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
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#173425 Sep 30, 2013
TrutherBirther wrote:
Do what you will to your own communities but risk death if you harm ours! Antichrist Obama WAS 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.(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.
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#173426 Sep 30, 2013
Frank wrote:
<quoted text>In 1961,infants traveled with their mothers on their mother's passport,so they would not show up on the immigration report. Same thing a couple years later when young Barack permanently moved to Indonesia with his mother.
Yes they were usually on their mother's passport, but the INS counted them anyway---what gave you the nutty idea that they just ignored infants?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#173427 Sep 30, 2013
Public Integrity org wrote:
<quoted text>
Read My Lips:
The Democratic Party will never nominate a Liberal for president just as the Republican Party will never nominate a Conservative for president.
ROTFL
LOL
Wake Up.
----------
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
The USS Stark Incident
http://tinyurl.com/3e7fx
http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id344.htm
Ah, you forgot about Obama whose national debt has gone up SIX TRILLION DOLLARS! The National debt on January 2009 was $10.7T and it will shortly go over $17T and you blame ...... BUSH!!!
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#173428 Sep 30, 2013
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>Yes they were usually on their mother's passport, but the INS counted them anyway---what gave you the nutty idea that they just ignored infants?
It is convenient for his fable - so it must be true.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#173429 Sep 30, 2013
Public Integrity org wrote:
<quoted text>
LINO Liberal In Name Only!
Both are Corporate Centrist Democrats like Obama.
Obviously you have no idea what a true liberal is;
classic liberal
Web definitions
Classical liberalism is a political ideology that developed in the nineteenth century in Western Europe, and the Americas. It was committed to the ideal of limited government and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classic_liberal
Just face it, you are not a liberal. You are a narrow minded Progressive s[Socialist!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#173430 Sep 30, 2013
Public Integrity org wrote:
<quoted text>
LINO Liberal In Name Only!
Both are Corporate Centrist Democrats like Obama.
Obviously you have no idea what a true liberal is;
classic liberal
Web definitions
Classical liberalism is a political ideology that developed in the nineteenth century in Western Europe, and the Americas. It was committed to the ideal of limited government and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classic_liberal
Just face it, you are not a liberal. You are a narrow minded Progressive Socialist!

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#173431 Sep 30, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, you forgot about Obama whose national debt has gone up SIX TRILLION DOLLARS! The National debt on January 2009 was $10.7T and it will shortly go over $17T and you blame ...... BUSH!!!
Of that $10.7 T debt, tell us how many Repub presidents were responsible for it.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#173432 Sep 30, 2013
Public Integrity org wrote:
<quoted text>
Safe trip!
Enjoy!
Merci

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#173433 Sep 30, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, you forgot about Obama whose national debt has gone up SIX TRILLION DOLLARS! The National debt on January 2009 was $10.7T and it will shortly go over $17T and you blame ...... BUSH!!!
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Of that $10.7 T debt, tell us how many Repub presidents were responsible for it.
Ah, it took over 200 years for the National Debt to go up $10.7 whereas the National Debt has gone up 58% in just four and a half years. Remember, it was Obama who signed the $3.7T FY 2009 Budget into law. The last Bush budget was just $2.7T!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#173434 Sep 30, 2013
Oh Jacques, you seem to be very concerned about the several thousand ducks killed in a oil soaked tailing pond but you do not seem to be concerned with over a million birds being chopped up in wind turbines. How come?!? Oh, I know, air is clear and gooey tar is .... BLACK and therefore evil.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#173435 Sep 30, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Oh Jacques, you seem to be very concerned about the several thousand ducks killed in a oil soaked tailing pond but you do not seem to be concerned with over a million birds being chopped up in wind turbines. How come?!? Oh, I know, air is clear and gooey tar is .... BLACK and therefore evil.
One : Like they did with glass windows, birds will get used to wind turbines which, as you know, turn very slowly. Give 'em time;

Two : But as I said, I am most concerned with harm done to men and women and their children, and the harm done by tar sands exploitation is permanent - tell us how we will get rid of those tailing ponds. Tell us , do you know how much harm is done to the water table? Tell us, do you know how much water is used in the separation process and how much is non-renewable and how much is renewable only if rainfall is abundant? Tell us about the smokestack pollution from refining. Tell us, tell us.

Yes, the birds will get used to windmills. But no bird, no animal, and, important, sort of, no human being will ever get used to irrepairable pollution.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#173436 Sep 30, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, you forgot about Obama whose national debt has gone up SIX TRILLION DOLLARS! The National debt on January 2009 was $10.7T and it will shortly go over $17T and you blame ...... BUSH!!!
<quoted text>
Ah, it took over 200 years for the National Debt to go up $10.7 whereas the National Debt has gone up 58% in just four and a half years. Remember, it was Obama who signed the $3.7T FY 2009 Budget into law. The last Bush budget was just $2.7T!!!
Sure,but no president, except perhaps FDR (from conservative Repub Hoover) received such a parting gift as Obama got from GWB. The edifice was crumbling, falling apart, when Obama took over - already, "gratuities" had been extended to brokers, banks, and Chrysler and GM, foisted onto Obama as GWB's term was catastrophically ending. You trying to tell us that the ensuing budget deficits during Obama's first term were not a consequence of GWB's stewardship? You gonna lay it on Obama's first two years with a Dem majority in Congress again?

Deficit is being whittled down as we speak. And will be further reduced before Obama's term is up. The actual stalling by a few tea party nutballs, led by Canadian-Cuban and perhaps American Ted Cruze is solely to put Obama in his place, where he belongs, with his black kin. They don't like him and will sink the nation just to teach him a lesson. All that for regular spending appropriations? Oh, rogue, stock market's down. More good news.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#173437 Sep 30, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure,but no president, except perhaps FDR (from conservative Repub Hoover) received such a parting gift as Obama got from GWB. The edifice was crumbling, falling apart, when Obama took over - already, "gratuities" had been extended to brokers, banks, and Chrysler and GM, foisted onto Obama as GWB's term was catastrophically ending. You trying to tell us that the ensuing budget deficits during Obama's first term were not a consequence of GWB's stewardship? You gonna lay it on Obama's first two years with a Dem majority in Congress again?
Deficit is being whittled down as we speak. And will be further reduced before Obama's term is up. The actual stalling by a few tea party nutballs, led by Canadian-Cuban and perhaps American Ted Cruze is solely to put Obama in his place, where he belongs, with his black kin. They don't like him and will sink the nation just to teach him a lesson. All that for regular spending appropriations? Oh, rogue, stock market's down. More good news.
And what gift will Obama leave his replacement?!?
And there you go throwing out the race card. Exactly what is Obama's "black kin"? As if he has no WHITE kin!!! What a racist you are.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#173438 Sep 30, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
One : Like they did with glass windows, birds will get used to wind turbines which, as you know, turn very slowly. Give 'em time;
Two : But as I said, I am most concerned with harm done to men and women and their children, and the harm done by tar sands exploitation is permanent - tell us how we will get rid of those tailing ponds. Tell us , do you know how much harm is done to the water table? Tell us, do you know how much water is used in the separation process and how much is non-renewable and how much is renewable only if rainfall is abundant? Tell us about the smokestack pollution from refining. Tell us, tell us.
Yes, the birds will get used to windmills. But no bird, no animal, and, important, sort of, no human being will ever get used to irrepairable pollution.
Last I heard glass windows don't go round and round. And how long will it take for Darwin's theory to work on birds avoiding wind turbines.
Oh, you keep forgetting, CO2 is PLANT FOOD. And oxides of sulfur and nitrogen are also plant food.
And the water is recycled. You do know that water is heavier than oil, don't you? Once the heated water is used it is sent to, not a tail pond, but a separation pond and the oil floats to the surface sand skimmed off. The water is then reused. Oh, the true tailings are cleaned sand with is returned to the pits.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#173439 Sep 30, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Of that $10.7 T debt, tell us how many Repub presidents were responsible for it.
In the past 100 years, 1908-2008, Republican have presided for 56 years while the Democrats 44 years. In any event, the budget is still controlled by the Speaker of the House and the Democrats and the Republicans have run Congress for only 14 of those years since 1932!!!
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#173440 Sep 30, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
You know, Rogue is a close adherent of everything WND.com and Foxnews.com . He is therefore molded into the distortion of news and cannot help it, it is ingrained in his psyche as he just did for Feinstein and so much other stuff. Another example was his labelling of Carter and Clinton as rednecks, which he probably read in one of his gun magazines. Sigh.
Waa Waa Waa! Feinstein is a certified nutjob who needs to return to the hospital! PTSD is a "new" phenomenon? This lady needs to go back to bed.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#173441 Sep 30, 2013
I noticed this several months ago. Obama like it being called Obamacare until a few months ago and since then claims The Affordable Care Act was tagged "Obamacare" by evil Republicans and he has avoid using the term "Obamacare" since.
I guess he can read the polls too. "Obamacare has a negative connotation whereas "The Affordable Care Act" has a positive connotation.

ObamaCare vs. Affordable Care
By USA Today September 30, 2013

A recent CNBC poll found more Americans oppose ObamaCare than oppose the Affordable Care Act. But more Americans support ObamaCare than the Affordable Care Act.
Confused?

That would be understandable given that these are two names for the same law. CNBC polled two different groups, using "ObamaCare" for one and "Affordable Care Act" for the other. Forty-six percent of the group asked about "ObamaCare" opposed it. But only 37% of those asked about the health law opposed it.

Conversely, ObamaCare had higher support than the law. As CNBC put it, Obama's name "raises the positives and the negatives."
http://www.gopusa.com/freshink/2013/09/30/oba...

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#173442 Sep 30, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Last I heard glass windows don't go round and round. And how long will it take for Darwin's theory to work on birds avoiding wind turbines.
Oh, you keep forgetting, CO2 is PLANT FOOD. And oxides of sulfur and nitrogen are also plant food.
And the water is recycled. You do know that water is heavier than oil, don't you? Once the heated water is used it is sent to, not a tail pond, but a separation pond and the oil floats to the surface sand skimmed off. The water is then reused. Oh, the true tailings are cleaned sand with is returned to the pits.
Last I heard, humans don't fly into wind turbines. Last I heard, wind turbines have ZERO effect pollution.

And quit it with the oxides and sulfur being plant food. Do YOU eat and breathe them? What if you do? Good for you as it is for the plants? Don't we have enough of the natural emissions and those from cars and what - not?

And you really believe in that water being recycled? I don't say I believe it or not, but I have my doubts. Those P.R. people are geniuses at lying. You've probably never seen the pro-tar sands ads we get here, how beneficial they are and good for the environment.

Guess they forgot to remove the tailings before the birds flew into them and died instantly. Oh, would you like a member of your family to fall in one of those ponds? What's your preference, have them look at a wind turbine or dive into a tailing pond?

Darwin's theory, as you name it for birds flying into windmills would fully apply to the said birds' evolution, that same evolution that made the birds and their descendants, and genetically too now, not to fly into windows. Oh, a few still do, but are you gonna outlaw windows? Humans never did fly into windows btw.
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#173443 Sep 30, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>One : Like they did with glass windows, birds will get used to wind turbines which, as you know, turn very slowly. Give 'em time;

Two : But as I said, I am most concerned with harm done to men and women and their children, and the harm done by tar sands exploitation is permanent - tell us how we will get rid of those tailing ponds. Tell us , do you know how much harm is done to the water table? Tell us, do you know how much water is used in the separation process and how much is non-renewable and how much is renewable only if rainfall is abundant? Tell us about the smokestack pollution from refining. Tell us, tell us.

Yes, the birds will get used to windmills. But no bird, no animal, and, important, sort of, no human being will ever get used to irrepairable pollution.
Actually the tip of a modern, efficient 3 blade turbine will generally be traveling at approx 6 x the speed of the wind - their size makes them appear to be moving much more slowly.

Even a 15 MPH breeze will produce tip speeds in excess of 90 mph -

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#173444 Sep 30, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
In the past 100 years, 1908-2008, Republican have presided for 56 years while the Democrats 44 years. In any event, the budget is still controlled by the Speaker of the House and the Democrats and the Republicans have run Congress for only 14 of those years since 1932!!!
Who was the speaker of the house for the 6 of 8 years that GWB was in charge? And you really think that the economic debacle that began in the fall - winter of 2007-08 was Pelosi's fault, she who had served as speaker of the house less than a year? Ultimately, though, the president is responsible for surpluses AND deficits. Who was the last Repub president to show a surplus in the 20th century? Perhaps by the time I come back from L.A., you'll have found one. Hmmm, NOT.

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) 6 min Eman 1,115,066
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 8 min welcome home 50,029
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 47 min Frijoles 69,490
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr Who 46,993
Grocery Coupon and saving your pennies 1 hr Susan 1
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 3 hr PEllen 98,344
A short math question. I will reply with answer... 5 hr Whats the Bulb An... 8

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 ]