Posted on 10/29/2009 10:19:10 AM PDT by Elderberry
Judge Carter Ruling on MTD
IIRC, that one wasn't quite right either. But heck if eligibility doesn't matter, then the details of the oath, also specified in Art.II section 1 of the Constitution, don't matter either.
Let's just have a big party, but no fireworks, too martial for the Messiah and his posse.
The oral oaths are ceremonial. There is a written oath signed shortly before the inauguration.
If I get detained on any battlefield, I've got a FReeking Geneva Convention ID card, with my name, photo, rank and service number on it. Not that the side that would be "detaining" me would give a rat's ash. I'd probably lose my head within a few days, if not sooner. (And not that I expect to be on any such foreign battlefield, being retired about 18 years ago)
“So, to extend your hypothetical: What should conservatives do when they have a reasonable suspicion that the current POTUS isn’t even eligible to hold the office, and the SCOTUS abdicated their responsibility to engage on this check/balance system set up by the founders?”
Ok, here is my problem with this:
There are a great number of attorneys who are no friend of the liberal administration, so I can either believe 2 things...they have either looked at what Taitz and company have done and decided there is no legal grounds to proceed on
or
I can decide everyone is in on it but Taitz and company, which seems to be what she is claiming now with the planned protest against Bill O’Reilly and the complaints that no conservative commentator will advance her arguments.
My view of the SCOTUS in this is that they haven’t been given a legally sound case to weigh in on so far, what has reached their desks has been a poor mishmash of competing legal theories and a truckload of suspicion. That is not what we want the SCOTUS to proceed on in any case, good lord can you imagine what a liberal court would do with that precedent if given the chance?
Give them a solid case that has gone through the proper channels and they would jump on this, the problem is ass Judge Carter noted that none of these cases were brought with the proper plaintiffs who had followed the proper process for challenging a candidate but instead they filed a barrage of cases afterwards and now want their day in court.
As I have said before, this kind of thing is going to make it impossible to actually enforce this next time around. Yes, we lost but we can either keep running into a brick wall or we can use this to make every state enact provisions to require proof of eligibility or we can see this again in 2012...which do you want?
So again, what injury would McCain have suffered that would allow him to have challenged Obama's Constitutional eligibility? He, McCain was on the ballot, people could vote for him, even though they chose not to. No harm, no foul?
I agree. Incumbency is IRRELEVANT to any new election. However, my major concern, is the precedent being set here AND not only that, ALL of his damage will have been long accomplished by then. It’s a dilemma that America is going to have to face NOW. I have two American cousins, both from Liberal States, but NOT in any way in support of this creep. They are ready to go to war (the streets) right now. How else are you going to save your country? How? Protests? He laughs at you. He will ONLY understand force pure and simple. I feel like a parrot but I’ll say it again, NO dictator or Communist has EVER been removed at the polls or peacefully. They come to the point, as he is, where HE and his minions, will control the elections process. I pray for you America. CO
Hi PNSN!! Good job!! Love CO
#382 - GREAT POST BROTHER!! CO
What you’ve got there is a logical fallacy of false dilemma. There’s plenty of other possibilities besides the 2 you mention.
My view of the SCOTUS in this is that they haven’t been given a legally sound case to weigh in on so far, what has reached their desks has been a poor mishmash of competing legal theories and a truckload of suspicion.
***That’s just ducking. If they wanted to look into it, there was plenty to look at. They made their choice and now that this stuff is going on in the courts, it could make them look very compromised. There was a reason why the founding fathers gave SCOTUS employment for life, it was to keep them from considering the political ramifications of their decisions and choosing selfishly. The system did not work in this case.
That is not what we want the SCOTUS to proceed on in any case,
***Bullstuff. They could have ruled on Berg v. Obama and been done with it. That was before the inauguration. Now all this stuff going on after the inauguration is “not what we want the SCOTUS to proceed on”? Baloney. If only the courts were so nitpicky about the constitutional requirements for POTUS.
good lord can you imagine what a liberal court would do with that precedent if given the chance?
***No worse than they’ve already done.
Give them a solid case that has gone through the proper channels and they would jump on this,
***Baloney. They already could have jumped on it, but no one in the judiciary wants to touch this lightning rod.
the problem is ass Judge Carter noted that none of these cases were brought with the proper plaintiffs who had followed the proper process for challenging a candidate but instead they filed a barrage of cases afterwards and now want their day in court.
***Same old Process arguments that amount to nothing.
As I have said before, this kind of thing is going to make it impossible to actually enforce this next time around.
Yes, we lost but we can either keep running into a brick wall or we can use this to make every state enact provisions to require proof of eligibility or we can see this again in 2012...which do you want?
***I want both. Are you going to answer my question, about what should conservatives do? You spent considerable effort on that response without even answering the question.
Sorry, you have just witnessed a COLB where the State lied about it. I don’t buy one single word you say. YOU have to be an Obama supporter. Congratulations for supporting and defending your own demise. CO
Yes, we lost but we can either keep running into a brick wall or we can use this to make every state enact provisions to require proof of eligibility or we can see this again in 2012...which do you want?
Just one state if the proof/certification is transparent to the public at large will allow for some assurances even if other states don’t require that proof.
Well, there's an entire paragraph without one true statement. If you can't make an argument that doesn't involve insulting people, then you don't have an argument.
Wowza, I just hopped on here to find the usual suspect Obot-sympathizing/enabling after-birthers (mlo, NS, etc.) foaming at the mouth - in hyperdrive!
Jesus Murphy - IT IS CLEARLY FALSE. Nobody but Nobody, would HIDE everything about themselves IF they were innocent or had nothing to hide. Give me a break, the man is a BLANK SLATE. Unfortunately for America, he’s a very DANGEROUS blank slate. And Lackie, he doesn’t care about you either. CO
There won’t be an election in 2012. IN FACT, be prepared for a manufactured CRISIS before the 2010 elections. It will be such that Martial Law will be declared and the elections will be suspended indefinitely. NO DICKtator is going to risk losing his minions. CO
My friend PNSN IS a Conservative. YOU are not!! CO
“you have just witnessed a COLB where the State lied about it.”
Huh?
Just where do you get this from?
Who’s been denied this?
*********************************
State of Virginia ,, rat machine mailing out overseas military ballots ONE DAY before the election to ensure they would never count.
You could also make an argument for the armed Black Panthers standing guard outside polling places as being sufficiently intimidating to people unlikely to be Obama voters.
Fair arguments.
Different topic, but still fair arguments.
Wasn’t there e screw up with a clerk not filing the motion on time, and it was delayed???
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.