BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 242784 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.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#179798 Nov 17, 2013
Frank wrote:
<quoted text>The Democrats took control of our economy after the November 2006 election. Bush was foolish to let the Democrats have free reign,but he basically allowed himself to be a lame duck after he realized that the 110th Congress wouldn't even vote in the middle. Things became much worse after the Democrat primary,when our country lost the battle against the radical left.
Yep, when the Republican took over Congress in 1995, Clinton shut down the government rather than sign a balanced budget,,,,,, but the press blamed the evil Newt for the shut down.
Bush realized if he had vetoed the Democrats bloated budget,,,,,, he would be blamed by the press. To the LSM, the Republicans are always wrong!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#179799 Nov 17, 2013
Bush submitted his last budget, FL2009, in February 2008 and it was for $2.7 Trillion. But by the time Obama signed it into law 13 months later it had ballooned to $3.7 Trillion and the LSM blamed ...... Bush!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#179800 Nov 17, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
er, Frank, 11 months after GWB left office, December 2009, HIS unemployment rate, FAKE unemployment rate was 10.5%(reality : 15%+). Today, FAKE unemployment rate is it's 7.3%*reality : 11%+). My basic math tells me that's a 3.2 percentage point improvement.
Just how was the December 2009 unemployment rate HIS (Bush's) when he left office 11 months earlier and it was Obama who signed Nancy Pelosi's FY2009 budget into law eight months earlier?
I'd like to hear this Libtardian Logic!!!
Oh, Today's (October 1013) U-3 unemployment is 7.3% but the U-6 unemployment is ..... 13.8%
http://portalseven.com/employment/unemploymen...

U1 : Percentage of labor force unemployed 15 weeks or longer.
U2 : Percentage of labor force who lost jobs or completed temporary work.
U3 : Official unemployment rate per ILO definition.
U4 : U3 + "discouraged workers", or those who have stopped looking for work because current economic conditions make them believe that no work is available for them.
U5 : U4 + other "marginally attached workers", or "loosely attached workers", or those who "would like" and are able to work, but have not looked for work recently.
U6 : U5 + Part time workers who want to work full time, but cannot due to economic reasons.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#179801 Nov 17, 2013
To be unemployed, and counted as unemployed, you must have looked for work in the past week. Last month 750,00 American just GAVE UP LOOKING!!!

U3: This is the official unemployment rate, which is the proportion of the civilian labor force that is unemployed but actively seeking employment.
http://portalseven.com/employment/unemploymen...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#179802 Nov 17, 2013
Excuse ME!!! It was not 750,000 but only 720,000 that lost their jobs and gave up looking last month. I don't want La Jacqueau claim I was lying!

The civilian labor force was down by 720,000 in October. The labor force participation rate fell by 0.4 percentage point to 62.8 percent
over the month. Total employment as measured by the household survey ell by 735,000 over the month and the employment-population ratio declined by 0.3 percentage point to 58.3 percent. This employment decline partly reflected a decline in federal government employment.
(See table A-1.)
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.ht...
Forum

Carlsbad, NM

#179803 Nov 17, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Excuse ME!!! It was not 750,000 but only 720,000 that lost their jobs and gave up looking last month. I don't want La Jacqueau claim I was lying!
The civilian labor force was down by 720,000 in October. The labor force participation rate fell by 0.4 percentage point to 62.8 percent
over the month. Total employment as measured by the household survey ell by 735,000 over the month and the employment-population ratio declined by 0.3 percentage point to 58.3 percent. This employment decline partly reflected a decline in federal government employment.
(See table A-1.)
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.ht...
God pays you when He wants to.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#179804 Nov 17, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Just how was the December 2009 unemployment rate HIS (Bush's) when he left office 11 months earlier and it was Obama who signed Nancy Pelosi's FY2009 budget into law eight months earlier?
I'd like to hear this Libtardian Logic!!!
Oh, Today's (October 1013) U-3 unemployment is 7.3% but the U-6 unemployment is ..... 13.8%
http://portalseven.com/employment/unemploymen...
U1 : Percentage of labor force unemployed 15 weeks or longer.
U2 : Percentage of labor force who lost jobs or completed temporary work.
U3 : Official unemployment rate per ILO definition.
U4 : U3 + "discouraged workers", or those who have stopped looking for work because current economic conditions make them believe that no work is available for them.
U5 : U4 + other "marginally attached workers", or "loosely attached workers", or those who "would like" and are able to work, but have not looked for work recently.
U6 : U5 + Part time workers who want to work full time, but cannot due to economic reasons.
I was waiting for that. You believe Obama could fix an 8-year mess in 10.5 months? GWB leaves Obama a 1.5 trillon hole made up of budget deficits, giveaways to brokers, banks , mtge bandits and automobile pvt jet CEOs... Obama takes over middle of January, 2009, administration looks like a suicide bomber blew himself up inside of it and you think that the unemployment rate, which shot up to 10.5% in December, 1-.5 months later, I Obama's baby? Are you nuts? GWB worked 8 years to get there, and incidentally from less than 6% unemployment that Clinton left him with and a budget surplus, a healthy one, if memory serves me right,%350 billion. You really think that the 10.5% December 2009 unemployment rate if Obama's doing?

The rest of the statistics that you post, the ones you read but do not understand, are the same that applied to ALL presidents since this type of numbering has been adopted post WWII. Do you want Obama to change it so GWB can look good? He used the same statistical methods, yes or no?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#179805 Nov 17, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Isn't that funny as back in the 1930s they did not differentiate between U-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. If you where unemployed, you were just unemployed. Now days if you did not look for work this week, you are not U-3 unemployed but U-6 unemployed.
The Democrats invented U-3 to make themselves look good!!!
Did Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Bush father and son not benefit from the same statistical bonanza?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#179806 Nov 17, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
I was waiting for that. You believe Obama could fix an 8-year mess in 10.5 months? GWB leaves Obama a 1.5 trillon hole made up of budget deficits, giveaways to brokers, banks , mtge bandits and automobile pvt jet CEOs... Obama takes over middle of January, 2009, administration looks like a suicide bomber blew himself up inside of it and you think that the unemployment rate, which shot up to 10.5% in December, 1-.5 months later, I Obama's baby? Are you nuts? GWB worked 8 years to get there, and incidentally from less than 6% unemployment that Clinton left him with and a budget surplus, a healthy one, if memory serves me right,%350 billion. You really think that the 10.5% December 2009 unemployment rate if Obama's doing?
The rest of the statistics that you post, the ones you read but do not understand, are the same that applied to ALL presidents since this type of numbering has been adopted post WWII. Do you want Obama to change it so GWB can look good? He used the same statistical methods, yes or no?
What EIGHT year mess? The economy did not fall apart until Nov. 2007, eight months after the Democrats took control of Congress!!!
And it was not Clinton that left him with a budget surplus, It was Newt Gingrich. Just like San Fran Nan Pelosi who rewrote Bush's FY2008 #2.7 Trillion proposed budget to the $3.7 Trillion that Obama signed into law.
Do you really think Bush would have signed a $3.7 T Budget into law?
No, I do not want to rewrite the statistics as it shows how bad the Obama economy really is. Just look at the Labor Participation Rate which is at a 35 year low! And that is after Obama printed $3T Obama Bucks. What will happen when he stops printing Obama Bucks. Probably the same thing after Carter stopped printing Carter Bucks and inflation surged to 14% annual rate and then we went into a recession.
We WILL have a double-dip recession as soon as Obama stops printing Obama Bucks!!! And you will probably blame Bush as usual!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#179807 Nov 17, 2013
Hey La Jacqueau, can you name ONE thing that you disagree with Obama on? Just one thing?!?
Like droning innocent civilians to death!!!
Isn't it funny that every time I ask you, you never reply!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#179808 Nov 17, 2013
You do know that every relative who lost a family member in any of these drone strikes can go to any U.S. Embassy and file a Claims against the U.S. government for wrongful death or injury?!?

Drone strikes killing more civilians than U.S. admits, human rights groups say

By Craig Whitlock, Published: October 22 E-mail the writer

Two influential human rights groups say they have freshly documented dozens of civilian deaths in U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen, contradicting assertions by the Obama administration that such casualties are rare.

In Yemen, Human Rights Watch investigated six selected airstrikes since 2009 and concluded that at least 57 of the 82 people killed were civilians, including a pregnant woman and three children who perished in a September 2012 attack.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#179809 Nov 17, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Did Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Bush father and son not benefit from the same statistical bonanza?
Did they not get discredit for the same statistical reports?
Until Obama, Jimmy Carter had the lowest Labor Participation Rate!!! And Bush-41 had the HIGHEST!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#179810 Nov 17, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
I was waiting for that. You believe Obama could fix an 8-year mess in 10.5 months? GWB leaves Obama a 1.5 trillon hole made up of budget deficits, giveaways to brokers, banks , mtge bandits and automobile pvt jet CEOs... Obama takes over middle of January, 2009, administration looks like a suicide bomber blew himself up inside of it and you think that the unemployment rate, which shot up to 10.5% in December, 1-.5 months later, I Obama's baby? Are you nuts? GWB worked 8 years to get there, and incidentally from less than 6% unemployment that Clinton left him with and a budget surplus, a healthy one, if memory serves me right,%350 billion. You really think that the 10.5% December 2009 unemployment rate if Obama's doing?
The rest of the statistics that you post, the ones you read but do not understand, are the same that applied to ALL presidents since this type of numbering has been adopted post WWII. Do you want Obama to change it so GWB can look good? He used the same statistical methods, yes or no?
You do know who owns the LARGEST private jet company in the world, don't you? Obama's buddy, the older brother of Jimmy Buffet!

NetJets
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
NetJets, a subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway, offers fractional ownership and rental of private business jets

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#179811 Nov 17, 2013
Yep, Jimmy Buffet's older brother has done real well with Obummer Boy in the White House.

Berkshire Hathaway
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Berkshire Hathaway Inc. is an American multinational conglomerate holding company headquartered in Omaha, Nebraska, United States, that oversees and manages a number of subsidiary companies. The company wholly owns GEICO, BNSF, Lubrizol, Dairy Queen, Fruit of the Loom, Helzberg Diamonds and NetJets, owns half of Heinz, owns an undisclosed percentage of Mars, Incorporated and has significant minority holdings in American Express, The Coca-Cola Company, Wells Fargo, and IBM. Berkshire Hathaway averaged an annual growth in book value of 19.7% to its shareholders for the last 48 years (compared to 9.4% from S&P 500 with dividends included for the same period), while employing large amounts of capital, and minimal debt.[2] Berkshire Hathaway stock produced a total return of 76% from 20002010 versus a negative 11.3% return for the S&P 500.[3]

The company is known for its control by investor Warren Buffett, who is the company's chairman, president and CEO. Buffett ....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkshire_Hathaw...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#179812 Nov 17, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Did Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Bush father and son not benefit from the same statistical bonanza?
Why did you not mention Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#179813 Nov 17, 2013
Under Bush-41 about a third of all month unemployed numbers were revised upwards, a third revised downwards, and a third where not revised.
Under Obama NONE were revised downward, only a few were not revised and all but just a few were revised UPWARD!!
Don't you find that odd?!?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#179814 Nov 17, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Yep, Jimmy Buffet's older brother has done real well with Obummer Boy in the White House.
Berkshire Hathaway
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Berkshire Hathaway Inc. is an American multinational conglomerate holding company headquartered in Omaha, Nebraska, United States, that oversees and manages a number of subsidiary companies. The company wholly owns GEICO, BNSF, Lubrizol, Dairy Queen, Fruit of the Loom, Helzberg Diamonds and NetJets, owns half of Heinz, owns an undisclosed percentage of Mars, Incorporated and has significant minority holdings in American Express, The Coca-Cola Company, Wells Fargo, and IBM. Berkshire Hathaway averaged an annual growth in book value of 19.7% to its shareholders for the last 48 years (compared to 9.4% from S&P 500 with dividends included for the same period), while employing large amounts of capital, and minimal debt.[2] Berkshire Hathaway stock produced a total return of 76% from 20002010 versus a negative 11.3% return for the S&P 500.[3]
The company is known for its control by investor Warren Buffett, who is the company's chairman, president and CEO. Buffett ....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkshire_Hathaw...
You mean Berkshire Hathaway was nowhere on the horizon when Obama came to power? The started from scratch in January 2009? Or were they around from 2000 to 2008 when GWB was supposedly at the helm?

Was Berkshire Hathaway supposed to tank because Obama cama to power?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#179815 Nov 17, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Why did you not mention Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter?
Why should I? It stands to reason that they also benefitted from those numbers. I mentioned Republican presidents only because you keep mentioning Dem numbers. You are so uncomprehending. I've told you a minimum of 20 times that since time immemorial, ALL administrations, Repub and Dem, have used the same statistical system for unemployment. Add 3 to 4 points to whatever percentage comes out, whether it's GWB or Obama. Stop harping on the real numbers. We know.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#179816 Nov 17, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Under Bush-41 about a third of all month unemployed numbers were revised upwards, a third revised downwards, and a third where not revised.
Under Obama NONE were revised downward, only a few were not revised and all but just a few were revised UPWARD!!
Don't you find that odd?!?
No. Methods, thanks to better software, have improved. The informatics from Bush-41 to today have bounded tenfold. How about researching the 42nd and see how HE did it.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#179817 Nov 17, 2013
Sorry, 43rd. Well, do 42d while you're at it.

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 Demo Vermin 1,619,992
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 1 hr They cannot kill ... 11,438
bill murray to open a new restaurant in crowne ... 7 hr Whatever 1
last post wins! (Dec '10) 12 hr honeymylove 3,208
Benghazi, the REAL story. 14 hr Genl Forrest 12
Steve Wilkos : talk show host ? or simple mi... (Feb '08) 17 hr Melovesteve8701 479
The Party of Racism. 19 hr Apropos 4 This 62

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages