RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Real0ne -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 8:47:50 AM)

I told you that you do not have enough shit to throw at the wall to get anything to stick.

I am waiting for the case law ANYTHING for you to provide that supports even one fucking claim you made. None out there and I have STANDING LAW, you have ZIPPO! LMAO

You cannot make the claim you make without the assumption the USC trumps the SAL yet you continue on your bogus assumptions as usual.

quote:

Now in the case of where there was no law before it is called a new law. If it changes (and that includes completely throwing out the old law and REVISING the law) it becomes part of the USC. Now, in the case of the Volstead act (an amendment to the constitution) if you drank the day before you were good to go, if you drank after its passage, ratification and signing into law, well then you were in violation (no expost facto to it you see) later this amendment was done in, and no law replaced it. We call that REPEALED.


only a shit house lawyer (or judge) would call that repealed as it violates the very foundational principles of this government.

If that were the case there would be no need to EVER repeal ANYTHING, and we could make any fucking assumptions we wanted.

I have already posted umteen fucking cases from the supreme court acknowledging english common law in this country in even the late 1900's that you and your ilk pejoratively claim is not relevant law because you as usual think its been "repealed"! LMAO

Suck my case law! LOL

For the 3rd time I accept your concession LOL








Real0ne -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 8:50:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:


City codei hasn't anything to do with the discussion of the USC, you see, we have another thing you are not aware of. local governments.


Ya can't blame him for that Ron. He's a Cheeser (wisconsin).... His governor has suspended local governments because they disagreed with him and he found that inconvenient.




just think he will go down in history as another abe lincoln or fdr!




SoftBonds -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 9:02:13 AM)

Being the last poster does not make you the "winner" of the thread, it means that you have made your lack of willingness to listen or learn so clear that no one is willing to bother any longer...




mnottertail -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 9:15:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

I told you that you do not have enough shit to throw at the wall to get anything to stick.

I am waiting for the case law ANYTHING for you to provide that supports even one fucking claim you made. None out there and I have STANDING LAW, you have ZIPPO! LMAO

You cannot make the claim you make without the assumption the USC trumps the SAL yet you continue on your bogus assumptions as usual.

quote:

Now in the case of where there was no law before it is called a new law. If it changes (and that includes completely throwing out the old law and REVISING the law) it becomes part of the USC. Now, in the case of the Volstead act (an amendment to the constitution) if you drank the day before you were good to go, if you drank after its passage, ratification and signing into law, well then you were in violation (no expost facto to it you see) later this amendment was done in, and no law replaced it. We call that REPEALED.


only a shit house lawyer (or judge) would call that repealed as it violates the very foundational principles of this government.

If that were the case there would be no need to EVER repeal ANYTHING, and we could make any fucking assumptions we wanted.

I have already posted umteen fucking cases from the supreme court acknowledging english common law in this country in even the late 1900's that you and your ilk pejoratively claim is not relevant law because you as usual think its been "repealed"! LMAO

Suck my case law! LOL

For the 3rd time I accept your concession LOL







I think this is why you post stuff about provosts and some guy who wrote a hawaiian constitution and being 120 years old is your good friend and other such stuff. You have a problem with the law, I grant you that, you make these plainly futile, and incorrect arguments that are prima facie untenable and lawless.

You could perhaps save yourself by writing a cogent dissertation on how the Volstead act was not repealed, as you seem to be claiming it isn't, and perhaps you could speak sensibly on the violation of that foundational principle of this government.  Because I have some concerns that the 21st amendment to our constitution, that repeals the 18th would be in violation of your notion of the law. 

Why give you caselaw, you don't understand the law, there is nothing to gain by it.

You quote 8 USC from the 1960's (another birther thread), when it was convienient to your laughably invalid arguement. but refuse to admit that there is 8 USC in force TODAY as law of the land, you don't know what expost facto is, or obiter dicta, or statutes at large, you don't even know that the REASON George Washington is referred to as the father of our country is that he presided over the constitutional congress and was the first signatory of said document.

And you, with this pangyric of useless bumptuous meandering would lecture me in law?

Prolly not, stick with cheesehead law, and making the toilet swill you call beer.

It is Wisconsin's forte.  They have nothing else.

I see you got nothing, as per usual.
 




Real0ne -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 9:21:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SoftBonds

Being the last poster does not make you the "winner" of the thread, it means that you have made your lack of willingness to listen or learn so clear that no one is willing to bother any longer...



sorry but I am not the one in denial here. I bitch about the gubafia all the time, its not because I agree with it obviously, but neither am I in denial or swayed by bullshit opinions over the letter of the law. That which I am the only one here who has provided.






On the contrary it spells it out with black ink on white paper, your opinion is worthless unless you can show it in law. In fact you all can go on a ride up da nile for all I give a shit, if you do not like the law fucking change it! Just because you all want to make it a political football changes not a damn thing! Until then its the law that has no known repeal so therefore it stands.



[image]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/blacks/NaturalizationLaw18021.jpg[/image]

[image]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/blacks/NaturalizationLaw18022.jpg[/image]

[image]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/blacks/NaturalizationLaw18023.jpg[/image]


if you dont fucking like it change it. I am only one damn person maybe if enough of you all bitch something will be done but I doubt it because its tied into treaties with other countries so good luck with that!




mnottertail -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 9:28:03 AM)

http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&source=hp&q=2+stat+153+repealed&pbx=1&oq=2+stat+153+repealed&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=3&gs_upl=4343l6468l0l6671l9l9l0l0l0l0l265l1594l0.7.2l9l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=dc5bf5ac59ed8e47&biw=800&bih=419

http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/doit/archives/natinfo.htm

so repealed, and artifacts transferred to 8 USC.  No magic words to get you out of it.

We didn't like it, we did change it.




SoftBonds -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 9:29:01 AM)

Realone, I quoted the 1790 law, which is the only one that applies.
I posted an explaination of Ex Post Facto, since you kept talking about that.
I got tired of pointing out that there is not one, not 3, not 5, but a multitude of legal explainations for why even if Obama wasn't born in the US, he could still be president. And that is before two other issues:
1. occam's razor, which is more likely, that a huge conspiricy was hatched 40-some years ago to change birth records solely so that Obama could one day run for pres (since his US citizenship was assured by his mother's nationality), or that he was actually born in Hawaii, and the folks who say otherwise are full of it?
2. who cares? The majority has spoken, and will soon speak again. When I was 25 I joked about running for president and challenging the constitutionality of the constitution to get on the ballot. Silly of me, but ultimately, you have to look at the intent of the founders. They didn't want a president who was influenced by foreign loyalty. AKA, if the king of England ran for president of the US, he might try to re-unify the British Empire. Personally, I don't see any problem with Arnold running for President of the US, all we would need is a constitutional amendment. But for Obama... sheesh, standing, lack of proof, and the sheer silliness.
Volume may win arguements, but it will not win converts.




Real0ne -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 9:37:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
Why give you caselaw, you don't understand the law, there is nothing to gain by it.

No need to, since the gubafia operates on your fucked up opinions! LOL


You quote 8 USC from the 1960's (another birther thread), when it was convienient to your laughably invalid arguement. but refuse to admit that there is 8 USC in force TODAY as law of the land, you don't know what expost facto is, or obiter dicta, or statutes at large, you don't even know that the REASON George Washington is referred to as the father of our country is that he presided over the constitutional congress and was the first signatory of said document.

again you fail to make proper distinctions and throw everything into one bucket, the result being shit in shit out, and I certainly am not going to teach you everything from the ground up. Go to a con law school.


yawn

 



read the section on rights that I posted a page or 2 ago, that is a good place to start understanding the word "distinction" and talk ta me in another 10 years.




Real0ne -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 9:43:25 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SoftBonds

Realone, I quoted the 1790 law, which is the only one that applies. [the 1802 repealed most if not all of that LOL]
I posted an explaination of Ex Post Facto, since you kept talking about that. [epost facto include retroactive and retrospect, again you miss the point]
I got tired of pointing out that there is not one, not 3, not 5, but a multitude of legal explainations for why even if Obama wasn't born in the US, he could still be president. And that is before two other issues:
1. occam's razor, which is more likely, that a huge conspiricy was hatched 40-some years ago to change birth records solely so that Obama could one day run for pres (since his US citizenship was assured by his mother's nationality), or that he was actually born in Hawaii, and the folks who say otherwise are full of it?
occams razor? definition, "reduce to the level of complete idiocy such that the merits may never be derived] whiich is exactly how these cazes have been handled!

that and occams was created to reference scientific understanding of matters empirical



2. who cares? <--nuff said The majority has spoken, and will soon speak again. When I was 25 I joked about running for president and challenging the constitutionality of the constitution to get on the ballot. Silly of me, but ultimately, you have to look at the intent of the founders. They didn't want a president who was influenced by foreign loyalty. AKA, if the king of England ran for president of the US, he might try to re-unify the British Empire.

and obama has a british daddy! imagine that


Personally, I don't see any problem with Arnold running for President of the US, all we would need is a constitutional amendment. But for Obama... sheesh, standing, lack of proof, and the sheer silliness.
Volume may win arguements, but it will not win converts.


and the framers would have hung you




mnottertail -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 9:49:58 AM)

You are going to be worse off than you are now, since you seem to understand less law day by day.

One only need view current law, and caselaw and see that you are absolutley without any foundation whatsoever.

So, by example here you go, pull up 2 USC 153 and show me that crap there, if it is in force.

And you can't because it isn't, it only exists as a curiosity. 




mnottertail -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 9:51:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: SoftBonds

Realone, I quoted the 1790 law, which is the only one that applies. [the 1802 repealed most if not all of that LOL]
I posted an explaination of Ex Post Facto, since you kept talking about that. [epost facto include retroactive and retrospect, again you miss the point]
I got tired of pointing out that there is not one, not 3, not 5, but a multitude of legal explainations for why even if Obama wasn't born in the US, he could still be president. And that is before two other issues:
1. occam's razor, which is more likely, that a huge conspiricy was hatched 40-some years ago to change birth records solely so that Obama could one day run for pres (since his US citizenship was assured by his mother's nationality), or that he was actually born in Hawaii, and the folks who say otherwise are full of it?
occams razor? definition, "reduce to the level of complete idiocy such that the merits may never be derived] whiich is exactly how these cazes have been handled!

that and occams was created to reference scientific understanding of matters empirical



2. who cares? <--nuff said The majority has spoken, and will soon speak again. When I was 25 I joked about running for president and challenging the constitutionality of the constitution to get on the ballot. Silly of me, but ultimately, you have to look at the intent of the founders. They didn't want a president who was influenced by foreign loyalty. AKA, if the king of England ran for president of the US, he might try to re-unify the British Empire.

and obama has a british daddy! imagine that


Personally, I don't see any problem with Arnold running for President of the US, all we would need is a constitutional amendment. But for Obama... sheesh, standing, lack of proof, and the sheer silliness.
Volume may win arguements, but it will not win converts.


and the framers would have hung you



You know this how?  Voices in your head, or?




Real0ne -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 9:59:45 AM)

yeh well lots of shit is in "FORCE".

you stated that word correctly.

they actually foreclosed on a guys house in this wonderful state over unpaid parking tickets! It was all over the news.

FORCE last time I checked does not come under the intent of the framers and certrainly does not come under "legitimate" government. It comes under tyanny and despotism known as the deMOBcratic gubafia.

read it and weap, truer words have never been spoken

quote:


But there’s a reason. There’s a reason. There’s a reason for this, there’s a reason education SUCKS, and it’s the same reason it will never, ever, EVER be fixed.

It’s never going to get any better, don’t look for it, be happy with what you’ve got.

Because the owners, the owners of this country don't want that. I'm talking about the real owners now, the BIG owners! The Wealthy… the REAL owners! The big wealthy business interests that control things and make all the important decisions.

Forget the politicians. They are irrelevant. The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice. You don't. You have no choice! You have OWNERS! They OWN YOU. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They’ve long since bought, and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the state houses, the city halls, they got the judges in their back pockets and they own all the big media companies, so they control just about all of the news and information you get to hear. They got you by the balls.

They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying, lobbying, to get what they want. Well, we know what they want. They want more for themselves and less for everybody else, but I'll tell you what they don’t want:

They don’t want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don’t want well informed, well educated people capable of critical thinking. They’re not interested in that. That doesn’t help them. Thats against their interests.

Thats right. They don’t want people who are smart enough to sit around a kitchen table and think about how badly they’re getting fucked by a system that threw them overboard 30 fucking years ago. They don’t want that!

You know what they want? They want obedient workers. Obedient workers, people who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork. And just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shitty jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, the reduced benefits, the end of overtime and vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it, and now they’re coming for your Social Security money. They want your retirement money. They want it back so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street, and you know something? They’ll get it. They’ll get it all from you sooner or later cause they own this fucking place! Its a big club, and you ain’t in it! You, and I, are not in the big club.

By the way, its the same big club they use to beat you over the head with all day long when they tell you what to believe. All day long beating you over the head with their media telling you what to believe, what to think and what to buy. The table has tilted folks. The game is rigged and nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care! Good honest hard-working people; white collar, blue collar it doesn’t matter what color shirt you have on. Good honest hard-working people continue, these are people of modest means, continue to elect these rich cock suckers who don’t give a fuck about you….they don’t give a fuck about you… they don’t give a FUCK about you.

They don’t care about you at all… at all… AT ALL. And nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care. Thats what the owners count on. The fact that Americans will probably remain willfully ignorant of the big red, white and blue dick thats being jammed up their assholes everyday, because the owners of this country know the truth.


Its called the American Dream,because you have to be asleep to believe it.



Read more: http://shoqvalue.com/george-carlin-on-the-american-dream-with-transcript#ixzz1nkDMN6mT






mnottertail -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 10:02:28 AM)

Yeah, and thats obamas birth certificate the short course then.




Real0ne -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 10:08:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Yeah, and thats obamas birth certificate the short course then.



its not material forensic evidence, it has no value beyond prima facia, which is the method used by the courts and scumbag attorneys today to bury discivery into the merits of literally anything to do with dissent.





Real0ne -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 10:15:04 AM)

if you REALLY wanna have fun lets make another thread and have a discussion about where they derive their authority to claim sovereignty over you and I. Oh "with bona fide validation in law". LOL

good luck with that one as well.




mnottertail -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 10:15:13 AM)

Yeah, that and that and laws that are repealed sorta get in the way too.

Obama is legal, end of joke.  




Real0ne -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 10:26:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Yeah, that and that and laws that are repealed sorta get in the way too.

Obama is legal, end of joke.  



only as a result of your lack of understanding in law. not to fear, law reviews will come out in another 50 years pointing that out criticizing how ignorant we are. same shit different day. government by mass legal ignorance.

You are one of the people who think the treaty of 1783 freed america from england when that same treaty dictated by the king created canada.

with that kind of cypherin I will take a monarch over the people any fucking day!




mnottertail -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 10:31:11 AM)

Oh, I am not at all afraid of law reviews 50 years hence, or repealed laws 110 years past.

My understanding is excellent.  




SoftBonds -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 10:40:39 AM)

Just to clarify the birther positions thus far:
1. A woman does not have the same right to grant citizenship to her children that a man does.
2. A black man does not have the right to be president, as the possiblity was not envisioned by the founders (therefore I suppose a woman can't be president either?)
And just to belabor point 1. Is this because woman is less likely to know the child is hers??? For that matter, if I am reading the arguement correctly, if a Female US officer is serving overseas while pregnant, and she declines to disclose the father, then her child will not be eligible to become president because she put her military service first?
Shitting on Women's rights, African American rights, and the MILITARY, all to try to argue that Obama can't be prez...
People, I give you the Birthers...




Real0ne -> RE: The newest wrinkle from the Birther front (2/28/2012 4:01:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Oh, I am not at all afraid of law reviews 50 years hence, or repealed laws 110 years past.

My understanding is excellent.  


the 8th wonder of the world!





Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875