Barack will not be president if elected.

[Whatssnew]

Court won't review Obama's eligibility to serve - White House transition- msnbc.com

The court did not comment on its order Monday

Just one. There are many reasons a case can be dropped, the fact that they even listened to it shows they believe there may be something legit. The fact that they rejected it is more likely on the basis of the suit, by which grounds, or one part of the suit, who knows...Also the suit was also filed against McCain being President.

No, they may not.

Lol, says you?

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: whatssnew The fact that they rejected it is more likely on the basis of the suit, by which grounds, or one part of the suit, who knows...

Or the simple fact that they checked out a serious allegation and found no there there.

.

[Dan_77]

Quote by: Whatssnew Court won't review Obama's eligibility to serve - White House transition- msnbc.com Just one. There are many reasons a case can be dropped, the fact that they even listened to it shows they believe there may be something legit. The fact that they rejected it is more likely on the basis of the suit, by which grounds, or one part of the suit, who knows...Also the suit was also filed against McCain being President.

LOL... You don't even have the foggiest idea how the Court works, and you've just proven it beyond a shadow of a doubt!

You said:

The Supreme Court had a closed door meeting with one of the complainants.

and

And the fact that they did listen to it doesn’t exactly lend creditability to your argument now does it?

That the Supreme Court "conferenced" on a case means absolutely nothing like that happened.

The Supreme Court justices "conference" on a semi-regular basis to determine how to whittle down the thousands of cases to the 100 or so they hear each year. They "conference" nearly every case with almost complete disregard to how stupid it is.

On the day they conferenced the Donofrio case, NO ONE from the case was in the room. They didn't "listen" to anything. They conferenced, in fact, hundreds of cases that day. The discussion of the case probably merited about 10 seconds and was limited to a simple yes-no vote on whether to grant cert.

A conference is not a meeting with the complainants. No one else is even allowed in the room when they conference.

Lol, says you?

Yes, in fact I do. And now we have yet another reason why.

[Deadeye]

Quote by: tivodan1116 Except that he is 100% absolutely positively eligible, and there is no reason for the Supreme Court to give audience to any nutjobs who are suing because they think otherwise.

So one is a "nutjob" if one thinks that the evidence that we have shows that BHO is not a naturalized citizen? What's with you anyway?

While I'm not very interested in this case, I'm not going to call someone who is concerned a nutjob.

We have a new president, who is devoid of any experience whatsoever, but we have him and I hope that he does well. I'm pretty concerned however.

BHO is going to do what JFK did. He also have zippo experience. He appointed a few dozen Harvard grads to help him. BHO had just hired a bunch of Harvard grads to help him. JFK was a pretty horrible president. I just hope that BHO's Harvard grads do better for him than JFK's did for him.

[Plus Ultra]

If they denied cert, the claim is without merit. It was not dismissed on a technicality, it was frivolous, unsubstantiated, there was no basis to the claim Obama was not eligible to be a candidate.

[Dan_77]

Quote by: Deadeye So one is a "nutjob" if one thinks that the evidence that we have shows that BHO is not a naturalized citizen?

If a person (such as Phillip Berg, Donofrio, etc) looks at all the evidence and sees anything other than that Obama is 100% eligible for the Presidency, yes, at this point, they are a nutjob.

What's with you anyway?

I've run out of patience for people who agressively ignore facts in evidence and obviously make up others.

While I'm not very interested in this case, I'm not going to call someone who is concerned a nutjob.

It's not a matter of being "concerned" anymore. It's nothing other than a witch hunt.

We have a new president, who is devoid of any experience whatsoever, but we have him and I hope that he does well. I'm pretty concerned however.

Wholly irrelevant to the topic of whether or not he's Constitutionally eligible to hold the office.

BHO is going to do what JFK did. He also have zippo experience. He appointed a few dozen Harvard grads to help him. BHO had just hired a bunch of Harvard grads to help him. JFK was a pretty horrible president. I just hope that BHO's Harvard grads do better for him than JFK's did for him.

Or, he could do what Abraham Lincoln did, who had almost exactly the same experience (Illinois legislature, law practice, few years in Congress) as Obama before he became President.

"Experience" is by no means a determinative factor in how good or bad a President one makes.

And what is wrong with "Harvard grads"? This ridiculous anti-intellectualism culture in the United States has got to stop. I don't want a President who I want to have a beer with. I don't want a VP I can take on a duck hunt and I don't want Cabinet secretaries who went to community college. I want a President and Cabinet who are the smartest people in the world. Nominating Harvard grads and Nobel Laureates is at least an attempt to do that.

[Whatssnew]

Yes I was mistaken. The way it was put “bringing the case before the Supreme Court..” gave me the misimpression that he was before the court. My mistake. As too not knowing much about procedural matters, true, but it still leaves us with no idea as to why they dismissed the case. You have your suspicions and I have mine.
P.S. The case had been denied and later accepted.

Justice Thomas has decided to send it to conference on December 5th! He could have dismissed it. He deems it worthy.

[Whatssnew]

I've run out of patience for people who aggressively ignore facts in evidence and obviously make up others.

Ok Tivodan, so have I. So here is a fresh new angle, I would love to hear your views on its relevance. Or anyone else who wishes to actually discus this angle.

Obama admits that he was born with Dual Citizenship

The Framers were not natural born citizens because, “at birth” they were all British citizens. That’s why they included a grandfather clause in Article 2, Section 1. The Framers wanted to make themselves eligible to be President, but they didn’t want future generations to be Governed by a Commander In Chief who had split loyalty to another Country. They recognized that they were NOT “Natural Born Citizens”, because “at birth” they were subject to the British Crown as was Barack Obama.

http://texasdarlin.files.wordpress.c...rsfc092508.jpg

PROOF - OBAMA’S ACKNOWLEDGED DUAL CITIZENSHIP MEANS NEVER ELIGIBLE TO BE POTUS - INFO ALWAYS IN PLAIN SIGHT « Hillary and Me

[Dan_77]

Quote by: Whatssnew I've run out of patience for people who aggressively ignore facts in evidence and obviously make up others. Ok Tivodan, so have I. So here is a fresh new angle, I would love to hear your views on its relevance. Or anyone else who wishes to actually discus this angle. Obama admits that he was born with Dual Citizenship The Framers were not natural born citizens because, “at birth” they were all British citizens. That’s why they included a grandfather clause in Article 2, Section 1. The Framers wanted to make themselves eligible to be President, but they didn’t want future generations to be Governed by a Commander In Chief who had split loyalty to another Country. They recognized that they were NOT “Natural Born Citizens”, because “at birth” they were subject to the British Crown as was Barack Obama. http://texasdarlin.files.wordpress.c...rsfc092508.jpg PROOF - OBAMA’S ACKNOWLEDGED DUAL CITIZENSHIP MEANS NEVER ELIGIBLE TO BE POTUS - INFO ALWAYS IN PLAIN SIGHT « Hillary and Me

And?

It's irrelevant. Totally irrelevant. It's a bunch of doublespeak.

A person born in the United States is a natural born US citizen. Regardless of anything else in their life. Period.

[brien]

Quote by: tivodan1116 And? It's irrelevant. Totally irrelevant. It's a bunch of doublespeak. A person born in the United States is a natural born US citizen. Regardless of anything else in their life. Period.

Furthermore, if I am not mistaken, the Naturalization Act of 1790 and its ammendment in 1934, covers American women citizens who give birth to children in nations other than the US.


Naturalization Act (1790): Major Acts of Congress

The history of naturalization also reveals that citizenship was centered around men. While the 1790 act naturalized all "persons" and so included women, it also declared that "the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States...." This prevented the automatic grant of citizenship to children born abroad whose mother, but not father, had resided in the United States. Citizenship was inherited exclusively through the father. Congress did not remove the inequity until 1934.

Therefore no mattter where BHO was born, since his mother was a natural citizen of the US all of her life, he was also one as well no matter where he was born..

[Mr. Jaggers]

This issue is a nonstarter and a no-brainer. President Elect Obama’s birth certificate has been authenticated by the State of Hawaii; and would be admissible as records of vital statistics under Rule 803(9) of the Federal Rules of Evidence in any action in which such issue was relevant. However, you don’t even get to that point because the federal courts do not have subject matter jurisdiction for lack of standing of the plaintiffs (appellants) in the case. The lawyers that filed these frivolous lawsuits (and appeals) well knew that they lacked standing to sue, and that such actions would be dismissed; and only did so to generate publicity for themselves. What is interesting is the number of gullible people that have been taken in by this champerty. Indeed, one would think that P.T. Barnum’s estimate on the birthrate of suckers will have to be adjusted for inflation.

[Deadeye]

As one views Obama's election from an historian's perspective we are seeing another step in Reconstruction. It took 144 years for a Black man to be elected president. This is indeed a huge step and one that should go a long way to bring the races together. Certainly black Americans are bursting with pride over the election of who they perceive as one of their own.

I hope therefore, that Obama is a good president. He has a huge responsibility, not only to Americans, but to the members of his race. If he turns out to be a terrible president what kind of a stigma will he cast upon future black presidential candidates?

Today, Americans are giving Obama the benefit of the doubt. No matter how we voted we want to see this man do well.

[shawmutt]

This is indeed a huge step and one that should go a long way to bring the races together.

Unless Obama is assassinated. Then the country will burn. Those that remember the riots after Martin Luther King, Jr. was killed haven't seen nothin' yet.

Anyway, why is this topic still open? All it is doing now is showing the mind of the conspiracy theorist. Obama will serve out at least four years and the whole time there will be a contingency of folks that insist he shouldn't be there.

[Plus Ultra]

A person born in the United States is a natural born US citizen. Regardless of anything else in their life. Period.

I think there are exceptions, the child of an undocumented immigrant, even if born in the US can still be deported -they don't deport citizens do they?

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Plus Ultra I think there are exceptions, the child of an undocumented immigrant, even if born in the US can still be deported -they don't deport citizens do they?

Can you show some proof of that? Anyone born in this country is an American citizen. period. I am not aware of any exceptions.

[xyzer]

Please...don't rattle the skeleton anymore! If Obama isn't qualified and can't serve just think WHO would become president? Joe(Large Foot in Small mouth... cretin) Biden. You innocents who voted for this pair evidently didn't realize who would be a "heart beat away from the Presidency"?
The Biden man is an intellectually deprived imbecile who doesn't even know under what article his office is described in the Constitution? He is just another relic of misguided Democrat Party politics who has been smiling and posturing in Congress for several decades.

He is a proven uninformed liar and plagerizer(good recommendations for a Democrat politician. An actionable crime for the rest of us.plain citizens)
I'm suprised to know he finds he way to work without guidance?

Obama may be a BS artist but he pales in comparison to Biden

Better to let this guy sit on the sidelines, smiling, mumbling to himself and replacing his hair follicles, than have him serve serve as President!

[Dadoo]

Biden is a functioning republican in a democratic sheepskin. He was chosewn to balance the tix, as bipartisanship is long dead, even with the ruse of politicos. He is the inventor of the The Drug Czar, countless ultra-conservative ideals and is ultimately espousing some quasi-liberal BS whilst maintaining a conservative status quo. I wonder about Obama's intentions once paired with such a flimsy, milquestost yet dangerous assistant. Good cop/ Bad cop? I wouldn't be surprised.

[Chris]

Quote by: xyzer The Biden man is an intellectually deprived imbecile

Coming from someone who said Sarah Palin was smart, thats rich.

[Jack]

The Biden man is an intellectually deprived imbecile who doesn't even know under what article his office is described in the Constitution?

And Cheney didn't think he was part of the executive branch. Maybe that's why they're vice-presidents. They're like interns. Hopefully, if the time comes they ever become president, they'll have learned to correct those mistakes.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Jack And Cheney didn't think he was part of the executive branch.

Neither did Sarah Palin.