BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 222347 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

#183403 Jan 4, 2014
In the early 1970s I cause a civilian stealing aircraft fuel from the Army. He was a contract fuel truck driver who would refuel aircraft at the base field and at the stage fields. We were using 100/130 octane AvGas and he would miss log about five gallons for every aircraft. He would refuel 40-50 aircraft per shift which would mean he was miss-logging 200-250 gallons per day.
After he refueled the aircraft at the stage field he would return to the base field. He would leave before the student bus but would arrive back at the base field AFTER the bus did. So I flew my helicopter and caught him stopping at a farm and filling a large tank there.
If you blend 100/130 AvGas with 87 AutoGas, you get a real good hightest. I informed Army CID and they turned it over to the FBI and that was the last time I saw him on Army property. I assume he got busted!
Again, would the student pilots be steal fuel or would the fuel truck drivers be more likely to do so? So why would Rush Limbaugh TRAFFIC in prescription drugs when he already has enough money? Again, the ONLY reason why Rush was prosecuted was because he was ...... Rush.
Citizen org

Oakdale, NY

#183404 Jan 4, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, why did Pelosi not impeach either Bush-43 or Dick Cheney? What would the charges be? And no you know why Clinton WAS impeached?
Pelosi is a corporate hack Democrat just like Obama, Clinton, Bush and Cheney.

----------
The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder
by Vincent Bugliosi / May 9, 2008 / http://tinyurl.com/yjwxsea
There is direct evidence that President George W. Bush did not honorably lead this nation, but deliberately misled it into a war he wanted. Bush and his administration knowingly lied to Congress and to the American public -- lies that have cost the lives of more than 4,000 young American soldiers and close to $1 trillion.
A Monumental Lie
In his first nationally televised address on the Iraqi crisis on October 7, 2002, six days after receiving the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), a classified CIA report, President Bush told millions of Americans the exact opposite of what the CIA was telling him -a monumental lie to the nation and the world.

On the evening of October 7, 2002, the very latest CIA intelligence was that Hussein was not an imminent threat to the U.S. This same information was delivered to the Bush administration as early as October 1, 2002, in the NIE, including input from the CIA and 15 other U.S. intelligence agencies. In addition, CIA director George Tenet briefed Bush in the Oval Office on the morning of October 7th.

According to the October 1, 2002 NIE, "Baghdad for now appears to be drawing a line short of conducting terrorist attacks with conventional or CBW [chemical and biological warfare] against the United States, fearing that exposure of Iraqi involvement would provide Washington a stronger case for making war." The report concluded that Hussein was not planning to use any weapons of mass destruction; further, Hussein would only use weapons of mass destruction he was believed to have if he were first attacked, that is, he would only use them in self-defense.
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/05/0...


========
Citizen org

Oakdale, NY

#183405 Jan 4, 2014
Judge Andrew Napolitano says Bush and Cheney should be prosecuted for crimes against the United States Constitution.
The Libertarian commentator debates politics, history and what he considers to be the unconstitutional behavior of both the Bush and Obama administrations, with consumer advocate and four-time presidential candidate Ralph Nader.
June 2, 2010 / http://tinyurl.com/kpno7e7
Well, this is something you don't see every day. Ralph Nader hosted this interview segment with Fox News' Judge Andrew Napolitano and discussed his book, Lies the Government Told You. I'm surprised the judge is going to be allowed on Fox after making the statements he did about Bush and Cheney during the interview.

Nader: What's the sanction for President Bush and Vice President Cheney?

Napolitano: There's been no sanction except what history will say about them.

Nader: What should be the sanctions?

Napolitano: They should have been indicted. They absolutely should have been indicted for torturing, for spying, for arresting without warrants. I'd like to say they should be indicted for lying but believe it or not, unless you're under oath, lying is not a crime. At least not an indictable crime. It's a moral crime.

Nader: So you think George W. Bush and Dick Cheney should even though they've left office, they haven't escaped the criminal laws, they should be indicted and prosecuted?

Napolitano: The evidence in this book and in others, our colleague the great Vincent Bugliosi has amassed an incredible amount of evidence. The purpose of this book was not to amass that evidence but I do discuss it, is overwhelming when you compare it to the level of evidence required for a normal indictment that George W. Bush as President and Dick Cheney as Vice President participated in criminal conspiracies to violate the federal law and the guaranteed civil liberties of hundreds, maybe thousands of human beings

--------
Citizen org

Oakdale, NY

#183406 Jan 4, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Hey Jacqueau, have you ever seen the 1997 film Amistad ? Do you remember the scene in which the lawyer is attacked and he asked the character played by Morgan Freeman why and he said that was because they were afraid of him. And that is why you Libtards attack Dr. Orly Taitz and Rush Limbaugh.
Bush On Jobs: The Worst Track Record On Record
President George W. Bush entered office in 2001 just as a recession was starting, and is preparing to leave in the middle of a long one. That’s almost 22 months of recession during his 96 months in office./ January 9, 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/9ylluu
His job-creation record won’t look much better. The Bush administration created about three million jobs (net) over its eight years, a fraction of the 23 million jobs created under President Bill Clinton’s administration and only slightly better than President George H.W. Bush did in his four years in office.
Here’s a look at job creation under each president since the Labor Department started keeping payroll records in 1939. The counts are based on total payrolls between the start of the month the president took office (using the final payroll count for the end of the prior December) and his final December in office.
Because the size of the economy and labor force varies, we also calculate in percentage terms how much the total payroll count expanded under each president. The current President Bush, once taking account how long he’s been in office, shows the worst track record for job creation since the government began keeping records
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bus...

“Kenyan-born Obama=Antichrist”

Since: Sep 09

Casper, WY

#183407 Jan 4, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
And you probably think Owl Gore won the election of 2000 too!
HE DID WIN by cheating(just like Kenyan-born Obama) but the Bush league retroactively cheated to get the win. Can anybody really believe Gore could beat anybody. GW was a fairly weak candidate though. JFK simply and stubbornly out-cheated Nixon in 1960 which is why Nixon turned down a recount in Illinois where he got $500,000 cash in a briefcase from Jimmie Hoffa.
Obama is The Antichrist.
Jacques of Ottawa

Cambridge, Canada

#183408 Jan 4, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Hey Jacqueau, have you ever seen the 1997 film Amistad ? Do you remember the scene in which the lawyer is attacked and he asked the character played by Morgan Freeman why and he said that was because they were afraid of him. And that is why you Libtards attack Dr. Orly Taitz and Rush Limbaugh.
1. I did not see Amistad;
2. Taitz and Limbaugh are jokes. Bad jokes, but they sure know how to have people mock them. But they are not stupid, as they sure know how to live off hating disillusioned fans like you.
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#183409 Jan 4, 2014
WelbyMD wrote:
<quoted text>It will never end until Kenyan-born gay Moslem Obama gets thrown into the lake of fire.
The never ending fable. Poor BSC Birfoon
Jacques of Ottawa

Cambridge, Canada

#183410 Jan 4, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Soooo, al Qaeda is worse than Saddamn Hussein? How many Jews were in Iraq under Saddamn? 150,000! How many are left? Less than ten!!! What happened to them? They were moved to Israel and the U.S.!
Yes, under the Shia, Jews and Christians do better than if they were under the Sunnis but Saddamn was a Sunni in name only. But the Christians and Jews "lived" under Saddamn and nothing more.
In my book, Saddamn and al Qaeda are EQUALLY evil.
Just like Cracker and Honkie are just as evil as the N-word. But you Libtards have a hard time seeing the difference as you think black people have the right to be racists!!!!
What? There were 150,000 Jews under Saddam and there are none left today? That is a good thing ? Wow.

Cracker, I explained a few days ago, referred to the "cracking" sound of the whip as white slave owners whipped their slaves. How can "cracker" be offensive when it refers to aggressive acts from one dominant race to a subversive one? Now, the N word. Does the "N" word refer to any act of aggression by the "N" worders?

HONKIE : From the urban dictionary

Do tell us how "honkie" can be offensive to whites as it precisely describes what a "honkie" is.

a derogatory term for a Caucasian person.
there are three main theories for the origin of the word:
1. the word originated from the practice of white males wishing to hire African-American prostitutes in the 1920's, and going to the appropriate part of town while honking their car horns to attract the whores. Some versions state that the reason for this was that the white men were too afraid to actually stop in those neighborhoods, so the honking would bring the hookers to them. Others say that since few African-Americans could afford cars back in that time, the honking signaled a higher-paying white client and would quickly gain the prostitutes' attention.
2. the term comes from the word "honky-tonk", which was used as early as 1875 in reference to wild saloons in the Old West. Patrons of such disreputable establishments were referred to as "honkies", not intended as a racial slur but still a disparaging term.
3. "honkie" is a variation of "hunky" and "bohunk", derogatory terms for Hungarian, Bohemian, and Polish immigrant factory workers and hard laborers in the early 1900's. African-Americans began to use the word in reference to all whites regardless of specific nation of origin.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#183411 Jan 4, 2014
Jacques of Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
1. I did not see Amistad;
2. Taitz and Limbaugh are jokes. Bad jokes, but they sure know how to have people mock them. But they are not stupid, as they sure know how to live off hating disillusioned fans like you.
But they worry you and your fellow Libtards because deep down you know Obama is vulnerable, If not, you wood never have replied.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#183412 Jan 4, 2014
Citizen org wrote:
<quoted text>
Bush On Jobs: The Worst Track Record On Record
President George W. Bush entered office in 2001 just as a recession was starting, and is preparing to leave in the middle of a long one. That’s almost 22 months of recession during his 96 months in office./ January 9, 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/9ylluu
His job-creation record won’t look much better. The Bush administration created about three million jobs (net) over its eight years, a fraction of the 23 million jobs created under President Bill Clinton’s administration and only slightly better than President George H.W. Bush did in his four years in office.
Here’s a look at job creation under each president since the Labor Department started keeping payroll records in 1939. The counts are based on total payrolls between the start of the month the president took office (using the final payroll count for the end of the prior December) and his final December in office.
Because the size of the economy and labor force varies, we also calculate in percentage terms how much the total payroll count expanded under each president. The current President Bush, once taking account how long he’s been in office, shows the worst track record for job creation since the government began keeping records
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bus...
Sorry Tootsie, The Labor Participation Rate proves that FIVE MILLION are employed now than when Obama entered the White House. In fact the Labor Participation Rate is the highest it has been since Jimmy Cater left office and for the every same reasons.
You can show us all the twisted loony-left sources you want but would you believe Obama's on Dept of Labor report?
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000
Just keep drinking that Red Kool Aide.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#183413 Jan 4, 2014
I know you Libtards like pretty picture so here is one you should really enjoy!
https://www.google.com/search...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#183414 Jan 4, 2014
or how about this picture?
https://www.google.com/search...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#183415 Jan 4, 2014
Oh, November 2013 U-3 Unemployment Rate was 7.0% which sounds good but when you consider the Labor Participation Rate, it is actually 11.3%. And you Libtards think Obama is doing a good job?!?
If he is doing such a good job, why is Bernanke going to print $75 Bin Obama Bucks this month??? Bernanke has printed over $3 Tln Obama Bucks so far under QR1, 2 & 3 which was caused a very BIG BUBBLE and when it pops, and like all bubbles it will, The U-3 unemployment rate will shot above 10%, we will have double digit inflation and the stock market will correct at least 10%. The only question now is ...... when will Bernanke stop printing Obama Bucks!!!!
Jacques of Ottawa

Cambridge, Canada

#183416 Jan 4, 2014
JBH wrote:
It is only a relative measurement to depict that US is declining.
In other words, it is a comparison appraisal that when the rest of world are having population explosion, gaining more technologies and better education, with climbing emerging economies around the world, US is not that strong and effective in operating its polices anymore.
Some emerging economies (e.g., El Salvador) have better economic growths than that of China where its economy has been growing rapidly in the last 20 straight years, yet there are signs showing China's growth slowing from now on.
Emerging economies are mostly the ones of developing countries, as those like El Salvador, Brazil, India, Russia, China whereas advanced economies are those of G-7.
There are very few advanced economies on the planet while besides those G-7, only few in Europe and elsewhere are of advanced economies.
China has expanded its military to challenge US that China could be the largest military on earth, but not US .
Russia has built to having most number of strategic missiles to meet US and face NATO.
North Korea already has nuclear bombs and built up the training base of its military that it is ready for anything.
US has shown ineffectiveness in quelling insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan as they are only small countries that US could not even tackle.
In this aspects, the rest of the world gain strength in many areas that US no longer would be taken for granted to force a policy or on any issues.
From the perspectives showing globally, US is declining as it is not as what it used to be to engage operatives that other countries would go along or yield to it.
When there is ineffectivity in all these, US is viewed as going downhill (and declining) because other countries become stronger and make more success in many matters.
Declining speaking is only a relative measurement related to world situations and phenomenon worldwide, nowadays, as compared to previous era.
Gibberish. All of the above. Again, one by one, and so so easy to demolish:

1. Rest of the world is improving, and that is not hard, as most of the rest of the world has no place to go but UP. That does not mean the U.S. is declining - no rapport. The U.S. IS declining, yes, but nothing to do with up-and-coming countries. It's simply the decline of the American Empire, the most natural thing in the world. Has happened to every civilization. Any reason why the U.S. should be the exception?

2. Yes, El Salvador is outpacing China. What kind of a insipid reflection is that? I think it's in the top ten poorest nations on earth. Up's the only way to go. Parable : If you earn $2,000 a year in salary, are you going to click your high heels and shout for joy if you get a 100% raise to $2,000 a year? How silly. And forget about a declining China as every time that behemoth shows slow growth, it rebounds the following week as we westerners cannot get enough of their goods;

3. Yes, we know of emerging countries, those that have more than half of their citizens living below the poverty line;

4. China's military manpower dwarfs that of the U.S. What good is that? U.S.'s defence budget is 5 times that of China's;

5. Russian and U.S. nuclear missiles, hmmm, about equal. What does it matter, 10,000 to 9,000 anyhow? N. Korea's nuclear? A farce;

6. Afghanistan and Iraq : Mistakes, HUGE Mistakes. Thank you GWB and cronies;

7. The rest of your post is unintelligible. Can anyone decipher it?
Jacques of Ottawa

Cambridge, Canada

#183417 Jan 4, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, why did Pelosi not impeach either Bush-43 or Dick Cheney? What would the charges be? And no you know why Clinton WAS impeached?
What would the charges be? For starters, how about 2 unneeded wars, one based on lies and costing oh so much in lives , destructions and budgets? How about spying on its own people, and torture?

Oh, Clinton was impeached for having stupid sex with an intern. Hmmm, what else, and how much did that cost in lives, destruction and budgets?

==========

Another parable for you, Rogue. Neighbour has sex with his baby-sitter. Baaaaaaad. Very bad. Other neighbour kills 10 people, burns down their houses. Who's the baddest?

Keep up the comparisons, Rogue.
Jacques of Ottawa

Cambridge, Canada

#183418 Jan 4, 2014
loose cannon wrote:
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear, we want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program".
Bill Clinton
Well, fact is, Clinton did not invade Iraq. GWB did. Clinton barred any aerial activity and bombed some selected targets. No war, no invasion.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#183419 Jan 4, 2014
This is from the ultra-left site 'Zero Hedge' and 'Tyler Durden' is a pseudonym. But what is funny they are pointing their finger at Wall Street blaming them on the low Labor Participation Rate caused by the evil Bush but the LPR is now 1.5% LOWER!!! Isn't it funny how things backfire on the loony-left!!!

Labor Force Participation Rate Drops To 25 Year Low, At 64.5%
Tyler Durden's picture
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/05/2010 09:03 -0400

The inverse silver lining to today's jobs report that will be lost in the shuffle of what is perceived as a good NFP (despite consistent initial jobless claims of around 450K, which means that either there is a massive data error, or the rate of job creation has somehow surged) is that labor force participation has now dropped to the lowest rate it has been since 1984, at 64.5%. Assuming a reversion to the long-term average participation rate of 66%, means that the civilian labor force is in reality 157.4 million as opposed to the disclosed 153.9 million, a delta of 3.5 million currently unaccounted for. Maybe someone can ask the president during his imminent press conference what happened to the unemployed population, which would have been 18.3 if this labor force delta was incorporated, resulting in an unemployment rate of 11.6%.
mike

Toledo, OH

#183420 Jan 4, 2014
1. Back in 1961 people of color were called ‘Negroes.’ So how can the Obama ’birth certificate’ state he is “African-American” when the term wasn’t even used at that time?

2. The birth certificate that the White House released lists Obama’s birth as August 4, 1961 & Lists Barack Hussein Obama as his father. No big deal, right ? At the time of Obama’s birth, it also shows that his father is aged 25 years old, and that Obama’s father was born in “Kenya , East Africa”.
This wouldn’t seem like anything of concern, except the fact that Kenya did not even exist until 1963, two whole years after Obama’s birth, and 27 years after his father’s birth. How could Obama’s father have been born in a country that did not yet exist? Up and until Kenya was formed in 1963, it was known as the “British East Africa Protectorate”.(check it below)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya_
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya )

3. On the Birth Certificate released by the White House, the listed place of birth is “Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital”. This cannot be, because the hospital(s) in question in 1961 were called ”KauiKeolani Children’s Hospital” and “Kapi’olani Maternity Home”, respectively. The name did not change to Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital until 1978, when these two hospitals merged. How can this particular name of the hospital be on a birth certificate dated 1961 if this name had not yet been applied to it until 1978?
(CHECK IT BELOW)
http://http/http/www.kapiolani .org/women-and-children/about- us/default.aspx
( http://www.kapiolani.org/women-and-children/a... )
Why hasn’t this been discussed in the major media?

4. Perhaps a clue comes from Obama’s book on his father. He states how proud he is of his father fighting in WW II. I’m not a math genius, so I may need some help from you. Barack Obama’s “birth certificate” says his father was 25 years old in 1961 when Obama was born. That should have put his father’s date of birth approximately 1936 – if my math holds (Honest! I did That without a calculator!). Now we need a non-revised history book – one that hasn’t been altered to satisfy the author’s goals – to verify that WW II was basically between 1939 and 1945. Just how many 3 year olds fight in Wars? Even in the latest stages of WW II his father wouldn’t have been more than 9 years old. Does that mean that Mr. Obama is a liar, or simply chooses to alter the facts to satisfy his imagination or political purposes?
Jacques of Ottawa

Cambridge, Canada

#183421 Jan 4, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Isn't it odd that you bash someone who became addicted to prescription medications but totally ignore someone like Obama who not only was a cocaine user but a cocaine dealer!
<quoted text>
I knew you would fall for the Red Herring "dealer" allegation while ignoring the cocaine allegation. Why? Because you, and everyone else, knows that Obama used illegal drugs like cocaine but in your Libtardian mind Rush addiction to prescription medication is worse!!! And that makes you a bigot!!!
And, as if, you do not look for trash on people like Rush Limbaugh. Do you know what the allegations against Rush were? He had ten too many Oxycontin pills, and nothing more. You see, here in Florida you can only pickup a thirty day supply of certain medications while in most states, under federal law, you can pickup a NINETY day supply. Florida enacted that law to help stop trafficking in prescription pills but Rush was not trafficking and it was obviously nothing more than a minor error. The ONLY reason why Rush was prosecuted was because he was ...... Rush Limbaugh and nothing more.
It is like doing one mile and hour over the speed limit and you get stopped for speeding, and ticketed, while the cops ignore the people who are drive 15+ mph over the speed limit.
About ten years ago the State of Tennessee was ignoring LOCAL trucks who were running seriously overweight while citing out of state trucks for the minor overweight violations. And, the Feds under G.W. Bush, came down hard on Tennessee for it too.
"I knew you would fall for the Red Herring "dealer" allegation ", you wrote. My eye. If you meant it, you were wrong. If it was in fact a red herring, which I doubt, it was childish and ignorant. As to him using cocaine, prove it. And if he did, which is no doubt untrue, then he did, IN THE PAST. So what?
Jacques of Ottawa

Cambridge, Canada

#183422 Jan 4, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
In the early 1970s I cause a civilian stealing aircraft fuel from the Army. He was a contract fuel truck driver who would refuel aircraft at the base field and at the stage fields. We were using 100/130 octane AvGas and he would miss log about five gallons for every aircraft. He would refuel 40-50 aircraft per shift which would mean he was miss-logging 200-250 gallons per day.
After he refueled the aircraft at the stage field he would return to the base field. He would leave before the student bus but would arrive back at the base field AFTER the bus did. So I flew my helicopter and caught him stopping at a farm and filling a large tank there.
If you blend 100/130 AvGas with 87 AutoGas, you get a real good hightest. I informed Army CID and they turned it over to the FBI and that was the last time I saw him on Army property. I assume he got busted!
Again, would the student pilots be steal fuel or would the fuel truck drivers be more likely to do so? So why would Rush Limbaugh TRAFFIC in prescription drugs when he already has enough money? Again, the ONLY reason why Rush was prosecuted was because he was ...... Rush.
Why this story? I suppose the guy was a Democrat too.

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
Marxiosocialist Double Speak 25 min HRC in a Bikini 13
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 36 min Megan 1,417,672
I love the beach. 37 min Shes In A Bikini 4
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 6 hr Go Blue Forever 103,437
last post wins! (Apr '13) 6 hr Hatti_Hollerand 1,448
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 6 hr Ize Found 70,939
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 6 hr They cannot kill ... 9,371

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages