BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 207774 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.

Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#151827 Apr 19, 2013
Forum wrote:
<quoted text>Being a natural born American citizen doesn't make
them Americans if they are raised by foreigners
who teach them to hate.
An American is pure and Godly.
So you're saying Dufus Dale, Romper, and Tacky aren't Americans? I must respectfully disagree

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#151831 Apr 19, 2013
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
That Rogue has to put up with the Hindu in the first place? Just a guess.
And you're a bigot and a racist. NOT guessing.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#151832 Apr 19, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ya know, instead of debating the issues, you attack the messenger. And what is sad is you think that just because you disagree with us, we are unpatriotic!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =NJxmpTMGhU0XX
I'm convinced you don't know the meaning of the phrase "attacking the messenger".

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#151834 Apr 19, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Oh wow, a poll posted by Looney-Lefty Huffington Post and done by Looney-Left CBS News and the NYT, why it must be true!!!
Gun Poll: Background Checks Supported By 92% Of Americans / The Huffington Post | By Ariel Edwards-Levy : 01/17/2013
Universal background checks on gun buyers are favored by 92 percent of Americans, according to a CBS News/New York Times poll released Thursday.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/17/gun-...
The NYT is rated as one of the 5 top and best newspapers in the world. Looney-tooney? Because it sometimes slants slightly centre-left,(and that makes eminent sense because it's an intelligent publication), does not mean it does not factually report the news.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#151835 Apr 19, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Tell us Jacques, just how will expanding background checks for buy guns prevent criminals and crazy people from obtaining guns?
Remember, it was LBJ and Jimmy Carter who left the crazy people out of the mental hospitals!
Crazy people, as you irreventerally call them, have not shot at anyone far as I know.

Criminals will always have guns to kill each other. Let 'em. Tell me, Rogue, how many "criminals" , real criminals, have killed innocent people in your country in 2012? Check it out. It's the ordinary joe who has easy access to weapons who kills innocent people, not very often the criminals. Check out domestic violence, workplace incidents, theatre,- no criminal background these people. But they easily bought guns, and used them, whereas had they not had them, there probably would not have been so many deaths.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#151836 Apr 19, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
The FauxNews poll says it is only 85%. Much more credible
Only 85%? Gee, Rogue won. Only 85% favour checks. No wonder the senate voted it down, only 85% of their constituents wanted gun checks. Hope they remember that come Nov 2014

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#151837 Apr 19, 2013
LRS wrote:
Halt all immigration!
You're lucky there was a botched abortion in that alley and you were born in the United States. Were you not, you'd be an undesirable immigrant. As things stand now, you are just an undesirable American.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#151838 Apr 19, 2013
Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA) grilled Defense Sec. Chuck Hagel on a Pentagon email warning Army officers to watch out for soldiers who do not support gay marriage or who disfavor Muslims, equating them with the Ku Klux Klan and Neo-Nazis.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#151839 Apr 19, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Only 85%? Gee, Rogue won. Only 85% favour checks. No wonder the senate voted it down, only 85% of their constituents wanted gun checks. Hope they remember that come Nov 2014
Well, when you ask people if they are willing to pay $100 for every time they need to get a background check to buy a gun, they change their minds!
It is sort of like ObamaCare, when they find out the facts, they have second and third thoughts.
But I guess they will have to pass the law to find out what's in it!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#151840 Apr 19, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Crazy people, as you irreventerally call them, have not shot at anyone far as I know.
Criminals will always have guns to kill each other. Let 'em. Tell me, Rogue, how many "criminals" , real criminals, have killed innocent people in your country in 2012? Check it out. It's the ordinary joe who has easy access to weapons who kills innocent people, not very often the criminals. Check out domestic violence, workplace incidents, theatre,- no criminal background these people. But they easily bought guns, and used them, whereas had they not had them, there probably would not have been so many deaths.
Ah, Jared Lee Loughner is not crazy? How about James Eagan Holmes? Or Adam Lanza?
Most domestic murders have criminal histories? Why do you think they passed a extending MISDEMEANOR family violence conviction to be denied the right to bear arms?
And using your analogy, there is no reason to extend background checks, is there?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#151841 Apr 19, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
WASHINGTON -- Adolphus Busch IV, heir to the Busch family brewing fortune, resigned his lifetime membership in the National Rifle Association on Thursday, writing in a letter to NRA President David Keene, "I fail to see how the NRA can disregard the overwhelming will of its members who see background checks as reasonable."
The resignation, first reported by KSDK, came a day after the Senate rejected a series of amendments to a gun control bill, including a bipartisan deal to expand background checks for gun sales. The NRA had vigorously opposed all those measures.
"The NRA I see today has undermined the values upon which it was established," wrote Busch. "Your current strategic focus clearly places priority on the needs of gun and ammunition manufacturers while disregarding the opinions of your 4 million individual members."
Reached for comment on Busch's resignation, NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam told The Huffington Post, "We disagree with his characterization, but we wish him all the best."
Busch joined the pro-gun organization in 1975 and has spoken before of his love of hunting. But the NRA has moved in a direction that Busch would not follow. "One only has to look at the makeup of the 75-member board of directors, dominated by manufacturing interests, to confirm my point. The NRA appears to have evolved into the lobby for gun and ammunition manufacturers rather than gun owners," he wrote.
Busch told Keene, "It disturbs me greatly to see this rigid new direction of the NRA." He singled out the gun lobby's reversal of its 1999 position in favor of universal background checks, as well as its opposition to an assault weapons ban and a ban on high-capacity magazines. "I am simply unable to comprehend how assault weapons and large capacity magazines have a role in your vision," he wrote.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/18/adol...
Sooo, was he sober when he said that?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#151842 Apr 19, 2013
NRA Members strongly oppose new gun restrictions, poll finds: Posted by Scott Clement on January 25, 2013
Strong majorities of National Rifle Association members reject newly proposed gun restrictions, according to a survey released Thursday by the gun advocacy organization.
The poll finds more than eight in 10 NRA members oppose bans on high-capacity ammunition clips and semi-automatic assault weapons, with at least seven in 10 opposing each “strongly.” At the same time, 91 percent support changing laws to stop people with a mental illness from acquiring guns, and 82 percent favor placing armed guards in every school, a central proposal of the advocacy organization.
While some survey questions ask about gun restrictions that go beyond what President Obama laid out in a news conference last week — such as bans on private sales and confiscation of previously purchased high-capacity clips — the poll may provide the clearest look at where NRA members stand on new gun restrictions.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#151843 Apr 19, 2013
nebka wrote:
<quoted text>
Alex Jones is a mental unbalanced whack job. He needs to be sent to a mental ward and any one who believes him also needs to be sent there also.
But Adam Lanza should not have been? How about the guy who shot Gabby Giffords or the nice guy who shot up that theater in Aurora, CO?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#151844 Apr 19, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
http://www.imediaethics.org/Bl og/3866/Do_9_of_10_americans_r eally_support_gun_buyer_backgr ound_checks_pretty_much_.php
More for Rouge to rant about.
Would a $500 fee to do a background check before they reissue people a drivers licence be okay with you?
Let's say you are in your house in Watertown, MA and there is a terrorist running around with bombs and an AK-47 but you could not afford a $100 background check to have a firearm to protect yourself?
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#151845 Apr 19, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>Well, when you ask people if they are willing to pay $100 for every time they need to get a background check to buy a gun, they change their minds!
It is sort of like ObamaCare, when they find out the facts, they have second and third thoughts.
But I guess they will have to pass the law to find out what's in it!!!
Or they could just accept your lie about language in the bill.(Remember - as Romper pointed out - we already have background checks)
American Lady

Danville, KY

#151846 Apr 19, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
You're lucky there was a botched abortion in that alley and you were born in the United States. Were you not, you'd be an undesirable immigrant. As things stand now, you are just an undesirable American.
Just for YOU jocko :D

Condom maker unveils smart underwear for virtual sex
http://english.pravda.ru/news/society/19-04-2...

u "ordered" urs YET?

)8~D>
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#151847 Apr 19, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>Would a $500 fee to do a background check before they reissue people a drivers licence be okay with you?
Let's say you are in your house in Watertown, MA and there is a terrorist running around with bombs and an AK-47 but you could not afford a $100 background check to have a firearm to protect yourself?
Then I wouldn't buy my firearm at a gun show.
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#151848 Apr 19, 2013
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>It refers to place of birth and being subject to the jurisdiction, thereof, the Constitution. It has been well established that to be subject to the jurisdiction, thereof, one can't be subject to any foreign power, just take the naturalized citizen, they do not get US Citizenship until they swear off their allegiance and citizenship to a foreign power/nation of which they were citizens.
At the minimal the father must be a US citizen, the head of the family, if no father then the mother.
The Constitution has never recognized a dual-citizenship, it will take an amendment for recognition.
No, every child born in the USA except for the children of foreign diplomats is born "subject to the jurisdiction."

This court ruling is right, and you are wrong:

Mustata v. US Dept. of Justice, 179 F.3d 1017 (6th Cir. 1999)(children born in US to two Romanian citizens described as “natural born citizens” of the US):

“Petitioners Marian and Lenuta Mustata are citizens of Romania. At the time of their petition, they resided in Michigan with their two minor children, who are natural born citizens of the United States.”

And this court ruling is right, and you are wrong:

Diaz-Salazar v. INS, 700 F.2d 1156 (7th Cir. 1983)(child born in US to Mexican citizen is “natural born citizen” of US):

“Petitioner, Sebastian Diaz-Salazar, entered the United States illegally [from Mexico] in 1974 and has been living and working in Chicago since that time.*** The relevant facts which have been placed before the INS, BIA, and this court can be summarized as follows: The petitioner has a wife and two children under the age of three in Chicago; the children are natural-born citizens of the United States.”

And:

Nwankpa v. Kissinger, 376 F. Supp. 122 (M.D. Ala. 1974)(child born in US to two Biafra citizens described as “natural born citizen” of the US):

“The Plaintiff was a native of Biafra, now a part of the Republic of Nigeria. His wife and two older children are also natives of that country, but his third child, a daughter, is a natural-born citizen of the United States.”

And this:

Ankeny v. Governor of Indiana (Indiana 2008 – Appellate Court) ruling:“Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”

And this:

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

And this:

Hollander v. McCain (New Hampshire 2008) ruling:“Those born “in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” U.S. Const., amend. XIV, have been considered American citizens under American law in effect since the time of the founding, United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 674-75 (1898), and thus eligible for the presidency..."

And here is the US Supreme Court in the Wong Kim Ark case:

"It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.

III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established."

They are right, and you are wrong.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#151849 Apr 19, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>Would a $500 fee to do a background check before they reissue people a drivers licence be okay with you?
Let's say you are in your house in Watertown, MA and there is a terrorist running around with bombs and an AK-47 but you could not afford a $100 background check to have a firearm to protect yourself?
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Then I wouldn't buy my firearm at a gun show.
You know what, LTR, Rogue has flipped. I remember, as a child, playing cowboys and Indians (I admit it, the Indians were the bad guys)and gangsters and we pipe dreamed and constructed scenarios almost identical to the one Rogue describred (above). It's uncanny. I guess it's ok for him to act like a child, but just knowing that he has 10 or more firearms and over 100,000 rounds of ammo stockpiled at home (is what he said) is a lot scarier than any terrorist running around the neighbourhood. I know Rogue has humid dreams, illusions, of cornering the terrorist and shooting him dead. Well, Rogue would probably end up being the dead one, and in a few seconds stat.

Children playing with adult weapons. Freaking scary.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#151850 Apr 19, 2013
Something just occurred to me, Rogue, and this applies as well to LRS, Frank, KFC GB, Communist Lady, Rush, and a few others.
If there WAS effective gun control, and you or one of your birther ilk wanted to purchase a firearm, and you showed your insane Topix postings to the gun seller who'd pass them on to the authorities, you would be turned down and he couln't sell you ANY guns. Why, the FBI would probably raid your homes and trailers seize the whole whole arsenal.

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
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 7 min boundary painter 1,849
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 10 min Nostrilis Waxman 1,348,952
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 12 min boundary painter 7,345
abby 2-14 16 15 min boundary painter 2
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 1 hr David 101,446
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 2 hr Earthling-1 57,336
Word (Dec '08) 3 hr PEllen 5,661
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages