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
153,661 - 153,680 of 177,399 Comments Last updated 24 min ago
Dale

Wichita, KS

#174272 Oct 8, 2013
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
LAMO!!!!
Every person in the USA except for the families of foreign diplomats is subject to the jurisdiction of the USA.
You cannot read into the US Constitution something that it does not say. And it does not say that two US citizen parents are required to be president. In fact, there is not a word in the US Constitution that says either that the US-born children of foreigners or that US-born dual citizens are not eligible to become president. Not a word.
Under strict construction (remember that?) you cannot interpret the Constitution as saying something unless it actually does says it-----and it does NOT say that two citizen parents are required or that a dual citizen is barred from becoming president. It does not say either of those things.
Under libertarian principles neither a law nor the Constitution can take away a right or a privilege unless the Constitution specifically allows that thing to be taken away. And, the Constitution does not specifically take away the right or privilege of the US-born children of foreigners to become president, and it does not take away the right or privilege of the US-born dual citizens either. It does not take away either of those things. It does NOT say any such thing.
And yet slimy Dale wants gullible people to ignore good conservative legal principles such as strict construction and good conservative moral principles such as libertarianism. Why?
Why? Why, when there isn't a word in the Constitution that says that the US-born children of foreigners are not eligible to become president? Why? What is slimy Dale's motive? Why, violate strict construction AND libertarian principles? Why does he do it? Why throw away such principles based solely on hatred of Obama?
The Declaration of Independence says: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..." And there is nothing in either the Constitution or in ANY of the writings of the men who were in the Constitutional Convention, or such other American leaders at the time as John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. There NOTHING in any of their writings that says that the US-born children of foreigners are not as eligible as the US-born children of US citizens. Nothing. But slimy Dale would like to throw out that principle too.
LMAO!!!! By the operation of the 14th amendment it only creates NBCs and naturalized citizens. People that are subject to a foreign power doesn't receive ipso facto citizenship, they must be naturalized. Why! Because they are subjects of and subject to the jurisdiction of another country and as wojar stated, the US only recognizes one allegiance, unless naturalized.
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#174273 Oct 8, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>Dale has overwhelmingly demonstrated that he is an incoherent schizophrenic spewing incoherent nonsense.
Dufus needs to have his dosage increased. Again
Dale

Wichita, KS

#174274 Oct 8, 2013
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
EVERY PERSON.
LMAO!!! Bingham was correct in 1869, the 14th amendment was ratified in 1868, citizenship doesn't go to a person who is not "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof", at birth.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#174275 Oct 8, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!!! By the operation of the 14th amendment it only creates NBCs and naturalized citizens. People that are subject to a foreign power doesn't receive ipso facto citizenship, they must be naturalized. Why! Because they are subjects of and subject to the jurisdiction of another country and as wojar stated, the US only recognizes one allegiance, unless naturalized.
At birth the US recognized Obama's immediate natural allegiance to the United States. British law was and is immaterial and had no force in the US.

Dale is several cards shy of a full deck.
Dale

Wichita, KS

#174276 Oct 8, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
So which are you the Walrus or the Eggman. F'ing psycho.
LMAO!!! Me? Hell, Obama has called me a "Conservative-Anarchist ", I can live with that!!! Hahahaha!!!!
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#174277 Oct 8, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Me? Hell, Obama has called me a "Conservative-Anarchist ", I can live with that!!! Hahahaha!!!!
OReaLY? You and Barry tip of few brews did you?
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#174278 Oct 8, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Me? Hell, Obama has called me a "Conservative-Anarchist ", I can live with that!!! Hahahaha!!!!
There is nothing "Conservative" about your delusion. You are an ultra-Liberal whack-job. Best change your ways
Dale

Wichita, KS

#174279 Oct 8, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
At birth the US recognized Obama's immediate natural allegiance to the United States. British law was and is immaterial and had no force in the US.
Dale is several cards shy of a full deck.
LMAO!!!! Obama's natural allegiance was the same as his father's, unless you can prove that Sr. wasn't his father.
Dale

Wichita, KS

#174280 Oct 8, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
OReaLY? You and Barry tip of few brews did you?
LMAO!!! I am very particular who I tip a few brews with, I don't drink with communist.
Dale

Wichita, KS

#174281 Oct 8, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
At birth the US recognized Obama's immediate natural allegiance to the United States. British law was and is immaterial and had no force in the US.
Dale is several cards shy of a full deck.
LMAO!!! Who need a full deck, when you play High Card Draw!
Dale

Wichita, KS

#174282 Oct 8, 2013
"unless naturalized", didn't need that. Just got carried away!!! Hahahaha!!!
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#174283 Oct 8, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Asked and answered. James Madison already gave the Play Justice the answer:“[P]lace is the most certain criterion [of allegiance].” He also mentioned that it is “what applies in the United States.” Chancellor Lewis Sandford confirmed that jus soli birthright citizenship was still the practice in 1844. James Kent, who was personally recommended by John Jay to be the first Professor of Law at Columbia, and who grew up during the Revolution noted in his Commentaries on American Law that natural born citizens were so born “without any regard or reference to the political condition or allegiance of their parents.” Bancroft’s History of the U.S.(1876) stated,“Everyone who first saw light on American soil was a natural-born American citizen.” Judge Pinckney McElwee quoted Frederick Van Dyne on “Citizenship of the United States”,(1904) pp.32 “It was almost universally conceded that citizenship by birth in the United States was governed by the principles of the English common law.” Congressional Record 14-June-1967, p. 15876. According to the distinguished scholar William Rawle in “A View of the Constitution of the United States,” 84-101 (2nd ed. 1829),“[E]very person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity.” And then the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment, John Bingham, Lyman Trumbull and Howard Jacob all clearly stated their agreement with citizenship by birth. Chief Justice John Marshall in Murray v. The Charming Betsy, 2 Cranch 64, 119 (1804) that all persons born in the United States were citizens thereof:“Whether a person born within the United States, or becoming a citizen according to the established laws of the country, can devest himself absolutely of that character otherwise than in such manner as may be prescribed by law, is a question which is not necessary at present to decide.”
Now if Play Justice wishes to disregard James Madison, John Marshall, James Kent, Lewis Sandford, William Rawle, Frederick Van Dyne, and every court of the United States he can throw a tantrum, jump up and down and insist I have not answered his question.
Who the F gives a crap?
<quoted text>
You're right, you didn't answer the question. I asked "you" why the U.S. would deem a child of two aliens an NBC. "You" have no answer. Enough said! LMAO run along now, lil fella

Apparently you give an F because you're replying! Dipshyt! LMAO
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#174284 Oct 8, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! I am very particular who I tip a few brews with, I don't drink with communist.
Thought so. Both you and your Kissin Cousin are afraid of a beer bottle. Stuck on Mommie's Milk are you?
Dale

Wichita, KS

#174285 Oct 8, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
There is nothing "Conservative" about your delusion. You are an ultra-Liberal whack-job. Best change your ways
LMAO!!! You mean I shouldn't have voted for Romney, or are you saying that Liberals are whack-jobs???
Forum

Carlsbad, NM

#174286 Oct 8, 2013
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama, having been born in the USA---as has been shown overwhelmingly---is a Natural Born US Citizen.
When a new President is in office,
Obama will be known for what he
has accomplished.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#174287 Oct 8, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
There is nothing "Conservative" about your delusion. You are an ultra-Liberal whack-job. Best change your ways
Ooooo....fluffybritches issues a threat! Good one!!! LMAO!!!
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#174288 Oct 8, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! You mean I shouldn't have voted for Romney, or are you saying that Liberals are whack-jobs???
Well you are certainly a.Whack-job. And being in KanSass, if you voted for Romney then you really deserve everything you've got
wojar

Bristol, CT

#174289 Oct 8, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
You're right, you didn't answer the question. I asked "you" why the U.S. would deem a child of two aliens an NBC. "You" have no answer. Enough said! LMAO run along now, lil fella
Apparently you give an F because you're replying! Dipshyt! LMAO
James Madison said it was the most certain criterion of allegiance. But Play Justice apparently does not like that answer since he chronically ignores it and whine that I didn't answer his pointless question. Why did they? Lewis Stanford addressed that question in Lynch v. Clarke. Go read for yourself the passage about the only standard that existed at the time. However, it doesn't really matter the reason because it is historical fact that birthright citizenship was the rule. Even in the case of Look Tin Sing, Justice Field lamented the inadequacy of the jus soli rule but was resigned to the reality that it was the law.
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#174290 Oct 8, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>Ooooo....fluffybritche s issues a threat! Good one!!! LMAO!!!
Threat? Yet another English word Romper doesn't comprehend. The list just keeps growing.
wojar

Bristol, CT

#174291 Oct 8, 2013
Even in the case of Look Tin Sing, Justice Field lamented the inadequacy of the jus soli rule but was resigned to the reality that it was the law.

The key word is reality, something of which birfoons have, at best, only the most tenuous grasp.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
Win a Free McDonalds Gift Card 6 min Gift Card Expert 1
AP Exclusive: Union members appointed after $10... (Mar '08) 7 min Union Corrupt 7,561
Abby 8-30 18 min edogxxx 2
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 21 min Rev Wright 1,100,246
Amy 8-30 27 min edogxxx 2
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 35 min gcaveman1 46,321
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 1 hr edogxxx 97,935
•••
•••

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 ]
•••