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

Full story: Chicago Tribune

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 ...

Comments (Page 6,552)

Showing posts 131,021 - 131,040 of173,766
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#148987
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Poor Lil Romper Stomper. Looks like getting exposed as the pathetic empty blowhard we all knew him to be was too much for him.

Talk about turning tail and running. What a puss
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#148988
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Fed Up wrote:
Obama Used Social Security Number Assigned To Dead Woman
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Millions of people have errors in their Social Security numbers and/or multiple SS numbers, and the cause was MAINLY data entry errors by SS Administration clerks.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/38678753/How_Many_Soci...

http://www.securityworldnews.com/2010/08/12/2...

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-200137...
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#148989
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>Millions of people have errors in their Social Security numbers and/or multiple SS numbers, and the cause was MAINLY data entry errors by SS Administration clerks.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/38678753/How_Many_Soci...

http://www.securityworldnews.com/2010/08/12/2...

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-200137...
You and your silly facts. You sure know how to ruin a good rant!
Grand Birther

Greenfield, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#148990
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Looks like not a single birfoon was able to write these simple word, and they thus confirm their deep hatred and bigotry.

"I fully support the right for gay people to be married, and their right to all the benefits associated with married status.

Gender is an infintesimal fraction of what makes a person a person, and I do not care what gender anyone identifies as."

“zero nuclear weapons”

Since: Sep 08

Perryville

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#148991
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Nuclear weapons cuts will make the United States safer
By Kingston Reif | 6 March 2013

Nuclear arms control is back in the news. After paying little public attention to the issue over the long course of his reelection campaign, President Obama said in his February State of the Union address that the United States "will engage Russia to seek further reductions in our nuclear arsenals." A recent report by the Center for Public Integrity revealed that senior Obama administration officials believe the United States can reduce its arsenal of deployed strategic warheads to between 1,000 and 1,100 without harming national security. Those numbers would put the total below levels called for by New START, the treaty that limits the United States and Russia to 1,550 deployed warheads apiece. Meanwhile, numerous high-ranking administration officials have met with their Russian counterparts this year. Further arms control measures were likely on the agenda.

Not surprisingly, many congressional Republicans have expressed opposition to further nuclear reductions. They argue that additional cuts would undermine US security and worry that the Obama administration could reduce the national arsenal outside the auspices of a formal treaty approved by the US Senate

These concerns are misplaced: Further nuclear weapons reductions are squarely in the national interest.

First, as President Obama said in March 2012, "we have more nuclear weapons than we need." Even after New START, he pointed out, the United States would have more than 1,500 deployed nuclear weapons and some 5,000 warheads. Such a large arsenal greatly exceeds any conceivable deterrence requirement and provides Russia with an incentive to maintain a similarly bloated force.

Bilateral reductions below the New START levels would reduce the number of Russian nuclear weapons pointed at the United States. Reductions could also strengthen stability by providing Russian defense planners with less reason to engage in costly worst-case estimates about force requirements. For example, lower US deployed force levels could dissuade Moscow from moving forward with destabilizing nuclear modernization programs -- such as the development of a new heavy intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). Verifiable limits on reserve warheads and nonstrategic arms would further enhance stability by addressing Russia's large stockpile of such weapons and ensuring that nuclear warheads are actually eliminated as opposed to merely placed in storage.

“zero nuclear weapons”

Since: Sep 08

Perryville

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#148992
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

part 2
Maintaining a nuclear posture and force levels that are still largely based on Cold War-era conditions has many costs. As nuclear security and non-proliferation specialist James Doyle has written, "Given the generally positive nature of the US-Russian relationship, the continued competitive mutual nuclear entanglement hinders the development of truly normalised relations." Keeping an excessive arsenal also costs money; $31 billion per year according to a 2012 study by the Stimson Center. The Pentagon and Energy Department are planning to spend hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade to build new nuclear delivery systems and warhead-production facilities. Reductions would stem the need for a significant amount of this spending.

Some of those opposed to US nuclear weapons cuts argue that they are irresponsible in light of North Korea's recent missile and nuclear tests and Iran's continued enrichment of uranium. But reducing its number of deployed strategic warheads to 1,000 would leave the United States with far more than enough weapons to deter North Korea, which is believed to possess a total of about 10 nuclear weapons, and Iran, which doesn't have any.

One of the most-repeated arguments against a new round of cuts involves the US nuclear umbrella: Some fear that reducing the American arsenal could cause allies to doubt the US commitment to their defense, thereby tempting them to acquire their own nuclear weapons. However, the continued US maintenance of thousands of nuclear weapons is not necessary to deter the nuclear threats our allies face today. Moreover, further arms control could actually benefit US partners: A US-Russia arms control process that addresses Russian nonstrategic nuclear weapons could reduce the threat posed by these weapons to America's Central European and Baltic allies. Likewise, further reductions in the number of US and Russian nuclear weapons could pave the way for future Chinese participation in the arms control process, which in turn would reduce the Chinese nuclear threat to America's East Asian allies.

Another criticism of further arms control contends that it is dangerous, because Russia likely will not come along unless the United States agrees to limitations on missile defense. It is true that Russia has not yet showed much interest in further nuclear weapons reductions, and that, at least publicly, it has linked further cuts to resolution of its concerns about US missile defenses and high-precision conventional strike capabilities.

But Moscow may still have good reasons to engage. As Brookings Institution arms control experts Steve Pifer and Michael O'Hanlon point out, "The US military can with its current force structure easily stay at the New START limits, while the Russian military must build new missiles to do so. Lowering the limits would offer Moscow a chance to save money. Also of interest to the Russians: Putting all weapons on the table would mean constraining reserve strategic warheads, where the U.S. military has a significant numerical advantage

“zero nuclear weapons”

Since: Sep 08

Perryville

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#148993
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

part 3

In an ideal world, the United States and Russia would pursue a new round of nuclear reductions via a treaty that limits not only deployed strategic forces, but also non-deployed and nonstrategic nuclear warheads, which aren't currently limited by any accord. However, the negotiation of such a treaty will be far more time-consuming and complex than the New START negotiations, which lasted about a year. In the meantime, Russia could deploy a new heavy ICBM, the momentum for further cuts could stall, and the two sides could make down payments on modernization plans that lock in excessively high force levels for decades to come.

To avoid these outcomes, the United States could jump start the process by declaring itself willing to reduce its deployed arsenal below the levels in New START if Moscow is willing to reciprocate. It's a step that could save money, reduce Russia's incentive to build a heavy ICBM, and pave the way for formal negotiations on a new treaty that limits all nuclear warheads. Non-treaty-based reductions have been a long-standing feature of US defense policy under both Republican and Democratic presidents.

As they pursue further weapons reductions, the United States and Russia should also pursue confidence-building and transparency measures that establish mutual trust and could be incorporated in future negotiations. Of particular importance are initiatives that address US concerns about Russia's large stockpile of non-strategic weapons and Russia's concerns about US missile defense and high-precision conventional weapons. Projects that might have that effect would include information sharing, joint experiments and studies, and enhanced dialogue.

The pursuit of further nuclear reductions will not be without significant challenges. Russia's willingness to participate remains uncertain and Republican opposition is congealing. Nonetheless, President Obama should make the push he promised in the State of the Union. If he doesn't, he'll pass up a chance to significantly enhance US security

http://thebulletin.org/web-edition/columnists...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#148994
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Ah, this is a lie, there is NO bullet (ammo) shortage. We have enough ammo to engage in an all out war for at least SIX months. But we will have a shortage of "training ammo" a few months from now. This is no real big deal.
On Aug 30, 1981 I blew out an engine on a Chinook helicopter in S. Korea. It was the only total engine failure I had in my 21 years of flying helicopter. It was a T-55 ASA engine but it was also the second failure in eight days in my unit. As a result they inspected all the other engines in my unit and condemned six more engines.
Now those six engines would be returned to depot for overhaul but the engine on my aircraft and the week prior where trash. So there we had four of out 16 Chinooks without engines. But there were engines available in WAR reserve status. In other words we needed special permission to get those engines shipped and they would not release them. Sooo, for two months we waited for eight engines to be shipped through normal channels.
They have ammo, tires, medicine, MRE's, etc. all in storage but they will not release them as they are WAR reserves. And they will have enough ammo to train with, just not as much as they would like.

U.S. Marines Rattled by Bullet Shortage
27 March 2013

At least one branch of the U.S. military is scrimping and saving every bullet it can while the Department of Homeland Security is on a bullet-buying spree.

Marine Corps Commandant James F. Amos blames sequester budget cuts.

In a video to Marines, he says,I ask you to save every round, every gallon of gas, that you take every single aspect, or opportunity, in training to get the most bang for the buck.

Amos said its no time to do business as usual.

Things have changed. The landscape has changed, he said.I need you to be conservative in the way we do business.

Read more: http://MinuteMenNews.com/2013/03/u-s-marines-...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#148995
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Oh, bask in the early 1980's they were converting A, B and C-model Chinooks to D-models. New rotor blades, new transmissions, new everything including uprated engines.
Soooo, they started with the A and B-model Chinooks with the 2,60 and 2,850 hp engines and they were sold as surplus. And the people who race unlimited hydroplanes bought them up to replace the WWII piston engines like the Merlin V-12's that flew in P-51 Mustangs.
And then someone told the hydroplane people at they could get 3,750 hp engines from the C-model Chinooks but they could not sell them but they could be "leased". So the hydroplane people leased them and at the end of the year they turned them in and leased newer engines.
They Army units started to get engines from depot, opened up the crates ...... and found highly corroded rebuilt engines!!!! Yep, they DoD civilians had been illegally renting out our engines. They FBI moved in and sent them to prison!!!
Real story!!!

Starting in 1980, they have increasingly used Vietnam War-era turboshaft engines from helicopters (in 19731974, one hydroplane, U-95, used turbine engines in races to test the technology). The most commonly used turbine is the Lycoming T55, used in the CH-47 Chinook.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroplane_ (boat)#Unlimited_hydroplane_en gines

Here is the link from the stolen engines. It would not let me copy though.
http://news.google.com/newspapers...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#148996
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nebka wrote:
Nuclear weapons cuts will make the United States safer
By Kingston Reif | 6 March 2013
Nuclear arms control is back in the news. After paying little public attention to the issue over the long course of his reelection campaign, President Obama said in his February State of the Union address that the United States "will engage Russia to seek further reductions in our nuclear arsenals." A recent report by the Center for Public Integrity revealed that senior Obama administration officials believe the United States can reduce its arsenal of deployed strategic warheads to between 1,000 and 1,100 without harming national security..........
-- such as the development of a new heavy intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). Verifiable limits on reserve warheads and nonstrategic arms would further enhance stability by addressing Russia's large stockpile of such weapons and ensuring that nuclear warheads are actually eliminated as opposed to merely placed in storage.
Hey nebka, that is one opinion but here is another;
Cutting Nuclear Weapons Funding Invites Insecurity, 12 Mar 2013
By David Yonkman, Washington Correspondent

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/nuclear-weap...
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

Now, we have Iran on the edge of deploying their nukes as is North Korea and you think that we can reduce ours and we will be safer? Yes, you and Obama believe that but there are many who think you are foolish.
In the Mid-1930's when German, Italy and Japan were building up their militaries, FDR has his thumb up his azz. And on Dec. 7, 1941 Japan caught us unprepared for war. Japan thought they could bloody our nose and then we would seek peace, but they were wrong. But until we rebuilt our military, we got our azz kicked for about six months. We can not afford to do that in the nuclear age as the next war maybe LOST in 72 hours!
You see, even the Romans two thousand years ago knew that strong military deterred war. Sure, it might not happen next year or the year after, and it may not happen before Obama leaves office, but sooner or later we will pay for not maintaining a DETERRENT!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#148997
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>Millions of people have errors in their Social Security numbers and/or multiple SS numbers, and the cause was MAINLY data entry errors by SS Administration clerks.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/38678753/How_Many_Soci ...

http://www.securityworldnews.com/2010/08/12/2 ...

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-200137 ...
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
You and your silly facts. You sure know how to ruin a good rant!
Yep, it is all the SS's fault. Or is it 20 million illegal aliens who are using borrowed SS#'s. Isn't it funny that the 20 million that share duplicate numbers while at the same time we have 20 million illegal aliens in our country?
Heck, I've heard that Obama has used over a dozen SS#'s over the years! Do you really think the SS Administration issued him all of those???

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#148998
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Oh, who is assign the SS prefix of "999"? Because their are no SS#'s with that prefix. Te military use them for foreign military students in the U.S. Yep, every Vietnamese, German, Dane, Saudi Arabian, Iranian (yes, we use to train them), etc were issue "999" student ID numbers!!!
In the seven years I was a Flight Evaluation pilot at Fort Rucker, AL I flew with about a thousand different students. Sometimes 14 different ones in the same week.
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#148999
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Heck, I've heard that Obama has used over a dozen SS#'s over the years! Do you really think the SS Administration issued him all of those???
You've heard that? Was that when Romper was whispering in your ear?

Sorry Rouge - your pathetic fables may get Romper all wet but stack them up against facts and their as empty and impotent as Francis

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#149000
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Liberals like to UNDER estimate the illegal alien problem. Yep, when the truth hurts, they cover it up the best they can!!!

Illegal immigration to the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The illegal immigrant population of the United States in 2008 was estimated by the Center for Immigration Studies to be about 11 million people, down from 12.5 million people in 2007. Other estimates range from 7 to 20 million........

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#149001
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey nebka, that is one opinion but here is another;
Cutting Nuclear Weapons Funding Invites Insecurity, 12 Mar 2013
By David Yonkman, Washington Correspondent
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/nuclear-weap...
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!
Now, we have Iran on the edge of deploying their nukes as is North Korea and you think that we can reduce ours and we will be safer? Yes, you and Obama believe that but there are many who think you are foolish.
In the Mid-1930's when German, Italy and Japan were building up their militaries, FDR has his thumb up his azz. And on Dec. 7, 1941 Japan caught us unprepared for war. Japan thought they could bloody our nose and then we would seek peace, but they were wrong. But until we rebuilt our military, we got our azz kicked for about six months. We can not afford to do that in the nuclear age as the next war maybe LOST in 72 hours!
You see, even the Romans two thousand years ago knew that strong military deterred war. Sure, it might not happen next year or the year after, and it may not happen before Obama leaves office, but sooner or later we will pay for not maintaining a DETERRENT!
OMG, only 1,100 ICBs left to defend the US. At an average of 6 nuclear warheads per ICBM, that comes to 6,600 nuclear bombs. And Rogue and those smart Republicans think that is too high a reduction in warheads. We must of course assume that the Russians have an equal number of ICBMs, so that makes 13,200 warheads. China, India, Pakistan, North Korea, Israel, France, the UK also have multiple warhead missiles, and I have no idea how many, but for the hell of it, let's say a combined 2,000 missiles x 6 = 12,000 more nuclear warheads. Total : 15,200. Hmmmm, do you think , Rogue, that maybe, just maybe, we should all start reducing those stockpiles a teeny weeny bit? It's like your 10,000 rounds of ammo hidden under your bed, how many bullets do you need?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#149002
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Heck, I've heard that Obama has used over a dozen SS#'s over the years! Do you really think the SS Administration issued him all of those???
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
You've heard that? Was that when Romper was whispering in your ear?
Sorry Rouge - your pathetic fables may get Romper all wet but stack them up against facts and their as empty and impotent as Francis
Would Rogue mind giving his sources or is LRS?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#149003
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Still poring over Google trying to find Gov Chiles's intentional delay in asking for Washington's aid following Hurricane Andrew, Rogue?

Do you still expect me to find and prove something YOU stated, yet doesn't exist?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#149004
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Fed Up wrote:
Obama Used Social Security Number Assigned To Dead Woman
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Looks like the inteview is taking place in some sort of mall. We have no idea which network reporter is interviewing her. She has no documents, no papers, and quotes no sources.

Hey, why not interview just anyone at all and accept everything anyone says if it suits one's jaundiced outlook on people they don't like. In this case, people they just plain hate, like Obama.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#149005
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

My post 149001 . Total : 25 200

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#149006
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
OMG, only 1,100 ICBs left to defend the US. At an average of 6 nuclear warheads per ICBM, that comes to 6,600 nuclear bombs. And Rogue and those smart Republicans think that is too high a reduction in warheads. We must of course assume that the Russians have an equal number of ICBMs, so that makes 13,200 warheads. China, India, Pakistan, North Korea, Israel, France, the UK also have multiple warhead missiles, and I have no idea how many, but for the hell of it, let's say a combined 2,000 missiles x 6 = 12,000 more nuclear warheads. Total : 15,200. Hmmmm, do you think , Rogue, that maybe, just maybe, we should all start reducing those stockpiles a teeny weeny bit? It's like your 10,000 rounds of ammo hidden under your bed, how many bullets do you need?
..........
My post 149001 . Total : 25 200
2,150 active nuclear warheads and I have a link!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_w...
No, I have 150,000 rounds of ammo.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 131,021 - 131,040 of173,766
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

48 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 15 min Torn Sak 1,073,062
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 33 min voice of peace 67,550
St. Vincent DePaul Store Thrift Store Moving to... 1 hr omeomy 3
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr litesong 45,580
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 1 hr JOEL COOL DUDE 68,176
If America Doesnt Abolish the FED, the FED wi... 2 hr hands on AR 2
AP Exclusive: Union members appointed after $10... (Mar '08) 3 hr HUmy 7,563
•••
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••