Moderated Obama birth certificate CT / SSN CT / Birther discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
BeAChooser said:
Who somehow managed to send not one, but two children to Princeton.
Click to expand...

Absolutely fantastic. I'm impressed by the work-ethic and values that they instilled in their children...it should be an inperiation and a lesson to us all of the value of hard work, taking advantage and leveraging every opportunity to come your way and profound family values put into practice...

Your point?

ETA...I might note, by contrast, the performance of another child of hard-working, not terribly wealthy or elitist parents who failed to take full advantage of his admission to Yale -- Dick Cheney. He dropped out of Yale (dropped being the nice word for "failed") and has been a constant source of national dissappointment ever since.
 
Last edited:
headscratcher4 said:
http://totalbuzz.freedomblogging.co...files/2009/10/carter-dismisses-obama-suit.pdf

Here's the juges order....

Pretty on target given the level of crazy in this case...
Click to expand...



This Court will not interfere in internal military affairs nor be used as a tool by military officers to avoid deployment. The Court has a word for such a refusal to follow the orders of the President of the United States, but it will leave the issue to the military to resolve.
Click to expand...


One wonders what that word was.....:)
 
Well you can expect the threats to start rolling in like they did with Land. But seriously what rational person would have expected anything different?
 
I like this judge:

If there should in fact be a dividing line for that is dependent on the likelihood of success in the election, then this is not a case which would hover on that line as Plaintiffs received only four-hundredth of one percent of the vote. The Court may have already met this entire group of voters at the hearings on this matter.
Click to expand...
 
"Put up or shut up!"

However, the pleading only states that while Plaintiffs had “accumulated several dossiers of evidence” suggesting a civil RICO conspiracy, they were unable to actually set forth a RICO pleading “ecause of the complexity of RICO.” Compl. ¶¶ 123-25. Plaintiffs originally filed this action on January 20, 2009, and the First Amended Complaint at issue was filed on July 15, 2009. Nearly six months was more than sufficient time for Plaintiffs to at least attempt to set forth civil RICO allegations. The failure to do so is inexcusable, and as Plaintiffs have failed to state any claim whatsoever against defendants Michelle Obama, Clinton, Biden, and Gates, all claims against them are DISMISSED.
Click to expand...
 
interesting

some interesting reading:
The hearings have been interesting to say the least. Plaintiffs’ arguments through Taitz have generally failed to aid the Court. Instead, Plaintiffs’ counsel has favored rhetoric seeking to arouse the emotions and prejudices of her followers rather than the language of a lawyer seeking to present arguments through cogent legal reasoning. While the Court has no desire to chill Plaintiffs’ enthusiastic presentation, Taitz’s argument often hampered the efforts of her cocounsel Gary Kreep (“Kreep”), counsel for Plaintiffs Drake and Robinson, to bring serious issues before the Court.
....
Taitz encouraged her supporters to contact this Court, both via letters and phone calls. It was improper and unethical for her as an attorney to encourage her supporters to attempt to influence this Court's decision. Despite these attempts to manipulate this Court, the Court has not considered any outside pleas to influence the Court's decision.
Click to expand...
 
And just for good measure:

Plaintiffs have encouraged the Court to ignore these mandates of the Constitution; to disregard the limits on its power put in place by the Constitution; and to effectively overthrow a sitting president who was popularly elected by “We the People”–over sixty-nine million of the people. Plaintiffs have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed their claim, as unpatriotic and even treasonous for refusing to grant their requests and for adhering to the terms of the Constitution which set forth its jurisdiction. Respecting the constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic. Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of patriotism.
Click to expand...
 
headscratcher4 said:
What she didn't say in the complaint was that the first lady controls Obama through the mercury-based fillings in his teeth (implanted early, one must suspect, in Kenya).
Click to expand...


Well, yeah, but that's still not a Constitutional office!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom