BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 196896 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

#184105 Jan 15, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Under Jimmy Carter they cut back Army flight school to half ....... but then they started to give flight surgeons and West Point cadets a month of flight training. Money that could be spent on actually training AVIATORS.
Because of that by early 1980 the Army was short 2,000 aviators!!!
I could go on and on about Jimmy Carter because I was on active duty and I saw it first hand. Things like flying with only one set of charts and plates in the aircraft so the pilot, or copilot, had no idea what the other was suppose to be doing.
<quoted text>
I did not compare Obama to G.W.! I compared him to Carter!! WHY? Because he is making the same damn mistakes as he does not understand the military!
Obama has been has been diverting funds from the DoD budget to other non-Defense issues which is a VIOLATION of the LAW! But until Congress jerks Obama's chain, he will get away with it. Meanwhile our country may not be able to defend us adequately!
While Japan and Europe were rearming in the early 1930s, FDR spent money on everything else. As a result, in 1941, Japan had three times as many aircraft carriers we did in the Pacific and the results were disaster at Pearl Harbor!!!
Disaster? Do you realise your above post is a disaster. I never mentioned Obama, but Carter yes, as you criticized him once more, 34 years later.

Europe was rearming in the 30s? Really? What Europe? Unless Germany was all by itself Europe. Pearl Harbor would've been bombed regardless how many aircraft carriers you had. And, as I told you yesterday,but you can't read, no carriers were at Pearl when the Japanese attacked. Those "missing" carriers dealth Japan its death blow at Midway and Leyte Gulf later on. As to FDR and Obama diverting military funds, good for them, they are much more needed elsewhere.

Defend yourself against who, what, exactly? Will more arms prevent embassy bombings, barracks bombings, destroyer attack, 9/11? WWII is over, Rogue. Conflicts are no longer fought the classic way. Strange that Vietnam where you served did not teach you that.

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#184106 Jan 15, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
If I showed you a poll that dated back to October 2012 just before the election which stated 26% of the military had a favorable opinion of Pres. Obama. Yes, I had said 20% and in 2012 I was off by 6% but do you want to take a military poll of the military NOW? Really?!?
Pres. Obama has been fully exposed for the liar he is and more and more people are realizing it .... to include our military.
Rogue's math:
the difference between 26% and 20% is 6%

Real math
The difference between 26% and 20% is THIRTY PERCENT!!!

It is like saying the difference between 20% and 30% is only 10% when in fact it is 50 PERCENT!!!

The 6% difference in Rogue's case would be if he had said 20% and the actual percent was 21.2%. That would be the 6% difference.

Birther's math as illogical as their argument

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#184107 Jan 15, 2014
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
Rogue's math:
the difference between 26% and 20% is 6%
Real math
The difference between 26% and 20% is THIRTY PERCENT!!!
It is like saying the difference between 20% and 30% is only 10% when in fact it is 50 PERCENT!!!
The 6% difference in Rogue's case would be if he had said 20% and the actual percent was 21.2%. That would be the 6% difference.
Birther's math as illogical as their argument
This should make LRS come back , intent on proving that the answer is 6%- not 30%.
JBH

Delta, Canada

#184108 Jan 15, 2014
While Acts of THE NEW AMERICA CENTURY (co-authored by Cheney )were resembling Hitlerism, Bush engaging in invasion of Iraq was acting on the start, which would spread more wars beyond Middle East to North Korea if Iraq war was successful.

That would demonstrate the unethical evil way if Iraq war was successful with no insurgents, that could lead to many wars of not any truths, that Bush actually ended up doing a lot of invasions as the neo-Hitlerist in this new world, that would become crazy.

They were a bunch of serial liars, radicals and fascists like Bush and Cheney that conducted extremism to make people think how great US military that could win lots of wars, so that Bush might be able to fulfill his dream as the war president, that he could win wars, while Hitler could not.

But the stand is all the same, that invasions are just invasions by directing aggression invasions as Hitlerism
US got burnt in Iraq, as all the US people took were burnt losses.

What such fools' jokes were all about , while they did talk about contributing to defeat Hitler, they would become Neo_Hitlerists instead, in a post-Hitler new world?
Obskeptic

Royal Oak, MI

#184110 Jan 15, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't say that, but I did infer, and I'll even insist that Rogue's figure of 20% was way, way off. As a matter of fact, and taking only blacks as an indication, close to 90% of black civilians voted Obama. You infer that they're dumb. Why? Well, you stated that these military "blacks' are fine men and women and intellectually independent. Did you mean that the black civvies are not "fine" and intellectually independent? Why , in essence, are black military finer and more intelligent than black civilians? Who is being presumptive and racist?
Rogue's 20% in favour of Obama is dumb, given the over 50% of military personnel being black and Hispanic. And presumptive and racist.
You got me on that one Jacques, because the black demographic votes 90% plus for democrats every election cycle, and all democrats do as a party is treat them like shit. The black condition in America has steadily declined ever since blacks turned to the democrats as a majority. Abortion was originally promoted by Margret Sanger as a means to exterminate blacks and the lower class citizens. Welfare has done nothing but promote illegitimacy and destruction of the traditional core family, and has hit blacks the hardest. Unions were formed not just to "improve working conditions and wages", but to exclude blacks from the higher paying blue collar jobs. Just about everything the democrats historically did up to the "big change" when they were integrated in the military and the south switched from democrat to republican was to screw the black man.
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#184112 Jan 15, 2014
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>You got me on that one Jacques, because the black demographic votes 90% plus for democrats every election cycle, and all democrats do as a party is treat them like shit. The black condition in America has steadily declined ever since blacks turned to the democrats as a majority. Abortion was originally promoted by Margret Sanger as a means to exterminate blacks and the lower class citizens. Welfare has done nothing but promote illegitimacy and destruction of the traditional core family, and has hit blacks the hardest. Unions were formed not just to "improve working conditions and wages", but to exclude blacks from the higher paying blue collar jobs. Just about everything the democrats historically did up to the "big change" when they were integrated in the military and the south switched from democrat to republican was to screw the black man.
More ignorant obsessions.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#184113 Jan 15, 2014
This is from a very good friend and a person who is still in the know. He is a retired CW5 but still teaches at the Army's Warrant Officer Advanced and Senior Courses. He still talks to generals and they still listen!

I guess BHO has decided he needs more money to support the illegal aliens.

Army Aviationís Future Plan Attacks Budget Crisis Through Self-Imposed Cuts.

Gone -- OH-58 Kiowa Warrior; Armed Aerial Scout

Training:$250 million cut to flying hours

Reserves to lose Apache attack helicopters.

Army Aviation Symposium and Conference, Arlington, Va. Maj. Gen. Kevin Mangum, commanding general of U.S. Army Aviation, revealed on Tuesday the full extent of his commands plans to hit the budget crisis head-on.

Speaking on the first day of the Army Aviation Symposium in Washington, D.C., he said that Army Aviation would retire its fleet of Bell OH-58 reconnaissance helicopters. The role would be handed to the Army Apache AH-64E attack helicopters supported by the rapidly expanding Shadow and Grey Eagle unmanned aerial systems (UAS) in a role that has seen rapid annual growth: Manned Unmanned Teaming.

Mangum said that the idea of prolonging the OH-58 Kiowa Warrior by putting new shoes on an old horse for $10 billion was rejected by the Army Aviation committee who collectively made the decision.

Apache helicopters would be taken out of the reserve component, being replaced by Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawks. Both Apache AH-64E and Black Hawk UH-60M procurement plans would be slowed and extended by 10 years so that the final aircraft in the process would not be fielded until the early 2030s.

The troubled Armed Aerial Scout program, which the Army has calculated would cost $16 billion, has been shelved indefinitely.

Planning to meet the aviation needs of an Army sized at the new level of 490,000 soldiers would require 15 Combat Aviation Brigades (CABs), said Mangum, a figure that had been derived from the Army. However, while the 13th Combat Aviation Brigade was still in the process of being formed, there would be no further increase. In fact, when a worst-case scenario was contemplated where government cut the standing Army even further by significant numbers, Mangum said that that only 10 CABs may be required. I donít like lean, but there ainít going to be no fat, remarked Mangum.

Training has already suffered from budget cuts. Since last year $250 million has been cut from the flying hour program, said Mangum. While the plan during his predecessorís time had been to increase the number of students passing through the Aviation Center at Fort Rucker, Ala., to around 1,500 per annum, a peak had been reached last year at 1,200. This year the number was expected to fall to just below 900 students. Again, in a worst-case scenario, Mangum said that cuts could take place over a five-year window, adding that Army Aviation command had planned for off-ramps in case we donít have to face worst case. We must balance force structure, modernization and training to mitigate the impact of the Budget Control Act on Army Aviation, he asserted.

Better to self-inflict the pain than have the force cut style where every aspect suffered. However, the determination to stand down the OH-58 and not pursue the AAS was clearly central.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#184114 Jan 15, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
If I showed you a poll that dated back to October 2012 just before the election which stated 26% of the military had a favorable opinion of Pres. Obama. Yes, I had said 20% and in 2012 I was off by 6% but do you want to take a military poll of the military NOW? Really?!?
Pres. Obama has been fully exposed for the liar he is and more and more people are realizing it .... to include our military.
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
Rogue's math:
the difference between 26% and 20% is 6%
Real math
The difference between 26% and 20% is THIRTY PERCENT!!!
It is like saying the difference between 20% and 30% is only 10% when in fact it is 50 PERCENT!!!
The 6% difference in Rogue's case would be if he had said 20% and the actual percent was 21.2%. That would be the 6% difference.
Birther's math as illogical as their argument
But what if it WAS 26% in October 2012 and is now down to 20%, is that a loss of 6% or is it 23%. In any event, the military approval rating of Obama is about half of the general public!!!
Now, what it they did a military poll TODAY, what would it say???
Slick Willie

Jacksonville, FL

#184115 Jan 15, 2014
Oh goody, Obama's approval rating has gone up 5% since me went on vacation. Maybe he should leave DC for another three years and his approval rating should be 100%.
Slick Willie

Jacksonville, FL

#184116 Jan 15, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Disaster? Do you realise your above post is a disaster. I never mentioned Obama, but Carter yes, as you criticized him once more, 34 years later.
Europe was rearming in the 30s? Really? What Europe? Unless Germany was all by itself Europe. Pearl Harbor would've been bombed regardless how many aircraft carriers you had. And, as I told you yesterday,but you can't read, no carriers were at Pearl when the Japanese attacked. Those "missing" carriers dealth Japan its death blow at Midway and Leyte Gulf later on. As to FDR and Obama diverting military funds, good for them, they are much more needed elsewhere.
Defend yourself against who, what, exactly? Will more arms prevent embassy bombings, barracks bombings, destroyer attack, 9/11? WWII is over, Rogue. Conflicts are no longer fought the classic way. Strange that Vietnam where you served did not teach you that.
Those carriers we had in the Pacific just held off the Japanese for about six moths. What turned the tide is that we launched over 20 Essex-class carrier in three year. Were as we were gaining aircraft carriers Japan was losing their faster than they could launch them.
We did not START to rebuild our military until 1938 and then only because a few Blue Dog Southern Democrats pushed the issue.
Ever hear of Carl Vinson?!?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#184117 Jan 15, 2014
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
You got me on that one Jacques, because the black demographic votes 90% plus for democrats every election cycle, and all democrats do as a party is treat them like shit. The black condition in America has steadily declined ever since blacks turned to the democrats as a majority. Abortion was originally promoted by Margret Sanger as a means to exterminate blacks and the lower class citizens. Welfare has done nothing but promote illegitimacy and destruction of the traditional core family, and has hit blacks the hardest. Unions were formed not just to "improve working conditions and wages", but to exclude blacks from the higher paying blue collar jobs. Just about everything the democrats historically did up to the "big change" when they were integrated in the military and the south switched from democrat to republican was to screw the black man.
I don't agree - at all. But we could go on forever with this.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#184118 Jan 15, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
This is from a very good friend and a person who is still in the know. He is a retired CW5 but still teaches at the Army's Warrant Officer Advanced and Senior Courses. He still talks to generals and they still listen!
I guess BHO has decided he needs more money to support the illegal aliens.
Army Aviationís Future Plan Attacks Budget Crisis Through Self-Imposed Cuts.
Gone -- OH-58 Kiowa Warrior; Armed Aerial Scout
Training:$250 million cut to flying hours
Reserves to lose Apache attack helicopters.
Army Aviation Symposium and Conference, Arlington, Va. Maj. Gen. Kevin Mangum, commanding general of U.S. Army Aviation, revealed on Tuesday the full extent of his commands plans to hit the budget crisis head-on.
Speaking on the first day of the Army Aviation Symposium in Washington, D.C., he said that Army Aviation would retire its fleet of Bell OH-58 reconnaissance helicopters. The role would be handed to the Army Apache AH-64E attack helicopters supported by the rapidly expanding Shadow and Grey Eagle unmanned aerial systems (UAS) in a role that has seen rapid annual growth: Manned Unmanned Teaming.
Mangum said that the idea of prolonging the OH-58 Kiowa Warrior by putting new shoes on an old horse for $10 billion was rejected by the Army Aviation committee who collectively made the decision.
Apache helicopters would be taken out of the reserve component, being replaced by Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawks. Both Apache AH-64E and Black Hawk UH-60M procurement plans would be slowed and extended by 10 years so that the final aircraft in the process would not be fielded until the early 2030s.
The troubled Armed Aerial Scout program, which the Army has calculated would cost $16 billion, has been shelved indefinitely.
Planning to meet the aviation needs of an Army sized at the new level of 490,000 soldiers would require 15 Combat Aviation Brigades (CABs), said Mangum, a figure that had been derived from the Army. However, while the 13th Combat Aviation Brigade was still in the process of being formed, there would be no further increase. In fact, when a worst-case scenario was contemplated where government cut the standing Army even further by significant numbers, Mangum said that that only 10 CABs may be required. I donít like lean, but there ainít going to be no fat, remarked Mangum.
Training has already suffered from budget cuts. Since last year $250 million has been cut from the flying hour program, said Mangum. While the plan during his predecessorís time had been to increase the number of students passing through the Aviation Center at Fort Rucker, Ala., to around 1,500 per annum, a peak had been reached last year at 1,200. This year the number was expected to fall to just below 900 students. Again, in a worst-case scenario, Mangum said that cuts could take place over a five-year window, adding that Army Aviation command had planned for off-ramps in case we donít have to face worst case. We must balance force structure, modernization and training to mitigate the impact of the Budget Control Act on Army Aviation, he asserted.
Better to self-inflict the pain than have the force cut style where every aspect suffered. However, the determination to stand down the OH-58 and not pursue the AAS was clearly central.
So what? What do you intend doing with all this "junk"? Your defence budget tops $700 billion per year. Time to cut it, and cut it drastically. That is more than the UK, France, China and Russia combined.And what for? Who are you planning to attack? Who are you planning to defend against?

Afghanistan, the biggest poppy producer in the world, increased its production last year by 50%. Yes , FIFTY PERCENT thanks to the U.S's. and allies' protection, and its sponsorship of drug lord Karzai. What the hell are we doing there? Why are we propping this drug dealer and killer?
Er, Generals listen to a CW5? Ha ha. In your wildest wet dreams, Rogue.
Slick Willie

Jacksonville, FL

#184119 Jan 15, 2014
It seems odd that two current aircraft carriers were named after Southern Blue Dog Democrats. The USS Carl Vinson and the USS John C. Stennis. All other carriers are named after U.S. presidents with the exception of the USS Nimitz who was named after the WWII hero Admiral Chester Nimitz.
Yep, no Republican Congressmen or Senators!!!
I can see it now, the USS Dirt Hairy Reed.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#184120 Jan 15, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
If I showed you a poll that dated back to October 2012 just before the election which stated 26% of the military had a favorable opinion of Pres. Obama. Yes, I had said 20% and in 2012 I was off by 6% but do you want to take a military poll of the military NOW? Really?!?
Pres. Obama has been fully exposed for the liar he is and more and more people are realizing it .... to include our military.
<quoted text>
But what if it WAS 26% in October 2012 and is now down to 20%, is that a loss of 6% or is it 23%. In any event, the military approval rating of Obama is about half of the general public!!!
Now, what it they did a military poll TODAY, what would it say???
Rogue, do maths have anything to do with flying, navigating, etc? How the hell did you manage all these years? Seat of your pants?

Percentages and percentage points are not to be confused. The difference between 26% and 20% is NOT 6%, it's 6 percentage points.

Atticus was correct, of course. Simpler example : 10% added to 20 will give you 22. 10% of 22, will NOT give you 20. It will give you 2.2 !

If you take 50% of 100, you will get 50. If you add 50% to 50, you will not return to 100, but will obtain75. I don't know of another easier elementary school method of teaching basic mathematics. Maybe someone else can help.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#184121 Jan 15, 2014
Slick Willie wrote:
Oh goody, Obama's approval rating has gone up 5% since me went on vacation. Maybe he should leave DC for another three years and his approval rating should be 100%.
What is his approval rating at the moment? But, more important, what was his approval rating in September 2012, 2 months before the November 6 election? The same? Want to check it out? Is that when you bought your dancing shoes?

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#184122 Jan 15, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
I
<quoted text>
But what if it WAS 26% in October 2012 and is now down to 20%, is that a loss of 6% or is it 23%. In any event, the military approval rating of Obama is about half of the general public!!!
Now, what it they did a military poll TODAY, what would it say???
You still don't get it.

If you wanted to know the price difference between two items one that is $26 and the other is $20 dollars. It is not a 6% percent difference between the two items but rather $26 item is 30 PERCENT higher price then the $20 dollar items.

In other words, a loss of 6% of 26 is NOT 20 but 24.52

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#184123 Jan 15, 2014
Slick Willie wrote:
<quoted text>
Those carriers we had in the Pacific just held off the Japanese for about six moths. What turned the tide is that we launched over 20 Essex-class carrier in three year. Were as we were gaining aircraft carriers Japan was losing their faster than they could launch them.
We did not START to rebuild our military until 1938 and then only because a few Blue Dog Southern Democrats pushed the issue.
Ever hear of Carl Vinson?!?
You're winging it. Again. Leave history, including military history, to others, Rogue. Midway, a huge victory, occurred barely 6 months after Pearl Harbor. How many new carriers participated? Did the U.S. even have time to build one single carrier and send it into combat in less than 6 months? No. Midway was won with its existing carriers, period. Wrong again.

Strategic victory for the Allies at Coral Sea. Lexington, though, was sunk. Again, no new carriers, this was 7 months after Pearl.

The battle of Leyte Gulf engaged new carrier additions, including the famous Enterprise. But, that was almost 3 years after Pearl.

Blue dog southern democrats did not begin the military buildup. FDR did, with the appt amongst others of Carl Vinson who worked under treaty restrictions. FDR, perhaps with Vinson's aid and in secret, secretly built up additional arms capacity. It partly explains why the U.S. had the B.17 of all things, a true surprise due to its advanced aeronautics.

Not only do I know who Carl Vinson was, I visited the carrier named after him, even went up to the bridge. Beautiful experience. Awesome reception.
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#184124 Jan 15, 2014
At the risk of sparking an international incident. Coral Sea BEFORE Midway.

Or we could just leave discussions of military history to "experts"
Frank

Spokane, WA

#184125 Jan 15, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you even know what a gigolo is? Look it up.
P.S. He'll be the first man. Get used to the idea.
Who,Todd?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#184126 Jan 15, 2014
Learn to Read wrote:
At the risk of sparking an international incident. Coral Sea BEFORE Midway.
Or we could just leave discussions of military history to "experts"
You're quite right. Coral Sea was may 42 and Midway June 42. I wrote from memory, and inverted the dates, my mistake. Does that change anything about the fact that there were no new carriers, and that the U.S. fleet nonetheless carried the day?

Your remarks , re "int'l incident" and "leave discussions of military history to "experts" were superfluous and churlish.

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) 10 min Nuculur option 1,276,412
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 10 min IBdaMann 54,520
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 17 min Tommy Devito 100,635
Word (Dec '08) 25 min RACE 5,422
News 2 dead, 10 wounded in shootings across the city... 41 min reality is a crutch 2
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 1 hr boundary painter 1,721
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 1 hr boundary painter 6,422
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages