BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 197105 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.

Frank

Spokane, WA

#184251 Jan 17, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>Obama's US Natural Born Citizenship began at the moment of his birth in Honolulu.
Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution :
“ No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.” National Born Citizenship is a birthright given to a child by his father,it can not be affected by any one in Congress and there is no law of the United States under which nationality acquired by the act of his father can be removed or changed. Barack Obama's father was a Kenyan British Subject and was never a citizen of the United States,not even for one day.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#184252 Jan 17, 2014
Frank wrote:
<quoted text>Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution :
“ No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.” National Born Citizenship is a birthright given to a child by his father,it can not be affected by any one in Congress and there is no law of the United States under which nationality acquired by the act of his father can be removed or changed. Barack Obama's father was a Kenyan British Subject and was never a citizen of the United States,not even for one day.
Sorry Frank, there is nothing in the Constitution stating that birthright citizenship derives from parentage.

"[B]ut in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.”–James Madison

Frank, do you have a clue what "it is what applies in the United States" means?

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#184253 Jan 17, 2014
Frank wrote:
<quoted text>Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution :
“ No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.” National Born Citizenship is a birthright given to a child by his father,it can not be affected by any one in Congress and there is no law of the United States under which nationality acquired by the act of his father can be removed or changed. Barack Obama's father was a Kenyan British Subject and was never a citizen of the United States,not even for one day.
A child's birthright is his or her own. It isn't depended upon the status of the father or mother.
A child's nationality is based solely upon the place of birth.

It is an established maxim THAT BIRTH IS A CRITERION OF ALLEGIANCE. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.” James Madison, The Founders’ Constitution Volume 2, Article 1, Section 2, Clause 2, Document 6 (1789)(emphasis added)

“It is an established maxim, received by all political writers, THAT EVERY PERSON OWES A NATURAL ALLEGIANCE TO THE GOVERNMENT OF THAT COUNTRY IN WHICH HE IS BORN. Allegiance is defined to be a tie, that binds the subject to the state, and in consequence of his obedience, he is entitled to protection… The children of aliens, born in this state, are considered as natural born subjects, and have the same rights with the rest of the citizens.” Zephaniah Swift, A system of the laws of the state of Connecticut: in six books, Volumes 1-2 of A System of the Laws of the State of Connecticut: In Six Book, pg. 163,167 (1795)

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#184255 Jan 17, 2014
Has anyone heard any good Obama jokes lately?

neither have I! All my Obama jokes are so scary I have to wait until Halloween o tell them!!!
.

United States

#184256 Jan 17, 2014
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>A child's birthright is his or her own. It isn't depended upon the status of the father or mother.
A child's nationality is based solely upon the place of birth.

It is an established maxim THAT BIRTH IS A CRITERION OF ALLEGIANCE. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.” James Madison, The Founders’ Constitution Volume 2, Article 1, Section 2, Clause 2, Document 6 (1789)(emphasis added)

“It is an established maxim, received by all political writers, THAT EVERY PERSON OWES A NATURAL ALLEGIANCE TO THE GOVERNMENT OF THAT COUNTRY IN WHICH HE IS BORN. Allegiance is defined to be a tie, that binds the subject to the state, and in consequence of his obedience, he is entitled to protection… The children of aliens, born in this state, are considered as natural born subjects, and have the same rights with the rest of the citizens.” Zephaniah Swift, A system of the laws of the state of Connecticut: in six books, Volumes 1-2 of A System of the Laws of the State of Connecticut: In Six Book, pg. 163,167 (1795)
Therefore Hussein should be president of Kenya. Or maybe a janitor in the U.S.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#184257 Jan 17, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Has anyone heard any good Obama jokes lately?
neither have I! All my Obama jokes are so scary I have to wait until Halloween o tell them!!!


I have.

In November, 2008, John McCain lost to Barack Obama

In November, 2012, Mitt Romney got clobbered by Barack Obama. Rogue had to put his dancing shoes away.

Last year, the supreme court approved Obamacare on the heels of both houses of Congress. Rogue had inside info, Roberts was gonna nix it. LMAO LRS-Dale tm reg'd)

Last summer, truckers were going to invade Washington and show Obama what-for, so predicted Rogue. Joke's on him, ha ha.

But the best Obama joke is GWB himself. Went into Afghanistan to "get" Bin Laden. Er, NOT. Obama GOT Bin Laden. Where, in Afghanistan? Nope, in GWB's allied Pakistan.

I'll tell ya, Rogue, what would we do without you? Who'd make us laugh to tears? Oh, what about that corruption index? Were you right on that one? More laughs. How about having no carriers to defeat the Japanese At Coral Sea (tk you, LTR) and Midway? New carriers 6 months after Pearl? Hmmm. Guffaws.

Let's have some GWB jokes now, Rogue. How about, when he said, or tried to say "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, er, hmm, how'd that go again?" Awww, a born comedian. How about a Mitt Romney joke, like "For sure these liberals on welfare, 47% of the population will automatically vote for Obama", thereby losing any hope of reining some in.

But I like your jokes best of all, Rogue, like the racist ones yesterday about the "Japs" (you still don't know it's pejorative to call 'em that 68 years after war's end?). And the anti-Semite ones about the Jews? Racism just courses naturally in your veins, doesn't it? Some DNA you must have, bet scientists can't wait to do that autopsy on you.
Frank

Spokane, WA

#184258 Jan 17, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry Frank, there is nothing in the Constitution stating that birthright citizenship derives from parentage.
"[B]ut in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.”–James Madison
Frank, do you have a clue what "it is what applies in the United States" means?
"there is no law of the United States under which nationality acquired by the act of his father can be removed or changed. Barack Obama's father was a Kenyan British Subject and was never a citizen of the United States,not even for one day. "

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#184259 Jan 17, 2014
Frank wrote:
<quoted text> "there is no law of the United States under which nationality acquired by the act of his father can be removed or changed. Barack Obama's father was a Kenyan British Subject and was never a citizen of the United States,not even for one day. "
“[I]t has consistently been held judicially that one born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction is, from birth, a citizen of the United States; that such citizenship does not depend upon like citizenship of his or her parents, or of either of them (except in the case of the children of ambassadors etc.). United States v. Richmond, 274 F. Supp. 43, 56 (CD Ca 1967). See also Von Schwerdtner v. Piper, 23 F. 2d 862 (D. MD 1928)(child born in the United States to German nationals)

"A person who is born in the United States, regardless of the citizenship of his parents, becomes an American citizen not by gift of Congress but by force of the Constitution. U.S.C.A., Constitutional Amendment 14, Section 1." In re Gogal, 75 F. Supp. 268, 271 (WD Pa 1947)

As such, the allegiance of parents whatever their situation is irrelevant in determining the citizenship status of a child born in the United States.“ At common law, a native is a person born within the jurisdiction and allegiance of a country, irrespective of the allegiance of his parents, except the child of an ambassador. Ex parte Palo, 3 F. 2d 44, 45 (W.D. Wa 1925)
(internal citation omitted)
Truth Detector

Louisville, KY

#184260 Jan 17, 2014
It has been a long hard fought battle.
Declassified Docs & Senate Investigation Vindicate Those Seeking Truth About Benghazi-Gate
Truth Has Come Out: Bit By Bit Unmasking Obama; Death By A Thousand Cuts; Lie After Lie
Bleep: Who Gave Obama Video Protest Narrative; Wanna Nail Son Of A B!tch Who Created Narrative
Obama Won Reelection On Lies: We Have All Been Defrauded Of The Election Of 2012
Gallups: Wait Until March When Sheriff Arpaio and Lt. Zullo Release Obama Findings
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#184261 Jan 18, 2014
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>Explain why a naturalized citizen can't run for POTUS, then you will under stand what a Natural Born Citizen is.
A naturalized citizen cannot be POTUS.(Anyone or any thing---Micky Mouse, is a frequent example---can run for POTUS, check the words.)

Why cannot a naturalized citizen be POTUS? Because a naturalized citizen is one who was born on foreign soil and the writers of the US Constitution were worried about the loyalty of people who were not born on US soil. IF they were worried about the US-born children of foreigners being disloyal, THEY WOULD HAVE SAID SO, but they didn't. They did say so about naturalized citizens, excluding them by making only Natural Born Citizens eligible. But they DID NOT say it about the US-born children of foreigners.

So, under strict construction, if they did not say it, you cannot infer that they meant it. And under libertarian principles you cannot take away a right or a privilege unless the Constitution specifically takes away that right or authorizes taking it away. And neither is said in the Constitution. There is not a word in the Constitution that says that the US-born children of foreigners are not just as good citizens as the US-born children of US citizens---nor did any of the writers of the US constitution ever say so in any of their writings.

Unless there is something in the Constitution that says that the US-born children of foreigners were not created equal to the US-born children of US citizens, they are equal to the US-born children of US citizens.

Once again, naturalized citizens are NOT equal. The Constitution says that only Natural Born Citizens are eligible. But all Natural Born Citizens are eligible, and there is nothing in the Constitution---not one word---that says that the US-born children of foreigners are not Natural Born Citizens.

But they were NOT worried about the loyalty of the children who were born on US soil
JBH

Delta, Canada

#184262 Jan 18, 2014
Fracking Joeq-Blow-Low is still here, only on the other side, day and night, wanting to learn English and American politics, would even think of English as self-accredited LANGUAGE, AS LONG AS THERE ARE THOSE having the same stand to defend Joeq-Blow, being in line with their thinking.

But he does not know much English and other things.


Fracturing dummy not knowing much English and other things, looks around, reads some comments, then would call Gibberish , yet he does not know what Gibberish is, as he just can't define it, for that reflects the poor standard of his make up--primary coming from lacking basic education.

Because frigging wacko is shortage in the language and head, he would call someone to decipher what he does not understand.

No wonder this country has few talents and goes down as well, because Blow-Joe-Jacq-low is so low in life that he has been deprived of any education.
Consequently Jacq -Blow-Low is under-educated , so that he has nothing in life that makes sense, and therefore would come to Topix by humiliating self like the blundering muppet.

Blow-Jacq-Low is the proletariat peasant, who has seen too many same hillbillies like him, being far away from the madding crowds, wants to make a change to demonstrate if he is really happy being dumb on Topix, because as long as any comments make him dis-oriented and fainted, that is what he would say, "Gibberish."

What a Fanatic-Cannie-maniac is-- that this proletariat folly's life of Jacq-Blow-Low is all that is, as being put down all the time, because his calling deciphering Gibberish proves that true facts indicate that all his thinking is merely the neo-radical molded robot with no education speaking -- this hillbilly of no talent peasant from this country thinks he can defend Obama, by having to be damned down instead?

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

#184263 Jan 18, 2014
"Southwest Airlines pilots who recently landed at the wrong airport in Missouri told investigators they were confused by the small airport's runway lights, believing it to be a larger airport in nearby Branson, said the National Transportation Safety Board on Friday.
They didn't realize until the plane touched down that they were at the wrong airport, the NTSB said."

Associated Press
Dale

Wichita, KS

#184264 Jan 18, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text> The irony is that Dufus Dale doesn't understand what a natural born citizen is and he doesn't have a clue the definition of jurisdiction. He conflates citizenship and jurisdiction, cannot understand that foreign countries cannot determine who is a US citizen, doesn't have a clue that his fantasy violates the principle of of sovereignty ....
Pathetic. He will never understand what is a natural born citizen. He will never understand that he will never have any authority or respect or a clue in matters of law. He will never understand that he is a grandiose delusional schizophrenic either.
Your inability to understand that a Natural Born Citizen does not have any foreign influence, this is why a naturalized citizen can't run for POTUS.
Dale

Wichita, KS

#184265 Jan 18, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>Obama's US Natural Born Citizenship began at the moment of his birth in Honolulu.
Sorry, a natural born citizen does not have any foreign influence, Obama was never a NBC.
Dale

Wichita, KS

#184267 Jan 18, 2014
wojar wrote:
“It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.”–James Madison
Yup, born here means no foreign allegiance, "it is what applies in the United States."
Sorry, we didn't have a national law on citizenship until 1866 and that law excluded citizenship to persons born in the US that were subject to any foreign power.
Dale

Wichita, KS

#184268 Jan 18, 2014
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
A naturalized citizen cannot be POTUS.(Anyone or any thing---Micky Mouse, is a frequent example---can run for POTUS, check the words.)
Why cannot a naturalized citizen be POTUS? Because a naturalized citizen is one who was born on foreign soil and the writers of the US Constitution were worried about the loyalty of people who were not born on US soil. IF they were worried about the US-born children of foreigners being disloyal, THEY WOULD HAVE SAID SO, but they didn't. They did say so about naturalized citizens, excluding them by making only Natural Born Citizens eligible. But they DID NOT say it about the US-born children of foreigners.
So, under strict construction, if they did not say it, you cannot infer that they meant it. And under libertarian principles you cannot take away a right or a privilege unless the Constitution specifically takes away that right or authorizes taking it away. And neither is said in the Constitution. There is not a word in the Constitution that says that the US-born children of foreigners are not just as good citizens as the US-born children of US citizens---nor did any of the writers of the US constitution ever say so in any of their writings.
Unless there is something in the Constitution that says that the US-born children of foreigners were not created equal to the US-born children of US citizens, they are equal to the US-born children of US citizens.
Once again, naturalized citizens are NOT equal. The Constitution says that only Natural Born Citizens are eligible. But all Natural Born Citizens are eligible, and there is nothing in the Constitution---not one word---that says that the US-born children of foreigners are not Natural Born Citizens.
But they were NOT worried about the loyalty of the children who were born on US soil
A NBC has no foreign influence and since a child born here of aliens would automatically receive its parents citizenship at birth, he would have foreign influence. A dual-citizen, that is self explanatory, even you can understand that.
Dale

Wichita, KS

#184269 Jan 18, 2014
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
A naturalized citizen cannot be POTUS.(Anyone or any thing---Micky Mouse, is a frequent example---can run for POTUS, check the words.)
Why cannot a naturalized citizen be POTUS? Because a naturalized citizen is one who was born on foreign soil and the writers of the US Constitution were worried about the loyalty of people who were not born on US soil. IF they were worried about the US-born children of foreigners being disloyal, THEY WOULD HAVE SAID SO, but they didn't. They did say so about naturalized citizens, excluding them by making only Natural Born Citizens eligible. But they DID NOT say it about the US-born children of foreigners.
So, under strict construction, if they did not say it, you cannot infer that they meant it. And under libertarian principles you cannot take away a right or a privilege unless the Constitution specifically takes away that right or authorizes taking it away. And neither is said in the Constitution. There is not a word in the Constitution that says that the US-born children of foreigners are not just as good citizens as the US-born children of US citizens---nor did any of the writers of the US constitution ever say so in any of their writings.
Unless there is something in the Constitution that says that the US-born children of foreigners were not created equal to the US-born children of US citizens, they are equal to the US-born children of US citizens.
Once again, naturalized citizens are NOT equal. The Constitution says that only Natural Born Citizens are eligible. But all Natural Born Citizens are eligible, and there is nothing in the Constitution---not one word---that says that the US-born children of foreigners are not Natural Born Citizens.
But they were NOT worried about the loyalty of the children who were born on US soil
You are correct, anyone can run for POTUS, but only a NBC can be POTUS, so what is the purpose in running, the law is very plain.

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

#184270 Jan 18, 2014
"What Washington needs is adult supervision"

Barack Obama, fundraising lettter, 2006
Dale

Wichita, KS

#184271 Jan 18, 2014
loose cannon wrote:
"Southwest Airlines pilots who recently landed at the wrong airport in Missouri told investigators they were confused by the small airport's runway lights, believing it to be a larger airport in nearby Branson, said the National Transportation Safety Board on Friday.
They didn't realize until the plane touched down that they were at the wrong airport, the NTSB said."
Associated Press
I guess we must color code the runway lights.
wojar

Bristol, CT

#184272 Jan 18, 2014
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>Your inability to understand that a Natural Born Citizen does not have any foreign influence, this is why a naturalized citizen can't run for POTUS.
As Madison stated, place (of birth) is the most certain criterion of allegiance: "it is what applies in the United States." That is why a person born in Hawaii of an alien father is not under any "foreign influence" under US law. That is why Ted Cruz has a problem.

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) 6 min Trey LaTrache 1,278,286
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr Mothra 54,601
News Should prostitution be less illegal-or more? 1 hr robert 4
"Slave clothes" My New, Original Work by Patric... 2 hr Outlaw Entitlements 2
Kim K has such a large azz, it turns me OFF. 2 hr Condoms unnecessary 1
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 6 hr contrary opinion 100,673
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 6 hr 40ish 6,443
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages