obama birth certificate: eligibility and natural born still uncomfortable politics for some

should the U.S. supreme court define natural born ??

  • yes

    Votes: 3 42.9%
  • no

    Votes: 4 57.1%

  • Total voters
    7
Oh goody goody.

Yet another idiotic thread about Obama's birth certificate.

"I like the Daily Caller" pretty much sums it up.

When are these brainless yahoos gonna come up with something FACTUAL?

:rolleyes:
well it's no snopes or factcheck, that's for real..:) huffington, olberman.......brian williams...heh


So post verifiable facts.

Not Arpaio or Trump or Orly.

FACTS.
 
Hey wash

You doing OK?
never better harper, back in the old country for hockey season ?, which is actually year round i guess. so yer home ? i just got back from a month on the gulf. spring is loveley here in vermont, as always.
 
Oh goody goody.

Yet another idiotic thread about Obama's birth certificate.

"I like the Daily Caller" pretty much sums it up.

When are these brainless yahoos gonna come up with something FACTUAL?

:rolleyes:


The delicious part is that, in this case, The Daily Caller is alarmed, because the Birfers aren't stopping with Obama. Now they have Cruz and Rubio in their sights. Interesting that both are Latino candidates. I wonder if they might object to Ben Carson too, something like:

"We have discovered that Ben Carson's great-grandfather was a slave and therefore did not come legally to the USA, therefore Ben Carson is not a natural-born citizen...."
 
I'm surprised that somebody are still talking about Obama's birth certificate...
I thought everybody understood that it doesn't matter who you are - because if you have such support from criminal authorities and minorities - you can become president, or congressman, or be who you want!
 
timslash's posts allow us to see how sensible is the country through such silly statements.
 
Oh goody goody.

Yet another idiotic thread about Obama's birth certificate.

"I like the Daily Caller" pretty much sums it up.

When are these brainless yahoos gonna come up with something FACTUAL?

:rolleyes:


The delicious part is that, in this case, The Daily Caller is alarmed, because the Birfers aren't stopping with Obama. Now they have Cruz and Rubio in their sights. Interesting that both are Latino candidates. I wonder if they might object to Ben Carson too, something like:

"We have discovered that Ben Carson's great-grandfather was a slave and therefore did not come legally to the USA, therefore Ben Carson is not a natural-born citizen...."
that's what make it interesting. the roles have completely reversed. your example is over the top.

i have to say the odds of an eligibility lawsuit soon are pretty good. you know what that means.

also it will be interesting to see how libs and dems, will criticize their opponents while not giving the appearance of being racist. cause that was/is a problem for everyone else.

what about ben carson ?? did you love that breakfast speech ??
 
Last edited:
The odds of such a lawsuit are zilch and nil.
eligibility will be on the debate shows with regularity as george stephanopolous was to prophylactic.

if you think an undefined term in the constitution that has so many facets now,
"won't come up" you are delusional. so to speak.:smoke:
 
Last edited:
The only way there will be a lawsuit is if one of the (announced) candidates files suit claiming another candidate is not eligible. Only an announced candidate would have standing.

And who wants to look that batshit crazy?

Feel free to identify the Republican candidate
 
i like the daily caller:

Birthers And 2016 Republican Primaries The Daily Caller

should the supreme court take a whack at defining the undefinable ??

Undefined is not undefinable. And precedent strongly favors a 'place of birth' definition. I'd argue under current law, all our current candidates are eligible.

As our law recognizes only citizens at birth (natural born) and citizens after birth (naturalized).

With the lone exception of those born in Puerto Rico....who are bizarrely 'naturalized at birth'. But since no candidate is Puerto Rico born, its irrelevant to this election.
 
i like the daily caller:

Birthers And 2016 Republican Primaries The Daily Caller

should the supreme court take a whack at defining the undefinable ??
Hi Scott, this is patriotic Steve McGarrett. I have observed something that appears to bother posters who I have discovered, even at the Daily Caller website you link at that yoy might feel interested in. It's nothing personal. Scott, why can't YOU capitalize letters when you start sentences? I mean really, I have researched you on eligibility threads going back years on different political websites and it's all the same! You have zero capitalization on starting sentences. As a true Article 2 Section 1 natural born Citizen born with sole allegiance to America, I find this disturbing. What is the problem? As a true White American, I would feel prideful to type out our distinct European heritage English language with dignity. You must realize that an American patriot named David Duke, who champions to keep our founders original intent alive, does. Scott, there is nothing better than using proper American sentence structure. Use it!
 
Last edited:
As a true Article 2 Section 1 natural born Citizen born with sole allegiance to America, I find this disturbing. What is the problem? As a true White American, I would feel prideful to type out our distinct European heritage English language with dignity. You must realize an American patriot named David Duke, who champions to keep our founders original intent alive, does. Scott, there is nothing better than using proper American sentence structure.

What possible relevance does being a 'white american' have with any issue being discussed, stormfront?
 
As a true Article 2 Section 1 natural born Citizen born with sole allegiance to America, I find this disturbing. What is the problem? As a true White American, I would feel prideful to type out our distinct European heritage English language with dignity. You must realize an American patriot named David Duke, who champions to keep our founders original intent alive, does. Scott, there is nothing better than using proper American sentence structure.

What possible relevance does being a 'white american' have with any issue being discussed, stormfront?
Are you prideful of your race? Well? Or will you let your sensitive political correctness interfere with your decision to answer?
 
As a true Article 2 Section 1 natural born Citizen born with sole allegiance to America, I find this disturbing. What is the problem? As a true White American, I would feel prideful to type out our distinct European heritage English language with dignity. You must realize an American patriot named David Duke, who champions to keep our founders original intent alive, does. Scott, there is nothing better than using proper American sentence structure.

What possible relevance does being a 'white american' have with any issue being discussed, stormfront?
Are you prideful of your race? Well?

Is pride in one's race the basis of presidential eligibility?

If no, then what the fuck are you talking about? You're getting red herring all over this thread.
 
As a true Article 2 Section 1 natural born Citizen born with sole allegiance to America, I find this disturbing. What is the problem? As a true White American, I would feel prideful to type out our distinct European heritage English language with dignity. You must realize an American patriot named David Duke, who champions to keep our founders original intent alive, does. Scott, there is nothing better than using proper American sentence structure.

What possible relevance does being a 'white american' have with any issue being discussed, stormfront?
Are you prideful of your race? Well?

Is pride in one's race the basis of presidential eligibility?

.
Being an White American, you damned right! Intellectual superiority is the key. Now answer my whole post presented to you.
 
As a true Article 2 Section 1 natural born Citizen born with sole allegiance to America, I find this disturbing. What is the problem? As a true White American, I would feel prideful to type out our distinct European heritage English language with dignity. You must realize an American patriot named David Duke, who champions to keep our founders original intent alive, does. Scott, there is nothing better than using proper American sentence structure.

What possible relevance does being a 'white american' have with any issue being discussed, stormfront?
Are you prideful of your race? Well?

Is pride in one's race the basis of presidential eligibility?

.
Being an White American, you damned right! Now answer my whole post presented to you.

So nothing whatsoever to do with eligibility to be president. No one gives a shit about your white supremacist bullshit, stormfront.

And you've clearly got nothing to contribute on the presidential eligibility front. When you have something relevant to say, I'll be about.
 
As a true Article 2 Section 1 natural born Citizen born with sole allegiance to America, I find this disturbing. What is the problem? As a true White American, I would feel prideful to type out our distinct European heritage English language with dignity. You must realize an American patriot named David Duke, who champions to keep our founders original intent alive, does. Scott, there is nothing better than using proper American sentence structure.

What possible relevance does being a 'white american' have with any issue being discussed, stormfront?
Are you prideful of your race? Well?

Is pride in one's race the basis of presidential eligibility?

.
Being an White American, you damned right! Now answer my whole post presented to you.

So nothing whatsoever to do with eligibility to be president. No one gives a shit about your white supremacist bullshit, stormfront.

And you've clearly got nothing to contribute on the presidential eligibility front. When you have something relevant to say, I'll be about.
Stormfront? Stormfront is not being mentioned here. You are clearly off course. Get back on track. Read the Naturalization Act of 1790 of who this country was founded for. Do you appreciate the 1st Congress's original intent in their language of that act?
 

Forum List

Back
Top