Amazing that so many are turning out to be "birthers", isn't it?

Put this one behind you and march onward to find another blip.

Rant and rave all you want but the situation is resolved.

Go forth and spread your rath elsewhere to those who see you as their champions.

Originally Posted by buggyone

Amazing that so many are turning out to be "birthers", isn't it?

Put this one behind you and march onward to find another blip.

Rant and rave all you want but the situation is resolved.

Go forth and spread your rath elsewhere to those who see you as their champions.

This post is an embarrassment. You've usually posted with much more intelligence.

Let's say you are served with a subpoena because it is thought you know something about someone else's alleged crime. But in actuality you know nothing about this supposed crime, and you barely know the person in question.

Can you just ignore the subpoena? I don't give a rat's patootie what the person is accused of, or what involvement you might have in the matter. We're just discussing the subpoena.

Why are you acting like such a dunce about this? Seriously, I'm just saying this as a friend.

LOL You guys are so funny yet have no sense of humor.

Originally Posted by skyguy79

Your question seems retorical to me, or at least a very hard one to find an answer for. If I'm wrong and/or if Richie doesn't give you an answer, please do provide us with the answer for him.

As for the president's representative, they could be on the hook as you indicated. But where does the buck stop? Is the President not the chief executive, responsible for everything that happens in the White House adminiatration just as the president of most any corporation or any past president of the US? If not then we're in more trouble in this country than any of us previously thought!

Oh really? Then why wasn't Bush tried for war crimes or held responsible for Abu Grahib? Why wasn't LBJ tried for the same thing? Why wasn't Reagan tried for the Iran-Contra deal - no, Ollie North took the fall for that.

If the President PERSONALLY made a decision to ignore the subpoena, then you 've got the goods on him.

The reason I haven't "answered" Rickie's question is because I don't have all the facts. Or, more precisely, I don't have ENOUGH of the facts to the point that I'd feel comfortable making a leap.

So far, what I've seen is that the President's legal team seems to have dropped a ball - though I can't find any evidence of 'the other side' jumping all over it. It screams to me that there's more to this than meets the eye - but in which partisan direction, I have no idea.

Richie, I wish we could discuss this in person but I will be at a concert at Savannah Center instead of the watering hole this week. Thanks for the kind words, I do appreciate them.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

This post is an embarrassment. You've usually posted with much more intelligence.

Let's say you are served with a subpoena because it is thought you know something about someone else's alleged crime. But in actuality you know nothing about this supposed crime, and you barely know the person in question.

Can you just ignore the subpoena? I don't give a rat's patootie what the person is accused of, or what involvement you might have in the matter. We're just discussing the subpoena.

Why are you acting like such a dunce about this? Seriously, I'm just saying this as a friend.

I'm just guessing that the judge in Atlanta knows more about the law than RichieLion. I could be wrong. Why then did he, the judge, not hold the president in contempt of court and swear out a warrant for his immediate arrest?

Originally Posted by djplong

Oh really? Then why wasn't Bush tried for war crimes or held responsible for Abu Grahib? Why wasn't LBJ tried for the same thing? Why wasn't Reagan tried for the Iran-Contra deal - no, Ollie North took the fall for that.

If the President PERSONALLY made a decision to ignore the subpoena, then you 've got the goods on him.

The reason I haven't "answered" Rickie's question is because I don't have all the facts. Or, more precisely, I don't have ENOUGH of the facts to the point that I'd feel comfortable making a leap.

So far, what I've seen is that the President's legal team seems to have dropped a ball - though I can't find any evidence of 'the other side' jumping all over it. It screams to me that there's more to this than meets the eye - but in which partisan direction, I have no idea.

Wow! Another opportunity to bash Bush for doing what Congress authorized him to do in the first place! That's another issue you've raised that I'm not going to get dragged into and besides, it's moot as to the subject at hand.

The key word here of this thread is "subpoena!" However you may have me here. I wasn't aware that Bush, LBJ and Regan were served subpoenas if in fact they were like Obama was! But then again that doesn't surprise me since most of that was before I became interested in politics through seeing first hand the shameless excessive dishonesty of left wing politicans (not that there aren't right wing dishonesty too, to a lesser degree at least) and through the dangers of the Progressive efforts of more than a century to undermine the American government and later the Democratic Party and US economy to cause the collapse of our government so they can then move in and form their vision of a socialistic government. I will digress from this because discussions of do no good and only serve to P*** me off!

BTW, it wasn't Rickie's question that you didn't answer, it was your own. I quote from your post "So why wasn't President Obama held in contempt of court by the Atlanta judge for ignoring a legally issued subpoena?" The reason I asked you to answer it if Richie didn't was to point out to you that the question was retorical and couldn't be answered by you or Richie. Neither of you are a prosecuting investigator nor a member of congress. By providing the excuse you did for not answering it confirmed that you didn't get why I asked, or you knew it was retorical before you asked it in the first place!

Despite all ths I do hope you have an enjoyable day today and ever day except for next November 6th and 7th of course!

Calm down everyone. The Judge and everything around this so called legal action is a joke. Don't get so wrapped up in this. The judge is from Georgia and Obama is part black. Can't you see the connection. I assure you the justice department will look into the judges action and reason for doing so. Let the authorities sort it out and fire the idiot judge in Georgia.

1. a group of birthers led by Orly Taitz files suit to keep Pres. off GA primary ballot.
2.attorny for Dem. party in Georgia files a motion to quash the suit.
3.GA official says no,he wants a hearing.
4.Orly downloads the GA subpeona form and issues"subpeonas" to everyone on earth including the state of Hawaii where she travelled made a total fool of herself and was asked to get out.
5.the residents of birthistan have latched onto Orly "subpeonas" and are rejoicing that the Pres. of the USA will be hauled into court and admit he wasborn in Kenya,the son of Saul Alinsky and so on.
6.so why is the Pres not going to Atlanta? simple,there is no subpoena.
7.keep believing in Orly

Originally Posted by waynet

5.the residents of birthistan have latched onto Orly "subpeonas" and are rejoicing that the Pres. of the USA will be hauled into court and admit he wasborn in Kenya,the son of Saul Alinsky and so on.

Son of Saul Alinsky? Na! But I've heard that it will soon be proved that Obama is the son of Louis Farrakhan, an American citizen, and the whole birther issue will become history for once and for all!

Originally Posted by waynet

1. a group of birthers led by Orly Taitz files suit to keep Pres. off GA primary ballot.
2.attorny for Dem. party in Georgia files a motion to quash the suit.
3.GA official says no,he wants a hearing.
4.Orly downloads the GA subpeona form and issues"subpeonas" to everyone on earth including the state of Hawaii where she travelled made a total fool of herself and was asked to get out.
5.the residents of birthistan have latched onto Orly "subpeonas" and are rejoicing that the Pres. of the USA will be hauled into court and admit he wasborn in Kenya,the son of Saul Alinsky and so on.
6.so why is the Pres not going to Atlanta? simple,there is no subpoena.
7.keep believing in Orly

Now, this is a proper post for this silly thread. It is silly funny, so follow-on posts should also be silly funny.

Republicans can't beat President Obama on a level playing field with their loser candidates, so they first try to suppress the vote with their voter ID laws, then they try to keep him off the ballot with their phoney lawsuits. Neither tactic will work.

Originally Posted by janmcn

Republicans can't beat President Obama on a level playing field with their loser candidates, so they first try to suppress the vote with their voter ID laws, then they try to keep him off the ballot with their phoney lawsuits. Neither tactic will work.

If Republicans can't beat Obama, it's because of the 8-10 point bump they enjoy from the liberal media, and that's without even considering the indoctrination in our educational system or the voter fraud which is rampant! If you took just the media out of the equation, Liberals would never ever win and that would be disastrous to a true and honest two party system! I'm sure though that you Democrats are tickled pink that these destructive elements benefiting the left exist!

Also Voter ID laws do not suppress votes except for the fraudulent ones! Why the left wingers are afraid of voter laws is because it makes winning elections more difficult for them!

I've only been on this political forum for a few days, and already the usual Democratic BS is getting annoying. No wonder posters here are mostly Democrats although they are a minority in TV.

Originally Posted by skyguy79

If Republicans can't beat Obama, it's because of the 8-10 point bump they enjoy from the liberal media, and that's without even considering the indoctrination in our educational system or the voter fraud which is rampant! If you took just the media out of the equation, Liberals would never ever win and that would be disastrous to a true and honest two party system! I'm sure though that you Democrats are tickled pink that these destructive elements benefiting the left exist!

Also Voter ID laws do not suppress votes except for the fraudulent ones! Why the left wingers are afraid of voter laws is because it makes winning elections more difficult for them!

I've only been on this political forum for a few days, and already the usual Democratic BS is getting annoying. No wonder posters here are mostly Democrats although they are a minority in TV.

and now there are all these stories about poor old people who will be disenfranchised because they don't have a picture ID!!! Why do the rest of us need a picture ID for anything and everything? I've have never been able to cast a vote without one!

Originally Posted by skyguy79

If Republicans can't beat Obama, it's because of the 8-10 point bump they enjoy from the liberal media, and that's without even considering the indoctrination in our educational system or the voter fraud which is rampant! If you took just the media out of the equation, Liberals would never ever win and that would be disastrous to a true and honest two party system! I'm sure though that you Democrats are tickled pink that these destructive elements benefiting the left exist!

Also Voter ID laws do not suppress votes except for the fraudulent ones! Why the left wingers are afraid of voter laws is because it makes winning elections more difficult for them!

I've only been on this political forum for a few days, and already the usual Democratic BS is getting annoying. No wonder posters here are mostly Democrats although they are a minority in TV.

I have to take exception to two comments in your above post; first "voter fraud which is rampant". The Bush administration conducted a five year study and found no voter fraud.

Second "Voter ID laws do not suppress votes except for the fraudulent ones".
Personally, I am all in favor of voter ID as long as these ID's are made available to all voters free of charge. Recently it cost me $23.00 to get the documents (birth certificate/marriage license) just to renew my Florida driver's license. This is a lot of money to some people and without the use of a computer, it would be a daunting task to get said documents.