BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 189906 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.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#182208 Dec 14, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
That is correct idiot. Such a small manchild.
Article V says you're a moron.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
In Birfoonistan, "shall not be infringed" means shall not be amended or repealed.
Sad. Please grow a brain.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#182209 Dec 14, 2013
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Bingham and Trumbull, who actually WROTE the 14th Amendment, disagree with you.
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.
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.
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. Why slimy Dale? Why?
And if the founders intended only strict construction would not they have said so?

Strict vs broad construction of the necessary and proper clause has never been settled.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#182210 Dec 14, 2013
Jim Shortz wrote:
enough with this controversy already
obama's kenyan birth certificate is 100% authentic
Is that the one you found in your box of Cracker Jacks?

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#182211 Dec 14, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Does that alien lose his citizenship, while in the US? I would say, no. That would mean, he is not subject to the jurisdiction of the US Constitution, which is the law of the land, this is why we have reciprocal treaties.
It would mean he is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States if you conflate jurisdiction and citizenship, applying a definition that breaks down and has never been the law in this country or in any other country -- except Birfoonistan.

Again, your fantasy breaks down. Your concept of jurisdiction violates the principle of sovereignty. A child could see that. Why can't Dale?
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
According to US law a person born in the US with a foreign father owes allegiance to the US. That person does not owe allegiance to a FOREIGN COUNTRY UNDER UNITED STATES LAW.
For example, a child born in New York to a US citizen mother and German father is a natural born US citizen who owes allegiance to the US under US law. There is no provision under US law requiring that individual to owe any allegiance whatsoever to Germany. That is what is meant by not "recognizing" dual citizenship de jure.
The fact that de jure dual citizenship does not exist in the US does not preclude the reality of de facto dual citizenship. It's really not a difficult concept, except for infantile play law aficionados operating at the level of young children and who believe that the constitution precludes what was understood at the time of the founding and ever since,
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#182212 Dec 14, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Any provision of any law or constitutional amendment is only valid and enforceable while the law or amendment is in effect. Repeal the amendment and there is no legal right to be infringed.
That's elementary, Play Justice.
<quoted text>
But it hasn't been repealed nor will it be. Guess the founding fathers didn't really care about your opinion on the matter. LMAO!
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#182213 Dec 14, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Article V says you're a moron.
<quoted text>
Sorry, I thought you were dealing in terms of reality.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#182214 Dec 14, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that the one you found in your box of Cracker Jacks?
That's where his real one was found! At least it was, until a mysterious fire destroyed the Cracker Jack Factory and burned up his original! Damn, the luck!

BTW, need any real estate advice? LMAO!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#182215 Dec 14, 2013
Adams recalled later that he had taken his oath of office on a book of law rather than the Bible itself.[1] This may have been common practice at the time; there is no concrete evidence that any president from John Adams to John Tyler used a Bible to swear the oath.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inauguration_of_...

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#182216 Dec 14, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, I thought you were dealing in terms of reality.
According to Article V only certain provisions of the constitution cannot be amended, and amendments are not on the list.

Sorry loser.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Article V says you're a moron.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#182217 Dec 14, 2013
Damn, more Global Warming. Silly me, I thought winter did not start until December 21st!!!

Rare storm leaves Jerusalem snowed in
Associated Press
21 hours ago

JERUSALEM (AP) A powerful winter storm left Jerusalem covered in snow on Friday, forcing police to block access to and from the city as a cold snap drove some Israelis to seek treatment from emergency medics.
Related Stories

Winter storm pummels Mideast, adding to refugee misery AFP
Wintry storm grips Middle East, worsens misery of Syrians Reuters
Winter storm pounds Mideast for second day Associated Press

Rare snow also fell in Cairo's suburbs and the port city of Alexandria while a blanket of white covered St. Catherine's Monastery on Mount Sinai.

In Syria's contested northern city of Aleppo, soldiers and rebels took a break from fighting as a thick layer of snow blanketed deserted streets, cars and buildings and temperatures hovered around zero.
http://news.yahoo.com/rare-storm-leaves-jerus...

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#182218 Dec 14, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Damn, more Global Warming. Silly me, I thought winter did not start until December 21st!!!
Rare storm leaves Jerusalem snowed in
Associated Press
21 hours ago
JERUSALEM (AP) A powerful winter storm left Jerusalem covered in snow on Friday, forcing police to block access to and from the city as a cold snap drove some Israelis to seek treatment from emergency medics.
Related Stories
Winter storm pummels Mideast, adding to refugee misery AFP
Wintry storm grips Middle East, worsens misery of Syrians Reuters
Winter storm pounds Mideast for second day Associated Press
Rare snow also fell in Cairo's suburbs and the port city of Alexandria while a blanket of white covered St. Catherine's Monastery on Mount Sinai.
In Syria's contested northern city of Aleppo, soldiers and rebels took a break from fighting as a thick layer of snow blanketed deserted streets, cars and buildings and temperatures hovered around zero.
http://news.yahoo.com/rare-storm-leaves-jerus...
I always find it rather amusing that people who don't understand science, or global warming take anecdotal evidence of weather to deny global warming.

Global warming does not mean the world's climate is going to be a balmy 70F year round. It does mean that by just increasing the average temperature of the atmosphere a couple of degrees results in a tremendous increase in the energy level of the atmosphere. Which results in more severe weather. As the ice caps shrink, the various jet streams also change, resulting in regional climate change. It also means there are changes in ocean currents like the Gulf Stream which also has an effect on regional climate. Winters in NE America and NW Europe become more severe without the warming effect of the Gulf Stream. Of course as more ice melts, the salinity of the ocean changes, which affects the food chain from the bottom up.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#182219 Dec 14, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>I really do want to thank you for the encouragement. it has been a long road.
Dale
Larry to Moe : "I really do want to thank you for the encouragement. it has been a long road."

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#182220 Dec 14, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Girl Scouts could throw cookie into you capital, while standing in the US.
Now, why don't you take your sorry Franch ass to bed!!!?? Haven't you been humiliated enough tonite or do you love the pain!!!
And when are you gonna take your Anglish ass to your manure pile?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#182221 Dec 14, 2013
wojar wrote:
Adams recalled later that he had taken his oath of office on a book of law rather than the Bible itself.[1] This may have been common practice at the time; there is no concrete evidence that any president from John Adams to John Tyler used a Bible to swear the oath.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inauguration_of_...
Exactly . Who cares? Nixon, GWB swore on the bible, as did most presidents. Did that make them better presidents?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#182222 Dec 14, 2013
Ya know, the closer we get to Christ Mass, the more temporary hires there are ..... normally. But this year it looks real bad. Yep, Obamanomics wurkin' as planned!!!!

Initial Jobless Claims Jump 23% as Holiday Season Weighs

By Justin Loiseau | More Articles | Save For Later
December 12, 2013 | Comments (2)

Initial jobless claims jumped a massive 22.7% to 368,000 for the week ending Dec. 7, according to a Labor Department report released today. Pundits caution people to be aware that there is seasonal adjustment volatility around the holidays.

After dropping off 6.5% the previous week to a revised 300,000, this newest report pushed far above analysts' predictions of 325,000 claims. Pundits say there is seasonal adjustment volatility around the holidays.
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/12...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#182223 Dec 14, 2013
Obskeptic wrote:
Any ideas on what China is up to folks?
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1723.htm
Politifact tells us the lie of the year is about the presidents BS about doctors and insurance plans. How about the explanation we are getting of the contrails off of our western shores.
Sure, we are down to just ten aircraft carriers with only one being near China so they are flexing their muscles.
Oh, of those ten carriers, two are refueling their reactors which take SIX months, two are in short term maintenance (less than two months), two are in a training cycle which leaves only FOUR carriers to cover the whole EARTH!!!
If the balloon went up today, the two in training could deploy, then we would have to wait a month or two for the next two and up to six moths for the last two.
The USS Kennedy is in storage and that would take six months to get her operational and the USS Enterprise would take at least a year!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#182224 Dec 14, 2013
Oh, the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) should be operational in ....2016!!! The USS Enterprise was suppose to be in service until then but Obama took it out of service three years early!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#182225 Dec 14, 2013
Oh goody, the USS Ford will have .... gender neutral lavatories!!!! Yep, one for straight guys, one for straight gals, one for gay guys and one for lesbos. I wonder if they will have one for transgenders too?

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#182226 Dec 14, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
And if the founders intended only strict construction would not they have said so?
Strict vs broad construction of the necessary and proper clause has never been settled.
We cannot turn the clock back to 1787 when the Constitution was ratified and pretended that nothing happen after that date. The Constitution was not meant to be a straitjacket for future generations but rather as a starting point based on the fundamental principles that civil liberties should be protected.

The constitution isn't a mummy displayed in a museum but rather it is a living organism in the laboratory.

Justice Holmes in Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S. 416 (1920), articulated the dynamic nature of the Constitution:

"With regard to that we may add that when we are dealing with words that also are a constituent act, like the Constitution of the United States, we must realize that they have called into life a being the development of which could not have been foreseen completely by the most gifted of its begetters. It was enough for them to realize or to hope that they had created an organism; it has taken a century and has cost their successors much sweat and blood to prove that they created a nation. The case before us must be considered in the light of our whole experience and not merely in that of what was said a hundred years ago. Id at 434.

In the 21st century, Justice Kennedy in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) made this observation about the Founding Fathers and their influence on future generations:

Had those who drew and ratified the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth Amendment..... known the components of liberty in its manifold possibilities, they might have been more specific. They did not presume to have this insight. They knew times can blind us to certain truths and later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress. As the Constitution endures, persons in every generation can invoke its principles in their own search for greater freedom." Id. at 578-79

As such, "what once was a 'natural' and 'self-evident' ordering later comes to be seen as an artificial and invidious constraint on human potential and freedom. City of Cleburne, Tex. v Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 US 432, 466 (1985)(Marshall, J., concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part).

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#182227 Dec 14, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Ya know, the closer we get to Christ Mass, the more temporary hires there are ..... normally. But this year it looks real bad. Yep, Obamanomics wurkin' as planned!!!!
Initial Jobless Claims Jump 23% as Holiday Season Weighs
By Justin Loiseau | More Articles | Save For Later
December 12, 2013 | Comments (2)
Initial jobless claims jumped a massive 22.7% to 368,000 for the week ending Dec. 7, according to a Labor Department report released today. Pundits caution people to be aware that there is seasonal adjustment volatility around the holidays.
After dropping off 6.5% the previous week to a revised 300,000, this newest report pushed far above analysts' predictions of 325,000 claims. Pundits say there is seasonal adjustment volatility around the holidays.
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/12...
Amongst all the good news on employment, specially after the November results, EUREKA, you were able to find this little piece. How it must please you. That'll teach Obama, never mind those with no jobs. But,.news is reported by Justin Loiseau. Hmmm, French name, highly suspicious, probably a communist.

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) 8 min Bluestater 1,236,570
News Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 26 min Graham Cracker 51,764
amy 6-2 30 min RACE 29
Last word + 2 (Mar '12) 1 hr RACE 900
Word (Dec '08) 1 hr RACE 5,256
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr IB DaMann 53,607
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 4 hr Ratloder 70,045
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]