BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 230940 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.

Since: Oct 09

Moreno Valley, CA

#141540 Feb 10, 2013
Learn to read the truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet you can't bring your Brain washer Mien Obummer Libtard self to watch more than 3 minutes of a intelligent black man who was asked to speaking at the inaugural prayer thing for Mien Obummer? LOL!
Blah, blah, blah, HEIL, Mien Obummer is God, He is my Daddy, I do what daddy tells me, where is my cool aid!
Did his speech have anything to do with Obama’s birth certificate or secret fake Documents Cmor?

Since: Oct 09

Moreno Valley, CA

#141541 Feb 10, 2013
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps Poppo, it's willful, yes, but it also helps to be a born fool.
Looks like poor Cmor is angry at the world and has taken his every frustration out on Obama. I’m afraid you’re absolutely right. A knucklehead at his level had to have been born a fool.

Since: Oct 09

Moreno Valley, CA

#141542 Feb 10, 2013
American Lady wrote:
Here poo poo...
Some African-American History for you :)
``````````
United Sons of Ham of America
aka: Sons of Ham
United Sons of Ham of America (USH) was a popular African-American secret society in the South during Reconstruction. In Little Rock (Pulaski County), the Sons of Ham was established on October 7, 1865, and was considered the city’s first black benevolent fraternal organization, starting with twenty members meeting in a wood-frame building. The goals of the society were to encourage industry, brotherly love, and charity by providing support to the widows and orphans of its deceased members. The Sons of Ham enforced a strict moral code that included no gambling or drinking. Although the organization proclaimed itself to be non-political, an annual convention held in 1871 closely resembled a state legislative session in which bills were introduced and passed and speeches given. In addition, the society had several members who wielded strong political clout as elected city officials and community leaders. It is unclear how the group derived its name, although it was likely associated with early religious teachings that held that Africans were the descendants of Ham and the misconstrued notion that Ham was cursed by Noah, his father.
http://www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/encyclo...
http://www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/encyclo...
http://www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/encyclo...
Thanks AL! Romney thought blacks were cursed as well; right on up to 1978.

The Book of Mormon's teaching of the accursedness and, therefore, the inferiority of blacks -- if blacks are cursed, then by definition they are inferior to the divinely acceptable whites -- was reaffirmed by numerous Mormon leaders for a century and a half. As late as 1969, even after the Civil Rights Movement had dismantled de jure segregation throughout the land, David O. McKay, then president and "living prophet" of Mormonism, still publicly justified its segregationist policies by declaring that "the seeming discrimination by the Church toward the Negro... goes back into the beginning with God."

Now, some will argue that I should dismiss the codified racism of the Book of Mormon as the unfortunate folklore of a bygone era because of the 1978 revelation by Spencer W. Kimball, the Church's president and "living prophet" at that time, that after a century and a half black males were finally un-accursed enough to fully participate in Mormonism's priesthood and sacred temple ceremonies. However, even if we ignore the suspiciously coincidental timing of this "revelation" (it conveniently appeared when the Church's federal tax-exempt status was imperiled by its racial policies), an attentive reading reveals that Kimball's proclamation did not in any way address the question of whether or not the Church still considered the Book of Mormon's assertions of black inferiority to be divinely authorized. In fact, the specific contents of Kimball's revelation were never made public. Nor has the Church ever disavowed the Book's white supremacist passages or the past racist practices and pronouncements of its leaders.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/obery-m-hendric...

Since: Oct 09

Moreno Valley, CA

#141543 Feb 10, 2013
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know about Bobby but I do know Barry is!
Well Bobby puts in a little more work than you Mr. Liars. He’s actually been officially informed that Barack Obama is constitutionally qualified to serve as president. Fact is you don’t know Bobby or Barry.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#141544 Feb 10, 2013
Poppo wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks AL! Romney thought blacks were cursed as well; right on up to 1978.
The Book of Mormon's teaching of the accursedness and, therefore, the inferiority of blacks -- if blacks are cursed, then by definition they are inferior to the divinely acceptable whites -- was reaffirmed by numerous Mormon leaders for a century and a half. As late as 1969, even after the Civil Rights Movement had dismantled de jure segregation throughout the land, David O. McKay, then president and "living prophet" of Mormonism, still publicly justified its segregationist policies by declaring that "the seeming discrimination by the Church toward the Negro... goes back into the beginning with God."
Now, some will argue that I should dismiss the codified racism of the Book of Mormon as the unfortunate folklore of a bygone era because of the 1978 revelation by Spencer W. Kimball, the Church's president and "living prophet" at that time, that after a century and a half black males were finally un-accursed enough to fully participate in Mormonism's priesthood and sacred temple ceremonies. However, even if we ignore the suspiciously coincidental timing of this "revelation" (it conveniently appeared when the Church's federal tax-exempt status was imperiled by its racial policies), an attentive reading reveals that Kimball's proclamation did not in any way address the question of whether or not the Church still considered the Book of Mormon's assertions of black inferiority to be divinely authorized. In fact, the specific contents of Kimball's revelation were never made public. Nor has the Church ever disavowed the Book's white supremacist passages or the past racist practices and pronouncements of its leaders.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/obery-m-hendric...
Right on, and well-researched, Poppo. However, the LRS's , yes particularly the LRS's of this world, the GBs, Rogues' Fwanks', Als' etc will tell you that Mitt did not agree with the "abomination" statements of the Book of Mormom or the "inferiority of the Negro (sorry) race" even though he gave the Mormon Chruch $3 million in 2011, and was a missionary in France during his youth (good luck with that,lol). If he did not believe the precepts of his very church, then he was not a true Mormom, right? Wrong, he believed all of it, gave "em 3 million smackeroos in 2011 alone and went door-to-door in France (talk about Mission : Impossible) preaching to the heathen abominations. And, worst of all, he , omg, horrors, Romney speaks French. That alone makes him THE abomination.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#141545 Feb 10, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Fascinating stuff this morning Romper
Can't Learn Shat, an ant fascinates you. Go chase a gnat.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#141547 Feb 10, 2013
Poppo wrote:
<quoted text>
Well Bobby puts in a little more work than you Mr. Liars. He’s actually been officially informed that Barack Obama is constitutionally qualified to serve as president. Fact is you don’t know Bobby or Barry.
Still haven't figured it out, huh slaveboi? Fact: no one knows who Barry is! LMAO
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#141548 Feb 10, 2013
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Right on, and well-researched, Poppo. However, the LRS's , yes particularly the LRS's of this world, the GBs, Rogues' Fwanks', Als' etc will tell you that Mitt did not agree with the "abomination" statements of the Book of Mormom or the "inferiority of the Negro (sorry) race" even though he gave the Mormon Chruch $3 million in 2011, and was a missionary in France during his youth (good luck with that,lol). If he did not believe the precepts of his very church, then he was not a true Mormom, right? Wrong, he believed all of it, gave "em 3 million smackeroos in 2011 alone and went door-to-door in France (talk about Mission : Impossible) preaching to the heathen abominations. And, worst of all, he , omg, horrors, Romney speaks French. That alone makes him THE abomination.
And another dig at religion. Atheist loser much? LMAO
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#141549 Feb 10, 2013
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>Can't Learn Shat, an ant fascinates you. Go chase a gnat.
Why would I want to chase you? You admit that you already see me behind every tree

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#141550 Feb 10, 2013
Justus Liebig wrote:
<quoted text>The percentage land mass occupancy is totally irrelevant.
Furthermore, whether you believe the scientific consensus or not, it's fact that over 95% of climate scientists believe there is significant anthropogenic contribution to climate change, and the Fox commentator's claim to the contrary was simply made up.
And you can not prove that!!! Reliable source!!!
How many times has Dr. James Hansen been arrested? And you think he is an open minded scientist? Do you know the difference between subjective and objective science??

Hansen and Schmidt of NASA GISS under fire for climate stance: Engineers, scientists, astronauts ask NASA administration to look at empirical evidence rather than climate models
Posted on April 10, 2012 by Anthony Watts
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/10/hansen-...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#141551 Feb 10, 2013
Justus Liebig wrote:
<quoted text>The percentage land mass occupancy is totally irrelevant.
Furthermore, whether you believe the scientific consensus or not, it's fact that over 95% of climate scientists believe there is significant anthropogenic contribution to climate change, and the Fox commentator's claim to the contrary was simply made up.
The Right Stuff: what the NASA astronauts say about global warming Tuesday, Apr 10 2012
http://1idvet.com/2012/04/10/5907/

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#141552 Feb 10, 2013
Peer Review, Liberally speaking. Ten Liberal scientists pass their research papers to the other nine scientists. They all turn to each other and like a bunch of Bobble Head dolls, nod!!!
Why has Dr. Michael Mann, Penn State, refused to let anyone outside his "peer group" review his data?
Same goes for Dr. James Hansen, Columbia University!
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#141553 Feb 10, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would I want to chase you? You admit that you already see me behind every tree
The ant will keep you spellbound for weeks! LMAO

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#141554 Feb 10, 2013
According to NASA-GISS (Columbia University), 2011 was the fourth hottest year this Century. But according to NASA-MSFC (the real NASA) 2011 was the coldest year since 1998!
How is right and who is wrong? Hint, Dr, James Hansen refuses to let anyone outside his peer group review his data. In addition he has been implicated in Climate Gate.

Hansen on the surface temperature record, Climategate, solar, and El Nino
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/21/hansen-...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#141555 Feb 10, 2013
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
"Well, 95% of those "scientists" are flat out wrong", says climate expert and scientist Rogue-clone LRS. 95?% eh? And of course,you are the 5% right.
What 95% of what scientists? Typical Libtardian response, everyone agrees with me!!!
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#141556 Feb 10, 2013
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
And another dig at religion. Atheist loser much? LMAO
Grateful you indicate how I took a dig at religion. I wrote that the Book of Mormom mentioned "abominations" and "inferior negro", as also quoted by Poppo. Does do the Book say these two things or not? Is Romney a bona fide Mormon leader and elder and therefore obliged to believe these two affirmations?

Why is it, with ignoramuses like you, all we need to do is quote the Bible word for word, no comments, or the Book of Mormon, and come out as atheists or "digging at religion?"

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#141557 Feb 10, 2013
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
"Well, 95% of those "scientists" are flat out wrong", says climate expert and scientist Rogue-clone LRS. 95?% eh? And of course,you are the 5% right.
Yep, repeat a lie often enough, and the the Libtards will believe it is true.

Forbes MagazineOP/ED | 7/17/2012
That Scientific Global Warming Consensus...Not!

Since 1998, more than 31,000 American scientists from diverse climate-related disciplines, including more than 9,000 with Ph.D.s, have signed a public petition announcing their belief that “…there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.” Included are atmospheric physicists, botanists, geologists, oceanographers, and meteorologists.

So where did that famous “consensus” claim that “98% of all scientists believe in global warming” come from? It originated from an endlessly reported 2009 American Geophysical Union (AGU) survey consisting of an intentionally brief two-minute, two question online survey sent to 10,257 earth scientists by two researchers at the University of Illinois. Of the about 3.000 who responded, 82% answered “yes” to the second question, which like the first, most people I know would also have agreed with.

://www.forbes.com/sites/larryb ell/2012/07/17/that-scientific -global-warming-consensus-not/
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#141558 Feb 10, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
And you can not prove that!!! Reliable source!!!
How many times has Dr. James Hansen been arrested? And you think he is an open minded scientist? Do you know the difference between subjective and objective science??
Hansen and Schmidt of NASA GISS under fire for climate stance: Engineers, scientists, astronauts ask NASA administration to look at empirical evidence rather than climate models
Posted on April 10, 2012 by Anthony Watts
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/10/hansen-...
Rogue : "And you can not prove that!!! Reliable source!!!"

What nerve, what gall, asking for a source. How many do you owe me? I've stopped counting. Yeah, for one, that 95% criminals, oh , so many.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#141559 Feb 10, 2013
No Need to Panic About Global Warming
There's no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to 'decarbonize' the world's economy.

Editor's Note: The following has been signed by the 16 scientists listed at the end of the article:
A candidate for public office in any contemporary democracy may have to consider what, if anything, to do about "global warming." Candidates should understand that the oft-repeated claim that nearly all scientists demand that something dramatic be done to stop global warming is not true. In fact, a large and growing number of distinguished scientists and engineers do not agree that drastic actions on global warming are needed.

In September, Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever, a supporter of President Obama in the last election, publicly resigned from the American Physical Society (APS) with a letter that begins: "I did not renew [my membership] because I cannot live with the [APS policy] statement:'The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth's physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.' In the APS it is OK to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible?"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297...
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#141560 Feb 10, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
The Right Stuff: what the NASA astronauts say about global warming Tuesday, Apr 10 2012
http://1idvet.com/2012/04/10/5907/
The most celebrated of the 5 astronauts, Buzz Aldrin, says that THE WORLD is causing it, not just us (the U.S.). What's the view of the hundreds of other astronauts?

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) 4 min Ray Ovehope 1,457,843
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 1 hr John Schanahan 104,504
Word (Dec '08) 7 hr PEllen 6,836
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 7 hr PEllen 3,443
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 7 hr PEllen 9,839
Four letter word game (Dec '11) 7 hr PEllen 2,272
Why does Chicago want to harbor illegal criminals 8 hr ThomasA 10

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages