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.
Each word in the Constitution has a specific meaning.
And, the meaning of each word derives from somewhere.
Don't be callin' the words of John Jay, Ben, George, James and Emerich drivel.
Just because they drove the point home, doesn't make their words any more a drivel than they make them a drill bit.
And if the writers of the Constitution had wanted to say the things you are inferring, they would have actually said those things. Instead, they did not outline a patriarchal citizenship system. They did not make the restrictions you are trying to apply from English common law. They could have made those choices, but instead, they made other choices. As reflected in each word in the Constitution with its specific meaning.
I wish you people would get over the fact that he is the freakin president for at least the next 3 years! Why don't you discuss a real issue? Maybe you could even start lobbying your congressmen etc about issues that actually need to be looked into, rather than this crap.
Posted by Jesse at 09:51 AM on August 06, 2009 comments (0) As much as I don't like it, we hired Obama to run the executive branch of the government.
He is our employee. We bought into his schpeel about how he was going to do this and that. Well, as time goes on, we continue to learn, that like all good democrats, he is a liar.
He played us. He said things he did not mean, just to get votes. Now that he is in office, his last concern is whether or not he keeps his word. He boldly stated as recorded on video tape, that he is for a one payer health system.
Now, he contends thorough a newly hired soul selling, lying bimbo, that those statements are not true.
Even though it has been clearly shown that he did in fact say it, meant it, and ran on that as part of his platform, he is now saying he never said it.
I am sitting here, completely stumped as to how to express my thoughts on when he is lying, and when he isn't.
He tells us, that when he said he was for it, he was lying.
To NOW trust him, because now, he is telling the truth. How do we know this? Just on his word? His word has been proven to be worthless. Do we need a decoder ring to figure out when he is lying or not?
And, if someone has been proven to be a liar, how, and why would you ever want to try and trust him again?
He is a liar. He can never be anything else. Once a liar, always a liar. Always doubt as to his honesty.
He has lost all creditability as a man, let alone as an elected official who has vowed to serve us.
He is like a cheating husband or wife. He is going to lie, just to stay out of trouble. He has cheated on us.
Why would anyone believe him?
The point is, he is our employee.
In what world would he be allowed to continue in the private sector if he did to the company, as he is doing to us?
We need to fire this lazy lying worthless employee, and get someone who can do the job we hire them to do.
It only comprises the etymologies of the word phrase. "natural born citizen" that is placed in the Constitution - Very useful for a Supreme Court Decision, which also would not BE the Constitution, literally, that is.
Unadulterated literation - that's what this country needs.
Unfortunately for you, the Supreme Court would first rely on American precedents before going back to a tenuous British interpretation. And American precedent would include the multiple Presidents prior to Obama who had multi-national parentage and dual citizenships. They would not be likely to entertain that Obama was somehow different from these previous executives, because someone would have to make the case that Obama was different. And how would he be different? Because of his color? Because he was exposed to Islam? You couldn't make the case on the first issue because of the 14th Amendment, and you couldn't make the case on the second issue because our government is a secular one without religious affiliation. So how would you make the case that Obama's multi-national parentage was different from any of the other Presidents who've had multi-national parentage?
Unfortunately for you, the Supreme Court would first rely on American precedents before going back to a tenuous British interpretation. And American precedent would include the multiple Presidents prior to Obama who had multi-national parentage and dual citizenships. They would not be likely to entertain that Obama was somehow different from these previous executives, because someone would have to make the case that Obama was different. And how would he be different? Because of his color? Because he was exposed to Islam? You couldn't make the case on the first issue because of the 14th Amendment, and you couldn't make the case on the second issue because our government is a secular one without religious affiliation. So how would you make the case that Obama's multi-national parentage was different from any of the other Presidents who've had multi-national parentage?
Stare decisis would only hold if the precedents were decided by the SC. A lower court, or no court, precedent would not hold sway.
I've never been a big advocate of the contained phraseology , thus and such "gave way to" thus and such. "Gave way to" means that it was never tested in court.
Stare decisis would only hold if the precedents were decided by the SC. A lower court, or no court, precedent would not hold sway.
I've never been a big advocate of the contained phraseology , thus and such "gave way to" thus and such. "Gave way to" means that it was never tested in court.
Stare decisis applies legal precedent. Precedent itself is not confined to only legal rulings. Historical precedent and contextual precedent are often considered in court decisions. The Supreme Court would certainly look at all precedents that would apply, whether there were legal rulings involved or not. To suggest otherwise is simply ridiculous.
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.
Posted by Jesse at 09:51 AM on August 06, 2009 
