BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting Obama's citizen...

There are 241631 comments on the Chicago Tribune story from Jan 8, 2009, titled BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting Obama's citizen.... In it, Chicago Tribune reports that:

The U.S. Supreme Court will consider Friday whether to take up a lawsuit challenging President-elect Barack Obama 's U.S. citizenship, a continuation of a New Jersey case embraced by some opponents of Obama's ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chicago Tribune.

Guru

Canyon Country, CA

#121094 Oct 28, 2012
Noway Duh wrote:
Well no wonder Oblama can't balance the budget or figure out you can't spend more than you have, he told late night talk show host his math skills are not not much higher than a 7th grader! LOL! He says his daughter is smarter than him in math! What? This is the knucklehead you loony left have hung your hat on to fix the economy! And boy has he fixed it, he spent twice as much in half the amount of time than Bush did with an even bleak economy! So glad we have a 7th grader running our country! OMG!
things like this tell me that obama is an absolute idiot. What president would ever say that when he is telling the USA that his budget is the path forward? obama is the biggest fraud and is so stupid it is amazing.. All he is is a carnival barker and a moron. He has no vital records, documents, degrees, or anything else in my opinion. His documents that Arpaio looked at are complete and comical forgeries. So is he, and he just proved it here.

8 more days and we are rid of this fool.
Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#121095 Oct 28, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
And the Associated Press throws out the RACE CARD!, Ah, AP, why did Obama get voted in four years ago? Because he was BLACK! And why will he lose this election? Because he is not worth a sh*t!!!
AP poll: Majority harbor prejudice against blacks
By JENNIFER AGIESTA and SONYA ROSS | Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP)— Racial attitudes have not improved in the four years since the United States elected its first black president, an Associated Press poll finds, as a slight majority of Americans now express prejudice toward blacks whether they recognize those feelings or not.
Those views could cost President Barack Obama votes as he tries for re-election, the survey found, though the effects are mitigated by some people's more favorable views of blacks.
http://news.yahoo.com/ap-poll-majority-harbor...
Obama won in 2008 because of the economy and because of general dislike of George Bush and his actions over the time that he was in office, and because the Republican candidate that year was John McCain.
Jack

North Creek, NY

#121096 Oct 28, 2012
Look at these poll numbers More reublican lies.

"The Hoyt Comany Polled 1000 NY residents at random. The New Yorkers polled were all from diffent areas of NY. 36% stated they will vote For Obama. 37% stated they were Casting their vote for Romney. 21 % stated they were undecided. 4% stated they were not voteing due to lack of faith in either campain. 2% said they were unable to vote as they were not US citizens."

You all best get on the Obama Wagon it is here to stay and if you don't like it too bad Leave the usa. If your aginst Obama you should be put in a labor camp. Morons should be fixed so they can not have more Idiot republican childern. Only the Dem Party knows whats best for everyone. You all need to be controled and you so called rights taken away as you are a menace to the USA.
Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#121097 Oct 28, 2012
SHEEPLE Buster wrote:
SHEEPLE ask, why doesn't Romney show his college transcripts or his passport records?
The answer is, There is NO CONTROVERSY concerning Mitt Romney's college transcripts or his passport records.
There IS controversy pertaining to both Obama's college transcripts and his passport records.
NEXT!
Oh, and about those tax returns, Romney said for you to GFY!
He doesn't have to show you shit and he is not going to.
Oh, he said for you to thank Obama for him, since Obama made it possible for him to tell you that.
There is exactly as much controversy about Mitt Romney's college transcripts and passport records as about Obama's college transcripts and passport records. Exactly as much. The only controversy about Obama's records of any kind comes from Obama's enemies, and the only controversy about Mitt Romney's records comes from his enemies. Mitt Romney has not showed his school transcripts, college transcripts, graduate school transcripts or passport records---why is he hiding them?

He does not, of course, have to show ten years of his tax records, but then his father did show ten years of his tax records, and George Bush showed eight years.(Mitt showed only two years.) Why is he hiding all the other years?

I do not doubt that everything that Romney did on his taxes was completely legal. But I bet he took some very questionable deductions, such as listing as a business expense a dancing horse. Yes, of course a dancing horse could be a business expense, but if the family got amusement and pleasure out of raising that horse, which it did, it was a hobby and not deductible.
Guru

Canyon Country, CA

#121098 Oct 28, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
There is exactly as much controversy about Mitt Romney's college transcripts and passport records as about Obama's college transcripts and passport records. Exactly as much. The only controversy about Obama's records of any kind comes from Obama's enemies, and the only controversy about Mitt Romney's records comes from his enemies. Mitt Romney has not showed his school transcripts, college transcripts, graduate school transcripts or passport records---why is he hiding them?
He does not, of course, have to show ten years of his tax records, but then his father did show ten years of his tax records, and George Bush showed eight years.(Mitt showed only two years.) Why is he hiding all the other years?
I do not doubt that everything that Romney did on his taxes was completely legal. But I bet he took some very questionable deductions, such as listing as a business expense a dancing horse. Yes, of course a dancing horse could be a business expense, but if the family got amusement and pleasure out of raising that horse, which it did, it was a hobby and not deductible.
....got news for you bozo...my accountant used to write off his racehorses in 2 years, The entire thing. He could shelter tons of income and it didn't matter if they ever won a race. It was 100% IRS-approved legal.

Don't like it? Move to Kenya. And take obama with you.
Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#121099 Oct 28, 2012
Guru wrote:
<quoted text>
....got news for you bozo...my accountant used to write off his racehorses in 2 years, The entire thing. He could shelter tons of income and it didn't matter if they ever won a race. It was 100% IRS-approved legal.
Don't like it? Move to Kenya. And take obama with you.
For your accountant it might be legal since he might be able to prove that he was attempting to make money. But for people who raise horses because they like them as pets or to ride as a hobby, it is not legal. Business expenses == legal. Hobbies = not legal.

Don't like it? Move to Bhutan.
Guru

Canyon Country, CA

#121100 Oct 28, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama won in 2008 because of the economy and because of general dislike of George Bush and his actions over the time that he was in office, and because the Republican candidate that year was John McCain.
GREAT POST!

ROMNEY WILL WIN BIG...

"Madonna booed after touting Obama during Concert..."
SHEEPLE Buster

Louisville, KY

#121101 Oct 28, 2012
SHEEPLE, have you got the memo yet?
It is now time to change your hope!
Only 9 more days to go before the usurper gets his pink slip.
Guru

Canyon Country, CA

#121102 Oct 28, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
For your accountant it might be legal since he might be able to prove that he was attempting to make money. But for people who raise horses because they like them as pets or to ride as a hobby, it is not legal. Business expenses == legal. Hobbies = not legal.
Don't like it? Move to Bhutan.
...where is it?
Guru

Canyon Country, CA

#121103 Oct 28, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
For your accountant it might be legal since he might be able to prove that he was attempting to make money. But for people who raise horses because they like them as pets or to ride as a hobby, it is not legal. Business expenses == legal. Hobbies = not legal.
Don't like it? Move to Bhutan.
no kidding....duhhhh

for your info Bozo...Mitt had show horses FOR MONEY! Therwfore it IS a writeoff as it is a business.

...maybe you could train a rat or two.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#121104 Oct 28, 2012
This is from one of my cousins who was a graduate of The Army War College. Let's just say he IS smarter than I am!

Obama’s October Surprise

First of all nothing would surprise me about Obama. I think he is a very narcissistic delusional individual who is incapable of looking at world events in a rational manner. Everything must revolve around him and must turnout exactly as he wanted. If they don’t then he ignores reality and looks through his rose colored glasses. How else can you explain any of his comments on the Arab Spring, Russia, or the economy? I never listen to him speak because he is smooth but vague. Reading his speeches and comparing the different paragraphs puts his comments in an entirely different perspective. What he says in one section is countered, very cleverly in the next. Add in the applause lines and the background noise and you will only be left with what YOU wanted to hear. He is a master at convincing most everyone in the audience that he is on their side.

Now I hope I do not bore you with details but I think they are important to understanding the issue. The problem is a dysfunctional Interagency System. The first Presidential Policy Directive that each president signs organizes the National Security Council, the organization responsible for coordinating Department positions into a workable solution. Obama signed PPD 1, Organization of the National Security Council System on February 13, 2009. The important part of that document is the identification of the members of the Principals Committee (NSC/PC), they are the key players. It also designates the National Security Adviser as the Chair. That is the most important point to remember because the National Security Adviser is the direct link to the president. If the president does not know what is happening either he does not care, his National Security Adviser is not telling him or the President’s Chief of Staff is not doing his job. I think the issue is Obama! Under Obama’s PPD the regular members of the NSC/PC are: SecState, SecTreas, SecDef, Attorney General, SecEnergy, SecHomeland Security, Dir Office of Management and Budget (OMB), US Rep to UN, Chief of Staff to President, Dir National Intelligence, and the Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS).[The CJCS is a very weak link in the chain – Gen Dempsey, should be relieved] Note that the Director CIA is not there – he is a secondary player. The Homeland Security Law established the position of Director of National Intelligence who is senior to CIA Dir.[Dir of Nat’l Intel should also be relieved – he is the guy who told Congress that the Muslim Brotherhood was a democratic leaning secular organization]. There is one additional comment in the PPD that is extremely important:“When homeland security or counter-terrorism related issues are on the agenda, the NSC/PC’s regular attendees will include the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counter-Terrorism, who, at the discretion of the National Security Adviser, may serve as chair”. Where was he during this event?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#121105 Oct 28, 2012
The dysfunction starts at the top. I call it dysfunction because it cannot be mismanagement. Mismanagement can only occur when something is being managed, and I don’t believe there is any coherent management at the Presidential level. I say that because Obama has missed over 40% of the Presidential Daily Briefs. Every night the NSC staff prepares a daily brief for the president on any important activities that have occurred in the previous 24 hours. That item is usually the first thing on the president’s daily schedule. Under Bush the briefing was 7am daily. Obama, when he does get briefed is at 9:30 am. Not getting briefed, or not getting briefed as the first item of presidential business, sends a very clear signal to the NSC staff – their work is not that important. Once people discover that their work is not a priority they get complacent – standard attitude in any organization, civilian or military,- why waste your time when the “boss” doesn’t care? That, to me is the most important part of the whole discussion.

Now for specifics. One of the most asked questions is, where were the Marines? The answer is simple – they were on their ships. We (USA) always (365 days a year) have Marine units deployed as immediate reaction forces. One of their missions is non-combatant evacuations. The terminology may have changed, but the concept is the same. Marine units are deployed as reinforced infantry battalions, or reinforced brigades. Each organization has its own small engineer, artillery, tank support along with enough helicopters and amphibious vehicles to make on over the beach assault if necessary. The question then becomes, why were they not on station prepared to evacuate our people or if they were on station why did they not act? There was plenty of time to reposition the Marines based on the requests for additional support coming from our diplomats. There is no logical reason for not attempting an evacuation if the Marines were in the proper position. The requests coming into the State Department should have been a discussion item at the NSC. The first issue to be answered would be to increase the local security. The problem there is that with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989 Congress got excited about spending the “peace dividend” and started cutting budgets. One of the budgets cut was the Dept of State Security Service (DSSS). That left only one option, if areas needed additional security it would have to be contract work (civilian hired guns). In order to get Stevens the support he wanted there would have to have been a shifting of already deployed “guns” from one area to another or more money to hire more “guns”. It appears to me that either the State Department failed to make the case for more contractors and a repositioning of Marine units or the NSC did not see the issue as a priority. The JCS would be derelict if they knew about the issue and failed to make a recommendation on repositioning naval assets. The Dir Nat’l Intel should be fired for failing to understand the dynamics of the situation and not presenting a clear case for preparations in the event the situation turned bad.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#121106 Oct 28, 2012
The second issue is why was the CIA ordered to stand down? That is the easier question to answer. We have spent years rebuilding our human intelligence assets after the Church Commission (Senator Church) hearings in the 1970s or early 1980s. Senator Church was upset because our CIA guys were working with less then honorable people overseas and the results were restrictions on who we could recruit as foreign assets. If a CIA operative was discovered to be working with someone who may have violated the law it could cost the agent his career. The CIA can only operate overseas so we weren’t talking about US criminals. Stop and think about what Congress did (example using US in place of a foreign country): if you wanted to break a prostitution ring you would lose your job if you dealt with prostitutes so it was safer, career wise, to stakeout convents. We quickly lost all of our foreign Intel capability and had to wait for the CIA rules to change before we could rebuild our capability. Now that we are trying to recruit foreign sources we must protect our own from getting captured so they can’t be tortured into identifying who their contacts were. Once the situation turns bad it is best to get our assets and their contacts, if possible out of the area. After spending years building our human Intel capability Obama blew-up the whole program after bin laden’s death. In his quest for glory, Obama identified our in-country source. That source is now in a Pakistan jail and you can bet that nobody overseas is volunteering to help us knowing they may be publicly identified. As a matter of record, Executive Order 12333 prohibits assassination. The president can get around that prohibition by signing a “finding”, a classified document that outlines exactly why the individual must be eliminated. Bush signed the “finding” immediately after the September 11 attack and ordered the CIA to use all assets to find bin laden. The only thing Obama did was say yes after our guys found him. Contrary to his delusional mind he was not responsible for anything except being in the Oval Office at the right time. Obama now has publicly announced that he reviews the “kill list” weekly and gives it his personal approval. That is a direct violation of EO 12333 and also the sign of a very sick individual. I don’t know of anyone who seeks glory in killing, regardless of the circumstances.

The final point I want to make is that there is NO JUSTIFIABLE REASON for Obama or any of the NSC/PC not knowing immediately about the attack on our diplomats. We had a drone with a live feed, that issue has been verified. What has also been verified is the fact that Obama was more interested in flying to Las Vegas for a fund raising event. That set the tone for everything that happened or did not happen in DC. Then it simply became a case of CYA that quickly turned against the Administration.

IF THE BOSS DOES NOT CARE, WHO DOES???

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#121108 Oct 28, 2012
PS: There may be some validity to the conspiracy issues. I know Obama is good at withholding information, but I am not sure he is capable of organizing anything as complicated as Stevens capture. Maybe he could do it in Chicago, but overseas I doubt it.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#121109 Oct 28, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama won in 2008 because of the economy and because of general dislike of George Bush and his actions over the time that he was in office, and because the Republican candidate that year was John McCain.
Not totally correct. The Conservatives were not happy with Bush fiscal policies and we did not trust McCain either so the Conservative base did not turn out.
But now we have someone we can trust will get our country's fiscal policies under control and while the Conservative base will turn out this year it does not look like the the Liberal base will turn out for Obama!
It is all in the TEA Party leaves, Romney will win in 2012!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#121110 Oct 28, 2012
Jack wrote:
Look at these poll numbers More reublican lies.
"The Hoyt Comany Polled 1000 NY residents at random. The New Yorkers polled were all from diffent areas of NY. 36% stated they will vote For Obama. 37% stated they were Casting their vote for Romney. 21 % stated they were undecided. 4% stated they were not voteing due to lack of faith in either campain. 2% said they were unable to vote as they were not US citizens."
You all best get on the Obama Wagon it is here to stay and if you don't like it too bad Leave the usa. If your aginst Obama you should be put in a labor camp. Morons should be fixed so they can not have more Idiot republican childern. Only the Dem Party knows whats best for everyone. You all need to be controled and you so called rights taken away as you are a menace to the USA.
Well, that is just the state of NEW YORK and thank God they do not speak for the rest of the country.
Oh, if New York gets shut down for a week because of the storm, they will run out of food in 3-4 days and then what? RIOTS!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#121111 Oct 28, 2012
A lot of people have no idea what the power of starvation has. Just look at the French Revolution of 1789. It was a famine that caused the revolution.
Sure, the people were very unhappy with the royals but when Marie Antoinette said, "Let them eat cake", they cut her head off!
If New York City and Long Island get cut off from this storm and they do not start getting more food into the islands, the politicians will understand the power of starvation!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#121112 Oct 28, 2012
stanky wrote:
i just ate my own excrement
And if New York gets shut in due to the storm, every New Yorker will be doing the same.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#121113 Oct 28, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well Wojo, here is ANOTHER video. Where are YOUR videos???
Romney/Ryan Sign Vandalism - Incident #1
http://www.youtube.com/watch ...
Hmmm black people again!
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Rouge cannot resist the race card.
What part of "No party has cornered the market on nutballs or jackasses" do you not comprehend?
And Rouge doesn't hesitate to make a racist comment, "black people again." Sad.
Just how did I play the race card? The first several videos of people vandalizing political signs just happen to be .... black. Oh, eye nose, yow ain't supposes ta mention da color of thar skin.
Oh, the case where some people were vandalizing an Obama sign I was quick to point out they were WHITE people and the victim was BLACK!!!
Post 121541;
Okay Wojo, I found ONE. Yes, I am an equal opportunity finger pointer!!! I hope they catch the WHITE guys who beat on the BLACK guy!!!
Lubbock sign vandals caught red-handed
http://www.youtube.com/watch ...
Now, this post was a few after your post but as everyone on this forum knows is that I am fair and balanced and I am quick to point out problem from the right.
But the facts are overwhelming that the vast majority of political crimes are committed by the LEFT!!!
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#121114 Oct 28, 2012
Guru wrote:
<quoted text>
...where is it?
What a surprise.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min RoxLo 1,548,803
Illinois is in critical financial crisis. 46 min Genl Forrest 13
Why are White men obsessed with Latina women? (Feb '10) 4 hr StupidGringos 205
Dissolving Illinois 7 hr De Bow 9
Italian Confessional 8 hr Fr Charlie Sheen 4
____ POPE & ISRAEL Agreement :: *7 YR TRIB ____ 9 hr NewsJune2017 YTube 1
Good R ox y, m-arijuana,t-ar,he-roin etc 11 hr Cadode 2

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages