The Mainstream SCOTUS

[LeBuick]

Now that the Obama protesters have managed to get the issue of his birth certificate to the supreme court, what happens if they refuse to hear the case or rules in Obama favor without forcing the original document to be produced? Will they then call the SCOTUS "mainstream"? That's what they call any other group who doesn't advocate their cause.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-change-obama-bd07dec07,0,5348796.story

Their little crusade won't go anywhere. But to them that will mean only that the Supreme Court has joined the mainstream media and perhaps Congress in a great conspiracy to put a foreign like man in the White House to launch a Marxist revolution with the help of his terrorist friends.

I personally find great humor in the GOP theories and even more humor in the passion they display accusing the nation of being against them then calling us a conservative country.

 

[Salty]

If they refuse to review the case or rule against it, I will accept their decision - I may not like it, but I accept it and then move on.

The real question is suppose the SCOUS rules agianst Obama, then what will you say "they are then (the SCOTUS0 "mainstream"?

But wouldnt you say there is enough questionable doubt that the SCOUS has a responsibilty to look into this case?

 

[LeBuick]

If they refuse to review the case or rule against it, I will accept their decision - I may not like it, but I accept it and then move on.

The real question is suppose the SCOUS rules agianst Obama, then what will you say "they are then (the SCOTUS0 "mainstream"?

But wouldnt you say there is enough questionable doubt that the SCOUS has a responsibilty to look into this case?

No, I don't believe there is any questionable doubt. Just rumors and accusations from the right. No one has proved anything.

There was the rumor his Kenyan Grandmother said she was at his birth.
There is the rumor he denounced his American citizenship at 10 (but his mother didn't denounce hers...)
There is the rumor the document he produced that was touched and personally viewed by some was fake.

If we decided court cases based on questionable doubt then I could say you're not a citizen and force you in to court to prove I'm wrong. That is crazy...

 

[just-want-peace]

Regardless of one's personal stance on this issue, there ARE qualifications for the office of POTUS, and if there is any doubt of a candidate meeting same, the issue should be resolved ASAP, if not sooner.

As of now, IMHO, the USSC is under obligation to verify the legitimacy of Obama since the question has been raised and not answered other than "Take my word for it; I'm qualified".

We are talking about the most powerful man in the world (at the moment anyway) and not whether he's qualified to run for Mayor of Bugtown, USA!!!!

If all is as CLAIMED by the "humble herds of Hussein", then why not produce the requested info and put out the fires of doubt? After all he should prove his qualifications rather than others having to prove his lack of same - he is the one that was the candidate by his own choice. (I guess?) Fact is, all this SHOULD have been done before he was even "in the race"; and if it was, just produce the documentation and then all will be quiet on the home-front. That's not too hard; is it???

To prolong something that is "so ridiculous and unnecessary" as the left claims, when it is so easy to answer (if true), is an abomination to the functioning of the government, and the trust of the people - at least those who care about the leadership of our country.

All this opposition to verify the qualifications of BHO, just bolsters the claim of another post questioning whether the "herd mentality" was the winning factor for O.

 

[LeBuick]

Regardless of one's personal stance on this issue, there ARE qualifications for the office of POTUS, and if there is any doubt of a candidate meeting same, the issue should be resolved ASAP, if not sooner..

If I'm not mistaken, the law says "Reasonable" doubt with the burden of proof put on the accuser not the accused. There is nothing to resolve when the accuser accusation is "I want him to prove it". The accuser has to provide reason for doubt and reason is more than "I think the legal document he presented is fake based on a picture I seen on the Internet".

As of now, IMHO, the USSC is under obligation to verify the legitimacy of Obama since the question has been raised and not answered other than "Take my word for it; I'm qualified".

Not true, he produced a certified copy of his BC AND the Government of HI has testified to its validity.