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: 101651
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
#1. To: BorisY (#0)
I can't wait to have Eisenhower decertified.
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
Oranges - apples - bananas all fruits ! No one knows what an obomba - tomato is ! Tomato , whether pronounced Tuh-MAY-toh or Tuh-MAH-to, is a delicious, nutritious fruit, more widely known as a vegetable.
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
No one knows what an obomba - tomato is ! Tomato , whether pronounced Tuh-MAY-toh or Tuh-MAH-to, is a delicious, nutritious fruit, more widely known as a vegetable. Sorry.....but after the fact is still after the fact, inspite of your literal word salad.
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
Trivia right - reality wrong is that how you play the game ! You just don't get past the slag - weeds !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
You just don't get pass the weeds ! Sorry, but that remains to be seen.
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
cabbage - lettuce - carrots all vegetables ! No one knows what an obomba - tomato is ! Tomato , whether pronounced Tuh-MAY-toh or Tuh-MAH-to, is a delicious, nutritious fruit, more widely known as a vegetable. Corn is a grain !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
If Boehner allowed impeachment proceedings against O'bungler, then Romney would be out too, and he'd also have to admit that McCain was ineligible to be prez. Too much truth for a neocon to handle. He wants Obungler to be reelected so badly, that he'll even allow an ineligible loser to be nominated.
Obama's watch stopped on 24 May 2008, but he's been too busy smoking crack to notice.
w / o control of the senate investigation - impeachment is impossible - suicidal !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
To: max americana I did watch it and what disturbed by what Mike Berlon said. He said they would take it to Federal court. Let’s say they do. What would happen? 20 posted on Friday, January 27, 2012 02:41:13 by Mimi3 To: Mimi3 Great take it to Federal Court...even if it goes against Orly then the case goes to the Supreme Court on appealm and they can finally settle what an NBC is. 21 posted on Friday, January 27, 2012 03:31:27 by bjorn14 (Woe to those who call good evil and evil good. Isaiah 5:20)
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
Bullshit. They used "natural born" to distinguish from those born prior to the USCON's adoption. No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
At the time are exempt - grand fathered ! After ... Age - resident - NATURAL BORN (( parents )) !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
It says nothing about the parents.
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
Goldwater was born in OK when it was a territory...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Parentage has nothing to do with it. Citizenship laws in the US are based first jus soli... Citizenship was conferred at the adoption of the USCON regardless of where they had been born or who their parents were. Given that, the Framers were hardly going to parse from thereafter to a most restrictive definition.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Outside of the country wouldn't matter if your parents are citizens ! That only works for anchor babies - aliens !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
Higher office - higher qualifications ! GROW THE FUCK UP ! This isn't about voting !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
One either acquires citizenship at birth, is natural born citizen; or acquires citizenship later in life, is a naturalized citizen. There is no third category of citizenship.
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
Natural (( parents )) ELIGIBLE ... native (( anchor status )) - naturalized (( immigrant )) --- INELIGIBLE !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
What in the world does that mean?
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
1 - Natural (( parents )) ELIGIBLE ... native (( NO parentS - anchor status )) - naturalized (( immigrant )) --- 2 & 3 INELIGIBLE ! 4 - Divine - royalty - obombammies !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
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.
To: formosa Back when my stomach was strong enough to actually troll democrat underground, and even post there, it was pretty clear that most of the dummies don't recognize any limits at all to government as long as they get their free milk and cookies. Beyond that beer should be cheap and sex should be free and highly variable. They don't seem to be able to think beyond that level. True freedom carries sometimes awesome consequences and that thought terrifies them. I read an essay many years ago addressing the question of whether a free people had the right to vote themselves into slavery, and, sadly, they do, if they choose to ignore the Constitution and the lessons of history. "Progressives" hate the Constitution beyond all reason, unless they are able to manipulate it's intent and purpose. 15 posted on Friday, January 27, 2012 14:18:20 by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not a Matter of Opinion)
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
It's good enough. So...moaning..no moaning? Does your squirt gun have a hair trigger?
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
I'll bet that guy is anti-abortion and gay marriage...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Because like others with yout mental problem you need your boundaries to be reenforced and your obsessions not catered to.
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
Quit playing games. Why don't you care for the practice of abortion? Or were you just making stuff up and now you don't know what to say?
Who are you to make such definitive statements? Oh, that's right... NOBODY STFU, you bloviating windbag socialist whore.
"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 --
Quit acting retarded and seek help for your obsession.
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
Just got that in my email. beautiful! Pam's Story In a recent email, I read about a woman named Pam, who knows the pain of considering abortion. More than 24 years ago, she and her husband Bob were serving as missionaries to the Philippines and praying for a fifth child. Pam contracted amoebic dysentery, an infection of the intestine caused by a parasite found in contaminated food or drink. She went into a coma and was treated with strong antibiotics before they discovered she was pregnant. Doctors urged her to abort the baby for her own safety and told her that the medicines had caused irreversible damage to her baby. She refused the abortion and cited her Christian faith as the reason for her hope that her son would be born without the devastating disabilities physicians predicted. Pam said the doctors didn't think of it as a life, they thought of it as a mass of fetal tissue. While pregnant, Pam nearly lost their baby four times but refused to consider abortion. She recalled making a pledge to God with her husband: If you will give us a son, we'll name him Timothy and we'll make him a preacher. Pam ultimately spent the last two months of her pregnancy in bed and eventually gave birth to a healthy baby boy August 14, 1987. Pam's youngest son is indeed a preacher. He preaches in prisons, makes hospital visits, and serves with his father's ministry in the Philippines . He also plays football. Pam's son is Tim Tebow. The University of Florida 's star quarterback became the first sophomore in history to win college football's highest award, the Heisman Trophy. His current role as quarterback of the Denver Broncos has provided an incredible platform for Christian witness. As a result, he is being called The Mile-High Messiah. Tim's notoriety and the family's inspiring story have given Pam numerous opportunities to speak on behalf of women's centers across the country. Pam Tebow believes that every little baby you save matters. I pray her tribe will increase! May the peace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you always!
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
It's been a practice in EVERY culture on earth. I don't care for it myself. I think you are lying again. Why don't you care for the practice of abortion. Are you to dumb to answer? I think you are.
The so called doctors should be put on trail for attempted murder.
Quit acting retarded and seek help for your obsession. Uh. You are the one having trouble answering a simple question on a debate forum. Are you here to debate or play games?
Who am I? Who AM I? Do you mean besides informed? Male 53...Gemini...I like midnight bar-b-ques, walks on the beach and schtupping frustrated haus fraus who were once mail order brides......
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
The case that Boris cited in his post, which wasn't a citizenship case but a right to vote case, clearly established two classes..."one is either naturalized or native thus natural born..." But I do appreciate you once again underscoring that even though your knowledge base suffers from a deficit you feel compelled to ACT like you know something anyway... We both know the fraud that is you Junior. We BOTH know.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
I surprised she actually left that on here instead of editing it out.......
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
You folks have been so brainwashed that you believe that anyone who is pro-choice finds abortion to be preferable to anything else. Notice how Stone refuses to answer any question about his sexual preferences and practices? Do you know why? He does. It's the "why" he won't answer. He *thinks* that he has a right to privacy. Right there is the Achilles Heal of the pro-gestation movement. He naively claims that sex is not a political issue when, given gay marriage, sodomy laws, deviant sexual behavior laws etc etc etc sex most certainly IS a political issue.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Speak for yourself. you are being the badgering, baitful idiot here. You use the issue at the drop of a hat as a foil to cover up your own intellectual laziness and gutlessness. She shouldn't answer; you don't deserve one.
You are forgetting this is a forum, not a court of law with you as a district attorney with her on the stand, with no judge to rule you out of order. From a personal basis of experience, you ignore my stand against abortion and constantly treat it suspect because it is a way to bait me for political views you can't stand. She has no need to answer you. It is you who needs to get a brain, dumb shit.
Are you here to debate or play games? A debate forum is not an inquisition forum with you as the inquisitor. I'm sorry you have so little power in your life that you have to try to make up for it on this forum, but that's not my problem. We've also had this tussle before and you appear to not be learning from experience.
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
It's probably his Hair Trigger squirt gun...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
I'm pro choice, pro life. You are pro abortion.
I like women. I'm married. Quit hitting on me. Go talk to meguro. He is your type.
So you think her making a statement then taking the cowards way out and not defend it is appropriate. Got you marked as a coward from now on.
Actions speak louder then words. You voted for a known abortionist. So you were pro death/murder until at least Nov 2008.
You said you didn't care for the practice of abortion. I think you are a liar. It would be easy to explain why you don't care for it. You talk about everything else. You are a coward, a liar, or stupid. Maybe all three. So go ahead and tell us why you don't care for the practice of abortion.
Yet you believe in the right of kings to split innocent children in two to settle a squabble between two women.
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
It's been a practice in EVERY culture on earth. I don't care for it myself. 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?
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? I already told you I will NOT play into your obsessions which have not one lick to do with abortion either pro or con. (EDITED OUT) I thought you said you didn't change poster's words. Omitting them changes the tenor of the post and makes you out to be lying again, just to get your juvenile way.
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
Why don't you care for the practice of abortion. You said you didn't. Why is that. Did you have an abortion and now you feel guilty? Did you tell your daughter to get an abortion and now you feel guilty you have no grandchildren? What is it that would make you say "I don't care for the practice" referring to abortion? Please give an honest answer and show libtards can tell the truth. I don't think you have it in you. Prove me wrong.
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
Obama's opinion on abortion is one of not liking it, but supporting a woman's right to chose to get one. Nobody in their right mind slams others against abortion because they don't refuse to have anything to do with someone who doesn't like abortion, but believes others have the right to make up their own minds on the topic. I disagree with Obama enough to not ant to vote for him this election, but I do not hate him personally. So according to your fucked up way to screw with people, I am pro-abortion unless I loath someone completely who does not feel exactly like you do anyway. In other words, you are an immature baby who tries to manipulate people using the abortion issue as a one size fits all taunt. Fuck off. I am not going to refuse human contact with people who feel differently than me on an issue, and I certainly do not care that you are a baby that tries to tell me I was for something when I was and am not.
Liar. You are not in any way shape or form "pro-life". You are pro-gestation even at the cost of the mother's life.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Yea so? That doesn't answer any of the questions posed to you. Quit hitting on me. Go talk to meguro. He is your type. When the going gets tough the weak make fag jokes...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
I know you should give the topic a rest. You are trying to conduct an inquisition. There is no rule to life that says that if you don't make little old you completely happy when you try to manipulate them with the abortion issue then a horrible injustice to humanity is being perpetrated.
I have never thought a woman should give up her life to bear young. Human life is too important to give up one's life to procreate. And I certainly don't believe a woman should have a rapist's child should she chose not to. Responsible people plan their pregnancies, and should they only plan to have one or two children, in no way should the choice of father, or time of pregnancy be decided by the act of violence rape is.
Stone is not against abortion because he is pro-life, he is anti-abortion because he is a male who believes in controlling women.
The more I can get you to edit the more I know I got you by the gonads
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
Your comment was just off topic that is all. I honestly don't understand your resistance to answering a very simple question. You must not be telling the truth or there is some deep dark secret you are ashamed of.
It's quite simple, she is engaging in a normal human reaction to being baited. War too has a good point; you want privacy over your sexual practices, yet you demand no privacy for views any and all posters here don't want to share with you because you are insatiable on a issue. Not only do you demand that someone be anti-abortion, but all their other views have to be in line the right way, or you call them a liar for saying they don't like abortion. No, there is no good reason anyone should ever post to you on the issue; because you don't view this as a pro-life issue, you see it as a control and manipulation point of order you can use to beat anyone over the head with concerning any other topic under the sun.
I honestly don't understand your resistance to answering a very simple question. You must not be telling the truth or there is some deep dark secret you are ashamed of. And just how is your abortion distraction "on topic" with this thread. I did answer yours.... just not up to whatever level of voyeurism you currently feel entitled to. But it's funny how you won't answer and even delete mine.
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
I concede that you have a valid point on it being off topic. Would you like me to start a new thread?
Would you like me to start a new thread? You can do whatever you want, but I will not play into your obsessions ......which have nothing to do with abortion, BTW You have already proven AGAIN to be ready to delete at a moments notice any post that you disagree with, so what's the point?
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 you never answered. You stated you that you didn't like the practice. You stated that not in answer to a question. The question I asked is why you don't like that practice. I asked to understand your reasoning better. That way I can be accurate in defining you. You being apparently ashamed to answer the question is what leads to the speculation. So again you didn't answer my question for some strange unknown reason. While debating someone on the internet and asking them questions may be annoying to someone who has something to hide it is nothing close to voyeurism. Go get a dictionary if you would like to know the definition. Like I said what I deleted was off topic and you already said it a few times. I don't think it has been 2 hours yet. If you want you can go put it back.
Who says she has to post to it if you do? She definitely shouldn't do that if you pick on her specifically in the header of it.
I ask questions about abortion because it is an evil practice. I was honestly encouraged when you said you didn't care for the practice. I wanted to know how you came to that conclusion. Abortion can be used like a litmus test. If you are in favor of it it tells you something about that individual. It tells you a whole lot about them and their values. If they have such lousy values that they think murdering an innocent baby in the womb is ok. Then something must be wrong with their morals. I wouldn't want them leading anything, lest they get mad and kill me too.
You really think that? There are 10 of thousands of posts I don't agree with.
And if she said you were on bozo for browbeating her for a very long time on the topic, you would ban her account for not wanting to deal with your cheesy baiting of her. Now, if that's not abusive behavior toward a woman, nothing is.
No I would just suspend her. If she did it without advertising it nothing would happen.
And her being a woman, and you a male, she has no right to chose not to respond to your obsessive baiting, which if answer to you would still not be happy with the answer anyway, and she would be subject to later be called a liar on it if she made you unhappy with another view she holds on something else. Remember, you are calling me a liar on the topic for something that has nothing to do with abortion. Why should anyone believe you on this topic when you are such a rabid lunatic on the matter?
Whatever you want to call it. The point remains that you refuse to let people not be baited by you or you will ban their account. Remember, you have given me several ban screens, from suspension to one stating I was permanently deleted. So when you split hairs with me on the verbiage concerning this matter, it means nothing to me.
You heard him gold. You have no right not to respond. So get your tail from between your legs and tell us if it is the truth why you don't like the practice known as abortion. I still think you are lying.
If she gave me an honest answer I would accept it as her opinion. I think she is trying to think up something but she can't think what to say to a question any third grader could answer.
That is what I said you are saying to her, thus the bait remains the same, it just gets shriller as the mental tyke doing it gets his diapers in such a knot, the baiting gets shriller.
No one has to answer any question you just because you want them too.
Then I will have to speculate as to the reason. Here are the choices. 1. She was lying and really loves the concept of abortion. 2. She had an abortion and is ashamed to admit it. 3. Someone in her family had an abortion and she doesn't want to talk about it. 4. She doesn't really have an opinion and just says anything. 5. She thinks it is the murder of an innocent precious human life. Can you think of any other choices?
Speculation is just speculation. You already reduce your veracity by speculating I am a liar merely for voting for a particular man who has stated he does not like abortion and discourages the practices, but does not want the procedure made illegal. I dare say you can speculate all you want, but we all would be more impressed and moved by you doing a you tube video of you farting to the tune of Yankee Doodle Dandy than by an speculations you make at this point. And the fact you have thusly hurt your own veracity in this manner is your doing, no one else's.
Yes you are lying. Obama never discouraged an abortion. He put all tax payers on the table for funding government sponsored child murder. The guy is evil. And people like you did this to us Mike.
If that's what you want to think, go for it...... But.... Why is it then that abortion is just being using as a tool to "clean up the mess" caused by a total lack of cognitive thought????? About 90% or more of abortions procedures done are for that very reason instead of what it should be used for.... That's why some people find abortion disgusting and those who are pro-abortion to be lacking morals.....
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
Please mininggold, the commissar needs an answer.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. Thomas Jefferson We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
True, he's been trying to move onto the next half baked demand for an answer to a yet unrevealed insane question for months now. How can you keep the lad waiting like that?
When you folks feel some sort of empathy for the post natal care of babies and children then you can lecture me about morals.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
This is related to what I said before about total lack of cognitive thought process..... They put themselve into a situation they don't know how or want to deal with..... If they had stopped to "REALLY" think about what they were doing instead of the "Do it if it feels good" attitude then the abortion and/or the post natal abuse would have been avoided..... But then again why think, that takes too much time, effort and common sense...... something that is sorely lacking in todays world..... hence the popularity of abortion, the solution for terminal stupidity!!!!!!!!
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
What has that got to do with the conservative's lack of care and concern for babies and children.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. Thomas Jefferson We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
You "ASSUME" that "SOME" Conservatives don't care about a babies welfare just because they oppose abortion!!!! Do you want to give the baby a chance to have the chance at a happy life (foster homes are an option) or do you just think it's easier to have the baby blendered???? But the point is "THINK" before you drop your britches!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
Do you want to give the baby a chance to have the chance at a happy life (foster homes are an option) or do you just think it's easier to have the baby blendered???? But the point is "THINK" before you drop your britches!!!!!!!!!!!!! Maybe having young children working as janitors is the conservative idea of how to 'care' for children. Is that a standard practice in your adopted country of Israel?
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
adopted country of Israel? You really want a little Israeli janitor kid for a slave don't you?
Obama's watch stopped on 24 May 2008, but he's been too busy smoking crack to notice.
For each abortion there's a distinct story. Some may be as you characterize. But you can;t paint with that broad brush. Did you know that Santorum and his wife had an abortion? The reason was VERY common.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
I'm sorry.... weren't you the one who insinuated all kids need to work for their room and board? And that anything less is dratted socialism.
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
No, you're halucinating again.
Obama's watch stopped on 24 May 2008, but he's been too busy smoking crack to notice.
Then you will agree that the normal family unit is pretty much socialistic.
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
No, just wondering how you can argue right to life and against right to health care.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. Thomas Jefferson We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
Well I see the spin doctor is alive and well today....... So just because I don't hate Jews like you do, you think that I've fallen in love with them..... Interesting assumption.....
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
Why are we letting someone who has shown they lack cognitive thought decide if the child should live or die?????? Only a small percentage of abortions are done because of health problems to the child/mother or because of rape/incest..... So why then does the child have to die just because it's mother is stupid???? Why doesn't it have the right to live???? I don't have a problem with people getting HealthCare as long as they can pay for the services and the bureaucrats stay the hell out of it!!!!
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
So just because I don't hate Jews like you do, you think that I've fallen in love with them..... Interesting assumption..... You must mean yourself since there's nothing false about my statement, or my description of much of your posting history, as was proven by your very post. You need to ask yourself why is Israel so sacred to you, that you overlook in that country the same practices that you claim to dislike in this one? Notice how I happen to not cram all Jews into the Israeli camp.
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 is that why you hate them????? Because they do what you support here????
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
No.... I meant you...... How is letting a child live such a bad thing???? Why don't you explain to me why it is...... I didn't know working for a living was such a bad thing either???? Why don't you explain to me why it is...... Next thing you're going to say is others sharing your air is a bad thing!!!! I thought you guys were all about sharing others possessions???? By the way who said Newt was a Conservative anyway????? (Oh yea that's right those who "THINK" they are and the Leftards)!!!!
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
I don't have a problem with people getting HealthCare as long as they can pay for the services and the bureaucrats stay the hell out of it!!!! However if a unborn child happens to occupy the womb of one of your stupid mothers too poor to afford pre-natal medical care then it's ok for that baby to die of a treatable medical condition, right?
He who knows best knows how little he knows. Thomas Jefferson We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul
No they didn't. You're reading that wrong. They had to allow 'citizens' to be president in the beginning, because there were no 35 year old natural born citizens. The only 'natural born citizens' were citizens born after the adoption of the Articles of Confederation. The AOC was formally ratified in 1781. In 1787, when the Constitution was ratified, the only natural born citizens around were 6 or younger.
“Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866)) Rep. John A. Bingham, the author behind the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, in comments about Section 1992 of the Revised Statutes. ****************************************************************************** At a Judiciary Committee hearing on April 3, Leahy asked Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, himself a former Federal judge, if he had doubts that McCain was eligible to serve as President. “My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen,” Chertoff replied. “That is mine, too,” said Leahy. www.leahy.senate.gov/pres...d4-440e-b53d-754f5bb58983 Both parents must be citizens of the US in order for their offspring to be natural born citizens.
Uh...no...I'm not. They had to allow 'citizens' to be president in the beginning, because there were no 35 year old natural born citizens. They Framers conferred US citizenship on all people alive and on the soil of the US. After that, anyone born on the soil of the US, those born into servitude and Indians excepted, was a natural born citizen. Anyone who immigrated was subject to Congress' Article I powers regarding immigration and naturalization. There is nothing in the USCON and there is nothing in case or administrative law that creates that mythical third class of citizen. That's N-O-T-H-I-N-G.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty
Nothing that you posted lends any credence to that being either a logical or legal conclusion. There was no corollary statement "but if one or both parents are not American then the offspring is not natural born". Nor does it state "My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen and if they are not then the offspring are not,” Chertoff replied. IN other words, you're making a leap over a very, very wide chasm of logic. Natural BORN not NATURAL BORN PARENTS.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Yea so? Neither England nor Kenya had or has any claim to a baby born to non-diplomats in the US. Nor was Obama, Sr. compelled under any US, British or Kenyan law to abrogate the US citizenship rights of Barack II. The test of natural born citizenship is if the child, at birth, has the full rights, privileges and immunities of any other citizen. I don't know what is worse, the fact that "your" argument is weak or that "you" don't realize how weak it is.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Who says I hate them? Who I detest are posters too chickenshit to even dare criticize the hold they have over this country. So... where did you meet Stone, at your local mental hospital? Because you both act like borderlines.
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
The very clause that you posted above distinguishes between a citizen and a natural born citizen.... No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States. If their intention was to allow any citizen to be eligible for the office, then the entire first sentence in the clause above wouldn't have been necessary. Read the Federalist Papers. They were intent on keeping foreign influence "out of our councils". The fact that this constitutional issue, along with many, many others has been bastardized over the years doesn't change the original intent.
IN other words, you're making a leap over a very, very wide chasm of logic. If a person says "the sky is blue" does that mean that the sky is not blue because the statement didn't include the phrase "and the sky is not red"? It is specifically stated in the clause that you posted. There is a difference between a citizen and a natural born citizen. If there is no difference, why use both terms in the same sentence? You may want to read... again, the Law of Nations, posted here at Constitution.org.
I would be happy if the Israelis would simply stop bullying, beating and imprisoning Palestinian Arab kids to get back at their older siblings or as a vehicle to torture these families on the whole enough to make them flee their homeland like the Nazis did to Jewish people before the Shoah.
And I know that you're going to bring up British common law, but does it make sense that the Framers of the US Constitution would rely on the common law of the King whom they rebelled against, or 'natural law' which they refer to many times?
Only in so far as the USCON confers citizenship on all those present on the soil at the time of the adoption to make them eligible for POTUS versus all those who shall be subsequently born on the soil AFTER the adoption. It makes no other distinction or qualification, e.g. immmigrants who arrived AFTER the adoption and had children. Hilarious that you would believe that the Framers tolerated non-natural born citizens being POTUS at the onset of this nation but then wouldn't tolerate Obama, who was born in Hawaii, as being eligible...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
The USCON specifically denies citizenship to Indians and Slaves. England's citizenship rules were detailed by Blackstone and stand in stark contrast to Vattel. English citizenship rules - at the time - made all of those who were born within the realm subjects, i.e. citizens, with all rights, privileges and immunities, of the Crown of England.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
English Common law was the law in effect in the colonies. Look at the early cases that went to the Supreme Court. Almost all of them dealt with a Common Law rather than Constitutional issue. A notable exception being Calder v. Bull Also, if you read the entirity of the D/I, Jefferson accuses the King of IGNORING established (common) law by asserting the King's own will on the colonies over the established Rule of Law. There is nothing in any of the writings of any of the Framers that had the affect of negating English Common law. IN fact, Blackstone is very often cited by Jay, Chase, Marshal, Story - all very important justices. So, again, simply surmising that because the English colonists, who considered themselves Englishmen and thus due all rights and privileges of being so, rebelled against the Crown of England, that they somehow negated an entire body of law, with roots going back more than 500 years is a premise unsupported by even anecdotal evidence.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Every person born in the country is, at the moment of birth, prima facie a citizen; and he who would deny it must take upon himself the burden of proving some great disfranchisement strong enough to override the ‘natural born’ right as recognized by the Constitution in terms the most simple and comprehensive, and without any reference to race or color, or any other accidental circumstance.” Bates himself saw only one (familiar) exception to the rule: “the small and admitted class of the natural born composed of the children of foreign ministers and the like... Edward Bates, USAAG, 1862 A "natural born citizen" is not one made by law or otherwise, but born.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Natural born liberal ! Ever watch 48 hours - homocide ! Typical gangbanger - dead teenager with 2 - 3 children ! The mtv graduate is - pregnant teenagers with tattoos - piercing on drugs not married ! Warjr - street bastards need govt father - mothers !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
My question is why is she pregnant to start with when she knows she can't afford it????? Why is it we spend so much taxpayer money on "TRYING" to fix the stupid things stupid people do?????? Instead of spending the money wisely and educating them.. Ohhhh that's right that means they would be too smart to vote for those "STUPID" politicians!!!! Free Prenatal Care, Low or No Cost Prenatal Care By Robin Elise Weiss, LCCE, About.com Guide Prenatal care is important for a healthy pregnancy. Sometimes pregnancy occurs and you are not ready. This can often mean the lack of quality prenatal care. This lack of prenatal care can be dangerous because you do not have anyone to help you figure out the ins and outs of pregnancy or to pick up on the rare serious complication. In essence, without prenatal care, you have no life guard. Here are some places that you can look for locally to help you get prenatal care: • Local Health Department Your local health department will be able to tell you where a prenatal care clinic is run. They may have one that they run or can help you find free or reduced prices on prenatal care depending on your income level. You can call 1- 800-311-BABY (1-800-311-2229) to connect you to your local health care department. This information is also available in Spanish by calling 1-800-504- 7081. • Local Medical School If you live in an area with a medical school or even have a bigger medical school in your state, even if it is not in your town, call their clinics. They often run clinics for prenatal care both at the medical school and in local towns within a certain distance. These are staffed by trained and qualified doctors and midwives who are training residents (doctors who have graduated from medical school but are learning the specialty of obstetrics), midwives and sometimes student doctors and nurses. Costs will vary depending on income. • Planned Parenthood There are many cities that are serviced by Planned Parenthood. They do provide sliding scale prenatal care. This means it will be based on your ability to pay. • Medicaid This is a sponsored program for women who do not have the money to pay for prenatal care. After the application process, you will be given a list of providers of care. This should include doctors and midwives in your area who have already agreed to take Medicaid. They will provide you with the exact same medical care as private pay or insurance based patients. Check in the blue pages of your phone book. • Other Resources You may have local resources that are helpful for finding prenatal care. It may be that your religious family has a prenatal care provider who will work with you. Or perhaps you can make payment arrangements with a local midwife or doctor. Be up front about your situation. Be truthful about what you can and can't afford.
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
So what are they doing besides spying on us, "TRYING" to influence our foreign policies, trying to influence union policies, trying to influence the ACLU, trying to influence the ADL, hunting down terrorists, hunting down old Nazis and kicking the Palestinians ass!!!!
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
She's stupid, remember. Would your death panel deny her and her unborn baby medical care because she's stupid? Instead of spending the money wisely and educating them.. Ohhhh that's right that means they would be too smart to vote for those "STUPID" politicians!!!! I'm all for education. It seems to work pretty well to reduce unwanted pregnancy and abortion rates in socialist, old Europe. Here are some places that you can look for locally to help you get prenatal care: Aren't conservatives working hard to eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood? Medcaid, there's another on the conservative hit list. Medical schools - how many get by with no government (taxpayer) money? Local health department - we know where their money comes from.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
It depends on what "PART" of Europe you're talking about..... Some are lower than the US, some are on par with the US and some are 2-3 times higher that the US!!!!
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
Well I guess it depends on how much money they bring in from doing business with the public, tuition from students, grants/donations from the drug companies, other miscellaneous business corporations and private individuals!!!!
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
If they thought they were getting their monies worth I don't think they would squawk, but I would say they don't think abortion is worth funding!!!!
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
Ann Coulter. Oh, and the exact quote was "It would be a much better country if women did not vote." Coulter is as much a crazed neocon as Newt, but I have to give her credit: she certainly gives the liberal morons fits. :) Some other choice quotes: That was the theme of the Million Mom March: I don't need a brain — I've got a womb. God said so: Go forth, be fruitful, multiply, and rape the planet — it's yours. I think [women] should be armed but should not vote ... women have no capacity to understand how money is earned. They have a lot of ideas on how to spend it ... it's always more money on education, more money on child care, more money on day care. Liberals don't read books – they don't read anything … That's why they're liberals. They watch TV, absorb the propaganda, and vote on the basis of urges. Liberals don't read books – they don't read anything … That's why they're liberals. They watch TV, absorb the propaganda, and vote on the basis of urges. Democrats cannot conceive of "hate speech" towards Christians because, in their eyes, Christians always deserve it. Being a Christian means that I am called upon to do battle against lies, injustice, cruelty, hypocrisy — you know, all the virtues in the church of liberalism. The tolerant liberal suddenly becomes very intolerant when their official religion is challenged. If someone enters the teaching profession for the big bucks, aren't they too stupid to be teaching our kids? Liberals have managed to eliminate the idea of manly honor. Instead, all they have is womanly indignation. Democrats want to turn the entire citizenry into welfare recipients. Liberals are hopping mad because Rush Limbaugh referred to phony soldiers as "phony soldiers." … True, all Democrats in the military are not phony soldiers, but all phony soldiers seem to be Democrats. The reason [Liberals] sob about the dark night of fascism under McCarthy is to prevent Americans from ever noticing that liberals consistently attack their own country. "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 --
The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, for instance, got more than half of its funding from NIH in 2004. Between 2-16% of medical school funding comes from drug companies nation wide.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
Abortions are only a small part of what they do, 3%.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
And accounts for right about 40% of their income!!!! For every 340 abortions they perform they do 1 adoption referral..... And they perform 47 abortions for every 1 prenatal care client..... Not very good numbers are they..... Can't say as I blame the Conservatives for wanting more for their money!!!!
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
I'm glad to bring a little humor into your day. They wouldn't tolerate Romney either.
For every 340 abortions they perform they do 1 adoption referral..... And they perform 47 abortions for every 1 prenatal care client..... Not very good numbers are they..... No they aren't, where did you get them? Obviously these numbers are not from your source: Planned Parenthood calculates the numbers by services provided, rather than dollars spent. In a fact sheet last updated in March 2011, the group lists the following breakdown of its services: Contraception (including reversible contraception, emergency contraception, vasectomies and tubal sterilizations): 4,009,549 services Sexually transmitted infections testing and treatment: 3,955,916 services Cancer screening and prevention: 1,830,811 services Other women’s health services (including pregnancy tests and prenatal care): 1,178,369 services Abortions: 332,278 procedures Miscellaneous (including primary care and adoption referrals): 76,977 Total services: 11,383,900 By this tally, abortions accounted for just under 3 percent of the procedures Planned Parenthood provided in 2009, which is the most recent year for which the group is reporting statistics. www.politifact.com/truth-...ices-are-well-over-90-pe/ Planned Parenthood gets $363 million a year from the federal government. None of that money can be used for abortions.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
They wouldn't tolerate Romney either. They tolerated the Quakers, the Papists and, in Jefferson's and Madison's case, the Calvinists. Regardless, the Berfer arguments, from any angle - Article II, BC, COB, Vattel etc - do not withstand even minimal scrutiny.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
For every 340 abortions they perform they do 1 adoption referral..... And they perform 47 abortions for every 1 prenatal care client..... Not very good numbers are they..... No they aren't, where did you get them? Obviously these numbers are not from your source: The 40% is from "CLINIC" income not total income..... they receive probably close to 6 or 700 million from the government, corporate donors and private donors..... Straight from the PPFA: STI/STD Testing and Treatment — 38.0 percent of services in 2010 STI Tests, Women and Men 3,552,955 Genital Warts (HPV) Treatments 51,197 HIV Tests, Women and Men 574,901 Total 4,179,053 Contraception — 33.5 percent of services in 2010 Reversible Contraception Clients, Women** 2,219,726 Emergency Contraception Kits 1,461,816 Female sterilization procedures 605 Vasectomy Clients 3,290 Total-3,685,437 Cancer Screening and Prevention — 14.5 percent of services in 2010 Pap Tests 769,769 HPV Vaccinations 34,130 Breast Exams/ Breast Care 747,607 Colposcopy Procedures*** 41,549 LOOP/LEEP Procedures*** 2,432 Cryotherapy Procedures*** 1,254 Total-1,596,741 Other Women’s Health Services — 10.4 percent of services in 2010 Pregnancy Tests 1,113,460 Prenatal Services 31,098 Total-1,144,558 Abortion Services — 3.0 percent of services in 2010 Abortion Procedures 329,445 Other Services — 0.6 percent of services in 2010 Family Practice Services, Women and Men 35,062 Adoption Referrals to Other Agencies 841 Other Procedures, Women and Men**** 32,229 Total-68,132 Total Services 11,003,366 *Patient Care Provided by Planned Parenthood Affiliate Health Centers in 2010 So...... Abortion-329,445, Prenatal-31,089 Adoption-841.... Which equals out to........ 1.5 abortions for every prenatal service and 391 abortions to every adoption service.... (looks like his/her calculator was broken because this is the information he/she used from the PPFAs website)..... The numbers still aren't pretty no matter which calculator you use.......
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
Obama thinks they are fairly pretty numbers. You see he loves dead babies. He wants more abortions and less adoptions.
While you believe abortions should be illegal, you also believe once born, those babies do not have a right to medical care, a home, clothing, food, or an education unless their parents can pay. Seventy-six percent of Planned Parenthood's clients are poor, defined as 150% of official poverty line. If it is true that Obama loves the sight of dead babies, then it is also true that you crave the sight of diseased and starving children dressed in rags on our streets. Come to think of it, it is the right to lifers that publicly display huge pictures of dead babies - they obviously love the sight.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
here is your statement that started began our exchange If they thought they were getting their monies worth I don't think they would squawk, but I would say they don't think abortion is worth funding!!!! My point, abortion is only 3% of the total services provided annually, and by law government money can not be used to pay for abortions. The list just provides information about PP's other services - what they are and how many.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
You do understand why some people here call you looney mom?
Back attcha.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
My point, abortion is only 3% of the total services provided annually, and by law government money can not be used to pay for abortions. The list just provides information about PP's other services - what they are and how many. Can you say that with a straight face???? So you don't think they have been circumventing the (cough....cough) law for years???? Don't forget that's one of the reasons ObamaCare was created, as a way to legally get around that (cough....cough) law!!!! So what else is it "SUPPOSEDLY ILLEGAL" to do with that money?????? I'd bet it's "NOT" give it back to the Leftards in campaign contributions!!!!!!! (The Circular Money Laundering scheme). How do you think they buy votes???? With other peoples money........
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
I'd say he is getting his wish!!!!
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
Or perhaps you're paranoid.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
Citizenship - qualification for presidential office are two separate things ! To: butterdezillion Attorneys who argued in a Georgia court this week that Barack Obama isn’t eligible to be president say Administrative Law Judge Michael Malihi considered granting a default judgment before they even argued the case. That presumably could have recommended that Obama failed to prove his eligibility and therefore should not be on the 2012 ballot, since he and his lawyer snubbed the hearing, for which Obama was subpoenaed. But the attorneys argued against such an easy victory on the point of the single hearing, expressing instead their desire to get the evidence concerning Obama’s eligibility or lack of it in the record, so that it would be there should the case elevate to an appellate level. The attorneys also said the strategy decision by Obama to simply ignore the subpoena and the hearing may ultimately backfire, because judges typically aren’t pleased to listen to arguments from someone who wants to introduce evidence during an appeal. Discover what the Constitution’s reference to “natural born citizen” means and whether Barack Obama qualifies, in the ebook version of “Where’s the REAL Birth Certificate?” Both attorneys, J. Mark Hatfield and Van R. Irion of Liberty Legal Foundation told WND they felt comfortable discussing the situation as the judge had imposed no ban on communicating what happened. “The judge … was considering just entering a default judgment against Obama,” Hatfield said today. “The plaintiffs’ attorneys uniformly did not want the judge to do that because there wouldn’t be any evidence in the record at all.” In Georgia, state law requires “every candidate for federal” office who is certified by the state executive committees of a political party or who files a notice of candidacy “shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.” State law also grants the secretary of state and any “elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate” in the state the authority to raise a challenge to a candidate’s qualifications, the judge determined. That’s exactly what several groups of individuals did. Citizens bringing the complaints include David Farrar, Leah Lax, Thomas Malaren and Laurie Roth, represented by Taitz; David Weldon represented by attorney Van R. Irion of Liberty Legal Foundation; and Carl Swensson and Kevin Richard Powell, represented by J. Mark Hatfield. Cody Judy is raising a challenge because he also wants to be on the ballot. Hatfield and Irion told WND the expected process is that Malihi will make a decision over the course of the next week whether Obama, without appearing or being represented at the hearing, documented his eligibility to the court’s satisfaction. That recommendation then goes to Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp, to whom Obama’s lawyer, Michael Jablonski, earlier had complained that Malihi was letting the attorneys “run amok” since the issue of Obama’s “citizenship” had been resolved. But in fact the U.S. Constitution demands a different status for presidents, that of a “natural born citizen,” which Founders likely considered to be the offspring of two citizen parents. If that is the case, Obama could not be eligible as his father was a Kenyan national subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom. At the time Jablonski complained to Kemp and told him he should simply cancel the hearing, Kemp warned Jablonski that he ultimately would be reviewing the hearing result, and to not participate would be at Obama’s “peril.” Both lawyers, whose cases in fact are separate from each other as well as from the Taitz’ case, said it was important for them to be able to introduce evidence and build a court record. Hatfield said the goal ultimately is to have a court rule on the substance of the controversy: Is it necessary to have citizen parents to be a “natural born citizen” or will that definition evolve as America ages? Hatfield told WND that he specifically asked the judge at the end of the hearing to close the record, and he did that. Hatfield said that should make it clear that as the decision is made, and any challenges progress, no new information can be added to the evidence already submitted. He said it’s very clear that the court had jurisdiction to take the case and accept evidence, since the ballot at issue is a ballot with which the state election in 2012 will be conducted. And Hatfield noted that although Obama’s lawyer at least made a motion to quash the subpoena from Taitz for his testimony and records, Obama’s attorneys never even bothered to respond to his own motion to produce records. Obama’s campaign declined to respond to WND emails and messages inquiring about a comment on the situation. Irion told WND the default is a typical result when one side fails to appear for a dispute that’s being adjudicated in court, but in this case, that would have left it wide open for arguments on appeal that had nothing to do with the issue. He said he explained to the judge that awarding a default judgment actually would have been rewarding Obama for failing to respond to the subpoena. The attorneys said they would be watching for Obama’s next move in the contest. And they said they believe there is a possibility that because of the dispute, Obama may end up not being on the Georgia ballot in the fall. Obama lost the state in the 2008 election to John McCain. Earlier, several attorneys who previously took cases challenging Obama’s eligibility as high as the U.S. Supreme Court said Obama’s refusal to participate in the hearing was a travesty. “That President Obama’s attorneys didn’t show respect for the court, the citizens, the secretary of state, and the statutes of Georgia reveals the true character of the administration as being completely and utterly against state’s rights,” said attorney Leo Donofrio. “The federal government is growing out of control with every administration and this action today is a loud announcement that this administration is going to do what it likes, and you can imagine that their response to this judiciary would be exactly the same if this had been the U.S. Supreme Court.” He said if Georgia does decide to keep Obama off its state election ballots, he won’t appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, “because if he were to lose there, his entire administration would be void, including his appointments to the Supreme Court.” “If Obama were to appeal in Georgia, only this election is in play, and only as to Georgia’s ballots, but if he loses in Georgia, appealing to the SCOTUS brings in his entire eligibility, and the legitimacy of his current administration,” Donofrio warned. “My personal belief is that if the U.S. Supreme Court held that he was ineligible, he might simply ignore the ruling, and test the will of the nation, just as he is testing the will of the state of Georgia,” he said. “If the judge’s recommendation – and I’ve been told that it’s going to be to disqualify Mr. Obama as a candidate – is followed by the secretary of state, Mr. Obama has got a real problem,” said Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation. His organization pursued several of the lawsuits over Obama’s occupancy of the Oval Office to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has not accepted any eligibility cases. “He’s thumbed his nose at the court. He’s thumbed his nose at the secretary of state in Georgia. He’s thumbed his nose at the people and said, ‘I’m above it all. I’m above the law,’” Kreep said. Mario Apuzzo, who also shepherded a case to the Supreme Court, said Obama, by not showing, “actually failed to meet his burden of proof, to show that he is eligible and should be placed on the ballot.” “For him to just ignore due process here is really telling a lot,” he said, noting, “This decision will have a ripple effect.” “He’s not above the law. That’s a very important thing here. He’s a private person running for office, so he had no business not showing up. So the court can enter the judgment, and then the secretary of state does what he wants with it. And this will have a ripple effect for other secretaries of state, for other states, for the public. Also for any case that could be pending in the Supreme Court, where the issue of Mr. Obama’s eligibility is implicated,” he said. 16 posted on Thursday, February 02, 2012 05:00:23 by Mr. Wright (N)
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
The Adminstrative Judge had no power to compel the President or his lawyers to attend.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
To: edge919 << “He was not being sued.” >> Semantics. This was all started by a lawsuit, yes? << “He was being subpoenaed for evidence and for testimony related directly to his candidacy for office. The only appeal he can file is with the state superior court, which he is NOT going to do.” >> He doesn't have to appeal in state court at all. He can simply ignore the whole mess then - if the state tries to keep him off the ballot - sue the state in Federal court. << “He is better off cutting his losses in this state and trying to marginalize the outcome of the hearing through his typical Alinsky tactics, and hope to high hell this isn’t repeated in all 57 states.” >> I don't see how you can reach that conclusion. No candidate with a brain is going to support that strategy. Concede states in a Presidential election? Silly. Other than a loss in Federal court, there appears to be no downside for him to simply ignore this. The USSC overruled the Florida Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore. You have to keep that precedent foremost in your mind if you want to understand how Obama is reacting tactically to this. If Georgia announces some adverse impact to Obama from all this, then you can expect a hurried Obama appeal to the Supremes. The real interesting aspect here is that this would force the Supremes to review the “Natural Born Citizen” issue for the first time. Wouldn't it be interesting if they decided that Obama didn't qualify for NBC status? What would happen then? Would he be removed as President? Would 2012 be Romney vs. Biden? I'd pay to see that. It would be a fascinating news cycle. 23 posted on Thursday, February 02, 2012 07:59:38 by omnidroid
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
No. This "case" was simply a ballot challenge.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
That issue has, in fact, been addressed several times by the court.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
sue = lawsuit
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
Or perhaps you're paranoid. Or perhaps you're naive....
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
More like kicking the can ! Eventually a republican senate will decide !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
Abortion was legal in over 20 states before the "sexual revolution".
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
No one was sued. It was a ballot challenge. Berfers know how gullible their audience is. They've made this out to be something it is not.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
www.guttmacher. org/statecenter/spibs/spib_SFAM.pdf State Funding of Abortion under Medicare.....
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
Whew! That is Medicaid, not Medicare - for a minute I was wondering how many elderly pregnant women could there be. From your link: First implemented in 1977, the Hyde Amendment, which currently forbids the use of federal funds for abortions except in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest, has guided public funding for abortions under the joint federal-state Medicaid programs for low-income women. At a minimum, states must cover those abortions that meet the federal exceptions. Although most states meet the requirements, one state is in violation of federal Medicaid law, because it pays for abortions only in cases of life endangerment. Some states use their own funds to pay for all or most medically necessary abortions, although most do so as a result of a specific court order. As part of her internship a friend worked with a group that provided services to homeless women. One client, a paranoid schizophrenic, pregnant as the result of rape (homeless women get raped a lot) and taking medication that was known to caused birth defects presented a moral dilemma for the staff, my friend said. They were in a position to get an abortion for her, but were not happy about doing so.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
PP gets NO Fed monies for abortions. They do get it for other procedures and administrative costs. And the Feds do regular audits and reviews to check that the monies are kept separate and the facilities are up to licensing and accreditation standards.
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
CZ knows differently. He says So you don't think they have been circumventing the (cough....cough) law for years???? because, you know, liberals love abortion. CZ is part of the conservative ilk that doesn't respond to reality, but creates it.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
CZ seems to be another practitioner of that Black and White 'thinking'.
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
LOL..... I didn't even notice that I mispelled that till you just mentioned it.....
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
What you call the sexual revolution was only ending the cultural cognitive dissonance about sex and who was having it. Girls got pregnant in the good old days just like they do now. They either had abortions or gave birth, just like they do now. The difference is that abortions are safe now, the girl who decides to carry her baby to term is more likely to keep her baby, and families tell the truth.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
They shouldn't be safe. I long for the days of the back alley abortion and the coat hanger. That way they can reap what they sow.
Again you show your contempt for the poor. Women with money had access to safe abortions either in the US, or abroad - it was only poor women who got the back alley, coat hanger abortions.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
Your post is insanity. Why should murder be clean and safe. Screw that let the bitch die. Any woman having an abortion deserves that.
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
It doesn't surprise me that you believe that...... It's so easy to "launder" the money by transferring it from account to account to account till it gets to where you want it to be even though it shouldn't be there..... We used to do it all the time in the military...... It also explains why you vote, you believe certain things you are told by some people..... Oh by the way PP are currently under investigation for doing exactly that, using federal money for abortions!!!!!
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
Oh, how DARE you... That you would expect someone like loonybitch to be held accountable for her actions, is outrageous! Of course, the pro-abortion crowd never mentions the third option... for girls to keep their damned knees together. Noooo..... We can't have that, now, can we? Feh.
To: mcToejam, rat-boy, drippy, Alzheimer Fred, whitesands, t-bird, loonymom/ming, e-type jackoff, goober56, wreck, cal-CON, rabid dog, dummy DwarF, biff and meguro. You're on the "a waste of human flesh" list. Piss off.
Kill anyone not agreeing with you exactly on the issue of abortion, heh..... Yeah, right, sure you are pro life; that is if you want to call pro control of women pro life that is.
Not only are you anything but pro life, you are pro sadism and pro blood revenge. The Mormons believe in Blood Atonement, that is, the policy of murdering someone before they can soil their soul with sin. So, this means you are Mormon now too?
Kill anyone not agreeing with you exactly on the issue of abortion, heh.... If someone is trying to kill someone. Someone else has the right to stop that killing and kill the aggressor. You are a phoney pro life person. You would let the baby die. You also are for allowing people to murder adults to not be put to death. It is no wonder you call yourself a witch. You are on the wrong side of almost every issue.
So, if you burst into a room with a gun, stopped the doctor from doing the procedure, murdered anyone there in the room as a guilty party to a murder that was about to happen, you are pro-life? Look in the mirror sonny boy; that is where you can see the phony pro-lifer.
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." Mahatma Gandhi, Indian political and spiritual leader Damn right I care enough about human life not to kill as a way to say killing is wrong. And that is not just a Wicca principle, you'll find people in all religions agreeing with me.
Look in the mirror sonny boy; that is where you can see the phony pro-lifer. I am pro innocent life. Someone who takes innocent life has forfitted their right to life. It is very calice and uncaring of you not want to punish the murderer. Lets go back in time to the month before your child was born. Scenario A. A bad person is going to harm your woman. He is robbing her. He is almost certainly going to kill your unborn child. The only way to stop him is to kill him. Would you kill him or would you let your unborn child die and never get to know the person you now know? Scenario B. Your woman is going to get an abortion. They only way to stop him is to kill the abortionist. Would you do it to save your unborn kid so that you can let him live?
No it doesn't.
Scenario B. Your woman is going to get an abortion. They only way to stop him is to kill the abortionist. Would you do it to save your unborn kid so that you can let him live? Either scenario you list, requires a man to take action. rat-boy is not a man, he's a brain-dead socialist. You want a good analogy? Think of the feckless Michael Dukakis, you've got rat-boy... rat-boy doesn't have a woman, because he's not a man... he's just another frustrated, testicularly-challenged socialist.
To: mcToejam, rat-boy, drippy, Alzheimer Fred, whitesands, t-bird, loonymom/ming, e-type jackoff, goober56, wreck, cal-CON, rabid dog, dummy DwarF, biff and meguro. You're on the "a waste of human flesh" list. Piss off.
If you were what masculinity was about, most women would choose celibacy.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
It was the pill, not abortion that liberated women sexually. For women, likewise, the sexual revolution concerned the rules of engagement, rather than the act of sex itself. Premarital virginity had been going out of fashion for decades before the declaration of sexual liberation. It started in the 1920s, as middle-class Americans converted from Victorianism to Freudianism and began to accept that a desirous woman was perhaps not so depraved after all. There- after doctors and psychologists counseled America’s women that a happy marriage was sustained by mutual sexual satisfaction. Experts encouraged women to explore their natural desires, but to start the journey in the marital bed. Women accepted the prescription and ignored the fine print. At the high noon of fifties traditionalism, 40 percent of women had sex before they married—compared to just 10 percent who did in the reputedly Roaring Twenties. Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
Unlike you stonie, I'm sane. I don't play judge, jury and executioner based on my own singular judgment. According to your own religion, only your God can pass the ultimate judgment on people. And you are not your own higher power. I do know I would never trust you armed and in the same room with me. You are too far into the insanity zone to feel safe in that situation. I'd only shot someone who pulled a dangerous weapon on me. That is the only situation I would take a life. I wouldn't even shoot someone stealing my bicycle or car. Property is not worth taking a human life for. I wouldn't interfere with a legal abortion procedure with deadly force either. Nonviolent civil disobedience yes, bt violence only hurts the cause of ending abortions. The backlash from it serves to strengthen the resolve to preserve the practice, and I am too mature and savvy to the methods of sound political action to be an insane cowboy like you.
Wow. You would have let your son die. Go tell him that.
It has workd out so well. How many women head a one parent household?
Just a sec buddy. You said judge not. You're a hypocrite. You would kill someone to save your own life but not your kids. Shame on you mike, your'e insane.
And dramatically raised the amount of anti-depressants prescribed..... And is screwing with the genetics of numerous species of animals/mammals..... So is it really worth it???
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
"rat-boy doesn't have a woman, because he's not a man... he's just another frustrated, testicularly-challenged socialist." If you were what masculinity was about, most women would choose celibacy. Okay. That is a keeper. You are also correct about the pill.
Don't blame the pill, blame Dr. Freud. Premarital virginity had been going out of fashion for decades before the declaration of sexual liberation. It started in the 1920s, as middle-class Americans converted from Victorianism to Freudianism and began to accept that a desirous woman was perhaps not so depraved after all. There- after doctors and psychologists counseled America’s women that a happy marriage was sustained by mutual sexual satisfaction. Experts encouraged women to explore their natural desires, but to start the journey in the marital bed. Women accepted the prescription and ignored the fine print. At the high noon of fifties traditionalism, 40 percent of women had sex before they married—compared to just 10 percent who did in the reputedly Roaring Twenties. In any case, women heading single parent households do, so in part, because they didn't have abortions.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
And is screwing with the genetics of numerous species of animals/mammals..... You are off the rails now.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
I was a teenager in Stone's good old days.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
I swear we have another BPDer here with all this black and white magical thinking, but this one seems more female. Women were taking antidepressants sometimes in the form of opium, way before there was such a thing as the pill. I guess CZs never heard of the common malady of years gone by that doctors called 'Hysteria' for which a certain operation she would not approved of, was commonly performed.
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
You would endanger the lives of countless thousands of kids by making sure abortion stays legal by creating martyrs. Every time some idiot takes the law into their own hands and murders a doctor because they oppose abortion, they make it easier to justify keeping it legal by making opposition to it seem like irrational terrorists. As for myself, I had my planned offspring and had a vasectomy a long time ago, so I made sure I was not going to leave a woman in the awkward position of an unwanted pregnancy, so your example is moot anyway. Even were I still able to get a woman pregnant, it's still her body, and the law is what it is; I would not make martyrs that would help keep abortion legal. In your example, you could kill a doctor, go to prison or to your execution for murder, the woman could still in the aftermath if your murderous rage still opt for an abortion. Not to mention that pregnancies that would have been spared abortion were the procedure to have been made illegal before additional murders of people over the issue happened polarized the issue making it easier for pro abortion proponents to keep it legal would be terminated. In your example, the pregnancy could still wind up being ended, and you would insure many more pregnancies could go by making martyrs to the cause of the pro-abortion side, improving the climate to insure abortion stays legal. You have to work the issue the right way, or abortion cannot be make illegal, it's as simple as that. You are just too pig headed and arrogant to see the cause and effect of your murderous intent. Your act would fall under the heading of an act of terror and intimidation and make all others against abortion have to work in an even more difficult and polarized climate. Your act would make it harder to make abortion illegal, not easier. And I am a responsible adult that had my offspring, and took a measure to insure I don't have unwanted additional kids. Because it's not just the woman who has the responsibility to practice birth control if they don't want to become pregnant, it's the man's job too. . Family planning is not a one gender deal.
My son is an RN who works in trauma medicine and supports the pro-abortion cause. We have argued the issue; me opposed, him for the procedure to be made even easier for any woman to get. So, what is it the fuck you want me to say to him, sport? I already know I am right on the issue, and he is wrong.
And there was Lydia Pinkham's (40-proof) for female complaints. What "real man" would want to return to the days when sex was a man's right and a women's duty?
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
Hear, hear!
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
I think they would have been better off burning all those corsets, but heh, you were supposed to please your man or else your next stay was with relatives or in the poor house. Real men like Eric continue this power play into the 21st century by buying a foreign wife.
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
The boy has issues when he engages in baiting that merely amuses me. If I were to be affected the way he wishes, I would of stopped posting on political boards a long time ago. He acts like someone who is angry because his marriage is on the rocks or has ended pissing him off royally. That's the impression his baiting gives me. He would of been better served by just not speaking as he merely cuts what little standing as a mature human even more then he already has by going after me in a way he can't have any effect on anyone in here.
The bloomer was invented by one of them uppity wimmins wanting rights (liberty) for themselves and willing to risk the ire of men to be free. Smith’s daughter, also named Elizabeth, was first to shed the 20 pounds of clothing that, fashion dictated, should hang from a white woman’s waist, dangerously deformed from corseting. The reform costume Elizabeth Smith adopted (named the “Bloomer” after the newspaper editor who popularized it) bore an uncanny resemblance to the loose-fitting tunic and leggings worn by the two Elizabeths’ Native American friends.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
You are off the rails now. Sounds like you need to do a little research before you start with the pot calling the kettle black stuff!!!! Remember when you said you friends child was born with asthma???? If she ever took the pill then that could be the cause of the child having asthma.... Along with other things like allergies, congenital deformities, autism, cancers and attention defecit disorders. It's also causing problems with animals that live around human trash and downsteam from water and waste plants..... Like I said before is it really worth it??????????????
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
I guess CZs never heard of the common malady of years gone by that doctors called 'Hysteria' for which a certain operation she would not approved of, was commonly performed. So when are you scheduled for your procedure???
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
When you have 3 daughters you pick up a few things here and there about their thoughts and activities..... Even though Dads aren't supposed to know those things, some of us do.... Especially when you were single parenting during their teenage years!!!! I thought you guys were so in tune/touch with your body and knew what "NOT" to put in it?????? (Guess that must be an old wifes tale for some.... ehhh....)
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
Really? ...while hormone fluctuations and asthma/allergy problems may be related, interestingly enough, the researchers found that those asthmatics taking birth control pills on a regular basis didn't experience the same hormonal changes, nor the related breathing and allergy affects. This means that oral contraceptives could have a profound impact on keeping asthma in check. Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
Who ever said that? Certainly not me.
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
I'm sure that posters who must obsessively use !!!!!! and ???? all the time when posting might be the more logical candidates.
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
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.
#2. To: mininggold (#1)
#3. To: BorisY (#2)
Oranges - apples - bananas all fruits !
#4. To: mininggold (#3)
(Edited)
#5. To: BorisY (#4)
Trivia right - reality wrong is that how you play the game !
#6. To: mininggold (#5)
#7. To: BorisY, *Yukon neo-Progressive Vermin*, *Ron Paul for President* (#0)
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#8. To: hondo68 (#7)
#9. To: All (#8)
#10. To: BorisY (#0)
(Edited)
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.
#11. To: war (#10)
(Edited)
#12. To: BorisY (#11)
Age - resident - parents !
#13. To: mininggold (#1)
#14. To: BorisY (#11)
#15. To: war (#13)
#16. To: war (#14)
#17. To: BorisY (#16)
Higher office - higher qualifications !
#18. To: lucysmom (#17)
#19. To: BorisY (#18)
Natural (( parents )) ELIGIBLE ... native (( anchor status )) - naturalized (( immigrant )) --- INELIGIBLE !
#20. To: lucysmom (#19)
(Edited)
#21. To: All (#20)
4 - 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.
#62. To: war, ferret, fred (#60)
#63. To: A K A Stone (#61)
Is that the best you can do?
#64. To: BorisY (#62)
#65. To: A K A Stone (#58)
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?
#66. To: mininggold (#65)
#67. To: war (#44)
There are 2 classes of citizens, Junior...natural born and naturalized. There is no difference between native born and natural born. Period. /asshole
#68. To: A K A Stone (#66)
Quit playing games.
#69. To: A K A Stone (#66)
#70. To: mininggold (#41)
So you are against abortion? You don't think it is an unalienable right?
#71. To: BorisY (#69)
Doctors urged her to abort the baby for her own safety
#72. To: mininggold (#68)
Quit playing games.
#73. To: Capitalist Eric (#67)
(Edited)
Who are you to make such definitive statements?
#74. To: Capitalist Eric (#67)
(Edited)
#75. To: A K A Stone (#70)
Why don't you care for the practice of abortion.
#76. To: CZ82 (#75)
(Edited)
#77. To: A K A Stone (#70)
"Are you to dumb to answer? I think you are."
#78. To: A K A Stone (#72)
(Edited)
"Uh. You are the one having trouble answering a simple question on a debate forum."
#79. To: A K A Stone (#72)
(Edited)
Uh. You are the one having trouble answering a simple question on a debate forum.
#80. To: mininggold (#79)
I'm sorry you have so little power in your life that you have to try to make up for it on this forum, but that's not my problem.
#81. To: war (#76)
You folks have been so brainwashed that you believe that anyone who is pro-choice finds abortion to be preferable to anything else.
#82. To: war (#76)
Notice how Stone refuses to answer any question about his sexual preferences and practices?
#83. To: Ferret Mike (#77)
She shouldn't answer
#84. To: Ferret Mike (#78)
From a personal basis of experience, you ignore my stand against abortion
#85. To: mininggold (#79)
We've also had this tussle before and you appear to not be learning from experience.
#86. To: A K A Stone (#81)
I'm pro choice, pro life. You are pro abortion.
#87. To: mininggold (#86)
#88. To: A K A Stone (#87)
(Edited)
It's been a practice in EVERY culture on earth. I don't care for it myself.
#89. To: mininggold (#88)
#90. To: A K A Stone (#89)
#91. To: A K A Stone (#84)
(Edited)
"Actions speak louder then words. You voted for a known abortionist. So you were pro death/murder until at least Nov 2008."
#92. To: A K A Stone (#81)
#93. To: A K A Stone (#82)
I like women. I'm married.
#94. To: A K A Stone (#83)
"So you think her making a statement then taking the cowards way out and not defend it is appropriate. Got you marked as a coward from now on."
#95. To: war (#93)
#96. To: war (#93)
#97. To: AKA Stone (#90)
#98. To: mininggold (#97)
#99. To: A K A Stone (#98)
(Edited)
"I honestly don't understand your resistance to answering a very simple question. You must not be telling the truth or there is some deep dark secret you are ashamed of."
#100. To: A K A Stone (#98)
Your comment was just off topic that is all.
#101. To: mininggold (#100)
And just how is your abortion distraction "on topic" with this thread.
#102. To: A K A Stone (#101)
I concede that you have a valid point on it being off topic.
#103. To: mininggold (#100)
I did answer yours.... just not up to whatever level of voyeurism you currently feel entitled to. But it's funny how you won't answer and even delete mine.
#104. To: A K A Stone (#101)
"Would you like me to start a new thread?"
#105. To: mininggold (#102)
You can do whatever you want, but I will not play into your obsessions ......which have nothing to do with abortion, BTW
#106. To: mininggold (#102)
You have already proven AGAIN to be ready to delete at a moments notice any post that you disagree with, so what's the point?
#107. To: A K A Stone (#106)
#108. To: Ferret Mike (#107)
And if she said you were on bozo for browbeating her for a very long time on the topic, you would ban her account for not wanting to deal with your cheesy baiting of her.
#109. To: A K A Stone (#105)
(Edited)
"I wanted to know how you came to that conclusion."
#110. To: A K A Stone (#108)
"No I would just suspend her."
#111. To: Ferret Mike, mininggold (#109)
she has no right to chose not to respond to your obsessive baiting,
#112. To: Ferret Mike (#109)
which if answer to you would still not be happy with the answer anyway
#113. To: A K A Stone (#111)
#114. To: A K A Stone (#112)
(Edited)
#115. To: Ferret Mike (#114)
No one has to answer any question you just because you want them too.
#116. To: A K A Stone (#115)
(Edited)
#117. To: Ferret Mike (#116)
I am a liar merely for voting for a particular man who has stated he does not like abortion and discourages the practices, but does not want the procedure made illegal.
#118. To: war (#76)
You folks have been so brainwashed that you believe that anyone who is pro-choice finds abortion to be preferable to anything else.
#119. To: A K A Stone, mininggold (#103)
The question I asked is why you don't like that practice. I asked to understand your reasoning better. That way I can be accurate in defining you. You being apparently ashamed to answer the question is what leads to the speculation.
#120. To: lucysmom (#119)
#121. To: CZ82 (#118)
#122. To: war (#121)
When you folks feel some sort of empathy for the post natal care of babies and children then you can lecture me about morals.
#123. To: CZ82 (#122)
This is related to what I said before about total lack of cognitive thought process..... They put themselve into a situation they don't know how or want to deal with..... If they had stopped to "REALLY" think about what they were doing instead of the "Do it if it feels good" attitude then the abortion and/or the post natal abuse would have been avoided.....
#124. To: lucysmom (#123)
What has that got to do with the conservative's lack of care and concern for babies and children
#125. To: CZ82 (#124)
You "ASSUME" that "SOME" Conservatives don't care about a babies welfare just because they oppose abortion!!!!
#126. To: mininggold, CZ82, *Liberal Rehab Staff* (#125)
(Edited)
children working as janitor
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#127. To: CZ82 (#122)
#128. To: hondo68 (#126)
You really want a little Israeli janitor kid for a slave don't you?
#129. To: mininggold, *Arab Spring Jihad* (#128)
weren't you the one who insinuated all kids need to work for their room and board?
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#130. To: hondo68 (#129)
No, you're halucinating again.
#131. To: CZ82 (#124)
You "ASSUME" that "SOME" Conservatives don't care about a babies welfare just because they oppose abortion!!!!
#132. To: mininggold (#125)
Maybe having young children working as janitors is the conservative idea of how to 'care' for children. Is that a standard practice in your adopted country of Israel?
#133. To: lucysmom (#131)
No, just wondering how you can argue right to life and against right to health care.
#134. To: CZ82 (#132)
(Edited)
Well I see the spin doctor is alive and well today.......
#135. To: mininggold (#134)
You need to ask yourself why is Israel so sacred to you, that you overlook in that country the same practices that you claim to dislike in this one?
#136. To: mininggold (#134)
(Edited)
You must mean yourself since there's nothing false about my statement, or my description of much of your posting history, as was proven by your very post.
#137. To: CZ82 (#133)
So why then does the child have to die just because it's mother is stupid???? Why doesn't it have the right to live????
#138. To: war (#10)
They used "natural born" to distinguish from those born prior to the USCON's adoption.
#139. To: war (#138)
#140. To: We The People (#138)
No they didn't. You're reading that wrong.
#141. To: war (#140)
#142. To: We The People (#139)
Both parents must be citizens of the US in order for their offspring to be natural born citizens.
#143. To: A K A Stone (#141)
(Edited)
born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty
#144. To: CZ82 (#135)
(Edited)
So is that why you hate them????? Because they do what you support here????
#145. To: war (#140)
There is nothing in the USCON and there is nothing in case or administrative law that creates that mythical third class of citizen.
#146. To: war (#142)
(Edited)
Nothing that you posted lends any credence to that being either a logical or legal conclusion. There was no corollary statement "but if one or both parents are not American then the offspring is not natural born". Nor does it state "My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen and if they are not then the offspring are not,” Chertoff replied.
#147. To: mininggold (#128)
"I'm sorry.... weren't you the one who insinuated all kids need to work for their room and board? And that anything less is dratted socialism."
#148. To: war (#146)
#149. To: We The People (#146)
(Edited)
There is a difference between a citizen and a natural born citizen.
#150. To: We The People (#146)
(Edited)
If a person says "the sky is blue" does that mean that the sky is not blue because the statement didn't include the phrase "and the sky is not red"?
#151. To: We The People (#148)
(Edited)
And I know that you're going to bring up British common law, but does it make sense that the Framers of the US Constitution would rely on the common law of the King whom they rebelled against, or 'natural law' which they refer to many times?
#152. To: We The People (#145)
(Edited)
#153. To: war (#152)
(Edited)
#154. To: lucysmom (#137)
However if a unborn child happens to occupy the womb of one of your stupid mothers too poor to afford pre-natal medical care then it's ok for that baby to die of a treatable medical condition, right?
#155. To: mininggold (#144)
Who I detest are posters too chickenshit to even dare criticize the hold they have over this country.
#156. To: CZ82 (#154)
My question is why is she pregnant to start with when she knows she can't afford it?????
#157. To: lucysmom (#156)
I'm all for education. It seems to work pretty well to reduce unwanted pregnancy and abortion rates in socialist, old Europe.
#158. To: lucysmom (#156)
Medical schools - how many get by with no government (taxpayer) money?
#159. To: lucysmom (#156)
Aren't conservatives working hard to eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood?
#160. To: CZ82 (#159)
Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!
I have to say I'm all for public flogging. One type of criminal that a public humiliation might work particularly well with are the juvenile delinquents, a lot of whom consider it a badge of honor to be sent to juvenile detention. And it might not be such a cool thing in the 'hood' to be flogged publicly.
#161. To: CZ82 (#158)
Well I guess it depends on how much money they bring in from doing business with the public, tuition from students, grants/donations from the drug companies, other miscellaneous business corporations and private individuals!!!!
#162. To: CZ82 (#159)
If they thought they were getting their monies worth I don't think they would squawk, but I would say they don't think abortion is worth funding!!!!
#163. To: Capitalist Eric (#160)
Liberals don't read books – they don't read anything … That's why they're liberals. They watch TV, absorb the propaganda, and vote on the basis of urges.
#164. To: lucysmom (#162)
Abortions are only a small part of what they do, 3%.
#165. To: war (#149)
Hilarious that you would believe that the Framers tolerated non-natural born citizens being POTUS at the onset of this nation but then wouldn't tolerate Obama, who was born in Hawaii, as being eligible...
#166. To: CZ82 (#164)
And accounts for right about 40% of their income!!!!
#167. To: We The People (#165)
(Edited)
I'm glad to bring a little humor into your day.
#168. To: lucysmom (#166)
And accounts for right about 40% of their income!!!!
#169. To: CZ82 (#168)
The numbers still aren't pretty
#170. To: A K A Stone (#169)
Obama thinks they are fairly pretty numbers. You see he loves dead babies.
#171. To: CZ82 (#168)
Which equals out to........ 1.5 abortions for every prenatal service and 391 abortions to every adoption service.... (looks like his/her calculator was broken because this is the information he/she used from the PPFAs website).....
#172. To: lucysmom (#170)
then it is also true that you crave the sight of diseased and starving children dressed in rags on our streets.
#173. To: A K A Stone (#172)
You do understand why some people here call you looney mom?
#174. To: lucysmom (#171)
here is your statement that started began our exchange If they thought they were getting their monies worth I don't think they would squawk, but I would say they don't think abortion is worth funding!!!!
#175. To: A K A Stone (#169)
He wants more abortions and less adoptions.
#176. To: CZ82 (#174)
Don't forget that's one of the reasons ObamaCare was created, as a way to legally get around that (cough....cough) law!!!!
#177. To: war (#152)
(Edited)
#178. To: BorisY (#177)
“He’s thumbed his nose at the court. He’s thumbed his nose at the secretary of state in Georgia. He’s thumbed his nose at the people and said, ‘I’m above it all. I’m above the law,’” Kreep said.
#179. To: war (#178)
#180. To: BorisY (#179)
Semantics. This was all started by a lawsuit, yes?
#181. To: BorisY (#179)
The real interesting aspect here is that this would force the Supremes to review the “Natural Born Citizen” issue for the first time.
#182. To: war (#180)
#183. To: lucysmom (#176)
Don't forget that's one of the reasons ObamaCare was created, as a way to legally get around that (cough....cough) law!!!!
#184. To: war (#181)
#185. To: CZ82 (#183)
#186. To: BorisY (#182)
#187. To: lucysmom (#176)
Or perhaps you're paranoid.
#188. To: CZ82 (#187)
State Funding of Abortion under Medicare.....
#189. To: lucysmom (#188)
First implemented in 1977, the Hyde Amendment, which currently forbids the use of federal funds for abortions except in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest, has guided public funding for abortions under the joint federal-state Medicaid programs for low-income women. At a minimum, states must cover those abortions that meet the federal exceptions. Although most states meet the requirements, one state is in violation of federal Medicaid law, because it pays for abortions only in cases of life endangerment. Some states use their own funds to pay for all or most medically necessary abortions, although most do so as a result of a specific court order.
#190. To: mininggold, CZ82 (#189)
(Edited)
PP gets NO Fed monies for abortions. They do get it for other procedures and administrative costs. And the Feds do regular audits and reviews to check that the monies are kept separate and the facilities are up to licensing and accreditation standards.
#191. To: lucysmom, CZ82 (#190)
CZ is part of the conservative ilk that doesn't respond to reality, but creates it.
#192. To: lucysmom (#188)
Whew! That is Medicaid, not Medicare - for a minute I was wondering how many elderly pregnant women could there be.
#193. To: CZ82 (#192)
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
#194. To: lucysmom (#193)
The difference is that abortions are safe now
#195. To: A K A Stone (#194)
They shouldn't be safe. I long for the days of the back alley abortion and the coat hanger. That way they can reap what they sow.
#196. To: lucysmom (#195)
#197. To: lucysmom (#190)
(Edited)
#198. To: mininggold (#189)
PP gets NO Fed monies for abortions. They do get it for other procedures and administrative costs. And the Feds do regular audits and reviews to check that the monies are kept separate and the facilities are up to licensing and accreditation standards.
#199. To: A K A Stone (#194)
They shouldn't be safe. I long for the days of the back alley abortion and the coat hanger. That way they can reap what they sow.
#200. To: A K A Stone (#196)
"Any woman having an abortion deserves that."
#201. To: A K A Stone (#194)
"They shouldn't be safe. I long for the days of the back alley abortion and the coat hanger."
#202. To: Ferret Mike (#200)
Any woman having an abortion deserves that."
#203. To: A K A Stone (#202)
(Edited)
#204. To: A K A Stone (#202)
"You also are for allowing people to murder adults to not be put to death."
#205. To: Ferret Mike (#203)
So, if you burst into a room with a gun, stopped the doctor from doing the procedure, murdered anyone there in the room as a guilty party to a murder that was about to happen, you are pro-life?
#206. To: Ferret Mike (#204)
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."
#207. To: A K A Stone (#205)
Scenario A. A bad person is going to harm your woman. He is robbing her. He is almost certainly going to kill your unborn child. The only way to stop him is to kill him. Would you kill him or would you let your unborn child die and never get to know the person you now know?
Dukakis was against the death penalty, and the question asked by Bernard Shaw invited him to show some passion and fire about crime — what if your wife were raped and murdered? — and Dukakis stayed doggedly on his track, expressing coolly rational rejection of the death penalty.
#208. To: Capitalist Eric (#207)
rat-boy doesn't have a woman, because he's not a man... he's just another frustrated, testicularly-challenged socialist.
#209. To: CZ82 (#197)
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
#210. To: A K A Stone (#205)
#211. To: Ferret Mike (#210)
I wouldn't interfere with a legal abortion procedure with deadly force either.
#212. To: lucysmom (#209)
It was the pill, not abortion that liberated women sexually.
#213. To: Ferret Mike (#210)
I'd only shot someone who pulled a dangerous weapon on me. That is the only situation I would take a life.
#214. To: lucysmom (#209)
(Edited)
It was the pill, not abortion that liberated women sexually.
#215. To: lucysmom, Ferret Mike (#208)
To: Capitalist Eric (#207)
#216. To: A K A Stone (#212)
It has workd out so well. How many women head a one parent household?
#217. To: CZ82 (#214)
And dramatically raised the amount of anti-depressants prescribed.....
#218. To: harrowup (#215)
You are also correct about the pill.
#219. To: lucysmom, CZ82 (#217)
(Edited)
You are off the rails now.
#220. To: A K A Stone (#213)
(Edited)
#221. To: A K A Stone (#211)
(Edited)
"Wow. You would have let your son die. Go tell him that."
#222. To: mininggold (#219)
Women were taking antidepressants sometimes in the form of opium, way before there was such a thing as the pill. I guess CZs never heard of the common malady of years gone by that doctors called 'Hysteria' for which a certain operation she would not approved of, was commonly performed.
#223. To: Ferret Mike (#220)
And I am a responsible adult that had my offspring, and took a measure to insure I don't have unwanted additional kids. Because it's not just the woman who has the responsibility to practice birth control if they don't want to become pregnant, it's the man's job too.
#224. To: lucysmom (#222)
(Edited)
And there was Lydia Pinkham's (40-proof) for female complaints.
#225. To: mininggold (#224)
(Edited)
"Real men like Eric continue this power play into the 21st century by buying a foreign wife."
#226. To: mininggold (#224)
I think they would have been better off burning all those corsets, but heh, you were supposed to please your man or else your next stay was with relatives or in the poor house.
#227. To: lucysmom (#217)
And dramatically raised the amount of anti-depressants prescribed..... And is screwing with the genetics of numerous species of animals/mammals.....
#228. To: mininggold (#219)
I guess CZs never heard of the common malady of years gone by that doctors called 'Hysteria' for which a certain operation she would not approved of, was commonly performed.
#229. To: mininggold (#219)
I swear we have another BPDer here with all this black and white magical thinking, but this one seems more female.
#230. To: CZ82 (#227)
Remember when you said you friends child was born with asthma???? If she ever took the pill then that could be the cause of the child having asthma....
#231. To: CZ82 (#229)
I thought you guys were so in tune/touch with your body and knew what "NOT" to put in it?????? (Guess that must be an old wifes tale for some.... ehhh....)
#232. To: CZ82 (#228)
(Edited)
So when are you scheduled for your procedure???
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]