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

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 ... Full Story
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#114169 Oct 4, 2012
Sure seems quiet today.
Johannes

Yucaipa, CA

#114170 Oct 4, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Rogue Scholar wrote:
<quoted text>
Get off the race thing. Everyone knows that Obama is a crack head and the last thing we need in the White House is a stoned head.
<quoted text>
OMG, we have the Three Stooges on here. I don't care if Pookie is black or a crack head, I just don't like the progressive agenda he is taking us on!
Three Stooges???

Oh, you mean like

1) Rogue Scholar
2) Rogue Scholar 5
3) Christie-Palin
4) Abdul

Oh, that's four....let's not forget the biggest Stooge of all, Thomas Nadeau....who seems to enjoy trading comments with himself....what a STOOGE!!!!
Romney Flip Flopper Rino

Islip, NY

#114173 Oct 4, 2012
Johannes wrote:
<quoted text>
Three Stooges???
Oh, you mean like
1) Rogue Scholar
2) Rogue Scholar 5
3) Christie-Palin
4) Abdul
Oh, that's four....let's not forget the biggest Stooge of all, Thomas Nadeau....who seems to enjoy trading comments with himself....what a STOOGE!!!!
Bingo!

I stand corrected.

He has four.

LOL

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#114174 Oct 4, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Number 1 : Your posts would have more credibility if you quit the name-calling. Have I ever name-called you?;
Number 2 : I'm not aware that Byrd causes any deaths. Did he? But he did change his outlook on race. Is there anything wrong with one changing his/her mind? I do it all the time if proven I'm on the wrong path. Winston Churchill said : "A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject." ;
Number 3 : May I respectfully remind you that Rogue brought up the subject of race, I didn't, and you picked it up. I accused no one of being racist, I just said that Byrd changes his viewpoint. You mentioned his racism.
Just so you know, I marked your post as funny.
If you had common sense, you'd explode.
:D
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#114175 Oct 4, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
So you take Factcheck's word simply because it is funded by .... Geo. Soros. Again, the original video was not taken by Republicans. Ergo it came from the LSM which means some where there is an original copy. Sooooo, where is this original copy?
Oh, there is a reason why Factcheck does not want to show us the original copy and that reason is, it is the same as the one shown. You see, if they had the original and it would prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the one shown was edited, they would have released it!!!
Good try there Tootzie, but as Clinton told Monica, no more cigars!
http://cjonline.com/opinion/2012-10-02/mike-h...

Politifact is not funded by Soros.

In addition, the fact that the video is forged can be seen in the lack of reaction by the audience. Obama is supposed to have told them that he was born in a foreign country, and yet there is not an expression of surprise on a single face.

IF Obama had actually said that he was born in Kenya, it would have been in the press. Obama's opponents in the 2008 election would have been all over the matter. Sarah Palin would have said something. But no, no one has said a thing.

It is easy to forge videos.

But say that Obama had actually SAID that he was born in Kenya? Would that make him born in Kenya? No obviously. When the government of Kenya says that it has investigated and determined that Obama was not born there, and the government of Hawaii (confirmed by the birth notices in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961) says that he was born in Hawaii, the evidence is that he was born in HAWAII and not in Kenya.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#114176 Oct 4, 2012
Romney Flip Flopper Rino wrote:
I am starting to believe Rogue is the authentic Sybil on Topix.
My guess he has three monikers and it is not Lewinsky.
LOL
With All Due Respect,
Shirley Ardell Mason
Ah, and who is Terri Tanna, Grand Birther, etc?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#114177 Oct 4, 2012
A friend of mine just brought up an important point, "What does Bill Clinton think about the debate?" In fact, where is Bill Clinton? Is he in hiding? And if so, why?
And where on Earth is Hillary Clinton? Is she in hiding too? And you Libytards are probably thinking, we should have voted for Hillary on Oh-eight!!!
While we Conservatives are probably thinking, Bush was not as bad as we thought either!!!
Johannes

Yucaipa, CA

#114178 Oct 4, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, and who is Terri Tanna, Grand Birther, etc?
Terri Tanna is the one who is handing you your ass with her every comment.
Johannes

Yucaipa, CA

#114179 Oct 4, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
A friend of mine just brought up an important point, "What does Bill Clinton think about the debate?" In fact, where is Bill Clinton? Is he in hiding? And if so, why?
And where on Earth is Hillary Clinton? Is she in hiding too? And you Libytards are probably thinking, we should have voted for Hillary on Oh-eight!!!
While we Conservatives are probably thinking, Bush was not as bad as we thought either!!!
Yea, where was that dufus Bush during the Repub Convention????

Yep, the dufus Bush was as bad as all Americans thought.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#114181 Oct 4, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
A friend of mine just brought up an important point, "What does Bill Clinton think about the debate?" In fact, where is Bill Clinton? Is he in hiding? And if so, why?
And where on Earth is Hillary Clinton? Is she in hiding too? And you Libytards are probably thinking, we should have voted for Hillary on Oh-eight!!!
While we Conservatives are probably thinking, Bush was not as bad as we thought either!!!
Bill is at home looking up the definition of "is". Hillary is simply hiding.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#114182 Oct 4, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
http://cjonline.com/opinion/2012-10-02/mike-h...
Politifact is not funded by Soros.
In addition, the fact that the video is forged can be seen in the lack of reaction by the audience. Obama is supposed to have told them that he was born in a foreign country, and yet there is not an expression of surprise on a single face.
IF Obama had actually said that he was born in Kenya, it would have been in the press. Obama's opponents in the 2008 election would have been all over the matter. Sarah Palin would have said something. But no, no one has said a thing.
It is easy to forge videos.
But say that Obama had actually SAID that he was born in Kenya? Would that make him born in Kenya? No obviously. When the government of Kenya says that it has investigated and determined that Obama was not born there, and the government of Hawaii (confirmed by the birth notices in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961) says that he was born in Hawaii, the evidence is that he was born in HAWAII and not in Kenya.
Again, where is the proof it was edited (forged)? No smoking gun, just opinions!
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#114183 Oct 4, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>Again, where is the proof it was edited (forged)? No smoking gun, just opinions!
This from a moron that has been proclaiming that both the long and short form Birth Certificates issued, verified and attested to by the State of Hawaii were forged? Rotflmao

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#114184 Oct 4, 2012
Johannes wrote:
<quoted text>
Yea, where was that dufus Bush during the Repub Convention????
Yep, the dufus Bush was as bad as all Americans thought.
Former Republican president avoid politics after they leave office. But did you notice that Jimmy Carter was nowhere to be found? Not that they wanted him around or anything like that!
But we I was not taking about the Convention, was I? No one wants to talk to Jimmy Carter but they would love to get Clinton's opinion, but only if they can find him!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#114185 Oct 4, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>and your point is?
You can't read into the Constitution what isn't there.
Mr. Howard insured there would not be a dual-citizenship status,"This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens," This doesn't look like much, but what it accomplished is outstanding
Too bad Mr. Howard's statement, which isn't controlling, had nothing to do with dual citizenship. A person born in the US of ordinary alien parents is born a citizen, and is not a "foreigner". Operation of foreign law cannot make a citizen into an alien.

Persons born aliens, foreigners, were understood, according to Mr. Howard, to be children of foreign ambassadors.

Sen. Howard himself believed that persons born in the US are born citizens.

“A citizen of the United States is held by the courts to be a person who was born within the limits of the United States and subject to their laws.” Senator Jacob Howard, Cong. Globe 39th Cong., 1st Sess, 2765 (1866).

“They became such in virtue of national law, or rather natural law which recognizes persons born within the jurisdiction of every country as being subjects or citizens of that country. Such persons were, therefore, citizens of the United States as were born in the country or were made by naturalization.” Senator Jacob Howard, Cong. Globe 39th Cong., 1st Sess, 2765 (1866).

Talk about reading into the constitution what is not there!

Get real.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#114186 Oct 4, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
A friend of mine just brought up an important point, "What does Bill Clinton think about the debate?" In fact, where is Bill Clinton? Is he in hiding? And if so, why?
And where on Earth is Hillary Clinton? Is she in hiding too? And you Libytards are probably thinking, we should have voted for Hillary on Oh-eight!!!
While we Conservatives are probably thinking, Bush was not as bad as we thought either!!!
Johannes wrote;
Yea, where was that dufus Bush during the Repub Convention????

Yep, the dufus Bush was as bad as all Americans thought.
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Bill is at home looking up the definition of "is". Hillary is simply hiding.
I think I struck Johannes' funny bone!
Johannes

Yucaipa, CA

#114188 Oct 4, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Former Republican president avoid politics after they leave office. But did you notice that Jimmy Carter was nowhere to be found? Not that they wanted him around or anything like that!
But we I was not taking about the Convention, was I? No one wants to talk to Jimmy Carter but they would love to get Clinton's opinion, but only if they can find him!
Once again you cherry pick your data to try and make some sort of distorted point. Dufus Bush wasn't at the convention because he is a disgrace to the American people and his presence would have brought back memories of his failed policies.

Bill Clinton was at the Dem Convention....and he was recently in New Hampshire. It is only YOU that seem to believe he his hiding.
Johannes

Yucaipa, CA

#114189 Oct 4, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Johannes wrote;
Yea, where was that dufus Bush during the Repub Convention????
Yep, the dufus Bush was as bad as all Americans thought.
<quoted text>
I think I struck Johannes' funny bone!
What's the matter, Thomas, no intelligent response to my comment?

Can't defend the dufus Bush????

Can't defend his absence at the convention???
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#114190 Oct 4, 2012
Terri Tanna wrote:
<quoted text>
But his mere legislative comments-opinion carry no weight in law. Try learning about constitutional and statutory construction. The rules have only been around for 800 years. Sorry you missed the first eight centuries of Anglo-American jurisprudence.
But, but, but!
How about this, " This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States".
The Citizenship Clause he offered was ratified in 1868, in it's entirety, now the supreme law of the land.
Sorry you missed the first 10,000+ years of natural law.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#114192 Oct 4, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>But, but, but!
How about this, " This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States".
The Citizenship Clause he offered was ratified in 1868, in it's entirety, now the supreme law of the land.
Sorry you missed the first 10,000+ years of natural law.
Sen. Howard himself believed that persons born in the US are born citizens, except for children of foreign ambassadors, certain Indians, etc.

“A citizen of the United States is held by the courts to be a person who was born within the limits of the United States and subject to their laws.” Senator Jacob Howard, Cong. Globe 39th Cong., 1st Sess, 2765 (1866).

“They became such in virtue of national law, or rather natural law which recognizes persons born within the jurisdiction of every country as being subjects or citizens of that country. Such persons were, therefore, citizens of the United States as were born in the country or were made by naturalization.” Senator Jacob Howard, Cong. Globe 39th Cong., 1st Sess, 2765 (1866).

Talk about reading into the constitution what is not there!
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#114193 Oct 4, 2012
Terri Tanna wrote:
<quoted text>
Guess you understand our sacred Constitution better than your own United States Supreme Court which has upheld a contrary dispositive holding by the controlling federal appellate court.
]What I understand, the USSC tried to change the US Constitution in 1898 (WKA) and failed miserably.
To allow an alien into the position of POTUS is unconstitutional, a violation of the supreme law of the land. Violations of the US Constitution does not create a precedence.
Where were the checks and balance?

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 News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Next gay marriage fight: religious exemptions 3 min WeTheSheeple 3,627
Allah "The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful" Pr... 4 min Joe 178
US judge upholds state same-sex marriage ban, r... 5 min Pietro Armando 1,233
Judge resigns so he won't have to marry gay cou... 5 min Rick in Kansas 759
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 6 min RealDave 1,144,469
The President has failed us (Jun '12) 7 min thefirm 284,142
Holder: We're Not Done Investigating Ferguson P... 7 min Knowthedifference 139
Ben Carson: Race Relations Have 'Gotten Worse' ... 7 min inbred Genius 45
Obama's Amnesty Action Fuels Flood of Immigrati... 10 min Jeff Brightone 9
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Released from Hospital Afte... 14 min Jeff Brightone 1
Immigrants' chances tied to their state's polices 22 min Jeff Brightone 1
GOP hopes class of black Republicans is trend 1 hr Lawrence Wolf 6

US News People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE