BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting Obama's citizen...

There are 240339 comments on the Chicago Tribune story from Jan 8, 2009, titled BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting Obama's citizen.... In it, Chicago Tribune reports that:

The U.S. Supreme Court will consider Friday whether to take up a lawsuit challenging President-elect Barack Obama 's U.S. citizenship, a continuation of a New Jersey case embraced by some opponents of Obama's ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chicago Tribune.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#118370 Oct 17, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>I suppose if a frog had longer legs, he wouldn't bump his ass when he jumped!
Does that put her on the same footing as a Brazilian citizen? Not!
C'mon play "Justice". Prove to the world you are not merely the great legend in your own mind.

Suppose a German man and Irish woman have a child while residing in New York. According to US law the child is a US citizen. According to German law, she is a German citizen, and according to Irish law, she is an Irish citizen. She is entitled to passports from all three countries. None of the countries may invalidate her citizenship in any other country.

Does the birfoon think that Ireland by issuing a passport recognizing her Irish citizenship "strips away" her German citizenship? Does the birfoon think that Germany similarly "strips away" her Irish citizenship? Meanwhile the birfoon believes Germany may invalidate -- "strip away" -- her US citizenship.
Just plain crazy.

Grow up.

And if she vacations on the beach in Rio, and gets busted for violating Brazilian law, under which country is she under the jurisdiction of? US, IE, GE, BR? Which country(ies) is she a citizen of?

Hey, you da JUSTICE! What are you afraid of? You da WORLD'S expert on JURISDICTION and CITIZENSHIP!

Cat got your tongue?

Hee hee hee!
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#118371 Oct 17, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
I think Mobarf need to grow the F up.
Sen. Trumbull stated during the drafting of the national birthright law that it was the goal to “make citizens of everybody born in the United States who owe allegiance to the United States.”
Sen. Trumbull felt the words,“That all persons born in the United States and owing allegiance thereto are hereby declared to be citizens” would be more than sufficient to fulfill this goal. However, after investigation it was found the United States had no authority to make citizens of those temporarily residing in the United States who owed only a “temporary allegiance.”
Now Mobarfa, if you can't understand what is in this post then you're simply stupid.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#118372 Oct 17, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't leave anything out. Merely hit the reply button. Better check that memory of yours. It is getting worse.
Well, from memory,Terri asked if anyone knew French. You took it out. Nothing new.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#118373 Oct 17, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>that my friend is called, ingenuity!
1000 variations on the same non sequitur is simple stupidity.
MyTwoCents wrote:
<quoted text>
ahh, greenie you're still boring. new moniker same tired old crap - 25 lbs in a 5 lb sack
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#118374 Oct 17, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, BirfoonBoy, NO COUNTRY can invalidate the citizenship of a person who is a citizen of a foreign country, or countries. In particular, this is the law in the US. Get used to it.
“In accordance with Section 358 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, while persons seeking to renounce U.S. citizenship submit the necessary documentation to a U.S. consular officer at a U.S. Foreign Service post abroad, the decision whether to approve the renunciation is made by the Department of State in Washington, D.C. Accordingly, unless and until a certificate of loss of nationality is approved by the U.S. Department of State, the oath of renunciation, even though signed by the individual is not/not legally effective in terminating the person's U.S. citizenship.”
http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citiz ...
How many times? How many times, birfoon?
PLAY LAW DOESN'T COUNT IN THE REAL WORLD.
<quoted text>
you are fighting against yourself, check your post 118005.
Puss! You have backed yourself into a corner, only one solution!
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#118375 Oct 17, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
C'mon play "Justice". Prove to the world you are not merely the great legend in your own mind.
Suppose a German man and Irish woman have a child while residing in New York. According to US law the child is a US citizen. According to German law, she is a German citizen, and according to Irish law, she is an Irish citizen. She is entitled to passports from all three countries. None of the countries may invalidate her citizenship in any other country.
Does the birfoon think that Ireland by issuing a passport recognizing her Irish citizenship "strips away" her German citizenship? Does the birfoon think that Germany similarly "strips away" her Irish citizenship? Meanwhile the birfoon believes Germany may invalidate -- "strip away" -- her US citizenship.
Just plain crazy.
Grow up.
And if she vacations on the beach in Rio, and gets busted for violating Brazilian law, under which country is she under the jurisdiction of? US, IE, GE, BR? Which country(ies) is she a citizen of?
Hey, you da JUSTICE! What are you afraid of? You da WORLD'S expert on JURISDICTION and CITIZENSHIP!
Cat got your tongue?
Hee hee hee!
I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform :noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#118377 Oct 17, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
1000 variations on the same non sequitur is simple stupidity.
<quoted text>
so, the constitution is stupid? Glad you think so, you are a target for further discussions.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#118378 Oct 17, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>you forgot what you posted back on "118005"! I don't think that would include aliens of any type, since they are subjects of a foreign power, and not subject to the jurisdiction, thereof. NEXT!
Huh? 118005? Dumbo, ordinary aliens in the US are completely subject to the jurisdiction United States. They enjoy no immunity from US law. Not my opinion. USSC's opinion, per Article 3 Section 1.

Duh!

Get used to it.

Sorry, BirfoonBoy, you are conflating "subject of" with "subject to" a foreign power.

Please go to high school.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
The discussions in Congress included many pages devoted to the special circumstances of Indians. I suggest you educate yourself. Also, court decisions elaborated on the special circumstances of Indians. Yet BirfoonBoy conflates children of European aliens with Indians as though the special circumstances should apply to both. UR an I---t.
Bottom line, the child of Indians was not considered the same as the child of Germans, English, Dutch, French, etc.
It ain't rocket science.
Did you just fall off the turnip truck?

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#118379 Oct 17, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>

Oath of Allegiance recited herein (yet again, ad nauseam, ad tedium).
So you think the Oath answers the question of which country she was under the jurisdiction of?

Clue, birfoon, she didn't take an oath of allegiance in the US, Ireland, Germany, or Brazil. Jack-wagon.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
C'mon play "Justice". Prove to the world you are not merely the great legend in your own mind.
Suppose a German man and Irish woman have a child while residing in New York. According to US law the child is a US citizen. According to German law, she is a German citizen, and according to Irish law, she is an Irish citizen. She is entitled to passports from all three countries. None of the countries may invalidate her citizenship in any other country.
Does the birfoon think that Ireland by issuing a passport recognizing her Irish citizenship "strips away" her German citizenship? Does the birfoon think that Germany similarly "strips away" her Irish citizenship? Meanwhile the birfoon believes Germany may invalidate -- "strip away" -- her US citizenship.
Just plain crazy.
Grow up.
And if she vacations on the beach in Rio, and gets busted for violating Brazilian law, under which country is she under the jurisdiction of? US, IE, GE, BR? Which country(ies) is she a citizen of?
Hey, you da JUSTICE! What are you afraid of? You da WORLD'S expert on JURISDICTION and CITIZENSHIP!
Cat got your tongue?
Hee hee hee!
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#118380 Oct 17, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh? 118005? Dumbo, ordinary aliens in the US are completely subject to the jurisdiction United States. They enjoy no immunity from US law. Not my opinion. USSC's opinion, per Article 3 Section 1.
Duh!
Get used to it.
Sorry, BirfoonBoy, you are conflating "subject of" with "subject to" a foreign power.
Please go to high school.
<quoted text>
I refer your back to your post 118005.
Obama was born a citizen of his father's nation, fact.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#118381 Oct 17, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>so, the constitution is stupid? Glad you think so, you are a target for further discussions.
It is not the Constitution that is stupid. Imaginary play law is stupid -- and pathetic.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
1000 variations on the same non sequitur is simple stupidity.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#118382 Oct 17, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, when you are the baddest dude on the block, who's gonna mess with you?
In Germany around 1956-57 the 11th Airborne Division use to have a golden eagle at the officers club in this large cage and they use to feed him fresh fish. This was at Warner Kaserne on the North side of Munich. I am sure they do not allow that any more.
Oh, Warmer Kaserne , up until the finished the Pentagon, had the larges building in the world. Hilter had it built in the mid-1030's for the Waffen SS and it could hold 18,000 troops. Even today it is still the second largest building in the world.
When I was 5-6 years old I would get a quarter a week allowance and we would go on post and for ten events buy some pommes fritis (French fries) at the kiosk next to the building.
Also, when the Eagle is in its 40's, it must make a life or death decision. See, its long and limber talons can no longer grab prey which serves as food. Its long and sharp beak has become bent too. Its old-aged and heavy wings, due to their thick feathers, become stuck to its chest and make it difficult to fly. The Eagle has two options; to die or go through a painful process of change that takes 150 days. The Eagle must fly to the mountain top and sit on its nest. There the Eagle knocks its beak against a rock until it plucks it out. After plucking it out, the Eagle will wait for a new beak to grow back and then it will pluck out its talons. When its talons grow back, it will begin plucking out its old-aged feathers. Then after five months, the Eagle takes its famous flight of rebirth and lives for another thirty years.

The Eagle can teach us many things the wise old Chief said.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#118383 Oct 17, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, from memory,Terri asked if anyone knew French. You took it out. Nothing new.
You're loony jacqazz. Join her on the bridge, will ya?

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#118384 Oct 17, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
However, after investigation it was found the United States had no authority to make citizens of those temporarily residing in the United States who owed only a “temporary allegiance.”
Please cite the authority that overrules the United States Supreme Court.

Next.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Grow up, loser. Bingham, Trumbull, and Howard all subscribed to the jus soli doctrine, birfoon misreading of "subject to a foreign power" notwithstanding.
They became such in virtue of national law, or rather natural law which recognizes persons born within the jurisdiction of every country as being subjects or citizens of that country. Such persons were, therefore, citizens of the United States as were born in the country or were made by naturalization.” Senator Jacob Howard, Cong. Globe 39th Cong., 1st Sess, 2765 (1866).
“A citizen of the United States is held by the courts to be a person who was born within the limits of the United States and subject to their laws.” Senator Jacob Howard, Cong. Globe 39th Cong., 1st Sess, 2765 (1866).
“Is not the child born in this country of German parents a citizen? I am afraid we have got very few citizens in some of the counties of good old Pennsylvania if the children born of German parents are not citizens.”-Senator Lyman Trumbull, Cong. Globe 39th, 1st Sess 498 (1866).
“Who are natural-born citizens but those born within the republic? Those born within the Republic, whether black or white, are citizens by birth—natural-born citizens.” John Bingham, Cong. Globe 37th Cong., 2nd Sess. 1639 (1862)
Grow up! The simple fact is THEY DIDN'T CONSIDER CHILDREN BORN IN THE US OF ORDINARY ALIENS TO BE BORN SUBJECT TO A FOREIGN POWER.
Too bad you don't understand what THEY MEANT by "subject to a foreign power", which meant children of foreign ambassadors and certain other exceptions.
GROW FECKING UP!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#118385 Oct 17, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>I refer your back to your post 118005.
Obama was born a citizen of his father's nation, fact.
Sorry, BirfoonBoy, but he was born a natural born US citizen per US law in the United States of America.

Foreign law is worth diddly squat in the US.

BTW, BirfoonBoy, post 118005 concerned Justice Stephen Field's opinion in the ruling of Look Tin Sing, where it was ruled that LTS was born COMPLETELY under US jurisdiction though born of alien parents.

Capisce?

Look Tin Sing was a natural born citizen.
Wong Kim Ark was a natural born citizen.
Barack H. Obama is a natural born citizen.

Sorry.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh? 118005? Dumbo, ordinary aliens in the US are completely subject to the jurisdiction United States. They enjoy no immunity from US law. Not my opinion. USSC's opinion, per Article 3 Section 1.
Duh!
Get used to it.
Sorry, BirfoonBoy, you are conflating "subject of" with "subject to" a foreign power.
Please go to high school.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#118386 Oct 17, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Please cite the authority that overrules the United States Supreme Court.
Next.
<quoted text>
Why did you cut it off Mobarf? Your silly azz games are getting really, really old. BTW, CC
American Lady

Danville, KY

#118387 Oct 17, 2012
A woman in a hot air balloon realized she was lost. She lowered altitude and spotted a man in a boat below. She shouted to him, "Excuse me, can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago, but I don't know where I am."

The man consulted his portable GPS and replied, "You're in a hot air balloon approximately 30 feet above a ground elevation of 2,346 feet above sea level. You are 31 degrees, 14.97 minutes north latitude and 100 degrees, 49.09 minutes west longitude."

She rolled her eyes and said, "You must be a Republican."

"I am," replied the man. "How did you know?"

"Well," answered the balloonist, "everything you told me is technically correct, but I have no idea what to make of your information, and I'm still lost. Frankly, you've not been much help to me."

The man smiled and responded, "You must be a Democrat."

"I am," replied the balloonist. "But how did you know?"

"Well," said the man, "You don't know where you are or where you're going. You've risen to where you are due to a large quantity of hot air. You've made a promise that you have no idea how to keep, and now you expect ME to solve your problem. You're in EXACTLY the same position you were in before we met, but somehow, now, it's MY fault.

~ From my friend BB
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#118388 Oct 17, 2012
Mobarf, AND you're supposed to be the patent consultant? Go work in your lab. Frickin' idiot.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#118389 Oct 17, 2012
Oh, I'm sorry....the Biologist, Chemist and Patent Consultant! ROTFLMAO HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa!!!!!!!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#118390 Oct 17, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Why did you cut it off Mobarf? Your silly azz games are getting really, really old. BTW, CC
Please cite the authority that overrules the United States Supreme Court.

Thank you.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min My New Alias RULES 1,522,224
Hello Chicago 3 hr JDogs The Name 1
News Ultra Foods in Crestwood offers array of prepar... (Jun '12) 4 hr Bryce 31
Scary Obituary 5 hr Diiiiiiiiiiiiiiii... 12
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 5 hr Rose of Tralee 105,132
News Chicago Restaurants Rally Against Trump Immigra... 9 hr Truth 8
I think she is pissed. From a few years ago. 10 hr SENIORS READ-THIS 6

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages