But I didn't post anything about original jurisdiction except an exact phrase from the Supreme Court's web site.

About the commas, I thought it was obviously joke-like. I already stated this in the post above. But since two people didn't get it than I must admit I am not funny.

I actually didn't mean to get into an argument over the law, my whole point was (as stated in one of the first 100) that it's not going to go anywhere and that it doesn't matter.

I, unlike other Obamabots, am only saying that this isn't really good for the country. Not legally speaking but reality speaking. I'm not trying to defend his citizenship, I said that I don't know and I don't care. He's not some radical, he's appointing a pretty standard cabinet minus full-time lobbyists so my view is the real truth isn't as important as what everyone believes. If he was appointing radical internationalists or foreign nationalist, than the real truth would matter.

I would like to see this issue put to rest because it would damage the country. I don't care if Obama was born in Kenya and isn't technically eligible, his transition hasn't been radical or tinged by foreign influence. I think Joe Biden is a great role model for me to pick up women, but I do not want to see him as president; he would most likely win.

What good would it do if you were right? You can answer honestly.
Are you worried he is influenced by Kenya, like Arnold had been influenced by Austria as Governator?
Are you worried he is a profiteer, like Bush/Cheney?
Are you worried he is going to push an Islamo-Fascist agenda?
Do you think he is going to federally fund the Comintern?

I do understand the importance of THE truth but any man who has ever lived with a girlfriend or wife will tell you, it's not always best to tell the truth.

Edit: I never seriously said we should follow what the fore fathers intended, I think I made a joke.  Despite their political innovations, they were racist, elitist, alcoholics, rapists (having sex with their slaves), and/or kid touchers (marrying women much younger)... these were the norms of the day but we have our norms for our day.  I always encourage people to think for themselves, disagree, and fight for what they THINK is right.  I would never tell anyone to follow "WWFFD?".  You should think about it, but weigh it against your situation and the intellectual developments of history in general.

 

 

In the words of David Bowie in the song "Underground" in the movie Labyrinth: "Don't tell me truth hurts little girl... 'cuz it hurts like hell."


The rest of the world is still laughing at us for our whole 2000 election fiasco, when we actually let the supreme court pick our president. If we take this to court, whether it succeeds or not, it makes us look retarded, because we don't trust our own democratic system of electing people.


But what I do know, I'm just the naked guy. When you guys are living in the USSA, don't blame me, I voted for Optimus Prime.

I am not "pre-law" you actually guessed correctly, I am polisci (international affairs).  In the US, there is no true pre-law, it's usually polisci with an emphasis on domestic law. Oh, btw...

Tyrannical said: Don't try to get it now, you probably won't. But even if it takes years to get the joke, try real hard to remember what your wrote there. I promise, you won't graduate from law school without finding that really funny.

 

Tyrannical said: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-ridicule.html The Appeal to Ridicule is a fallacy in which ridicule or mockery is substituted for evidence in an "argument." A fallacy is, very generally, an error in reasoning. This differs from a factual error, which is simply being wrong about the facts. To be more specific, a fallacy is an "argument" in which the premises given for the conclusion do not provide the needed degree of support. Try not to repeat that error in the future.

 

 

I just find it funny that some people are still pushing this so strongly after the election is already over.

Its like the Republicans didn't make themselves look like big enough fools getting their entire party dragged through the mud (worse than 2006 even, since they lost the Oval Office), and now they are back for more!

GOP = Got Ourselves Pwned.

steven787 said:

I am not "pre-law" you actually guessed correctly, I am polisci (international affairs).  In the US, there is no true pre-law, it's usually polisci with an emphasis on domestic law. Oh, btw.

It's pretty obvious based on your posts you aren't pre-law. Though "Student(Pre-Law)/Work in Hotel Management" and "Barry H. Obama was 29 when he graduated from Harvard Law, I'll be 30 when I graduate from law school... coincidence?  I don't think  so" makes it look like you pretend to be.

Does your college not offer any law courses under poly sci? I took constitutional law to fulfill some requirement, and it was under poly sci I think. I totally forgot I even took the class it was so long ago until I thought back to where I learned certain things.

There is a fascinating supreme court case on the importance of the comma, maybe some day you'll get your own joke.

http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2008/08-93.pdf
This isthe official statement from Hawaii.


This is what Keyes is asking for:

http://www.soundinvestments.us/files/final_writ_keyes_v_bowen.pdf

"This proof could include items such as his original birth certificate, showing the name of the hospital and the name and the signature of the doctor, all of his passports with immigration stamps, and verification from the governments where the candidate has resided, verifying that he did not, and does not, hold citizenship of these countries, and any other documents that certify an individual’s citizenship and/or qualification for office."

This is ridiculous.  I was actually involved in a situation that asked a similar question about a non-existent document. Someone who bought a business was asking me to prove that I didn't sign a contract with a previous business owner, that I never signed, saw, or heard about. The accuser had to prove the documents exist not me.

The burden of proof for the birth certificate is on Obama, which the state has said is real and in their records. Keyes would have to prove that it's not accurate. He has to prove Obama was documented to be born somewhere else because if those records don't exist then how could Obama provide them.

Your sources are Youtube and Obamacrimes while citing a case that was thrown out... Your back up for experience is the Beta club, national honor society, and volunteering for the library... (Which is funny cause we have a;; three in common.) Jeez I support the opposing argument better in my posts (before I tear them apart) than you do when you are seriously defending them. When you're in the real world, and you need smart, capable people to work for you and be loyal or you need to sell big ticket items this illogical reasoning isn't going to fly. You are a smart guy, you can do better: collect your thoughts, organize them, and check them to see if they are going to be relative and significant to your audience.

 

Arlington County Young Republicans, Arlington County Republican Committee at age 19, Presidential Merit Honor CGPA 4.0, have emails of several candidates for Congress, and Dick Heller of Heller v. DC which he won (Nice guy). 

It is a forum for Pete's sake!  I presented a link for anyone interested.

OK.  If you download Obama's templated fraud of a BC from fightthesmears or factcheck--which is run by supporters of his from CO'ing and Annenburg, a liberal foundation--and open it in a hex editor (Hex Editor Neo is a good freeware for this), you will find that the following is embedded: Adobe Photoshop CS3 Macintosh.2008:6:12 08:42:56.  This means that it was not a direct scan, and was saved in Adobe PS CS3 on 6/12/08 @ 8:42 in the morning.  Something is fishy with this.

 

Much better. Still doesn't apply to my arguments.

The State of Hawaii says it's real and on file. A Republican governor refuses to release it because that is the law in Hawaii. Do you have so little faith in this government that you think both Republicans and Democrats would work to cover this up.

I've refrained from saying it because I've been trying to keep this argument reasonable but I see that Halo and Tyrannical don't want to provide any evidence to back up their claims. They are sore losers who do not trust the government and only question Obama because one of his parents was a foreign ex-Muslim, he's black, and his name is Barack Hussein Obama.

Saying, "I'm not saying that he is, I just want proof." is a thin veil of racism and/or sour grapes. I hope it's the latter.

Instead of providing evidence you choose to ignore some of my arguments and facts presented. Tyrannical has decided to attack me personally instead of arguing with facts, because he can't win.

Provide some evidence, the website and news stories refer to his mother traveling, show us his foreign hospital birth records. You support a lawsuit hinges on Obama's foreign passports or citizenship, let me see some documentation and show me what dual citizenship would imply.

Again: http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2008/08-93.pdf

I know that you think that it was filed fraudulently, there is no way anyone can prove it wasn't. Prove it was.

It's simple logic: You can't prove something doesn't exist, you can only prove something else exists and makes the former invalid.

Steven:  Well if Gov. Lingle says it, it must be true ;)  Anyway, your arguments are solid for your perspective.  I am not racist against his name or "purported" faith, I am, however, one who is against slick, free rides in the face of the law.  I have endorsed Piyush "Bobby" Jindal (a former Hindu turned Catholic-convert) for President.

 

Here is a link to a document showing Obama's name as Barry Soetoro, religion Islam: http://www.daylife.com/photo/01u33pL9Ns06D

 

In additon, under Indonesian law of 1960, that nation did not allow for dual citizenship w/ the US.  It didn't until 2006.

http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008/09/25/breaking-obama-admits-dual-citizenship/

More on the new Indonesian DC law below:

http://searchwarp.com/swa335761.htm

Child Born Before Aug. 01, 2006

 

So as the italics point out, Obama would either have to hold US or Indonesian citizenship prior to this new law.  He was in a school there and under Islamic law of Indonesia, that would automatically make him an Indonesian citizen.  Obama has not renounced this.

 

But on to other things and papers to write, steven... College you know...

 

 

steven787 said: http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2008/08-93.pdf This isthe official statement from Hawaii. This is what Keyes is asking for: http://www.soundinvestments.us/files/final_writ_keyes_v_bowen.pdf "This proof could include items such as his original birth certificate, showing the name of the hospital and the name and the signature of the doctor, all of his passports with immigration stamps, and verification from the governments where the candidate has resided, verifying that he did not, and does not, hold citizenship of these countries, and any other documents that certify an individual’s citizenship and/or qualification for office." This is ridiculous.  I was actually involved in a situation that asked a similar question about a non-existent document. Someone who bought a business was asking me to prove that I didn't sign a contract with a previous business owner, that I never signed, saw, or heard about. The accuser had to prove the documents exist not me. The burden of proof for the birth certificate is on Obama, which the state has said is real and in their records. Keyes would have to prove that it's not accurate. He has to prove Obama was documented to be born somewhere else because if those records don't exist then how could Obama provide them.

Wouldn't he at the very least need access to the BC for that to be a reasonable request?  .....just saying =P