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
115,481 - 115,500 of 176,762 Comments Last updated 2 hrs ago
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131133
Dec 2, 2012
 
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean Rogue is responsible for the current economic situation? And I thought it was Omama's fault because he's a doofus who hates America and Americans and sets his policies accordingly. Omama is a disgrace to America and all it stands for.
As usual, you DOH all that you read. oh thickest one. Who ever said Rogue was responsible, save that I opined that he was of the happiest of dolts when things go wrong with what he calls his country?. There is no containing his glee when numbers are bad, so long as it spites Obama? Gloom and doom are his and birthers' joy, if somehow they can blame the president, this very president rre-elected according to the will of the people.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131135
Dec 2, 2012
 
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Sooo, what is the BIG difference between June and November? Well, in June most investors were very optimistic that there would be a Republican in the White House early next year and now we know that will not happen. And everyone knows Obama is anti-petroleum!
You see, if investors see little profit in their future, they switch there investments. Just think of all the jobs that will not materialize next year because investors are still worried about Obama will do.
Gulf of Mexico Lease Sale Draws Little Attention
Posted: November 30, 2012
The US Department of Interiorís Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) on Wednesday held a lease sale for approximately 21 million acres of US outer continental shelf open for development in the western Gulf of Mexico. The total of all bids came to $157.68 million for 653,00 acres. Thatís a far cry from the June sale, which brought in $2.6 billion on leases for 2.4 million acres.
Read more: Gulf of Mexico Lease Sale Draws Little Attention - 24/7 Wall St. http://247wallst.com/2012/11/30/gulf-of-mexic...
Then please explain why the US imports less and produces more. And why Canada is worried and looking for more venues for its oil as US dependence on Canadian crude lessens.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131136
Dec 2, 2012
 
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Better a winning PUSS than a losing birther birfoon.
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>So, you agree! hahaha!!!
That Obama and therefore his followers won? Yes. That you and your pathetic birther birfoons and tea partyers lost? Yes.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131137
Dec 2, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>quite the contrary, to bind a German citizen to the Constitution is Unconstitutional, this is a process that only he can do through the naturalization process, not through an act of lawlessness.
Does the German criminal have a US citizenship after his crime spree? According to your theory he does.
Sorry, only US Citizens are subject to the US Constitution, which has jurisdiction over the US, remember it is the supreme law of the land.
Gibberish. UR simply repeating the same nonsensical assertion.
It is factual reality that the US has jurisdiction over persons, including aliens, within US borders.
Please take your meds.
wojar wrote:
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.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131138
Dec 2, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>quite the contrary, to bind a German citizen to the Constitution is Unconstitutional, this is a process that only he can do through the naturalization process, not through an act of lawlessness.
Does the German criminal have a US citizenship after his crime spree? According to your theory he does.
Sorry, only US Citizens are subject to the US Constitution, which has jurisdiction over the US, remember it is the supreme law of the land.
You can argue that a demonstrably flat tire isn't really flat until the cows come home but it won't get you anywhere. Isn't it time you join the real world?

Since: Dec 11

Fort Worth, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131140
Dec 2, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Gibberish. UR simply repeating the same nonsensical assertion.
It is factual reality that the US has jurisdiction over persons, including aliens, within US borders.
Please take your meds.
<quoted text>
Is Dale for real? I'm coming around to the possibility that he's just pulling our legs. I don't think anyone can be that obtuse and still function. Heck, he even argues against himself at times. I think he's just trying to keep the pot stirred.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131141
Dec 2, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Terry Buckeye wrote:
<quoted text>
Is Dale for real? I'm coming around to the possibility that he's just pulling our legs. I don't think anyone can be that obtuse and still function. Heck, he even argues against himself at times. I think he's just trying to keep the pot stirred.
On the other hand he believes in perpetual motion machines that can create energy from nothing, in violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics.

Since: Dec 11

Fort Worth, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131142
Dec 2, 2012
 
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>On the other hand he believes in perpetual motion machines that can create energy from nothing, in violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics.
Yeah, he seems to have problems understanding all kinds of laws. Gravity must drive him nuts!!
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131143
Dec 2, 2012
 
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
The rationale of having the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the first sentence of the 14th Amendment wherein it set forth who is a citizen of the United States is to EXCLUDE indians who were members of tribes that existed within the boundaries of the United States. Congress acknowledged that INDIANS were not citizens despite the fact that they lived with the borders of the United States.
That is why the Civil Rights Act of 1866 had language that excluding INDIANS as citizens:
"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, EXCLUDING INDIANS NOT TAXED, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States"
In Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884), Justice Gray noted the legal status of Indians tribes and their members:
The Indian tribes, being within the territorial limits of the United States, were not, strictly speaking, foreign States; but they were ALIEN NATIONS, DISTINCT POLITICAL COMMUNITIES, with whom the United States might and habitually did deal, as they thought fit, either through treaties made by the President and Senate, or through acts of Congress in the ordinary forms of legislation. The members of those tribes OWED IMMEDIATE ALLEGIANCE TO THEIR SEVERAL TRIBES. and were not part of the people of the United States. Id at 99
The drafters of the 14th Amendment understood that Indians were not citizens of the United States and as such incorporated "subject to the jurisdictioni thereof" language in the 14th Amendment to EXCLUDE them in setting forth who is a citizen of the United States.
Your folderol theory that this language also exludes aliens as being subject of the jurisdiction of the United States has no basis in fact or in law.
Do yourself a favor and read the congressional debates during the drafting of the 14th Amendment.
The Indian tribes, being within the territorial limits of the United States, were not, strictly speaking, foreign States; but they were ALIEN NATIONS.
You shot yourself, last time I checked all Nations other than the US, are Alien Nations.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131144
Dec 2, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

wojar wrote:
<quoted text>You can argue that a demonstrably flat tire isn't really flat until the cows come home but it won't get you anywhere. Isn't it time you join the real world?
It is time for everyone to realize that being "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof", simply means your are bound to the jurisdiction of the US Constitution, only a citizen enjoys this right.

Since: Dec 11

Fort Worth, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131145
Dec 2, 2012
 
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>
The Indian tribes, being within the territorial limits of the United States, were not, strictly speaking, foreign States; but they were ALIEN NATIONS.
You shot yourself, last time I checked all Nations other than the US, are Alien Nations.
WOW! That may be the first time I have ever heard a Native American referred to as an alien! How, exactly, does one justify this???

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131146
Dec 2, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>
The Indian tribes, being within the territorial limits of the United States, were not, strictly speaking, foreign States; but they were ALIEN NATIONS.
You shot yourself, last time I checked all Nations other than the US, are Alien Nations.
They were alien nations and ATF shot you through the head but UR unable to realize it.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131147
Dec 2, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
The rationale of having the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the first sentence of the 14th Amendment wherein it set forth who is a citizen of the United States is to EXCLUDE indians who were members of tribes that existed within the boundaries of the United States. Congress acknowledged that INDIANS were not citizens despite the fact that they lived with the borders of the United States.
That is why the Civil Rights Act of 1866 had language that excluding INDIANS as citizens:
"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, EXCLUDING INDIANS NOT TAXED, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States"
In Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884), Justice Gray noted the legal status of Indians tribes and their members:
The Indian tribes, being within the territorial limits of the United States, were not, strictly speaking, foreign States; but they were ALIEN NATIONS, DISTINCT POLITICAL COMMUNITIES, with whom the United States might and habitually did deal, as they thought fit, either through treaties made by the President and Senate, or through acts of Congress in the ordinary forms of legislation. The members of those tribes OWED IMMEDIATE ALLEGIANCE TO THEIR SEVERAL TRIBES. and were not part of the people of the United States. Id at 99
The drafters of the 14th Amendment understood that Indians were not citizens of the United States and as such incorporated "subject to the jurisdictioni thereof" language in the 14th Amendment to EXCLUDE them in setting forth who is a citizen of the United States.
Your folderol theory that this language also exludes aliens as being subject of the jurisdiction of the United States has no basis in fact or in law.
Do yourself a favor and read the congressional debates during the drafting of the 14th Amendment.
The drafters of the 14th Amendment understood that Indians were not citizens of the United States and as such incorporated "subject to the jurisdictioni thereof" language in the 14th Amendment to EXCLUDE them in setting forth who is a citizen of the United States.
Germans, Italians, French, Chinese, etc... are not citizens of the US, and such persons born here of them acquire the citizenship of their father's nation.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131148
Dec 2, 2012
 
Terry Buckeye wrote:
<quoted text>
WOW! That may be the first time I have ever heard a Native American referred to as an alien! How, exactly, does one justify this???
Read!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131149
Dec 2, 2012
 
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>It is time for everyone to realize that being "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof", simply means your are bound to the jurisdiction of the US Constitution, only a citizen enjoys this right.
It's time for Play Justice to realize that subject to the jurisdiction of the United States cannot be changed to "not subject to the jurisdiction thereof" by an infantile change of phrase.
Aliens subject to US laws are subject to US jurisdiction no matter how you slice it. Grow up and put your children's toys away.
wojar wrote:
You can argue that a demonstrably flat tire isn't really flat until the cows come home but it won't get you anywhere. Isn't it time you join the real world?
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131150
Dec 2, 2012
 
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>They were alien nations and ATF shot you through the head but UR unable to realize it.
you wish!! Puss!!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131151
Dec 2, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>The drafters of the 14th Amendment understood that Indians were not citizens of the United States and as such incorporated "subject to the jurisdictioni thereof" language in the 14th Amendment to EXCLUDE them in setting forth who is a citizen of the United States.
Germans, Italians, French, Chinese, etc... are not citizens of the US, and such persons born here of them acquire the citizenship of their father's nation.
Sorry, Play Justice, but Germans born in the US are not born on German reservations in the US not fully under US jurisdiction. You should write a book: 10,000 ways to miss a simple point.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131152
Dec 2, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Terry Buckeye wrote:
<quoted text>
Is Dale for real? I'm coming around to the possibility that he's just pulling our legs. I don't think anyone can be that obtuse and still function. Heck, he even argues against himself at times. I think he's just trying to keep the pot stirred.
Rarely does it occur but I have to disagree. He's too dumb to pull anyone's leg, save his own.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131156
Dec 2, 2012
 
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
It's time for Play Justice to realize that subject to the jurisdiction of the United States cannot be changed to "not subject to the jurisdiction thereof" by an infantile change of phrase.
Aliens subject to US laws are subject to US jurisdiction no matter how you slice it. Grow up and put your children's toys away.
<quoted text>
Aliens have never been "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof", the Constitution. Only citizens are subject to this jurisdiction, to say they are, would be giving them citizenship by just being here.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#131157
Dec 2, 2012
 
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Slopuke likes to switch up jurisdiction and allegiance. That's how he keep his sillyazz game going. I don't think he understands either term. But then again, what can we expect from a pollock!
President James Madison, Chancellor James Kent, Supreme Court Justices over many generations, appellate and district courts of the US "switch up" jurisdiction and allegiance in LRS's play world.

Grow up.

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.

Other Recent Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min Lily Boca Raton FL 1,095,610
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 9 min bi stander 49,252
Abby 8-21 20 min Mister Tonka 4
Amy 8-21 37 min RACE 2
IL Who do you support for Governor in Illinois in ... (Oct '10) 46 min whatitis 3,911
NRA targets former NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg wit... 55 min James Warren 1
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 2 hr Mothra 46,229
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 2 hr edogxxx 97,775

Search the Chicago Forum:
•••
•••

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 ]
•••