BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 242538 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.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#179203 Nov 12, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Sen. Feinstein turns on Obama!!! She is a very Blue senator in a very Blue state and she is NOT up for reelection next year but she has called out Obama!! Things are looking really bad for Obummer Boy!!! In fact he has been castrated!
Dianne Feinstein joins push to keep health plans
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/dianne-...
Because she pushed for keeping plans, she's against Obama? As is Clinton? How easily you fall for that crap. You know, Democrats are allowed to diverge now and then with their leadership, UNLIKE the republicans who unanimously voted , yes, ALL REPUBLICANS in congress and the senate , to the last one, voted AGAINST Obamacare. Sheep? Hmmm, those Repub make sheep look like lions.
Democracynow org

Brooklyn, NY

#179204 Nov 12, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll bet Chirac was impressed !
I'm sure Chirac was wondering how did this ignoramus of a man become the nominee of the Republican party.

lol

========

The pessimist was right / Bush wanted to sodomized bin Laden
In retrospect, Sharon would have done well to listen to the reservations of his friend and admirer, who wrote this book./ Feb. 15, 2007 / http://tinyurl.com/keok3lz
Speaking of George Bush, with whom Sharon developed a very close relationship, Uri Dan recalls that Sharon's delicacy made him reluctant to repeat what the president had told him when they discussed Osama bin Laden. Finally he relented. And here is what the leader of the Western world, valiant warrior in the battle of cultures, promised to do to bin Laden if he caught him: "I will screw him in the ass!"
http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/week-s-end/the...
Democracynow org

Brooklyn, NY

#179205 Nov 12, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Seems your principal anatomical interests are Clinton's penis and young female soldiers' periods and their sanitary napkins.
That was in the mind of Newt Gingrich also.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Scottsdale, AZ

#179206 Nov 12, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Oh, this is from your favorite person about the Law of Nations.
Document 11
James Kent, Commentaries 1:1--4, 15--19, 171--76
1826
When the United States ceased to be a part of the British empire, and assumed the character of an independent nation, they became subject to that system of rules which reason, morality, and custom had established among the civilized nations of Europe, as their public law.
Dale fantasizes that Kent redefined common law as civil law, even though he recognized the distinction throughout his career.

And Dufus Dale fantasizes that a quote from a chapter on the Law of Nations is pertinent to the common law as understood by Kent as it pertained to citizenship? What is in Dale's Kool-Aid?

Hey Dale, how about reading from the pertinent chapter?

OF ALIENS AND NATIVES

"Natives are all persons born within the jurisdiction of the United States." "Allegiance accrued to the state in which he was born."

And BTW, Dale, Kent understood jurisdiction according to its standard definition, not the Play Law definition. Duh!

"It was admitted that this claim of the state to the allegiance of all persons born within its territories" (That means Dufus, if you're within the territories of the sovereign (king or government), you are under the jurisdiction, thereof. Duh!)

----------
"James Kent was a U.S. attorney, judge, and scholar who played a central role in adapting the Common Law of England into the common law of the United States."

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...

Ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Civil law and common law are quite distinct.

What a f'cking moron.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Giving up on defending his blathering on the self contradictory assertion that Vattel's rule is common law, Dufus goes into an Irwin Corey impersonation.
<quoted text>

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Scottsdale, AZ

#179207 Nov 12, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Oh, this is from your favorite person about the Law of Nations.
Document 11
James Kent, Commentaries 1:1--4, 15--19, 171--76
1826
When the United States ceased to be a part of the British empire, and assumed the character of an independent nation, they became subject to that system of rules which reason, morality, and custom had established among the civilized nations of Europe, as their public law.
Wowee Zowee, when the US became an independent nation its international relations were considered in respect to international law rather than as a vassal of the British. In Dufus Dale's world, that means common law became civil law and civil law became common law and I am you and you are me and we and she and he are all together. Hoo hoo cachoo!

Moron.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Giving up on defending his blathering on the self contradictory assertion that Vattel's rule is common law, Dufus goes into an Irwin Corey impersonation.
<quoted text>

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Scottsdale, AZ

#179209 Nov 12, 2013
"During his time on the court, Kent addressed the then burning issue of whether English precedents could claim the authority of law in the United States. Some members of the New York bar felt that the American Revolution would be unfinished until the United States had a body of law of its own, untainted by the laws of its former imperial master.

Kent disagreed. He argued that the predictability of justice was an indispensable requirement for achieving the commercial progress and stable social order sought by the Federalists. He further suggested that citation and the following of precedent were the best means to judicial predictability. Like many Federalists he admired the stability of the English common law and he maintained that it was the best system ever devised to ensure justice and order. Although he did not follow precedent blindly, Kent believed that previous decisions should not be expressly overturned except when absolutely necessary."

But according to Dufus Dale Kent didn't know the difference between common law and civil law.

Pathetic.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Scottsdale, AZ

#179210 Nov 12, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Good try, but no cigar!!
As a sovereign nation we made the decision as to who would be citizens of the US, they are those born/naturalized here and subject only to the jurisdiction, thereof.
And the pathetic Dufus does not comprehend that the child born of aliens in the US (not the child of foreign diplomats) is completely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at the moment of birth.

100%. It's US law.
wojar wrote:
And Dale reverts back to his "every nation is sovereign but the US where citizenship is governed by foreign law" fantasy.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#179212 Nov 12, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Everything? If you believe that everything side A proposes or will agree to is wrong or destructive then you are as myopic as the rest of the "us v them" crowd and I'm sure you'd call Reagan a RINO as well
EVERYTHING the dems and Obumbles have proposed is to redistribute wealth, that's all they're interested in domestically. Name something they've done otherwise that repubs oppose.

Higher taxes,less freedom, more giveaways.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#179213 Nov 12, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think that the current tax rates are unreasonable?
Yes $500 billion in welfare is excessive. So is a couple trillion in corporate welfare. So is refusing to talk to "them" out of fear you may agree on something
There is no couple of trillion in corporate welfare, you've been misled and are confused, I'll be happy to educate you. For your information virtually every lib on here[besides you, so far] is a coward, they refuse to discuss anything.

The tax imbalance I see is millions who pay NO federal taxes, yet receive checks from the treasury. The rich pay a very large proportion of the taxes already, so do the middle class.

Back to your spurious claim corps. receive trillions in welfare.

1. no tax dollars are given to corps. or the "rich". What happens is tax breaks and tax credits, put into law by both parties.

2. the massive stacks of federal laws on the books concern exactly that, 90% are tax issues[breaks, credits] that have been put into law.

3.

Manipulating who pays what is the main concern of all members of congress. Of both parties.

4. welfare/charity to the poor is actual dollars taken from taxpayers, put in the treasury and then handed out to the poor.

Hopefully this has been useful to you.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#179215 Nov 12, 2013
We need to have a law requiring any member of congress and the president to have actually read every word of a bill before being allowed to vote on it. Don't read it, don't vote.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#179216 Nov 12, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
I've previously explained some of the issues / objections that I have with ACA. That said, when it became apparent that something was going to pass I would have worked to improve it (my country matters more to nec than the next election). I also would not have wasted tax payer funds on nearly 40 meaningless "repeal" votes
What taxpayer funds were wasted on those 40 votes? How much was spent by chief executive Obumbles keeping people out of outside national monuments? That was pure spite, pettiness, vindictiveness towards the American people.

Do we need federal employees to see the Washinton Monument?

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#179217 Nov 12, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way. Is requiring useless medical tests for pregnant women your idea of less Government and not inserting Uncle Sam between your wife and her doctor?
I'm pro choice.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#179218 Nov 12, 2013
Pdamerica org wrote:
<quoted text>
I appreciate you used the word Democrats instead of liberal.
Todays Democrats are LINOs Liberal In Name Only.
The Democratic silence speaks volumes concerning Single Payer instead of Obamacare.
---------
The liberals sold out just like the Tea Bags did.
A viable third and fourth party is the only way out of this mess that these two corrupt parties ruined.
They ruined our American way of life and continue to do so with each passing day.
==========
Can You Afford To Retire? Video / http://tinyurl.com/h8xdx
The baby boomer generation is headed for a shock as it hits retirement: many of them will be long on life expectancy but short on savings. The two main strategies for funding retirement -- lifetime pensions and 401(k)-style savings plans -- are in serious trouble. In "Can You Afford to Retire?" FRONTLINE correspondent Hedrick Smith ("Is Wal-Mart Good for America?") investigates this looming financial crisis and the outlook for middle-class Americans.(more)»
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/retir...
-------
How the Bush Family Makes a Killing from George’s Presidency
25 Oct 2006 / http://tinyurl.com/y47o57 / It's good to be a Bush
Halliburton scored almost $1.2 billion in revenue from contracts related to Iraq in the third quarter of 2006, leading one analyst to comment: "Iraq was better than expected ... Overall, there is nothing really to question or be skeptical about. I think the results are very good."
Very good indeed. An estimated 655,000 dead Iraqis, over 3,000 dead coalition troops, billions stolen from Iraq’s coffers, a country battered by civil war - but Halliburton turned a profit, so the results are very good.
Very good certainly for Vice President Dick Cheney, who resigned from Halliburton in 2000 with a $33.7 million retirement package (not bad for roughly four years of work). In a stunning conflict of interest, Cheney still holds more than 400,000 stock options in the company. Why pursue diplomacy when you can rake in a personal fortune from war?
Yet Cheney isn’t the only one who has benefited from the Bush administration’s destructive policies. The Bush family has done quite nicely too. Just a few examples:
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1025-21.h...
You dont know wtf ur talking about and yur a borderline lunatic.
If you want to see who cashed in see Clinton and Al jazeera Al Gore.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#179219 Nov 12, 2013
Pdamerica org wrote:
<quoted text>
For the most part Republicans are gangsters and Democrats are racketeers who do not represent 99% of all Americans.
Our tax code is over 76,000 pages because both corrupt parties use it to benefit their corporate donors.
==========
Perfectly Legal: The Covert Campaign to Rig our Tax System to Benefit the Super Rich- and Cheat Everyone Else
http://tinyurl.com/3ptn5qm / May 18, 2004
One of the country's top investigative reporters reveals how the richest people within the top 1 percent of the country has rigged the tax code and other laws in its favor.
Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter David Cay Johnston has been breaking pieces of this story on the front page of The New York Times for nine years, work for which one business school professor calls him ìthe de facto chief tax enforcement officer of the United Statesî. With Perfectly Legal, he puts the whole shocking narrative together in a way that will stir up media attention and make readers angry about the state of our country. And he has sound advice on what to do.
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/181339-1
---------
Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense /(And Stick You with the Bill)
January 18, 2008 / http://tinyurl.com/2yequa
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist David Cay Johnston joins us to talk about his new book,“Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense (And Stick You with the Bill).” Johnston reveals how government subsidies and new regulations have quietly funneled money from the poor and the middle class to the rich and politically connected.
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/18/free_lu...
You can't mean that, except the part about the crooked, dishonest,criminal, lying dirtbag dems in the government.

Funneled what money from the poor? They don't pay any money.
Me thinks you're seen too many Oliver Stone movies.
Dale

Wichita, KS

#179220 Nov 12, 2013
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
As a sovereign nation we did indeed make a decision as to who would be citizens, and who would be Natural Born Citizens, and Bingham and Rawle and ten appeals courts all say the same thing about the definition of Natural Born. It includes EVERY child born in the USA regardless of the citizenship of the parents, regardless of whether the child was a dual citizen at birth (or even a dual citizen when eligible to be president);;
"Therefore every 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."---William Rawle, A VIEW OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 2d ed.(1829)
“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)”
More reading on the subject:
http://www.fredthompsonsamerica.com/2012/07/3...
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyiname...
http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:/www.obama...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-cit...
http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_eviden...
Irrelevant!!! The Constitution says who will be citizens of the US, those that are only subject to the jurisdiction, thereof.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#179221 Nov 12, 2013
Pdamerica org wrote:
<quoted text>
Twenty-five people at the heart of the meltdown
26 January 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/bwrl8l
The worst economic turmoil since the Great Depression is not a natural phenomenon but a man-made disaster in which we all played a part. In the second part of a week-long series looking behind the slump, Guardian City editor Julia Finch picks out the individuals who have led us into the current crisis
1. Alan Greenspan, chairman of US Federal Reserve 1987- 2006 2. Mervyn King, governor of the Bank of England 3. Bill Clinton, former US president 4. Gordon Brown, prime minister 5. George W Bush, former US president 6. Senator Phil Gramm 7. Abby Cohen, Goldman Sachs chief US strategist 8. Kathleen Corbet, former CEO, Standard & Poor's 9. Hank" Greenberg, AIG insurance group 10. Andy Hornby, former HBOS boss
11. Sir Fred Goodwin, former RBS boss 12. Steve Crawshaw, former B&B boss
13. Adam Applegarth, former Northern Rock boss 14. Dick Fuld, Lehman Brothers chief executive 15. Ralph Cioffi and Matthew Tannin 16. Lewis Ranieri 17. Joseph Cassano, AIG Financial Products 18. Chuck Prince, former Citi boss 19. Angelo Mozilo, Countrywide Financial 20. Stan O'Neal, former boss of Merrill Lynch
21. Jimmy Cayne, former Bear Stearns boss 22. Christopher Dodd, chairman, Senate banking committee 23. Geir Haarde, Icelandic prime minister 24. The American public
25. John Tiner, FSA chief executive, 2003-07 26. Andrew Lahde 27. John Paulson, hedge fund boss 28. Professor Nouriel Roubini 29. Warren Buffett, billionaire investor 30. George Soros, speculator 31. Stephen Eismann, hedge fund manager 32. Meredith Whitney, Oppenheimer Securities
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jan/2...
The bankruptcy barons
27 January 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/bb9fax
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jan/2...
Was Clinton, Carter, Obama, Frank and Dodd on that list? How about the millions who took out loans they couldn't afford and had no skin in their mortgages? So they could walk away with impunity?

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#179222 Nov 12, 2013
Pdamerica org wrote:
<quoted text>
Your own post proves that BOTH parties do not represent "We The People".
Too big to fail will happen again.
==========
Government Bailouts: A U.S. Tradition Dating to Hamilton
SEPTEMBER 20, 2008 / http://tinyurl.com/ygk788s
The bubble pops. Lenders freeze. Depositors lose faith. Panic spreads. And the government steps in because nobody else will.
Today it is Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke putting together the rescue package for a financial system rocked by falling home prices and a wave of defaults on subprime mortgages.
But a short walk through U.S. history demonstrates the point made by Alex J. Pollock of the American Enterprise Institute: "If you would like an empirical law of government behavior, it is that in a panic or threatened financial collapse, governments intervene -- every government, every party, every country, every time."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1221866620360...
---------
The Big Takeover / The Socialist Bailout of Wall Street
The global economic crisis isn't about money - it's about power. How Wall Street insiders are using the bailout to stage a revolution
Mar 22, 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/mblrxrs
It's over — we're officially, royally fucked. No empire can survive being rendered a permanent laughingstock, which is what happened as of a few weeks ago, when the buffoons who have been running things in this country finally went one step too far. It happened when Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was forced to admit that he was once again going to have to stuff billions of taxpayer dollars into a dying insurance giant called AIG, itself a profound symbol of our national decline — a corporation that got rich insuring the concrete and steel of American industry in the country's heyday, only to destroy itself chasing phantom fortunes at the Wall Street card tables, like a dissolute nobleman gambling away the family estate in the waning days of the British Empire.
https://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/03/22-...
I was against the bailout, let them fail I said. No one listened to me however.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#179223 Nov 12, 2013
Pdamerica org wrote:
<quoted text>
The Dirty Dozen
Meet the bankers and brokers responsible for the financial crisis - and the officials who let them get away with it / Mar 25, 2009 /
The Enabler ALAN GREENSPAN / The Pioneer SANDY WEILL
The Ideologue PHIL GRAMM / The Arsonist JOE CASSANO
The Bagman ROBERT RUBIN / The Card Shark JIMMY CAYNE / Mr. Buck Passer CHRISTOPHER COX / The Predator ANGELO MOZILO / The Decorator JOHN THAIN / The Maestro HENRY PAULSON / The Big Loser DICK FULD / Mr. Too Big KEN LEWIS /
https://umdrive.memphis.edu/rblanton/public/P...
--------
John McCain’s friend Fred Dalton Thompson : enabled S & L crisis of '80s
Please spread the word....this is not the type of man we want as President.
In 1975, Thompson began his eighteen year engagement as a lobbyist in Washington, D.C., eventually representing clients including Westinghouse, General Electric (the current corporate owner of the NBC Universal-NBC television network), Westinghouse used to own CBS TV and the Tennessee Savings and Loan League
By 1982, Thompson worked the U.S. Congress membership as a lobbyist for passage of the Savings and Loan deregulation legislation desired by the Tennessee Savings and Loan League --- in this case, federal deregulation legislation allowing for additional government support of ailing S&Ls; giving U.S. thrifts the freedom to invest in potentially more profitable, but riskier, ventures; and eliminating interest-rate ceilings on new accounts to increase S&Ls' competitiveness.
Enacted into law during in September 1982, the Senate bill pushed by Thompson was incorporated into the Garn - St Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982.
The Garn - St Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 is widely credited with having laid the groundwork for the U.S. Savings and Loan crisis of the late 1980s
The savings and loans crashes of the 1980s, themselves directly the result of Reagan’s deregulation of the banking industry, is more interesting because of how it reflects the rapacious nature of unbridled capitalism than of Neil Bush himself. Who by the way, is now embroiled in another scam with his latest venture, educational software, Ignite
(turnover $20 million, much of it from educational subsidies obtained in the state of Florida ,where,‘coincidentally’ of course, his bro Jeb Bush, was governor).
I don't absolve any of these miscreants, however without government[dem] meddling, government coercion and the CRA, none of it would have happened.

Why would lending institutions loan money to people who have bad credit, crap jobs, no down payment?

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#179224 Nov 12, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
And Frank weighs in with absolutely nothing. As always
not really, he had good points imo.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#179225 Nov 12, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
All your posts are birther posts.
Translation- you got nothing
The Americans are talking, perhaps you should get lost, jockstrap. Start a thread on that fat drunken druggie mayor.

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) 9 min The Don 1,583,199
Please 3 hr ThomasA 7
Jonny's Towing is Chicagoland's Most Crooked Co... (Feb '17) 3 hr Ricardo montobomb 73
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 4 hr Agents of Corruption 63,948
News Uber driver accused of locking female rider ins... 5 hr Silly Midbags 2
sex crimes time to tell 5 hr Silly Boobaps 2
last post wins! (Apr '13) 6 hr Hatti_Hollerand 2,610

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages