Posted on 10/13/2010 3:04:13 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
Thank you for also posting that we have an illegal alien destroying our country from within and from outside. This means absolutely zero for these defectors, the “AFTER-BIRTHERS” who constantly are screwing the meaning of the CONSTITUTION the way their dear “boss” is doing???
Here you have it!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11OhmY1obS4
Pulling a fast one, how exactly? The lawsuits challenging ObamaCare will go forward, thankfully. But until it is reversed by Congress or found unconstitutional by the SCOTUS, it is law and its effects are currently wrecking parts of the economy. Read the headlines. It’s in black and white, precious.
Pulling a fast one, how exactly? The lawsuits challenging ObamaCare will go forward, thankfully. But until it is reversed by Congress or found unconstitutional by the SCOTUS, it is law and its effects are currently wrecking parts of the economy. Read the headlines. It’s in black and white, precious.
You very conveniently left out his main reason to defend and uphold the CONSTITUTION which he had sworn and was taught in the military to defending???
Yes, also he did NOT make an oath to the usurper but ONLY to the Constitution, and that's what his case is about, but been denied like Clarence Thomas' remark!!!
Amen and a big AMEN!!!
WHY are you double postings here???
As soon as I saw that, I knew your motives were clear.
You cannot dispute one fact on her site so you attack what YOU think are things that are out of line....like of speaking of God having influence and perhaps a plan, changing tides of public opinion on our side and the clincher, she postulates she may have a computer virus.
Whoa, that's the one that did it for me, she is definately a nut and conspiracy freak for sure.
Hmmmm, seems to me your the one with the paranoia problem, not butter.
Danae does an excellent job of analyzing why the Military are twisting themselves into pretzels to evade and avoid the case as long as possible. You should read it:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2606951/posts?page=389#389
. . . . . # 389, - then # 475.
I’ve provided you with the citation many times, but you ignore the first half of the decision. Since no court does, you end up not understanding why the courts do what they do.
Here it is again:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZO.html
Section 4 begins about 1/3 of the way thru the decision. But I know you won’t understand it, since you don’t understand that the courts says NBC is the American form of NBS, and that IS the first 1/3 of the decision!
“The Founders clearly were not thinking of themselves or others as being “subjects” of any kind.”
Maybe that is why the changed the third word to “citizen”?
Read WKA in the above post and you will, if you can read, know that the Supreme Court has already said you are an idiot.
and they know who they are.
~ ~ ~ ~
Thank you. And, yes they do, including
the robotic, admittedly paid troll, james777,
who curiously has *still* not responded to a
post, after a reminder yesterday.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2606951/posts?page=382#382
Referenced initial post
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2599850/posts?page=193#193
He has been on my “not worth a keystroke” list for a while now.
You are a slippery snake, sir.
So much obfuscation and conflation.
Add in the ad personem, and I thank you for conceding the argument.
Either she’s crazy and lying, or telling the truth. Those of us who are not leftist or Cass Sunstein hirelings have read her diligent research that stands for itself.
You, OTOH, are unknown who ignores factual research to focus on personality traits and beliefs.
I don’t share her specific religious beliefs but to me those don’t nullify her research proving criminal malfeasance at the DoH in Hawaii. So you only believe facts if they are presented by those who share your exact religious beliefs or lack thereof? How do you find out what they believe in the religion department before looking at facts and evidence? Sounds bigoted and primitive to me. Do you also try to find a photo to know what race or ethnicity they are, to make sure that’s acceptable as well?
Try to prove that research wrong.
It’s very easy to make fun of others’ religious beliefs, or say that someone else’s experiences of crap in their computer is not really happening; your word against hers.
But the fact that you say not one freaking word about her work shows that you are a disgusting troll who is here to enable 0thugga’s coup.
No actually she hasn’t. Each state SHALL certify its candidate for POTUS according to the constitution. Hawaii REFUSED to do so. So Nancy Pelosi had to draw up an illegal document at the DNC Convention to make it appear that they did. Nancy Pelosi broke the law by certifying FOR the state of Hawaii that Obama was eligible.
He was NOT constitutionally elected and then verified by the joint session of Congress. He was never even a constitutional CANDIDATE because of Nancy Pelosi’s actions. Just because it was successfully covered up doesn’t make it alright, constitutional, OR legal.
Wow, that makes it even worse! LOL
I was going totally from memory, I should have found a link and gotten the quote right. Thanks Ron!
I quoted from section 4, which proved you wrong. Did you not read my previous response?? You need to cite actual words that support your claim. So far you’ve failed.
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.