The ISSUE that did DIE
 

The 2nd lawsuit rejected by the Supremes-RE: Obama's birth status.

All suits submitted to 15-20 legal venues have all been denied.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/...eal/index.html

Justices turn aside another challenge over Obama's citizenship

Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court has again cast aside an appeal that raised doubts about President Barack Obama's U.S. citizenship, a grass-roots legal issue that has gained little legal or political footing, but continues to persist in the courts.

The justices without comment Monday rejected a challenge from Charles Kerchner Jr., a Pennsylvania man who sought a trial in federal court forcing the president to produce documents regarding his birth and citizenship.

Who looks more silly; folk bringing these suits to court or someone who could allay the whole bollix with one document?

It's not about who looks silly.

You're right. It's about the most secretive president in U.S. history who has gone to great pains and expense to cover the tracks of his past.

Boxcar

n. pl. folk or folks

1.
a. The common people of a society or region considered as the representatives of a traditional way of life and especially as the originators or carriers of the customs, beliefs, and arts that make up a distinctive culture: a leader who came from the folk.
b. Archaic A nation; a people.

2. Informal People in general. Often used in the plural: Folks around here are very friendly.
3. People of a specified group or kind. Often used in the plural: city folks; rich folk.
4. folks Informal a. The members of one's family or childhood household; one's relatives.
b. One's parents: My folks are coming for a visit.


adj. Of, occurring in, or originating among the common people: folk culture; a folk hero.



http://www.thefreedictionary.com/folk


Definition #3 fits. :rolleyes:

The Deceiver-in-Chief fits better. He's the problem.

Boxcar

Back on the dark side, I see. To answer your question, it's the folks bring the suits to court. First of all, copies of the birth certificate are readily available, there was a birth annoucement in the Honolulu paper at the time.
The President is absolutely right in not producing the original. He is absolutely right in ignoring the whole thing. If any president responded every time some moron questioned him, he would have no time to run the country. Which is the real purpose behind all this. Conservatives flitting around like annoying gnats, because they are peeved at not having their way.
Obama could produce the original certificate, a video of the birth and the ride home from the hospital, and sworn testimony from the obstetrician and that would not be enough proof for the stupid birthers.

Link, please -- and not to a COLB either. I assume you know the difference? Or am I giving you too much benefit of the doubt?

And can you verify the announcement in the paper for us?

Boxcar

I agree with all you guys in this thread, hows that? I do think there is nothing to stop Rand Paul or any other United States Senator from a filibusterer to raise the debt ceiling until much cuts are made, the display of birth certificates if they want to dump that in there too. What we are now talking about is someone with questionable creditability and no political leverage what so ever. Who here thinks the next two years are going to be a cake walk, you have seen absolutely nothing yet just wait.

The silly part is that you seem to be the only one posting about it lately...have fun!

We all know we're stuck with this disaster of a President until Jan. 2013. Stop reminding us! :lol:

Have you caught your bud, KO, lately? He's yappin' about Bush & war crimes. Ain't that a hoot? :lol:

:sleeping: :sleeping: :sleeping: You need to catch up. A COLB doth not make a BC. Get with the program.

Boxcar

He can't produce it; it was LOST IN THE MAIL.