The President has failed us

Jun 9, 2012 Read more: Times News 323,263
This week, I decided to list the reasons I would not vote for Barack Obama in the next election. Read more

Since: Jun 10

Fremont, CA

#121067 Mar 28, 2013
Quirky wrote:
<quoted text>
Grow the F*&K up you lunatic. LMAO @ U
Whatever, punk.
2 posts removed
Welcome To Obamas America

San Bernardino, CA

#121070 Mar 28, 2013
Gun Store Owners: Ammo Shipments Are Not Even Making It To Shelves

Customers “are buying up everything”

Steve Watson
Infowars.com
March 28, 2013

Gun store owners say they have never experienced anything like the demand for firearms and ammunition that they are currently witnessing in the wake of a renewed government push for gun control.

Read more: http://www.infowars.com/gun-store-owners-ammo...

Since: Jun 10

Fremont, CA

#121071 Mar 28, 2013
huntcoyotes wrote:
<quoted text>Not at all, Rose. I'm being sincere. I even found this for you- "Our culture has accepted two lies. The first is that if you disagree with someone’s lifestyle, you must fear or hate them. The second is that to love someone means you agree with everything they believe or do. Both are nonsense..
You don’t have to compromise convictions to be passionate."
Rick Warren
Now this:
I have a childhood friend- known him since we were 5, so we've been friends for over 40 years. He got on medication that changed his personality to the point I (and everyone else!)could barely stand to be around him as it made him extremely abrasive, indeed at one point he told me to lose his phone #, so we didn't talk for almost a year. Finally, he got off the medication by finding another doctor who changed his meds. I have my friend back now. I wish you well.
LMAO! I am NOT your friend. How arrogant of you to even address such a personal issue to me in this context.

And yes, it was condescending. You don't know me, you don't know anything about me. Yet, you get a hold of one piece of personal information and think you do, and that you have any right to advise me?

I can't stop laughing. Perhaps, it's YOU and not your friend who has the problem. Presuming to know a stranger on the Internet and giving them personal advice publicly is the height of arrogance and completely inappropriate.

If you find me "abrasive," then perhaps you shouldn't offer your snide little unsolicited advice on the subject. I'm certain I know far more about my own personal history than YOU do.

Get back on topic, and leave my personal business out of your comments.
1 post removed

Since: Jun 10

Fremont, CA

#121073 Mar 28, 2013
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>Why not take the below for a spin!
4. Supreme Court cases that cite “natural born Citizen” as one born on U.S. soil to citizen parents:
The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)
Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says:“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.
Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)
Ann Scott was born in South Carolina before the American revolution, and her father adhered to the American cause and remained and was at his death a citizen of South Carolina. There is no dispute that his daughter Ann, at the time of the Revolution and afterwards, remained in South Carolina until December, 1782. Whether she was of age during this time does not appear. If she was, then her birth and residence might be deemed to constitute her by election a citizen of South Carolina. If she was not of age, then she might well be deemed under the circumstances of this case to hold the citizenship of her father, for children born in a country, continuing while under age in the family of the father, partake of his national character as a citizen of that country. Her citizenship, then, being prima facie established, and indeed this is admitted in the pleadings, has it ever been lost, or was it lost before the death of her father, so that the estate in question was, upon the descent cast, incapable of vesting in her? Upon the facts stated, it appears to us that it was not lost and that she was capable of taking it at the time of the descent cast.
Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857)
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As society cannot perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their parents, and succeed to all their rights.' Again:'I say, to be of the country, it is necessary to be born of a person who is a citizen; for if he be born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country....
Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)
The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.
Barack Obama is still President of the United States and a legal U.S. citizen.

Take it up with the Supreme Court if you still have a problem with that.
1 post removed
J S Hammond

Buffalo, NY

#121075 Mar 28, 2013
---Wild Irish Rose--- wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO! I am NOT your friend. How arrogant of you to even address such a personal issue to me in this context.
And yes, it was condescending. You don't know me, you don't know anything about me. Yet, you get a hold of one piece of personal information and think you do, and that you have any right to advise me?
I can't stop laughing. Perhaps, it's YOU and not your friend who has the problem. Presuming to know a stranger on the Internet and giving them personal advice publicly is the height of arrogance and completely inappropriate.
If you find me "abrasive," then perhaps you shouldn't offer your snide little unsolicited advice on the subject. I'm certain I know far more about my own personal history than YOU do.
Get back on topic, and leave my personal business out of your comments.
Mad one minute then laughing the next.......Sounds like Bipolar Disorder. IMO
1 post removed

Since: Jun 10

Fremont, CA

#121077 Mar 28, 2013
NTRPRNR1 wrote:
<quoted text>Not so fast, hotshot. He was born in The U.S.A. to an American mother - which automatically makes him a U.S. citizen by birth. His mother owed no allegiance to any other country. Just as my granddaughter was born in a German civilian hospital to U.S. citizen active duty military personnel and was conferred dual citizenship, she was and is, and ever will be a U.S. citizen by birth. The laws have changed, but she had until either age 18 or 21 to decide whether or not she wanted to become a German citizen or give up that option. Well, of course she gave it up.
Now, move along from your own silly little history lesson which has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the President's birthright as a U.S. citizen. You birthers are the most ignorant in the stable of far right nags.
Amen, NTR.

I'm afraid it's useless. They will run with any lie, any accusation as long as it involves discrediting or hating the President. They're hatred knows no bounds.

What they're too ignorant to accept is that if there were even the slightest chance that Barack Obama was not a legal U.S. citizen, the far right would have been all over it LONG before he even started running for President. They would have turned over every rock, initiated every possible legal challenge, and the State Department and the Justice Department would have uncovered any fraud, and Barack Obama would not be President now.

But I'm sure the conspiracy lunatics would have us believe that the entire government has been in cohoots to see that Obama was elected President. The insanity would be amusing if it weren't so pathetically ignorant.

The birthers have had no case from the beginning. Nothing but lies motivated by hatred.
Big Bubba

Los Angeles, CA

#121078 Mar 28, 2013
---Wild Irish Rose--- wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO! I am NOT your friend. How arrogant of you to even address such a personal issue to me in this context.
And yes, it was condescending. You don't know me, you don't know anything about me. Yet, you get a hold of one piece of personal information and think you do, and that you have any right to advise me?
I can't stop laughing. Perhaps, it's YOU and not your friend who has the problem. Presuming to know a stranger on the Internet and giving them personal advice publicly is the height of arrogance and completely inappropriate.
If you find me "abrasive," then perhaps you shouldn't offer your snide little unsolicited advice on the subject. I'm certain I know far more about my own personal history than YOU do.
Get back on topic, and leave my personal business out of your comments.
Can U try warshing out dat disgusting GASH?
dem flies are landin on it, lmbao
2 posts removed
Snake Eyes

Long Beach, CA

#121081 Mar 28, 2013
Tranquillity wrote:
<quoted text>
Once again, "The President has failed us".
GOP ponders long list of names, policies, for 2016

Republicans' search for a way back to presidential success is drawing a striking array of personalities and policy options, creating a wide-open self-reassessment of the party.

Ponder more: http://news.channelone.com/ap/news/GOP-ponder...

Since: Jun 10

Fremont, CA

#121082 Mar 28, 2013
positronium wrote:
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.
Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939),
was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that a child born in the United States to naturalized parents on U.S. soil is a natural born citizen and that the child's natural born citizenship is not lost if the child is taken to and raised in the country of the parents' origin, provided that upon attaining the age of majority, the child elects to retain U.S. citizenship "and to return to the United States to assume its duties." Not only did the court rule that she did not lose her native born Citizenship but it upheld the lower courts decision that she is a "natural born Citizen of the United States" because she was born in the USA to two naturalized U.S. Citizens.
"But the Secretary of State, according to the allegation of the bill of complaint, had refused to issue a passport to Miss Elg 'solely on the ground that she had lost her native born American citizenship.' The court below, properly recognizing the existence of an actual controversy with the defendants [307 U.S. 325, 350](Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Haworth, 300 U.S. 227 , 57 S.Ct. 461, 108 A.L.R. 1000), declared Miss Elg 'to be a natural born citizen of the United States'(99 F.2d 414) and we think that the decree should include the Secretary of State as well as the other defendants. The decree in that sense would in no way interfere with the exercise of the Secretary's discretion with respect to the issue of a passport but would simply preclude the denial of a passport on the sole ground that Miss Elg had lost her American citizenship."
The Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”.<quoted text>You Ma'me, are out of line.
This "ado" is about everything.
Our nation's future is at stake.
You're fired!
LMAO at you!

What a drama queen.
Welcome To Obamas America

San Bernardino, CA

#121083 Mar 28, 2013
Obama agrees with Napolitano: We can’t make legalization contingent upon border security
posted at 11:21 am on March 28, 2013 by Allahpundit

The newsiest bit from yesterday’s interview with Telemundo. Rubio’s said since the beginning that the path to citizenship (which is different from initial probationary legal status) can’t happen until the border’s been tightened, so if O insists upon this then Rubio’s destined to walk away.

But would Obama insist upon it, to the point of veto? I’m skeptical.

Read more: http://hotair.com/archives/2013/03/28/obama-a...
1 post removed
American Lady

Netherlands

#121085 Mar 28, 2013
Darn I have dobie jizz in my hair again
1 post removed

Since: Jun 10

Fremont, CA

#121087 Mar 28, 2013
J S Hammond wrote:
<quoted text>
Mad one minute then laughing the next.......Sounds like Bipolar Disorder. IMO
Nope. It's called being human. Try it, and don't even attempt armchair psychology with me and stupid labels when you don't know what you're talking about, troll.

Since: Jun 10

Fremont, CA

#121088 Mar 28, 2013
Tranquillity wrote:
<quoted text>Hi itch.
Hi Ralff.

Thanks for posting my personal information yesterday and subjecting me to all the abuse today, you Pr*ck.
1 post removed

Since: Jun 10

Fremont, CA

#121090 Mar 28, 2013
Freakin' idiots.

And it's ALWAYS the far right who turn every thread into a garbage dump with their vulgarity and hatred.

No matter you people lost--you're losers.
3 posts removed

Since: Jun 10

Fremont, CA

#121094 Mar 28, 2013
Just An Honest Man wrote:
<quoted text> I pity the person you do call "friend".
How childish of you.

I have very good friends and I am a good friend to them as well. You apparently are quite ignorant, and have no idea what you're talking about since you don't know me in the slightest.

Get back on topic and grow up.

Since: Oct 07

sugarcoated sunshine

#121095 Mar 28, 2013
Republican Honey wrote:
On Monday afternoon, Salon‘s Joan Walsh posted a scathing critique of Breitbart‘s Matthew Boyle, triggered by Boyle’s report on President Obama’s daughters’ spring break vacation in the Bahamas.
Arguing that Boyle’s reporting has a racial undercurrent, Walsh’s post is entitled:“How not to seem like a racist: A tip for right-wingers angry about charges of racial bias: Try treating the Obama daughters with decency.”
What’s that you say about ‘decency’ towards POTUS’s daughters, Joan? Perhaps a column on double-standards should be next on your list.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/salons-joan-wa...
The very same Joan Walsh, who today rails about the need to show POTUS’s daughters “respect” and “decency”, in 2001 penned an article for Salon implying that Jenna Bush, a teenager at the time, may have a drinking problem.
Jenna Bush did have a drinking problem - she was cited for underage drinking more than once, that's a problem! She was charged with a misdemeanor at least once, so I would say this became a reportable story.
I'll bet you had no problem with the intense scrutiny Pres. and Hillary Clinton were put through because of his sexual indescretions?
Borat Ovomit

Los Angeles, CA

#121096 Mar 28, 2013
---Wild Irish Rose--- wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi Ralff.
Thanks for posting my personal information yesterday and subjecting me to all the abuse today, you Pr*ck.
Oh look, it's the Bi-Polar old lady nut. Like bubba said" go warsh out that disgusting GASH"

Since: Jun 10

Fremont, CA

#121097 Mar 28, 2013
Just An Honest Man wrote:
<quoted text> I pity the person you do call "friend".
BTW, hi Ralff.
2 posts removed
American Lady

France

#121100 Mar 28, 2013
---Wild Irish Rose--- wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi Ralff.
Thanks for posting my personal information yesterday and subjecting me to all the abuse today, you Pr*ck.
You just need a back rub from my dobies. I call it double penetration lol but I just love it girl

“Peace”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#121101 Mar 28, 2013
J S Hammond wrote:
<quoted text>
Just like a Libtard to teach their ilk to cheat the system.
The only problem with what you said is that person is a conservative.

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 Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 11 min Chimney1 159,630
News Gay marriage (Mar '13) 17 min Belle Sexton 59,236
News The Supreme Court's big gay-marriage case could... 19 min Belle Sexton 8
News Russia providing arms to Ukrainian separatists:... 21 min ACTUALLY 895
How Should the US Government Respond to ISIS? (Sep '14) 29 min Payson Terhune 3,361
News U.S. corporations pressure two states accused o... 34 min NorCal Native 793
News US Shouldn't Condone Turkey's Posture Of Denial... 43 min SpaceBlues 1
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 hr ACTUALLY 1,216,684
News Hillary Clinton has a new position on same-sex ... 2 hr Fa-Foxy 197
News Poll: Hillary Clinton most admired woman 4 hr Bill Clinton 519
More from around the web