that any would-be candidate appearing on THEIR state's ballot would
have to PROVE they are qualified. Were Obama to run in 2012, it seems
that such proof will need to be provided.
While there may be some benefit to the ongoing and continuous controversy,
it seems that were such 'proof' to exist ... simply providing it woul have
long ago allayed any/all concerns.
Regard$,
--MJ
"I'M NOT GOING TO HAVE SOME REPORTERS PAWING THROUGH OUR PAPERS.
WE ARE THE PRESIDENT."
-Hillary Clinton commenting on the release of subpoenaed documents
At 09:40 AM 2/9/2011, you wrote:
>SCOTUS said no 2 years ago.
>
>As much as I would like to see otherwise (it would be fun), the train
>has left the station. Time to move on
>
>On Feb 9, 9:28 am, JSM <ekrub...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > ** A veteran attorney who has pursued a lawsuit challenging Barack Obama's
> > presidential eligibility since he was elected is telling the U.S. Supreme
> > Court that if its members continue to "avoid" the dispute they effectively
> > will "destroy the constitutional rule of law basis of our legal system."
> > Isn't anybody out there the least concerned the the question of eligibility
> > of the leader of this nation doesn't make the news? Who is controlling the
> > media and why? (Duh)
> >
> > --
> > When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying
> > the cross.
> >
> > Sinclair Lewis
>
>--
>Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
>* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
>* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment