BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 243471 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

#182072 Dec 13, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>And no one but Dale knows what the 14th is about.
LMAO.
LMAO!!! Stay tuned, you might learn something.
Dale

United States

#182073 Dec 13, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>Irrelevant is a birfoon who doesn't understand the limitations imposed by his ignorance.
LMAO!!! You must be looking into a mirror.
Dale

United States

#182074 Dec 13, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
According to play law, aliens who are subject to taxation, are not taxed because if they were taxed it would burst his little bubble.
LMAO!!! I see all liberals have flunked the "taxed" issue. How does it feel to be numb between the ears? Oh, that is right, you can't feel, anything!
Dale

United States

#182075 Dec 13, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>Make believe law belongs to those in a make believe world.
LMAO!!! Now that is funny, especially coming from one that hasn't any idea what "taxed" means.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#182076 Dec 13, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Twelve people get shot by a gun-toting nut at movie theatre;
2. One day later, police spot a gun-toting nut with a pistol on his hip at a HOMOSEXUAL PRIDE FESTIVAL;
3. Police take the nut into custody;
4. Nut files a suit, nut wins as nutty and insane judge awards him $23,000.
People, what is wrong with that picture?
See United States Constitution for more information.
Truth Detector

Louisville, KY

#182077 Dec 13, 2013
Rest In Peace America, You are done. Taken out by a usurper!
America Got STUPID!
No laws apply to the usurper!
We have a metastasizing cancer on the pResidency.
We have become a banana republic on our path to becoming a totally communist nation,
America fell to the Obama error.
&fe ature=related
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#182078 Dec 13, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Birfoon, buffoon are the same as dumbazzbastard, dumbazzbitch, buttflapper etc? I can say mine anywhere, any audience, any public. Can YOU, birfoon buffoon birther?
Thanks for admitting it's the same exact thing regardless of the words used! joke
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#182079 Dec 13, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Why? did you feel targeted? Why? Tell me. Did I target anyone in particular? Is birther a bad name? Well, well, who knew.
Did you hear Speaker Boehner and what he had to say about the tea partyers who, after the near-default of the U.S. that they engineered, exclaimed "Oh, we didn't think it would work". Boehner even said of his republican tea partyers that they kept opposing bills that they did not, the tea partyers, understand. You want demeaning talk? Go see Boehner who, incidentally was much too nice to these nuts and tea party dinosaurs.
Birfoons, buffoons, birthers, the 3 Bs, yes, the THREE Bs, HA HA.
Did I feel targeted? Not at all. Just calling you out on your BS.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#182080 Dec 13, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
See United States Constitution for more information.
Oh yeah?

1. Constitution clearly mentions "belonging to a militia". What militia did this gun nut in the park beloing to? What militia do YOU belong to that allow you to have an arsenal at home?

2. Do you know that, and these are but a few examples, in places like London, Paris, Milan, Geneva, Berlin, Madrid, Sydney, Auckland, Brussels, etc etc, this nut with the gun on his hip would've been ARRESTED forthwith, dragged before a judge who would've thrown the book at him? You see nothing strange, weird, DANGEROUS, about a gun nut, like he was in Tombstone or OK Corral in 1860, with a gun in a holster, on his hip a day after a theatre massacre and with a gay festival is going on a few metres away? If you think that's par for the course, then you can't tell me there's nothing wrong with you.

Jacques from Ottawa wrote:

<quoted text>
1. Twelve people get shot by a gun-toting nut at movie theatre;
2. One day later, police spot a gun-toting nut with a pistol on his hip at a HOMOSEXUAL PRIDE FESTIVAL;
3. Police take the nut into custody;
4. Nut files a suit, nut wins as nutty and insane judge awards him $23,000.
People, what is wrong with that picture?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#182081 Dec 13, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Did I feel targeted? Not at all. Just calling you out on your BS.
Wrong again, and thank you for pointing out that I targeted no individual ( but, if the shoe fits...) and admitting that your vocabulary is vulgar and un-presentable and mine is NOT vulgar and presentable to ANYone.
Dale

United States

#182082 Dec 13, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh yeah?
1. Constitution clearly mentions "belonging to a militia". What militia did this gun nut in the park beloing to? What militia do YOU belong to that allow you to have an arsenal at home?
2. Do you know that, and these are but a few examples, in places like London, Paris, Milan, Geneva, Berlin, Madrid, Sydney, Auckland, Brussels, etc etc, this nut with the gun on his hip would've been ARRESTED forthwith, dragged before a judge who would've thrown the book at him? You see nothing strange, weird, DANGEROUS, about a gun nut, like he was in Tombstone or OK Corral in 1860, with a gun in a holster, on his hip a day after a theatre massacre and with a gay festival is going on a few metres away? If you think that's par for the course, then you can't tell me there's nothing wrong with you.
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Twelve people get shot by a gun-toting nut at movie theatre;
2. One day later, police spot a gun-toting nut with a pistol on his hip at a HOMOSEXUAL PRIDE FESTIVAL;
3. Police take the nut into custody;
4. Nut files a suit, nut wins as nutty and insane judge awards him $23,000.
People, what is wrong with that picture?
LMAO!!!
"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#182083 Dec 13, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!!
"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788
That is George Mason's opinion, and he's clearly wrong and in left field although left field had not been invented at that time

He declared : ""I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials.". Sure. The whole people? Including men, women and children, the sick, the old, the infirm, the deranged and mentally disabled? How very ridiculous.

Militias were normal at the époque of the 2nd amendment. There was no or very little regular and organised armed forces to thwart any possible British counter-attack against the colonies. There HAD to be militias. Not so today.:Passé. Finito. Did you even know that the U.K. is one of your closesst allies?

There is no excuse for an armed nut parading in a park. The U.S. supreme court reaffirmed the 2nd amendment and agree or not, it is affirmed and that's it , no use arguing with it. But that does not mean said 2nd amendment makes sense in the 21st century. Could you be the only civilized nation that's out of step?
"
Dale

United States

#182084 Dec 13, 2013
The 2nd Amendment has taxed each citizen with the responsibility of protecting this Constitutional Republic, from both foreign and domestic attacks.
Now with that said, where do you Socialists, Marxists and Communists stand, as I see it, on the wrong end of the gun.!!!
Dale

United States

#182085 Dec 13, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
That is George Mason's opinion, and he's clearly wrong and in left field although left field had not been invented at that time
He declared : ""I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials.". Sure. The whole people? Including men, women and children, the sick, the old, the infirm, the deranged and mentally disabled? How very ridiculous.
Militias were normal at the époque of the 2nd amendment. There was no or very little regular and organised armed forces to thwart any possible British counter-attack against the colonies. There HAD to be militias. Not so today.:Passé. Finito. Did you even know that the U.K. is one of your closesst allies?
There is no excuse for an armed nut parading in a park. The U.S. supreme court reaffirmed the 2nd amendment and agree or not, it is affirmed and that's it , no use arguing with it. But that does not mean said 2nd amendment makes sense in the 21st century. Could you be the only civilized nation that's out of step?
"
LMAO!!! It is our Constitutional Right to carry a weapon and to even think of changing that, would be Unconstitutional, that is plainly states in the 2nd amendment.
Now, those that use a firearm in the commitment of a crime should face the harshest punishment that a man can think of, prior to their death.
Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#182086 Dec 13, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! It is our Constitutional Right to carry a weapon and to even think of changing that, would be Unconstitutional, that is plainly states in the 2nd amendment.
Now, those that use a firearm in the commitment of a crime should face the harshest punishment that a man can think of, prior to their death.
How about a heavy machine gun? A bazooka? A tank?
Dale

United States

#182087 Dec 13, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
That is George Mason's opinion, and he's clearly wrong and in left field although left field had not been invented at that time
He declared : ""I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials.". Sure. The whole people? Including men, women and children, the sick, the old, the infirm, the deranged and mentally disabled? How very ridiculous.
Militias were normal at the époque of the 2nd amendment. There was no or very little regular and organised armed forces to thwart any possible British counter-attack against the colonies. There HAD to be militias. Not so today.:Passé. Finito. Did you even know that the U.K. is one of your closesst allies?
There is no excuse for an armed nut parading in a park. The U.S. supreme court reaffirmed the 2nd amendment and agree or not, it is affirmed and that's it , no use arguing with it. But that does not mean said 2nd amendment makes sense in the 21st century. Could you be the only civilized nation that's out of step?
"
LMAO!!! Of course the UK is one of our best allies. Hell, we have been their mercenaries for over 100 years.
Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#182088 Dec 13, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Obama isn't either, since he was born subject to his father's country of origin, just a fact.
He was born a dual citizen, like many US-born children. That does not affect his Natural Born Citizen status in the slightest.
Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#182089 Dec 13, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>Irrelevant!!! The moment of birth is the deciding factor and as you know children born in the US subject to a foreign power are not ipso facto citizens.
The only children born in the USA who are subject to a foreign power under US law are the children of foreign diplomats.

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? 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.

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 at the time? 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 was afraid of the 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"? Who says that the US-born children of foreigners are not created equal with the US born children of US citizens in terms of being eligible to be president? Only slimy Dale.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#182090 Dec 13, 2013
It looks like Ms Fuddy killed herself!!! The first thing the flight attendant tells you is NOT to inflate your PFD inside the cabin but wait until you exit the aircraft. Ms Fuddy, being a Libtard, immediately inflated her PFD while inside the cabin and then got pined on the ceiling and could not get out.
I just love Darwin unfortunately she was old enough to have reproduced her defective jeans.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#182091 Dec 13, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! It is our Constitutional Right to carry a weapon and to even think of changing that, would be Unconstitutional, that is plainly states in the 2nd amendment.
Now, those that use a firearm in the commitment of a crime should face the harshest punishment that a man can think of, prior to their death.
Great. Explain the latest one, today, Colorado again.

Says v: "would be Unconstitutional, that is plainly states in the 2nd amendment." Sorry, where's the militia?

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) 3 min Politico Incorrecto 1,762,493
Trump says Kids Over Medicated 2 hr MAGA 5
84 shootings in May 2 hr MAGA 3
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 5 hr INTO FARTS 64,687
Change one letter in the word (Apr '12) 11 hr The real Rudy 91
Change one letter in the word (Mar '12) 11 hr The real Rudy 109
Kennedy Lied and People Died and were enslaved. 16 hr Includes Bobby Ke... 31

Chicago Jobs

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages