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

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 ... Full Story
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#135779 Jan 7, 2013
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm a Dem? HaHaHaHa! Not on your life.
Of course not,and as per usual, you did not understand. You're a birther welfare case, utlra right wing.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#135781 Jan 7, 2013
Poppo wrote:
Frankie Logic.
<quoted text>
And if he traveled under an American passport?_________
And if Frank is a serial rapist he should be imprisoned. And if ... blah blah blah.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#135782 Jan 7, 2013
American Lady wrote:
Sen. Coburn’s “Wastebook” Eyes NFL’s Nonprofit Status
http://www.nonprofitquarterly.org/policysocia...
Sen. Coburn’s “Wastebook”
http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm...
The teams are for profit businesses that pay taxes.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#135783 Jan 7, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure he does. Talk about clinging to your delusions
Sure he does. Reminds one of ROGUE SCHOLAR's claim that Obama, certain of electoral defeat on November 6, had bought a $35 million (NOT 3.5 million, nooo, 35 million!) home in Hawaii. I wish Rogue would explain what he posted and favour us with his 'sure-thing" sources.
Learn to Read

Chicago, IL

#135784 Jan 7, 2013
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>Sure he does. Reminds one of ROGUE SCHOLAR's claim that Obama, certain of electoral defeat on November 6, had bought a $35 million (NOT 3.5 million, nooo, 35 million!) home in Hawaii. I wish Rogue would explain what he posted and favour us with his 'sure-thing" sources.
Rouge has posted so many "sure things" that were off by 180 degrees - makes me want to take him to Vegas. I'll give him $5 to bet on a game and then I'll lay 5 large against the side he chooses. After 2 days I'd be able to keep Mrs LtR in the lifestyle she deserves for much longer than either of us will need to worry about it
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#135785 Jan 7, 2013
American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
Free to enter a Bar & Smoke ...
While enjoying my Margarita ...
and people watching ...
I had no idea your cultural tastes were so wide-ranging.
Bar & smoke? Btw, most civilized states have a no-smoking policy in all public establishments, including bars. I knew you were not quite with the times, but...
Er, what're they watching? Rather, WHO are they watching? American er hmm Pravda Lady, sloopy or Patriot "ha ha give me a break" warrior?
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#135786 Jan 7, 2013
And what're YOU watching? Baseball-capped gun nuts, pick-ups parked outside, proudly displaying their rifles stowed in their gun racks, bubble gum packs and chewin' tabacchy on the front seat, and revelling in the sound of gunfire and tin cans flying in the air from these patriots who will repel the enemy invading the homeland with their assault rifles? Or dreaming of a WHITE House without that black guy Obama in it? Not to worry, he'll be out---in January 2017.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#135787 Jan 7, 2013
Poppo wrote:
<quoted text>
You must be consistent in you logic Mr. Liars. If a gun is not the culprit in and of itself then neither are food stamps.
One should be smart enough not to compare apples and oranges. AHEM, not to mention I didn't say food stamps were THE problem. Food stamps aren't the problem, just as guns are not the problem. BTW, in your mind, how do you compare a Gov. program to a private citizen owning something he purchased with his own money? Comical nonsense!
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#135788 Jan 7, 2013
Poppo wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course not! You’re a loser so your natural instinct is to side with losers; but until your Party purges itself of bottom feeders the likes of the birfoon they may never see light let alone a win at the end of the tunnel.
If I'm a loser Pops then you never even got in the game.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#135789 Jan 7, 2013
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
If I'm a loser Pops then you never even got in the game.
Tell one and all who you sided with in November's presidential election, specially after your famous and oft-repeated "Can you hear us coming?" . Then, find the usual excuse and profanity to show your birther ilk that you are NOT a LOSER.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#135790 Jan 7, 2013
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell one and all who you sided with in November's presidential election, specially after your famous and oft-repeated "Can you hear us coming?" . Then, find the usual excuse and profanity to show your birther ilk that you are NOT a LOSER.
All that hate is chewing you up inside jacqie. Best get rid of it before it's too late.

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#135791 Jan 7, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
You do know that Massachusetts has only 11 Electoral College votes, don't you??? yep, 11 out of .....538!!!!
<quoted text>
No, I got it, it does not matter who badly Romney will lose by in Massachusetts, he will not need Mass. to win the election. All he needs is 271 Electoral College votes and right now he looks like he will win more than 300.
This election comes down to the Independent voters in the Swing States, and nothing else. In 2000, Bush would have lost, if Al "Owl" Gore had won his home state. Sure, Romney was the governor of Mass. but he was also born in Mich. and he may lose both of those states, but in the end, it will mean nother if O'Bummer Boys gets less than 271!!!
One of Rogue Scholar's classic predictions

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#135792 Jan 7, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, racism will not be a factor. They voted him in in 2008 because he was black but in 2012 they will vote he out 'cause his Couson Pookie is to lazy to vote!
Barack Obama Cousin Pookie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =-Al6r8ESjAYXX
Another Rogue Scholar's classic predictions

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#135793 Jan 7, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, Obama's demeanor may have looked good to the Libtards but it was a big turn off to many Independent voters. And it is the Independent voters in the swing states who will decide this election!
Yet another of Rogue Scholar's classic predictions.

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#135794 Jan 7, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Hummmm, on October 26th, 2008 Obama had a crowd of over 100,000 in Denver but yesterday he had only 16,000?!?
<quoted text>
Well, why don't you tell us? The facts are that Obama's numbers where way down. Just look at the DNC Convention in Charlotte when they cancelled the stadium event. Oh, I know, that said it was because of the chance of a storm but all the real weather guys said the chances were less than 10%!
We will see how many show up across this nation on Nov. 6th.
Enough showed up on November 6 to have Obama reelected.

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#135795 Jan 7, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
But our laws did not originate in the Magna Charta. Depending on your point of view it could be the Jewish holy books. But all of our current laws are based on our Constitution and had nothing to do with England.
Wrong.

As far back as in 1798, The United State Supreme Court in United States v. Worrall, 2 US 384, 394-395 (1798) recognized that our jurisprudence was based on English common law:

"When the American colonies were first settled by our ancestors, it was held, as well by the settlers, as by the judges and lawyers of England, that they brought hither, as a birth-right and inheritance, so much of the COMMON LAW, as was applicable to their local situation, and change of circumstances. But each colony judged for itself, what parts of the COMMON LAW were applicable to its new condition...."

Similarly, the court in Wheaton v. Peters , 33 US 591, 658-659 (1834)observed:

It is insisted, that our ancestors, when they migrated to this country, brought with them the English common law, as a part of their heritage. That this was the case, to a limited extent, is admitted. No one will contend, that the common law, as it existed in England, has ever been in force in all its provisions, in any state in this union. It was adopted, so far only as its principles were suited to the condition of the colonies: and from this circumstance we see, what is common law in one state, is not so considered in another. The judicial decisions, the usages and customs of the respective states, must determine, how far the common law has been introduced and sanctioned in each.

The court in Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 US 145 , 150 ,fn 14.(1968)noted our common law heritage in criminal proceedings:

The recent cases, on the other hand, have proceeded upon the valid assumption that state criminal processes are not imaginary and theoretical schemes but actual systems bearing virtually every characteristic of the common-law system that has been developing contemporaneously in England and in this country. The question thus is whether given this kind of system a particular procedure is fundamental—whether, that is, a procedure is necessary to an Anglo-American regime of ordered liberty.


The court in Smith v. Alabama, 124 U. S. 465, 478 (1888) stated in clear and concise language the common law's influence on the constitution:

"The interpretation of the Constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law, and are to be read in the light of its history."

Finally, as recent as 2000, the court in Carter v. United States, 530 US 255, 266 (2000) stated:

We have not hesitated to turn to the COMMON LAW for guidance when the relevant statutory text does contain a term with an established meaning at common law.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#135796 Jan 7, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>

You do know that Massachusetts has only 11 Electoral College votes, don't you??? yep, 11 out of .....538!!!!
<quoted text>

No, I got it, it does not matter who badly Romney will lose by in Massachusetts, he will not need Mass. to win the election. All he needs is 271 Electoral College votes and right now he looks like he will win more than 300.
This election comes down to the Independent voters in the Swing States, and nothing else. In 2000, Bush would have lost, if Al "Owl" Gore had won his home state. Sure, Romney was the governor of Mass. but he was also born in Mich. and he may lose both of those states, but in the end, it will mean nother if O'Bummer Boys gets less than 271!!!
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
One of Rogue Scholar's classic predictions
Well, you must admit that Rogue was right,(at last) predicting a Romney loss in Mass. He didn't just lose, he was crushed in his own state. His VP "who dat?" also lost miserably in his state of Wisconcin. As to the election, how normal, how boring, Rogue was wrong...again.("All he* needs is 271 Electoral College votes and right now he looks like he will win more than 300.")*Romney

“Reduce immigration levels”

Since: Dec 06

Kings Mountain, NC

#135797 Jan 7, 2013
The Fate Of The Republic Is In The Hands Of One Man…
http://www.westernjournalism.com/the-fate-of-...

The Middle Class In America Is Being Wiped Out – Here Are 60 Facts That Prove It
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/the-middle-cla...
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#135798 Jan 7, 2013
¢orr, wow : Wisconsin
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#135799 Jan 7, 2013
Fed Up wrote:
The Fate Of The Republic Is In The Hands Of One Man…
http://www.westernjournalism.com/the-fate-of-...
The Middle Class In America Is Being Wiped Out – Here Are 60 Facts That Prove It
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/the-middle-cla...
www.westernjournalism.com . Hmm, probably, after WND.com and FoxNews.com , the most discredited and unreliable news source in the country. God any more "trusted" sources?

www.thedailysheeple.com Double Hmm. Check the title. How unbiased a source.

You're so clueless. Do you think that any intelligent and self-respecting so-called "sheeple" would turn to a site called, for example, " thedailydumbbirhter.com " for unbiased testimony? The depths of birther ignorance are legend.

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
Some Valid Points 51 min Rest of the story 1
How to make a woman squirtting 1 hr GuGu 1
im single black hndsome 2 hr ligolyser 1
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 hr shinningelectr0n 1,153,060
women are so shallow these days (Nov '11) 3 hr Silk 81
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 7 hr JOEL 70,988
CHICAGO BEARS ARE SHYT. Boycott them 9 hr Sublime1 19
Chicago Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

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 ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 5:07 pm PST

Bleacher Report 5:07PM
Lions vs. Bears: Breaking Down Detroit's Game Plan
Bleacher Report 5:55 PM
Indianapolis Colts vs. Dallas Cowboys Betting Odds, Analysis, NFL Pick
NBC Sports 6:29 PM
Reports: Bears benching Cutler - NBC Sports
Bleacher Report 7:26 PM
Trestman May Never Get 2nd Shot After Bears Meltdown
Bleacher Report 7:27 PM
What Are Experts Saying About Detroit?