BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 243588 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.

Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#88003 Jun 29, 2012
American Lady wrote:
Did you really ever think Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and Barack Obama could outsmart and outplay Justice Roberts? Really?
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/obamac...
The opinion Justice Roberts REALLY wrote ....

Sorry Sam - your "commerce clause" is way off base ... This is a tax, pure and simple., and we (SCOTUS) have already agreed that Congress and POTUS have broad powers so levy taxes.(besides - what if another Bush becomes POTUS? We can't tie their hands by pretending we can limit taxes)

The REAL problem here is that ANY law signed by the USURPING MF'er MUST be illegal! The FACT that he is a USURPING MF'er has already been declared proven by a baker's dozoon of morons on the internet ... and since my flunky so snidely referenced Vatell let us not forget that he has ADMITTED that his father was never a US Citizen FOR ONE SINGLE MINUTE!!!!!!!!!(hat tip to Tacky the Elmer’s Cow and that sniveling coward Mr. Larkin).

No - Obama Care must be tossed because I had my fingers crossed behind my back BOTH TIMES as I administered the Oath of Office. TAKE THAT Bitches!!!!!!

....

So why didn't the Chief Justice publish these words? Oh - That's right - because in addition to being THE BEST guest at a reception, the man has character and smarts ... and he doesn't share your Birfoon fantasies ... never has, never will.

Rant on Hag ... rant on
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#88004 Jun 29, 2012
Just Sayin wrote:
<quoted text>
GREAT POST ROGUE
I was listening to a liberal radio talk show on the road yesterday and a caller asked about the rumor he had heard about the new taxes in Obamacare.
The host said that was just the penalty he would have to pay if he didn't get insurance. Needless to say I instantly went into controlled road rage.
LIE!!!! You haven't controlled ANY rage for at least 4 years.

the westerner

“wisdom”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#88005 Jun 29, 2012
Just Sayin wrote:
Analysis: Ruling adds hundreds of billions to healthcare law costs
The Supreme Court's decision to let states opt out of the healthcare law's Medicaid expansion will increase costs by hundreds of billions, according to an analysis by a conservative think tank.
Thursday's ruling means that states can refuse to expand Medicaid coverage for millions of low-income people without facing the law's original penalty.
The American Action Forum (AAF) estimated that states will not only forgo the Medicaid expansion, they'll cut their Medicaid roll back to the "federally designated minimum" and move everyone onto the law's insurance exchanges.
AAF chief Douglas Holtz-Eakin blogged Friday that this would force the "federal government (read: taxpayer)" to foot the bill.
http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-r...
Only the acutely stupid, ignorant, dishonest or naive could possibly believe or claim Obamacare will cut the costs of healthcare.

Without a doubt it will be an unmitigated disaster and failure.
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#88006 Jun 29, 2012
so levy taxes?

Like auto correct thinks THAT makes sense?

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#88007 Jun 29, 2012
American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
Vol. 14 No. 5 (May 2004), pp.337-341
THE CREATION OF AMERICAN COMMON LAW, 1850-1880: TECHNOLOGY, POLITICS, AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF CITIZENSHIP, by Howard Schweber. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004. 304pp. Cloth,$60.00.£45.00. ISBN: 0521824621.
http://www.bsos.umd.edu/gvpt/lpbr/subpages/re...
Sorry, BirfoonLady, your copy'n'paste does not address the issue that "The interpretation of the constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law, and are to be read in the light of its history." Smith v. Alabama, 124 U.S. 465,478(1888).

See also, Minor v. Happersett, US v. Ark, Perkins v. Elg, US v. Rhodes, In re Look Tin Sing, Lynch v. Clarke, Ex parte Chin King, etc.

UR tilting at windmills.
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
American er hmm Lady still does not realise that Wikipedia's researchers and contributors are all unpaid volunteers who are also called on to correct each others' contributions. And that is a good thing, and a fine source for any kind of information of a general nature. I use it all the time, a great time-saver. For example, we can accept that Columbus discovered North America on behalf of Spain and that the Allies won WWII. However, and if the subject at hand is complex, scientifcially, constitutionally or otherwise, best to turn to sources that are universally recognised.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#88008 Jun 29, 2012
American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't KNOW how to "click"....;-)
Huh? AL is off-point, as usual.

Does BirfoonLady have a point? Does she know what a point is? Can she coherently express it in the English language?
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
??????

Since: Dec 11

Fort Worth, TX

#88009 Jun 29, 2012
the westerner wrote:
<quoted text>
The majority of Americans oppose BO's "tax", he's doomed for sure. 26 states will tell BO to go pound sand.
You might want to reinforce your support circle. I think you'll need it again in November.
Just Sayin

Toledo, OH

#88010 Jun 29, 2012
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
LIE!!!! You haven't controlled ANY rage for at least 4 years.
And I see that you are still learning to read.

Since: Dec 11

Fort Worth, TX

#88011 Jun 29, 2012
the westerner wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, BO displayed a total lack of class and civility never seen in the office of the presidency before. The words "petulant" and "spoiled brat" come to mind.
And see, I think he brings class and integrity to the offce. Not that either was lacking after that suave and debonaire GWB!
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#88012 Jun 29, 2012
Just Sayin wrote:
<quoted text>
And I see that you are still learning to read.
blather blather blather weak response blather blather ... the more times change, the more stupid Birfoons remain.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#88013 Jun 29, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text> ...firstly intiated by GWB. It should never have been started by GWB and certainly never continued by Obama, though I doubt both GWB and Obama made those decisions.
the westerner wrote:
<quoted text>
Another lie.
Ah, have you noticed that Jacques gives Obama the credit for everything ...... except when he disagrees and then it is Bush's fault. I wonder if Jacques knows that Bush left the White House three and a half years ago!?!?
Just Sayin

Toledo, OH

#88014 Jun 29, 2012
the westerner wrote:
<quoted text>
Only the acutely stupid, ignorant, dishonest or naive could possibly believe or claim Obamacare will cut the costs of healthcare.
Without a doubt it will be an unmitigated disaster and failure.
Obama's minions don't seem to realize that once the government gets them under it's thumb choices are not an option anymore.

Oh wait.......we are already there.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

United States

#88015 Jun 29, 2012
American Lady wrote:
THE
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
OF
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
IN THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
BY
THOMAS M. COOLEY, LL.D.,
AUTHOR OF "CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS," ETC.
THIRD EDITION BY ANDREW C. McLAUGHLIN, A.M., LL.B.
PROFESSOR OF AMERICAN HISTORY, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN.
BOSTON: LITTLE, BROWN, AND COMPANY.
1898.
Copyright, 1880, BY THOMAS M. COOLEY
Copyright, 1891, 1898, BY LITTLE, BROWN, AND COMPANY.
UNIVERSITY PRESS
JOHN WILSON AND SON, CAMBRIDGE
FOURTH EDITION EDITED BY JON ROLAND
2002
A State is either sovereign or dependent. It is sovereign when there resides within itself a supreme and absolute power, acknowledging no superior, and it is dependent when in any degree or particular its authority is limited by an acknowledged power elsewhere.[2] It is immaterial to this definition whether the supreme power reposes in one individual, or one body or class of individ-
[1] Vattel, b. 1, ch. 1,§ 1; Wheat. Int. Law, pt. 1, ch. 2,§ 2; Story on Const.,§ 207; Burlamaqui, Pol. Law, ch. 5; Cooley, Const. Lim., 1.
2 Vattel, b. 1, ch. 1,§ 2; Chipman on Government, 137; Halleck, Int. Law, 65.
uals, or in the whole body of the people; whether, in other words, the government is a monarchy, an aristocracy, a republic, or a democracy, or any combination of these; for the form only determines the methods in which sovereign powers shall be exercised.
http://www.constitution.org/cmt/tmc/pcl.htm
Off the top of my head where it is used in conjunction with constitution......
Woo-wee! BirfoonLady found a book with a footnote that mentions Vattel and several other authors.

Accordingly birfoons irrationally conclude that the interpretation of the constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of NOT the English common law, but rather should be read in the light Vattel.

Hee hee hee.

"The interpretation of the constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law, and are to be read in the light of its history." Smith v. Alabama, 124 U.S. 465,478(1888).
Just Sayin

Toledo, OH

#88016 Jun 29, 2012
Romney raises $5.5M after health ruling

Romney started raising funds immediately after the decision, and in a message to supporters Friday morning his campaign spokeswoman said he had raised $5.5 million from 55,000 donations.
Jacques Ottawa

Thornhill, Canada

#88017 Jun 29, 2012
the westerner wrote:
<quoted text>
This is just one of your many big, fat lies, you're an idiot. No proof of this whatsoever, if you have some, let's see it.
Just your dumbass opinion.
My opinion, not a lie, and shared by millions.
Jacques Ottawa

Thornhill, Canada

#88018 Jun 29, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text> ...firstly intiated by GWB. It should never have been started by GWB and certainly never continued by Obama, though I doubt both GWB and Obama made those decisions.
the westerner wrote:
<quoted text>
Another lie.
Grateful you point out the lie in my above post.

Did your mamma never wash your vile mouth with soap?

the westerner

“wisdom”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#88019 Jun 29, 2012
Terry Buckeye wrote:
<quoted text>
You might want to reinforce your support circle. I think you'll need it again in November.
You again? Mitt raises $4 million since ruling. CBS/NYT's poll shows Americans still not in favor of "Obamacare" and raised taxes.

Brokeback Barak " I will not raise taxes on the middle class"

Hilarious, you can't make this stuff up!
Jacques Ottawa

Thornhill, Canada

#88020 Jun 29, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
I just asked you a while back not to make statements that you cannot back up. Yet you just wrote : "To use Jacques analogy, Trayvon Martin was shot and killed,and Geo. Zimmerman is guilty." I said Zimmerman shot and killed Martin. I think everyone pretty much agrees with that, including you. However, I never said Zimmerman was guilty, not even once. I even told your buddy American er hmm Lady numerous times to quit pre-judging either Zimmerman or Martin, seeing as none of us were there when it happened and to let justice take its course.
the westerner wrote:
<quoted text>
where's your proof, dumbass?
Re-read what I wrote. What is the proof I should give you? That Zimmerman killed Martin? He admitted it. As to guilt, I said numerous times to let justice decide.

And what of this dumbass thing you keep repeating? Can't you write civilly?

the westerner

“wisdom”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#88022 Jun 29, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text> ...firstly intiated by GWB. It should never have been started by GWB and certainly never continued by Obama, though I doubt both GWB and Obama made those decisions.
<quoted text>
Ah, have you noticed that Jacques gives Obama the credit for everything ...... except when he disagrees and then it is Bush's fault. I wonder if Jacques knows that Bush left the White House three and a half years ago!?!?
I had noticed that. Have you noticed virtually all moose humping canadians are butt in skis?

the westerner

“wisdom”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#88023 Jun 29, 2012
Terry Buckeye wrote:
<quoted text>
And see, I think he brings class and integrity to the offce. Not that either was lacking after that suave and debonaire GWB!
10 year old: why does the president[BO] talk so funny?

That kind of class and integrity?

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 Supreme Court Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
State's collect tax internet sales 12 hr Paul Revere 2
News US top court rules for baker in gay wedding cak... 12 hr Vino- Veritas 764
News Why This Flag Day Is a Reminder That the Meanin... 18 hr Elganned 3
News Judge: Kansas cannot require proof of citizensh... Jun 19 Carol Welsh 1
News SCOTUS Rules Against Wisconsin Democrats On Red... Jun 19 North Mountain 6
News Coming soon to Mormon genealogical database: re... Jun 16 NICK 11
News Texas abortion clinics sue to undo laws dating ... Jun 16 Choicerocks 2