Conquer Club

DaGip wrote:Communists who wish to subvert government towards their one world socialist governmental ends = American

Libertarians who wish to protect the integrity of the law of the land via the Constitution of the United States = Hatters

What's wrong with this picture, people? How did Communist philosophy become mainstream thought in America? How did the valiant Libertarian end up turning into "a right wing conspiracy nut"?

Hang on. No ones put forward any views that you could consider to be even slightly communist from what I've read. What are you talking about?

This just in from Phil Berg, Esq.:

We understand everyone is eager to learn what occurred on December 1, 2008, at the U.S. Supreme Court. There is a rumor claiming Mr. Obama was Court Ordered by Justice Souter to turn over his birth certificate by December 1, 2008. This is NOT true.

When a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari is filed the Defendants automatically are given thirty (30) days to respond. They are not required to respond. The end of thirty (30) Days in the Berg v. Obama case was December 1, 2008. Keep in mind, the Defendants could have mailed in a response to the Petition for Writ of Certiorari and the Court allows approximately a week for mail. If this is the case, the envelopes must be postmarked December 1, 2008.

In the afternoon, December 1, 2008, Lisa, Mr. Berg's Assistant contacted the U.S. Supreme Court and spoke with the Clerk. The Clerk informed Lisa Mr. Berg's Petition for Writ of Certiorari would be distributed to all nine (9) Justices and a conference should be set within ten (10) days. As I'm sure you are aware, during the conference the Justices will discuss Mr. Berg's Petition for the Writ of Certiorari and decide whether or not to grant or deny the Petition. It only takes four (4) out of nine (9) Justices to agree to grant Mr. Berg's Petition for Writ of Certiorari. The Justices can also make other Orders during the Conference.

Mr. Berg's Office also learned the Solicitor General is only representing the Federal Election Commission.

Additional documents will be filed within the next couple of days. All Legal briefs will be posted on our website, so please continue checking back for updates.
Last Updated on Thursday, 04 December 2008 12:20

http://www.obamacrimes.com/

DaGip wrote:http://www.obamacrimes.com/

So THAT is where the sad and despondent McCain/Palin loonies are hanging out.

And I thought they were all here.

This bizarre fascination/obsession with birth certificates is beyond belief. The ultimate straw grasp.

If you don't grasp at all the straws you can, how ya gonna build a man of straw to knock down?

There's a song in that, I'm sure.

Yes, and a dance. Dorthy and the scarecrow did it together.

Backglass wrote:

DaGip wrote:http://www.obamacrimes.com/

So THAT is where the sad and despondent McCain/Palin loonies are hanging out.

And I thought they were all here.

This bizarre fascination/obsession with birth certificates is beyond belief. The ultimate straw grasp.

Joe the Plumber is not a loony, you commie pinko bastard!

Yeah, right.

DaGip wrote:

Backglass wrote:

DaGip wrote:http://www.obamacrimes.com/

So THAT is where the sad and despondent McCain/Palin loonies are hanging out.

And I thought they were all here.

This bizarre fascination/obsession with birth certificates is beyond belief. The ultimate straw grasp.

Joe the Plumber is not a loony, you commie pinko bastard!

...or named Joe.

jonesthecurl wrote:

DaGip wrote:

Backglass wrote:

DaGip wrote:http://www.obamacrimes.com/

So THAT is where the sad and despondent McCain/Palin loonies are hanging out.

And I thought they were all here.

This bizarre fascination/obsession with birth certificates is beyond belief. The ultimate straw grasp.

Joe the Plumber is not a loony, you commie pinko bastard!

...or named Joe.

...or technically not a real plumber, for that matter.

DaGip wrote:

jonesthecurl wrote:

DaGip wrote:

Backglass wrote:

DaGip wrote:http://www.obamacrimes.com/

So THAT is where the sad and despondent McCain/Palin loonies are hanging out.

And I thought they were all here.

This bizarre fascination/obsession with birth certificates is beyond belief. The ultimate straw grasp.

Joe the Plumber is not a loony, you commie pinko bastard!

...or named Joe.

...or technically not a real plumber, for that matter.

So from the offset, he's a liar?

Nickbaldwin wrote:
So from the offset, he's a liar?

Who? Obama? McCain? Backglass?

Joe

mpjh wrote:

kentington wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

Juan_Bottom wrote:"It will be a great day in America when schools get all the funding that they need, and the Air Force has to have a bake sale to buy a bomber."

Word. I've always wondered how it would be if people had to make charity funds for military purposes and give the money normally paid by the taxpayer to something else.

I would be upset with this. There are too many things I don't think our money should be paying for and this would increase the money going towards those items. I would rather the ability to choose where your tax money goes. I wonder where most of the taxes would end up that way or how it would change things.

There is an interesting experiment with this in the United Way funding. At one point in its history donors to the United Way complained about what organizations the money was going to. So the United Way set up a menu of organizations to which a donor could earmark for its donation. The change was that pretty much the same amount of money went to pretty much the same organizations, however the United Way experienced a significant increase in cost to accommodate the process.

Thus, I think we are better of voting for policy priorities and funding through legislation. This is a more efficient system.

I am going to take your word on that because I don't want to look it up. But that is interesting and does make sense, because if the majority vote for a policy, then the majority would be sending their money there. But there is no way I could ever agree with allowing the military to be solely paid by donors. I am a strong believer in a strong military. This is coming from a kid who grew up scrawny. I would like to believe that most rulers in other countries would be mature enough to not pick on smaller countries, but we all know this to be untrue. When people see an advantage they take it. Just like most people would take money if they were sure they could not be caught or even that there would be no significant consequence.

Someone said that you have to have standing to demand proof of a BC from a president elect. I disagree to a certain extant. The whole point of a democracy is that everyone matters. All the democrats want people to be equal, then why would you need a particular standing? I think that if the question is raised then the courts should look into it, it is their duty to preserve our laws and constitution, even when we don't agree with them. If Obama has such a huge following, then he did them all a diservice by running if he wasn't a U.S. citizen. He should have been pushing to get it out of the constitution and then ran for presidency. I would have respected that a lot more than the way it is going now, if he is not a citizen. We have a right to ask this of him and if we are grasping at straws it is our right. But we can't make an exception even on an outdated law, by some peoples opinion.

DaGip wrote:

Nickbaldwin wrote:
So from the offset, he's a liar?

Who? Obama? McCain? Backglass?

McCain mainly.

and joe

Joe too.

Yeah, Joe looks like a liar...

Hey, just heard from Wolf Blitzer that he is going to have a story on the Obama Citizenship controversy in the Supreme Court. I am watching Wolf right now...finally the mainstream is starting to perk their ears, took them long enough.

DaGip wrote:Yeah, Joe looks like a liar...

Hey, just heard from Wolf Blitzer that he is going to have a story on the Obama Citizenship controversy in the Supreme Court. I am watching Wolf right now...finally the mainstream is starting to perk their ears, took them long enough.

they may have just had tinnitus from working so hard to get him elected.

i didnt read through all 12 pages but... correct me if im wrong, if your mother is a United States Citizen and you are born off country, arnt you still a considered a citizen?

Natewolfman wrote:i didnt read through all 12 pages but... correct me if im wrong, if your mother is a United States Citizen and you are born off country, arnt you still a considered a citizen?

That's not exactly what this is about... the Constition says you must be born on American soil to be able to run for president.
HOWEVER it has now been reported that in Hawaii a mother may be issued a certificate of live birth even if she has her child in another country. All that's needed is proof that she had lived in America for a year prior to giving birth and that she is a citizen. So maybe that's where the certificate came from?

Another suite:
Federal suit seeks Obama certificate
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/artic ... lnewsfront

Plaintiffs in that suit subpoenaed a copy of the birth certificate Nov. 26 from the Hawai'i Health Department. The plaintiffs include conservative political activist and failed presidential candidate Alan Keyes, who lost to Obama in the 2004 U.S. Senate race in Illinois.

Deputy Attorney General Jill Nagamine wrote Dec. 1 to the local attorney handling the case, James Hochberg, stating that Hawai'i law prohibits disclosure of the record.

"Vital statistics records, such as birth certificates, are protected by strict confidentiality requirements under Hawai'i state law," Nagamine wrote.

"The record could be disclosed to a person whose right to inspect or obtain a copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction," the letter continued.

"This requires more than a subpoena prepared and issued by counsel of record," Nagamine wrote

Pretty standard stuff.

What if Obama becomes a really awesome president? As Dancing Mustard always said,"The Constitution is an archaic document..."

I know, I know, I am straying from my original position a bit; but I was just thinking that there are a lot of old laws on the books that are completely retarded and we wouldn't even consider prosecuting anyone over them or implementing them (dancing on Sunday; not serving cheddar cheese with apple pie; if three or more Indians are walking down the street together, they can be considered a war party and fired upon.[that last one is still on the books in Spearfish, South Dakota! http://www.dumblaws.com/laws/united-states/south-dakota ])

Let's take a closer look at the Naturalization Act of 1790 (much for the basis of immigration and American citizenship). Within that act only WHITE people were allowed to become citizens, surely Black Elk, Juan, or myself do not see that as a good aspect of that particular law. Why? Because times and ways of thought have changed. The same could very well hold true for the "natural born citizen" clause. Perhaps that too is in need of a "change of thought" and a well awaited definition.

The same tactic had been tried on Barry Goldwater and John McCain. Now, yes, in all technicality these gentlemen were not exactly born in the United States; but to question their allegiance and loyalty to America? Come on. The same could also hold true for Obama, plus he did win the election which was the will of the people.

Yes, Obama perhaps through some technicality in law might not exactly be a citizen; but we should actually weigh what would be more damaging to the country right now? I would say that ruling Obama a fraud wouldn't be a positive step for the country at this particular moment in time, and I believe that the Supreme Court will see it this way. Despite my feelings on the matter, I have to be truthful about this. I am not an Obama supporter, but for the greater good of our country, I have to say that Obama should stay president, otherwise the rift in the United States would be blown wide open.

What the Supreme Court decides in regards to this matter of citizenship, I will abide fully and I will not discuss it anymore. But for the meantime, Obama isn't president yet and he's fair game!

The Naturalization Act of 1790 is not law anymore. We went through a period in the early 1900s where the law was changed. The revision says that we only accepted a certain percentage of people into America based on country/region of origin.
And even that law is off the books now, if I'm not mistaken. If I get challenged on this I'll look it up.

Archaic or not (And I don't think that it is exactly) it is the law. Obama and the people backing him new that to begin with. That's why there is no copy of the birth certificate.
There is a story about a Chinease-American spy caught in the early 50s. Born in China, the Chinese government convinced him that he was one of them. Plus they had his parents...
I can't remember the source but it was put into a Michael Cricton(however you spell his name) book.



If it turns out that he wasn't born in America then he has been lying this whole time. That makes him very dangerous IMO. I'm not calling him a spy; I'm saying that he would do anything in his quest for power. Do you really want another president with as much honesty as Bush? And worse with a legion of people who would lie so blatently like that to protect him?

But again, that's only if the BC is a fake or doesn't exist.

Juan_Bottom wrote: That's why there is no copy of the birth certificate.

Wrong. there is an original birth certificate at the Obama HQ in Chicago. The Obama organization has let people inspect it and has placed a copy on the web. A court can inspect it. There is nothing hidden here, including the political agenda of the people pushing this issue.

Juan_Bottom wrote:The Naturalization Act of 1790 is not law anymore. We went through a period in the early 1900s where the law was changed. The revision says that we only accepted a certain percentage of people into America based on country/region of origin.
And even that law is off the books now, if I'm not mistaken. If I get challenged on this I'll look it up.

Archaic or not (And I don't think that it is exactly) it is the law. Obama and the people backing him new that to begin with. That's why there is no copy of the birth certificate.
There is a story about a Chinease-American spy caught in the early 50s. Born in China, the Chinese government convinced him that he was one of them. Plus they had his parents...
I can't remember the source but it was put into a Michael Cricton(however you spell his name) book.



If it turns out that he wasn't born in America then he has been lying this whole time. That makes him very dangerous IMO. I'm not calling him a spy; I'm saying that he would do anything in his quest for power. Do you really want another president with as much honesty as Bush? And worse with a legion of people who would lie so blatently like that to protect him?

But again, that's only if the BC is a fake or doesn't exist.

That's my point, that laws change, and sometimes the only way for that particular law to change is for someone to challenge it. So either way, Americans need to have closure over this Constitutional issue.

If Obama broke the law (and it wouldn't be the first time a president or politician broke the law, it seems to be common occurrence) and gets ruled doing so, then he should pay the penalty, but what will happen if he gets into office is that Biden would assume the role of president if there is an impeachment. But if the entire DNC is found guilty of fraud (because there would be no way Obama could have done all the cover up on his own) then what? Do we throw all the Dems in prison? That would suck, but at the same time, that would be sooo friggin' awesome! Clearly not all the Dems would go to jail. Perhaps, Howard Dean, but I don't know if Biden would or not.

As far as your Chinese story, I am unfamiliar and would like a source to read up more on it if you got one.

But either way, Obama or McCain, America was heading toward a more socialistic state of governance. It's just that the Dems don't cover it up as much as the Republicans. The Republicans hide behind the old "smaller government and less taxes"-bullshit, and then they end up spending us into oblivion all the while the Dems in the House just keep going along with it. Are they under a mind control ray or what?

Also, perhaps the NeoCon agenda IS to throw America into absolute anarchy? If that is what I wanted to do, I would go ahead and wait until Obama became president and then push for this issue and have Obama impeached right away. That would surely throw us into a state of distrust and dissent, and would definitely work towards the NeoCons goal of One World Government.

Interview with Donofrio, pretty interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_IqA-JWaFc&NR=1