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

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 ... Full Story
Frank

Spokane, WA

#170191 Sep 2, 2013
Poppo wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you saying the majority of the electorate are anti-American Frank?
Only a small percentage of the people that voted for Obama are 100% behind his entire anti-American radical left wing agenda.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#170192 Sep 2, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Oh, I know how Jacqueau is always pull sh*t out of my azz so here is the link. But do excuse me as it was in the mid-1990s.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 94-896
BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, INC., PETITIONER v. IRA GORE, Jr.
on writ of certiorari to the supreme court of alabama
[May 20, 1996]
Justice Stevens delivered the opinion of the Court.
....In addition, the jury assessed $4 million in punitive damages, based on a determination that the nondisclosure policy constituted "gross, oppressive or malicious" fraud.....
Firstly, that sentence is out of nowhere : "I know how Jacqueau is always pull sh*t out of my azz so here is the link." Irrelevant; Secondly, there is no linkl; thirdly, what in blazes' name are you mumbling about?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#170193 Sep 2, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you own oil stock?
Why do you ask and why should I even reply? Did I, or anyone else here ever even so much as HINT that it was wrong to own oil stock? Anyone holding retirement savings plan or mutual funds probably owns some, often without his/her knowledge. So what?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#170194 Sep 2, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmmmm, I have shown proof before but when Bush was president about a third of the unemployment numbers were revised upward on the following monthly report, about a third revised DOWNWARD and about a third were not revised.
But before last years election all of Obama's monthly unemployment numbers were revised UPWARDLY with the except of only a couple and one were revised downwardly. I am not gone to bother to look up the link for you so you will just have to take my word for it.
Those revisions by Obama : Do you have any hint, rumour, indication, or proof, that they were tampered with? That would be extremely grave and don't think the opposition parties and anti-Obama media wouldn't like to expose said tampering. Statistics is a big industry in gov't, and it seems to me, with so many people involved, that should there have been tampering the last 4 years, aforementioned parties would only be too happy to divulge it.
Linktv org

Sayville, NY

#170195 Sep 2, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe only millions? Highly unlikely.
But the evidence for human lineage from an ancestor common to chimp is conclusive. Also conclusive is the evidence that the founder population was much greater than a single mating pair.
That means the Adam & Eve story is literally incorrect. "Adam" had a mother and father, who had parents ....
It also means that Paul's claim that death entered the world through sin of one man is FALSE.
<quoted text>
Maybe Millions? How about 900,000? 800,000? 700,000 years old?

Or maybe 10 Billion years old? or 20 Billion years old? or 50 billion years old?

This too me is speculation and scientist do not really know so they estimate.

Am I making any sense too you?
Linktv org

Sayville, NY

#170196 Sep 2, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Oh, I know how Jacqueau is always pull sh*t out of my azz so here is the link. But do excuse me as it was in the mid-1990s.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 94-896
BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, INC., PETITIONER v. IRA GORE, Jr.
on writ of certiorari to the supreme court of alabama
[May 20, 1996]
Justice Stevens delivered the opinion of the Court.
....In addition, the jury assessed $4 million in punitive damages, based on a determination that the nondisclosure policy constituted "gross, oppressive or malicious" fraud.....
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...
Linktv org

Sayville, NY

#170197 Sep 2, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
I do not know who to copy text from a PDF so go the the last paragraph on the Aug 2, 2013 unemployment report.
Please note that the new employed was revised DOWNWARD from +195K to +176K for the moth of May and June's numbers were also revised downward from +195k to +188k.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pd...
There seems to be a pattern in the Obama administration that the GOOD NUMBERS are almost always revised DOWNWARDLY!!! They hope that people will never read the last paragraph of their unemployment reports! WHY?!? Because they know Libtards never read beyond the first page of anything!!!
Tax Returns: A Comprehensive Assessment of the Bush Administration's Record on Cutting Taxes / April 23, 2004 / http://tinyurl.com/orghy2
The Bush Administration has stood in favor of tax cuts through thick and thin. In the midst of a booming economy and large projected budget surpluses, President Bush’s top economic policy initiative — both as a candidate in 2000 and upon taking office — was to cut taxes. When the economy slowed, the Bush Administration’s response also was dominated by tax cuts. Now, in the face of yawning deficits and its own pledge to reduce them, the Administration has again put forward large, permanent tax cuts as part of its most recent budget.
This analysis offers a comprehensive review of the Bush Administration’s tax cuts. It assesses their costs, benefits to different income groups, and economic effects to date, as well as down the road. It both synthesizes previous findings about the individual tax measures and includes new findings about their combined effects, using new distributional analyses by the Urban institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center and fresh cost estimates by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. The early returns on the effects of the tax cuts have not been good. http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm...
wojar

Bristol, CT

#170198 Sep 2, 2013
Linktv org wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe Millions? How about 900,000? 800,000? 700,000 years old?
Or maybe 10 Billion years old? or 20 Billion years old? or 50 billion years old?
This too me is speculation and scientist do not really know so they estimate.
Am I making any sense too you?
Your throwing "how about" numbers around is not speculation by scientists.

You're not making much sense.

We know that the universe is very old. Billions of years old. We know the Earth is also billions of years in age.

It is well established that humans are descendants of non-human primates.

It is also known that the founder population was much more than a single mating pair.

Despite your dissatisfaction with the fact that scientific knowledge does not come from the mouth of an infallible deity the fact remains that the Adam & Eve story is literally false. It is also undeniable that death could not have come into the world through the transgression of one man.

Get over it.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe only millions? Highly unlikely.
But the evidence for human lineage from an ancestor common to chimp is conclusive. Also conclusive is the evidence that the founder population was much greater than a single mating pair.
That means the Adam & Eve story is literally incorrect. "Adam" had a mother and father, who had parents ....
It also means that Paul's claim that death entered the world through sin of one man is FALSE.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#170199 Sep 2, 2013
Linktv org wrote:
I posted that hours ago and I do not think it is likely.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#170200 Sep 2, 2013
Linktv org wrote:
<quoted text>
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...
Get over it. At least the USSC ruled on the election of 2000 and they have not touched Obama's NBC status!
By the way, the governor of Florida had just announced an emergency legislature meeting when the USSC made it's ruling. The purpose of the legislature would have been to nullify the election and then the legislature would vote directly on the Electoral College and it would have been perfectly legal.
There is no place in our Constitution that requires a popular vote for the presidency. All our Constitution says it is a state's right but does not tell the state how to accomplish that.
In fact Senators were appointed by the state legislatures until 1913 when the 17th Amendment became law.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#170201 Sep 2, 2013
Hey Jacqueau, if both gold and oil are down, which indicates the Syrian crisis is waning, why is the stock market continuing to drop?
Linktv org

Sayville, NY

#170202 Sep 2, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Your throwing "how about" numbers around is not speculation by scientists.
You're not making much sense.
We know that the universe is very old. Billions of years old. We know the Earth is also billions of years in age.
It is well established that humans are descendants of non-human primates.
It is also known that the founder population was much more than a single mating pair.
Despite your dissatisfaction with the fact that scientific knowledge does not come from the mouth of an infallible deity the fact remains that the Adam & Eve story is literally false. It is also undeniable that death could not have come into the world through the transgression of one man.
Get over it.
<quoted text>
I appreciate and respect science.

I think it was probable that if Adam cut down a tree there would be many, many, many rings inside it.

Also some of the fruit and vegetables might have been rotten and not editable.

So What!

Maybe Adam and Eve were hairy ape-like Humans?

After all Chimps cannot drive airplanes or pass an SAT test.

Something to ponder my friend.

Why are the Muslims, the Christians, and the Jews all waiting for Jesus to come back?

========

Moshiach Facts
Five Questions and Answers About Moshiach
http://www.chabad.org/multimedia/media_cdo/ai...

Resurrection of the Dead
Moshiach Facts, Lesson 2
http://www.chabad.org/multimedia/media_cdo/ai...

Heaven on Earth
Moshiach Facts, Lesson 3
http://www.chabad.org/multimedia/media_cdo/ai...

Louis Farrakhan on Barack Obama, Churches and Satan's Rule
&NR =1
Linktv org

Sayville, NY

#170204 Sep 2, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
I posted that hours ago and I do not think it is likely.
I thought this was your personal website.

Scholars and Rogues
http://scholarsandrogues.com/

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#170205 Sep 2, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Population, U.S., 2008 : 306 million
Population, U.S., 2012 : 316 million
Seeing as there were 10 million more Americans from Obama's swearing-in, to this day, how many coming into the work force at a time when things were/are pretty tight? Could that by any chance have an effect on employment figures and part of that 13 and 3 million without jobs that you cited?, not to mention a 10.5% unemployment rate at the end of 2009, which had nothing to do with Obama, but is GWB's legacy. Numbers are numbers, but you have to decipher them too, Rogue.
In January 2009 the Labor Participation Rate was 65.7% and July 2013 (last published rate) it was down to 63.4%(same rate it was when Jimmy Carter left office) which means a drop of 2.3% and what is 2.3% of our population that is of employable age?
316M X 78% X 2.3%= 5.67M and that does not include those who are less than full time employed.
Oh, 78% of our population are employment age (16-70 years old).
Linktv org

Sayville, NY

#170206 Sep 2, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Hey Jacqueau, if both gold and oil are down, which indicates the Syrian crisis is waning, why is the stock market continuing to drop?
Glenn Beck’s Gold Deal Raising Questions at Fox
December 13, 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/ybezk7b
The Fox News Channel is only too happy to have the Midas ratings touch that Glenn Beck has been providing, but the golden words he may pour into the ears of his audience have raised questions at the news network.
Most of those have concerned whether Mr. Beck, who often hails the virtue of buying gold on his Fox show (as a hedge against a coming economic collapse), had been identified as a “paid spokesman” for a company named Goldline International, which sells gold coins.
Joel Cheatwood, the senior vice president of development for Fox News, said the network’s legal department had recently sent a letter to Mr. Beck’s representatives “seeking clarification” about his work for Goldline.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/14/business/me...
Truth Detector

Louisville, KY

#170207 Sep 2, 2013
Obama Seeks Syria Support from Former Foe McCain.
No need for the SHEEPLE to worry because he is addicted to that Obama ASS-CRACK, just like you!
Linktv org

Sayville, NY

#170208 Sep 2, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Get over it. At least the USSC ruled on the election of 2000 and they have not touched Obama's NBC status!
By the way, the governor of Florida had just announced an emergency legislature meeting when the USSC made it's ruling. The purpose of the legislature would have been to nullify the election and then the legislature would vote directly on the Electoral College and it would have been perfectly legal.
There is no place in our Constitution that requires a popular vote for the presidency. All our Constitution says it is a state's right but does not tell the state how to accomplish that.
In fact Senators were appointed by the state legislatures until 1913 when the 17th Amendment became law.
I just prove too you that Bush vs Gore can never be used again in another close election.

The rightwing activist jurist Scalia said as much.

Why don't you send him an email and see for yourself his answer.
Linktv org

Sayville, NY

#170209 Sep 2, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
In January 2009 the Labor Participation Rate was 65.7% and July 2013 (last published rate) it was down to 63.4%(same rate it was when Jimmy Carter left office) which means a drop of 2.3% and what is 2.3% of our population that is of employable age?
316M X 78% X 2.3%= 5.67M and that does not include those who are less than full time employed.
Oh, 78% of our population are employment age (16-70 years old).
They're All Against Jobs
by Sen. Fritz Hollings / December 20, 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/ydr27ze
Who is against jobs in the United States? The big banks, Wall Street, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Business Roundtable, the United States Chamber of Commerce, the National Retail Federation, Corporate America, the President of the United States, Congress of the United States. Everyone is crying for jobs, but no one seems to understand why there aren't any. And the reason for those opposing jobs is money.
Beginning in 1973, big banks made most of their profit outside of the United States. Industries off-shoring, investing, banks financing the investments, transfer fees, fees and interest on the loans made for bigger profits. Long since, the big banks under the leadership of David Rockefeller have led the way to off-shore and make a bigger profit. Goldman Sachs, AIG, Citicorp and Wall Street, conspiring for a bailout and now using it for bonuses, make more money from the off-shored operations.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/12/20-6
Linktv org

Sayville, NY

#170210 Sep 2, 2013
Top Ten Worst Things about the Bush Decade;
Or, the Rise of the New Oligarchs

December 22, 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/yl2lb2g

We have always had robber barons in American politics, but the Neoliberal moment created a new social class. At about 1.3 million adults, it is not too large to have some cohesive interests, and its corporations, lobbyists, and other institutions allow it to intervene systematically in politics. It owns 45 percent of the privately held wealth and is heading toward 50, i.e. toward a Banana Republic. Thus, we have a gutted fairness doctrine and the end of anti-trust concerns in ownership of mass media, allowing a multi-billionaire like Rupert Murdoch to buy up major media properties and to establish a cable television channel which is nothing but oligarch propaganda. They established 'think tanks' like the American Enterprise Institute, which hires only staff that are useful agents of the interests of the very wealthy, and which produce studies denying global climate change or lying about the situation in Iraq. Bush-Cheney were not simply purveyors of wrong-headed ideas. They were the agents of the one percent, and their policies make perfect sense if seen as attempts to advance the interests of this narrow class of persons. It is the class that owns our mass media, that pays for the political campaigns of 'our'(their) representatives, that gives us the Bushes and Cheneys and Palins because they are useful to them, and that blocks progressive reform and legislation with the vast war chest funneled to them by deep tax cuts that allow them to use essential public resources, infrastructure and facilities gratis while making the middle class pay for them.

Here are my picks for the top ten worst things about the wretched period, which, however, will continue to follow us until the economy is re-regulated, anti-trust concerns again pursued, a new, tweaked fairness doctrine is implemented, and we return to a more normal distribution of wealth (surely a quarter of the privately held wealth is enough for the one percent?) It isn't about which party is in power; parties can always be bought. It is about how broadly shared resources are in a society. Egalitarianism is unworkable, but over-concentration of wealth is also impractical.

The latter produced a lot of our problems in the past decade, and as long as such massive inequality persists, our politics will be lopsided.
http://www.juancole.com/2009/12/top-ten-worst...
Linktv org

Sayville, NY

#170211 Sep 2, 2013
Majority Of Tea Party Group's Spending Went To GOP Firm That Created It
December 28, 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/yl3dbqv
The political action committee behind the Tea Party Express (TPE)-- which already has been slammed as inauthentic and corporate-controlled by rival factions in the Tea Party movement -- directed almost two thirds of its spending during a recent reporting period back to the Republican consulting firm that created the PAC in the first place.
Our Country Deserves Better (OCDB) spent around $1.33 million from July through November, according to FEC filings examined by TPMmuckraker. Of that sum, a total of $857,122 went to Sacramento-based GOP political consulting firm Russo, Marsh, and Associates, or people associated with it.
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/200...

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
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 49 min Grey Ghost 1,127,024
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 2 hr Bite Me 50,643
very cute unuasual pix 6 hr ALL GOOD 1
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 6 hr Mandela 68,666
omnipods boxes for sale 6 hr thanxlord 1
Amy 10-24 6 hr Mister Tonka 12
Mrs. Bush: History will vindicate her husband (Jun '08) 7 hr Anonymous91 54,522
Chicago Dating
Find my Match

Chicago Jobs

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 ]