Who said anything about birther stuff making Obama disappear? From the very outset I have said this isn’t even about Obama but is about the rule of law. If we have the rule of law we can hold an idiot tyrant in check even if he gets elected. If we don’t have the rule of law we’ve got NOTHING.
The people who were busy mocking us “rule of law” people by calling us “birthers” and saying what we stood for is an “embarrassment” managed a double-whammy: not only did we get Obama in office, but we got a LAWLESS Obama in office. We sold our ability to hold him in check, because we deemed “the rule of law” people to be too embarrassing for the “cool kids”.
And that was (and apparently still is) you. You would not stand for the rule of law requiring Obama to prove his eligibility, and it is hypocrisy now if you expect anybody else to have to follow the rule of law.
You’re big on 2nd amendment (one of the few issues you ever address, other than mocking us “rule of law” people). Give me one good reason that Obama and his shills shouldn’t treat you the same way as you have treated us “rule of law” people who said that the Constitution matters - using the exact same language and techniques as you and your ilk have employed against those of us who believed the Constitution and rule of law matter. If those who support the 2nd Article (and forgery, identity fraud, perjury, murder etc laws) are too “embarrassing” for those who want to be popular (get elected), then why shouldn’t those who support the 2nd amendment likewise be too “embarrassing”? The same reasons you give to berate my “cause” would be used by a non-hypocrite to berate the 2nd Amendment also. Either the Constitution is a rug for politicians and the society to wipe their feet on as they laugh their fool heads off.... or it’s not.
I support the 2nd Article AND the 2nd Amendment. Why do you support only one of those?
I use the term “cool kids” because that’s how that Alinsky crap always goes. It’s junior high all over again. If you wanna get elected homecoming queen you make fun of other people’s cooties - whether they really have them or not. Juvenile. When are there finally going to be some adults in charge?
Has anybody figured out yet that this is serious? How many 9-11’s is it gonna take before we wake the heck up and realize we’ve got enemies who are NOT giggling about cooties?
What I do or do not mock is irrelevant to the law.
We sold our ability to hold him in check, because we deemed “the rule of law” people to be too embarrassing for the “cool kids”
Ah. I see. It's my fault for not upholding your majic birfer mojo.
Had I but embraced Orly Taitz and "who be his daddy this week" then the world would be full of unicorns pooping out cheeseburgers.
And that was (and apparently still is) you. You would not stand for the rule of law requiring Obama to prove his eligibility
Again, you assign too much power to me.
I'm just one guy. I control nothing in law or government.
You sound like my ex-wife, who blames my lack of enthusiasm for Sarah Palin for causing her not to run.
Give me one good reason that Obama and his shills shouldn’t treat you the same way as you have treated us “rule of law” people
Don't they? Seems like they do. You don't see me whining about it.
using the exact same language and techniques as you and your ilk have employed against those of us who believed the Constitution and rule of law matter.
I have ilks? Who knew?
Of course the Constitution matters. What does NOT matter is my opinion of kookery.
There are serious means of accomplishing things.. and also kookery.
When you trot out lunatics like Taitz and folks who claim Obama's
daddy was Frank Marshall Davis last week and Jimi Hendrix or
James Earl Jones or somebody else the next.. you won't be taken seriously.
That's how the world works.
Why do you support only one of those?
Just covered that, see above.
I use the term “cool kids” because that’s how that Alinsky crap always goes
Ah, jeez.. not that tired old Alinsky crap again.
Got news, sweeticakes.. Alinsky didn't invent mockery.
Mockery predates that guy by thousands of years.
Has anybody figured out yet that this is serious?
Then I'd suggest that you should have gotten someone to present the case that wasn't a smacktard clown.
Being consistent and on-message counts too.
"He's Kenyan! He's Indonesian! Frank Marshall Davis! Subud!"
Pick one. When you have a new "theory" every week how can you expect to be taken seriously?