BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 237647 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

United States

#173741 Oct 3, 2013
Question for the Tepublicans. Many TeaBaggers promised to shut down the Government during the most recent campaign season. Now that they've finally found one campaign promise that they have been able to keep they are giving all the "credit" to Obama. Why don't they want to take the credit for keeping their promise?
Learn to Read

United States

#173742 Oct 3, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! So why do you even mention the courts?
Keep flapping those lips, the clouds are getting darker.
Why do you mention your play law? You know that it has been rejected by every authority in the land and yet you blather on and on. Talk about delusional.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#173743 Oct 3, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
So do you prefer foreign policy based on religion? Does that mean you're not an American? Or does it just mean that you're as clueless as ever?
By the way moron. How did you say my statement came off? Oh - that's right - you claimed that must not be an American because of my experiences and concerns. Then you claimed that my experiences were the same as every other American..... Sure - you have a real solid grasp on reality
Tell us brainbucket, how do you go into the Middle East and NOT have religion become an issue? Who's the moron, moron? My point about your post was perfectly clear. You made it sound as though your family had been through something the rest of us haven't. I asked for an explanation and guess what? You can't give one!
Dale

United States

#173744 Oct 3, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Since day 1 under the Constitution Congress has had the authority to enact naturalization law. Guess what Dufus? That's much more than 147 years that aliens have been required to be under the jurisdiction of the US before being naturalized in the US.
Grow up.
<quoted text>
LMAO!!! You still haven't answered my question.

"What citizenship does an alien have prior to his naturalization?"

The first time the US government made citizens was in 1866, before that the states made the citizens, a completely new game and laws with creation of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the 14th Amendment (ratified 1868).
Learn to Read

United States

#173745 Oct 3, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>Tell us brainbucket, how do you go into the Middle East and NOT have religion become an issue? Who's the moron, moron? My point about your post was perfectly clear. You made it sound as though your family had been through something the rest of us haven't. I asked for an explanation and guess what? You can't give one!
I told you that I was making no such claim. I stated this in English. Your confusion should have been expected.

So you think we should base our foreign policy on Religion? I knew you weren't an Anerican
Dale

United States

#173746 Oct 3, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you mention your play law? You know that it has been rejected by every authority in the land and yet you blather on and on. Talk about delusional.
LMAO!!!! The Law of the Land is the US Constitution and it looks like many are ignorant to its jurisdiction.
Learn to Read

United States

#173747 Oct 3, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!!! The Law of the Land is the US Constitution and it looks like many are ignorant to its jurisdiction.
Well one of you anyway
Learn to Read

United States

#173749 Oct 3, 2013
Romper: "gee LTR - your family's experiences are much different than mine. You must not be an American"

Romper: "gee LTR - your family's experiences are just like every other American"

Poor Moron arguing with himself and comes out twice the loser
Dale

United States

#173750 Oct 3, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
Question for the Tepublicans. Many TeaBaggers promised to shut down the Government during the most recent campaign season. Now that they've finally found one campaign promise that they have been able to keep they are giving all the "credit" to Obama. Why don't they want to take the credit for keeping their promise?
LMAOI!!! You will have to refresh my memory on the "TeaBaggers" promising to shut down the government during the most recent campaign season. Are we in a campaign season. Who is running?
Dale

United States

#173751 Oct 3, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Well one of you anyway
LMAO!!! That is just your feeble thinking, remember you're just an uninformed tool.
Learn to Read

United States

#173752 Oct 3, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAOI!!! You will have to refresh my memory on the "TeaBaggers" promising to shut down the government during the most recent campaign season. Are we in a campaign season. Who is running?
Most recent. Contrast that with current.
Learn to Read

United States

#173753 Oct 3, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! That is just your feeble thinking, remember you're just an uninformed tool.
So you've found someone to adopt your delusion?
Dale

United States

#173755 Oct 3, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Most recent. Contrast that with current.
LMAO!!! Oh, I see. The one that started after Labor Day.
Have you noticed how much of the government has been shut down?
Dale

United States

#173756 Oct 3, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
So you've found someone to adopt your delusion?
LMAO!! You the uninformed tool calling me, delusional! Hahahaha!!
Dale

United States

#173757 Oct 3, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
So you've found someone to adopt your delusion?
LMAO!! Keep flapping those lips, we need about two inches of rain.
Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#173758 Oct 3, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!!
Ellen wrote:
"You cannot read into the Constitution something that is not there. And there isn't a single word IN the Constitution that bars the US-born children of foreigners or dual citizens from becoming president."
If it isn't there then it can't be Constitutional law and as you know the Constitution makes the citizens.(see 14th amendment)
Precisely.

You cannot read into the Constitution something that is not there. And there isn't a single word IN the Constitution that bars the US-born children of foreigners or dual citizens from becoming president. And, as noted earlier, Bingham also said:

“Who does not know that every person born within the limits of the Republic is, in the language of the Constitution, a natural-born citizen.” Rep. Bingham, The congressional globe, Volume 61, Part 2. pg. 2212 (1869)”

Are you saying that Bingham was wrong?

“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are "natural born citizens" eligible to serve as President ..."---- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005)[Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.

Are you saying that both Bingham and the Heritage Foundation book are wrong?

In fact, since that is also the way that the US Supreme Court ruled in the Wong Kim Ark case (which, BTW, was AFTER Minor v. Happersett), are you saying that the US Supreme Court is wrong?
Learn to Read

United States

#173759 Oct 3, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Oh, I see. The one that started after Labor Day.
Have you noticed how much of the government has been shut down?
Oh, I see. You failed TOEFL.
Learn to Read

United States

#173760 Oct 3, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!! Keep flapping those lips, we need about two inches of rain.
That explains your repetitive dance moves
Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#173761 Oct 3, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!!
Ellen wrote:
"You cannot read into the Constitution something that is not there. And there isn't a single word IN the Constitution that bars the US-born children of foreigners or dual citizens from becoming president."
If it isn't there then it can't be Constitutional law and as you know the Constitution makes the citizens.(see 14th amendment)
Indeed, you cannot read into the Constitution something that is not there. And there isn't a single word IN the Constitution that bars the US-born children of foreigners or dual citizens from becoming president. And, as noted earlier, Bingham also said:

“Who does not know that every person born within the limits of the Republic is, in the language of the Constitution, a natural-born citizen.” Rep. Bingham, The congressional globe, Volume 61, Part 2. pg. 2212 (1869)”

Are you saying that Bingham was wrong?

“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are "natural born citizens" eligible to serve as President ..."---- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005)[Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.

Are you saying that both Bingham and the Heritage Foundation book are wrong?

In fact, since that is also the way that the US Supreme Court ruled in the Wong Kim Ark case (which, BTW, was AFTER Minor v. Happersett), are you saying that the US Supreme Court is wrong?
Dale

United States

#173762 Oct 3, 2013
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Precisely.
You cannot read into the Constitution something that is not there. And there isn't a single word IN the Constitution that bars the US-born children of foreigners or dual citizens from becoming president. And, as noted earlier, Bingham also said:
“Who does not know that every person born within the limits of the Republic is, in the language of the Constitution, a natural-born citizen.” Rep. Bingham, The congressional globe, Volume 61, Part 2. pg. 2212 (1869)”
Are you saying that Bingham was wrong?
“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are "natural born citizens" eligible to serve as President ..."---- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005)[Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.
Are you saying that both Bingham and the Heritage Foundation book are wrong?
In fact, since that is also the way that the US Supreme Court ruled in the Wong Kim Ark case (which, BTW, was AFTER Minor v. Happersett), are you saying that the US Supreme Court is wrong?
LMAO!!! No, Bingham was right in 1869, since the 14th amendment was ratified in 1868, which all people that received citizenship had no foreign attachments.

We haven't used English Common to make citizens since 1866, it is Constitutional Law now.(see 14th Amendment)

Yes the USSC was wrong, as a matter of fact they violated the Constitution. The only way for the Constitution to be altered in any way is through an amendment.

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) 2 min Nostrillis Waxman 1,497,791
Finally help for Citizens 28 min Let Freedom Ring 1
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 54 min Mothra 63,374
Are democrats destroyed? 59 min Susanm 326
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 1 hr Susanm 10,362
Four letter word game (Dec '11) 1 hr GEORGIA 2,481
News Scientists say they have proved climate change ... (Dec '08) 1 hr Patriot AKA Bozo 8,008

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages