KARK, Little Rock/ArkensasMatters.com, seven hours ago, refers to a much earlier Washington Times story:
The decision on granting a hearing challenging President-elect Barack Obama's U.S. citizenship is still pending.The Daily Writ, 9 hours ago says that the absence of the case on the list for next week means they won't hear it:
The "Washington Times" reports that the U.S. Supreme Court held a private conference Friday morning to discuss whether to take up a lawsuit but it was not on the list of court orders for the day.
According to the "Times" a Supreme Court spokesman said the decision to hear the case will most likely be announced next week.
If four of the nine justices vote to hear the case, oral arguments could be scheduled.
The Supreme Court appears to have declined review in a case filed against the Secretary of State of New Jersey that sought to nullify Barack Obama’s election to the presidency. The case, which centers on Obama’s citizenship, was not among those for which the Court accepted review on Friday; thus, watchers of the high Court expect review to be formally denied on Monday.Whatever the outcome, I'll bet you a quarter this was revenge from Clarence Thomas for Obama's casual dismissal of Thomas's intellect:
Obama said, “that’s a good [question],” and then explained: “I would not have nominated Clarence Thomas. I don’t think that he, I don’t think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation. Setting aside the fact that I profoundly disagree with his interpretation of a lot of the Constitution.” Obama added that he wouldn’t have appointed Justice Scalia, and perhaps not John Roberts, either.Nia-Malika Henderson agrees that it's at least a possibility, speculating on Politico:
Maybe Thomas is just returning the favor — putting through a case that questions whether Obama should be president, after Obama said he wouldn't have picked Thomas for the high court.And, whatever the outcome, the fact that the SCOTUS even considered hearing it at all...well...that's a testament to the American dream: Any complete idiot with a poor excuse for an argument, given enough bitterness and enough money, can win the ear of a dimwitted Justice.
4 comments:
I think Justice Thomas is a bigger man than to play revenge with so much at risk. Obama on the other hand appears very small by not releasing pertinent documents that would have prevented this.
Actually, you're confusing one dumbass lawsuit with another even dumberass lawsuit.
The "documents" question pertains to the birth certificate issue. Proponents of the birth certificate issue believe it plausible that B.O.'s mommy either flew from Kenya to Hawaii on a lark 48 hours after B.O. was born, or conspired with a bunch of evil muslims to birth a future president who would bring about the downfall of white holy capitalist goodness. The state government of Hawaii is obviously in on it.
However, even the most small-minded of the justices don't buy those theories. The challenge Thomas has submitted to the rest of the Court is based on Obama's alleged "Dual Citizenship," which has nothing to do with the birth certificate issue, and, while equally nonsensical, doesn't require quite the level of conspiracy theory to imagine.
And oh yeah, you're making the argument that, sigh, if only Obama would have been an obedient, humble public servant and just produced every document requested by far right tax evader steel-can't-melter sons-of-Birchers. There are so many things wrong with that way of thinking that I wouldn't know where to begin.
Forgive all the ridicule, but clearly you and I have vastly different political priorities. So go somewhere else and speculate on whether Obama is circumcized and if so does that make him eligible to be President, or whether this is all part of some Kenyan plot to sap and impurify all our precious bodily fluids.
Bottom line, Obama is not above the Constitution and must prove natural-born citizenship like everyone else.
There can be no exceptions.
Bottom line, way to ignore everything I just wrote. We put debating skills at a high premium here at The Underview. If you want to win debates, answer the other sides' arguments.
Bottom line, he has already done so, and no other President has been asked to do so. He's being asked because of a foreign-sounding name, and the color of his skin, and he's being "asked" by a bunch of loonies. And where were you, crazy righties, when George W. Bush called the Constitution "a goddammed piece of paper?"
Post a Comment