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
132,021 - 132,040 of 175,165 Comments Last updated 16 min ago
Wilson

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150100
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Blather on and on pathetic moron. I will instead read the opinions of legal scholars and laugh at your delusions. Don't forget to file your demand that Cruz, Rubio and Jindal all be immediately removed from office since - under Dufus' play law -none of them are US Citizens
Cruz, Rubio and Jindal will never sit in the White House, unless circumstances change.
----------
The US Supreme Court can not change the Constitution, all the Supreme Court can do is decide how the framers intended for the Articles and Amendments to be applied, any interpretation outside the scope intended by the framers will be Unconstitutional.

In order to prevent frivolous and ill-conceived changes to the Constitution, the Founding Fathers made the formal process of amending the document difficult.

In simple terms: an Amendment can be added to the Constitution through a super-majority (two-thirds) vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate followed by ratification by three-fourths of the state legislatures. To repeal an existing Amendment to the Constitution requires the addition of a new Amendment -- as was done with the 18th Amendment (prohibition), which was repealed by the 21st Amendment.

It is not within the power of the Supreme Court to change the Constitution. The founders were very wary of investing too much power in the hands of any single person or branch of government. Essentially, the Constitution rules over the Supreme Court, the President, and the Congress -- they are all bound by IT, not the other way around. If the Supreme Court could change the Constitution, too much power would be invested in the judiciary.
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150101
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Replying to "Justice Dale."

Re: "As you know Howard was the father of the citizenship clause and I would like for you to find me one indication that he used english common law for his framing.(ratified in 1868) "

Answer: Dream on about Howard being "the father of the citizenship clause. At most he was ONE of the fathers.

Over on the Senate side, the author of the citizenship clause was Senator Lyman Trumball.

And here is what Lyman Trumball said:

“By the terms of the Constitution he must have been a citizen of the United States for nine years before he could take a seat here, and seven years before he could take a seat in the other House ; and, in order to be President of the United States, a person must be a native-born citizen. It is the common law of this country, and of all countries, and it was unnecessary to incorporate it in the Constitution, that a person is a citizen of the country in which he is born. I read from Paschale's Annotated Constitution, note 274:‘All persons born in the allegiance of the king are natural born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together.’ Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country as well as of England. There are two exceptions, and only two, to the universality of its application. The children of ambassadors are, in theory, born in the allegiance of the powers the ambassadors represent, and slaves, in legal contemplation, are property, and not persons.”—Sen. Trumbull, Cong. Globe. 1st Session, 42nd Congress, pt. 1, pg. 575 (1872)
Therealnews com

West Sayville, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150102
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

American Lady wrote:
The Great Betrayal - Obama Budget to Cut Social Security
http://current.com/community/94091281_the-gre...
Tell President Obama: No cuts to Social Security or Medicare
04/08/13
From all reports we’ve seen, President Obama is going to propose a budget plan this week that is unprecedented for a Democratic president. It will propose a cut to Social Security benefits for seniors, veterans and people with disabilities.
http://www.uaw.org/articles/tell-president-ob...
I "think" THIS will BE ...
more than your lil hearts can STAND ...
at one time.
He's a f-a-i-l-u-r-e ...
Yet the libTARDS
VOTED
for
him ...
NOT once ...
.
.
.
BUT
.
.
.
TWICE!
~~~~~~~~~
Night
:)
Proving that Obama is a corporate hack loser just like Bush/Cheney.

----------

President Eisenhower once noted that a few Texas oil millionaires wanted to abolish social security
http://tinyurl.com/bp7h8 / Nov. 8, 1954
http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/ike.asp
Grand Birther

Louisville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150103
Apr 10, 2013
 
Poppo wrote:
<quoted text>
'FANCIFUL, DELUSIONAL AND IRRATIONAL'
JUDGE ARTHUR SCHACK
Judges will say anything to avoid the merits of the eligibility issue!
They know what the evidence proves.
It has been that way for 5 years running, and they must be getting tired of looking like the cowardly idiots that they are.

Too bad that your lie can't be proven with a fraudulent birth certificate that contains no raised seal of authentication and a one-of-a-kind error in the registrars stamp.
The original has NEVER been produced in any court!
The fraud was born in Kenya, Poopoo stain!
Obama is not even American, much less Black or Natural Born.

Since: Oct 09

Moreno Valley, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150104
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Anderson Coooper wrote:
<quoted text>
Go on the Mormon ancestry website and sign in as a guest and try to find any record of Obama! There is nothing! And they keep more records than anyone! If there was ever an authentic document anywhere it would come up! I can find ancestors from the 1500's and people who no one had any info on, but nothing on O! His whole life is a sham!
Then what the hell is this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Or this?

WASHINGTON (RNS) President Obama met with Mormon leaders Monday (July 20) and received genealogical information about his family.
The president met with President Thomas Monson of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and Elder Dallin Oaks, who oversees the church’s genealogical program, along with Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. Reid, a Mormon, set up the meeting, said White House spokesman Jen Psaki.
http://blog.beliefnet.com/news/2009/07/mormon...

Incidentally, even your own living family members can request certain information pertaining to them specifically not be available to you and vise versa.
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150105
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Grand Birther wrote:
Psst, just because a SHEEPLE said it doesn't mean it is true, especially when you can't see it with your own eyes!
Why don't you post a a link to a copy of the LFBC where your LYING EYES think you see it and tell us exactly where on the copy your delusional brain thinks it is located, HOLLA!
Too bad that your lie can't be proven with a fraudulent birth certificate that contains no raised seal of authentication and a one-of-a-kind error in the registrars stamp.
The original has NEVER been produced in any court!
The fraud was born in Kenya, Poopoo stain!
Obama is not even American, much less Black or Natural Born.
Re: Raised seal.

(1) Here is the web image of Mitt Romney's birth certificate:

https://www.google.com/search ...

Do you see any embossed seal at all?

(2) Here is the Savannah Gutherie photo, and if you look very closely just below the Aug 8, and just above the Apr 25, you can see that the raised seal comes through.

http://www.city-data.com/forum/politics-other ...

It is not visible on the White House scan into PDF, but it is faintly visible in this jpg image.

(3) Here is the raised seal on the short form birth certificate---which actually is the official birth certificate:

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/08/born-in-the-...

In addition to the raised seals being visible, the fact that Obama has a birth certificate from Hawaii and that it says that he was born in Hawaii has been repeatedly confirmed by the officials of BOTH parties in Hawaii, including the former Republican governor (a friend of Sarah Palin's) and by the public Index Data file and by the birth notices sent to the Hawaii newspapers by the DOH of Hawaii in 1961.

And it continues to be irrational (to say the very least) to think that Obama's relatives were rich enough (his American grandfather was a furniture salesman and his American grandmother was a low-level employee in a bank in 1961, and his father came to Hawaii on a free flight) or stupid enough to spend any money at all on a long, risky (the incidence of stillbirths were high) trip to Kenya or to any foreign country for their pregnant daughter-----when there were perfectly fine hospitals in Hawaii.
Therealnews com

West Sayville, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150106
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>Irrelevant. Citizenship is not a states right, it is a Constitutional Law.
Prior to the Civil Rights Act of 1866, the states had the responsibility of making citizens and the 14th Amendment is the Act, just place where it will take an amendment to overturn it.
This PROVES that the Republican Conservative Supreme Court are Activist Jurist.

==========

No other future Supreme Court or any court is allowed to use Bush v Gore as precedent. Bush is truly an illegitimate President. http://tinyurl.com/2ps3e3
George W. Bush's January 20, 2001 inauguration was unconstitutional. This isn't because Bush lost the popular vote. Nor is it because he lost Florida and thus the electoral vote. The U.S. Supreme Court's decision to hear the Florida recount lawsuit, Bush v. Gore, violated the U.S. Constitution. It's a states' rights issue. Elections fall under state law; the highest court that may resolve a legal challenge about an election is a state supreme court. The U.S. Supreme Court--a federal body--didn't have jurisdiction in the case.
http://yalelawjournal.org/2006/11/07/flanders...

==========

Has Bush v. Gore Become the Case That Must Not Be Named?
August 15, 2006 / http://tinyurl.com/qbx2s
At a law school Supreme Court conference that I attended last fall, there was a panel on “The Rehnquist Court.” No one mentioned Bush v. Gore, the most historic case of William Rehnquist’s time as chief justice, and during the Q. and A. no one asked about it. When I asked a prominent law professor about this strange omission, he told me he had been invited to participate in another Rehnquist retrospective, and was told in advance that Bush v. Gore would not be discussed.
The ruling that stopped the Florida recount and handed the presidency to George W. Bush is disappearing down the legal world’s version of the memory hole, the slot where, in George Orwell’s “1984,” government workers disposed of politically inconvenient records. The Supreme Court has not cited it once since it was decided, and when Justice Antonin Scalia, who loves to hold forth on court precedents, was asked about it at a forum earlier this year, he snapped,“Come on, get over it.”
There is a legal argument for pushing Bush v. Gore aside. The majority opinion announced that the ruling was “limited to the present circumstances” and could not be cited as precedent. But many legal scholars insisted at the time that this assertion was itself dictum — the part of a legal opinion that is nonbinding — and illegitimate, because under the doctrine of stare decisis, courts cannot make rulings whose reasoning applies only to a single case.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/15/opinion/15t...

Since: Oct 09

Moreno Valley, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150107
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

or is it vice-versa? Oh well I doubt it matters.
Therealnews com

West Sayville, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150108
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Wilson wrote:
<quoted text>Cruz, Rubio and Jindal will never sit in the White House, unless circumstances change.
----------
The US Supreme Court can not change the Constitution, all the Supreme Court can do is decide how the framers intended for the Articles and Amendments to be applied, any interpretation outside the scope intended by the framers will be Unconstitutional.
In order to prevent frivolous and ill-conceived changes to the Constitution, the Founding Fathers made the formal process of amending the document difficult.
In simple terms: an Amendment can be added to the Constitution through a super-majority (two-thirds) vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate followed by ratification by three-fourths of the state legislatures. To repeal an existing Amendment to the Constitution requires the addition of a new Amendment -- as was done with the 18th Amendment (prohibition), which was repealed by the 21st Amendment.
It is not within the power of the Supreme Court to change the Constitution. The founders were very wary of investing too much power in the hands of any single person or branch of government. Essentially, the Constitution rules over the Supreme Court, the President, and the Congress -- they are all bound by IT, not the other way around. If the Supreme Court could change the Constitution, too much power would be invested in the judiciary.
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's obnoxious remark Wednesday about the Voting Rights Act as a "perpetuation of racial entitlement" wasn't the half of it.

Scalia is often held up by self-described "conservatives" as a model jurist, setting the standard for the type of "strict constructionism" or "originalist" interpretation of the Constitution that Republicans would like to see more of on the bench.

Jurists like Scalia, the pretend argument goes, are the antidote to those "liberal activist judges" who don't appreciate the limited authority of the judicial branch and who abuse their position in order to usurp the power of the executive and/or legislative branches by --- gasp!--- "legislating from the bench!"
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150109
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Wilson wrote:
<quoted text>Cruz, Rubio and Jindal will never sit in the White House, unless circumstances change.
----------
The US Supreme Court can not change the Constitution, all the Supreme Court can do is decide how the framers intended for the Articles and Amendments to be applied, any interpretation outside the scope intended by the framers will be Unconstitutional.

In order to prevent frivolous and ill-conceived changes to the Constitution, the Founding Fathers made the formal process of amending the document difficult.

In simple terms: an Amendment can be added to the Constitution through a super-majority (two-thirds) vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate followed by ratification by three-fourths of the state legislatures. To repeal an existing Amendment to the Constitution requires the addition of a new Amendment -- as was done with the 18th Amendment (prohibition), which was repealed by the 21st Amendment.

It is not within the power of the Supreme Court to change the Constitution. The founders were very wary of investing too much power in the hands of any single person or branch of government. Essentially, the Constitution rules over the Supreme Court, the President, and the Congress -- they are all bound by IT, not the other way around. If the Supreme Court could change the Constitution, too much power would be invested in the judiciary.
Sorry Dufus. Changing your sign-in doesn't make you any less wrong
Grand Birther

Louisville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150110
Apr 10, 2013
 
Poppo wrote:
<quoted text>
Cruz will never be the POTUS, but yes he is eligible.
Glad you feel that way.
If Cruz runs, he WILL get my vote, even though I know that he is not legally eligible.

Thanks to Obama's usurpation, I would vote for Putin's son if he were a Conservative, born in Russia, presented a fraudulent birth certificate proving birth in the US, and had a US citizen Mother.
Hell, I don't think a US parent is even necessary anymore, only being Conservative and a successful fraud.

Yep, payback will be a MF'er!
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150111
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Poppo wrote:
<quoted text>Cruz will never be the POTUS, but yes he is eligible.
According to Dufus Dale's play law he's not even a Citizen.
Grand Birther

Louisville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150112
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SMEllen1 wrote:
in order to be President of the United States, a person must be a native-born citizen.
Still waiting for your explanation for SR 511 and John McCain'e Panamanian birth.
Yep, I'm SMellen1, SHEEPLE!

Since: Oct 09

Moreno Valley, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150113
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Grand Birther wrote:
<quoted text>
Judges will say anything to avoid the merits of the eligibility issue!
They know what the evidence proves.
It has been that way for 5 years running, and they must be getting tired of looking like the cowardly idiots that they are.
Too bad that your lie can't be proven with a fraudulent birth certificate that contains no raised seal of authentication and a one-of-a-kind error in the registrars stamp.
The original has NEVER been produced in any court!
The fraud was born in Kenya, Poopoo stain!
Obama is not even American, much less Black or Natural Born.
You mean like when Orly insisted the Georgia case be heard on the merits while no defense was presented and you still lost? I’m sure you remember that old empty chair thing don’t cha GB?

“The Court finds the TESTIMONY OF THE WITNESSES, AS WELL AS THE EXHIBITS TENDERED, TO BE OF LITTLE, IF ANY, PROBATIVE VALUE, AND THUS WHOLLY INSUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT PLAINTIFFS’ ALLEGATIONS…. None of the testifying witnesses offered persuasive testimony. Moreover, the Court finds that none of the written submissions tendered by plaintiffs have probative value. GIVEN THE UNSATISFACTORY EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY THE PLAINTIFFS, THE COURT CONCLUDES THE PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS ARE NOT PERSUASIVE.”

Oh my!
Grand Birther

Louisville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150114
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SMEllen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Re: Raised seal.
(1) Here is the web image of Mitt Romney's birth certificate:
Why bring up Romney? That is your argument?

Savannah Guthrie is a lying Obot and there is no seal to be seen in that photo, SHEEPLE!
Where exactly do you think you see it at with your delusional brain?

Psst, just because a SHEEPLE said it doesn't mean it is true, especially when you can't see it with your own eyes!
Why don't you post a a link to a copy of the LFBC where your LYING EYES think you see it and tell us exactly where on the copy your delusional brain thinks it is located, HOLLA!

Too bad that your lie can't be proven with a fraudulent birth certificate that contains no raised seal of authentication and a one-of-a-kind error in the registrars stamp.
The original has NEVER been produced in any court!
The fraud was born in Kenya, Poopoo stain!
Obama is not even American, much less Black or Natural Born.

Yep, I'm SMellen1, SHEEPLE!
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150115
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Grand Birther wrote:
<quoted text>Glad you feel that way.
If Cruz runs, he WILL get my vote, even though I know that he is not legally eligible.

Thanks to Obama's usurpation, I would vote for Putin's son if he were a Conservative, born in Russia, presented a fraudulent birth certificate proving birth in the US, and had a US citizen Mother.
Hell, I don't think a US parent is even necessary anymore, only being Conservative and a successful fraud.

Yep, payback will be a MF'er!
Ranted like a tru patriot.
Grand Birther

Louisville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150116
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Poppo wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean like when Orly insisted the Georgia case be heard on the merits while no defense was presented and you still lost? I’m sure you remember that old empty chair thing don’t cha GB?
“The Court finds the TESTIMONY OF THE WITNESSES, AS WELL AS THE EXHIBITS TENDERED, TO BE OF LITTLE, IF ANY, PROBATIVE VALUE, AND THUS WHOLLY INSUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT PLAINTIFFS’ ALLEGATIONS…. None of the testifying witnesses offered persuasive testimony. Moreover, the Court finds that none of the written submissions tendered by plaintiffs have probative value. GIVEN THE UNSATISFACTORY EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY THE PLAINTIFFS, THE COURT CONCLUDES THE PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS ARE NOT PERSUASIVE.”
Oh my!
I repeat!
Judges will say anything to avoid the merits of the eligibility issue!
There are none more blind than those who refuse to see!
They know what the evidence proves.
It has been that way for 5 years running, and they must be getting tired of looking like the cowardly idiots that they are.

I'm sure that two mew nuclear power plants for Georgia caused his temporary blindness and willful stupidity.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150117
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Ranted like a tru patriot.
Trolling like a trew anti-patriot!
Grand Birther

Louisville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150118
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Poppo wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean like when Orly insisted the Georgia case be heard on the merits while no defense was presented and you still lost? I’m sure you remember that old empty chair thing don’t cha GB?
“The Court finds the TESTIMONY OF THE WITNESSES, AS WELL AS THE EXHIBITS TENDERED, TO BE OF LITTLE, IF ANY, PROBATIVE VALUE, AND THUS WHOLLY INSUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT PLAINTIFFS’ ALLEGATIONS…. None of the testifying witnesses offered persuasive testimony. Moreover, the Court finds that none of the written submissions tendered by plaintiffs have probative value. GIVEN THE UNSATISFACTORY EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY THE PLAINTIFFS, THE COURT CONCLUDES THE PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS ARE NOT PERSUASIVE.”
Oh my!
I repeat!
Judges will say anything to avoid the merits of the eligibility issue!
There are none more blind than those who refuse to see!
They know what the evidence proves.
It has been that way for 5 years running, and they must be getting tired of looking like the cowardly idiots that they are.

I'm sure that two new nuclear power plants for Georgia caused his temporary blindness and willful stupidity.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#150119
Apr 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

St Black Pope wrote:
<quoted text>You are kidding, right? I am not an Obama supporter. All congress did was specify the existing law. John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone, while his dad was serving in the military. All family members of military personnel on duty are naturalized citizens and the military bases and hospitals and embassies are classified as American soil. My little sister was born in Panama and she can run for president too. I was born in Alaska before it was a state and I too can run for president.
My little sister was born in Munich, Germany in 1956 and she has a DS-1350 to prove it. Does your little sister have a DS-1350?
Certification of Report of Birth (DS-1350)
http://www.travel.state.gov/passport/faq/faq_...

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

80 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 5 min THE DEVIL 1,084,240
Woman Sues Plastic Surgeon Over Labeling Surger... 12 min Tina 1
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 38 min Terry rigsby 49,021
EBOLA virus can solve many of USA problems. 53 min I say go ye forward 2
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 57 min truth-facts 45,906
A murder-suicide in Chicago's financial district 1 hr Tory II 1
Interview with retired border patrol agent. Tru... 1 hr Pay Attention Folks 3
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 3 hr RACE 97,585
•••
•••
•••

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 ]
•••