BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 194506 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.

Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#125731 Nov 11, 2012
The Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
You didn't respond to my previous post on this petition.
1) There is no mechanism in place in law for a national recount as voting is administered and controlled by the individual states (remember "states rights"?)
2) There is no evidence of any need to recount - most of the voter suppression was by the Republicans, in fact.
You lost. The America people have spoken. They didn't want Romney and his lies and said so in no uncertain terms.
According to Karl Rove, 332 electoral votes qualifies as a landslide. America WANTS women to be able to make their own choices, and wants blacks, gays and Latinos to be free of the Republican racism.
You lost. Big time. It is over. Done. Give it and form your own political party and try again in 2014 or 2016.
She cannot respond as she is illiterate. She can only cut and paste.
Guru

Canyon Country, CA

#125732 Nov 11, 2012
right out of jacazzez azz...

( CNSNews.com )– It’s Friday morning, and so far today, the Obama administration has posted 165 new regulations and notifications on its reguations.gov website.

In the past 90 days, it has posted 6,125 regulations and notices – an average of 68 a day.

The website allows visitors to find and comment on proposed regulations and related documents published by the U.S. federal government. "Help improve Federal regulations by submitting your comments," the website says.

The thousands of entries run the gamut from meeting notifications to fee schedules to actual rules and proposed rule changes.

In recent days, for example, the EPA posted a proposed rule involving volatile organic compound emissions from architectural coatings:“We are approving a local rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act),” the proposed rule states.“We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.”

Another proposed rule will provide guidance for FDA staff on "enforcement criteria for canned ackee, frozen ackee, and other ackee products that contain hypoglycin A." (Ackee is the national fruit of Jamaica; unripened or inedible portions can be toxic.)

Some of the proposed regulations revise regulations already on the books.

The website also links to a video of a speech President Barack Obama gave at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Washington, D.C. on Feb. 7, 2011, in which the president promised to remove “outdated and unnecessary regulations.”

“I've ordered a government-wide review, and if there are rules on the books that are needlessly stifling job creation and economic growth, we will fix them,” the president said.

A number of groups, including the Competitive Enterprise Institute, expect a rush of new regulations now that President Obama has won a second term:

CEI expects the EPA to move ahead on delayed rules on everything from greenhouse gas emissions to ozone standards.“Rules from the health care bill and the Dodd-Frank financial regulation bill will also likely make themselves known in the weeks to come," the group said on its website."

CNSNews.com is not funded by the government like NPR. CNSNews.com is not funded by the government like PBS.
American Lady

Danville, KY

#125733 Nov 11, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
More plagiarism. More unattributed hogwash. Cite yoir sources, unchristian stealer or words.
When Is It Okay to Disobey?
Catholics and Civil Disobedience

http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/whe...
American Lady

Danville, KY

#125734 Nov 11, 2012
God’s Law Comes First
UninformedOhio Republican

Highland, IN

#125735 Nov 11, 2012
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
And I am sure if you a link to prove that point.
I'm sorry, but what the hell is that?

Is that a statement?

Is it a question?

Can someone please unscrammble Rogue Scholars incomprehensible word jumble into a proper sentence?
American Lady

Danville, KY

#125736 Nov 11, 2012
WAS THE UNITED STATES FOUNDED AS A CHRISTIAN NAT
ION?

Recently, many authors have debated whether or not the United States of America was founded as a Christian nation. I wish to provide a few historical quotes from our Founding Era that lend credence to the supposition that we indeed were founded as a Christian nation.

Granted, God is not mentioned in the Constitution, but He is mentioned in every major document leading up to the final wording of the Constitution. For example, Connecticut is still known as the "Constitution State" because its colonial constitution was used as a model for the United States Constitution. Its first words were: "For as much as it has pleased the almighty God by the wise disposition of His Divine Providence…"

Most of the fifty-five Founding Fathers who worked on the Constitution were members of orthodox Christian churches and many were even evangelical Christians. The first official act in the First Continental Congress was to open in Christian prayer, which ended in these words: "...the merits of Jesus Christ, Thy Son, our Savior. Amen". Sounds Christian to me.

...

It was to keep Government from establishing a 'National Denomination" (like the Church of England). As early as 1799 a court declared: "By our form of government the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed on the same equal footing." Even in the letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Baptists of Danbury Connecticut (from which we derive the term "separation of Church and State") he made it quite clear that the wall of separation was to insure that ********Government would never interfere with religious activities because religious freedom came from God, not from Government.*****

...

Even George Washington who certainly knew the intent of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, since he presided over their formation, said in his "Farewell Address": "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars." Sure doesn't sound like Washington was trying to separate religion and politics.

John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, and one of the three men most responsible for the writing of the Constitution declared:

"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is their duty-as well as privilege and interest- of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." Still sounds like the Founding Fathers knew this was a Christian nation.

...Before that momentous ruling, even the Supreme Court knew that we were a Christian nation. In 1892 the Court stated:

"No purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any legislation, state or national, because this is a religious people...This is a Christian nation." There it is again! From the Supreme Court of the United States. This court went on to cite 87 precedents (prior actions, words, and rulings) to conclude that this was a "Christian nation".

In 1854, the House Judiciary Committee said: "in this age, there is no substitute for Christianity...That was the religion of the founders of the republic, and they expected it to remain the religion of their descendants.'

http://www.afn.org/~govern/Christian_Nation.h...

The Supreme Court's War on God

[the Constitution mandates that the government remain secular]

This is a lie. The Framers of the Constitution intended no such mandate, and never observed any such mandate. Just as all individuals have a duty to worship God, so do nations. America's Founding Fathers honored that duty. The Constitution did not repeal that duty.(The duty to "remain secular," in this particular case, means the duty of the government not to acknowledge Christmas.)

This page traces the Court's war on God.

http://kevincraig.us/EndTheWall/war.htm
America Got Stupid

Louisville, KY

#125737 Nov 11, 2012
UninformedOhio Republican wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry, but what the hell is that?
Is that a statement?
Is it a question?
Can someone please unscrammble Rogue Scholars incomprehensible word jumble into a proper sentence?
This is what I think he meant to say.
And I am sure you have a link to prove that point?
Learn to Read

Elmhurst, IL

#125738 Nov 11, 2012
Guru wrote:
The biggest joke of the day is seeing liberal haters of our county and military come in here praising them and all they do for us.

Put down your drugs and get a life you morons. You are not fooling anyone, especially those who served.
This proclamation from Ragu who regularly acts as if the Constitution were nothing more than generic single-ply?
Learn to Read

Elmhurst, IL

#125739 Nov 11, 2012
Guru wrote:
right out of jacazzez azz...

( CNSNews.com )– It’s Friday morning, and so far today, the Obama administration has posted 165 new regulations and notifications on its reguations.gov website.

In the past 90 days, it has posted 6,125 regulations and notices – an average of 68 a day.

The website allows visitors to find and comment on proposed regulations and related documents published by the U.S. federal government. "Help improve Federal regulations by submitting your comments," the website says.

The thousands of entries run the gamut from meeting notifications to fee schedules to actual rules and proposed rule changes.

In recent days, for example, the EPA posted a proposed rule involving volatile organic compound emissions from architectural coatings:“We are approving a local rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act),” the proposed rule states.“We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.”

Another proposed rule will provide guidance for FDA staff on "enforcement criteria for canned ackee, frozen ackee, and other ackee products that contain hypoglycin A." (Ackee is the national fruit of Jamaica; unripened or inedible portions can be toxic.)

Some of the proposed regulations revise regulations already on the books.

The website also links to a video of a speech President Barack Obama gave at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Washington, D.C. on Feb. 7, 2011, in which the president promised to remove “outdated and unnecessary regulations.”

“I've ordered a government-wide review, and if there are rules on the books that are needlessly stifling job creation and economic growth, we will fix them,” the president said.

A number of groups, including the Competitive Enterprise Institute, expect a rush of new regulations now that President Obama has won a second term:

CEI expects the EPA to move ahead on delayed rules on everything from greenhouse gas emissions to ozone standards.“Rules from the health care bill and the Dodd-Frank financial regulation bill will also likely make themselves known in the weeks to come," the group said on its website."

CNSNews.com is not funded by the government like NPR. CNSNews.com is not funded by the government like PBS.
Complete crapola
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#125740 Nov 11, 2012
Christie-Palin2012 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, but Obama is!
This is christian charity? This is christian love? Going against scripture and judging your brother? And you know what is in his heart? You call yourself a christian?
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#125741 Nov 11, 2012
loose cannon wrote:
Qur'an 8:12
"I will cast teror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"
Intro to Islam
I refer you to Atticus' s bible quotes on massacres of men, women, children and animals. Have you any comments?

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#125742 Nov 11, 2012
America Got Stupid wrote:
<quoted text>
This is what I think he meant to say.
And I am sure you have a link to prove that point?
Who cares?
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#125743 Nov 11, 2012
America Got Stupid wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, that occurred during Bill Clinton's terms.
Remember NAFTA and the CFTT?
NAFTA belongs to conservatives, namely president Reagan and P.M. Mulroney. Signed by Clinton, yes and Chrétien but entirely initiated and approved by Reagan and Mulroney. All Clinton did was sign the treaty. We've discussed this before, Rogue. You were wrong then, and wrong now.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#125744 Nov 11, 2012
American Lady wrote:
"I" am NOT saying to call upon the supreme court!
Hell, I don't EVEN TRUST them anymore!!!!!!!!!
Yes, it is a majority conservative supreme court, no? Can't trust your own people anymore?
Learn to Read

Elmhurst, IL

#125745 Nov 11, 2012
American Lady wrote:
WAS THE UNITED STATES FOUNDED AS A CHRISTIAN NAT
ION?
No - but it should come as no surprise that Birfoons also would claim that all early references to religion must have meant their own personal sect
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#125746 Nov 11, 2012
Johannes wrote:
<quoted text>
DUH!!! This isn't a dem or repub thing, it's a problem with America in general.
Since you want to blame it on Clinton....talks for NAFTA began in 1986 and the final document was signed by GHW BUSH!!!!!!
Look who the dumb one is now!
I stand corrected. I wrote that Clinton signed it a minute ago. Thank you. Makes Rogue even "wronger" ha ha.

Here is how LRS or GB or Guru would have replied if corrected like I was. Dunmbazzbastard dumbazzbitch GFY, you're not American ... ha ha
Guru

Canyon Country, CA

#125747 Nov 11, 2012
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Complete crapola
Complete MSM. The only shit in here is you pal. Get a life!
Guru

Canyon Country, CA

#125748 Nov 11, 2012
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
This proclamation from Ragu who regularly acts as if the Constitution were nothing more than generic single-ply?
...your cowardly leader called on our Military to get Osama, and they responded.

When our guys were begging for support and help at Benghazi obama said "let them die" and did nothing. He went to Vegas to campaign while refusing to do one damn thing. Then he and his corrupt fools threw this election by getting 147% of the votes in the swing states, which is impossible.

And you support him.

obama is a liar and a coward, and so are you.

Too bad you never served or even tried. Anything you post in here is as hollow as you are. Unfortunately we have to protect azzholes and POS like you. Don't worry. Change is coming soon. We'll see what you think and say then.
American Lady

Danville, KY

#125749 Nov 11, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, it is a majority conservative supreme court, no? Can't trust your own people anymore?
The Supreme Court's War on God
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#125750 Nov 11, 2012
Christie-Palin2012 wrote:
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you know that ALL SOUTHERN REPUBLICANS in both House and Senate voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
And did you know that a larger percentage of NORTHERN REPUBLICANS (16%) in the House voted AGAINST the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than NORTHERN DEMORACTS (2%)?
<quoted text>
According to Mr. Finch, there are 11 Southern States and 39 Northern States. Ah, Mr Finch, California is NOT a Southern State. Nor is Arizona, New Mexico, etc., etc., etc.!
Rogue tends to get mixed up with his cardinal points. One wonders how he never got lost piloting that helicopter of his. Oh, even if all those southern states were, as he says, southern states, which most are not, the house and senate votes that he quoted would still come out 3-1 in favour of democrats. Poor rogue, must be barred again, is using his pink thigh leopard skin panther moniker, whoooo whoooo whoooo, check it out guys. Watch out for patriot warrior LRS, Rogue, ha ha.

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 Darren Wilson is ... 1,263,311
Fun Song Combos (Sep '12) 9 min boundary painter 454
abby7-31-15 35 min RACE 3
Ask Amy July 31 47 min Mister Tonka 3
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 56 min Brian_G 54,351
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 1 hr Mister Tonka 100,297
Amy 7-30-15 1 hr PEllen 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages