Berg. The Energizer Bunny. Still Going ......

[the bib]

http://www.newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news107.htm

He ain't letting it die.

Good.

[Tipsycatlover]

He might though. Die that is. Under the obamination dictatorship, dissent will not be tolerated.

[Laramie]

Under the obamination dictatorship, dissent will not be tolerated.

Darn right!

Obama will be coming after you soon, Tipsy.

Your best -- only! -- defense at this point is to start sleeping under a tinfoil blanket.

[the bib]

Like the Clinton body count?

G is right, we need to organize and take back gov't.

Personally, I think the push should start with educating the unwitting, uninformed exactly WHAT Constitutional gov't actually is.

From there it is a clear path to see what is wrong.

People have no idea that they've voted against country, against interest and against the constitution.

Berg is but one, there will be more.

[THE Gypsy]

Originally Posted by the bib

http://www.newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news107.htm

He ain't letting it die.

Good.

[Laramie]

It's dead.

Good.

[Lazarus]

Originally Posted by the bib

http://www.newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news107.htm

He ain't letting it die.

Good.

Whether he is a natural born citizen or not ( I do not know), I think it is very important for the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in--if he is natural born--then the court might so rule (and better define the term) and provide a sort of stamp of approval upon his election. On the other hand, if Obama is not a natural born citizen, then some impartial review of the controversy must be held in order to determine the facts (the case would be remanded back to the FDC to find out the facts).

Either way, I don't see what the big deal would be for a natural born citizen of the United States to show through documentation that he or she is eligible to serve in an elective office with requirements specified in the U.S. Constitution.

[the bib]

If SCOTUS doesn't stand up and hold for the Constitution in this matter, it tells us all we really need to know about their view on other, and more complicated matters.

That they were almost split in interpreting "the right to bear arms," tells me too many are more interested in their leftist opinions than living up to their sworn duty and loyalty to constitutional law.

It saddend me to say but I have lost almost all faith in SCOTUS.

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by the bib

If SCOTUS doesn't stand up and hold for the Constitution in this matter, it tells us all we really need to know about their view on other, and more complicated matters.

That they were almost split in interpreting "the right to bear arms," tells me too many are more interested in their leftist opinions than living up to their sworn duty and loyalty to constitutional law.

It saddend me to say but I have lost almost all faith in SCOTUS.

They already chose loyality to government power over the rights of citizens in that awful eminent domain ruling. And that was before Democrats took control. It will just get worse.

People like Laralame think that is Cool!

[Laramie]

Berg doesn't have standing.

That's not going to change.

And the Constitution puts the decisions about the eligibility (and continuing eligibility) of folks running for president in the hands of Congress.

And that's not changing either.