Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How does that change the fact that Obama was born subject to the jurisdiction of the U.K.?
Again... he was not the son of a foreign diplomat or alien Army in hostile occupation. Therefore, according to the Supreme Court, he was born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
It doesn't, as admitted to by Obama's own campaign.
His campaign has never said he was not born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
since you truly believe this then why haven't you found, or made an attempt to find, a competent constitutional attorney to champion your cause?
have you done any action other than post on blogs?
That would be a big mistake because that would involve someone with an actual education on the topic.
What we have here is a bunch of guys standing around drinking beer looking at the space shuttle take off and describing how much better it would be if the reconfigured the rocket distribution and maybe slapped some duct tape on the loose tiles.
They jot down their ideas on a sheet of scrap plywood using a sharpie and walk over to their friends house whom is a nasa aerospace rocket engineer. He quickly points out that the rockets would cartwheel the shuttle to earth in a ball of fire.
They respond by calling him a communist, throwing their beer cans at him and storming off to send chain email about their new design that the government wants to suppress.
I'm not a constitutional legal expert, but I did stay at a holiday inn express.
What we have here is a bunch of guys standing around drinking beer looking at the space shuttle take off and describing how much better it would be if the reconfigured the rocket distribution and maybe slapped some duct tape on the loose tiles.
They jot down their ideas on a sheet of scrap plywood using a sharpie and walk over to their friends house whom is a nasa aerospace rocket engineer. He quickly points out that the rockets would cartwheel the shuttle to earth in a ball of fire.
They respond by calling him a communist, throwing their beer cans at him and storming off to send chain email about their new design that the government wants to suppress.
You've basically described Homer Simpson. And I agree, we're dealing with a pack of Homers here.
Devolved? This thread started out single-celled and circling the drain.
Absolutely. When people, who I would wager have never set foot in a civil procedure class, start trying to explain jurisdiction not only have we striped it down to the mitochondria, it is down the drain, through the pipes and in the sewer.
Again... he was not the son of a foreign diplomat or alien Army in hostile occupation. Therefore, according to the Supreme Court, he was born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
AND the U.K.
Hence the only SCOTUS definition of Constitutional NBCspecifically stating the requirement to be born in the U.S. to citizen parents. That eliminates conflicting jurisdictions and allegiances, which was EXACTLY the intent expressed in John Jay's letter to Washington:The Papers of John Jay - View page 1 of 2
That would be a big mistake because that would involve someone with an actual education on the topic.
What we have here is a bunch of guys standing around drinking beer looking at the space shuttle take off and describing how much better it would be if the reconfigured the rocket distribution and maybe slapped some duct tape on the loose tiles.
They jot down their ideas on a sheet of scrap plywood using a sharpie and walk over to their friends house whom is a nasa aerospace rocket engineer. He quickly points out that the rockets would cartwheel the shuttle to earth in a ball of fire.
They respond by calling him a communist, throwing their beer cans at him and storming off to send chain email about their new design that the government wants to suppress.
I'm not a constitutional legal expert, but I did stay at a holiday inn express.
And yet here you are spewing your completely unsubstantiated opinion, offering NO primary hstorical sources whatsoever to document your 'position.'
Intellectually vapid? Look in the mirror.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
