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

There are 189874 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.

Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#137125 Jan 15, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Still wrong - but still spamming the same fable.
Voeltz v. Obama (2nd suit Florida 2012):“In addition, to the extent that the complaint alleges that President Obama is not a “natural born citizen” even though born int he United States, the Court is in agreement with other courts that have considered this issue, namely, that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purpose, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.[Citations to Wong, Hollander, Ankeny].
by the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which the 14th was built from, no person which is subject to a foreign power will acquire a US citizenship, they are not eligible to be subject to the jurisdiction, thereof.

Gray attempts to obfuscate the meaning of “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” using dicta:
The real object of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, in qualifying the words,“All persons born in the United States” by the addition “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” would appear to have been to exclude, by the fewest and fittest words (besides children of members of the Indian tribes, standing in a peculiar relation to the National Government, unknown to the common law), the two classes of cases — children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation and children of diplomatic representatives of a foreign State…

Not only was Gray not sure of what he was stating, he actually was stating the process that was used by some states prior to the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The Act plainly stated who would be citizens, plus it was the first national law dealing with citizenship.

Looks like y'all have about 114+ years of bad law to correct, Gray tried to take the citizenship law back to what it was before the Civil Rights Act of 1866.
Chop-chop!!! LMAO!!!
Learn to Read

Buffalo Grove, IL

#137126 Jan 15, 2013
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>they sure did, you will notice that they did not say "and subject to the jurisdiction, thereof". Only a citizen is subject to the jurisdiction, aliens are here by reciprocal treaties only and are never subject to the Constitution
And yet another court refuses to adopt play law:

Tisdale v. Obama (Virginia federal court 2012):“It is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens.”
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#137127 Jan 15, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Still wrong - but still spamming the same fable.
Voeltz v. Obama (2nd suit Florida 2012):“In addition, to the extent that the complaint alleges that President Obama is not a “natural born citizen” even though born int he United States, the Court is in agreement with other courts that have considered this issue, namely, that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purpose, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.[Citations to Wong, Hollander, Ankeny].
what is with all of the A? LMAO!!!
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#137128 Jan 15, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet another court refuses to adopt play law:
Tisdale v. Obama (Virginia federal court 2012):“It is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens.”
Like I stated, y'all got 114+ years of bad law to correct!! LMAO!!!
Chop-chop!!!
Learn to Read

Buffalo Grove, IL

#137129 Jan 15, 2013
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>what is with all of the A? LMAO!!!
Facts and law? I can understand why those concern you.

“Reduce immigration levels”

Since: Dec 06

Kings Mountain, NC

#137130 Jan 15, 2013
Mark Levin Rips Colon Powell: Defends Birthers
&fe ature=em-uploademail
Learn to Read

Buffalo Grove, IL

#137131 Jan 15, 2013
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>Like I stated, y'all got 114+ years of bad law to correct!! LMAO!!!
Chop-chop!!!
Like I stated, take your fable on a long walk down a short pier.

Spam on loser.(Don't forget to click your heels three times as you repeat your wish)
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#137132 Jan 15, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Facts and law? I can understand why those concern you.
my only concern, I didn't put them there. So don't be fuching with my post.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#137133 Jan 15, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Like I stated, take your fable on a long walk down a short pier.
Spam on loser.(Don't forget to click your heels three times as you repeat your wish)
pull your head out and get busy correcting those 114+ years of BOGUS law.
Chop-chop!!!
FISTa LIEberal

Lady Lake, FL

#137136 Jan 15, 2013
Affirmative Diversity wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do they use your picture for the definition?
Have you looked in the mirror lately? There's your answer!
FISTa LIEberal

Lady Lake, FL

#137137 Jan 15, 2013
Grand Birther wrote:
<quoted text>
You probably meant to capitalize English, right?
We'll overlook your simple mistake this time.
I guess you are too "case sensitive" don't like english much, little monkee?
FISTa LIEberal

Lady Lake, FL

#137138 Jan 15, 2013
Affirmative Diversity wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do they use your picture for the definition?
Look at you!

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#137139 Jan 15, 2013
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>they sure did, you will notice that they did not say "and subject to the jurisdiction, thereof". Only a citizen is subject to the jurisdiction, aliens are here by reciprocal treaties only and are never subject to the Constitution
Under the jurisdiction of the US is EXACTLY the same as subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Grow up.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#137140 Jan 15, 2013
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>pull your head out and get busy correcting those 114+ years of BOGUS law.
Chop-chop!!!
Four years of ignorant and delusional whining and sniveling.

And four more years to go.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#137141 Jan 15, 2013
Justus von Liebig wrote:
<quoted text>Oooh-Wee birfoon boy just discovered checks and balances. He better report his findings to Chief Justice Roberts. It seems there are no checks or balances on birfoon stupidity.
As Obama should remember when he based the USSC at a State of the Union address.
Learn to Read

Buffalo Grove, IL

#137142 Jan 15, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>Four years of ignorant and delusional whining and sniveling.

And four more years to go.
Some how I suspect he's been ignorant, delusional, whining and sniveling for a lot longer than four years ... The focus of his fantasy may change, but the song remains the same

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#137143 Jan 15, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
As Obama should remember when he based the USSC at a State of the Union address.
I don't recall Obama declaring that he overruled the USSC Rouge, unlike DufusDale. Got a clue?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#137144 Jan 15, 2013
Jeep to open a new plant in .... China. And that means countries who would have bought their jeeps, will buying them from .....China.
All the auto bail out was temporarily save UNION jobs. You Democrats and the trade unions have sent millions of U.S. jobs overseas.
I know, I know, in you twisted logic the evil CEO's did but they were forced to my market forces created by you Libtards.
And that is why I will never by another vehicle from either Government Motors or CRYsler.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#137145 Jan 15, 2013
So sorry, forgot to leave a link.

ASIA BUSINESS January 15, 2013, 2:35 p.m. ET
Chrysler Looks to Restart Jeep Production in China

By CHRISTINA ROGERS

Chrysler Group LLC majority owner Fiat SpA has struck a deal with Guangzhou Automobile Group to restart Jeep production in China, a major step toward expanding the brand in the world's largest auto market.

The Jeep was first launched in China in 1983, and although production there ended in 2009 when Chrysler filed for bankruptcy, the brand remains well recognized. Today, Jeep sells three models in Chinathe Grand Cherokee, Wrangler and Compassall imported.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142412788...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#137146 Jan 15, 2013
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
So? He's still got 4 years and 6 days to make it go back up
There is still a distinct possibility that he won't. Just look at Richard Nixon.

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 Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min Grey Ghost 1,232,815
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 44 min Mothra 53,517
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 56 min Michael Satterfield 99,542
News Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 2 hr James 51,766
News More Than 40 People Shot In Chicago Over Holida... 4 hr reality is a crutch 1
abby 5-25-15 4 hr mrs gladys kravitz 3
amy 5-25-15 4 hr Kuuipo 4
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]