• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Senate Resolution On McCains Citizenship

Mike

Well-known member
Where's the resolution for Obama? :lol: :lol: :lol:
____________________________________________________


http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=sr110-511
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
The fact that no one with "legal standing" has raised the issue makes me believe there is no issue and this is just another figment of the imaginations of a bunch of right wingnuts....
 

Mike

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
The fact that no one with "legal standing" has raised the issue makes me believe there is no issue and this is just another figment of the imaginations of a bunch of right wingnuts....

You uninformed fool...................................

Hollander vs. McCain was filed on March 14, 2008.

The immediate Senate reaction was to create a resolution to declare McCain as qualified. Even as Hollander was declared as having no standing, a certified photocopy of his birth certificate was at the hearing.

The Senate rushed and passed this resolution in April to quell any and all rumors.

Why haven't they done the same for Obama?

Does the Senate have "No Standing"? :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
Oldtimer said:
The fact that no one with "legal standing" has raised the issue makes me believe there is no issue and this is just another figment of the imaginations of a bunch of right wingnuts....

You uninformed fool...................................

Hollander vs. McCain was filed on March 14, 2008.

The immediate Senate reaction was to create a resolution to declare McCain as qualified. Even as Hollander was declared as having no standing, a certified photocopy of his birth certificate was at the hearing.

The Senate rushed and passed this resolution in April to quell any and all rumors.

Why haven't they done the same for Obama?

Does the Senate have "No Standing"? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Apparently didn't think there was any need- as its a point only circulating in some weak extremist rights minds....And its fearmongering smear tactic apparently didn't work.....
 

Mike

Well-known member
Apparently didn't think there was any need

or couldn't? :lol: :lol:

And its fearmongering smear tactic apparently didn't work.....

The MSM never mentioned it. The question of it alone would definitely have raised a few eyebrows. But as the Libs/Dems themselves said......the media was on board with Obama. :roll:
 

Steve

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
The fact that no one with "legal standing" has raised the issue makes me believe there is no issue and this is just another figment of the imaginations of a bunch of right wingnuts....

Phillip J. Berg of Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania, USA, is the former Pennsylvania Deputy Attorney General.,, [Berg is a former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania; former candidate for Governor and US Senate in Democratic Primaries; ... "Berg has involved himself with causes that he believes are in adherance with the US Constitution." The case was appealed to the Supreme Court to suspend the election on Nov 4th. The supreme court denied his petition, but required the defendants to reply by December 1st.

wack job.. maybe.. but right wing nut... nope.. Berg is a liberal who wants to defend the US Consittution. ...

I thought you wanted the US constitution upheld?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
Oldtimer said:
The fact that no one with "legal standing" has raised the issue makes me believe there is no issue and this is just another figment of the imaginations of a bunch of right wingnuts....

Phillip J. Berg of Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania, USA, is the former Pennsylvania Deputy Attorney General.,, [Berg is a former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania; former candidate for Governor and US Senate in Democratic Primaries; ... "Berg has involved himself with causes that he believes are in adherance with the US Constitution." The case was appealed to the Supreme Court to suspend the election on Nov 4th. The supreme court denied his petition, but required the defendants to reply by December 1st.

wack job.. maybe.. but right wing nut... nope.. Berg is a liberal who wants to defend the US Consittution. ...

I thought you wanted the US constitution upheld?

If you read all about him he is an all over the place wack job- and has even been banned by numerous courts from filing an action because of all his "frivolous suits"...

If the person that has standing- John McCain- thought there was a question- why has he not filed an action :???:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
The real question is; Why does Obama refuse to provide the cert? Why does he lie about it? Are these the actions of an innocent man?
 

Steve

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Steve said:
Oldtimer said:
The fact that no one with "legal standing" has raised the issue makes me believe there is no issue and this is just another figment of the imaginations of a bunch of right wingnuts....

Phillip J. Berg of Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania, USA, is the former Pennsylvania Deputy Attorney General.,, [Berg is a former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania; former candidate for Governor and US Senate in Democratic Primaries; ... "Berg has involved himself with causes that he believes are in adherance with the US Constitution." The case was appealed to the Supreme Court to suspend the election on Nov 4th. The supreme court denied his petition, but required the defendants to reply by December 1st.

wack job.. maybe.. but right wing nut... nope.. Berg is a liberal who wants to defend the US Consittution. ...

I thought you wanted the US constitution upheld?

If you read all about him he is an all over the place wack job- and has even been banned by numerous courts from filing an action because of all his "frivolous suits"...

If the person that has standing- John McCain- thought there was a question- why has he not filed an action :???:

I really don't care why he filed, or why McCain didn't file...

I do care that you were wrong again in blaming this on a rightwingnut..... in a recent post you faulted Bush for not being able to admit he was wrong as one reason for your hatred..

I showed how you were wrong again.. and you failed to admit it.. maybe we should start calling you little Bush..

or are you man enough to admit your wrong?

and a question OT,.. if a person defends the US Constitution..if we disagree with him? is he a wack job?
 
Top