It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Judge Has [not] Ruled, Obama [not] Off Of Ballot In Georgia! (erroneous news report)

page: 32
122
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:51 PM
link   
It's AMAZING how people are totally IGNORANT to what George W. Bush, Jr. did to the country. I guess you thought Obama was just gonna run in and save the day? Bush's policies are still in effect, lest ye forget.

I'm not much into politics, persay; and i have never cast a vote...but i will say this...Obama hasn't been that bad of a president...if you REALLY think about it. The economy didn't collapse, like it was predicted to have collapsed, years ago. There hasn't been any Waco's, Oklahoma Cities, Gulf Wars (eventhough Bush's war still lingers on), under Obama's watch.

If you look at the past 3 president's....their leadership has changed America, for the worse, and not the better. So, how come no one ever points the finger, where the finger should be pointed? Can we PLEASE, place the blame, where the blame should be: Bush, Clinton, Bush?

In my opinion....Obama has been a wash. He's done nothing horrible, and has done nothing good. To me, it's a draw. I'm not really sure, what everybody else is bitchin' at?




posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by ahmonrarh
 




Au Contraire.....I live in Georgia, and the metro Atlanta area, and trust me when I say "Atlanta Voted Obama"


I believe you, but the State of Georgia, as a whole, went to McCain, I believe, and therefore Obama did not get any electoral votes from Georgia.

That's one of the reasons this challenge is silly. It is for the Primary Election ballot, and has, quite literally, nothing to do with the General Election, where Obama is likely to have a hard time winning anyway. Its a waste of time, effort, spittle, and money from the Obama opponents side, and an embarrassment to Georgia to have to take the idiots seriously.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Annee
 


Obama is Marxist. That is no religion.


Name a Marxist policy that Obama has actively pursued, one which Marxists would recognize as Marxist.


LOL
- - I listen to America Left radio (also conservative radio) - - - and it always cracks me up when Left radio says: "I wish he was more Socialist - - but he isn't".

"People" love to throw out words and ideologies - - - they really have no clue about.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by wutz4tom
reply to post by candcantiques
 


Never would of thought I would have been hearing that news.....
What Is the Message that's being sent??? nobody is above the law?

edit on 26-1-2012 by wutz4tom because: (no reason given)


We all exist within the law. Anyone above the law= an outlaw, a criminal. as they are outside the confines of law abiding society.

I can imagine States that are Republican Controlled to try and copy this. As I could imagine if a state did something similar to Bush or a Republican, Democratic controlled states would do likewise.
It is annoying that this matter is not addressed properly, and it should be criminal for a President or Presidential candidate to have their records sealed. That alone, regardless of the apparent ridicules nature of the birther argument, is a huge red herring that only a partisan hack, black supremacist or total moron could ignore.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:55 PM
link   
Why all the hate for Obama and not these Republican clowns?
What Obama has done is be a puppet for the Republican
party so he can catch the heat for everything and later a crook
can sneak into the WhiteHouse. We are better off with Obama.
That is unless Ron can sneak in there. But nobody with any
special interest will let that happen.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:57 PM
link   
       In conclusion, P.A. Madison draws attention to Rep. John A. Bingham’s (OH) comments about Section 1992 of the Revised Statutes. Rep. Bingham is the author behind the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
       
       “Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))
       
       P.A. Madison provides context to Bingham’s definition.
       
       Bingham subscribed to the same view as most everyone in Congress at the time that in order to be born a citizen of the United States one must be born within the allegiance of the Nation. To be born within the allegiance of the United States the parents, or more precisely, the father, must not owe allegiance to some other foreign sovereignty (remember the U.S. abandoned England’s “natural allegiance” doctrine). This of course, explains why emphasis of not owing allegiance to anyone else was the affect of being subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
www.worldandi.com...

       E. de Vattel’s Law of Nations (1758). "The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society can not exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as a matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children.”



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:58 PM
link   
reply to post by OGOldGreg
 


i feel so sad for you, because the real NEWS is not on cable or network TV.. it can not be found in the mainstream media which is 50% entertainment and 50% watered down news stories, TOPICS that have no depth with little or no RESEARCH into HISTORY or TRUTH. they are OWNED by CORPORATIONS with selected journalism molded to fit a specific agenda so they can turn a profit. RESEARCH for yourself- past the talking heads that read what has been scripted and approved. they cover stories that are good for the corporation and for the share holders. the truth about MOST CONSPIRACY THEORIES does not SELL what the CORPORATIONS need to push, therefore they are overlooked. true journalists DO NOT WORK for the CORPORATIONS their stories would never make it through the PRODUCERS. ufo's and the 911 history are two subjects that can not be dealt with by the CORPORATIONS...certain share holders will not allow NEWS without CONTROLS ATTACHED. if you only get your news from network or cable news you probably have NO CLUE what is happening on the planet.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Annee
 


Obama is Marxist. That is no religion.


Name a Marxist policy that Obama has actively pursued, one which Marxists would recognize as Marxist.


Every thing he does reeks of class warfare which is a tactic used by Marxists. Spread the Wealth. The Affordable Health Care Act is part of that. Hillary is also a Marxist and interned for a Marxist.


“Red Army” reveals the principal author of the foundation for Obamacare is third generation progressive academic Jacob S. Hacker, a Yale professor who is an expert on the politics of U.S. health and social policy
Hacker is author of Health Care for America, the centerpiece of the George Soros–funded Economic Policy Institute’s Agenda for Shared Prosperity. “Red Army” finds Hacker’s proposal for so-called guaranteed, affordable healthcare for all Americans is the foundation for Obama’s healthcare plan.



In 2003, Hacker first devised a public health insurance program called “Medicare Plus,” which would offer coverage to all legal residents not otherwise covered by Medicare or employer-sponsored insurance. Employers would be required to either provide a minimum level of coverage to their workers or pay a payroll tax
That plan was the basis for the U.S. National Healthcare Insurance Act, which was first introduced in February 2, 2005, in the House by Representative John Conyers. That act was sponsored by several other congressmen, all members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
“Red Army” documents how the Progressive Caucus was founded by the Democrat Socialists of America. The book charges the caucus works as a Marxist-socialist bloc in congress to introduce progressive legislation with socialist intent.


Some other highlights from “Red Army”:
*The existence of a powerful “Marxist-socialist” bloc in Congress (explicitly formed as an arm of the Democratic Socialists of America) and how it is behind legislation in areas that affect all Americans, including the complete socialization of health care and comprehensive immigration reform, which, the book exposes, seeks to change the very nature of the American electorate.

*The multipronged policy offensive aimed at disarming America by emboldening its enemies within and without, spurning traditional allies, subjecting the nation to the authority of foreign tribunals and systematically dismantling the U.S. military.


"Red Army" by Aaron Klein

kleinonline.wnd.com... dicals/



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 12:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by candcantiques
Did you catch that?
Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of PARENTS (2) NOT OWING ALLEGIANCE TO ANY FOREIGN SOVERIGNTY, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural-born citizen.

At birth Obama was a citizen of 2 countries. NOT ONE TWO. He is NOT NATURAL BORN


This is false.

The "Owing allegiance to foreign sovereignty" refers to children of diplomats on US soil.

His mother was a US citizen, and he was a US citizen by birth at the moment of his birth, hence he is natural born.


There are only two classes of citizens, those who are natural born and those who are not. There is no dispute that Obama is a citizen of the US.

Somebody who is not natural born citizen needs to be naturalized (as in go through a process with forms, tests, signatures and oath).

Obama was not so naturalized.

There is no positive evidence Obama was born outside the USA, as in an official birth certificate from a foreign jurisdiction.

Conclusion: Obama is a natural born citizen.


No, 'citizens may be BORN or they may be naturalized which is totally different from what you said.

The 14th ammendment confers CITIZENSHIP to anyone born in the soil who are subject to the jurisdiction.of the U.S. But no Court has ruled that the 14th Amendment confers natural born citizenship status to everyone born and subject to the jurisdiction. Even the Citizenship and inmigration services recognizes a distinction between "native born' (born in the soil), natural born, and naturalized citizens. The U.S. government, although, it does not currently enforce it, has never recognize dual citizenship at birth. Either you owe full allegiance to this country, or you don't. Even the 14th amendment founders drafted the "subject to the jurisdiction" phrase as to mean full and complete allegiance.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by jacklondonmiller

Originally posted by wutz4tom
reply to post by candcantiques
 


Never thought I would have been hearing that news.....
Is the Message being sent??? nobody is above the law?


the message is a couple of partisan scumbags in a state can use their power to
decide who people can vote for... Sounds truly Fascist


You have it wrong sir. The message is that a judge, (not some backwoods dude) ordered Obama to attend court to defend himself. The fact that Obama had ample time to do so but decided not to do it and decided to do what any other person would have gone to jail for is the fact that he is the one who made the decision of who can vote for him. Get it?....... no? Read further......

Neither the "backwoods" judge, the "southern dude" that made the case nor the "racist" system in place made this decision. The fact is that Obama made the decision of who can vote for him by not showing up for court like any other normal citizen would do (and indeed is legally obligated to do and same goes for the president).

So you can play the race card all you want but as a man with black children I can tell you right here and now that I agree with the decision of that court.

No one is above the law and the day that anyone is above our law is the day that we as a people have failed to our selves and our children as true freedom loving people, we have failed our parents and our grand parents by way of letting our selves be taken over and ruled by a dictator that is above our law.

The only person that can be above our law would be a dictator. Is Obama a dictator?

Do you have a problem with what I just typed? Do you not like something I just typed? Do you disagree with something I just typed? Well then feel free (while you still have the chance) to speak your mind in a reply to this post at your earliest convenience .

-Alien



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 12:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Annee
 


Obama is Marxist. That is no religion.


Name a Marxist policy that Obama has actively pursued, one which Marxists would recognize as Marxist.


LOL
- - I listen to America Left radio (also conservative radio) - - - and it always cracks me up when Left radio says: "I wish he was more Socialist - - but he isn't".

"People" love to throw out words and ideologies - - - they really have no clue about.


And I'm just not one of them, unfortunately for you.
We have had socialist policies in the US for decades now. All the Socialists have been coming out of the woodwork saying how great socialism is and what's wrong with it.
Class warfare is totally a Marxist ploy and the Obamas have both been using it profusely. How many times do I have to inform people here that Lenin and Marx both said that socialism is a bridge to the more radical communism. CPUSA also says it on their website. I would think the Communist Party would know what they are up to.
It's really a matter of degree.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Gixxr1rider
 




the SCOTUS in 1875 Minor vs Happersett defined who is a Natural Born Citizen.


No it didn't, exactly the opposite, in fact. It specifically said it did not need to define NBC for the purposes of the case in front of it.

It mentioned in passing that there was no doubt that Miss Minor was a natural born citizen due to her birth circumstances. It also mentioned in passing that there was active debate about whether children born in the US of foreign parents were also NBC, but that that was irrelevant to the case at hand.

By the way "mentioned in passing" is what is meant by the term "dicta" (formally orbiter dictum), a term you may have heard before. It means that it is not part of the binding finding of the court, but just a side comment. The reason any discussion of the citizenship status of Miss Minor was 'dicta' is because everybody agreed that she was a citizen, and the question before the court was whether or not citizenship automatically carried the right to vote. The case was a suffrage case, not a citizenship case.

Wong Kim Ark put an end to that active debate and found specifically that the 14th Amendment confirms that being born on American soil, in and of itself (but with the minor exclusion of Diplomatic or invading army parents), is sufficient to confer NBC status. That is settled law for over 100 years.

End of story.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

There have been Amendments to the Constitution before - - - ruling on Natural Born citizen.

WHO made those rulings/'amendments? Did Obama? Did some judge in Georgia?



There is a massive difference between a court ruling and a Constitutional Amendment.

A judge cam make a court ruling, but he cannot amend the Constitution. That has to be done by the legislative branch, not the judicial, and it has to be approved by the States before it can be passed and entered as an amendment.

That requires a lot more than just "some judge in Georgia".



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 12:13 AM
link   
So 2 guys decide who you can vote for? That doesnt sound like a democracy to me. Regardless of the reason behind it, this is an affront to the constitutional given rights of standing for election.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 12:15 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


It requires zero parents to be NBC. Born in America is sufficient.

The one parent rule you cite only applies to single mothers when the child is born over seas (there are no residency/age restrictions when both parents are know citizens and the child is born over seas).

Obama was not born overseas. He was born in Hawai'i which was American soil long before it was a state.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 12:16 AM
link   
reply to post by davedeath
 





seriously this site has gone down hill so much the past five years, so much hidden racism it makes me sick.


What do you expect? Racism is a "conspiracy".



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by nuttin4U
It's AMAZING how people are totally IGNORANT to what George W. Bush, Jr. did to the country. I guess you thought Obama was just gonna run in and save the day? Bush's policies are still in effect, lest ye forget.

I'm not much into politics, persay; and i have never cast a vote...but i will say this...Obama hasn't been that bad of a president...if you REALLY think about it. The economy didn't collapse, like it was predicted to have collapsed, years ago. There hasn't been any Waco's, Oklahoma Cities, Gulf Wars (eventhough Bush's war still lingers on), under Obama's watch.

If you look at the past 3 president's....their leadership has changed America, for the worse, and not the better. So, how come no one ever points the finger, where the finger should be pointed? Can we PLEASE, place the blame, where the blame should be: Bush, Clinton, Bush?

In my opinion....Obama has been a wash. He's done nothing horrible, and has done nothing good. To me, it's a draw. I'm not really sure, what everybody else is bitchin' at?


Here is the single-handed most important fact that you will ever need to answer your question.

Obama Added More to National Debt in First 19 Months Than All Presidents from Washington Through Reagan Combined, Says Gov’t Data


-Alien



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Annee

There have been Amendments to the Constitution before - - - ruling on Natural Born citizen.

WHO made those rulings/'amendments? Did Obama? Did some judge in Georgia?



There is a massive difference between a court ruling and a Constitutional Amendment.

A judge cam make a court ruling, but he cannot amend the Constitution. That has to be done by the legislative branch, not the judicial, and it has to be approved by the States before it can be passed and entered as an amendment.

That requires a lot more than just "some judge in Georgia".



Yes - it definitely does.

The Constitution is not set in stone. It is open for interpretation. Thus we have amendments and rulings.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 12:21 AM
link   
reply to post by mbkennel
 




Name a Marxist policy that Obama has actively pursued, one which Marxists would recognize as Marxist.


I heard a rumor that he enjoys the spending the evening at the opera on occasion. But I haven't heard whether he likes horse racing, so I haven't made up my mind yet.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by rnaa
reply to post by nenothtu
 


It requires zero parents to be NBC. Born in America is sufficient.




"The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens.
Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the
nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never
doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens
became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural born
citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners."
Minor v. Happersett




top topics



 
122
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join