BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 192524 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.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#162381 Jul 3, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Hummm, firearms expert at Geo. Zimmerman trial said that when the gun was fired, the muzzle was against Trayvon's short butttttt the shirt was not up against Trayvon's body. And that can only mean that Trayvon was leaning forward when he was shot which backs Zimmerman's statement that Trayvon was on top of him!
So maybe he was. Does that mean Martin attacked Zimmerman? Asked you this before, but no reply. Let's say you attack me, I fight back, and find myself on top. That makes me the aggressor, the attacker? Appears to me Zimmerman was all talk, all mouth. But, hey, again, let the jury decide.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#162382 Jul 3, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
You stupidly asked,(above) "Your point being? Nothing. Nothing at all"
Well, my point being is, did you not write : "Do not allow small children near this entity".
Excuse me, I merely pointed in whose presence, you or me, parents would prefer leaving their children with. Another thing, how will you also explain "kerplung" to the kindergarteners? And dumbazzbastard and dumbazzbitch? Equal opportunity foul mouth? You said you only write like that to me and the others, whoever that may be, though we can guess. LIE. You talk like that to any one who stuffs you at every turn, whether here in Topix or anywhere. You're a loudmouth who has nothing but vagaries, insults, ad hominems, profanities, all patented LMAO (LRS tm reg'd).
Who was the post directed at, moron? I'm sorry, I've never used the word "kerplung". Since DABs are not real words and cannot be found in a dictionary, there is no reason to explain at all. Lie? No. You assume way too much. I speak this way to you and your puppets. That's it. I've been warning you about assuming too much. Just can't learn, can ya? You also have that memory issue. Remember day one? Sure you do spanky. Will you ever learn the world does not like AHoles? Not a chance. The jackfish motto; Carry on with azz held high and face dragging the pavement. The least you could do is shave your butt and walk backwards! LMAO!
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#162383 Jul 3, 2013
WelbyMD wrote:
<quoted text>They are dual-citizens at best however they could never ever become "natural-born" U.S. citizens. Just like Kenyan-born Obama could not. In fact Obama is technically an illegal-alien as dual-citizenship is not recognized w/Great Britain.
He is not really the POTUS and he isn't even half-black. His mother was a pornstar and his real father was Frank Marshall Davis. The man is a thug and usurper maximus. Obama is the Antichrist set-up by the Freemasons/Illuminati to run their NWO from the UN.
Snowden knows BHO was born in Kenya and that is why the Obamanites want him dead so bad. Just like they did to Andrew Breitbart.
www.WND.com
Every child born in America regardless of the citizenship of her or his parents, is a Natural Born US citizen.

"Some birthers imagine that there is a difference between being a “citizen by birth” or a “native citizen” on the one hand and a “natural born” citizen on the other.“Eccentric” is too kind a word for this notion, which is either daft or dishonest. All three terms are identical in meaning."---The Wall Street Journal ( http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297... )

More reading on the subject:

http://www.fredthompsonsamerica.com/2012/07/3...

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyiname...

http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:/www.obama...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-cit...

http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_eviden...

Re: "born in Kenya."

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.

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
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#162384 Jul 3, 2013
Re: "born in Kenya."

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.

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
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#162385 Jul 3, 2013
Re: "Obama is the Antichrist set-up by the Freemasons/Illuminati to run their NWO from the UN."

You seem to be trying very hard to give a great example of how nutty birthers really are. You are doing a great job. Keep up the excellent work!

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#162386 Jul 3, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Who was the post directed at, moron? I'm sorry, I've never used the word "kerplung". Since DABs are not real words and cannot be found in a dictionary, there is no reason to explain at all. Lie? No. You assume way too much. I speak this way to you and your puppets. That's it. I've been warning you about assuming too much. Just can't learn, can ya? You also have that memory issue. Remember day one? Sure you do spanky. Will you ever learn the world does not like AHoles? Not a chance. The jackfish motto; Carry on with azz held high and face dragging the pavement. The least you could do is shave your butt and walk backwards! LMAO!
Oh, the good speller. Seeing as kerplunk is not to be found in the dictionary, as your warped mind made it up, does it really matter whether it ends in "g" or "k"? And you think you look smart?

Are you not just a wee bit embarrassed?

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#162387 Jul 3, 2013
JBH wrote:
<quoted text>
=========
Protocol could be a verb and noun.
When it is talking a third person, it is the verb being protocols--just like what it says, "Obama protocols to the Corporate."
If it were you, then it would say, "you protocol to corporate."
And it would still be a fantasy verb with no definition in the English language.

Apparently nouns have special meaning as verbs for the schizophrenic.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Protocols is a verb?

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#162388 Jul 3, 2013
JBH wrote:
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Protocols is a verb?
=========
Protocol could be a verb and noun.
Protocol usage is just like usage of the word better.
Better could be a verb or adjective.
Examples as adjective are: you are better if you have a good sensory organ, or you are better (off) if you know logic.
Examples for verb are: you can better yourself if you could improve your writings, or you want a good job in order to better your future.
Here is the example of verb and adjective together:
You need to better yourself for advancement, by speaking of things that make sense in order that you can be better (off) in the future, to live a better life.
Cool! Then 'schizophrenics' is also a verb, as in "JBH schizophrenics his English on Topix."

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#162389 Jul 3, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Megyn Kelly Report on 'Hide The Decline'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =FwTuEqqh0-gXX
Oh, can you guess what happened to Michael Mann's lawsuit?
Can you guess what happened to all the birfoon lawsuits?
Opensecrets org

Oakdale, NY

#162390 Jul 3, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Very unfortunately, the above is pretty much all true. But I will persist in saying that democrats or liberals, whatever, and however as corporation-bonded and dishonest, still leave a greater percentage of the crumbs to the ordinary Joe/Jane than the Republicans or conservatives , whatever. I can't think of a single piece of social legislation that your Repubs and our conservatives have ever enacted in the last 100 years. Name them ; unemployment insurance, social security, vacation leave, reduced work hours, benefits, safety on in the workplace, medical benefits or some medical benefits, maternity leave, children's allowances or tax credits, ALL democrat or here in Canada, liberal. They do leave some crumbs, the Repubs can't be bothered.
Your words are ALL TRUE.

Democrats are the lesser of two evils.

I am tired of voting for another corporate centrist hack that is why I did not vote for Obama.

In 2008 I voted for Ralph Nader in the General Election and Ron Paul in the Republican primary.

NOT Obama and NOT McCain.

I didn't even vote in 2012.

A POX ON BOTH HOUSES!
Opensecrets org

Oakdale, NY

#162391 Jul 3, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Aren't repubs the party of "small government, small budgets?" Perhaps Rogue can explain. Oh, country clubbers, progressives. I did ask Rogue , oh , a number of times, and he never replied. I asked him to name me one republican president in both the 20th and 21st century who was not a progressive country clubber. Silence.
The Republican party "small government does not exist.

HEADLINES THAT YOU NEVER READ IN THE REPUBLICAN/FOREIGN-OWNED U.S. MEDIA:/ http://tinyurl.com/5mq65x

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!

President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion a THIRD time!

President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion a FOURTH time!

President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion a FIFTH time!

"Our National Debt is up Three Trillion Dollars under George W. Bush!" / http://www.lafn.org/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html
Opensecrets org

Oakdale, NY

#162392 Jul 3, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Aren't repubs the party of "small government, small budgets?" Perhaps Rogue can explain. Oh, country clubbers, progressives. I did ask Rogue , oh , a number of times, and he never replied. I asked him to name me one republican president in both the 20th and 21st century who was not a progressive country clubber. Silence.
No Republican administration has balanced a budget since Eisenhower in 1957.

Dwight Eisenhower was last Republican President to preside over a balanced budget. He had a balanced budget in 1956 and 1957. Since then, there have been two presidents to preside over balanced budgets, LBJ in 1969 and Clinton in 1998 through 2001. During the last 40 years there have been five budget surpluses, all five were under Democratic Presidents: 1969, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001.
Opensecrets org

Oakdale, NY

#162393 Jul 3, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
And just what percentage of our population are Progressive Socialists?
Liberals can never be progressives as a true Liberal is open minded and believe in the free market system.
From Wiki: Classical liberalism is a political philosophy and ideology belonging to liberalism in which primary emphasis is placed on securing the freedom of the individual by limiting the power of the government. The philosophy emerged as a response to the Industrial Revolution and urbanization in the 19th century in Europe and the United States.[1] It advocates civil liberties with a limited government under the rule of law, and belief in laissez-faire economic policy. Classical liberalism is built on ideas that had already arisen by the end of the 18th century, such as selected ideas of Adam Smith, John Locke, Jean-Baptiste Say, Thomas Malthus, and David Ricardo, stressing the belief in free market and natural law, utilitarianism, and progress. Classical liberals were more suspicious than conservatives of all but the most minimal government and, adopting Thomas Hobbes's theory of government, they believed government had been created by individuals to protect themselves from one another.
You do not even know the definition of a liberal/progressive.

All liberal/progressives believe in the Free Market, Freedom, Liberty, etc. etc. etc.

The sad truth is there is no such thing as a free market.

Fox News has ZERO liberal/progressives working for them.

They are all corporate Centrist Democrats just like the Obama's and the Clinton's.

Most Republicans like Reagan and the Bush's LOVE socialism for the wealthiest.
Opensecrets org

Oakdale, NY

#162394 Jul 3, 2013
General Eisenhower Was Right
February 16, 2004 / http://tinyurl.com/luxwlqe
A small article on page A12 of the January 29 issue of the New York Times is revealing with respect to the extent of the power of the military-industrial complex in American life. The article reports that the Army’s chief of staff, Gen. Peter Schoomaker, told the House Armed Services Committee that he is going to increase the size of U.S. forces by 30,000.

Did Congress authorize the increase? No. And when a few congressmen indicated to the general that they’d be pleased to have Congress authorize the increase, the general responded that Congress didn’t need to trouble themselves with providing such authority — that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld had already authorized the temporary increase under his “emergency” power — and that the “emergency” would justify the increase for the next four years. In other words,“Don’t worry your pretty little heads, elected representatives of the people; the military bureaucracy has the situation well under control. Go back to your knitting.” http://fff.org/explore-freedom/article/eisenh...

President Eisenhower once noted that a few Texas oil millionaires wanted to abolish social security / http://tinyurl.com/bp7h8 / Nov. 8, 1954
http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/ike.asp

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#162395 Jul 3, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
So maybe he was. Does that mean Martin attacked Zimmerman? Asked you this before, but no reply. Let's say you attack me, I fight back, and find myself on top. That makes me the aggressor, the attacker? Appears to me Zimmerman was all talk, all mouth. But, hey, again, let the jury decide.
Yes, all physical evidence and the one eyewitness proves that Martin ATTACKED Zimmerman. You see, you Libtards think it is okay to attack people who offend you in anyway. Just like my next door neighbor who stole my TEA Party sign or the Occutards that break things simply because they are frustrated and then wonder why they got arrested.
I would suggest you Libtards grow up but I know that is impossible. You will always be immature cry babies.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#162396 Jul 3, 2013
Opensecrets org wrote:
<quoted text>
No Republican administration has balanced a budget since Eisenhower in 1957.
Dwight Eisenhower was last Republican President to preside over a balanced budget. He had a balanced budget in 1956 and 1957. Since then, there have been two presidents to preside over balanced budgets, LBJ in 1969 and Clinton in 1998 through 2001. During the last 40 years there have been five budget surpluses, all five were under Democratic Presidents: 1969, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001.
Rogue ain't gonna like that one bit. He'll say that 3 or it 4, of them were Gingrich budgets who singlehandedly wrote all 3/4.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#162397 Jul 3, 2013
Opensecrets org wrote:
General Eisenhower Was Right
February 16, 2004 / http://tinyurl.com/luxwlqe
A small article on page A12 of the January 29 issue of the New York Times is revealing with respect to the extent of the power of the military-industrial complex in American life. The article reports that the Army’s chief of staff, Gen. Peter Schoomaker, told the House Armed Services Committee that he is going to increase the size of U.S. forces by 30,000.
Did Congress authorize the increase? No. And when a few congressmen indicated to the general that they’d be pleased to have Congress authorize the increase, the general responded that Congress didn’t need to trouble themselves with providing such authority — that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld had already authorized the temporary increase under his “emergency” power — and that the “emergency” would justify the increase for the next four years. In other words,“Don’t worry your pretty little heads, elected representatives of the people; the military bureaucracy has the situation well under control. Go back to your knitting.” http://fff.org/explore-freedom/article/eisenh...
President Eisenhower once noted that a few Texas oil millionaires wanted to abolish social security / http://tinyurl.com/bp7h8 / Nov. 8, 1954
http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/ike.asp
Ah, you are a Extreme Libertarian. Well Gen. Peter Schoomaker did not say that and you can not prove it. I have know enough generals in my time and even a loony-left like Colon Powell or Wesley Clark would not have said that to Congress.
By the way, some generals did some funny math in the early 1980s and Congress got even. In fact I was in a meeting with Gen. Colon Powell when he read the letter from Congress. I could go into the details but I seem to bore people so this time I won't.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#162398 Jul 3, 2013
In the late 1970s Jimmy Carter, and the Democrat controlled Congress, cut the military to the bone and they cut Army flight school students in half. By 1982 the Army was short 2,000 aviators and Reagan doubled the number of students going through but someone got the idea that they would phase out warrant officer aviators so without Congresses knowledge or approval they increased the number of commissioned officers and cut back warrant officers.
By 1988 we had the correct number of aviators but we had one thousand to many commissioned officers while we were short one thousand warrant officer aviators and that was when Congress got involved.
I was at FORSCOM and worked in J1 and specialized in aviator (and EOD) assignments. After the meeting with Powell, all excess commissioned officers were reassigned to NONE aviator positions and promotions for COs dropped to close to 50% while WO promotions went to 90%.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#162399 Jul 3, 2013
Do you know that the Army has five-man EOD teams all over the place. They only do military munitions but if a local police finds something that looks like a military explosive device, Army the EOD get's called.
Well, these five-man EOD teams seemed to be at 40% strength or 200% and I spent just as much time trying to fix them then I did aviator unbalances.
Do you want to know how many aviators there are at Fort Campbell, KY? Probably around a thousand!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#162400 Jul 3, 2013
Opensecrets org wrote:
General Eisenhower Was Right
February 16, 2004 / http://tinyurl.com/luxwlqe
A small article on page A12 of the January 29 issue of the New York Times is revealing with respect to the extent of the power of the military-industrial complex in American life. The article reports that the Army’s chief of staff, Gen. Peter Schoomaker, told the House Armed Services Committee that he is going to increase the size of U.S. forces by 30,000.
Did Congress authorize the increase? No. And when a few congressmen indicated to the general that they’d be pleased to have Congress authorize the increase, the general responded that Congress didn’t need to trouble themselves with providing such authority — that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld had already authorized the temporary increase under his “emergency” power — and that the “emergency” would justify the increase for the next four years. In other words,“Don’t worry your pretty little heads, elected representatives of the people; the military bureaucracy has the situation well under control. Go back to your knitting.” http://fff.org/explore-freedom/article/eisenh...
President Eisenhower once noted that a few Texas oil millionaires wanted to abolish social security / http://tinyurl.com/bp7h8 / Nov. 8, 1954
http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/ike.asp
Hummm, I knew I would find it. And here is the truth. Congress approved it!!! Oh, please note the source!!!

Army to Restructure, Will Grow by 30,000

By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Jan. 29, 2004 – The Army will grow to 510,000 soldiers over the next four years as a temporary measure, a senior Army official said today.
The official briefed the press on background after Army Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Schoomaker told Congress Jan. 28 that Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has authorized the Army to exceed end strength limits by 30,000. The increase is allowed under emergency authorities Congress granted the Defense Department.
http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min Bluestater 1,252,455
News Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 8 min Mark 52,028
SOLUTION ON HOW TO GET AN EX BACK,CONTACT (drdo... 30 min stacy 24
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 35 min RACE 99,926
Word (Dec '08) 52 min RACE 5,329
Last word + 2 (Mar '12) 55 min RACE 965
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 56 min RACE 6,152
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages