LEFT WING LOONS
See other LEFT WING LOONS Articles
Title: The Dirty “little” Secret Of ...The Natural Born Citizen Clause --- Revealed.
Source:
naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com
URL Source: http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress ... -born-citizen-clause-revealed/
Published: Jan 27, 2012
Author: Leo Donofrio
Post Date: 2012-01-27 14:14:32 by BorisY
Keywords: native, naturalized - immigrant, natural - parents
Views: 102417
Comments: 232
Natural Born Citizen Respecting the Constitution The Current INS Officially Recognizes A Delineation Between Natural-Born and Native-Born. The Dirty “little” Secret Of The Natural Born Citizen Clause Revealed. I have emphasized the word “little” because the truth of the law on this issue is very simple, folks. So simple that the mystery is deciphered by application of one of the most clear, concise and undeniable rules of law; the code of statutory construction governs, and therefore, “natural born Citizen” must require something more than being born in the United States. Let me put it to you in appropriately simple language: Clause A = “Only a natural born Citizen may be President.” Clause B = “Anyone born in the United States is a Citizen.” (While these two clauses reflect Article 2, Section 1, and the 14th Amendment, I shall refer to them as “Clause A” and “Clause B” for now.) The code of statutory construction is learned by every student in law school, and every practicing attorney has confronted it. Every judge is required to apply the rule equally to all statutes, and the Constitution. There is no wiggle room at all. The rule states that when a court examines two clauses, unless Congress has made it clear that one clause repeals the other, the court must observe a separate legal effect for each. More specifically, regardless of the chronology of enactment, the general clause can never govern the specific. Clause B is a general rule of citizenship, which states that all persons born in the country are members of the nation. Clause A is a specific clause that says only those members of the nation who are “natural born” may be President. According to the rule of statutory construction, the court must determine that Clause A requires something more than Clause B. It’s truly that simple. This is not some crazy conspiracy theory. It’s not controversial. This is not rocket science. Every single attorney reading this right now knows, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that I have accurately explained the rule of statutory construction to you. Any attorney who denies this rule, is lying. The rule cannot be denied. And its simplicity cannot be ignored. Now let’s see what the United States Supreme Court has to say about the rule: “Where there is no clear intention otherwise, a specific statute will not be controlled or nullified by a general one, regardless of the priority of enactment. See, e. g., Bulova Watch Co. v. United States, 365 U.S. 753, 758 (1961); Rodgers v. United States, 185 U.S. 83, 87 -89 (1902). The courts are not at liberty to pick and choose among congressional enactments, and when two statutes are capable of co-existence, it is the duty of the courts, absent a clearly expressed congressional intention to the contrary, to regard each as effective. “When there are two acts upon the same subject, the rule is to give effect to both if possible . . . The intention of the legislature to repeal `must be clear and manifest.’ ” United States v. Borden Co., 308 U.S. 188, 198 (1939).” Morton v. Mancari, 417 U.S. 535, 550-551 (1974). This is what I mean by no wiggle room – “The courts are not at liberty to pick and choose among congressional enactments…” Any court construing Clause A is not at liberty to assume that Congress intended to put the words “natural born” into Clause B. The general does not govern the specific, and the rule requires the court to “give effect to both if possible”. Is it possible to give separate effect to both Clause A and Clause B? Yes. The Constitution tells us that any Citizen can be a Senator, or Representative, but that to be President one must be a “natural born Citizen”. The Constitution specifically assigns different civic statuses to “Citizens” and “natural born Citizens”. Therefore, not only is it possible to give separate effect to both Clause A and Clause B, it is absolutely required by law, and no court has the ability to circumvent the rule. Had the original framers intended for any “born Citizen” to be eligible to the office of President, they would not have included the word “natural” in the clause. Additionally, had the framers of the 14th Amendment intended to declare that every person born in the country was a “natural born Citizen”, then the 14th Amendment would contain clear and manifest language to that effect. But it doesn’t. Therefore, each clause must be given separate force and effect. Deputy Chief Judge Malihi explained the rule of statutory construction in his denial of candidate Obama’s Motion to Dismiss, wherein his opinion of the Court stated: “Statutory provisions must be read as they are written, and this Court finds that the cases cited by Defendant are not controlling. When the Court construes a constitutional or statutory provision, the ‘first step . . . is to examine the plain statutory language.’ Morrison v. Claborn, 294 Ga. App. 508, 512 (2008). ‘Where the language of a statute is plain and unambiguous, judicial construction is not only unnecessary but forbidden. In the absence of words of limitation, words in a statute should be given their ordinary and everyday meaning.’ Six Flags Over Ga. v. Kull, 276 Ga. 210, 211 (2003) (citations and quotation marks omitted). Because there is no other ‘natural and reasonable construction’ of the statutory language, this Court is ‘not authorized either to read into or to read out that which would add to or change its meaning.‘ Blum v. Schrader, 281 Ga. 238, 240 (2006) (quotation marks omitted).” Order On Motion To Dismiss, Deputy Chief Judge Malihi, Jan. 3, 2012, pg. 3. (Emphasis added.) Therefore, the term “natural born” must be considered as requiring something more than simple birth in the country. And Judge Malihi states, quite clearly, in his ruling above, that the Court “is not authorized to read into or to read out that which would add to or change its meaning.” The rule is the same for election statutes in Georgia as it is for the Constitution of the United States. The rule of statutory construction, with regard to the Constitution, was best stated by Chief Justice Marshall in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803): “It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect; and therefore such construction is inadmissible, unless the words require it.” Id. 174. (Emphasis added.) If the 14th Amendment was held to declare that all persons born in the country, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, were natural-born citizens, then the “natural born Citizen” clause would be rendered inoperative. It would be superfluous. And its specific provision would, therefore, be governed by the general provision of the 14th Amendment. The United States Supreme Court has determined that it is inadmissible to even make that argument. Any genuine construction of the “natural born Citizen” clause must begin from the starting point that it requires something more than citizenship by virtue of being born on U.S. soil. Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), tells you exactly what that something is; citizen parents. Leo Donofrio, Esq. [For a more detailed analysis of this issue, please see my Amicus Brief entered in the Georgia POTUS eligibility cases.] [See commenting rules here.]
Poster Comment: People who can't figure this out shouldn't be allowed to vote - citizenship !
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-20) not displayed.
.
.
.
#21. To: All (#20)
The jig - dance is up ! The dark - savage age ! Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job? Imagine a future historian examining Obama's pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer"; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote "present"); and finally an unaccomplished single term in United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's "spiritual mentor"; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president? - Matt Patterson, American Thinker
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
Oh I see, you're creating a third class of citizenship. Good luck with that!
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
For the senate qualifications the constitution says ' citizen ' - native - naturalized ! You've been duped ! Luck doesn't work in the USSC !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
Bimbo: Oh I see, you're creating a third class of citizenship. Good luck with that! Your willful ignorance is getting old. Boris is right. You're wrong, so shut up.
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” -- Samuel Adams --
If you want to converse with the adults, you'll need to grow up.
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
Perhaps you are correct and the Constitution says just what you claim, however Article I, section 3, clause 3 says: No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
A one week old mutt to be senator ! the bar for president is much higher !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
BorisY: 1 - Natural (( parents )) ELIGIBLE ... native (( anchor status )) - naturalized (( immigrant )) --- 2 & 3 INELIGIBLE ! Bimbo: "Oh I see, you're creating a third class of citizenship. Good luck with that!" CE: "Your willful ignorance is getting old. Boris is right. You're wrong, so shut up." Ignorance - can be corrected through education. Stupid - is a birthright often passed down in families but sometimes organizationally inherited. Stupid is a choice.
Trying to get a pass by being a fatherless child ! how about the divorce - adoption !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
Good point, and from what I have gathered, he never had his named changed back from 'Barry Sotoroe'. But I think the most damning evidence is, his father not being a US citizen, but a British Subject. They can smear all the lipstick on that pig they want, but it will still be a PIG! For him to be eligible, BOTH parents have to be US Citizens.
I bow to your expertise in the matter of stupid.
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
Do you have credible evidence his name was ever changed to begin with? Of course not.
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
FOX News 5 did cover and report this in Georgia. There are, I think, 3 videos that covered the court proceedings, if you'd like them posted, just let me know!
Obama's father was a "citizen of Africa" - that's a good one.
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
Obama didn't show up in court. He thinks he is a dictotor. He is a dick. Impeach the asshole.
Was Obama legally served? I know Orly has had a lot of trouble with that legal concept in the past.
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
And you think you are God. It's up to the judge to make that decision, it's his/her court.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
Actually that would be you. Who think you can kill a baby and claim it to be the most virtuous of all human acts.
And you think you can put words into other's mouths, when you can't find the facts to argue your case. That's typical of BPD. Did King Solomon offer to split a baby in two or did he not? And not one person in the Bible denied he had the right and the power to do so
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
So you are against abortion? You don't think it is an unalienable right?
It's been a practice in EVERY culture on earth. I don't care for it myself.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
That is a start. That last sentence has to be the best post you have ever made. Why don't you care for the practice?
Why don't you care for the practice? Stop playing god, you aren't very good at it.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
There are 2 classes of citizens, Junior...natural born and naturalized. There is no difference between native born and natural born. Period. /asshole
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Another question worth asking; Why no media coverage of this hearing? Granted, the mainstream or elite or whatever we’re calling them these days media lean hard to the left and it should come as no surprise that they refuse to give an eye blink toward this hearing. But what of Fox News and even their local Georgia affiliates? Why was nary a word of any broadcast given to today’s hearing? I suspect it has a great deal to do with their prior position that the birth certificate was real…case closed. I also suspect, that should the Georgia judge find compelling reason to exclude Obama from the state’s 2012 ballot ... this WILL --- become a story. http://www.conservativerefocus.com/blog5.php/2012/01/27/a-failure-to-appear- obama-s-eligibility-case-in-georgia-officially-unchallenged-by-president
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
If the media and everyone else knew that the Moon landings were faked would they have covered them? From what I understand, this is an administrative law judge and hearing. Any "decision" that he may make is, in fact, merely a recommendation to the SoS who is the final determinant of who may or may not appear on the ballot.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Why don't you care for the practice? Stop playing god, you aren't very good at it. Quit diverting. Why don't you care for the practice?
Stone...when you have sex with your wife or significant other is s/he on the top or bottom? Doggy? Missionary? Any ass play?
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
This ain't shitcago ! s - s he would follow the judge's decision ! To: geraldmcg Dozens of threads on this over the past two days...and FYI, the GA. SecState has already publicly announced he will go with the admin judge’s recommendations. 8 posted on Friday, January 27, 2012 15:42:39 by IrishPennant (We don't want to work so we go to work to make enough money not to work...Huh?)
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
There is a HUGE difference between a process judge and a REAL judge. The burden of proof is on the complainants to provide proof that Obama would be ineligible to be on the ballot.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
To: geraldmcg; Danae Do you think this has any substantiation in fact? It was offered here: The real issue in this is a President is not elected to these 49 United States, but Constitutionally must be elected by all 50 states, unless they have seceded from the Union as the Confederates did. Unless an event as that has taken place, the Constitution is not about Electoral Colleges or being ratified by Congress, but it is about the Union electing a President of all 50 states. Understand that any President can loose the popular vote as President Bush had, and win the electoral votes, along with numerous states, but no President can be President of these United States if he is not on the ballot or certified in all 50 states. Scholars have missed this ultimate check and balance in the "silence of the Constitution". No state can keep any legal candidate off the ballot, but a state can keep anyone off the ballot who does not provide legal documentation they are qualified to be President. That is the Constitution at it's core in the Articles concerning the Presidency. 49 states can state a fraud can be President in their super majority, but if one state demands proof and the candidate does not provide that legal proof, the one state in checks and balances can negate a national Presidential Election. ...The experts will try to state that …….. can not override a majority vote by 49 other states, ……………..A President must be accepted by all 50 states according to legal Constitutional requirements. Any subject failing to provide natural born status can legally be rejected by any one state, and that one state in its minority rights will negate the other 49 states in the check and balance the Founders left silently in the Constitution to protect America from threats domestic and foreign. . Danae offers this from: Article II Section 1…. The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term, be elected, as follows: Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector. The electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves. And they shall make a list of all the persons voted for, and of the number of votes for each; which list they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. ++++++++++++++++++++++ So if Obama is off the ballot in Georgia... the DNC MUST present another candidate somehow in that state! There must be 2 persons for electors to choose from! oOOOOOOOoooooo the Ante has just been upped!! So much is riding on Malihi's decision, and a Default judgment with Commentary based upon that validity of the evidence presented, and lacking any rebuttal.... Oh, there is no hiding THAT. The press will HAVE to take notice. ….. Danae . 31 posted on Friday, January 27, 2012 16:59:31 by Elle Bee
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
Uh...no...he has said no such thing...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
To: Fantasywriter; SvenMagnussen “I only wish there had been a way to introduce Fuddy’s description of the original ‘birth record’ - i.e.: that it was “half handwritten’.” The only legal and full original BC Obama has is his adoption BC recognizing Lolo Soetoro as his father. When Obama and H.Clinton were battling it out during the spring and summer of 2008, Butterdezillion and Miss Tickley were shaking the Hawaii DOH very hard and something interesting fell out before Hawaii went into cover-their-ass mode: a birth index for 1960-1964 with BHO2’s name on it. The document was listed as Filed - Not Accepted. Many folks on FR responded stating that they knew why that would be so: the BC was very late in being submitted, and it was incomplete. That also meant this BC was not a legal identification document. Fuddy claimed it was half-hand written, and that does not sound like one generated by a hospital. Keep in mind that concurrent in this time frame, newspaper announcements came out stating that Mr.& Mrs. Obama had a baby boy on August 4, 1961. No hospital is given and the baby is not named. The address provided turns out to be where Grandpa and Grandma Dunham were renting the guesthouse at the back of the property. This whole scenario would be implausible if BHO2 was born in Hawaii. If he had been born in Hawaii then the birth certificate would have been complete, submitted in a timely manner and be legal, and his name would have been proudly posted on the birth announcements. Conclusion: he was born somewhere else. Whatever BHO2 is pushing as his real BC, it is not. 36 posted on Friday, January 27, 2012 17:32:35 by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS OUR PRESIDENT)
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
It was offered here: The real issue in this is a President is not elected to these 49 United States, but Constitutionally must be elected by all 50 states, unless they have seceded from the Union as the Confederates did. Unless an event as that has taken place, the Constitution is not about Electoral Colleges or being ratified by Congress, but it is about the Union electing a President of all 50 states. Understand that any President can loose the popular vote as President Bush had, and win the electoral votes, along with numerous states, but no President can be President of these United States if he is not on the ballot or certified in all 50 states. Scholars have missed this ultimate check and balance in the "silence of the Constitution". No state can keep any legal candidate off the ballot, but a state can keep anyone off the ballot who does not provide legal documentation they are qualified to be President. That is the Constitution at it's core in the Articles concerning the Presidency. 49 states can state a fraud can be President in their super majority, but if one state demands proof and the candidate does not provide that legal proof, the one state in checks and balances can negate a national Presidential Election. ...The experts will try to state that …….. can not override a majority vote by 49 other states, ……………..A President must be accepted by all 50 states according to legal Constitutional requirements. Any subject failing to provide natural born status can legally be rejected by any one state, and that one state in its minority rights will negate the other 49 states in the check and balance the Founders left silently in the Constitution to protect America from threats domestic and foreign. It's 100% horseshit...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
What about oral? Are you a gentleman? Ladies first?
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Take the night off weirdo.
You'll ask Ming about abortion but how you make scrumpies is off limits? What a hypocrite...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Abortion is a legitimate political issue. She said the didn't care for it. Now I am waiting to know why she doesn't care for it. Why do you think she hasn't answered yet?
That's very deep.
Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1 We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
I'm going to run for City Council on the "How Does Stone Have Sex" ticket. Now your bedroom is a political issue.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Now your bedroom is a political issue. Is that the best you can do? Go war go run. Post us about it.
Comments (62 - 232) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest4 - Divine - royalty - obombammies !
#22. To: BorisY (#20)
1 - Natural (( parents )) ELIGIBLE ... native (( anchor status )) - naturalized (( immigrant )) --- 2 & 3 INELIGIBLE !
#23. To: lucysmom (#22)
(Edited)
Good luck with that!
#24. To: lucysmom, BorisY (#22)
BorisY: 1 - Natural (( parents )) ELIGIBLE ... native (( anchor status )) - naturalized (( immigrant )) --- 2 & 3 INELIGIBLE !
#25. To: Capitalist Eric (#24)
Boris is right. You're wrong, so shut up.
#26. To: BorisY (#23)
For the senate qualifications the constitution says ' citizen ' - native - naturalized !
#27. To: lucysmom (#26)
nine Years a Citizen
#28. To: Capitalist Eric, lucysmom, BorisY (#24)
#29. To: Murron (#28)
#30. To: BorisY (#29)
"how about the divorce - adoption !"
#31. To: Murron (#28)
Stupid - is a birthright often passed down in families but sometimes organizationally inherited. Stupid is a choice.
#32. To: Murron, BorisY (#30)
Good point, and from what I have gathered, he never had his named changed back from 'Barry Sotoroe'.
#33. To: BorisY, A K A Stone, All (#30)
Murron: "But I think the most damning evidence is, his father not being a US citizen, but a British Subject. For him to be eligible, BOTH parents have to be US Citizens."
#34. To: Murron (#33)
#35. To: lucysmom (#34)
#36. To: A K A Stone (#35)
Obama didn't show up in court. He thinks he is a dictotor. He is a dick. Impeach the asshole.
#37. To: A K A Stone (#35)
Obama didn't show up in court. He thinks he is a dictotor. He is a dick. Impeach the asshole.
#38. To: mininggold (#37)
And you think you are God.
#39. To: A K A Stone (#38)
(Edited)
Actually that would be you. Who think you can kill a baby and claim it to be the most virtuous of all human acts.
#40. To: mininggold (#39)
And you think you can put words into other's mouths, when you can't find the facts to argue your case. That's typical of BPD.
#41. To: A K A Stone (#40)
So you are against abortion? You don't think it is an unalienable right?
#42. To: mininggold (#41)
It's been a practice in EVERY culture on earth. I don't care for it myself.
#43. To: A K A Stone (#42)
That is a start. That last sentence has to be the best post you have ever made.
#44. To: Capitalist Eric (#24)
#45. To: war (#44)
#46. To: BorisY (#45)
(Edited)
Why no media coverage of this hearing?
#47. To: mininggold (#43)
That is a start. That last sentence has to be the best post you have ever made.
#48. To: A K A Stone (#47)
(Edited)
#49. To: war (#46)
(Edited)
#50. To: BorisY (#49)
s - s he would follow the judge's decision !
#51. To: war (#50)
#52. To: BorisY (#49)
SecState has already publicly announced he will go with the admin judge’s recommendations.
#53. To: All (#51)
#54. To: BorisY (#51)
Do you think this has any substantiation in fact?
#55. To: A K A Stone (#47)
#56. To: war (#55)
#57. To: A K A Stone (#56)
#58. To: war, miningold (#57)
#59. To: war (#54)
...check and balance the Founders left silently in the Constitution...
#60. To: A K A Stone (#58)
#61. To: war (#60)
I'm going to run for City Council on the "How Does Stone Have Sex" ticket.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]