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

There are 240942 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.

The Truth

Minneapolis, MN

#126160 Nov 12, 2012
Mourning in America

By now, most of you have probably seen the Tumblr page entirely dedicated to pictures of white people mourning the Republican defeat last Tuesday.

I realize how easy it is to make fun of those people (our those people), but for me the images posted there call up -- somewhat to my surprise -- decidedly mixed emotions. Spite and sympathy, it seems, can co-exist, and even lay the groundwork for something that begins to resemble empathy.

It's an involuntary reflex, to be sure, after the bile, racism, and sheer deranged hatred those people have flung at us these past four years -- not to mention their cocksure arrogance (up until about 10:00 pm Tuesday night) that "real" Americans were going to rise as one and send the Kenyan usurper packing.

But looking at those woeful faces -- hopes smashed, the awful truth finally revealed -- it's hard not to remember election night 2004, when it became clear that lies and war crimes notwithstanding, President Cheney and his sidekick were going to be reelected despite our best efforts.

It's devastating to believe that your country has looked evil full in the face and decided to embrace it, and feel completely helpless to stop it. And if even one-twentieth of the things those people believe about President Obama, and about us, were true, they would be right to despair, just as we did eight years ago.

In the end, though, what really makes it hard for me to dine with gusto at the schadenfreude buffet is that the grieving faces on the other side of the partisan divide aren't those people, they're my people -- the middle-class neighbors of my Southern childhood, the kids I went to school with, my redneck uncles and cousins, my own mother and father.

The sagging chins and pot bellies, the crew cuts and blue hair, the bad make up and worse fashion sense -- these are all as familiar to me as the lines on my own face. I know these people too intimately, their pasts are too intertwined with mine, for me to look at them and see only the despised Other, even though I have no doubt that's how many, if not most, of them would look at me.

I also know that they have been lied to, with ferocious intensity and relentless dedication, by the conservative propaganda machine and its political masters. If we must have demons to hate, better to seek them among the con artists who have turned Rwandan-style hate speech into an industry profitable enough to rival the porn business.

I know it's customary at times such as these for victors to speak of reconciliation -- to remind the defeated, as President Obama never seems to get tired of repeating, that there are no red states, no blue states, just the United States of America. But that's not what I'm trying to do here. I have no particular interest in offering any olive branches. We've gone too far, traveling in opposite directions, to meet halfway now. One side must rule and the other must grind its teeth in rage. That being the case, I'd much rather it was them than us wearing down the enamel.

All that said, though, there is still something poignant, even tragic, about those faces of red America, something worthy of a eulogy. Their America -- Bill O'Reilly's "traditional America" -- is fading away. Whatever the future holds, it's not likely to look like them, or think like them, or live like them.
Jacques Ottawa

Oshawa, Canada

#126161 Nov 12, 2012
The Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
And you live in a country that elected and supports Obama. Get over it. You lost big time.
You want to talk about broke - every red state except Utah and Texas get more back from the Federal government than they pay in.
Or to put it in simpler terms for simpler minds, the blue states support the red states.
I thought Texas was on the dole also. When did that change?
Jacques Ottawa

Oshawa, Canada

#126162 Nov 12, 2012
The Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Your story is from October 21st. Since then both Fiat and Chrysler have come out multiple times and said that this story is completely false.
You know that and you post it anyway.
That makes you a god damned liar. Isn't lying a sin in your religion? If it is, you are going to hell, where you belong, for posting all the lies that you post.
And Bloomberg immediately corrected itself.
The Truth

Minneapolis, MN

#126163 Nov 12, 2012
Bush, Cheney back Obama's mandate on taxes

In the aftermath of Barack Obama's reelection victory, voices across the political spectrum were quick to deny that the President had earned a mandate from voters. In the Washington Post, Ruth Marcus warned that a Democratic claim to a mandate was a "delusion." The National Journal's Ron Fournier agreed, adding that the absence of a mandate was "thanks in part to his own small-bore and brutish campaign."

Regardless, when it comes to the issue of increasing taxes for the wealthiest Americans, President Obama has very a strong case in asserting he's earned voters' blessing to proceed. After all, that key pillar of his "balanced approach" to deficit reduction wasn't merely a centerpiece of both his 2008 and 2012 campaigns. Ending the Bush tax cuts for those earning over $250,000 enjoyed majority support on Election Day, just as it has since before Obama vanquished John McCain four years ago. And as it turns out, President Obama can point to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, who after the disputed 2000 election claimed a mandate to bulldoze their $1.3 trillion package of tax cuts through Congress.

After he dispatched John Kerry in 2004 by a smaller margin (286 electoral votes to 262, 51 to 48 percent popular vote edge) than Obama compiled on Tuesday, President Bush nevertheless boasted that "I earned capital in the campaign, political capital, and now I intend to spend it." (That capital investment in his wildly unpopular Social Security privatization scheme came to nothing in 2005.) But within days of their anointing by the Supreme Court four years earlier, President-Elect Bush and Vice President-Elect Cheney claimed a mandate just the same.

Following the disputed 2000 election, the Bush-Cheney transition team prepared to assume the White House without either a popular vote mandate or dominant majorities in Congress. But while the mainstream media consensus concluded that a "weakened" President Bush would have to govern from the center and "build bridges to the opposition," Dick Cheney had a different idea.

As Barton Gellman details in his book, Angler: The Cheney Vice Presidency, Dick Cheney made it abundantly clear that the Bush administration would put pedal to the metal in pursuit of its radical agenda. In a series of media appearances that December, Cheney proceeded as if the Florida recount and Bush v. Gore had never happened.

His December 3, 2000 exchange with the late Tim Russert on Meet the Press is particularly telling:

RUSSERT: Governor Bush and you campaigned on a platform of a $1.3 trillion tax cut. Now that the Senate is 50-50, Democrats-Republicans, and the Republicans control the House by eight or nine votes, won't you have to scale down your tax cut in order to pass it?[...] But, in reality, with a 50-50 Senate and a close, close, small majority in the House, you're going to have to have a moderate, mainstream, centrist governance, aren't you?
CHENEY: Oh, I think so.[...] But I think there's no reason in the world why we can't do exactly what Governor Bush campaigned on.
Two weeks later, following the controversial Supreme Court decision which made George W. Bush the 43rd President, Cheney made his case even more forcefully on Face the Nation:

"As President-elect Bush has made very clear, he ran on a particular platform that was very carefully developed. It's his program, it's his agenda, and we have no intention at all of backing off of it.

Shreveport, LA

#126164 Nov 12, 2012
Grand Birther wrote:
<quoted text>
Rogue, do you like your government funded health care and pension?
All evidence points to you being too dumb to take care of yourself, and you most likely would not have lived this long had your employer not invested in your health.
Bladder Spatter leaks again. LMAO Got Depends?
Jacques Ottawa

Oshawa, Canada

#126165 Nov 12, 2012
Christie-Palin2012 wrote:
Christie-Palin2012 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, 1.6% of the popular vote is NOT a landslide.
A landslide was in 1984 when Ronald Reagan won a 18.2% difference in the popular vote over, ah over, ah, ah, yea, what's his name!
<quoted text>
Okay, so you'd rather go by electoral college vote. No problemeau.
Reagan won 525 to, ah, er, ah, what's his name who got only 13!!!
Check Mate!!!!!!!
Oh, and Democrats only win fairly and never buy races?!?
Rogue . Who cares? Obama won. In a few years, no one will recall who his defeated contender was. Repeat after me, rogue : Congratulation Mr President. Now, SALUTE your c in c.
Jacques Ottawa

Oshawa, Canada

#126167 Nov 12, 2012
Johannes wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm amazed that you can type. What with one finger in your nose and another in your ass. Southern just never seems to go away.
Yes, he plays switch. Switches fingers.
America Got Stupid

Louisville, KY

#126168 Nov 12, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
Want to keep it up?
I thought you always kept it up, YOUR ASS!
NO more American Lady

Danville, KY

#126170 Nov 12, 2012
RWYoung • 2 hours ago
At this rate there may be no union, to speak of. Does anybody in the DNC think this is a fluke?
15 •Reply•Share ›

stratus99 RWYoung • 29 minutes ago &#8722;
No this is what they want...They never wanted a United States of America...They wanted a Socialist States of America...The original Democratic party was more soviet socialist in the beginning and that is still at its core.
0 •Reply•Share ›

Melissa Frost • 2 hours ago
Interesting. Hate to see it come to this.
11 •Reply•Share ›
The Truth

Minneapolis, MN

#126171 Nov 12, 2012
The Emerging Pro-Choice Majority

Abortion rights, we’re told, are our Great Divider. America is cleaved in two. Fifty unremitting percent on either side. There is no United States of America, only pro and anti choice America.

But what if that’s not true? Or, more precisely, what if that won’t be true for much longer?

The 2012 election has been touted as a watershed moment for the Democratic Party, but it may have been one for the pro-choice cause as well. And it’s not because the would-be rape caucus was defeated or that pro-choice candidates won big, though those help. Rather, it’s that there’s good reasons to believe the coalition Obama has built is not only durable, but also staunchly pro-choice. If that’s true, it could signify the start of a major shift on what had previously been thought to have been a fundamental fault line in American politics.

Let’s start with the exit polling. The 2012 electorate was overwhelmingly pro-choice; 59 percent said abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while only 36 percent said the reverse. The critical swing states followed the pattern, with some like Virginia falling to the left of the national average. Exit polls should be taken with a grain of salt, of course, but these numbers undeniably suggest American voters are more pro-choice than previously thought, especially in the states up for grabs in Presidential and Senatorial elections.

These data throw a monkey wrench in the conventional wisdom about abortion rights — namely, that it’s an issue that the GOP could use to make inroads with the new Obama coalition. Young voters, women, African-Americans, and Latinos have average-to-conservative views on choice, we’re told. But many identified as pro-choice in 2012. What gives?

Part of the answer is that the general picture is wrong: these key Democratic groups generally track the national average on abortion or tilt left. Though some polls suggest young voters are likely to support restricting abortion rights, the most systematic evidence suggests Milllenials are as, if not more, likely to support keeping abortion legal in all or most cases as the general population. Ditto with women. While African-Americans used to lean right, the most recent polling suggests a decisive pro-choice shift.

Even Latinos, who generally (though not always) tend to oppose abortion rights, have more complicated views than pundits generally let on. While first and second generation Latino-Americans tend to oppose abortion in most or all cases, third generation and higher Latinos support abortion rights by a 19 point margin. Since the Latino population boom is currently being fueled by birth rather than immigration, the third generation cohort seems likely to grow over time. Not incidentally, Latinos who voted in the 2012 election supported keeping abortion legal by a 2:1 margin (though, for it’s worth, the poll didn’t include Texas).
Jacques Ottawa

Oshawa, Canada

#126172 Nov 12, 2012
NO more American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
THIS post WAS for YOU!!!!!
What is the Supplemental Poverty Measure and How Does it Differ from the Official Measure? ...
Fees, Bills and Taxes
Donations - Texas Match the Promise Fund ...
Yes, American er hmm PATRIOT Lady, who is beseeching everyone to sign a petition asking for 20 states to secede and break up the country. Funny and strange patriot. Pravda and Putin surely put her up to this. The US bought Alaska,(Seward's folly) why not the Russians getting even and buying those 20 states,(Putin's folly). Putin's smart, I'm sure he'd insist on a money-back guarantee.
NO more American Lady

Danville, KY

#126174 Nov 12, 2012

November 13 , 2012

NBCUniversal - 500

Dana Corporation - Warns Employees of Poss. Layoffs

Mississippi County Arkansas - About 12 Layoffs

TMX Group ( International )- Plans to Cut 100 Jobs

November 12 , 2012

Update: Wingspan Portfolio Advisors - 459 Possible Layoffs

German news agency dapd -100

The Commercial Appeal - Another Round of Layoffs?

Airlines SAS ( International )- About 6,000 Jobs Lost


November 13 , 2012

Hostess Brands Inc Permanently Closing 3 Bakeries Following a Nationwide Strike

Philips Electronics subsidiary Lightolier will close its local fluorescent light fixture manufacturing plant in Willington

November 12 , 2012

Update: 2 SunTrust Bank branches on the Eastern Shore of Virginia

Dena's Hallmark in Champaign Commons Plaza IL?
Learn to Read

United States

#126175 Nov 12, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>We eat what we want, when we want. Have you seen the size of her thick azz? Plus, she's not our mother! Tell us what to eat....please. A reminder: "all this for a damned flag"! American my azz!!!!!!
Typical class act Birfoon. What a putz
Jacques Ottawa

Oshawa, Canada

#126176 Nov 12, 2012
Christie-Palin2012 wrote:
<quoted text>
So? Most Republican like to keep their intimate relationships quiet! But I wonder if she, she is a she, isn't she?, would get upset that the guy she was with was also Bi?!?
If I was a woman, I would not some guys penis in me that had also need butt-f-ed by a gay guy who might have AIDS!
You'll not that "The truth" did not go into detail. Howerver,
how you enjoy talking about that stuff, don't you? Hell, rogue, c'mon, relax, emjoy, you WANT to. You know you want to. We all know that's why you're sporting those pink tights. No takers? So sorry. There's always "escorts".
The Truth

Minneapolis, MN

#126177 Nov 12, 2012
Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol: Raising Millionaires’ Taxes ‘Won’t Kill The Country’

Even before the election results came in Tuesday, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) was focused on narrowing options for compromise to resolve the looming “fiscal cliff,” saying he would not support a tax increase on the wealthiest Americans. But on Fox News Sunday, conservative Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol counseled Republican leadership to stop “falling on its sword to defend a bunch of millionaires”:

I think honest debate, fresh thinking, leadership in the Republican party and the leadership in the conservative movement has to pull back, let people float new ideas. Let’s have a serious debate. Don’t scream and yell over what one person says.

You know what? It won’t kill the country if Republicans raise taxes a little bit on millionaires. It really won’t, I don’t think.

I don’t really understand why Republicans don’t take Obama’s offer to freeze taxes for everyone below $250,000. Make it $500,000, make it a million.

Really? The Republican party is gonna fall on its sword to defend a bunch of millionaires, half of whom voted Democratic, and half of whom live in Hollywood and are hostile to Republicans?

Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) infamous budget proposal would have cut taxes on those making more than $1 million, while ending tax cuts for those with the lowest incomes — a plan Kristol predicted Republicans would have difficulty defending. But even in the face of poor election results and exit polls that showed 60 percent of Americans support higher taxes for the wealthy, Boehner reiterated his opposition to raising taxes on Friday, as did Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).
Jacques Ottawa

Oshawa, Canada

#126178 Nov 12, 2012
NO more American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
WHY were they POSTED
This is far too complicated for you, American er hmm Pravda Lady. Stick to Our father. He wants you to keep it simple.
Jacques Ottawa

Oshawa, Canada

#126180 Nov 12, 2012
Christie-Palin2012 wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's see, Owl Gore failed out of law school, dropped out of divinity school and final got a bachelor's degree in journalism. And John Kerry would have flunked out of Yale in his Freshman year except for he got an "A" in French. And like Owl, he only has a bachelor's degree.
Now G.W. attended both Yale and Harvard and obtained a MASTERS degree. M.B.A.!!!
And yes, we do know what grades G.W. got in Yale but what grades did Obama get?(Twilight Zone music play by crickets)
He was president of the Harvard Law Review. And it's on record and official.
The Truth

Minneapolis, MN

#126181 Nov 12, 2012
Media fight on the right over GOP

On the night of Nov. 6, shortly after President Barack Obama won reelection, Steve Schmidt went on NBC News and called on GOP leaders to “stand up” against the extreme elements in the party that the Republican strategist believes are leading it down the wrong path, even singling out Limbaugh by name. Days later on MSNBC, Joe Scarborough criticized Republicans for taking cues from unnamed pundits “who make tens of millions of dollars engaging in niche marketing” that the host complained provides a misleading picture of the nation’s electorate. Columnist David Frum last week slammed the “conservative entertainment complex” that had “fleeced, exploited and lied to” Republicans, ensuing doom on Election Day.

“These people have made politics a theater for identity politics for a segment of America, rather than a way to solve collective problems,” Frum told POLITICO, referring to conservative media commentators.“What is happening now, and it’s disturbing, is that this complex has sold the idea that conservatives are the real majority in America. That claim has been exposed as false. But they are turning on the country and leading their viewers toward alienation and rejection.”

These were the opening salvos in a larger and escalating civil war playing out now between moderate and far-right-wing pundits. After a disastrous performance in the 2012 elections, the Republican party has come face-to-face with the new demographic reality:“The white establishment is now the minority,” as Fox News host Bill O’Reilly said on election night. Republican support among old, white men can no longer offset their lack of support among women, the young, African-Americans, Asians and the fast-growing Hispanic populations — all key groups in Obama’s victory, some observers say.

But which path to take for the GOP toward broader appeal — doubling down on a core economic and family values conservative message that transcends identity politics or polishing the party’s image by recruiting more women and minority candidates and adopting more moderate positions, particularly on immigration reform — has exposed a sharp rift in the conservative media.

Read more:


Since: Apr 12

The city that I reside

#126182 Nov 12, 2012
GBPfan wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that William Penn's way of claiming that God isn't a tyrant? Hmmmm. Didn't you recently post something about God making people bow before him? Sounds like a tyrant to me.
such a secular putz.
Jacques Ottawa

Oshawa, Canada

#126183 Nov 12, 2012
The Truth wrote:
A Children’s Treasury of Random Wingnut Post-Election Butthurt (Part Douche)
As we have already pretty much established, America is Over Now, so all that’s left is just sitting around and waiting for the last few remaining embers of Freedom to burn out. If we’re really lucky, the Ancient Mayans or Space Jebus will just smash the Earth and be done with it. So let us see what further Elevated Whining there is to review.
To start with, there’s Orson Scott Card, the Mormon propagandist / anti-ghey crusader / science fiction writer who wrote one pretty good novel (OK, and his early stories were often quite nice, too) but has of late declined into a sad, right-wing parody of himself. He has discovered the truly perfidious villains responsible for the reelection of Barack Hussein Obama. You will be astonished to know that it’s all the fault of the Liberal Media!
To you newspeople at CBS, CNN, ABC, NBC. To you journalists at the New York Times, the Washington Post, at newspapers all over America.
You did it. You won. You were able to get Barack Obama his second term.
You knew that if you told the American people the truth, they would not have reelected this man.
Americans don’t vote to reelect a commander-in-chief who abandons our soldiers and agents and ambassadors when they’re under enemy fire.
But you, confident that you are much wiser than the American people, you decided we had no reason to think about this during the election.
Card then goes on to identify the precise bit of information that would have turned the whole election around:
You knew that Obama lied to cover up this culpable negligence, and then lied about lying. You had the video, CBS, which you could have aired immediately after the second debate, exposing him for the liar that he is.
Instead you held it back until two days before the election, when other stories predominated.
If you have no idea what CBS video Card is talking about (and does he provide a link or an explanation? Of course not!), welcome to the club. It turns out that it’s this thing, which further tweaks the total number of pin-head-dancing angels regarding Obama’s remarks the day after the Benghazi attack. See, we were thinking that maybe it was video of Barry saying,“Yeah, I withheld an AC-130 attack and a Delta Force rescue mission just so I could watch Ambassador Stevens die…in hi-def.” But we suppose that it is indeed possible that maybe the horrific lie that is Barack Obama might have completely unraveled if we’d had this one bit of tape to help us parse whether he meant “terrorist attack” when he said “act of terror.”
Also, Card thinks that Obama’s withholding of some of the documents in the “Fast And Furious” investigation is worthy of impeachment, and that Obama’s handling of Hurricane Sandy is objectively far more incompetent than George Bush’s handling of Katrina, and that there’s only one place we learn about these important truths:
You have to attack Fox News and sneer at them and accuse them of bias, don’t you — because they’re actually doing the job you merely pretend to do. They shame you by their genuinely balanced coverage, so you have to lie and accuse them of being what you are: ideological hacks, providing propaganda in order to advance a cause, while hiding the unhelpful truth
We should note that in Card’s nearly unreadable novel Empire, the good guy actually enlists the help of Bill O’Reilly to warn America of her mortal peril in the face of a liberal conspiracy to overthrow the government with an army of giant robots (the conspiracy is funded by a character who’s clearly a stand-in for George Soros). Yes, that is a completely accurate description of this novel, which was written as a tie-in to a video game.
Are those people deranged or what? Tell birthers anything that smells hate and they pounce on it.

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) 1 min Joy 1,535,824
News Chicago's population decline continues for the ... 4 hr Fitus T Bluster 1
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 8 hr SweLL GirL 10,708
Congressional FIX and REPAIR------NOW. 10 hr Panco and Cisco 3
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 19 hr Comrades 105,188
Blank ATM card available for exchange (Oct '16) 21 hr linda randy 5
Trump Puddy Comment Worst Ever 23 hr Earl 3

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages