Obama Eligibility Hearing in Arizona tomorrow

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/arizona-obama-ballot-challenge-hearing-tomorrow-in-tucson ^ | Feb 22, 2012 | obamaballotchallenge.com

[jdirt]

Please attend hearing if you can.

[philman_36]

I know you have cherry picked enough out of context words...
Oh, you're a fine one to talk about "cherry picking" out of context words!

@Here is some more of what Madison had to say that same day and in the next paragraph! I guess you never read down that far.

[philman_36]

So you are smarter then Justices Roberts and Scalia?
Do you know how delusional you sound?

Your psychological manipulations are no longer effective.
The Farce is strong in you.

[philman_36]

I’ll be back to spank you later.

[W. W. SMITH]

A wholly accurate term/phrase would be “Republican freeman”. The brand new Democratic party could not abide this labeling of those residing within this nation and have insisted on the use of citizen ever since.

I have debated Mr Rogers on the subject of natural born in the past and will not waste any more of my time debating it again.

[philman_36]

Where can we find updates, I searched the site you linked to a minute ago just now and didn’t come up with anything... searched on case number and judges name
Sorry, I have no idea. If there is a gag order you'll not find anything.

[Mr Rogers]

The syllabus is NOT the decision.

But you are not sane, so telling you facts will not help. You will just have to go on believing the entire world is in conspiracy, and you alone know you are the Emperor of Rome...

[philman_36]

@gag ordera judge's order prohibiting the attorneys and the parties to a pending lawsuit or criminal prosecution from talking to the media or the public about the case. The supposed intent is to prevent prejudice due to pre-trial publicity which would influence potential jurors.

[PA-RIVER]

So there we have it.

Aldo Mario Bellei, born a citizen, lost his citizenship by living as a foreign citizen. Sounds so familiar.

[Harlan1196]

So Justice Roberts was helpless to stop a crime? Not only that, he had no choice but to swear in a man he knew was not eligible? Surely Roberts could have refuse to participate?

An honorable man in that position would have resigned.

What you are saying is that Roberts, Scalia and Thomas have no honor. That they would knowingly violate their oaths to protect the Constitution.

[edge919]

So Justice Roberts was helpless to stop a crime?

Was he supposed to perform a citizen's arrest (pun intended)??? Honestly, it helps to think things through before you post and expose your mental inadequacies even further.

[philman_36]

@Ken Allen v Obama/Democratic Party/Brad Nelson - Complaint for Constitutional Violations of Article II and Ballot Challenge5)An order for the defendant to provide documents regarding Obama and his presence at any hearing scheduled by this court.

6)For any and further relief that this court deems just to include a jury trial.

[Harlan1196]

Do you think that Robert knowingly swore in a man he knew was not eligible?

Roberts could have resigned. Could have refused to administer the oath - he is untouchable.

[PA-RIVER]

All I know is we have a Kenyan/Indonesian citizen in the Oval office pissing away our treasure and good credit, our life's work, our children's life's work.

John Jay was right. People with foreign citizenships shouldn't be sitting in the oval office. The temptation to ruin us is just to great.

[philman_36]

The syllabus is NOT the decision.
I know, that's why I showed you that the syllabus simply shortened what was in the decision, to prevent you from making the lame argument you're making now.

In your ignorance you're making it anyway.

[edge919]

The syllabus is NOT the decision.

Justice Fuller quoted the Minor syllabus in Ex Parte Lockwood to great effect. The color coded sections below illustrate how each part was quoted verbatim:

From Lockwood:

In Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162, this court held that the word 'citizen' is often used to convey the idea of membership in a nation., and, in that sense, women, if born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, have always been considered citizens of the United States, as much so before the adoption of the fourteenth amendment of the constitution as since; but that the right of suffrage was not necessarily one of the privileges or immunities of citizenship before the adoption of the fourteenth amendment, and that amendment did not add to these privileges and immunities.

The Minor syllabus:

1. The word "citizen" is often used to convey the idea of membership in a nation.

2. In that sense, women, of born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, have always been considered citizens of the United States, as much so before the adoption of the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution as since.

3. The right of suffrage was not necessarily one of the privileges or immunities of citizenship before the adoption of the fourteenth amendment, and that amendment does not add to these privileges and immunities.

[philman_36]

The syllabus is NOT the decision.
I know, that's why I showed you that the syllabus simply shortened what was in the decision, to prevent you from making the lame argument you're making now.

@#191

You, Mr Rogers, are in italics...

For example, Minor did not rule that “The word “citizen “ is often used to convey the idea of membership in a nation.”
And yet what do we find in the full decision?

For convenience it has been found necessary to give a name to this membership. The object is to designate by a title the person and the relation he bears to the nation. For this purpose the words 'subject,' 'inhabitant,' and 'citizen' have been used, and the choice between them is sometimes made to depend upon the form of the government. Citizen is now more commonly employed, however, and as it has been considered better suited to the description of one living under a republican government, it was adopted by nearly all of the States upon their separation from Great Britain, and was afterwards adopted in the Articles of Confederation and in the Constitution of the United States. When used in this sense it is understood as conveying the idea of membership of a nation, and nothing more.

That's what the syllabus says but only in fewer words, right?
1. The word "citizen " is often used to convey the idea of membership in a nation.

In your ignorance you're making it anyway.

[W. W. SMITH]

Ankeny is junk and even those who can’t pass the barr know it is junk. WKA clearly defines NBC by saying he is a citizen but not a NBC.

[Harlan1196]

Sounds like you are mentally prepared to lose. That’s good - soft landings are easier on the ego.

[Mr Rogers]

The actual ruling in Minor doesn’t mention NBC. It is one sentence.

The decision, including the dicta, spends a paragraph on the subject. WKA, in the decision, spent half the decision. But the WKA RULING was limited, just as the Minor ruling was.

[W. W. SMITH]

I am fairly certain that Chief Justice Roberts, out of fear for his and his families lives, put his hand in the air and said repeat after me......