Via John Cole, I see that the Supreme Court has declined, without comment, to hear the case brought by some wingnut claiming that Obama was not a "natural-born citizen," and therefore ineligible to be president.
Kate Phillips of the NYT concludes:
This is the kind of doubt-bending thing that lives independently online, but from the looks of today’s decision by the highest court in the land, the accusation isn’t gaining much ground in the realm of reality.
Smart lady. What say you, Wingnuttia?
The Supreme Court, not wanting to upset the apple cart, has only fueled the fire.
Apparently this part of the Constitution is a dead letter, because the Courts will not admit the standing of anyone raising it as an issue.
I don't know if the Court specifically considered Alan Keyes' lawsuit, but, as a contender for the presidency, he undeniably has standing. So apparently the constitution now places no enforceable restrictions on candidates for President whatsoever.
This issue has been successfully kookified, labeled as unworthy of attention. This started out normally, with the mainstream media ignoring the issue, or treating it as tin-foil hat material. Then it got eerie as even conservative talk radio ignored it. Finally, new-media, solid conservatives like Michelle Malkin and David Horowitz dismissed the issue and joined the MSM in treating doubters as tin-foilers (Michelle even ran a picture of a man in such a hat with her article on the matter).
Needless to say, the questioners will not be persuaded by the court and media, and will continue to press their case.
Not even the U.S. Supreme Court can kill the dispute that has developed over Sen. Barack Obama's eligibility to occupy the Oval Office based on questions raised over his birthplace and citizenship and his steadfast refusal to provide documentation on the issue.
Those familiar with the case that still remains at the court say his "real" birth certificate authenticated by Snopes and Factcheck actually has 2007 borders and doesn’t list the hospital, doctor or place of birth …
Oh, yeah. The case dismissed today isn't the last one. Not by a long shot. Hateway and WingNutDaily are already onto the next one. Better order up another truckload of Cheetos.
[Added] There is for some of them, however, a new shiny object to obsess over. Who knew cardboard could be a shiny object?
4 comments:
There is for some of them, however, a new shiny object to obsess over. Who knew cardboard could be a shiny object?
LOL. I cannot believe they are getting all worked up about that. It's exactly the kind of thing that for their whole lives if a feminist complained about it, they would regard it as a form of oppression.
But honestly, the central guiding principal for wingnuts is hatred of liberals, and virtually every other position they've taken will fall by the wayside if necessary in their quest to confound the left.
I mean, wingnuts cheering Hillary's name at the RNC? Wingnuts complaining about sexism?
Strange days indeed.
So far, they are not handling the transition well at all.
Funny thing is, if you really thought it was such an offensive picture, would you post it over and over again? I mean, for example, the self-appointed Hillarhoid-in-Chief has at least four separate posts up, with the supposedly horrifying picture repeated in each one of them.
Exactly. Remember John Kerry's supposed insult of the troops, when he said that if you're dumb you'll get stuck in Iraq? They made sure every service member in America heard that insult at least 10 times. If they really were afraid the troops would be offended or hurt, they would have kept it quiet. But the fact is, they wanted the troops to be offended and hurt -- even if they had to lie about Kerry's intentions to ensure that outcome.
... they wanted the troops to be offended and hurt ...
That's GOP Morale-Building 101.
Support Our Troops! (TM)
Post a Comment