were, they mistakenly believed the Senate Resolution, SR 511, to have covered them. A majority of Secretaries of State are Democrat. State legislatures have a mix of liberal and conservative, and not even all conservatives were on board and still aren’t.

And, again, there’s the fear of being labeled racist, and the dark hints and rumors of rioting that were prevalent at the time. People in positions of responsibility were cowed.

That’s why.

Now, let’s turn to you. You purport to agree with the so-called “birther” definition of NBC, and yet you attack it at every turn. Explain yourself.


327 posted on 05/02/2010 10:40:49 AM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 325 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson