BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 190172 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.

Justus Liebig

Rocky Hill, CT

#130390 Nov 28, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>quite the contrary, he was born a citizen of his father's nation, the Constitution hasn't any control over that fact. As you know all persons born subject of other nations, must be naturalized, for citizenship in the US.
Sorry, BirfoonBoy, he was born a citizen under the constitution, and British law has no control over that fact.

A person born a cizizen needs no naturalization. Operation of foreign law has no force or effect within the boundaries of the US. British law cannot dictate that anyone need be naturalized by the US. Last time I checked, the US is a SOVEREIGN nation.
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#130391 Nov 28, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Nor has he been proven to be a citizen! Those docs are as fake as they can be. Even a 6th grader could see that. If there is no problem with his citizenship then why wouldn't he show his BC for 5M to a charity of his choice? Tell me that.
Obama has showed his birth certificate TWICE, the short form and the long form. Only birther "experts"---who have not proved that they are experts and who certainly have not showed that they are impartial---have CLAIMED that there is anything wrong with Obama's birth certificate. Those are two reasons why Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, the National Review, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and the members of the US Congress do not believe them.

Re the $5 million offer:(1) when a supporter of your political opponent makes you an offer, it is common sense to ignore it; (2) It is not a good precedent for the President of the United States to do something for an offer of money by an individual, even if the money is for charity; (3) if Trump wanted to give $5 million to charity, he could give it without making an "offer" to Obama.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#130392 Nov 28, 2012
Just Dumb wrote:
<quoted text>
And that means donning a play justice robe and weilding a toy gavel makes Dale a real justice!
Wowee-Zowee!
Of course not, I have a toy court of dumb libs.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#130393 Nov 28, 2012
Justus Liebig wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, BirfoonBoy, he was born a citizen under the constitution, and British law has no control over that fact.
A person born a cizizen needs no naturalization. Operation of foreign law has no force or effect within the boundaries of the US. British law cannot dictate that anyone need be naturalized by the US. Last time I checked, the US is a SOVEREIGN nation.
Sorry, the US Government can not strip the citizenship from anyone, unless requested by the individual, through the naturalization process. As you know Obama was born a citizen of his father's country of origin, that was his country's right.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#130394 Nov 28, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama has showed his birth certificate TWICE, the short form and the long form. Only birther "experts"---who have not proved that they are experts and who certainly have not showed that they are impartial---have CLAIMED that there is anything wrong with Obama's birth certificate. Those are two reasons why Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, the National Review, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and the members of the US Congress do not believe them.
Re the $5 million offer:(1) when a supporter of your political opponent makes you an offer, it is common sense to ignore it; (2) It is not a good precedent for the President of the United States to do something for an offer of money by an individual, even if the money is for charity; (3) if Trump wanted to give $5 million to charity, he could give it without making an "offer" to Obama.
"Has showed"? Really.
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#130395 Nov 28, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>you are correct, the US Constitution can not deny foreign citizenship, Obama was born a citizen of his father's nation and has never been naturalized.
Here is a decision by the US Army Judge Advocate General's office that says that a US-born child whose father was a German citizen who was never naturalized is a Natural Born US Citizen. And it specifically says that dual citizenship does not affect the situation.

http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2010/0...

Moreover, sadly you have not been following CONSERVATIVE legal principles. Conservatives have always said that foreign laws do not affect, and cannot be allowed to affect US laws. And in the case of dual citizenship that is exactly right, US law does not allow foreign laws to affect US Citizen status (or as the JAG ruling shows, NBC status), and yet you think that they do.

Well, that is giving entirely too much power to foreign laws, a most non-conservative thing to do. And besides, it is not the law, foreign citizenship laws simply have NO effect on US citizens in the USA.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#130396 Nov 28, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU bashed Mitt Romney for being a LDS with zero evidence that he would base all his rulings on his religion. You never Question Democrats who happen to be Democrats like San Fran Nan Pelosi or Teddy Kennedy but you some how thing a Conservative who appears to have religious conviction will disregard our Constitutution.
And again, Jimmy Carter help establish the Muslim Theocratic in Iran and Obama is doing it in Egypt and Libya and you remain SILENT!
I do not want to live in any theocracy but neither do I want to live in an atheistic society. You seem to think that because of our First Amendment you should be able to restrict people's religious freedoms.
1. I never bashed Mitt Rommey. I simply quoted the book of mormon. You're a strange one, Rogue. I quote verbatim the bible and then the book of mormon, I don't invent anything, I don't add, I just quote it as it is written and the result ? I bash the bible, I bash Romney? I never ever said that he would base all his rulings on his religion. Look all you want, scroll, you'll never see a word of mine that said that;

2. Did you know that the Carters spent Christmas 1978 in Teheran with the Shah? It's what he wanted. Is this he hated the Shah? In your above post, you wrote : "And again, Jimmy Carter help establish the Muslim Theocratic in Iran and Obama is doing it in Egypt and Libya and you remain SILENT!". Wow. Would you care to tell us how Carter accomplished this? And while you are at it, how Obama is right at the moment accomplishing it?"

3. How ridiculous that you would write : "You seem to think that because of our First Amendment you should be able to restrict people's religious freedoms". I never mentioned the 1st amendment and even less advocated the restriction of people's religious freedoms. You know that's a lie, why you saying it?

4. Finally, Rogue, you don't know what's in me, religious, atheist, etc. And you never will. But I will say this. Atheists seem a whole lot more tolerant than religious peoople, ANY and all religions. Atheists have never persecuted anyone based religion. As a matter of fact, and after Constantine's blessing of christianity and during the inquisition, it was sure death by horrible torture to be an atheist, and during the crusades, to be moslem.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#130397 Nov 28, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Where in the world do you come up with this crap from? What it would teach you dumbazz is to watch your mouth. Which, obviously is a lesson you haven't learned. Which tells me you wouldn't say it to his/her face or anyone else's! You're laughable jacqazz. Quit thinking you're someone of influence, you're not. LMAO!
No, none of that. You just think that brawn trumps brain. Think about that.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#130398 Nov 28, 2012
Terry Buckeye wrote:
<quoted text>
I;m pretty sure the U.S. never declared war on either of the Korean countries.
You're right. It was a United Nations intervention.

As to the 1st WW ending in 1990 or whatever, because that is when the reparations were finally paid off, what a lot of hooey. I guess I would not have visited Germany before 1990 had I known we were at war with them. Why did neither of our countries issue a travel advisory?
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#130399 Nov 28, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
1. I never bashed Mitt Rommey. I simply quoted the book of mormon. You're a strange one, Rogue. I quote verbatim the bible and then the book of mormon, I don't invent anything, I don't add, I just quote it as it is written and the result ? I bash the bible, I bash Romney? I never ever said that he would base all his rulings on his religion. Look all you want, scroll, you'll never see a word of mine that said that;
2. Did you know that the Carters spent Christmas 1978 in Teheran with the Shah? It's what he wanted. Is this he hated the Shah? In your above post, you wrote : "And again, Jimmy Carter help establish the Muslim Theocratic in Iran and Obama is doing it in Egypt and Libya and you remain SILENT!". Wow. Would you care to tell us how Carter accomplished this? And while you are at it, how Obama is right at the moment accomplishing it?"
3. How ridiculous that you would write : "You seem to think that because of our First Amendment you should be able to restrict people's religious freedoms". I never mentioned the 1st amendment and even less advocated the restriction of people's religious freedoms. You know that's a lie, why you saying it?
4. Finally, Rogue, you don't know what's in me, religious, atheist, etc. And you never will. But I will say this. Atheists seem a whole lot more tolerant than religious peoople, ANY and all religions. Atheists have never persecuted anyone based religion. As a matter of fact, and after Constantine's blessing of christianity and during the inquisition, it was sure death by horrible torture to be an atheist, and during the crusades, to be moslem.
Bullchit!
Affirmative Diversity

Louisville, KY

#130401 Nov 28, 2012
Learn to Read wrote:
Flash. Oily loses again. This time it was her ObamaCare debacle
http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/114369912
The old lack of standing excuse, AGAIN, huh?
Apparently no one has the standing to challenge the US's illegal usurper pResident.
One of these days the Republicans will find their common sense and balls.
Until then, we shall all suffer immensely.
Affirmative Diversity

Louisville, KY

#130402 Nov 28, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
belive in it.
There is that lack of edumacation showing again.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#130403 Nov 28, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
1.I'm a fair guy. Okay, I believe you, you wrote household and I therefore erred and apologize;
2. "MARTA" is definitely racist as it refers to Africans, and yes, Africans are not a race, BUT it is so clearly implied that Africans are black, so therefore it IS racist. Way-out racist. Are you trying to tell us that the expression "MARTA, Moving Africans Rapidly Through Atlanta" applies to even ONE white person? Tell me this, Rogue, and in the spirit of answering questions like I do, like I just did, would you state that the acronym "MARTA" encompasses any white dudes? Do the words African or afro-American imply white caucassian people?
1. I accept the fact you believe me.
2. And yes, African imply any racial group that is indigenous to AFRICA. I use it because most black people do not seem to understand that. Yes, you can totally be a white person and be an Afro-American too.
And I understand that there are three groups of people who are indigenous to the Americans. The first and third groups came from Manchurian and Mongolia and the second group came from Siberia and that is why American Indians from East of the Mississippi River have thinner faces and nose and have lighter skin color than those from west of the Mississippi River.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#130404 Nov 28, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Bullchit!
Prove it. Paragraph by paragraph, line by line.
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#130405 Nov 28, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
"Has showed"? Really.
Yes really. Want to see the citations?
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#130406 Nov 28, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
belive in it.
Affirmative Diversity wrote:
<quoted text>
There is that lack of edumacation showing again.
1. I don't recall writing that. Post number please;
2. I always capitalize my first word in a sentence;
3. If I did write "belive", so what? Little boy blue enjoys highlighting typos because he can't find anything else?
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#130407 Nov 28, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
1. I accept the fact you believe me.
2. And yes, African imply any racial group that is indigenous to AFRICA. I use it because most black people do not seem to understand that. Yes, you can totally be a white person and be an Afro-American too.
And I understand that there are three groups of people who are indigenous to the Americans. The first and third groups came from Manchurian and Mongolia and the second group came from Siberia and that is why American Indians from East of the Mississippi River have thinner faces and nose and have lighter skin color than those from west of the Mississippi River.
Rogue, "African" and "Afro-American" are generally regarded as black. That's it.

As for North Africa, the Maghreb and middle east and parts of Asia (Israel, some of Gaza, etc). well, let me tell you that all of those people dislike being called Africans. They don't say so, but they don't. Even Ethiopians, who are darker than North Africans, resent being called Africans, as they consider themselves to be descendants of Solomon who was apparently neither African nor black. It's a complex thing, but you must admit, when one thinks of Africa, one thinks of the black, of the dark continent.
Affirmative Diversity

Louisville, KY

#130408 Nov 28, 2012
Johannes wrote:
<quoted text>
teh
Lack of edumacation shows itself again, huh?

Since: Dec 11

Fort Worth, TX

#130409 Nov 28, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
I mean, ask any past President to show his BC for 5M to the charity of his choice and they'd jump on it. That doesn't say anything to you?
Which President was ever asked? I've seen a few in my day and I don't remember a single one who was asked to show his birth certificate. Nonetheless, he showed it and it was confirmed by several independent sources.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#130410 Nov 28, 2012
Affirmative Diversity wrote:
<quoted text>
Lack of edumacation shows itself again, huh?
The typo parade, having nothing better to do, are now pointing them out for all to see, instantly provoking loud cheers and celebrations from childish and illiterate birthers and tea partyers. Keep it up, kids.

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) 5 min EasyEed 1,234,133
News US Sen. Thad Cochran marries longtime aide, his... 13 min Emily Latella 9
News Santorum Launches Second White House Bid 19 min Far Away 23
News Can Rick Santorum escape his past? 21 min Lawrence Wolf 21
News U.S. Strategy Against Islamic State Under Scrutiny 33 min Cat74 67
News National poll shows no clear GOP frontrunner 1 hr fatbacksx 5
News Rand Paul: Republican brand 'sucks' 1 hr American_Infidel 73
More from around the web