Kenny Bunk asked: “The question of Obama’s eligibility is just that, a question. Instead of leaving it to us cyber-brawlers to pro and con this issue, don’t you think the SCOTUS ought to get off it’s collective black-robed duff and agree to hear a case?”
The Supreme Court’s case load prevents them from taking time to debunk crank nonsense. That’s my hobby, not their job.
Here’s the deal: If you refuse to take a clue from anything less than a SCOTUS ruling specifically on Obama’s eligibility, then Obama remains president and you remain clueless. Obama seems fine with that. Does it work for you?
IMNSHO, several of the cases contain elements worthy of the august appellate body's attention. I believe my opinion is shared by, among others, Justice Thomas. He has publicly stated that the SCOTUS is ducking this issue.
If you refuse to take a clue from anything less than a SCOTUS ruling specifically on Obama’s eligibility, then Obama remains president and you remain clueless. Obama seems fine with that. Does it work for you?
Well, no actually. This does not work for me and several million (at least) other citizens when a simple question about the Constitution is left unanswered. This issue goes quite beyond Obama, who is now for all intents and purposes a bit of a "lame duck."
"What exactly is a "Natural Born Citizen?" Pardon me for preferring a ruling of the SCOTUS to your interpretation of past cases, which may or may not affect it the decisions of those actually paid to interpret the Constitution. You seem to feel that the question is settled. Possibly so. In that case, let the Justices speak for themselves. If they are not too busy, of course.