Supreme Court rejects Obama case

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/orders/courtorders/120808zor.pdf ^

[cycle of discernment]

too bad

[Theodore R.]

I read somewhere once that the “Reaganite” Anthony Kennedy is particularly fond of D.C. cocktail parties. He likes for people to tell him nice he is!

[American in Israel]

Bye bye Miss American Pie.

So the Supremos do not follow the constitution. Big surprise. Guys in robes have been the problem all along since the last King George...

[Sharrukin]

That doesn’t coincide with the facts.

Sun Yat-sen was born on 12 November 1866, to a peasant family in the village of Cuiheng, Xiangshan county , Guangzhou prefecture, Guangdong province (26 km or 16 miles north of Macau)

Sun Yat-sen got a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth!

[Iowan]

Excellent Job, Polarik!!!!!

Amazing!

This morphing of facial characteristics between MalcolmX and Obama is even stronger than your first one of the two of them

Ping.

[plain talk]

I dunno. Many of us can multi-task. We are attacking his policies AND challenging his credentials to become President. We can and should pursue both and fight Obama and his ilk on many fronts simultaneously. The latter should be pursued even after he is inaugurated.

[Kevmo]

My answer is that Obama is not releasing his birth certificate because he has forged the “copy” on FightTheSmears, and the original won’t match up with the forgery. In particular, the original won’t match up on place of birth, which is likely to be Kenya. However, there has been a lot of intervening time where a motivated and resourceful (he certainly has resources) forgery team could have replaced the original.

[LucyT]

In case anyone missed the morph to Malcolm X at #801.

[Old Sarge]

“I’m a Kennedy - no really, that’s what my driver’s license says! Is that radicchio?”

[Nipfan]

“Thank God our long FR nightmare(as it relates to Obama’s Birth Certificate)is over...now on to fighting Obama as sane FR peers...”

Its anything but over. Didn’t you read the earlier posts?

[Fred Nerks]

Someone who knows something about genetic inheritance should take a close look at the ears...I would like to know what are the odds that two people, if unrelated, would have almost identical ears?

[Iowan]

Thanks, LucyT

Check out the new morph of Obama to Malcolm X at #801 PING.

[Iowan]

I agree the ears are identical, as well as the other facial features.

Too uncanny to not be the result of common DNA, IMO!!

[little jeremiah]

I can understand disagreement - and strong disagreement - about the 0bama BC thing.

But I do not understand the motivation why you and so many other freepers have an uncontrollable urge to denigrate the concern of others, using words like “kook”, “tinfoil”, “luncay, “insanity” and so on. I just don’t get it. Maybe some of you really care about what talk show host think of you.

[andy58-in-nh]

I appreciate your thoughtful comments. I've been a member of FR for more than 8 years now, and I've seen my share of controversies. In general, civility reigns. I have never once hit the "abuse" button on a fellow FReeper, nor do I plan to.

As I have said before on this board as well as to friends, what distinguishes liberals from conservatives in our present times is that liberalism is an ideology and conservatism a philosophy. "Progressives" define themselves by strict adherence to a dogma crafted by men in pursuit of perfection on Earth, shunning those who stray from the party line. Conservatives, by contrast, seek what is true in the exercise of reason and what is just in the light of our faith in a benevolent Father.

Increasingly, it seems, we live in different worlds.

For those who argue vociferously for their point of view on this forum, if your view should differ from mine, I would only ask for the same respect I would accord you in the same circumstances. That doesn't mean we all won't get testy at times, but unlike our adversarties on the Left, conservatives don't demand perfection of others, or of themselves either.

[Grampa Dave]

Like you said, who cares!

[Spunky]

Not sure if you were pinged to this morph at posting #801 of Obama and Malcolm X. I still say the resemblance is astonishing, along with the characteristics.

[LucyT]

Thank you, Fred Nerks.

Experts. We need Experts.

Ping.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2144892/posts?page=850#850

[kinghorse]

What if a young Vladimir Putin went to school in Hawaii and had a kid named Obama by some sweet young Kansas girl? Can still be President? Just because the daddy in this case was from a harmless, foolish part of the world doesn’t change the fact he’s a foreigner with no US standing.

[TigersEye]

This case never had a chance of succeeding, and quite frankly, it's making some of us look like howling moonbats.

Give your usual posts what the heck are YOU worried bout? And, FWIW, I have no problem with your posts but...seriously!

[Sibre Fan]

“”Leo’s case would have penalized th NJ SOS...”
Penalize the SOS? So what?”
- - - -
Agreed. Also, Cort’s case would “also penalize” the CT SOS. Read the Connecticut Supreme Court’s Opinion here: http://www.jud.state.ct.us/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR289/289CR9.pdf.

“the plaintiff filed a complaint in the Supreme Court pursuant to § 9-323 alleging, inter alia, that the defendant had failed to perform her duty to prevent election fraud by requiring proof that Obama was a natural born citizen of the United States before placing his name on the ballot for the office of president of the United States for the November 4, 2008 presidential election.... Later clarifying that he sought “a writ of mandamus requiring that [the defendant], or a duly appointed authority . . . immediately acquire primary documents or certified copies from primary sources such as the appropriate [h]ealth [d]epartment and/or appropriate hospital records or verifiable reports regarding same from the [f]ederal [e]lections [c]ommission [or] . . . Obama.””

- - - -
So, *unlike* Donofrio’s case, the primary reason the CT Supreme Court rejected Wrotnowski’s case was due to lack of standing - under STATE law. (Berg lost due to standing under federal law).

So, however “better” Wrotnowski’s briefs are written, I don’t see how the arguments are stronger - or how he gets over the standing hurdle, so that SCOTUS could even consider whether to “penalize” the CT SOS or force it to do something?