BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 219484 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.

Old Goat

United States

#80548 May 23, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow! He's your Daddy!
<quoted text>
Family member?
UR forgetting what your Daddy said.
“Who are natural-born citizens but those born within the republic? Those born within the Republic, whether black or white, are citizens by birth—natural-born citizens.” John Bingham, Cong. Globe 37th Cong., 2nd Sess. 1639 (1862).
Post totally Irrelevant!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#80550 May 23, 2012
Old Goat wrote:
<quoted text>sorry hojar, the 14th states, aliens are not under the jurisdiction of the US Constitution, until they are naturalized, this is a fact you can not change, unless you change the Constitution.
Children born in this country of visiting aliens parents belong to the country of their father's origin, since the US Constitution has no jurisdiction over the father.
The US can not claim something that is not legally bound to it.
Sorry, BirfoonBoy, I'm not privy to your play Constitution.

Grow up.

Aliens, visiting or otherwise have always been under the jurisdiction of the United States while in its territorial limits.

jurisdiction, n.(14c) 1. A government's general power to exercise authority over all persons and things within its territory; [Excerpted from Black's Law Dictionary.]
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry birfoonboy, for the 100th time, check out the Naturalization Act of 1790, which required that aliens be under the jurisdiction of the United States for two years prior to acquiring citizenship.
"That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE UNITED STATES for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof ...." Naturalization Act of 1790.[Emphasis added.]
Ingliss? UR nuts. The court asserted in its opinion that aliens do indeed owe temporary allegiance and that their US born children are US citizens.
Ummm, NO. According to the law in the United States, the child born on US soil has a NATURAL tie of allegiance to this country. Unlike Birfistani law, private individuals don't make up US law as it suits their fantasies, unless they're insane.
See again Ashkir, 46 Fed.Cl. 438. The court cited the USSC which stated that “in extending
constitutional protections beyond
citizenry, the Court has been at pains to
point out that it was the alien's presence
within its territorial jurisdiction that gave
the Judiciary the power to act.”
Read it again: "constitutional protections beyond
citizenry"
Get a life.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#80551 May 23, 2012
Old Goat wrote:
<quoted text>John was right, to be born within a family, you must be born of a family member! THIMK!!!!
Within the Republic, means to members of the Republic! That would be citizens of the Republic!
Oh, just a minute, I have a pain in my ass, should I get a beer or a 7.5, maybe both!
Sorry, BirfoonBoy, that's not what your Daddy said.

“Who are natural-born citizens but those born within the republic? Those born within the Republic, whether black or white, are citizens by birth—natural-born citizens.” John Bingham, Cong. Globe 37th Cong., 2nd Sess. 1639 (1862).

Got Alzheimer's?
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh?
“Who are natural-born citizens but those born within the republic? Those born within the Republic, whether black or white, are citizens by birth—natural-born citizens.” John Bingham, Cong. Globe 37th Cong., 2nd Sess. 1639 (1862).
He's your Daddy. Got Alzheimer's?
Old Goat

United States

#80552 May 23, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
The Congress in 1790 and the FOUNDERS who were among them were office boys?
They, the FOUNDERS and other members of Congress in 1790, who OG thinks were office boys, said an alien had to live in the US for two years under the JURISDICTION OF THE US prior to naturalization.
Yes/No?
I'll help you.
“That any alien, being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years ....” Naturalization Act of 1790.
Yes/No?
It ain't rocket science.
<quoted text>
No, an "office boy" was trying to get his point across, but failed miserably, due to his misunderstanding of the the US Constitution. I could explain it to you, but you would just call me name, you don't want to know!
Damn, that was very good for a 6th grade edumacation and being TAB'D out.
Last post, see y'all in Sept! Been FUN!!!!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#80553 May 23, 2012
Old Goat wrote:
<quoted text>Post totally Irrelevant!
Yo' Daddy said something you don't like, so it's irrelevant.

Get a grip, BirfoonBoy.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow! He's your Daddy!
<quoted text>
Family member?
UR forgetting what your Daddy said.
“Who are natural-born citizens but those born within the republic? Those born within the Republic, whether black or white, are citizens by birth—natural-born citizens.” John Bingham, Cong. Globe 37th Cong., 2nd Sess. 1639 (1862).
bert

UK

#80554 May 23, 2012
Obama was born in America.get over it birfers

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#80555 May 23, 2012
Old Goat wrote:
<quoted text>No, an "office boy" was trying to get his point across, but failed miserably, due to his misunderstanding of the the [fantasy invisible ink] US Constitution. I could explain it to you, but you would just call me name [since you are not schizophrenic like me, OG], you don't want to know [the SPECIAL knowledge that only I am privy to [due to my special condition.]!
Damn, that was very good for a 6th grade edumacation [and serious mental illness] and being TAB'D out.
Last post, see y'all in Sept![after I am released from the looney bin.] Been FUN!!!!
Nice retreat, wimp.

“That any alien, being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years ....” Naturalization Act of 1790.

They, the FOUNDERS and other members of Congress in 1790, who OG thinks were office boys, said an alien had to live in the US for two years under the JURISDICTION OF THE US prior to naturalization.
Yes/No?

LOSER.

Cat got your tongue?

Turn tail and run.

Wimp out, Wimpy.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>

The Congress in 1790 and the FOUNDERS who were among them were office boys?

They, the FOUNDERS and other members of Congress in 1790, who OG thinks were office boys, said an alien had to live in the US for two years under the JURISDICTION OF THE US prior to naturalization.

Yes/No?

I'll help you.

“That any alien, being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years ....” Naturalization Act of 1790.
Yes/No?

It ain't rocket science.
Just Sayin

Toledo, OH

#80556 May 23, 2012
Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes §338-14,3, I verify the following:

This means nothing.

All this states is:

Subject to the requirements of section 338-18, the department of health, upon request, shall furnish to any applicant, in lieu of the issuance of a certified copy, a verification of the existence of a certificate and any other information that the applicant provides to be verified relating to the vital event that pertains to the certificate.

Now look at the original verification and we see some initial next to Onanka's stamp which means that someone with the initials gk sent this.

http://www.azcentral.com/12news/Obama-Verific...

So lets look at the certificate the White House first released:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.shared/image...

Hmmmm.....No seal of approval.

But not to worry. Lets look at the reference numbers in the bottom right hand corner.(HRS 338-13(b),338-19

Wojar stated that these laws did not even exist when Obama was born.

But lets look at them anyway.
HRS 338-13(b) IS SUBJECT TO 338-16, 338-17 AND 338-19.

Then look at the date revised on the left hand side

§338-16 Procedure concerning late and altered birth certificates.(a) Birth certificates registered one year or more after the date of birth, and certificates which have been alter after being filed with the department of health, shall contain the date of the late filing and the date of the alteration and be marked distinctly "late" or "altered".(b) A summary statement of the evidence submitted in support of the acceptance for late filing or the alteration shall be endorsed on the certificates.(c) Such evidence shall be kept in a special permanent file.(d) When an applicant does not submit the minimum documentation required by the rules for late registration or when the state registrar finds reasons to question the validity or adequacy of the certificate or the documentary evidence, the state registrar shall not register the late certificate and shall advise the applicant of the reason for this action. The department of health may by rule provide for the dismissal of an application which is not actively prosecuted.(e) As used in this section, "late" means one year or more after the date of birth.

I don't have enough room for all of this so will take this up tomorrow when I get off work.

If you can't wait that long look all the laws up and read the fine print carefully.
MyTwoCents

Park Ridge, IL

#80557 May 23, 2012
Just Sayin wrote:
A shill, plant, or stooge is a person who publicly helps a person or organization without disclosing that he has a close relationship with that person or organization.
Plant and stooge more commonly refer to any person who is secretly in league with another person or organization while pretending to be neutral or actually a part of the organization he is planted in, such as a magician's audience, a political party, or an intelligence organization.
A shill is readily recognized when involvement in political conversations come from foreign countries.
Toledo, yup sounds pretty foreign. Even that Hobart...who names a Toledo company after a city in Indiana?

>
MyTwoCents

Park Ridge, IL

#80559 May 23, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
"Additionally, I verify that the information in the copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama that you attached with your request matches the original record in our files."
But he didn't say that he looked at the file with both eyes!
Woj, Woj, Woj ... you feed the insanity, you led the birther to truth and then taunt them with a possible conspiracy. Shame on you!

>
MyTwoCents

Park Ridge, IL

#80560 May 23, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
This is typical Libtardian behavior. Someone insults them and they think they have the right to beat the crap out of them. Especially if the Libtard is a black and the victim white!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =mNKANj-ZJ8AXX
I had the right to beat the shit out a wingnut douche that insulted my wife, refused to apologize and provoked me and then had the gall to threaten our lives. Had it coming. The court admonished me and I paid the hospital bill. The wingnut fool nearly ended up in jail.

>
MyTwoCents

Park Ridge, IL

#80561 May 23, 2012
Old Goat wrote:
<quoted text>get use to my facts, your facts are BOGUS!
Oh, here!
Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital
1600/600 Bingham Dr.
Honolulu, HI
Bingham brought him in and John Bingham will take him "OUT"!
John Bingham, said Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes meant “every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.”
You might check into this:
http://digitaljournal.com/article/325256

>

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#80562 May 23, 2012
Just Sayin wrote:
Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes §338-14,3, I verify the following:
This means nothing.(If UR an idiot.)
Then look at the date revised on the left hand side
§338-16 Procedure concerning late and altered birth certificates.(a) Birth certificates registered one year or more after the date of birth, and certificates which have been alter after being filed with the department of health, shall contain the date of the late filing and the date of the alteration and be marked distinctly "late" or "altered".
Duh! UR barking up the wrong tree.

BirfoonBoy: "§338-16 Procedure concerning late and altered birth certificates." Duh! The record shows it was a hospital birth, not a late or altered certificate. Got an effing clue?

5. Name of Hospital: Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital

10. Date of Signature of Parent: 8-7-61

12. Date Accepted by Local Registrar: Aug-8 1961

Grow up.

Get real.

Grow a brain.
MyTwoCents

Park Ridge, IL

#80563 May 23, 2012
Old Goat wrote:
<quoted text>the only thing I see here is your misinterpretation of the the US Constitution, what else would I expect from an "office boy"! Do you fetch coffee and donuts for your bosses?
“Subject to the Jurisdiction of the United States”: All children born in and subject, at the time of birth, to the jurisdiction of the United States acquire U.S. citizenship at birth even if their parents were in the United States illegally at the time of birth.
(1) The U.S. Supreme Court examined at length the theories and legal precedents on which the U.S. citizenship laws are based in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). In particular, the Court discussed the types of persons who are subject to U.S. jurisdiction.
The Court affirmed that a child born in the United States to Chinese parents acquired U.S. citizenship even though the parents were, at the time, racially ineligible for naturalization.
(2) The Court also concluded that:“The 14th Amendment affirms the
ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the
territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including children here born of resident aliens
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/8...

It's the law, stupid.

>

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#80564 May 23, 2012
Just Sayin wrote:
Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes §338-14,3, I verify the following:
This means nothing.(If UR an idiot.)
Then look at the date revised on the left hand side
§338-16 Procedure concerning late and altered birth certificates.(a) Birth certificates registered one year or more after the date of birth, and certificates which have been alter after being filed with the department of health, shall contain the date of the late filing and the date of the alteration and be marked distinctly "late" or "altered".
BirfoonBoy: "§338-16 Procedure concerning late and altered birth certificates."

Hee hee hee! Birfoon Boy thinks that a HOSPITAL BIRTH verified by HI DOH has something to do with late registration!

Is BirfoonBoy on LSD?

No, he just a psychotic birfoon.
MyTwoCents

Park Ridge, IL

#80565 May 23, 2012
Hell Yeah wrote:
On May 18, 2012, I filed on behalf of my clients, Nicholas E. Purpura and Theodore T. Moran, their Brief and Appendix in their New Jersey Ballot Access Challenge appeal currently pending before the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division. In the brief, we argue that Administrative Law Judge, Jeff S. Masin, and New Jersey Secretary of State, Kimberly M. Guadagno, erred in finding that candidate Barack Obama, when challenged to do so, has no constitutional or legal obligation to present any evidence as to who he is, where he was born, and that he is an Article II “natural born Citizen,” before the Secretary of State can place his name on the primary election ballot. We also argue that because he presented no evidence on the matter, they erred in finding that he was born in Hawaii. Finally, we also argue that because he was not born to two U.S. citizen parents, they erred in finding that as a matter of law he is a “natural born Citizen.”
The Brief and Appendix may be read here, http://www.scribd.com/puzo1/d/94493192-Purpur...
And yet another one will end up on the pile of losses.

>
MyTwoCents

Park Ridge, IL

#80566 May 23, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Duh! UR barking up the wrong tree.
BirfoonBoy: "§338-16 Procedure concerning late and altered birth certificates." Duh! The record shows it was a hospital birth, not a late or altered certificate. Got an effing clue?
5. Name of Hospital: Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital
10. Date of Signature of Parent: 8-7-61
12. Date Accepted by Local Registrar: Aug-8 1961
Grow up.
Get real.
Grow a brain.
<quoted text>
Grow up.
Get real.
Grow a brain.
This will never happen. They are so far down the rabbit hole they are incapable of returning.

>

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#80567 May 23, 2012
Just Sayin wrote:
Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes §338-14,3, I verify the following:
This means nothing.(If UR an idiot.)
Then look at the date revised on the left hand side
§338-16 Procedure concerning late and altered birth certificates.(a) Birth certificates registered one year or more after the date of birth, and certificates which have been alter after being filed with the department of health, shall contain the date of the late filing and the date of the alteration and be marked distinctly "late" or "altered".
Hee hee hee! So ya think it was altered?

Ya think they got the Hospital name wrong?

Hee hee hee.

It was an effing HOSPITAL BIRTH, Birfoon.

It doesn't take an IQ above 70 to figure out that a hospital birth is not registered late.

It doesn't take an IQ above 50 to figure out that for a birth on August 4, 1961, that was registered on August 8, 1961, was not registered "one year or more after the date of birth". Duh!

Did a horse kick you in the head when you were a child?

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#80568 May 23, 2012
MyTwoCents wrote:
<quoted text>
“Subject to the Jurisdiction of the United States”: All children born in and subject, at the time of birth, to the jurisdiction of the United States acquire U.S. citizenship at birth even if their parents were in the United States illegally at the time of birth.
(1) The U.S. Supreme Court examined at length the theories and legal precedents on which the U.S. citizenship laws are based in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). In particular, the Court discussed the types of persons who are subject to U.S. jurisdiction.
The Court affirmed that a child born in the United States to Chinese parents acquired U.S. citizenship even though the parents were, at the time, racially ineligible for naturalization.
(2) The Court also concluded that:“The 14th Amendment affirms the
ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the
territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including children here born of resident aliens
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/8...
It's the law, stupid.
>
In Goat Herder's alternate universe, the law is whatever he wants it to be. Anyone who does not understand his idiosyncratic philosophy is defective. He is the Oracle of the Earth.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#80569 May 23, 2012
Old Goat wrote:
<quoted text>No, an "office boy" was trying to get his point across, but failed miserably, due to his misunderstanding of the the US Constitution. I could explain it to you, but you would just call me name, you don't want to know!
Damn, that was very good for a 6th grade edumacation and being TAB'D out.
Last post, see y'all in Sept! Been FUN!!!!
Badly beaten, BirfoonBoy retreats to the refuge of his insane asylum.
Unfortunately, BirfoonBoy cannot explain his whimsical theories, which he is incapable of articulating (Sad). He has no coherent definitions. No consistent rules. He is nothing but a legend in his own mind. He has never written an appellate brief. Moreover, he has never written a paper submitted to a court that was not laughed at. His claim to fame: conflation. He cannot figure out the difference between citizenship and jurisdiction.

One last time BirfoonBoy, how could an alien be under the jurisdiction of the United States for two years before becoming a citizen per the Naturalization Act of 1790 according to your birfoon theory which requires citizenship precedent to jurisdiction?

Eh? The Founders were idiots?

Bye bye loser.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
The Congress in 1790 and the FOUNDERS who were among them were office boys?
They, the FOUNDERS and other members of Congress in 1790, who OG thinks were office boys, said an alien had to live in the US for two years under the JURISDICTION OF THE US prior to naturalization.
Yes/No?
I'll help you.
“That any alien, being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years ....” Naturalization Act of 1790.
Yes/No?
It ain't rocket science.

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.

US Senate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min Incognito4Ever 1,404,296
News Sarah Silvermana s rebuke to the Bernie-or-bust... 3 min He Named Me Black... 33
News Emanuel Cleaver: Hillary Clinton faces a irrati... 8 min Ronald 10
News Excited by Trump, gay Republicans struggle with... 8 min Frankie Rizzo 138
News The Latest: Podesta: Clinton campaign has 'robu... 12 min Go Blue Forever 6
News Hacked emails show Democratic party hostility t... 19 min Trumping On 176
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 26 min Frankie Rizzo 14,750
More from around the web