BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 222795 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.

Dale

United States

#181977 Dec 12, 2013
Ellen1 wrote:
Continuing:
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. There isn’t 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 (remember them?), 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?
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.
There is NOTHING in the US Constitution or in the writings of any of the framers that says that the US-born children of US citizens are any better than the US-born children of foreigners. NOTHING.
And yet slimy Dale thinks that he can convince a few gullible people that the writers of the US Constitution (who never said any such thing) really believed that the US-born children of foreigners (such as perhaps your father or grandfather) are really not as good citizens as the US-born children of US-citizens.
Well, do you think that you are any better a US citizen than your father or grandfather? Do you think that George Washington, who never said any such thing, thought that your US-born ancestors who had foreign parents should be lower-level citizens than the children of US parents?(If Washington did think so, he could have said so--but he never did. So why assume that he did?) Why does slimy Dale want you to think that George Washington, who was not afraid of much, or Ben Franklin or Alexander Hamilton, or the others, was afraid of US-born children of foreigners-----such as your ancestors?
IF the writers of the Constitution had been afraid of the US-born children of foreigners, they would have said so, but they NEVER said so, so why assume that they were afraid? Why does slimy Dale want to throw out strict construction judicial interpretation AND libertarian principles, and ALSO throw out "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” Why slimy Dale?
LMAO!!! Hey, Nasty!!! Do we expect anymore from our naturalized citizens than we do from our Natural Born Citizens, what is that oath they take?
As we all know, children born in this country of alien fathers receive the citizenship of their father's country of origin, this would make them subject to a foreign power.
Dale

United States

#181978 Dec 12, 2013
Ellen1 wrote:
Continuing:
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. There isn’t 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 (remember them?), 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?
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.
There is NOTHING in the US Constitution or in the writings of any of the framers that says that the US-born children of US citizens are any better than the US-born children of foreigners. NOTHING.
And yet slimy Dale thinks that he can convince a few gullible people that the writers of the US Constitution (who never said any such thing) really believed that the US-born children of foreigners (such as perhaps your father or grandfather) are really not as good citizens as the US-born children of US-citizens.
Well, do you think that you are any better a US citizen than your father or grandfather? Do you think that George Washington, who never said any such thing, thought that your US-born ancestors who had foreign parents should be lower-level citizens than the children of US parents?(If Washington did think so, he could have said so--but he never did. So why assume that he did?) Why does slimy Dale want you to think that George Washington, who was not afraid of much, or Ben Franklin or Alexander Hamilton, or the others, was afraid of US-born children of foreigners-----such as your ancestors?
IF the writers of the Constitution had been afraid of the US-born children of foreigners, they would have said so, but they NEVER said so, so why assume that they were afraid? Why does slimy Dale want to throw out strict construction judicial interpretation AND libertarian principles, and ALSO throw out "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” Why slimy Dale?
Nasty!!! Under Constitutional construction, you better get yourself an amendment, if you want a dual-citizenship to be recognized. Trumbull made it very clear when he said, complete jurisdiction, not somewhat.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#181979 Dec 12, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not a cop fan, but to put Zimmerman and cops in the same category? How do you know Zimmerman killed in self defence? Oh, damn, sorry, I forgot, you and Justice ho ho LRs were on the scene , you saw it all.
Not false. Dismissed. Not the same thing. So were Al Capone's charges against him dismissed, except for income tax. Was he innocent? Was Zimmerman innocent?
So, two complaints you say were false? What about the other two? And you compare that with Martin's school report cards?
Ah, the jury ruled it was self defence!!!
Did I say anything about a "report Card" which is about his grades and has nothing to do with his conduct.
Why was he not attending the high school that was in his district? That's right, he was attending a high school that was not in his district and we still do not know why?!?
Dale

United States

#181980 Dec 12, 2013
Mr. TRUMBULL. The Senator from Ohio says they ought to be. If they are there and within the jurisdiction of Colorado, and subject to the laws of Colorado, they ought to be citizens; and that is all that is proposed. It cannot be said of any Indian who owes allegiance, partial allegiance if you please, to some other Government that he is “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.” Would the Senator from Wisconsin think for a moment of bringing a bill into Congress to subject these wild Indians with whom we have no treaty to the laws and regulations of civilized life? Would he think of punishing them for instituting among themselves their own tribal regulations? Does the Government of the United States pretend to take jurisdiction of murders and robberies and other crimes committed by one Indian upon another? Are they subject to our jurisdiction in any just sense? They are not subject to our jurisdiction. We do not exercise jurisdiction over them.[[[[[[[It is only those persons who come completely within our jurisdiction, who are subject to our laws, that we think of making citizens; and there can be no objection to the proposition that such persons should be citizens]]]]]]. It seems to me, sir, that to introduce the words suggested by the Senator from Wisconsin would not make the proposition any clearer than it is, and that it by no means embraces, or by any fair construction -- by any construction, I may say -- could embrace the wild Indians of the plains or any with whom we have treaty relations, for the very fact that we have treaty relations with them shows that they are not subject to our jurisdiction. We cannot make a treaty with ourselves; it would be absurd. I think that the proposition is clear and safe as it is.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#181981 Dec 12, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, the jury ruled it was self defence!!!
Did I say anything about a "report Card" which is about his grades and has nothing to do with his conduct.
Why was he not attending the high school that was in his district? That's right, he was attending a high school that was not in his district and we still do not know why?!?
Told you a thousand times, I thought the jury had no real choice but to declare the bum "not guilty" as there were no witnesses. Oh, except you and LRS . You two have written here like you were there. There can be no claim that he killed Martin in self-defence or not as there were no witnesses. Instead of saying "no on can tell what and how it happened", you jump to the bum's defence and speak of the incident like you were there. Blow by blow.

Whether he was in the right school or not, is that an excuse for killing him? Whether he consumed cannabis or not, sold it or not, was that sufficient to kill him? What about Zimmerman's two other "incidents?"

I repeat, hoping I'm wrong. Zimmerman will either maim or kill someone else. It's only a matter of time. Tell me, Rogue, and knowing the looney-tooney is armed, would you like to have a road-rage argument with him? Oh, I know, you'll reply you're also armed. Great response. OK corral revisited. What if it's someone else who is unarmed?

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

#181982 Dec 12, 2013
"To misquote Shakespeare, something is rotten in Gaza and it is tme to take out the trash"

US Senator Mark Kirk

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

#181983 Dec 12, 2013
Jacques,
That useless dirtbag Kirk has got to go.

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

#181984 Dec 12, 2013
Jacques,
Shakespeare is my favorite author.
I do not take kindly to him being misquoted.
loose

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#181985 Dec 12, 2013
loose cannon wrote:
Jacques,
That useless dirtbag Kirk has got to go.
Pourquoi tant en vouloir à Kirk? Que vous a-t-il fait?Ëtes-vous vraiment en Polynésie franpaise? Si vous ne connaissez pas le français, la vie ne doit pas être facile.

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

#181986 Dec 12, 2013
Jacques,
I shall return.
loose

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#181987 Dec 12, 2013
P.S. And if you have not a clue as to what I wrote in French, please don' use google translator. I was curious, tried it, OMG. And I actually thought they had improved !

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#181988 Dec 12, 2013
loose cannon wrote:
Jacques,
Shakespeare is my favorite author.
I do not take kindly to him being misquoted.
loose
You wrote : "Shakespeare is my favorite author."

TALK ABOUT CLICHÉS. That was the mother of them all.
Grand Birther

Painesville, OH

#181990 Dec 12, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Still having problems with "taxed", I see.
No, aliens have never been subject to the US Constitution, if they were, they would be called, citizens.
Since when don't aliens pay taxes?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#181991 Dec 12, 2013
Rogue :

From your fav, Wikipedia on Zimmerman:

Other encounters with police

Beyond the 2012 Martin shooting, Zimmerman has had other encounters with the law, including two incidents in 2005, and five incidents in 2013.[26]

In July of 2005, when he was 21, Zimmerman was arrested after shoving an undercover alcohol-control agent while a friend of Zimmerman's was being arrested for underage drinking. The officer alleged that Zimmerman had said, "I don't care who you are," followed by a profanity, and had refused to leave the area after the officer had shown their badge.[27] The charges were subsequently dropped when Zimmerman entered a pre-trial diversion program that included anger-management classes.[3][28] Also in 2005, Zimmerman's ex-fiancée filed a restraining order against him, alleging domestic violence. Zimmerman requested a reciprocal restraining order. Both orders were granted.[3][29] These incidents were raised by prosecutors at Zimmerman's initial bond hearing. The judge described them as "run of the mill."[30][31]

On September 9, 2013, in Lake Mary, Florida, police responded to a 9-1-1 call by Zimmerman's estranged wife, who reported that Zimmerman had threatened her and her father with a gun and had punched her father in the face. Zimmerman was briefly detained and questioned by police.[32] No gun was found at the scene. Police took a broken iPad from the scene for examination of a video recording of the incident to determine whether to press charges against either Zimmerman or his wife.[33] His wife declined to press charges and said that she had not actually seen a gun but had assumed Zimmerman had had a gun from his stance and the way he was putting his hand in his shirt. She said, in a subsequent interview on the Today show, "In hindsight I should've [pressed charges], and I really regret that, but I'm on probation and the officers made it very clear that day if I pressed charges we were all going to go to jail and I would've been the only one to stay there."[34] After determining that the iPad video could not be recovered, the Lake Mary police department announced they would not be pressing charges against Zimmerman, his wife, or her father.[35]

On November 18, 2013, Zimmerman's girlfriend called the police alleging that after she had asked Zimmerman to leave her home, he had pointed a shotgun at her and begun breaking her belongings.[36] When the police arrived on the scene and met her outside, Zimmerman initially would not let them inside or speak with them and instead called 9-1-1 himself, saying that he had nothing to say to the police and just wanted "everyone to know the truth".[37][38] The police subsequently reported that Zimmerman had barricaded himself inside the apartment before they had made their way inside and arrested him.[39] He was charged with aggravated assault with a weapon – a felony – as well as domestic violence battery and criminal mischief.[38][40] Zimmerman obtained the services of Chief Seminole County Public Defender Jeff Dowdy,[41] and Assistant public defender Daniel Megaro,[42]who said that Zimmerman was indigent with about $2.5 million in debt.[43] On November 25, 2013, The Orlando Sentinel reported that Zimmerman, despite being legally indigent, had discharged the public defender's office in favor of Jayne Weintraub, a south Florida attorney who has done legal commentary on cable.[44]His arraignment was scheduled for January 7, 2014.[43] On December 6, his girlfriend requested that the charges be dropped, and the restraining order be lifted.[45] On December 11, prosecutors announced they would not press charges due to Samantha Scheibe's decision not to cooperate and the lack of other corroborating evidence.[46]

==========
==========

I said 4 incidents. Well, looks like it's SEVEN. As I said before, Rogue, where there's smoke, there's fire. Only a matter of time before your hero...
Learn to Read

United States

#181992 Dec 12, 2013
Grand Birther wrote:
<quoted text>Since when don't aliens pay taxes?
Since Dufus was appointed "big giant head"

“A proud Kentuckian ”

Since: Aug 13

At Your Mama's House

#181993 Dec 12, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Still having problems with "taxed", I see.
No, aliens have never been subject to the US Constitution, if they were, they would be called, citizens.
That is as ignorant of a statement as I have ever seen.
I assume the "LMAO" in every post indicates you are jesting with us? Pretending to be the stereotypical ignorant teabagger for laughs?
BTW Any above board income made by aliens is taxed the same as yours and mine (If they have no SS number they can use a TIN).
Phil Shifley

Coffeyville, KS

#181994 Dec 12, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
Rogue :
From your fav, Wikipedia on Zimmerman:
Other encounters with police
Beyond the 2012 Martin shooting, Zimmerman has had other encounters with the law, including two incidents in 2005, and five incidents in 2013.[26]
In July of 2005, when he was 21, Zimmerman was arrested after shoving an undercover alcohol-control agent while a friend of Zimmerman's was being arrested for underage drinking. The officer alleged that Zimmerman had said, "I don't care who you are," followed by a profanity, and had refused to leave the area after the officer had shown their badge.[27] The charges were subsequently dropped when Zimmerman entered a pre-trial diversion program that included anger-management classes.[3][28] Also in 2005, Zimmerman's ex-fiancée filed a restraining order against him, alleging domestic violence. Zimmerman requested a reciprocal restraining order. Both orders were granted.[3][29] These incidents were raised by prosecutors at Zimmerman's initial bond hearing. The judge described them as "run of the mill."[30][31]
On September 9, 2013, in Lake Mary, Florida, police responded to a 9-1-1 call by Zimmerman's estranged wife, who reported that Zimmerman had threatened her and her father with a gun and had punched her father in the face. Zimmerman was briefly detained and questioned by police.[32] No gun was found at the scene. Police took a broken iPad from the scene for examination of a video recording of the incident to determine whether to press charges against either Zimmerman or his wife.[33] His wife declined to press charges and said that she had not actually seen a gun but had assumed Zimmerman had had a gun from his stance and the way he was putting his hand in his shirt. She said, in a subsequent interview on the Today show, "In hindsight I should've [pressed charges], and I really regret that, but I'm on probation and the officers made it very clear that day if I pressed charges we were all going to go to jail and I would've been the only one to stay there."[34] After determining that the iPad video could not be recovered, the Lake Mary police department announced they would not be pressing charges against Zimmerman, his wife, or her father.[35]
==========
==========
I said 4 incidents. Well, looks like it's SEVEN. As I said before, Rogue, where there's smoke, there's fire. Only a matter of time before your hero...
Edited your post for space....
What is up with the obsession with Zimmerman? Who cares??? Why do you care??? Have you read the news lately and found anything else of importance to be concerned with that might be slightly more important?

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

#181995 Dec 12, 2013
Jacques,
That fake sign language guy sure pulled a fast one on the Secret Service.
Apparently, he was paid the handome sum of $85 dollars to do the historical event.

There's just something twistedly comedic about the whole thing.
Something Satuday Night Live woud do today.

It seemed like sort of a raucus event, from what little I saw.

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

#181996 Dec 12, 2013
raucous: boisterous and disorderly

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#181997 Dec 12, 2013
Phil Shifley wrote:
<quoted text>
Edited your post for space....
What is up with the obsession with Zimmerman? Who cares??? Why do you care??? Have you read the news lately and found anything else of importance to be concerned with that might be slightly more important?
I have to say you're right. I was replying to Rogue who brought it up out of nowhere. I should have passed. Thanks for the reminder.

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) 1 min John Galt 1,420,435
Science proves negroes closer to apes than humans. 28 min NB Forrest 7
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 42 min RACE 3,052
abby8-30-16 44 min RACE 3
here we go - now i suppose we will see full cou... 59 min no sports fan 4
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr Actual Science 61,084
Four letter word game (Dec '11) 1 hr GEORGIA 1,951

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages