Replies

He is going to ask the SCOTUS to change the law in essence. To make it possible for the average person to question the qualifications of a candidate for President. This is either a Pandora's Box, or a chance for the average Man to have a say with just cause to do so.

Once again you make no sense (which is even more amazing since you seemed to barely read the very article that you posted)

144 posted on 10/25/2008 5:19:17 PM PDT by torchthemummy (Why Is The Educational Establishment Comfortable With Ayers' Unrepentent Radicalism (Terrorism)?)

"Once again you make no sense (which is even more amazing since you seemed to barely read the very article that you posted)" Please back that statment up. What I said is accurate. Surrick stated that his court has no jursdiction to decide the matter, and he also based his decision on Standing. Berg is going to be appealing to the SCOTUS, and doing so he is going to have to prove he has standing to do so. That means SCOTUS will have to rule that he DOES have standing which will CHANGE Legal Precidence. It will change the law. So you want to back up your assertion?

152 posted on 10/25/2008 5:26:43 PM PDT by Danae (Obama = Trickle up Poverty. Don't like it, get ready to be"reeducated" into it if he is elected.)