On 1/23/2011 12:44 PM, wrote:

...
Smith;
The Chief Justice administered the Oath of Office twice. There is no
requirement for a "birth certificate" to be president. Have you seen
George W. Bush's?

Well, we all know WHO his father is . The problem was nobody ever
required him to take an IQ test . And the rest became History...

No. There would not be a requirement for a president to have a birth
certificate ... if, AND ONLY IF, he can prove he was born in USA by
other means ... the only means I know of, legally, is a birth
certificate ...

Regards,
JS

On Jan 23, 11:19*pm, John Smith wrote:
On 1/23/2011 8:03 PM, Animal 07 wrote:

...
snicker then feel free to post where in the constitution a "natural
born citizen" is defined as "one born on american soil"

I already did. *Tell you what, ask your local college
history/political/legal scholar if that is correct ... they will set you
straight.

You can call the college, ask the professors hours and office number,
and ask them right from your house.

Anyone who might be swayed by your disinformation, lies, might want to
do that for themselves ...

ONLY A PERSON BORN ON AMERICAN SOIL IS ELIGIBLE FOR PRESIDENTIAL OFFICE.

Nuts like the anal crazed animal are a dime a dozen ...

Regards,
JS

I'm REALLY disturbed by now . By the way, how exactly did you get this
first hand expirience with 'anal crazed animals' ,may I ask ?(!!!)

On 1/23/2011 8:51 PM, harry k wrote:

...
There are a whole bunch of "natural born citizens" born overseas.
Trey reading the entire section of the constitution instead of just he
parts you _wish_ were there.

Harry K

Hairy Kook:

Try to maintain focus, I know your mental condition makes that
difficult, so, one more time, obama has on USA birth certificate, obama
has no other birth certificate showing American birth ... obama was born
in Kenya, Africa ...

Just keep repeating that, eventually, I hope, you will get it ...

Regards,
JS

On 1/23/2011 9:16 PM, Brenda Ann wrote:

...
Our representatives have done little in the history of the country to do
the will of the voters. We have to remember that our form of government
is not the will of the majority, but a way to protect us from the
tyranny of the majority.

The majority of citizens supported the ERA. It was never ratified by the
states. AFAIK, there was NOT widespread public support for prohibition,
nor for presidential term limits, yet those amendments were both
ratified by the state legislatures.



THEN:
"When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people
to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another,
and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal
station to which the laws of nature entitle them, a decent respect for
the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes
which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men and Women were
created equal, that they are naturally endowed with certain unalienable
rights, rights which have been deliberately and repeatedly ignored,
eroded, even destroyed. To re-secure these rights that our forefathers
toiled so hard to create and support, we again state that governments
are created for the people and solely by the consent of the people so
governed. Whenever, such as now, a form of government has become
destructive to these ends, it is OUR RIGHT as citizens, to alter and/or
abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on
the original ideals and ideas from whence this country was first
imagined, then created through sweat, education, imagination,
experience, tears, and toil. Likewise, it becomes our duty as citizens
to strive to improve upon that foundation, eradicating the biases based
on differences of sex, culture, religion, skin color, nationality, and
other individual and groups traits that make individuals who and what
they are. ... "

And, you know the rest of the story ...

If what you say is correct ... and what I am seeing is correct ... it is
time ...

God, Gold, Guns, Food, Shelter, Medical, etc. and let us prepare for our
future ... cowards, queers and lackeys need not apply ...

Regards,
JS

On 1/23/2011 9:25 PM, Brenda Ann wrote:

...
True. Many children are born here in Korea of American parents and they
are full natural born US citizens fully able to run for and become
POTUS. Anyone going to tell our troops that have their kids overseas
that those kids are second or third class citizens?



Anyone going to tell me that the forefathers got it wrong? Anyone
living in the United States who had the best colleges, best roads, best
autos, best educations, best lifes of anyone in the world going to tell
me that the forefathers had it wrong. That this should have been changed?

Anyone telling me that, simply tells me they are an idiot. We don't
need to change the Constitution, the rest of the world needs to adopt
our constitution and have what we have had ...

The rest of the fools are arguing to reduce us to their status ... and
have done NOTHING to improve their status!

Regards,
JS

On 1/23/2011 9:16 PM, Brenda Ann wrote:

...
Our representatives have done little in the history of the country to do
the will of the voters. We have to remember that our form of government
is not the will of the majority, but a way to protect us from the
tyranny of the majority.

The majority of citizens supported the ERA. It was never ratified by the
states. AFAIK, there was NOT widespread public support for prohibition,
nor for presidential term limits, yet those amendments were both
ratified by the state legislatures.



Well, the queers, fruitcakes, and nuts that manage to get public office
need to be hung on the steps of their public offices, and I cite this as
proof:

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.
The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is
wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts
they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,
it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...
And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost
in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is its natural manure." -- Thomas Jefferson

It is time to refresh that tree of liberty ... but then, what have I
been saying?

Regards,
JS

On Jan 23, 11:54*pm, harry k wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:56*pm, wrote:





On Jan 23, 1:20*pm, John Smith wrote:

On 1/23/2011 10:04 AM, dave wrote:

...
Smith;
The Chief Justice administered the Oath of Office twice. There is no
requirement for a "birth certificate" to be president. Have you seen
George W. Bush's?

There is a requirement in the Constitution that a president be a natural
born citizen of the USA -- that means born within the borders of the
USA. *You can only prove this with a birth certificate.

If "they" allowed obama to enter office without confirming that he was
eligible, "they" are criminally negligent in their dutys and oaths to
uphold the Constitution and need to be gone with obama.

This isn't rocket science ... it's the law!

Regards,
JS

" ...or a Citizen of the United States...". *Why do some people read
only small segments of the Constitution and like to twist everything
around ?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Because they know that if they read past the part they like the
constitution would jam itself up their ass.

Harry K- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

From what I just read- it was actually 'anal crazed animals' and no
human part of the body was ever mentioned at all !

On Jan 23, 11:54*pm, John Smith wrote:
On 1/23/2011 8:31 PM, wrote:

...
Maybe the Founding Fathers foresaw 'unnatural births' in their
prophetic minds . Unisex couples having babies ? Who knows .

Fool, they didn't say "natural births!" they said "NATURAL BORN."

Since there was nothing but natural births back then, it is more than
obvious they meant "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN" as opposed to "FOREIGN BORN
CITIZEN."

The first doesn't need to seek citizenship, he/she already has it. *The
FOREIGN BORN CITIZEN has to petition and be granted citizenship ... DUH!

I am afraid you are of an intelligence level that is too low to be of
any value in communicating/debating/arguing/discussing/etc. ANY SUBJECT
WITH!

You need the type of attention only special education could afford you
... especially if you can't understand the above ... goodbye ...

... * * * * * * * * * * * * plonk * * * * * * * * * * * * ...

Regards,
JS

So you finally ADMIT that you lost this NON-argument ! Well, then the
case is considered closed for all intents and purposes , my Beloved
Dear Friend .

On Jan 23, 11:56*pm, harry k wrote:
On Jan 23, 3:47*pm, John Smith wrote:





On 1/23/2011 12:59 PM, wrote:

...
Obviously, some people don't even suspect it.

The argument began on if george had displayed his birth certificate. *I
gave on place, a university in texas, where one could write, email,
visit, request, call, etc. ... a copy of his birth certificate can be
seen ...

I care not where george bush was born, as long as it is within the
borders of the USA ... you can argue state and city ... I have no
interest ... he is not a current president, nor seeking office, nor can
he ever again ... he is a moot point ... but just one of many fools find
to argue ... carry on ...

Regards,
JS

Not to forget that you didn't demand his BC because he was WHITE.

Harry K- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And this is probably so...

On Jan 24, 12:30*am, John Smith wrote:
On 1/23/2011 9:16 PM, Brenda Ann wrote:

...
Our representatives have done little in the history of the country to do
the will of the voters. We have to remember that our form of government
is not the will of the majority, but a way to protect us from the
tyranny of the majority.

The majority of citizens supported the ERA. It was never ratified by the
states. AFAIK, there was NOT widespread public support for prohibition,
nor for presidential term limits, yet those amendments were both
ratified by the state legislatures.

THEN:
"When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people
to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another,
and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal
station to which the laws of nature entitle them, a decent respect for
the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes
which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men and Women were
created equal, that they are naturally endowed with certain unalienable
rights, rights which have been deliberately and repeatedly ignored,
eroded, even destroyed. To re-secure these rights that our forefathers
toiled so hard to create and support, we again state that governments
are created for the people and solely by the consent of the people so
governed. Whenever, such as now, a form of government has become
destructive to these ends, it is OUR RIGHT as citizens, to alter and/or
abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on
the original ideals and ideas from whence this country was first
imagined, then created through sweat, education, imagination,
experience, tears, and toil. Likewise, it becomes our duty as citizens
to strive to improve upon that foundation, eradicating the biases based
on differences of sex, culture, religion, skin color, nationality, and
other individual and groups traits that make individuals who and what
they are. ... "

And, you know the rest of the story ...

If what you say is correct ... and what I am seeing is correct ... it is
time ...

God, Gold, Guns, Food, Shelter, Medical, etc. and let us prepare for our
future ... cowards, queers and lackeys need not apply ...

Regards,
JS

Lately, I've noticed that you are obscessed with guns and gold. Are
you a gold peddler ?