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

Full story: Chicago Tribune

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 ...
Comments
104,861 - 104,880 of 174,600 Comments Last updated 6 hrs ago

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118333
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, loser, but Bingham, Howard, and Trumbull adhered to the jus soli principle and they plainly stated so. They clearly did not believe that children born in this country of ordinary aliens were subject to a foreign power.
Furthermore, they are not the "highest authority" under the US Constitution, which you presumably hold dear. According to the Constitution, the Supreme Court is vested with the judicial Power of the United States, and it interprets the meaning of the Constitution.
Get used to it. And GROW UP!
<quoted text>
Poor little puppet. Still thinks stomping his feet, flailing his arms, and repeating himself while plugging his ears screaming "LALALALALA" wins a debate.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118335
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>I love it when you come-out with BS that has nothing to do with the US Constitution, just irrelevant BS.
Huh? You da expert on JURISDICTION!

What's your problem? Every other country is sovereign but not the US? England can invalidate US citizenship of a born US citizen?

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.

Cat got your tongue?

UR a birfoon!
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
BirfoonChild, "play Justice" cannot render an opinion according to his play law.
Why is he so afraid? He thinks he is a "Justice". Hee hee. He's a grandiose delusional NPD twerp.
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?
Cat got your tongue? Hee hee hee!
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118337
Oct 17, 2012
 
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, BirfoonBoy, a country may refuse to accept its citizen's renunciation. C.f., Kenya which routinely refuses to approve renunciation of Kenyan citizenship. Also, in the US, renunciation must be approved.[1]
BirfoonBoy's problem is that I do "get it" and can see through his infantile logic and childish premises.
__________
[1] "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...
<quoted text>
Puss! Just more BS, you just don't understand, do you.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118340
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, loser, but Bingham, Howard, and Trumbull adhered to the jus soli principle and they plainly stated so. They clearly did not believe that children born in this country of ordinary aliens were subject to a foreign power.
Furthermore, they are not the "highest authority" under the US Constitution, which you presumably hold dear. According to the Constitution, the Supreme Court is vested with the judicial Power of the United States, and it interprets the meaning of the Constitution.
Get used to it. And GROW UP!
<quoted text>
So, it is your claim that an Indian mother who snuck off the reservation and plopped out a child in Philadelphia would have a child who was a US Citizen?

I mean, since all those wonderful people believed in "jus soli"..

I got a bridge I can sell ya, give me a call..

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118343
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
Poor little puppet. Still thinks stomping his feet, flailing his arms, and repeating himself while plugging his ears screaming "LALALALALA" wins a debate.
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!
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, loser, but Bingham, Howard, and Trumbull adhered to the jus soli principle and they plainly stated so. They clearly did not believe that children born in this country of ordinary aliens were subject to a foreign power.
Furthermore, they are not the "highest authority" under the US Constitution, which you presumably hold dear. According to the Constitution, the Supreme Court is vested with the judicial Power of the United States, and it interprets the meaning of the Constitution.
Get used to it. And GROW UP!
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118346
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh? You da expert on JURISDICTION!
What's your problem? Every other country is sovereign but not the US? England can invalidate US citizenship of a born US citizen?
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.
Cat got your tongue?
UR a birfoon!
<quoted text>
How is the water tasting, Puss!
Better yet! How does it feel to be arguing with a 6th grader?
What is education level?!!!!!
MyTwoCents

Hanover Park, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118347
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
You better wake your azz up!
Still boring.

>
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118348
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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!
<quoted text>
they also argued to, " and Subject to the jurisdiction, thereof", looks like to me, Obama missed half of the requirements. Ain't no such thing in the constitution, you is or you ain't. Obama ain't!
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118349
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh? You da expert on JURISDICTION!
What's your problem? Every other country is sovereign but not the US? England can invalidate US citizenship of a born US citizen?
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.
Cat got your tongue?
UR a birfoon!
<quoted text>
just not the way the 14th was setup. We don't invalidate a citizenship, unless requested.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118350
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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!
<quoted text>
Hi puppet..

So, it is your claim that an Indian mother who snuck off the reservation and plopped out a child in Philadelphia would have a child who was a US Citizen?

I mean, since all those wonderful people believed in "jus soli"..

I got a bridge I can sell ya, give me a call..

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118351
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
So, it is your claim that an Indian mother who snuck off the reservation and plopped out a child in Philadelphia would have a child who was a US Citizen?
I mean, since all those wonderful people believed in "jus soli"..
I got a bridge I can sell ya, give me a call..
Huh? They weren't referring to Indians, jagoff.

Indians? The law concerning Indians was a SPECIFIC EXCEPTION. They were not "ordinary aliens". DUH!

“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).

Indians? The law concerning Indians was a SPECIFIC EXCEPTION.

GROW UP! LOSER.

Indians were a special case, not subject to the GENERAL RULE.

Got a clue?

"[I]t (the 14th amendment) granted, and was intended to grant, national citizenship to every person of the Indian race in this country who was unconnected with any tribe, and who resided, in good faith, outside of Indian reservations and within one of the states or territories of the Union. This fact is, we think, entitled to great weight in determining the meaning and scope of the amendment. Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, 111 U. S. 57; S. C. 4 SUP. CT. REP. 279."
Elk v. Wilkins, 112 US 94. 118 (1884).

GROW UP!

If you haven't yet figured it out, Indians within the US have ALWAYS BEEN CONSIDERED SEPARATELY FROM GENERAL RULES OF CITIZENSHIP.

Did you just fall off the turnip truck?
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, loser, but Bingham, Howard, and Trumbull adhered to the jus soli principle and they plainly stated so. They clearly did not believe that children born in this country of ordinary aliens were subject to a foreign power.
Furthermore, they are not the "highest authority" under the US Constitution, which you presumably hold dear. According to the Constitution, the Supreme Court is vested with the judicial Power of the United States, and it interprets the meaning of the Constitution.
Get used to it. And GROW UP!
MyTwoCents

Hanover Park, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118352
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Now this is typical Libtardian Logic. In the debate last night Obama claimed the price of gasoline was $1.80+ gallon when he entered office so what is it now $3.60+ a gallon? Hint, what was the cost of crude oil when Obama entered office and what is it today?
Since non-government owned petroleum companies control only 10% of the earths oil, who is to blame? Now if you were Bill O'Really you would blame it on ... brokers .... but O'Really is no Conservative.
OPEC sets the price of oil as they control 50% of the EXPORT oil market! And here is the list of the OPEC member COUNTRIES;
...
Algeria, Angola, Ecuador, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Venezuela
..
Please note, Exxon-Mobile, Texaco, BP, Shell, etc. are not among those countries!!!
....
Oh, and oil production in U.S. federal controlled lands and waters is DOWN 14% since Obama entered the White House.
And SUPPLY, on whole, is up. Go figure. So who sets the price of GAS? What is the NATIONAL supply level comapred historically?
Go Rouge, you're a googleman reaserchist. hehehehe

>
MyTwoCents

Hanover Park, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118353
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SHEEPLE Buster wrote:
<quoted text>
SKANK, STFU!
I made a mistake.
Definition of C'EST LA VIE
: that's life : that's how things happen
I also got the meaning wrong, but then again I am not French.
Nope. Just simply Stupid.

>

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118354
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>just not the way the 14th was setup. We don't invalidate a citizenship, unless requested.
Sorry, BirfoonBoy, but NO COUNTRY invalidates the citizenship of a person who is a citizen of a foreign country.

Duh!

It cuts both ways, BIRFOON.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh? You da expert on JURISDICTION!
What's your problem? Every other country is sovereign but not the US? England can invalidate US citizenship of a born US citizen?
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.
Cat got your tongue?
UR a birfoon!
MyTwoCents

Hanover Park, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118355
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Do any of you Libtards understand "royalties"? Let's say you own a property and you sell an oil lease and the person who bought those rights agreed to pay you X amount of money per gallon of oil pumped out of the ground.
Now, if you are the Federal government, the more they pump out the more money flows into the Treasury of the United States and the more money Obama would be able to spend on his pet project but nooooo, Obama is to stoooooped to know that!!!
But then again, who ever accused a Libtard of having any commonsense?
What is the royalty on ZERO?
I have a great deal for you, Rouge. It just looks like a swamp; there's gazillions of dollars there if'n I can find something worthwhile under that swamp...e3ventually in 20, 30, 50 years. But hey the payback will be HUGE.

>
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118356
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

MyTwoCents wrote:
<quoted text>
Still boring.
>
what could be more boring than 2% of a dollar. You can't buy a piece of gum for that.
MyTwoCents

Hanover Park, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118357
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Whitey wrote:
<quoted text>
I wouldn't go that far. I say just deport all you racist darkies. We have no need for you anymore. Besides you have proved you hate us Whiteys and don't understand what it means to be American. Off with you I say.
Thank you for your candor. It underscores the true mindset of conservapublibaggers.

>

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118358
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh? They weren't referring to Indians, jagoff.
Indians? The law concerning Indians was a SPECIFIC EXCEPTION. They were not "ordinary aliens". DUH!
So those who drafted the 14th Amendment only believed in Jus Soli when it is convenient for you.. Got..

Poor little puppet..
MyTwoCents

Hanover Park, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118360
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>what could be more boring than 2% of a dollar. You can't buy a piece of gum for that.
ahh, greenie you're still boring. new moniker same tired old crap - 25 lbs in a 5 lb sack

>
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118361
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, BirfoonBoy, but NO COUNTRY invalidates the citizenship of a person who is a citizen of a foreign country.
Duh!
It cuts both ways, BIRFOON.
<quoted text>
correct, unless the individual request such!

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.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

19 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 7 min RealDave 1,079,669
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr Brian_G 45,781
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 1 hr Uzi 67,930
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 3 hr truth 48,894
Presidential library planned for Chicago Chicag... 4 hr joey 3
One kilometre high and counting (Jul '07) 6 hr TW_sugar_daddio 10
Amy 7-24 6 hr loose cannon 19
Abby 7-24 7 hr Pippa 42
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 10 hr Mister Tonka 97,524
•••
•••
•••
Chicago Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••