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

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#180943 Dec 2, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
5.6T is 76% of 10.025T? 66% is also incorrect. Only a DIM!!!!!
Nitpicking ignoramus ! It's 76.7% and 66.7%. What a loser, never heard of rounding out numbers or percentages?

Instead of saying, "hey, you're right about GWB's bigger debt, thanks for setting me straight", you remark on tenths of percents? What a birther birfoon buffoon loser. Plus ça change, plus c'est pareil.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#180944 Dec 2, 2013
Newport Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmm, I don't know...
You seem ignorant about a lot of things most Americans know, AND you seem intent one defaming our President.
Those are exactly the two things I would look for in an Iranian plant.
Ah, typical squid thinking. No one is "defaming" our president, he does that all by himself on a daily basis.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#180945 Dec 2, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
I wonder if this Idiotard will still feel this way in 14 months when the Republicans control the Senate.
There's nothing nuclear about the nuclear option
Posted: 12/02/2013 by Dale Hansen
Harry Reid and Senate Democrats made waves last week when they detonated the "nuclear option." Thanks to this change in Senate rules, ending debate on judicial nominees will only require 51 votes instead of the previous 60 votes needed to quash a filibuster.
It should be noted this change does not affect the typical Senate filibuster we have all come to know and love. So Mitch McConnell and company are free to continue to block every piece of legislation brought before the chamber and will likely use the threat of filibuster on legislation as a proxy filibuster for judicial nominees.
Not too long ago this was called the "Constitutional Option" by Rush Limbaugh and the "path to a military state" by the Daily Kos. Unfortunately, Congress has become just another step in getting re-elected, so voting or not voting now has more to do with establishing a Congressman's partisan credentials than actually accomplishing any legislative victories.
As an example in the debate before the nuclear option was passed Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said "You'll regret this and you may regret it a lot sooner than you think," but if this change was so immoral and unconscionable wouldn't Republicans just take the high ground and stand on the side of righteousness by changing the rules back the first chance they get?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dale-hansen/the...
Rouge isn't working with a full deck. The so-called "nuclear option" only affects appointments, and in 14 months, even if the Repubs control the Senate, the President will still be Obama. Even without the the "option" if Repubs were to have a majority they could block appointments. So the "nuclear option" will not matter as Dems will not be interested in blocking Obama's appointments and wouldn't need the option if they were in the minority.

Duh!

Meanwhile, Rouge's prophesies about who is going to win the "next" election is always wrong. Hehehehe.

Rouge should predict that the Dems will keep control of the Senate; then maybe the Republicans might win.
Dale

Wichita, KS

#180946 Dec 2, 2013
nebka wrote:
<quoted text>
Dale try very had to get this threw the empty space betwen your ears. The President was born in HAWAII and he passed the requtrmants to be Pesident
LMAO!!! He could have been born in the White House, since at the moment of birth he was a citizen of his father's country.
Yep, Obama was subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign nation and there is only one way for him to be a US citizen, that would be through naturalization.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#180947 Dec 2, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Nitpicking ignoramus ! It's 76.7% and 66.7%. What a loser, never heard of rounding out numbers or percentages?
Instead of saying, "hey, you're right about GWB's bigger debt, thanks for setting me straight", you remark on tenths of percents? What a birther birfoon buffoon loser. Plus ça change, plus c'est pareil.
Under Bush the debt rose 4.4T in 8 years. Under Obobblehead the debt has risen 6.7T in 5 years! And you think the rate was greater under Bush? LMAO!!! There's some fuzzy math being used here.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#180948 Dec 2, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Aw, but Dodger, that is only your opinion. You forgot to state that. Just thought I'd remind you! LMAO! And, you know about opinions.....opinions are like feet, everybody has a couple and they both stink. Some (yours) stink more than others. First you speak ill of the dead then you speak ill of Christ. Not too bright are ya? Nope! BTW Moonbeam, I'm still not Dale! LMAO!!!
Foolish man. I never said that was an opinion. It's fact, in both cases, as claim has been made that Jesus delivered the Constitution to the founding fathers and Mormons believe that Jesus visited the U.S. after his resurrection. God, you read and understand badly. NOT and opinion, a fact. You can't distinguish between either. Explains your fascination for these dingbat websites of yours.

Spoke ill, me? Tell me, show me where I spoke ill of Christ. C'mon, liar, show me or is this another "can you hear us coming " lie? Speak ill of the dead? Your mom? Please show me where and when I did that. Asked you before as a matter of fact. Still no reply.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#180949 Dec 2, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Under Bush the debt rose 4.4T in 8 years. Under Obobblehead the debt has risen 6.7T in 5 years! And you think the rate was greater under Bush? LMAO!!! There's some fuzzy math being used here.
Hey, hey, nitpicker, we are talking percentages here, wake up.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#180950 Dec 2, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Rouge isn't working with a full deck. The so-called "nuclear option" only affects appointments, and in 14 months, even if the Repubs control the Senate, the President will still be Obama. Even without the the "option" if Repubs were to have a majority they could block appointments. So the "nuclear option" will not matter as Dems will not be interested in blocking Obama's appointments and wouldn't need the option if they were in the minority.
Duh!
Meanwhile, Rouge's prophesies about who is going to win the "next" election is always wrong. Hehehehe.
Rouge should predict that the Dems will keep control of the Senate; then maybe the Republicans might win.
And the cellar-dwelling six year old thinks he has a full deck? LMAO! NOW THAT IS FUNNY!
Dale

Wichita, KS

#180951 Dec 2, 2013
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
Globe? You mean the Congressional Globe? Does it have the force of law? Is it the supreme law of the land or is it the CONSTITUTION?
Explain how "anyone born in this nation" is "subject to a foreign power"? Does that mean that a person born in the United States whose parents were foreign nationals and this person never left the jurisdiction of the United States for let's say 50 years then this person is STILL SUBJECT to a foreign power?
Applying your "logic", let's say this person married another person under similar circumstances and they have children. Then under your "logic" their CHILDREN WILL ALSO BE NON-CITIZENS since their native born parents weren't citizens.
As such, under your "logic" a family who has been in the United States for three generations (70 plus years) is still "subject to a foreign power".
LMAO!!! The "Globe" is the official record showing the intent of the framers.
Yes, if one is never naturalized they are still citizens of their father's nation of origin.
Looks like y'all have about 115+ years of citizenships to correct.
I see no reason to give amnesty to anyone until the above is corrected.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#180952 Dec 2, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey, hey, nitpicker, we are talking percentages here, wake up.
Hey, hey, dumbazz.....those precentages are skewed to say the least. Of course, if you start with a lower base then the percentages are going to be higher! Fool. Lies and misinformation. Do you ever tire of spreading BS? What a piece of work you are. Pathetic.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#180953 Dec 2, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Foolish man. I never said that was an opinion. It's fact, in both cases, as claim has been made that Jesus delivered the Constitution to the founding fathers and Mormons believe that Jesus visited the U.S. after his resurrection. God, you read and understand badly. NOT and opinion, a fact. You can't distinguish between either. Explains your fascination for these dingbat websites of yours.
Spoke ill, me? Tell me, show me where I spoke ill of Christ. C'mon, liar, show me or is this another "can you hear us coming " lie? Speak ill of the dead? Your mom? Please show me where and when I did that. Asked you before as a matter of fact. Still no reply.
Then you've committed plagiarism! LMAO!
Dale

Wichita, KS

#180954 Dec 2, 2013
Scrutiny wrote:
<quoted text>
I attempted communicating the same thing weeks back with less articulation.
Sadly, it is like teaching the game of golf to a fish.
Some here seem to lack the most basic elements of IQ. "Logic" is a word that gets tossed around in here a lot.
Dale and his brick head band of denial enthusiast should never be branded with their own brand of "logic" when it is the absence of the process that is their issue.
He has no affinity for rational argument. Hell, I am willing to bet that according to how he defines the 14th... HE is not a citizen either. His family had to come from somewhere.
Globe = Opinion
Hell, in his Howard quote he rode around for months...
Howard starts by clearly stating that "In my opinion...."
Those words are somehow less important than a misinterpreted definition.
LMAO!!!

!!!
(2893)
Mr. TRUMBULL. The Senator from Ohio says they ought to be. If they are there and within the jurisdiction of Colorado, and subject to the laws of Colorado, they ought to be citizens; and that is all that is proposed. It cannot be said of any Indian who owes allegiance, partial allegiance if you please, to some other Government that he is “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.”Would the Senator from Wisconsin think for a moment of bringing a bill into Congress to subject these wild Indians with whom we have no treaty to the laws and regulations of civilized life? Would he think of punishing them for instituting among themselves their own tribal regulations? Does the Government of the United States pretend to take jurisdiction of murders and robberies and other crimes committed by one Indian upon another? Are they subject to our jurisdiction in any just sense? They are not subject to our jurisdiction. We do not exercise jurisdiction over them.(((It is only those persons who come completely within our jurisdiction, who are subject to our laws, that we think of making citizens; and there can be no objection to the proposition that such persons should be citizens))). It seems to me, sir, that to introduce the words suggested by the Senator from Wisconsin would not make the proposition any clearer than it is, and that it by no means embraces, or by any fair construction -- by any construction, I may say -- could embrace the wild Indians of the plains or any with whom we have treaty relations, for the very fact that we have treaty relations with them shows that they are not subject to our jurisdiction. We cannot make a treaty with ourselves; it would be absurd. I think that the proposition is clear and safe as it is.
Now can it be any plainer as to who will receive citizenship of this nation, only those born here that are completely subject to our jurisdiction.
Obama Jr. was born a citizen of his father's country of origin, with this condition he is not subject to the complete jurisdiction of the US.
Truth Detector

Louisville, KY

#180955 Dec 2, 2013
From a woman of faith who loves America:‘Black people have been deceived’[VIDEO]

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/01/from-a-woma...

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#180956 Dec 2, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
5.6T is 76% of 10.025T? 66% is also incorrect. Only a DIM!!!!!
Sorry Dufus, the increase was 76.7%, not 76%. I know math is not a birfoon strength.

If you need a math lesson I'll show you how to calculate it.

BTW, Dufus, did you score in the top 7% of college graduates in quantitative thinking? Didn't think so.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#180957 Dec 2, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you've committed plagiarism! LMAO!
LMAO (LRS tm reg'd). So ignorant. Why do I bother replying? You don't even know what plagiarism means.

Definition of plagiarism to LRS : The weatherman says tomorrow's gonna be sunny. I then say to my friend it's gonna be sunny tomorrow. I've committed plagiarism.

To the corner, put the dunce hat on, and sit there, LOSER.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#180958 Dec 2, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey, hey, dumbazz.....those precentages are skewed to say the least. Of course, if you start with a lower base then the percentages are going to be higher! Fool. Lies and misinformation. Do you ever tire of spreading BS? What a piece of work you are. Pathetic.
And so you decided to go from the higher number ! What a fool. You don't even understand grade 4 math. And you worked on airplanes? Wow. Probably emptied the toilet tanks with a straw.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#180959 Dec 2, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Nitpicking ignoramus ! It's 76.7% and 66.7%. What a loser, never heard of rounding out numbers or percentages?
Instead of saying, "hey, you're right about GWB's bigger debt, thanks for setting me straight", you remark on tenths of percents? What a birther birfoon buffoon loser. Plus ça change, plus c'est pareil.
LRS wasn't nitpicking. He was out in left field calculating something else totally irrelevant. Indeed, if the increase had been, say, 300%, according to LRS it would only be 25%. LRS is so innumerate that he doesn't realize his math calculates a smaller percentage the larger the increase. He's mathematically an imbecile.
Truth Detector

Louisville, KY

#180960 Dec 2, 2013
From a woman of faith who loves America:‘Black people have been deceived’[VIDEO]

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/01/from-a-woma...

What exactly do you think she means by Native Born Citizen?
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#180961 Dec 2, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry Dufus, the increase was 76.7%, not 76%. I know math is not a birfoon strength.
If you need a math lesson I'll show you how to calculate it.
BTW, Dufus, did you score in the top 7% of college graduates in quantitative thinking? Didn't think so.
And these percentages are still skewed. Do you really think simple math is that hard? Bush spent 4.4 in 8 years, Obobblehead has run up 6+ in 5 years. These numbers tell the story, Mr. BS! DUH!!! Hell, you probably don't see your error! LMAO!!!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#180962 Dec 2, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
And the cellar-dwelling six year old thinks he has a full deck? LMAO! NOW THAT IS FUNNY!
The sad illiterate twerp thinks that's a rebuttal.

Please explain to the class how in 14 months, if the Republicans have a majority in the Senate, lack of the "nuclear option" for Democrats would affect Obama's appointments. Puh-lease! That was the point, MORON.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Rouge isn't working with a full deck. The so-called "nuclear option" only affects appointments, and in 14 months, even if the Repubs control the Senate, the President will still be Obama. Even without the the "option" if Repubs were to have a majority they could block appointments. So the "nuclear option" will not matter as Dems will not be interested in blocking Obama's appointments and wouldn't need the option if they were in the minority.
Duh!
Meanwhile, Rouge's prophesies about who is going to win the "next" election is always wrong. Hehehehe.
Rouge should predict that the Dems will keep control of the Senate; then maybe the Republicans might win.

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) 4 min DBWriter 1,109,766
Music Artists A to Z (Feb '14) 8 min boundary painter 321
Word (Dec '08) 20 min boundary painter 4,710
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 21 min litesong 46,642
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 28 min ralph 98,222
Abby 9-16 32 min boundary painter 10
Dear Abby 9-17-14 33 min ralph 17
Amy 9-16 1 hr Toj 50
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••
•••

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 ]
•••