|
By:
ruth - couple of things.
for one, some of the claims and the "fanatics" you speak of, are democrats. and, since when did wanting to uphold the constituion mean you were a fanatic??? also, some people are well aware of the close link that exists in reality between ALL of the political figure-heads, left and right. you will not change my opinion on that - i have spent a great deal of time proving this to myself. so, imo, the parites, and who a politician is meant to represent (and what part of the spectrrum they're meant ro represent) is irrelevant. i guess you will just have to wait and see though - it is certainly your prerogative to swallow what the media tells you entirely and believe that the two party system is there to ensure balance and fairness. i argue the two part system is only there to make you think this is the case. quick question for you - obama is clearly intending on following the same economic principles as the previous adminsitration - he is proposing another 700 bil stimulus package, he agrees with the other bailouts.... so he is doing the same thing. his appoinments in particular prove that nothing willl change surely?? do you not agree that the bailouts etc are doing nothing but line the pockets of the already wealthy and are not resolving the market difficulties?? |
|
By:
update to thread:
here is donofrio's original and full blog on the subject. it was initially removed from the internet but it is back online now. http://www.blogtext.org/naturalborncitizen/ |
|
By:
almost forgot - what a travesty it would be for obama to be deemed ineligible as a result of the law. only fanatics would attempt such a thing eh?
Obama won his first election ever by getting three Democratic opponents thrown off the ballot due to legal technicalities. He's all for using the law to help himself win and it would certainly be ironic if he is not allowed to serve as president due to the law imo. |
|
By:
No-one cares, Don.
|
|
By:
actually i have a number of people on msn who are checking here for my updates because they are interested, they just choose not to post.
thx for your concern though. |
|
By:
they're just people who had the same mug bets as you and want some hope they might have a chance still
false hope like a cult leader in many ways... |
|
By:
not at all. this will be a historic issue in due course i believe. each to there own anyway.
i reckon it's safe for you to leave this thread canary - we got your view :) |
|
By:
what if my views slighlty alter?
i don't see you leaving the thread, so why should i? |
|
By:
Not a living prayer of being right Don. Spend your time on something else.
|
|
By:
like knitting imo
|
|
By:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/05/court-to-weigh-question-about-obama-citizenship/
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/05/an-imposter-in-the-white-house/ bumping both threads - that will pi$$ canary off and he will keep one of them at the top for the next few days for us :) |
|
By:
washington times says:
But it's an interesting story, nevertheless, since we have not yet actually elected a president. This may come as news to millions who voted for Barack Obama and John McCain and thought Nov. 4 was the end of it. But Nov. 4 was merely the day we elected the men and women who will meet in 50 state capitals Dec. 15 to actually elect the president. so the pres election is not finished, the market should still be open. :) |
|
By:
"One way or another, the Supreme Court is likely to say Mr. Obama's birth was OK, too."
|
|
By:
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/84445
|
|
By:
Don, I hold no brief for Obama; I believe him to be a fraud and of no substance - a product of the corrupt Illinois "kingmakers", but it is a tough one to ignore the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which reads:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. (my italics) |
|
By:
it says nothing about the "natural born citizen" requirement, only "citizen". it is being argued that the two terms are differnent in their requirements, and therefore the 14th amendment has no bearing on the eligibility requirements for president, only the eligibiilty for citizenship.
|
|
By:
Hate to disagree Don, but
The Citizenship clause/ Naturalization clause in the 14th Amendment and in United States v. Wom Kim Ark looks solid: The following persons born in the United States are explicitly citizens: Children born to U.S. citizens Children born to aliens who are lawfully inside the United States (resident or visitor), with the intention of amicably interacting with its people and obeying it's laws |
|
By:
it all replies to just citizenship.
i take ur point re kim v wong, however if you actually read the wrotnowski case, and the supplementary application submitted with it regarding the historical identification of chester a arthur actually being ineligible also, thus calling into question the wong ruling. if you want a full explanation of the above i will provide it, alternatively you can find it here: http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2008/12/08/wrotnowski-application-referred-to-full-court-by-justice-scalia-distributed-for-conference-on-dec-12-supplemental-brief-to-be-submitted-tomorrow/ |
|
By:
i should add i do respect your argument here however, ty for taking the time to take a look.
i just think it will eventually be ruled against obama, and we will see soon enough :) |
|
By:
typo - usa v wong kim ark
|
|
By:
http://www.sonorannews.com/archives/2008/081210/FrntPgObama.html
another new article |
|
By:
It is true that December 8th, the Supreme Court of the United States denied Donofrio v. Wells without comment however, that very same day the Honorable Justice Antonin Scalia submitted Wrontowski v Bysiewicz to be Distributed for Conference this Friday, December 12, 2008. Mr. Donofrio worked with Mr. Wrotnowski and authored the formal filing with SCOTUS. Donofrio v Wells had some unsettled judicial misconduct issues that raised scrutiny questions if the Justices had elected to take that case on. Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz has a pristine history in its ascension through the courts.
Think about that for a moment folks . . . Donofrio v Wells was dismissed without comment, later that very same day Justice Scalia, the champion of Originalism, distributes Wrotnowski v Bysiewicz - a similar yet stronger case. If Scalia felt that Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz didn't have merit, he wouldn't have wasted the court's time by submitting it for Conference this Friday. Mr. Obama if finally pressed into defending his qualifications will likely resort to citing the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment. The problem is the 14th Amendment dealt with equal application of the law to United States Nationals and has no relevance to the specified qualifications needed to serve as President of the United States. Based on a literal reading of Article II and the historical context of the birth right of 43 preceding Presidents, Chester A. Arthur notwithstanding, it is clear that Barrack Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen and thus has no legal claim to take the Oath of office. To allow him to do so would be a farce and undoubtedly ignite an endless series of litigation challenging his legitimacy. Time to wake up, News-Press. http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-161263 |
|
By:
Honorable Justice Antonin Scalia
honorable....wtf pmsl!!! the guy is a sh!t of the highest order! |
|
By:
Scalia was key in making sure GWB got in...fwiw.
|
|
By:
was he not appointed by the bush family in the first place? so that is to be expected lol incidentally i believe the bush' appointed 5 of the 9 justices didnt they?
i could not comfortably and honestly say that any of them are honourable and above reproach - Honourable, with a capital H just happens to be the accepted salutation when referring to a Justice as im sure u know :) |
|
By:
:-)
|
|
By:
cant wait to see what happens next couple of days..
|
|
By:
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/
|
|
By:
yep, big few days.
last article on his blog, complete with links to official sources is pretty conclusive i think. |
|
By:
WASHINGTON (AP) The Supreme Court has turned down an emergency appeal from a New Jersey man who says President-elect Barack Obama is ineligible to be president because he was a British subject at birth.
The court did not comment on its order Monday rejecting the call by Leo Donofrio of East Brunswick, N.J., to intervene in the presidential election. Donofrio says that since Obama had dual nationality at birth his mother was American and his Kenyan father at the time was a British subject he cannot possibly be a "natural born citizen," one of the requirements the Constitution lists for eligibility to be president. Donofrio also contends that two other candidates, Republican John McCain and Socialist Workers candidate Roger Calero, also are not natural-born citizens and thus ineligible to be president. At least one other appeal over Obama's citizenship remains at the court. Philip J. Berg of Lafayette Hill, Pa., argues that Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii as Obama says and Hawaii officials have confirmed. Berg says Obama also may be a citizen of Indonesia, where he lived as a boy. Federal courts in Pennsylvania have dismissed Berg's lawsuit. Federal courts in Ohio and Washington state have rejected similar lawsuits. Allegations raised on the Internet say the birth certificate, showing that Obama was born in Hawaii on Aug. 4, 1961, is a fake. But Hawaii Health Department Director Dr. Chiyome **ino and the state's registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, say they checked health department records and have determined there's no doubt Obama was born in Hawaii. The nonpartisan Web site Factcheck.org examined the original document and said it does have a raised seal and the usual evidence of a genuine document. In addition, Factcheck.org reproduced an announcement of Obama's birth, including his parents' address in Honolulu, that was published in the Honolulu Advertiser on Aug. 13, 1961. |
|
By:
In other words, there are a few nutters out there making daft assertions. Yawn.
|
|
By:
http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a469.htm
canary you have no idea what is going on to you. you fully swallow everything the msm says, re-gurgitating inaccurate stories. when they denied donofrio's case, they chose not to comment on why it was denied. they had the wrotnowski case (prepared by donofrio) in front of them too and made no ruling on it, instead scheduling it for conference today. |
|
By:
if you're asking whether i'm a deluded conspiracy theorist,the answer is no.
|
|
By:
u are deluded though.
|
|
By:
Ever heard of the concept of "transference" Warro; its quite a common psychological trick we play on ourselves.
|
|
By:
pmsl he's been at it since the election.
i finally broke him when he told me to kill myself. |
|
By:
yes i understand that concept. it has no relevance here. keep denying and disagreeing with me all you want. i am still confident that eventually he will be proven ineligible, and one way or another will not become president.
he is constitutionally ineligible and that will soon be proven as fact. perhaps then you will wake up. the media is misdirecting you, and i actually pity you for being so gullible. |
|
By:
Obama's Chief of Staff, Rahm Emmanuel seems to be running scared by refusing to answer the press as to whether he was the Obama "advisor' named in the Criminal Complaint agaisnt Blago. Old buddy Rezko is now talking with Fed Prosecutors in the hope of a reduced sentence. This may be of interest: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0804/S00064.htm
But in any case Rezko won't finger BO; when he becomes Prez he will have to the power to pardon. |
|
By:
This is the biggest fishing trip in the history of betfair forum.
Well done Don, you caught some whoppers. |
|
By:
he's not fishing
there have been other threads check out poker forum for a recent one plus an oldie there in the archives the guy is a genuine loon |