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 6,875)

Showing posts 137,481 - 137,500 of167,698
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156410
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
In the 1930 John Dos Passos novel The 42nd Parallel, the quotation [ "There's a sucker born every minute"] is attributed to Mark Twain.
Mark Twain, one of the best, was as anti-religious, the ultimate iconoclast, as any man or woman. Did you at least know that? Yet, it is not clear if he believed in God and I don't think you or anyone else could be the judge of that. But anti-religious, Twain? Yes. Look it up.

Since: Sep 09

ISTANBUL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156411
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

ISTANBUL and REPUBLIC OF TURKEY
THE CENTER OF THE WORLD.

The Center of 3 Major Religions..

Churches,Mosques,Sinagogs and PEACE in Mind...

http://www.youtube.com/watch...
neighbor

Westerlo, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156412
May 21, 2013
 
Bogus
neighbor

Westerlo, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156413
May 21, 2013
 
neighbor wrote:
Bogus
For sure
Pdamerica org

Oakdale, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156414
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Nazrat wrote:
Democracynow org wrote:
<quoted text>
Your small Republican Government is a MYTH:
12 years of Reagan/Bush and 8 years of Bush/Cheney increased the size of government with the largest deficits in history.
Enclosed is the Proof:
----------
President Ronald Reagan is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $100 Billion in one year!
President Ronald Reagan is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $200 Billion in one year!
President George H.W. Bush is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $300 Billion in one year!
President George H.W. Bush is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $400 Billion in one year!
President George W. Bush is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $500 Billion in one year!
President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion AGAIN! Almost hits $600 Billion!
html
=======
BUSH REPUBLICANS DESTROYED USA with the help of some Blue Dog Corporate Democrats!
Iraq war 'caused slowdown in the US'
February 28, 2008 / http://tinyurl.com/2r8b3k
THE Iraq war has cost the US 50-60 times more than the Bush administration predicted and was a central cause of the sub-prime banking crisis threatening the world economy, according to Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz.
The former World Bank vice-president yesterday said the war had, so far, cost the US something like $US3trillion ($3.3 trillion) compared with the $US50-$US60-billion predicted in 2003.
Australia also faced a real bill much greater than the $2.2billion in military spending reported last week by Australian Defence Force chief Angus Houston, Professor Stiglitz said, pointing to higher oil prices and other indirect costs of the wars.
Professor Stiglitz told the Chatham House think tank in London that the Bush White House was currently estimating the cost of the war at about $US500 billion, but that figure massively understated things such as the medical and welfare costs of US military servicemen.
The war was now the second-most expensive in US history after World War II and the second-longest after Vietnam, he said.
The spending on Iraq was a hidden cause of the current credit crunch because the US central bank responded to the massive financial drain of the war by flooding the American economy with cheap credit.
"The regulators were looking the other way and money was being lent to anybody this side of a life-support system," he said.
That led to a housing bubble and a consumption boom, and the fallout was plunging the US economy into recession and saddling the next US president with the biggest budget deficit in history, he said.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0 ,...
======<quoted text>
But what she does not seem to comprehend is that under Reagan the the 98th and 99th Congresses, the Republicans controlled the Senate and that coincides with the debt trend going down between 1986 and 1989 and then when Bush-41 the Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress and the trend went UP!!!
And under Clinton in 1994 BOTH Houses of Congress where controlled not only by the Republicans, but CONSERVATIVE Republicans under Newt Gingrich and that was when the trend started down.
But under Bush-43 both Houses were controlled by Country Club RINOs until the PROGRESSIVES under San Fran Nan Pelosi and Dirty Hairy Reid took over for Bush's last two years in office and that is why FY2008 took off like a skyrocket!!!
For 6 out of 8 years Bush and Cheney had a Republican House and a Republican Senate.

They increased the size of government with the greatest deficits in history.

BTW: Obama, Reid, Pelosi are all corporate Centrist Democrats and NOT LIBERAL.
Pdamerica org

Oakdale, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156415
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Great work. 100% in agreement. And your sources are undeniable.
Of course, your post will receive very bad reviews from birthers and tea partyers. Having no decent or intelligent reply, expect abuse, name-calling and profanity. Such is the nature of the birther beast.
I am very aware of the crazies on this thread.

LOL
Pdamerica org

Oakdale, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156416
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Nazrat wrote:
<quoted text>
Generals Powell and Petraeus are both left-wing political hacks. All generals are political appointees, appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. As a result, some generals lean left and some right depending on who appointed them.
For an example, in 1989 Reagan appointed Powell to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. WHY? Well, Reagan knew the Democrat controlled Senate would approve it and Reagan knew that the Chairman JofS was a dead end job.
In the end that proved to be a correct appointment as Colon was stuck i D.D. while Gen. Schwarzkopf was combate field commander in the Persian Gulf!!! If Powell had been the field commander, the war probably would not turned out very well for us.
I do give Daddy Bush credit for Iraq war One.

90% of the cost was paid by the Arabs, Germans, Japanese, and Daddy Bush had most of the whole world with the USA.

Dumbya Junior Bush did the exact opposite of his father.

Bush and Cheney stuck the American taxpayer with the WAR BILL.

==========

Cheney 1994: Invading Baghdad Would Create Quagmire C-SPAN
http://tinyurl.com/3d6x5b
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

General Norman Schwartzkopf : Iraq Quagmire For USA
http://tinyurl.com/ymngms
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

General Norman Schwartzkopf : Iraq Quagmire For USA
Iraq Quagmire: That, George Bush, knew!
http://tinyurl.com/2q9ex6
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Pdamerica org

Oakdale, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156417
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO!!!!!
O'Connor questions court's decision to take Bush v. Gore

April 27, 2013 / http://tinyurl.com/c9sy69e

Retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor hasn't given much thought to which was the most important case she helped decide during her 25 years on the bench. But she has no doubt which was the most controversial.

It was Bush v. Gore, which ended the Florida recount and decided the 2000 presidential election.

Looking back, O'Connor said, she isn't sure the high court should have taken the case.

"It took the case and decided it at a time when it was still a big election issue," O'Connor said during a talk Friday with the Tribune editorial board. "Maybe the court should have said,'We're not going to take it, goodbye.'"

The case, she said, "stirred up the public" and "gave the court a less-than-perfect reputation."

"Obviously the court did reach a decision and thought it had to reach a decision," she said. "It turned out the election authorities in Florida hadn't done a real good job there and kind of messed it up. And probably the Supreme Court added to the problem at the end of the day."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-m...
Pdamerica org

Oakdale, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156418
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

No other future Supreme Court or any court is allowed to use Bush v Gore as precedent. Bush is truly an illegitimate President. http://tinyurl.com/2ps3e3
George W. Bush's January 20, 2001 inauguration was unconstitutional. This isn't because Bush lost the popular vote. Nor is it because he lost Florida and thus the electoral vote. The U.S. Supreme Court's decision to hear the Florida recount lawsuit, Bush v. Gore, violated the U.S. Constitution. It's a states' rights issue. Elections fall under state law; the highest court that may resolve a legal challenge about an election is a state supreme court. The U.S. Supreme Court--a federal body--didn't have jurisdiction in the case.
http://yalelawjournal.org/2006/11/07/flanders...

---------

Has Bush v. Gore Become the Case That Must Not Be Named?
August 15, 2006 / http://tinyurl.com/qbx2s
At a law school Supreme Court conference that I attended last fall, there was a panel on “The Rehnquist Court.” No one mentioned Bush v. Gore, the most historic case of William Rehnquist’s time as chief justice, and during the Q. and A. no one asked about it. When I asked a prominent law professor about this strange omission, he told me he had been invited to participate in another Rehnquist retrospective, and was told in advance that Bush v. Gore would not be discussed.
The ruling that stopped the Florida recount and handed the presidency to George W. Bush is disappearing down the legal world’s version of the memory hole, the slot where, in George Orwell’s “1984,” government workers disposed of politically inconvenient records. The Supreme Court has not cited it once since it was decided, and when Justice Antonin Scalia, who loves to hold forth on court precedents, was asked about it at a forum earlier this year, he snapped,“Come on, get over it.”
There is a legal argument for pushing Bush v. Gore aside. The majority opinion announced that the ruling was “limited to the present circumstances” and could not be cited as precedent. But many legal scholars insisted at the time that this assertion was itself dictum — the part of a legal opinion that is nonbinding — and illegitimate, because under the doctrine of stare decisis, courts cannot make rulings whose reasoning applies only to a single case.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/15/opinion/15t...
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156419
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
chuck wrote:
IT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED THAT OBAMA ,WAS INDEED BORN IN KENYA. AND TRUE TO FORM THE UNITED STATES GOV'T. HAS ALWAYS LIED. WHY ARE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE SO WILLING TO SIT BACK AND ACCEPT WHAT IS CONSTITUTIONALLY AND ETHICALLY WRONG. THEY TRIED TO CRUCIFY BILL CLINTON FOR GETTING A LITTLE IN THE CLOSET OF THE OVAL OFFICE. YET CONGRATULATE A MUSLIM ,ALIEN AND VOLATE THE LAWS OF OUR CONSTITUTION AND NOT ONLY LET HIM RUN BUT ALLOW HIM TO BECOME THE MOST DISGRACEFUL PRESIDENT IN HISTORY. ANY BODY AWAKE
The “born in Kenya” story is the height of the loony side of the birther movement. It is based on forgeries like that of Lucas D. Smith, and falsifications–such as the claim that Obama’s Kenyan grandmother said that he was born in Kenya—when she actually said right on the same tape that he was born IN HAWAII, and she said in another interview that the first that her family in Kenya had heard of Obama’s birth was in a letter FROM HAWAII.

Lucas D. Smith, a convicted felon, claimed that he went to Kenya and got Obama’s birth certificate at a hospital in Mombasa. But Lucas D. Smith has constantly refused to show proof that he, Smith, had ever gone to Kenya. All that he would have to do would be to show a Kenya stamp on a page of a passport, but Lucas D. Smith has refused to do that, constantly, and he has also constantly refused to say why he will not show that proof.(Moreover, his “birth certificate” uses US date formats [month/day/year] and not the day/month/year format used in Kenya.)

Laying aside for a moment the overwhelming proof that Obama was born in Hawaii, the evidence that Obama was NOT born in Kenya is also very strong. There were a grand total of 21 people who came to the USA from Kenya in 1961. Of these only seven were US citizens. And the birther myth has always been that Obama’s parents went there and returned by plane, but only one person came to the USA from Kenya in 1961 by plane and that person was, wait for it, NOT a US citizen. And Obama’s father did not go to Kenya in 1961 either (making it unlikely that his mother did, since travel late in pregnancy was rare, and even more rare without the husband going along). WND has proved with a FOI Act request that Obama senior stayed in Hawaii throughout 1961.

And the Kenyan government investigated the “born in Kenya” story, and found that it was not true.

“Jon Chessoni, a first secretary at the Kenyan Embassy in Washington, can’t understand why his office gets so many baseless questions about whether Barack Obama was born in Kenya.

“It’s madness,” said Chessoni on Monday.“His father, in 1961, would not even have been in Kenya. When this matter first came up, the Kenyan government did its research and confirmed that these are all baseless claims.””

http://washingtonindependent.com/53654/forged

Obama has a Hawaii birth certificate that says that he was born in Hawaii, in Kapiolani Hospital, and the officials of both parties in Hawaii have confirmed that fact. It is also confirmed by the birth announcement in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961, which were sent to the papers only by the DOH of Hawaii.

Obama’s birth announcement appeared in a section of the newspapers called Health Bureau Statistics. As the name indicates, and as the papers and the DOH also say, ONLY the DOH of Hawaii could send birth notices to the Health Bureau Statistics section of the paper. And the DOH only sent out those notices for children that it had issued birth certificates for, and in 1961 the DOH was not allowed to register the births of children who were not born in Hawaii.

Oh, and there is this:

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/04/kapiol
neighbor

Clinton, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156420
May 21, 2013
 
Bull larky

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156421
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Jacques,
Bill Clinton's tawdry extra-marital affairs were a devastating side-effect for Al Gore's election bid.
And Gore's inability to speak in anything other than choppy sentences was not an asset to him or the country either. He couldn't even carry Tennessee.
He's nearly as stiff as John Kerry.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156422
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

OMG, you can not believe this sh*t. My good old friend, Dr. James Hansen, use to not only believe in Global Cooling some 35 odd years ago but he believed we were entering another Little Ice Age.
But not only that, he thought the New Little Ice Age would mean more TORNADOES!!!
Thank you God, thank you God, for exposing Dr. James Hansen as the idiot I knew he was!!!
Oh, make sure you go to the link and read the newspaper release from 1975!!!

Oklahoma’s Tornadoes Caused by Global Cooling — 1975 Theory Written by Gary North on May 21, 2013

There is a simple explanation for the tornadoes in Oklahoma: global cooling. That was hot stuff in 1975.

James Hansen, an up-and-coming climate scientist with NASA in 1971, laid the groundwork with his computer model that showed that a new ice age was coming. Hard to believe? Click here. Today, he is the most famous of the global warmers — sorry,“climate change” scientists.
As for tornadoes in Oklahoma, the ever-alert Real Science blog posted this clipping.

Read more: http://teapartyeconomist.com/2013/05/21/oklah...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156423
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

loose cannon wrote:
Jacques,
Bill Clinton's tawdry extra-marital affairs were a devastating side-effect for Al Gore's election bid.
And Gore's inability to speak in anything other than choppy sentences was not an asset to him or the country either. He couldn't even carry Tennessee.
He's nearly as stiff as John Kerry.
Yep, if good old Owl Gore had won his home state, he would not have needed FLORIDA!!!
Why in 1984 Walter Mondale won his home state which was the ONLY state (+ D.C.) he won!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156425
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Global Warming Petition Project
http://www.petitionproject.org/

Signers by state;
http://www.petitionproject.org/signers_by_sta...

And I thought you Libtards said that 97% of all Scientists agreed that manmade Global Warming was real?!?!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156426
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

neighbor wrote:
Bull larky
Sheeple larky!!! LOL

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156427
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Pdamerica org wrote:
No other future Supreme Court or any court is allowed to use Bush v Gore as precedent. Bush is truly an illegitimate President. http://tinyurl.com/2ps3e3
George W. Bush's January 20, 2001 inauguration was unconstitutional. This isn't because Bush lost the popular vote. Nor is it because he lost Florida and thus the electoral vote. The U.S. Supreme Court's decision to hear the Florida recount lawsuit, Bush v. Gore, violated the U.S. Constitution. It's a states' rights issue. Elections fall under state law; the highest court that may resolve a legal challenge about an election is a state supreme court. The U.S. Supreme Court--a federal body--didn't have jurisdiction in the case.
http://yalelawjournal.org/2006/11/07/flanders...
---------
Has Bush v. Gore Become the Case That Must Not Be Named?
August 15, 2006 / http://tinyurl.com/qbx2s
At a law school Supreme Court conference that I attended last fall, there was a panel on “The Rehnquist Court.” No one mentioned Bush v. Gore, the most historic case of William Rehnquist’s time as chief justice, and during the Q. and A. no one asked about it. When I asked a prominent law professor about this strange omission, he told me he had been invited to participate in another Rehnquist retrospective, and was told in advance that Bush v. Gore would not be discussed.
The ruling that stopped the Florida recount and handed the presidency to George W. Bush is disappearing down the legal world’s version of the memory hole, the slot where, in George Orwell’s “1984,” government workers disposed of politically inconvenient records. The Supreme Court has not cited it once since it was decided, and when Justice Antonin Scalia, who loves to hold forth on court precedents, was asked about it at a forum earlier this year, he snapped,“Come on, get over it.”
There is a legal argument for pushing Bush v. Gore aside. The majority opinion announced that the ruling was “limited to the present circumstances” and could not be cited as precedent. But many legal scholars insisted at the time that this assertion was itself dictum — the part of a legal opinion that is nonbinding — and illegitimate, because under the doctrine of stare decisis, courts cannot make rulings whose reasoning applies only to a single case.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/15/opinion/15t...
Yep, still whining after 23 years. You need to get a life!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156428
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Pdamerica org wrote:
<quoted text>
O'Connor questions court's decision to take Bush v. Gore
April 27, 2013 / http://tinyurl.com/c9sy69e
Retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor hasn't given much thought to which was the most important case she helped decide ..........
of messed it up. And probably the Supreme Court added to the problem at the end of the day."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-m...
Ah Tootzie, how long did it take for the IRS to approve YOUR tax exempt status?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156429
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I talked to a friend last night and he mentioned that the Army depot in Pennsylvania has not overhauled a M109 Paladin self-propelled field gun in three years!!! When they return from the Mideast, they are just lined up and sit!!!
Apparently the same thing is happening to M1 Abrams tanks and M2/3 Bradleys.
Most of the cost of these vehicles is the hull which almost never wear out and you ran refurbish and update these for a fraction of their real cost. Case in point is the M109 which served in Vietnam and is still economically repairable and updateable.
But the real concern is, what if we have another war and these vehicles will need six month plus to get back in the supply line. Obama is doing the same thing Carter did and that is to gut the military which only endangers our men and women in uniform!

Editorial: M1 tanks? No thanks Sunday, May 5, 2013

The addiction to pork in Washington is coming in 70-ton servings — the M1 Abrams tanks the U.S. Army says it can't stomach but Congress keeps serving. This is bipartisan spending run amok to preserve jobs back home, and it reflects what is wrong with a Congress that talks tough on reducing the fiscal deficit but wastes taxpayer money on military equipment the Army doesn't even want.

The Army wants to stop the ongoing refurbishing of Abrams tanks, which would largely idle a General Dynamics plant in Ohio until 2017 and save roughly $3 billion. After the Pentagon first announced its plan two years ago, the company estimated more than 500 subcontractors employing up to 18,000 people could be affected.

The predictable pushback from Congress came amid aggressive lobbying and campaign contributions from General Dynamics' employees and political action committees, according to the Center for Public Integrity. As the donations rolled in, Congress reauthorized the tank spending in fiscal year 2012, and last year 173 Democratic and Republican House members signed a letter urging the Defense Department to continue tank production to "preserve the industrial base.''

The Army has 2,300 of the M1 Abrams tanks deployed and 3,000 more sitting idle at a military base in California. The Army has said its needs for a 2,384-tank fleet can be met by the end of this year, but Congress wants to spend $436 million to keep refurbishing additional tanks despite the military's objections. Never mind that the Pentagon must absorb $42 billion in sequester cuts by September and cut $487 billion over the next decade. This is another waste of public money just when the pressure to cut spending is increasing.

http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/ed...
denise

Rome, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#156430
May 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rude ppl

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 137,481 - 137,500 of167,698
|
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.

38 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 min Fair Game 43,047
What’s Next for the Bundys? 2 min Because they didnt kill 1
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 2 min JOEL COOL DUDE 65,244
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min shinningelectr0n 1,034,780
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 8 min truth 47,085
Happy Easter Chicago 9 dead 32 min throw more shoes 2
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 33 min Go Blue Forever 96,160
•••
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••