BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 242540 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

#176454 Oct 25, 2013
Just me wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks Jacques. Things are a little slow today so I thought I'd pop in. I hope everthing is going well with you.
Better than ever. LRS's been confirmed the biggest liar ever. The birthers, thanks to House Speaker Boehner, have been humiliated and outed, and although everything's far from perfect in your fair land and mine and others, they could be worse. And you?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#176455 Oct 25, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Failure of a healthcare plan? As Mitt once said, you're entitled to your opinion but you're not entitled to your own facts.
Given what you know about it, in general, do you support or oppose the Massachusetts Universal Health Insurance Law?
Support: 59 percent
Oppose: 28 percent
Donít Know: 13 percent
----------
<quoted text>
Same numbers will come up on Obamacare in less than 2 years. Then the Republicans will claim it as theirs.
wojar

Bristol, CT

#176456 Oct 25, 2013
Frank wrote:
<quoted text>Who lives in Massachusetts and what difference does it make to the rest of the country? Unless you live in Massachusetts,who cares? What effect does ObamaKare have on Massachusetts?
Frank, if you were not hopelessly senile you would understand that the post was in reply to a comment that postulated Romneycare was a failure in Massachusetts.

RU taking your Arricept?
wojar wrote:
Do you think the Massachusetts Health Insurance Reform Law should be repealed, continued as the law currently stands, or continued but with some changes made?
Repealed: 11 percent
Continued as the law currently stands: 22 percent
Continued but with some changes made: 57 percent
Donít know: 10 percent

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#176457 Oct 25, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
You're reading the sentence wrong, moron.
Ha! Dufus believes anything he sees in print? Gullible fool.

So how does a nonfunctional statement in source code that is NOT SHOWN to the user SHOW the user a friggin' thing?

Eh genius?

Does Dufus know anything at all about HTML source code?

Didn't think so. Gullible fool.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
"Shows users"?
Actually, a nonfunctional statement in source code that is NOT SHOWN to users DOESN'T show they have no reasonable expectation of privacy.
Duh!
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#176458 Oct 25, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Better than ever. LRS's been confirmed the biggest liar ever. The birthers, thanks to House Speaker Boehner, have been humiliated and outed, and although everything's far from perfect in your fair land and mine and others, they could be worse. And you?
I was? Delusional much? Let's not forget your name.....Pathological Liar. Idiot.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#176459 Oct 25, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
What part of "hidden in the source code" does the 6 Year Old not comprehend? Doofus!
What part of "the source code is not part of the terms and conditions page" does Dufus not comprehend? Dolt.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
"[O]n the terms and conditions page"?
RU on drugs?
Does BirfoonBoy understand that source code is not part of the end-user agreement? It is not part of the "terms and conditions page".
The terms and conditions page is what is shown to the end user on their screen, which is distinct from the source code used to produce the page.
Grow up.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#176460 Oct 25, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Ha! Dufus believes anything he sees in print? Gullible fool.
So how does a nonfunctional statement in source code that is NOT SHOWN to the user SHOW the user a friggin' thing?
Eh genius?
Does Dufus know anything at all about HTML source code?
Didn't think so. Gullible fool.
<quoted text>
Just how frickin' inept are you? Uh, "hidden" usually means, out of sight! LMAO! That message is not displayed on the webpage. Hence, HIDDEN! The question is, WHY IS IT NOT SHOWN, you moronic moosetwit. Did you ever figure out how the sentence was supposed to be read? Probably not. Why do users have to register before seeing prices? So, someone registers, decides none of the plans are appropriate for him, opts out, BUT he's already given his personal information which the Gov. says he should not expect any privacy in regards to the information he provided! Can lil Mr. 6 Year Old understand that? Any decent website will assure you of your privacy, why not here? Hmm? Tissue, you've shat all over your face AGAIN! LMAO!!!!!
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#176461 Oct 25, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
What part of "the source code is not part of the terms and conditions page" does Dufus not comprehend? Dolt.
<quoted text>
You don't even understand the damn issue, you idiot. Lil Mr. 6 Year Old is a dumbshyt!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#176462 Oct 25, 2013
"In computer science, source code is any collection of computer instructions (possibly with comments) written using some human-readable computer language, usually as text."

But in Dufus-World, source code is part of a legally-enforceable binding end-user agreement.

PATHETIC.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#176463 Oct 25, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't even understand the damn issue, you idiot. Lil Mr. 6 Year Old is a dumbshyt!
The fact that the source code is not part of the end user agreement is not an issue, it's a fact, numskull.

The fact is your "damn issue" is not an issue. It's a wet dream.

What part of "the source code is not the web page" does Dufus not comprehend? The programmers could write anything they damn well please in source comments and the end user is not bound in any way whatsoever.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
What part of "the source code is not part of the terms and conditions page" does Dufus not comprehend? Dolt.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#176464 Oct 25, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Just how frickin' inept are you? Uh, "hidden" usually means, out of sight! LMAO! That message is not displayed on the webpage. Hence, HIDDEN! The question is, WHY IS IT NOT SHOWN, you moronic moosetwit. Did you ever figure out how the sentence was supposed to be read? Probably not. Why do users have to register before seeing prices? So, someone registers, decides none of the plans are appropriate for him, opts out, BUT he's already given his personal information which the Gov. says he should not expect any privacy in regards to the information he provided! Can lil Mr. 6 Year Old understand that? Any decent website will assure you of your privacy, why not here? Hmm? Tissue, you've shat all over your face AGAIN! LMAO!!!!!
Sorry, loser, the source code is not part of the end-user agreement and as such has no affect on expectation of privacy. None whatsoever. The Play Justice seems to think that a comment in source code has the effect of four-year-old thinking - that it's ok to fib while crossing his fingers.

GROW UP!
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Ha! Dufus believes anything he sees in print? Gullible fool.
So how does a nonfunctional statement in source code that is NOT SHOWN to the user SHOW the user a friggin' thing?
Eh genius?
Does Dufus know anything at all about HTML source code?
Didn't think so. Gullible fool.
<quoted text>
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#176465 Oct 25, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact that the source code is not part of the end user agreement is not an issue, it's a fact, numskull.
The fact is your "damn issue" is not an issue. It's a wet dream.
What part of "the source code is not the web page" does Dufus not comprehend? The programmers could write anything they damn well please in source comments and the end user is not bound in any way whatsoever.
<quoted text>
Do you agree that in order to see the message about the privacy of your information, that you must look at the source code? Yes or No?

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#176466 Oct 25, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
The question is, WHY IS IT NOT SHOWN, you moronic moosetwit.
It was not shown because it is not part of the end-user agreement and has no effect or significance whatsoever.

The source code could also include a statement that the Wizard of Oz shall decide all medical questions. It would be equally irrelevant as it would not be part of the end-user agreement.
What part of "not part of the end-user agreement" does Dufus not comprehend?
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#176467 Oct 25, 2013
I'm talking about the message that you have no right to expect any privacy with regards to the information one provides on the website. I'm not talking about reading the EULA. Ineptness at its finest!
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#176468 Oct 25, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
It was not shown because it is not part of the end-user agreement and has no effect or significance whatsoever.
The source code could also include a statement that the Wizard of Oz shall decide all medical questions. It would be equally irrelevant as it would not be part of the end-user agreement.
What part of "not part of the end-user agreement" does Dufus not comprehend?
Your private and personal information is of no significance? Speak for yourself bonehead. Do you know what the major concern over this very issue is?

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#176469 Oct 25, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Just how frickin' inept are you? Uh, "hidden" usually means, out of sight! LMAO! That message is not displayed on the webpage. Hence, HIDDEN! The question is, WHY IS IT NOT SHOWN, you moronic moosetwit. Did you ever figure out how the sentence was supposed to be read? Probably not. Why do users have to register before seeing prices? So, someone registers, decides none of the plans are appropriate for him, opts out, BUT he's already given his personal information which the Gov. says he should not expect any privacy in regards to the information he provided! Can lil Mr. 6 Year Old understand that? Any decent website will assure you of your privacy, why not here? Hmm? Tissue, you've shat all over your face AGAIN! LMAO!!!!!
Huh? Perhaps in Play Law World the government issues regulations and makes binding agreements in source code, but not in the real world.

GROW UP LITTLE BOY. The government did not state to the end-user that there was no expectation of privacy. It NEVER HAPPENED.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Ha! Dufus believes anything he sees in print? Gullible fool.
So how does a nonfunctional statement in source code that is NOT SHOWN to the user SHOW the user a friggin' thing?
Eh genius?
Does Dufus know anything at all about HTML source code?
Didn't think so. Gullible fool.
<quoted text>

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#176470 Oct 25, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you agree that in order to see the message about the privacy of your information, that you must look at the source code? Yes or No?
That was not a "message" about privacy of "your" information pertaining to the end-user agreement at healthcare.gov .

A source code comment is not a message to the end-user. Dufus.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact that the source code is not part of the end user agreement is not an issue, it's a fact, numskull.
The fact is your "damn issue" is not an issue. It's a wet dream.
What part of "the source code is not the web page" does Dufus not comprehend? The programmers could write anything they damn well please in source comments and the end user is not bound in any way whatsoever.
<quoted text>
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#176471 Oct 25, 2013
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#176472 Oct 25, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh? Perhaps in Play Law World the government issues regulations and makes binding agreements in source code, but not in the real world.
GROW UP LITTLE BOY. The government did not state to the end-user that there was no expectation of privacy. It NEVER HAPPENED.
<quoted text>
You've missed the entire point! Read the article.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#176473 Oct 25, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Just how frickin' inept are you? Uh, "hidden" usually means, out of sight! LMAO! That message is not displayed on the webpage. Hence, HIDDEN! The question is, WHY IS IT NOT SHOWN, you moronic moosetwit. Did you ever figure out how the sentence was supposed to be read? Probably not. Why do users have to register before seeing prices? So, someone registers, decides none of the plans are appropriate for him, opts out, BUT he's already given his personal information which the Gov. says he should not expect any privacy in regards to the information he provided! Can lil Mr. 6 Year Old understand that? Any decent website will assure you of your privacy, why not here? Hmm? Tissue, you've shat all over your face AGAIN! LMAO!!!!!
I've extracted the best and brightest part of your above post :

"Tissue, you've shat all over your face AGAIN! LMAO!!!!! "

Memorable words, those. They propel computer science to its outer limits. Yes, the jury, based on the impressive evidence as presented by Justice LRS, with the clincher "shat all over your face" declares him the uncontested winner in this informatics war against wojar. Another great leap forward for Justice LMAO LRS-Dale.

You've wasted a lot of good computer knowledge on this loser, wojar.

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) 1 min Realtime 1,581,751
What's the real story about Charlottsville? 15 min ThomasA 23
The Party of Racism. 2 hr Its The Democrats 2
Only Mother Fu__ers would destroy our statues. 2 hr Out of Potty Expe... 3
TRUTH will be revealed, someday, maybe. 3 hr Muslims Did IT 42
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 5 hr Agents of Corruption 63,946
Chicago is much worse since Obama was elected 9 hr check please 2

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages