BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 197214 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.

LRS

Shreveport, LA

#130988 Nov 30, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Ha ha, replies with LRS-type crass clueless vulgar diatribe. Very LRS-like indeed, can't explain his imbecilic statements, goes schoolyard DOH on me.
What can we say jacqazz? You just bring out the best in people! LMAO!

Since: Oct 09

Moreno Valley, CA

#130990 Dec 1, 2012
LRS wrote:
If Omama allows us to go over the cliff, he will be impeached as he should be.
No doubt thinking gives you a migraine Mr. Liars, but Obama won that argument back on Nov, 6th. It’s not nice to repeatedly frustrate the will of the people as eventually there’ll be a price to pay.

Suffice it to say that protecting rich tax cuts at the expense of 95 percent of the working class will not bode well for the rich protectors.

Even the rich protectors have begun to see the folly of their position Mr. Liars. It’s amazing a mere laborer such as yourself cannot.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#130991 Dec 1, 2012
Celebrated historian Bertram Oxley has uncovered a memorandum from former Japanese Emperor Hirohito to Admiral Yamamoto dated December 6, 1941, showing that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was motivated by an offensive film made by Charlie Chaplin ridiculing Japanese cuisine.

"Contrary to historical accounts over the last seventy years," Professor Oxley said in an interview today with the BBC, "What appeared to be a meticulously planned surprise attack was actually a spontaneous demonstration by moderate sushi connoisseurs in the Imperial Navy in response to a hateful and offensive movie. Thereafter, extremist elements within the Japanese military co-opted the spontaneous attack, transforming it into the overseas contingency operation sometimes referred to as 'World War II.'"

The discovery has created a sensation in scholarly circles. "This is a remarkable find," declared Reginald Smythe, chairman of the Progressive Historians Association and former Obama State Department official. "Had President Roosevelt condemned this movie­ instead of uttering that infernal 'Day of Infamy' provocation ­ the war could have been avoided and millions of lives would have been saved."

Reached at his home in Houston, former President George H. W. Bush, an aviator in the Pacific during the war, expressed skepticism. "It's simply inconceivable that the Japanese First Air Fleet, with six aircraft carriers, could have staged a spur of the moment attack on an island thousands of nautical miles from the Japanese homeland with such stealth and precision." Most experts dismissed Mr. Bush's remarks, however, since it's widely understood that World War II was primarily his son's fault.

White House spokesman Jay Carney, asked this afternoon about the memo's discovery stated, "Of course, hindsight's 20-20. But one can only wonder how much pain and suffering could have been averted had FDR simply apologized to Hirohito at the outset."

"Fortunately," Carney continued, waving off questions from White House reporters anxious to return to questions about Mitt Romney's grooming habits, "We've evolved to a more sophisticated strategy of leading from behind, so we're unlikely to repeat the disastrous mistakes of the past."

If Hilary had been running the State Department then, we’d all be living on EASY STREET today.


“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#130992 Dec 1, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>since we have a treaty with Germany, we will try you IAW the statutes where you robbed the bank, but being a German citizen you still are not subject to the US Constitution, otherwise, you are not a citizen.
Sorry, loser, if Germany had jurisdiction, the bank robber would be tried in Germany by a German court. His citizenship has no bearing on the matter. The German bank robber who robs a bank in Kansas is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. If there is a treaty in which each country recognizes each other's natural right to exercise its sovereign power within its borders, that does not change the FACT that each country exercises dominion over aliens within its jurisdiction and that the aliens are subject to the jurisdiction of the respective host countries. You cannot change that FACT by rewording "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof [of the US]" to "subject to jurisdiction of the constitution".

FACT, ordinary aliens within US borders are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Even if you fantasize that this natural authority of every independent and sovereign nation is derived purely via treaty, it would not change that FACT. UR in denial.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#130993 Dec 1, 2012
Poppo wrote:
<quoted text>
No doubt thinking gives you a migraine Mr. Liars, but Obama won that argument back on Nov, 6th. It’s not nice to repeatedly frustrate the will of the people as eventually there’ll be a price to pay.
Suffice it to say that protecting rich tax cuts at the expense of 95 percent of the working class will not bode well for the rich protectors.
Even the rich protectors have begun to see the folly of their position Mr. Liars. It’s amazing a mere laborer such as yourself cannot.
Never had a migraine in my life pops. Omama won an argument on migraines? Brilliant pops. A price to pay? LMAO! Taxes on the rich are set to expire anyway. On top of that it won't amount to squat, it's purely a game Omama is trying to play but people are tired of his games. They want answers to our problems and Omama doesn't have them. When Omama says the taxes on the wealthy will help reduce the deficit, he's FOS and everyone with more than one brain cell knows it. You're a dumbazz pops. Wake up! Four years in office and he's done nothing, well except spend money that isn't his. Typical for a common garden variety con man. DoDo bird. LMAO!!
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#130994 Dec 1, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, loser, if Germany had jurisdiction, the bank robber would be tried in Germany by a German court. His citizenship has no bearing on the matter. The German bank robber who robs a bank in Kansas is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. If there is a treaty in which each country recognizes each other's natural right to exercise its sovereign power within its borders, that does not change the FACT that each country exercises dominion over aliens within its jurisdiction and that the aliens are subject to the jurisdiction of the respective host countries. You cannot change that FACT by rewording "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof [of the US]" to "subject to jurisdiction of the constitution".
FACT, ordinary aliens within US borders are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Even if you fantasize that this natural authority of every independent and sovereign nation is derived purely via treaty, it would not change that FACT. UR in denial.
While here, aliens must obey our laws, that's it. They owe no permanent allegiance to the U.S. Very simply Mobarf. I'm really surprised that a Biologist, Chemist and Patent Pusher (LMAO) can't understand such a simple law. Better back off on the juicing. LMAO!!!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#130995 Dec 1, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>since we have a treaty with Germany, we will try you IAW the statutes where you robbed the bank, but being a German citizen you still are not subject to the US Constitution, otherwise, you are not a citizen.
I'm sorry, but you cannot prove reality wrong through reductio ad absurdum. You can only prove a premise to be false that is inconsistent with reality.

The reality is that an alien criminal who commits a crime in the US by being tried and convicted in US courts is in fact subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. This fact proves your premise (only citizens are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States) incorrect, but you cannot prove REALITY incorrect. REALITY proves your premise to be pure fantasy.

Indeed, if "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" is equivalent to "subject to the jurisdiction of the Constitution" the reality of aliens being subject to the jurisdiction of the United States would make it true that they are "subject to the jurisdiction of the constitution."

Again, a false premise cannot prove reality unreal.

That is, of course, unless you live in a dream world.

Now go put your play robe and gavel away in your toy box where they belong and grow up.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#130996 Dec 1, 2012
nebka wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh quoting old Jimmy Hoffa one of the direst people the Unions have ever seen.
"direst"? The word does not seem to fit. Anyway, the union bosses are just a crocked now as they were then. The only difference now is that they fly by private jet these days.
Yep, it is bad for CEO's to fly by private jets but the LSM will not even talk about the Union Bosses who do!

Obama's Union Buddies Have Their Own Private Jets to Fly to Las Vegas (and Ireland), 02/11/2009

for instance, this private LearJet, shown below taking off in Las Vegas. Machinists union bosses spent $1.8 million (from forced dues) for hangars, jet fuel, jet maintenance, mechanics, pilots, and associated loan repayments in 2006 alone.
http://www.nrtw.org/en/blog/machinsts-private...

Salaries for the 10 largest unions’ bosses range from $173,000 for the United Auto Workers’ Bob King to $618,000 for Terence O’Sullivan, the president of the Laborers’ International Union of North America. AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka makes about $283,000 per year. Gerald McEntee, the president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), makes $480,000. The AFSCME stands to lose the most from any of the governors’ budget victories, as it’s currently the nation’s powerhouse public sector union, with around 1.5 million members nationwide.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/04/union-bosse...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#130997 Dec 1, 2012
LIFESTYLE | 9/22/2011
Why Warren Buffett owns a private jet

Since the financial crisis and when the leaders of the Big Three automakers showed up in Washington DC in private jets in order to ask for bailout money from Congress, general aviation and private jets, especially those owned or used by corporate leaders, have received considerable flak from politicians and other critics.

Nevertheless Warren Buffett explains why he owns and uses a private jet. In short, Buffet says that having a private jet makes his life better and easier as he needs to do a considerable amount of traveling as the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway.

Its also worth noting that when Buffett bought a Bombardier Challenger 600 over 20ago, he named it the “The Indefensible” due to his past criticisms of such purchases that were made by other corporate CEOs. However and after he started using a private jet for awhile, he realized its value as a business tool. Hence, he renamed his aircraft:“The Indispensable.”(For more on the positive case for business aviation, see No Plane, No Gain.)

In fact, to coin a phrase, he liked it so much he bought the company. Sort of. In fact, Berkshire Hathaway owns NetJets.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewstibbe/201...

Since: Dec 11

Fort Worth, TX

#130998 Dec 1, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>Acerbic! Have you been watching Bill O'Riley! I haven't heard that word in years.
Veritas confundit stultitia.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#130999 Dec 1, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
While here, aliens must obey our laws, that's it. They owe no permanent allegiance to the U.S. Very simply Mobarf. I'm really surprised that a Biologist, Chemist and Patent Pusher (LMAO) can't understand such a simple law. Better back off on the juicing. LMAO!!!
According to the 14th amendment, a person born in the US who is born subject to the jurisdiction of the US is a citizen of the United States. Such a person is born with permanent allegiance to the United States.

Insofar as aliens are concerned, while here, they are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and they owe local allegiance in reciprocity to protection of the host country. Permanent allegiance to a foreign country does not negate the sovereign right of the United States to exercise its exclusive power within its borders. That's a simple fact of life. Get used to it.

The 14th Amendment does not say that only children born of parents with permanent allegiance to the United States can be born citizens. In fact the 14th does not even mention parents or their permanent allegiance. In other words, permanent allegiance is an inept red herring.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, loser, if Germany had jurisdiction, the bank robber would be tried in Germany by a German court. His citizenship has no bearing on the matter. The German bank robber who robs a bank in Kansas is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. If there is a treaty in which each country recognizes each other's natural right to exercise its sovereign power within its borders, that does not change the FACT that each country exercises dominion over aliens within its jurisdiction and that the aliens are subject to the jurisdiction of the respective host countries. You cannot change that FACT by rewording "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof [of the US]" to "subject to jurisdiction of the constitution".
FACT, ordinary aliens within US borders are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Even if you fantasize that this natural authority of every independent and sovereign nation is derived purely via treaty, it would not change that FACT. UR in denial.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#131000 Dec 1, 2012
Why does Obama want another $150 BILLION for stimulus? Isn't the recession OVER?!?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#131001 Dec 1, 2012
Or does he know we will be back into another recession within a few months?
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#131002 Dec 1, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
According to the 14th amendment, a person born in the US who is born subject to the jurisdiction of the US is a citizen of the United States. Such a person is born with permanent allegiance to the United States.
Insofar as aliens are concerned, while here, they are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and they owe local allegiance in reciprocity to protection of the host country. Permanent allegiance to a foreign country does not negate the sovereign right of the United States to exercise its exclusive power within its borders. That's a simple fact of life. Get used to it.
The 14th Amendment does not say that only children born of parents with permanent allegiance to the United States can be born citizens. In fact the 14th does not even mention parents or their permanent allegiance. In other words, permanent allegiance is an inept red herring.
<quoted text>
The U.S. has the right to exercise its power within in its own borders?!? Duh. All I will say is this, if this is truly how you interpret the 14th, then you're a complete dumbazz without a clue. LMAO! squid

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#131003 Dec 1, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
The U.S. has the right to exercise its power within in its own borders?!? Duh. All I will say is this, if this is truly how you interpret the 14th, then you're a complete dumbazz without a clue. LMAO! squid
You call that a rebuttal?
Sorry loser, ordinary aliens in the US are under US jurisdiction. Their children born in the US are born subject to the jurisdiction of the US. They are natural born citizens.

The parents' "permanent allegiance" does not negate US sovereignty or jurisdiction - the authority to exercise its power within its borders.

wojar wrote:
According to the 14th amendment, a person born in the US who is born subject to the jurisdiction of the US is a citizen of the United States. Such a person is born with permanent allegiance to the United States.
Insofar as aliens are concerned, while here, they are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and they owe local allegiance in reciprocity to protection of the host country. Permanent allegiance to a foreign country does not negate the sovereign right of the United States to exercise its exclusive power within its borders. That's a simple fact of life. Get used to it.
The 14th Amendment does not say that only children born of parents with permanent allegiance to the United States can be born citizens. In fact the 14th does not even mention parents or their permanent allegiance. In other words, permanent allegiance is an inept red herring.
<quoted text>

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#131004 Dec 1, 2012
Terry Buckeye wrote:
<quoted text>
Veritas confundit stultitia.
I didn't know you were Italian!
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#131005 Dec 1, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>You call that a rebuttal?
Sorry loser, ordinary aliens in the US are under US jurisdiction. Their children born in the US are born subject to the jurisdiction of the US. They are natural born citizens.
The parents' "permanent allegiance" does not negate US sovereignty or jurisdiction - the authority to exercise its power within its borders.
<quoted text>
Mobarf, don't you remember? I said I was done with your stupid little game of twisting words. You have to twist things because you know you're wrong. Poor Mobarf just doesn't have a clue about much of anything. And do not forget, you remain unAmerican, Insignificant and Irrelevant. LMAO
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#131006 Dec 1, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>You are still a PUSS! LMAO!!!
Better a winning PUSS than a losing birther birfoon.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#131007 Dec 1, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Mobarf, don't you remember? I said I was done with your stupid little game of twisting words. You have to twist things because you know you're wrong. Poor Mobarf just doesn't have a clue about much of anything. And do not forget, you remain unAmerican, Insignificant and Irrelevant. LMAO
Every time the irrational birfoon is stymied he whines and calls names.

wojar wrote:
<quoted text>You call that a rebuttal?
Sorry loser, ordinary aliens in the US are under US jurisdiction. Their children born in the US are born subject to the jurisdiction of the US. They are natural born citizens.
The parents' "permanent allegiance" does not negate US sovereignty or jurisdiction - the authority to exercise its power within its borders./
<quoted text>
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#131008 Dec 1, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Celebrated historian Bertram Oxley has uncovered a memorandum from former Japanese Emperor Hirohito to Admiral Yamamoto dated December 6, 1941, showing that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was motivated by an offensive film made by Charlie Chaplin ridiculing Japanese cuisine.
"Contrary to historical accounts over the last seventy years," Professor Oxley said in an interview today with the BBC, "What appeared to be a meticulously planned surprise attack was actually a spontaneous demonstration by moderate sushi connoisseurs in the Imperial Navy in response to a hateful and offensive movie. Thereafter, extremist elements within the Japanese military co-opted the spontaneous attack, transforming it into the overseas contingency operation sometimes referred to as 'World War II.'"
The discovery has created a sensation in scholarly circles. "This is a remarkable find," declared Reginald Smythe, chairman of the Progressive Historians Association and former Obama State Department official. "Had President Roosevelt condemned this movie­ instead of uttering that infernal 'Day of Infamy' provocation ­ the war could have been avoided and millions of lives would have been saved."
Reached at his home in Houston, former President George H. W. Bush, an aviator in the Pacific during the war, expressed skepticism. "It's simply inconceivable that the Japanese First Air Fleet, with six aircraft carriers, could have staged a spur of the moment attack on an island thousands of nautical miles from the Japanese homeland with such stealth and precision." Most experts dismissed Mr. Bush's remarks, however, since it's widely understood that World War II was primarily his son's fault.
White House spokesman Jay Carney, asked this afternoon about the memo's discovery stated, "Of course, hindsight's 20-20. But one can only wonder how much pain and suffering could have been averted had FDR simply apologized to Hirohito at the outset."
"Fortunately," Carney continued, waving off questions from White House reporters anxious to return to questions about Mitt Romney's grooming habits, "We've evolved to a more sophisticated strategy of leading from behind, so we're unlikely to repeat the disastrous mistakes of the past."
If Hilary had been running the State Department then, we’d all be living on EASY STREET today.
In case, just in case, one never knows --- this is a tongue-on-cheek thing, Rogue. A joke.

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 Should prostitution be less illegal-or more? 3 hr El Diablo 13
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 4 hr Into The Night 54,626
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 hr Yeah 1,279,007
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 9 hr David Morrison 100,682
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 9 hr Doug77 6,449
abby 9-4-15 10 hr mrs gladys kravitz 6
Word (Dec '08) 11 hr Red_Forman 5,431
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages