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
108,361 - 108,380 of 177,461 Comments Last updated 6 hrs ago
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#122467 Nov 2, 2012
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet you fail
I can see you were a botched abortion, they took your brain and you still lived.
Yep, just an Obotto.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#122468 Nov 2, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
My Neanderthal forehead tells me that every prediction you've made on this thread has been wrong. Every one of them. So will that one. And if Romney wins, you'll be hoping it doesn't happen , but if Obama wins, and damn the consequences to the American people and the rest of the world, you'll be orgasming with joy.
Oh, how many times do I have to ask you what you think of Romney's belief that you, a catholic, are an abomination?
Nice word there jacqazz....."orgasming "???? Still below Neanderthal standards. What's that forehead angle jacqazz? runny stool
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#122469 Nov 2, 2012
UninformedOhio Republican wrote:
<quoted text>
But he's WINNING!!! Why would he need to cover his ass?
Even if the impossible did happen and he wasn't anointed VP, why would he need to spend 2 million in his own district where I though he was the unbeatable hero?
102 americans lay dead and Ryan spends 2 million to "cover his ass." Very vice presidential of him.
Or should I say, very Ayn Randian of him.
Unlike those 102 unfortunate citizens, "Be Prepared".

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#122470 Nov 2, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
And Canada the largest potash producer. Not sure, Wojar, but is China not the largest producer of phosphate? Or does the term "rock" differentiate it from just potash? I'm not well informed on this suject.
Canada does have a phosphate producer, but I'm not sure of Canada's rank in the world. Potash contains potassium, though Potash Corporation does produce phosphate. China is a major phosphate producer, as is the US. I hope this helps.
wojar wrote:
" The United States is the world's leading producer and consumer of phosphate rock, which is used to manufacture phosphate fertilizers and industrial products. "
http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commod ...
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#122471 Nov 2, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
What dream world are you inhabiting?
the one where ACME falls on you. Beep, Beep!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#122472 Nov 2, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
My Neanderthal forehead tells me that every prediction you've made on this thread has been wrong. Every one of them. So will that one. And if Romney wins, you'll be hoping it doesn't happen , but if Obama wins, and damn the consequences to the American people and the rest of the world, you'll be orgasming with joy.
Oh, how many times do I have to ask you what you think of Romney's belief that you, a catholic, are an abomination?
You are so full of recycled dog food!
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#122473 Nov 2, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
No need. Hey, Justice dept sending 700 (SEVEN HUNDRED) lawyers to Ohio to look over election and ensure all goes smoothly and HONESTLY. Almost as many in Florida. Isn't that like when we send monitors to what you call 3rd world countries? Can you explain that?
No need? Really? Been there, done that huh? LMAO you moron

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#122474 Nov 2, 2012
Homer Votes 2012 | The Simpsons | Animation on Fox
UninformedOhio Republican

Munster, IN

#122475 Nov 2, 2012
Obama

Wisconsin +5
Pennsylvania +4.6
Ohio +2.3
Iowa +2
New Hampshire +2
Colorado +.9

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#122476 Nov 2, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>Everyone knows the Constitution is has jurisdiction over the US, except for you.
Sorry states stopped creating citizens, Apr 1866.
BirfoonBoy: "Sorry states stopped creating citizens, Apr 1866."

That's news?

Wowee-Zowee, state citizenship became derivative! And aliens in this country were before, and after April, 1866, under the jurisdiction of the United States. Play Law doesn't count.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Only if you're illiterate, schizophrenic, and a grandiose NPD twerp.
The amendment does not define jurisdiction. Thus the pre-existing definition controls, and the pre-existing definition, as indicated by usage of the term in the naturalization Act of 1790 provides that aliens are under the jurisdiction of the US while in this country.
Play Law doesn't count. Play Justices do not rule, except in their fantasy worlds.
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#122477 Nov 2, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>I can see you were a botched abortion, they took your brain and you still lived.
Yep, just an Obotto.
Please let me know if you ever grow tired of being pathetic, hateful and wrong
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#122478 Nov 2, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
BirfoonBoy: "Sorry states stopped creating citizens, Apr 1866."
That's news?
Wowee-Zowee, state citizenship became derivative! And aliens in this country were before, and after April, 1866, under the jurisdiction of the United States. Play Law doesn't count.
<quoted text>
do you know the difference between "under" and "subject to"?
Check it out.

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#122479 Nov 2, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>what Howard offer was accepted in its entirety and ratified in 1868.
Wrong.

The personal opinions of the drafters of the 14th Amendment
were irrelevant into the meaning of the final language of the 14th Amendment.

Justice Scalia reminds us that "We are governed by laws, not by the intentions of legislators. As the Court said in 1844: "The law as it passed is the will of the majority of both houses, and the only mode in which that will is spoken is in the act itself ...." Aldridge v. Williams, 3 How. 9, 24 (emphasis added). But not the least of the defects of legislative history is its indeterminacy. If one were to search for an interpretive technique that, on the whole, was more likely to confuse than to clarify, one could hardly find a more promising candidate than legislative history....
Judge Harold Leventhal used to describe the use of legislative history as the equivalent of entering a crowded cocktail party and looking over the heads of the guests for one's friends. Conroy v. Aniskoff, 507 US 511, 519 (Scalia, J., concurring)

Moreover, "While it is generally true that debates in Congress are not appropriate sources of information from which to discover the meaning of the language of a statute passed by that body. Binns v. United States, 194 US 486 , 495(1904)(internal citation omitted)

Finally, the piece de resistance "By repeated decisions of this court it has come to be well established that the debates in Congress expressive of the views and motives of individual members are not a safe guide, and hence may not be resorted to, in ascertaining the meaning and purpose of the law-making body. Aldridge v. Williams, 3 How. 9, 24; United States v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 91 U.S. 72, 79; United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Association, 166 U.S. 290, 318. Duplex Printing Press Co. v. Deering, 254 US 443, 474 (1923)

Want more?

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#122480 Nov 2, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>sorry, individual states made citizens in 1790, Apr 1866 changed that, "all persons born in the US and not subject to any foreign power are citizens".
At no time are aliens "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof", unless naturalized, this is plainly stated in the 14th amendment.
BirfoonBoy: "this is plainly stated in the 14th amendment"

Perhaps if you have a special decoder ring from a box of cereal.

Sorry, loser, but ordinary aliens in the US were just as subject to the jurisdiction of the United States before the CRA and 14th amendment as after.

BTW, the 14th Amendment does not expressly define which persons are or are not under the jurisdiction of the United States. Please learn the English language. There is nothing in the amendment that supports the Play Law fantasy that ordinary aliens in the US are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Grow up!
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Dale's Play Law understanding of the Constitution is a product of grandiose fantasy delusions. He thinks the First Congress didn't understand the meaning of "jurisdiction of the United States" as recited in the Naturalization Act of 1790. Aliens were understood to be under the jurisdiction of the United States. Slam dunk.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#122481 Nov 2, 2012
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Please let me know if you ever grow tired of being pathetic, hateful and wrong
Scooter, you will be second on my list!
Guru

Canyon Country, CA

#122483 Nov 2, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
You are so triumphant. But check the record, I have never been that. All the time, even when Obama was 6 to 8 pts ahead, I maintained it was too close to call. I stil maitain that and whoever wins will be a surprise to me.
lol...you know what is too close to call?...your face and obama's ass.

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

#122485 Nov 2, 2012
Islamist Watch

Under Sharia Law in Sudann it is illegal for women to wear pants in public.
The penalty: 40 Lashes

Islam 101
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#122486 Nov 2, 2012
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong.
The personal opinions of the drafters of the 14th Amendment
were irrelevant into the meaning of the final language of the 14th Amendment.
Justice Scalia reminds us that "We are governed by laws, not by the intentions of legislators. As the Court said in 1844: "The law as it passed is the will of the majority of both houses, and the only mode in which that will is spoken is in the act itself ...." Aldridge v. Williams, 3 How. 9, 24 (emphasis added). But not the least of the defects of legislative history is its indeterminacy. If one were to search for an interpretive technique that, on the whole, was more likely to confuse than to clarify, one could hardly find a more promising candidate than legislative history....
Judge Harold Leventhal used to describe the use of legislative history as the equivalent of entering a crowded cocktail party and looking over the heads of the guests for one's friends. Conroy v. Aniskoff, 507 US 511, 519 (Scalia, J., concurring)
Moreover, "While it is generally true that debates in Congress are not appropriate sources of information from which to discover the meaning of the language of a statute passed by that body. Binns v. United States, 194 US 486 , 495(1904)(internal citation omitted)
Finally, the piece de resistance "By repeated decisions of this court it has come to be well established that the debates in Congress expressive of the views and motives of individual members are not a safe guide, and hence may not be resorted to, in ascertaining the meaning and purpose of the law-making body. Aldridge v. Williams, 3 How. 9, 24; United States v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 91 U.S. 72, 79; United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Association, 166 U.S. 290, 318. Duplex Printing Press Co. v. Deering, 254 US 443, 474 (1923)
Want more?
what Howard offered, was accepted in its entirety (final language) became the law of the 14th amendment.
DICK

Canyon Country, CA

#122488 Nov 2, 2012
UninformedOhio Republican wrote:
<quoted text>
Romney was asked FEMA question 14 times and refused to answer during his fake relief fund.
Maybe he just got tired to being asked the same question, dummy.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#122489 Nov 2, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
BirfoonBoy: "this is plainly stated in the 14th amendment"
Perhaps if you have a special decoder ring from a box of cereal.
Sorry, loser, but ordinary aliens in the US were just as subject to the jurisdiction of the United States before the CRA and 14th amendment as after.
BTW, the 14th Amendment does not expressly define which persons are or are not under the jurisdiction of the United States. Please learn the English language. There is nothing in the amendment that supports the Play Law fantasy that ordinary aliens in the US are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Grow up!
<quoted text>
Aliens have never been "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof", this is only a status held by citizens.
"All persons born or naturalized in the US and "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof" are citizens." Who are subject to the jurisdiction, thereof?

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 55 min the wandering girl 4,681
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 hr NMx 1,100,983
Word (Dec '08) 2 hr andet1987 4,662
Ping G20 Irons Compared With Cheap G15 Irons (May '12) 2 hr lucy 2
chief keef 2 hr sd 1
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 3 hr voice of peace 68,393
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 4 hr JOEL 69,030
•••
•••
•••

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 ]
•••