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
155,241 - 155,260 of 175,040 Comments Last updated 2 min ago
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175944
Oct 21, 2013
 
wojar wrote:
There was a meeting of the single parents club. The parents of the children had cookies and tea. Of course, according to Play Law parentS means both parents of each child were assembled at the meeting.
Birfoons could not pass a middle school English test.
I guess Daddy is at work, huh? Ok, this may be a little tough for you considering your age, but here goes. How many people are involved in the making of a baby?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175945
Oct 21, 2013
 
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Oh Jacqueau, did you see Sen. Cruz's welcoming home this weekend?
Texans Stick With Cruz Despite Defeat in Washington
By MANNY FERNANDEZ
Published: October 18, 2013
HOUSTON — Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas and the face of the angry right, has been criticized, lambasted and lampooned for putting the nation through a 16-day government shutdown and the prospect of a financial default.
Bloomberg Businessweek put him on its cover as a mad hatter who defines how “crazy is the new normal.” Representative Peter T. King, a Republican from New York, has said Republican leaders need to go after Mr. Cruz and accused him of bringing the country “to the edge of ruin.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/19/us/politics ...[BBpRPT]
In Texas, it is a different story.
<quoted text>
That's right. They are his constituents and they voted him in and can vote him out.
Now, can you explain how his filibuster of Sep. 24-15 shut down the government a week later as you claim?
You wrote : "Now, can you explain how his filibuster of Sep. 24-15 shut down the government a week later as you claim? ". Are you actually serious? You don't think he was the tea party ringleader of the whole thing, the one who made Speaker Boehner shake in his boots, the one who shut down the gov't? You think he did his ridiculous Dr Seuss filibuster and ended his anti-Obama and anti-citizen shutdown right there? Why was the congress shutting down the gov't? Why didn't Boehner allow a vote? Who was behind this disaster?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175946
Oct 21, 2013
 
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
I always carried spare light bulbs and a head light with me. One evening I was at a state scale and another trucker was asking for a lift to the next truck stop to by a head light as he was shut down. I told him if he had the $8 I would sell him mine. He did and I am sure he got on the road faster.
Oh, in most states cops will only shut down a private car if both headlights/ taillights are out but in most states they will shut down a commercial vehicle. And that is why I carried spares even though I never got shut down.
Personal anecdotes are fine, but they hardly give a while picture of the trucking industry in the U.S. and elsewhere.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175947
Oct 21, 2013
 
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess Daddy is at work, huh? Ok, this may be a little tough for you considering your age, but here goes. How many people are involved in the making of a baby?
If I were a praying man, I would pray you would abstain from making one.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175948
Oct 21, 2013
 
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
You wrote : "Now, can you explain how his filibuster of Sep. 24-15 shut down the government a week later as you claim? ". Are you actually serious? You don't think he was the tea party ringleader of the whole thing, the one who made Speaker Boehner shake in his boots, the one who shut down the gov't? You think he did his ridiculous Dr Seuss filibuster and ended his anti-Obama and anti-citizen shutdown right there? Why was the congress shutting down the gov't? Why didn't Boehner allow a vote? Who was behind this disaster?
ObobbleHead.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175949
Oct 21, 2013
 
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
If I were a praying man, I would pray you would abstain from making one.


Ah, but you're not, so your post is irrelevant as always. LMAO!

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175950
Oct 21, 2013
 
Justice LRS wrote:
There's that darn "S" again! LMAO!

FACT: In the SCOTUS decision, The Venus, 1814, Justice Marshall defines 'natural-born citizen' using Vattel's work, but in his own words saying,(#123)'Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says,'the citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or indigenes, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.'

Wrong.

The language that you cited in Venus 12 U.S. 253 (1814) was not part of majority opinion by Justice Washington but rather it was the concurring and dissenting opinion by Chief Justice Marshall in which Justice Livingston concurred. As such, the opinion of Chief Justice Marshall regarding Vattel was NOT THE OPINION OF THE COURT but rather his own opinion. Under the doctrine of stare decisis, an opinion by the majority is considered mandatory authority that is binding on lower courts; however, opinions expressed as concurring opinions are not mandatory but may be considered persuasive authority but they are by no means binding on lower courts.

In this case, Chief Marshall's concurring opinion is not mandatory authority since it was not the majority opinion but at best it was persuasive authority.

One of the best indicators that a concurring opinion was considered persuasive authority by later courts would be for these later courts to cite Chief Justice's concurring opinion. However, a search failed to show that any subsequent federal cases citing Chief Justice's concurring opinion.

As such, Chief Justice's concurring opinion has never been cited by later court cases and the only conclusion to be drawn is that Chief Justice's reliance on Vattel's definition of natives who are born in the country requiring two parents who are citizens has never been used as persuasive authority by later cases.

As a side note, Justice Story concurred with the majority but failed to concur with Justice Marshall

If Vattel were the source of our citizenship laws as you indicated then why didn't the drafters who according to you who were cognizant of the Vattel's "Law of Nations" just draft the following language of a person's eligibility to be president:

“No Person except a NATIVE born citizen,.....”

Why would the drafters insert natural born citizen instead of NATIVE born citizen since according to Vattel, NATIVE are those born in the country whose parents were citizens?

Unless, the drafters used the language borrowed from Blackstone concept of natural born subject by simply substituting the word citizen for subject.

FACT:

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175951
Oct 21, 2013
 
Justice LRS wrote:
There's that darn "S" again! LMAO!
FACT: The description of natural-born citizen was derived from Vattel's work, Law of Nations § 212
Wrong.

It was Blackstone's influence and not Vattel's influence that was the source of the natural born citizen term in the Constitution.

Blackstone noted the difference between Civil Law and Common Law regarding children born of aliens in England:

The children of aliens, born here in England, are, generally speaking, natural-born subjects, and entitled to all the privileges of such. In which the constitution of France differs from ours; for there, by their jus albinatus, if a child be born of foreign parents, it is an alien.(Commentaries of the Laws of England (1765)

The natural born citizen language in the Constitution is derived from its English Common Law counterpart natural born subject. This idea is based on courts understanding that the term citizen is analogous with term subject. "The term `citizen,' as understood in our law, is precisely analogous to the term `subject' in the common law, and the change of phrase has entirely resulted from the change of government."). Rather, the terms are meant to encompass persons living under distinct forms of government: "A monarchy has subjects; a republic has citizens.” Matimak Trading Co. v. Khalily, 118 F. 3d 76 , 85 (2nd Cir. 1997)

The court in Smith v. Alabama, 124 U. S. 465, 478 (1888) stated in clear and concise language the common law's influence in the Constitution: "The interpretation of the Constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law, and are to be read in the light of its history."

That at the time of the drafting of the Constitution the drafters were acquainted with Blackstone’s Commentaries including his definition of natural born subjects. Justice Stone observed:“It is noteworthy that Blackstone's Commentaries, more read in America before the Revolution than any other law book.” CJ Hendry Co. v. Moore, 318 US 133 , 151-152 (1943). Similarly, the court in United States v. Green, 140 F. Supp. 117, 120 (SD NY 1956) noted:“ Blackstone, whose Commentaries probably did much to influence the thinking of American lawyers at and before the time of the framing of the Federal Constitution.”

Moreover, "Blackstone's Commentaries had a wide circulation in America at the time of the Constitutional Convention. It is said that sixteen signers of the Declaration of Independence knew the book cover to cover. A source book of legal science, a landmark in law and literature. It is safe to say that it contents were familiar to every American lawyer in public life in 1789 and 1791. Sunray Oil Corp. v.Allbritton, 187 F.2d 475,478 (5th Cir. 1951)

As such, it is inconceivable for the framers of the Constitution to "import" a foreign idea of citizenship based on the bloodline of fathers and not based on the Jus Soli doctrine as enunciated by Lord Coke in Calvin’s Case and reaffirmed by Blackstone in his Commentaries whose book was required reading by lawyers in colonial America.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175952
Oct 21, 2013
 
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
The article says 80% but it's surely wrong, you say, it's more than 20%. Why would the ministry of transport people make that up? I'm not surprised, as rig accidents are on the rise - often, too many hours and defective eqpt - not the drivers' faults, as employers or contractors are very demanding. Ever looked at those big trucks and their tires, for example, when they stop at a stop light? Often just plain horrifying.
The inspectors talked of defective trucks, did not mention percentages.
Some twenty years ago the EDITOR of the Clayton County, GA newspaper claimed 65% of the county population was 65 years old or older and I wrote her demanding her source. She corrected herself the following week. It was only 14% and claimed the State of Georgia told her it was 65%. Commonsense would tell you it was no where near 65%!!!
Get some commonsense!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175953
Oct 21, 2013
 
Hey Jacqueau, do you know how many lights are on a typical 18-wheeler rig? 30-40! If one light is out, they may, or may not, write it up on a DOT inspection.
I would say about half the time I have been DOTed they have found a minor problem like a one marker light out. Is it possible that 80% of the trucks had a minor problem but were NOT shut down? YES!
But it is not logical that 80% where shut down. It does not pass the commonsense test. Something you Libtards seriously lack!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175954
Oct 21, 2013
 
Jacqueau, if you are going to travel over a thousand miles you are at least ten times safe flying in a scheduled aircraft carrier than driving. But do you know how many people refuse the fly as they think they are safer driving?
But you are four times safer driving than flying in a single-engine private plane (like I fly). But most private pilots do not have my experience as I do. But if someone does not want to fly with me I do not feel insulted.
Why my ex-wife only flew in a plane I was flying once in the 21 years we were together and she has been working for Delta Airlines for twenty years now. I had the chance to fly her in an Army helicopter but she declined.
By the law, you need the written permission from a general officer to fly an civilian in an Army aircraft and I did have permission.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175955
Oct 21, 2013
 
Oh, don't tell anyone but in Vietnam I "may" have flown a civilian catholic priest without permission because he had never flown before.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175956
Oct 21, 2013
 
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong.
The language that you cited in Venus 12 U.S. 253 (1814) was not part of majority opinion by Justice Washington but rather it was the concurring and dissenting opinion by Chief Justice Marshall in which Justice Livingston concurred. As such, the opinion of Chief Justice Marshall regarding Vattel was NOT THE OPINION OF THE COURT but rather his own opinion. Under the doctrine of stare decisis, an opinion by the majority is considered mandatory authority that is binding on lower courts; however, opinions expressed as concurring opinions are not mandatory but may be considered persuasive authority but they are by no means binding on lower courts.
In this case, Chief Marshall's concurring opinion is not mandatory authority since it was not the majority opinion but at best it was persuasive authority.
One of the best indicators that a concurring opinion was considered persuasive authority by later courts would be for these later courts to cite Chief Justice's concurring opinion. However, a search failed to show that any subsequent federal cases citing Chief Justice's concurring opinion.
As such, Chief Justice's concurring opinion has never been cited by later court cases and the only conclusion to be drawn is that Chief Justice's reliance on Vattel's definition of natives who are born in the country requiring two parents who are citizens has never been used as persuasive authority by later cases.
As a side note, Justice Story concurred with the majority but failed to concur with Justice Marshall
If Vattel were the source of our citizenship laws as you indicated then why didn't the drafters who according to you who were cognizant of the Vattel's "Law of Nations" just draft the following language of a person's eligibility to be president:
“No Person except a NATIVE born citizen,.....”
Why would the drafters insert natural born citizen instead of NATIVE born citizen since according to Vattel, NATIVE are those born in the country whose parents were citizens?
Unless, the drafters used the language borrowed from Blackstone concept of natural born subject by simply substituting the word citizen for subject.
FACT:
Parent"s"! Twinkerbelle.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175957
Oct 21, 2013
 
When we went on maneuvers sometimes people took things like lawn chairs or a portable TV. Once we had to go from Fort Sill, Oklahoma to Fort Irwin, California and we loaded the aircraft on a Friday and were to takeoff Monday morning. Our aircraft was loaded light.
On Monday I noticed we had a civilian Jeep CJ5 in the back which belonged to the pilot and off we went for a month in California. Our commander hit the roof but the pilot had violated no regulation. But the commander got even as when we were about to head home he informed my pilot that his personal vehicle will NOT be on any aircraft so he had to ship it back commercially.
Somethings are legal but may still piss off someone.
Obskeptic

Ferndale, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175958
Oct 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Stewart is too smart for guys like Carlson. Not in Stewart's league. Walked all over him.
Why is it that anyone that disagrees with a liberal is not only an idiot in their eyes, but they declare them to be liars as well? The democrats took on healthcare reform because they proclaimed that something must be done to cover the 30 million + uninsured in our country. It was also declared as reprehensible that we were the only industrialized nation in the world that does not provide healthcare for its citizens. So the democrats refuse to bring the republicans into the negotiations, and pass this law against the will of the people. They close out the republicans and refuse to incorporate any of their ideas into the law, therefore unable to muster a single republican vote in passing it. They bribe some democrats that were also resisting what they viewed as a socialist takeover of the system to buy their vote, and then pass it at midnight on Christmas eve. They lied in selling the law by using bogus CBO numbers, robbing medicare, claiming if you liked your coverage that you could keep it, and that the cost curve would be bending down. Now that it is law, the president selectively decides on his own who must adhere to it, and who gets special waivers and exemptions and no one on the left seems to care. They told us the interactive web site would cost less then 100 million, yet it has cost over 350 million and counting, and it doesn't work. Now we find out that by the governments own estimates, in 2020 there will be roughly 20 million Americans that will still be uninsured. This is a horror story and yet there are still folks that are confident the government should be controlling our healthcare, and that are still prepared to defend and support democrats. All of this brings a new meaning to the reality of what stuck on stupid means. Pathetic!
Obskeptic

Ferndale, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175959
Oct 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
You wrote : "Now, can you explain how his filibuster of Sep. 24-15 shut down the government a week later as you claim? ". Are you actually serious? You don't think he was the tea party ringleader of the whole thing, the one who made Speaker Boehner shake in his boots, the one who shut down the gov't? You think he did his ridiculous Dr Seuss filibuster and ended his anti-Obama and anti-citizen shutdown right there? Why was the congress shutting down the gov't? Why didn't Boehner allow a vote? Who was behind this disaster?
Can we at least be honest about the so called shut down. The government was not shut down. About 1/7th of it was given a two week paid vacation, and what was "furloughed" was selected to cause as much inconvenience as the president could inflict. The administration had been planning this political charade for months in advance, all by design to damage the republicans for the 2014 election cycle. The democrats are not done playing politics with the American peoples lives to benefit themselves, and there are enough useful idiots in the country to help them accomplish it, and that includes many republicans. The president told us that raising the debt ceiling does not mean we will take on more debt, which is nothing but a flat out lie. I think I figured out the inspiration Alicia Keyes had to write that song about how she likes the way he lies, while we all stand back and watch the country burn.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175960
Oct 21, 2013
 
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, but you're not, so your post is irrelevant as always. LMAO!
OMG, tell me you never made any.

Jacques from Ottawa wrote:

<quoted text>
If I were a praying man, I would pray you would abstain from making one.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175961
Oct 21, 2013
 
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Some twenty years ago the EDITOR of the Clayton County, GA newspaper claimed 65% of the county population was 65 years old or older and I wrote her demanding her source. She corrected herself the following week. It was only 14% and claimed the State of Georgia told her it was 65%. Commonsense would tell you it was no where near 65%!!!
Get some commonsense!!!
Was it you who mentioned apples and oranges? You compare an error in population make-up to a report on unsafe and un-roadworthy trucks? The EDITOR was corrected and that's it. NO ONE has corrected the ministry on the truck Hamilton findings. I said 50% were defective this morning, and I was intentionally lowballing it. I never dreamt it was 80%. Those giant trucking companies will cut corners, no laws too precious to break, to make a profit.

Oh, YOU asked the EDITOR for a source? YOU? Are you serious? Where are the sources I've asked you for?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175962
Oct 21, 2013
 
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Hey Jacqueau, do you know how many lights are on a typical 18-wheeler rig? 30-40! If one light is out, they may, or may not, write it up on a DOT inspection.
I would say about half the time I have been DOTed they have found a minor problem like a one marker light out. Is it possible that 80% of the trucks had a minor problem but were NOT shut down? YES!
But it is not logical that 80% where shut down. It does not pass the commonsense test. Something you Libtards seriously lack!!!
What's the matter with you? It's an official ministry of transport report. It mentioned brakes and unsecured loads and so forth. Position lights were not mentioned. Do you think they'd ground a truck because one of several tail lights was out? Do you feel targeted, guilty? And don't forget, I did not say you had the same situation in the U.S. I said I didn't know. You better find out before I do.
Obskeptic

Ferndale, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#175963
Oct 21, 2013
 
The president claims you can call the 800 number and get answers to your questions in 25 minutes or less. The number for the help line is 1-800-318-2596. That number can also be displayed as 1-800-F1U-CKYO. Once again the subtle, in your face hatred the democrats have for everyone, including the useful idiots that support and defend them. I believe this is no accident, but done by design. You democrats must be so proud.

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.

60 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min shinningelectr0n 1,082,921
IL Who do you support for Governor in Illinois in ... (Oct '10) 29 min nono 3,840
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 37 min andet1987 4,565
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 37 min Terry rigsby 48,984
Word (Dec '08) 38 min andet1987 4,589
Last word + 2 (Mar '12) 39 min andet1987 476
Scat Man 58 min Coonskin 1
Abby 7-29 2 hr j_m_w 16
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 4 hr Sublime1 97,573
•••
•••
•••

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 ]
•••