Posted on 10/13/2010 3:04:13 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
On consideration of the Petition for Extraordinary Relief in the Nature of a Writ of Mandamus and Application for a Stay of Proceedings, the petition is DENIED.
(Excerpt) Read more at caaflog.com ...
“If your logic were correct, a child of illegal immigrants could be POTUS.”
Nope. The parents have to be here “in amity” - in harmony - with the government.
Have you read the DISSENT to WKA? It complains, “Considering the circumstances surrounding the framing of the Constitution, I submit that it is unreasonable to conclude that “natural-born citizen” applied to everybody born within the geographical tract known as the United States, irrespective of circumstances, and that the children of foreigners, happening to be born to them while passing through the country, whether of royal parentage or not, or whether of the Mongolian, Malay or other race, were eligible to the Presidency, while children of our citizens, born abroad, were not.”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZD.html
Although I’m not a birther, the dissent is an excellent read. However, it is also the DISSENT.
I was going to say, the Disscent isn’t law.
We had Norton; that didn’t work, on my computer only.
So then we had McAfee; that didn’t work, on my computer only. Somebody put a virus on there that made it appear that my computer was downloading updates and making regular scans but when I contacted McAfee’s support they told me I hadn’t updated anything or run any scans for a month. The only way I can get that straightened out is to go online and give them control over my computer altogether and considering some bad stuff I had happen with them before, I’m not prepared to do that. So I just need to wipe that hard drive clean and start over.
Now I’m on a different computer with AVG and B Secure, and that also didn’t work, only on my computer. I clean it regularly with AdAware and CCleaner. So now Ad Aware tells me that it’s blocking IE from connecting to a malicious site - right before IE goes to an ad site.
When I went to shut down before going to work a couple hours ago (whenever I last posted to you) my speakers surprised me. I had turned them way up to try to listen to a Youtube clip, which was when I received the message telling me I didn’t have a driver for audio equipment. I tried to adjust the audio properties and it told me I didn’t have any audio hooked up. I checked that it was plugged in, etc. So then when the computer was shutting down I was in the other room and this loud Windows shut-down melody nearly blew me away. Out of the blue the speaker was apparently fine again. I haven’t tried it yet since starting the computer back up so I don’t know what’s up.
But I started having troubles with Google, where it wouldn’t let me click on anything; then it went to ads if I tried clicking on anything. Then I was OK on Yahoo but now it sends me to ads if I click on anything. I can’t save anything in Word. Right before the Win32 Host Service screen pops up saying it has to close, my screen changes appearance; the tabs at the bottom are white instead of blue and some of my navigation bar at the top disappears; everything is a lower resolution.
Fairly frequently when I start the computer it goes only to the Welcome screen and then nothing. I can’t get to IE by clicking on the start-up menu; I have to click from the desktop. If I unplug the network connection when I’m working offline, half the time I’m OK if I plug it back in and half the time it won’t let me connect to the internet until I reboot.
It’s nuts. I’m going to have to wipe everything and start over with this one too. Wouldn’t be a big deal except I don’t know how to do it myself and my husband is sick of this crap and very busy.
A new computer is a financial impossibility at this point.
Want to explain how an amendment to the Constitution, passed in accordance with the rules laid out in the Constitution, can be fraudulent?
Oh, I understand the difference; but considering just how much of that terminology was inspired or impacted by the Magna Carta you’re putting yourself on VERY thin ice to say that it isn’t, in any measure, applicable. Especially since one could argue that the Magna Carta is a sort of parent document (in ideas & applications) to the Constitution.
Really? Says who? The congress? The Judiciary? The Executive?
And if it be illegal, then why does the second amendment say:
A well regulated Militia, BEING NECESSARY TO THE SECURITY OF A FREE STATE, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
That's about as clear a statement that we have the right to defend ourselves from a corrupt/run-away/malevolent government as you can get. Also consider that in 2014 it becomes a Felony not to have health insurance. [Thanks Congress/ObamaCare] If the government can dictate that I MUST, under penalty of losing the rights of a Citizen, but a product; especially considering there is no clause exempting the unemployed and that the Government is doing much, whether by accident or by design, to prevent the rate of unemployment from improving.
So my advice would be don’t try it unless you’re feeling pretty certain about the quality and quantity of the force you’re raised.
Would you, considering the above, be willing under any circumstance to be a part of such force? If not, then permit me to quote Patrick Henery:
March 23, 1775.
No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free-- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
Pretty easy the 17th.....Madison put a clause in the Constitution that no state without it’s consent can be deprived of it’s sufferage in the Senate....They did not get the unanimous consent so all states were deprived of their sufferage in the Senate...Score one for tyranny...16th deadline passes without the necessary votes. No problem Solicitor General just waits a couple of weeks till he has enough (no matter that the ratifications were changed by the states). Score 2 for tyranny.
The 14th is fraudulent.
“Want to explain how an amendment to the Constitution, passed in accordance with the rules laid out in the Constitution, can be fraudulent?”
As I just explained, they could give a rat what the Constitution requires.
You might want to ask how Ohio, which was not admitted to the union until 1952 was counted in the ratification votes. ( A border dispute prevented their petition for statehood to be finalized ). It is pretty much what the pols want the pols get there is no boundary they will not cross. There is not some wording they will abide by if they want something accomplished. These are creative folks and they love their tyranny.
Hmmm
” The Premise
The authority of the federal government to collect its income tax depends upon the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the federal income tax amendment, which was allegedly ratified in 1913. After a year of extensive research, Bill Benson discovered that the 16th Amendment was not ratified by the required 3/4 of the states, but nevertheless Secretary of State Philander Knox fraudulently announced ratification.”
http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/new/home.asp
And
http://www.devvy.com/new_site/17th_amendment_docs_march_2010.html
Looks like more hogwash to me. But wait! The 2nd Amendment isn’t real either:
“There are several versions of the text of the Second Amendment, each with slight capitalization and punctuation differences, found in the official documents surrounding the adoption of the Bill of Rights.[5] One such version was passed by the Congress, which reads:[6]
“ A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. ”
Another version is found in the copies distributed to the states, and then ratified by them, which had this capitalization and punctuation:[7]
“ A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
It is obvious that an Amendment must be passed by both Congress & the States, and they must pass the same thing - so the 2nd Amendment is bogus as well!
< / sarcasm >
The NBC clause has never been defined [in terms of law] yet we know by common sense what the Founding Fathers had in mind. A favorite trick of liberal lawyers...AKA perverts.
You twist arguments, lie and otherwise defend the enemy and wonder why you are labeled a troll.
Who's side are you on?
It sure isn't America's
You post in the company of people like jameses777 who is a documented anti FReeper (Liberal hack) WTF is the matter with you?
The NBC clause definition is tenuous at best yet you side with Obama, what's up with that?
Tell us why you defend the man who is a marxist, is stealing this Countries future and its traditions......please tell us all why you defend him so.
I'd relly like to know.
Prediction, don't give me any bullshit how this is a Country of laws.
“You might want to ask how Ohio, which was not admitted to the union until 1952 was counted in the ratification votes.”
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Where do we find such men?!
It doesn’t matter what Madison put in the Constitution. The point of an amendment is that it changes what the Constitution says. And the process for amendment laid out in the Constitution does not require unanimous consent. Score one for correct process. And there was no deadline on the 16th. The first amendment to be proposed with a deadline for passage was the 18th. Score two for process.
And there you go, off into wingnut territory. I suppose that next you'll be claiming that the seven presidents born in Ohio weren't natural born citizens, either.
How many FReepers are you FRiends with and have met with.....none....none I'd bet.
I'm going to do my best to be at the Tea Party here in Vegas tomorrow and have the opportunity to meet with JimRob.....what will you be doing?
You'll be on this same thread defending your man....disgusting fool that you are.
“You spend incomprehensible time here on these threads to defend a man in office who is bent on destroying this Country.”
You spend incomprehensible time here on these threads bullshitting about how you can get the courts to throw Obama out, if folks will just donate money and support dupes like Lakin.
“Prediction, don’t give me any bullshit how this is a Country of laws.”
Maybe you don’t like having laws. I do.
“The NBC clause has never been defined [in terms of law] yet we know by common sense what the Founding Fathers had in mind. “
Must be nice to be a mind reader...but THAT is a favorite trick of liberals...to pretend they know what the law REALLY says instead of what it ACTUALLY says. The WKA decision DID use common sense - common sense says the meaning comes before the Constitution was written, rather than derived from a translation made 10 years LATER. You can’t get much more common sense than that the inspiration PRECEDES the writing, rather than follows it.
I got involved on these threads around March, when I posted a comment on Lakin and suddenly found myself called a traitor by multiple Internet warriors. That pissed me off.
And now I post on these threads to prevent more LIES being spread by posters who care nothing but the truth. I”m tired of seeing folks write that “Everyone KNOWS a NBC requires two citizen parents” when there is a very strong legal argument against it.
‘If’n you want to cite that then what’s to [legally] stop some section of America from seizing the Congress while it is in session and forcing them to sign on to Constitutional Amendments? If so, I think I need to raise such a force to get the following 10 Amendments put into the Constitution:’
That would be the US military acting legally to prevent the coup d-etat you describe. By the way, after you succeed with this coup, how are you going to get the politicians in 3/4 of the states to ratify these changes, and who will be running the country in the years before any ratification can be accomplished. I guess you will simply have to establish a personal dictatorship to see things done right, Mr. Cromwell/Mussolini.
So blacks aren't citizens and the Dred Scott decision still stands?
Perhaps that’s exactly why the Government has no problem restricting the keeping and bearing of arms..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.