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

[LRS]

Jacques Ottawa wrote:

<quoted text>
Overestimating yourself again, I see. Do you really think that Topix has the time to censor nutball old women/men like you who post boring right-wing prose and Pravda crap, not to mention phantasmagoric Obama BC conspiracy looney-tooney fairy tales.
Our father...tell American er hmm Pravda Lady to get a brain transplant as he/she has been sitting on it far too long.

That's exactly what Topix did. I watched it! The post wasn't up for one minute. It was so petty of Topix I couldn't help but laugh at them.

[Learn to Read]

LRS wrote:

<quoted text>I said it made no diff to me. Why reply back? Just an angry lil kid. Go brush your butt and wipe your hair.

Because I find 2nd graders comical. Rant some more RomperStomper. You're pathetic but good for laughing at

[LRS]

Learn to Read wrote:

<quoted text>
Because I find 2nd graders comical. Rant some more RomperStomper. You're pathetic but good for laughing at

And you still haven't made a post of any substance. Ignorant or stupid?

[LRS]

Learn to Read wrote:

<quoted text>
Because I find 2nd graders comical. Rant some more RomperStomper. You're pathetic but good for laughing at

BTW, how long have you been fixated on young children? Frickin' sicko!

[Jacques Ottawa]

LRS wrote:

<quoted text>
Unions are at fault. Their usefulness vanished many years ago. Even a complete bonehead like yourself should understand that. Lunasquid, get on one side of the fence or the other. Preferably, the North side!

I put up what I think is a reasonable and fair argument. No one but no one has to agree with me. But is there any way you can reply beside name-calling? Is there not one point in my post where you may write "well, I can't agree with you because...". No, instead, you knee-jerk it instantly. And, what does what I wrote on unions have to do with me being "up north? But the part I don't get is that you will boast and truly BELIEVE that you bested me again, and more incredibly in other cases, wojar, with your nonsensical aggressive replies. THIS is why everyone with a modicum of common sense should pity you.

[Jacques Ottawa]

LRS wrote:

<quoted text>
And you still haven't made a post of any substance. Ignorant or stupid?

Well, how about the following post of yours? Substance, NOT, ignorant and stupid, plus vulgar, YES:

"BTW, how long have you been fixated on young children? Frickin' sicko! "

And it's so typical, representing 99% iof your posts.

[Rogue Scholar 05]

da unions
http://conservativebyte.com/2012/12/da-unions...

[LRS]

Jacques Ottawa wrote:

<quoted text>
I put up what I think is a reasonable and fair argument. No one but no one has to agree with me. But is there any way you can reply beside name-calling? Is there not one point in my post where you may write "well, I can't agree with you because...". No, instead, you knee-jerk it instantly. And, what does what I wrote on unions have to do with me being "up north? But the part I don't get is that you will boast and truly BELIEVE that you bested me again, and more incredibly in other cases, wojar, with your nonsensical aggressive replies. THIS is why everyone with a modicum of common sense should pity you.

H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E Your behavior on here doesn't deserve a respectful response. You have to remember what I told you Lunatic; "I'll give it back to you ten fold". Don't like it? Then carry your azz. You made the choice long ago to continue acting like an azz, not I. But I will do what I said I would. Ten fold!

[Rogue Scholar 05]

Jacques Ottawa wrote:

<quoted text>
You mean how they took care of their workers before the advent of unions right up to the 1920s? No sick leave, no vacation leave, no health plan, no pension plan, no severance pay, 60+ hour 6-day week and child workers. Is that what you would call "taking care of them?". Foundng union organizers were harassed, beaten and often killed. Ford, the anti-semite, employed almost as many goons to beat up defiant workers as he did assembly-line workers. Add the other employers to the roll-call. What's to prevent them from going back to that kind of regime?
Companies AND unions need to re-assess their respective roles,as both, in my view, are guilty of ignoring company AND worker rights. Tell me this, Rogue, what did GM., for example, do with the workers' share of pension plan contributions?
And quit using the word "bigot" when you're on the losing end of an argument. Don't forget, you went beyond lunacy when you branded me an "oil bigot". I was not taken aback, no, I just laughed so hard...

I did not say that. One hundred years ago unions did a lot to improve the lives and health of workers but for the past fifty odd years they have been an albatross around the necks of American!
But you are a bigot. They ONLY reason why you hate Halliburton is because Dick Cheney used to be the CEO and nothing more.

[LRS]

Jacques Ottawa wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, how about the following post of yours? Substance, NOT, ignorant and stupid, plus vulgar, YES:
"BTW, how long have you been fixated on young children? Frickin' sicko! "
And it's so typical, representing 99% iof your posts.

Don't you get it Lunasquid? No one gives a rat's azz what you think. Other than your puppets of course. You remain unAmerican, insignificant and irrelevant! Why are you here every day? Could it be that you don't live in Canada at all? HaHaHaHa Now, get lost weirdo.

[Learn to Read]

LRS wrote:

<quoted text>And you still haven't made a post of any substance. Ignorant or stupid?

Substance? In response to the schoolyard wannabe? Why waste perfectly good English on you.(And RomperStomper proves my point again as he can't live without "getting the last word")

[Justice Dale]

The 14th amendment’s citizenship clause “the phrase,‘subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.”

The citizenship clause was designed to ensure that all persons born within the United States were both citizens of the United States and the state in which they resided, provided they were not at the time subjects of any foreign power, thus without any foreign influence, a "Natural Born Citizen".

The persons declared to be citizens are “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The evident meaning of these last words is not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction and owing them (U.S. Constitution) direct and immediate allegiance. And the words relate to the time of birth in the one case, as they do to the time of naturalization in the other. Persons not thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United States (U.S. Constitution) at the time of birth cannot become so afterwards except by being naturalized, either individually, as by proceedings under the naturalization acts, or collectively, as by the force of a treaty by which foreign territory is acquired.

Obama was born a citizen of his father's nation of origin, since his father was not a citizen of the US nor any state of the US, "and not subject to the jurisdiction, thereof" (US Constitution).

[Jacques Ottawa]

LRS wrote:

<quoted text>
H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E Your behavior on here doesn't deserve a respectful response. You have to remember what I told you Lunatic; "I'll give it back to you ten fold". Don't like it? Then carry your azz. You made the choice long ago to continue acting like an azz, not I. But I will do what I said I would. Ten fold!

I'll try again. Here is what I wrote. Tell me how it merits the first reply and then the above. Show me the hypocrisy, what there is to give back ten fold and how the following is acting like and azz :
"Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
You deserve plenty of credit for having achieved much success by taking a trucking job instead of piloting commercial aircraft. Both are valuable to the country and honourable. I've always said there is no such thing as a bad job if it's honest.
However, you solely blame Hostess and Eastern Airline workers for those companies' demise. Are you a huge shareholder, or the CEO of a huge conglomerate. Reason I ask is you speak like one. When things go wrong, it invariably the workers' fault. NEVER is it bad policy, bad admnistration, incompetence, fraud, etc on the company's part. Oh no, it's all about the ungrateful overpaid workers. Don't you think it's time you started to study the ENTIRE, COMPLETE, TOTAL reasons why companies go belly-up, Rogue? Do it in an impartial manner, and if you do, you'll find there is plenty of fault to go around, ON BOTH THE EMPLOYERS' AND THE EMPLOYEES'. However, and in the final analysis, does the buck not stop at the CEO's and board of directors' desks?"

[Ellen1]

Justice Dale wrote:

The 14th amendment’s citizenship clause “the phrase,‘subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.”
The citizenship clause was designed to ensure that all persons born within the United States were both citizens of the United States and the state in which they resided, provided they were not at the time subjects of any foreign power, thus without any foreign influence, a "Natural Born Citizen".
The persons declared to be citizens are “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The evident meaning of these last words is not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction and owing them (U.S. Constitution) direct and immediate allegiance. And the words relate to the time of birth in the one case, as they do to the time of naturalization in the other. Persons not thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United States (U.S. Constitution) at the time of birth cannot become so afterwards except by being naturalized, either individually, as by proceedings under the naturalization acts, or collectively, as by the force of a treaty by which foreign territory is acquired.
Obama was born a citizen of his father's nation of origin, since his father was not a citizen of the US nor any state of the US, "and not subject to the jurisdiction, thereof" (US Constitution).

The meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law and refers to the place of birth without regard to the citizenship of a parent or even both parents:

http://www.fr edthompsonsameric...

http://www.economist.com/blogs ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N ...

http://tesibria.typepad.com/wh ...

http://tesibria.typepad.com/wh ...

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org ...

[Rogue Scholar 05]

And here is a typical case of Loony-Lefty hate of Halliburton.

Halliburton Watch
http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/

You do know that Bill Clinton awarded no bid contracts to Halliburton, don't you? It was not until Dick Cheney became the VeeP nominee in 2000 that the hate speech from the left started.
Tell me, why is there nothing new on Halliburton these days? Because Dick Cheney is no longer the VeeP!!!

[Rogue Scholar 05]

Did you know the Gore family also owns an open-pit zinc mine?

Al Gore Was Big Oil Before Being Big Green
The BP oil spill in the Gulf is an unfortunate accident and it needs to be cleaned up. Granted. President Obama is responding with all the swiftness of a one-winged albatross in a wind storm. So be it. He will suffer a green voter backlash when the time comes. Nut the question that popped into my mind is what does Al Gore have to say about this oil spill? No really. Where is the bombastic tirade? You know if this had happened on President Bush's watch Al Gore's head would have exploded with seething rage. Why hasn't he been on every network lambasting Democrat inaction? Besides the politically inconvenient truth, maybe Al Gore is rich enough already.
A few days ago Al Gore in light of the BP oil spill, not surprisingly, did speak out. He continued his impassioned plea for the destruction of the oil industry:
http://www.nonsensibleshoes.com/2010/05/al-go...

[LRS]

Learn to Read wrote:

<quoted text>
Substance? In response to the schoolyard wannabe? Why waste perfectly good English on you.(And RomperStomper proves my point again as he can't live without "getting the last word")

You can't quit posting to me, why? Get lost tumbleweed.

[Rogue Scholar 05]

Liberal politicians are frigging hypocrites!

Michael Moore Owned Halliburton, Defense Stocks
Jim Meyers; Friday, Nov. 4, 2005

Filmmaker Michael Moore has made a career out of trashing corporations and said he doesn't own any stocks due to moral principle.

How then did author Peter Schweizer uncover IRS documents showing that Moore's very own foundation has bought stocks in some of America's largest corporations – including Halliburton, other defense contractors and some of the same companies he has attacked?

In his blockbuster new book "Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy," Hoover Fellow Schweizer reveals the glaring contradictions between the public stances and real-life behavior of prominent liberals including Al Franken, Ralph Nader, Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi.
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/...

[Rogue Scholar 05]

And then there is San Fran Nan Pelosi and Star-Kist tuna. Sure Snoopes tap dances around the issue but Snoops had to address the issue. "Naw, we see no problem here. Ignore to woman behind the curtain!"
http://www.snopes.com/politics/pelosi/america...
You Libtards are soooo pathetic!

[LRS]

Jacques Ottawa wrote:

<quoted text>
I'll try again. Here is what I wrote. Tell me how it merits the first reply and then the above. Show me the hypocrisy, what there is to give back ten fold and how the following is acting like and azz :
"Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
You deserve plenty of credit for having achieved much success by taking a trucking job instead of piloting commercial aircraft. Both are valuable to the country and honourable. I've always said there is no such thing as a bad job if it's honest.
However, you solely blame Hostess and Eastern Airline workers for those companies' demise. Are you a huge shareholder, or the CEO of a huge conglomerate. Reason I ask is you speak like one. When things go wrong, it invariably the workers' fault. NEVER is it bad policy, bad admnistration, incompetence, fraud, etc on the company's part. Oh no, it's all about the ungrateful overpaid workers. Don't you think it's time you started to study the ENTIRE, COMPLETE, TOTAL reasons why companies go belly-up, Rogue? Do it in an impartial manner, and if you do, you'll find there is plenty of fault to go around, ON BOTH THE EMPLOYERS' AND THE EMPLOYEES'. However, and in the final analysis, does the buck not stop at the CEO's and board of directors' desks?"

Your hypocritic nature is all throughout this forum. You chose to act like an azz and I've been giving it back to you ten fold. Now, you're whining and bellyaching. Because of name calling no less! Like I said, you're a hypocrite. Ten fold pal, ten fold. LMAO squid