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

There are 189853 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: Oct 08

Location hidden

#184514 Jan 24, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
You foolishly wrote : "We've had it right all along ". Are you mad?
Also, and because I'm not a U.S.citizen, does that signify that the numbers I advanced (435, 50, 9, 222, 197) are wrong? If I say Washington is the capital of the United States of America, am I wrong because I'm not a U.S. citizen?
If I say you have no logical reply, that you are in total denial and a birther, am I wrong because I'm not a U.S. citizen?
Who were you before cowardly changing your moniker to "Chicagoan by Birth"? Your prose has that same insignificant and clueless ring I've often had the misfortune of reading before.
Yes, you are wrong, because you still are part of the monarchy, yes the English monarchy, you haven't figured a way to break the shackles, something we did 237 yrs. ago. Who are you really? Are you Jock Quez from Montreal? Or, are you Jake from Ottawa? We'll allow you to pick??

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#184515 Jan 24, 2014
Oh poor Obummer Boy is in a panic as his agenda starts to crumble. Bill Clinton will be remembered as the president between two Bushs and Obummer Boy will be remembered as .....!

Obama Calls Out Rush Limbaugh, Fox News for Painting ‘Caricature’ for ‘Republican Base’
The Wrap By Greg Gilman

President Barack Obama is blaming his rocky relationship with Republicans in Congress on Rush Limbaugh, and the constant stream of bad press he receives from Fox News.

In the New Yorker follow-up interview to the magazine’s in-depth portrait of the President, Obama is described as being “particularly touchy” when discussing the notion that his inability to compromise with Republicans prevents him from passing more legislation. The publication’s initial interview made media waves earlier this week due to his comments about marijuana.
http://celebrity.yahoo.com/news/obama-calls-r...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#184516 Jan 24, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, but V.P. Bush visited, Johannes. You just don't get it, do you? Rogue gets it.
Then, GWB strutted in his military uniform on board that carrier under the banner "Mission accomplished". Rogue was impressed, as GWB looked so much more presidential than Obama who got Bin Laden. Yup, leave it to Rogue, he knows military stuff.
You are only pissed at Bush's visit to that Navy aircraft carrier because he looked great and the men loved him. When will Obummer Boy try a trick like that? If me does fly aboard a carrier it will be flying backwards in the back of a COD and the sailors will only be polite,,,,,,, and nothing more!
Dale

Wichita, KS

#184517 Jan 24, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
The evident meaning is that Dufus Dale does not comprehend that foreign law cannot operate within the borders of the United States and that an ordinary alien or a child born thereto is not subject to a foreign power while in the United States and such inoperative foreign law thereby cannot create an immediate natural allegiance.
<quoted text>
LMAO!!!
JURISDICTION IN NINETEENTH CENTURY INTERNATIONAL LAW AND ITS MEANING IN THE CITIZENSHIP CLAUSE OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT.
Source: St. Louis University Public Law Review . 2013, Vol. 32 Issue 2, p329-387. 59p.
Author(s): MENSEL, ROBERT E.
Subject Terms:*JURISDICTION *JURISDICTION (International law)*DUE process of law *CITIZENSHIP *INTERNATIONAL conflict *UNITED States -- History -- War of 1812 *BIRTHRIGHT citizenship (United States)*ALLEGIANCE -- United States
Abstract:
This article addresses the meaning of the citizenship clauses of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Fourteenth Amendment by augmenting the historical record relevant to those clauses. It argues that the key to understanding their meaning lies in the nineteenth century concept of allegiance, the central concept in the international law of citizenship and subjecthood in the nineteenth century. International law, diplomatic history, and international conflict centered around that concept, reveal complexities not fully explored in the previous scholarly literature on the citizenship clauses. Conflicting national claims to the allegiance of subjects and citizens and to the duties they owed to sovereigns caused, in part, the War of 1812. They almost led the U.S. to war with Austria in 1853, and they contributed to tensions with other German states. They flared up again with Great Britain in conflicts over conscription by the United States of British subjects in 1862, and in the Fenian conflicts of 1866. Conflict arose over the extent to which sovereigns whose subjects emigrated to the United States retained jurisdiction over those emigrants based on allegiance to their native sovereigns. This, to which I refer as the jurisdiction arising from allegiance, differed from and to some extent clashed with territorial jurisdiction. It was recognized as a matter of international law as an extraterritorial jurisdiction grounded in the relationship between the subject and the subject's original sovereign. It was vastly more extensive and expansive than its enervated twenty-first century descendant, and so, in a seeming paradox, has remained generally invisible to the modern eye. To understand it is to gain important insights into the meanings underlying both the Act and the Amendment. The citizenship clauses of the Act and the Amendment offered opportunities to relieve this international tension, even while addressing their principal purpose of making citizens of the freedmen. The congressional debates over the Act and Amendment lapsed into incoherence because one group of legislators discussed the proposed Amendment as if the word jurisdiction ' therein meant the jurisdiction arising from allegiance. That suggests that they intended to exclude from birthright citizenship the children of aliens, of persons who owed allegiance to some other sovereign at the time of the child's birth in the United States. Their opponents discussed the proposed Amendment as if the word jurisdiction' meant only territorial jurisdiction. That meant that anyone born within the United States would be a citizen by birthright, with only the most trivial exceptions, unless excluded explicitly. The greater weight of language and history favors the conclusion that the word "jurisdiction" in the Fourteenth Amendment was predominantly understood to mean the jurisdiction arising from allegiance. The weight of the evidence is not overwhelming, however, and the disposition of enormously important modern issues on the basis of that weight, without further research, might well be ill-advised.

It is the Law, since 1868
Dale

Wichita, KS

#184518 Jan 24, 2014
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Senator Trumbull ALSO said:
"By the terms of the Constitution he must have been a citizen of the United States for nine years before he could take a seat here, and seven years before he could take a seat in the other House ; and, in order to be President of the United States, a person must be a native-born citizen. It is the common law of this country, and of all countries, and it was unnecessary to incorporate it in the Constitution, that a person is a citizen of the country in which he is born…. I read from Paschal's Annotated Consitutuion, note 274: "All persons born in the allegiance of the king are natural born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together." Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country as well as of England. There are two exceptions, and only two, to the universality of its application. The children of ambassadors are, in theory, born in the allegiance of the powers the ambassadors represent, and slaves, in legal contemplation, are property, and not persons." Sen. Trumbull, Cong. Globe. 1st Session, 42nd Congress, pt. 1, pg. 575 (1872)
And Bingham said:
“Who does not know that every person born within the limits of the Republic is, in the language of the Constitution, a natural-born citizen.” Rep. Bingham, The congressional globe, Volume 61, Part 2. pg. 2212 (1869)”
They are right, and you are wrong.
Irrelevant, the 14th Citizenship Clause has been the law of the land, since 1868. You should get yourself an amendment..
Oh, how has that dual-citizenship been working for you?
Truth Detector

Louisville, KY

#184519 Jan 24, 2014
SHEEPLE got it right!
We are in recovery!
even though it is Bushes fault, right???
US stocks slammed; Dow falls 300-plus points in worst week since 2011
Obskeptic

Canton, MI

#184520 Jan 24, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Oh poor Obummer Boy is in a panic as his agenda starts to crumble. Bill Clinton will be remembered as the president between two Bushs and Obummer Boy will be remembered as .....!
Obama Calls Out Rush Limbaugh, Fox News for Painting ‘Caricature’ for ‘Republican Base’
The Wrap By Greg Gilman
President Barack Obama is blaming his rocky relationship with Republicans in Congress on Rush Limbaugh, and the constant stream of bad press he receives from Fox News.
In the New Yorker follow-up interview to the magazine’s in-depth portrait of the President, Obama is described as being “particularly touchy” when discussing the notion that his inability to compromise with Republicans prevents him from passing more legislation. The publication’s initial interview made media waves earlier this week due to his comments about marijuana.
http://celebrity.yahoo.com/news/obama-calls-r...
The problem this failing president has is not his black skin, but his thin skin. The idea that Fox News and Rush Limbaugh is responsible for his pitiful approval ratings and poll numbers is a joke. We are a nation of 330 million people of which only about 230 million of us have opinions that even matter, because the rest are either illegal or to young to be relevant. How many viewers does a pay to view cable channel tune in on any given night? Or for that matter Rush Limbaugh? Maybe 20-25 million and thats being generous. Not even all of those viewers agree with their information. Probably 30% of that 200+ million are democrats that would vote that way if Satan himself were on the ticket and the presidents poll numbers confirm his problems are way deeper then that. The problem is he is an extreme socialist to the core, and there are still many of us that resent being herded, which Obamacare is doing to even the democrats. The worst is yet to come as we will be seeing many businesses shed their employees insurance coverage as we roll through 2014 and approach the mid-term elections. The democrats thought 2010 was bad, just wait. Harry Reid is the democrat I most look forward to getting smoked. He is an absolute piece of shit.
Obskeptic

Canton, MI

#184521 Jan 24, 2014
Silver and Gold!! Silver and Gold!!!
Dale

Wichita, KS

#184522 Jan 24, 2014
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem this failing president has is not his black skin, but his thin skin. The idea that Fox News and Rush Limbaugh is responsible for his pitiful approval ratings and poll numbers is a joke. We are a nation of 330 million people of which only about 230 million of us have opinions that even matter, because the rest are either illegal or to young to be relevant. How many viewers does a pay to view cable channel tune in on any given night? Or for that matter Rush Limbaugh? Maybe 20-25 million and thats being generous. Not even all of those viewers agree with their information. Probably 30% of that 200+ million are democrats that would vote that way if Satan himself were on the ticket and the presidents poll numbers confirm his problems are way deeper then that. The problem is he is an extreme socialist to the core, and there are still many of us that resent being herded, which Obamacare is doing to even the democrats. The worst is yet to come as we will be seeing many businesses shed their employees insurance coverage as we roll through 2014 and approach the mid-term elections. The democrats thought 2010 was bad, just wait. Harry Reid is the democrat I most look forward to getting smoked. He is an absolute piece of shit.
Hell, the Democrat party is nothing more than a Socialist-Marxist fist, their objective is to form us into their image, this is not going to happen.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#184523 Jan 24, 2014
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem this failing president has is not his black skin, but his thin skin. The idea that Fox News and Rush Limbaugh is responsible for his pitiful approval ratings and poll numbers is a joke. We are a nation of 330 million people of which only about 230 million of us have opinions that even matter, because the rest are either illegal or to young to be relevant. How many viewers does a pay to view cable channel tune in on any given night? Or for that matter Rush Limbaugh? Maybe 20-25 million and thats being generous. Not even all of those viewers agree with their information. Probably 30% of that 200+ million are democrats that would vote that way if Satan himself were on the ticket and the presidents poll numbers confirm his problems are way deeper then that. The problem is he is an extreme socialist to the core, and there are still many of us that resent being herded, which Obamacare is doing to even the democrats. The worst is yet to come as we will be seeing many businesses shed their employees insurance coverage as we roll through 2014 and approach the mid-term elections. The democrats thought 2010 was bad, just wait. Harry Reid is the democrat I most look forward to getting smoked. He is an absolute piece of shit.
33 other OECD countries with a population of more than that of the U,S. have been, to use your prose, "herded" Obama-style into total no-premium health care. Ever thought of asking the opinions of all those folks what they think of universal govt-funded health care? Ever wondered why all of them live longer? Ever imagined what would happen to any one of those 33 govts that decided to do away with govt-funded universal health care? Would it not be useful to look outwards now and then and see how others manage? The U.S. is a fine country, but it's not the only one with answers, witness health care, 1 of 34 and yet the only one in step.

Hey, do you have highways, roads, police, armed forces, schools, research, govt departments, hospitals, prisons, food inspectors, etc? Are these not a form of socialism? Aren't your revered armed forces, like one of its soldiers in the movie that made you and your wife cry, paid for by the populace? Isn't that another form of socialism? Should you not have a privately-funded military with mercenaries?

Get used to Obama, he's gonna be around for another 3 years. As to Limbaugh, well, no woman in her right mind would ever bring such an uncouth oaf to meet her folks. He's the child the parents hid when they had visitors. I know, I know, he's successful and I' m not. I'll give him credit for, no problem.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#184524 Jan 24, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
I know, to us 60F is not cold but it is in Bangkok it is as 63 people have died of hypothermia!
Coldest weather in decades hits Thailand
Deutsche Presse-Agenture January 23, 2014
"Bangkok hit its coldest record in 30 years Thursday morning when the temperature fell to 15.6 Celsius," said Songkram Aksorn, Deputy Director General of the Thai Meteorological Department.
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Cold...
2013 was fourth warmest year since 1880, globally.

How's that global cooling working out for you?

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/how-hot-was-it...

http://tinyurl.com/k6tr3xn

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#184525 Jan 24, 2014
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!!
JURISDICTION IN NINETEENTH CENTURY INTERNATIONAL LAW AND ITS MEANING IN THE CITIZENSHIP CLAUSE OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT.
Source: St. Louis University Public Law Review . 2013, Vol. 32 Issue 2, p329-387. 59p.
Author(s): MENSEL, ROBERT E.
Subject Terms:*JURISDICTION *JURISDICTION (International law)*DUE process of law *CITIZENSHIP *INTERNATIONAL conflict *UNITED States -- History -- War of 1812 *BIRTHRIGHT citizenship (United States)*ALLEGIANCE -- United States
Abstract:
This article addresses the meaning of the citizenship clauses of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Fourteenth Amendment by augmenting the historical record relevant to those clauses. It argues that the key to understanding their meaning lies in the nineteenth century concept of allegiance, the central concept in the international law of citizenship and subjecthood in the nineteenth century. International law, diplomatic history, and international conflict centered around that concept, reveal complexities not fully explored in the previous scholarly literature on the citizenship clauses. Conflicting national claims to the allegiance of subjects and citizens and to the duties they owed to sovereigns caused, in part, the War of 1812. They almost led the U.S. to war with Austria in 1853, and they contributed to tensions with other German states. They flared up again with Great Britain in conflicts over conscription by the United States of British subjects in 1862, and in the Fenian conflicts of 1866. Conflict arose over the extent to which sovereigns whose subjects emigrated to the United States retained jurisdiction over those emigrants based on allegiance to their native sovereigns. This, to which I refer as the jurisdiction arising from allegiance, differed from and to some extent clashed with territorial jurisdiction. It was recognized as a matter of international law as an extraterritorial jurisdiction grounded in the relationship between the subject and the subject's original sovereign. It was vastly more extensive and expansive than its enervated twenty-first century descendant, and so, in a seeming paradox, has remained generally invisible to the modern eye. To understand it is to gain important insights into the meanings underlying both the Act and the Amendment. The citizenship clauses of the Act and the Amendment offered opportunities to relieve this international tension, even while addressing their principal purpose of making citizens of the freedmen. The congressional debates over the Act and Amendment lapsed into incoherence because one group of legislators discussed the proposed Amendment as if the word jurisdiction ' therein meant the jurisdiction arising from allegiance. That suggests that they intended to exclude from birthright citizenship the children of aliens, of persons who owed allegiance to some other sovereign at the time of the child's birth in the United States. Their opponents discussed the proposed Amendment as if the word jurisdiction' meant only territorial jurisdiction. That meant that anyone born within the United States would be a citizen by birthright, with only the most trivial exceptions, unless excluded explicitly.
Pathetic. MENSEL's article and $2.00 can get you a ride on the bus.'

Following adoption of the 14th Amendment, no one lost citizenship for being children born in the US of aliens. And not one of the amendments framers suggested that the 14th amendment was being violated. Get real. Mensel's article has the legal force of a wet noodle.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
The evident meaning is that Dufus Dale does not comprehend that foreign law cannot operate within the borders of the United States and that an ordinary alien or a child born thereto is not subject to a foreign power while in the United States and such inoperative foreign law thereby cannot create an immediate natural allegiance.[

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#184526 Jan 24, 2014
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!!
JURISDICTION IN NINETEENTH CENTURY INTERNATIONAL LAW AND ITS MEANING IN THE CITIZENSHIP CLAUSE OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT.
Source: St. Louis University Public Law Review . 2013, Vol. 32 Issue 2, p329-387. 59p.
Author(s): MENSEL, ROBERT E.
Subject Terms:*JURISDICTION *JURISDICTION (International law)*DUE process of law *CITIZENSHIP *INTERNATIONAL conflict *UNITED States -- History -- War of 1812 *BIRTHRIGHT citizenship (United States)*ALLEGIANCE -- United States
Abstract:
This article addresses the meaning of the citizenship clauses of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Fourteenth Amendment by augmenting the historical record relevant to those clauses. It argues that the key to understanding their meaning lies in the nineteenth century concept of allegiance, the central concept in the international law of citizenship and subjecthood in the nineteenth century. International law, diplomatic history, and international conflict centered around that concept, reveal complexities not fully explored in the previous scholarly literature on the citizenship clauses. Conflicting national claims to the allegiance of subjects and citizens and to the duties they owed to sovereigns caused, in part, the War of 1812. They almost led the U.S. to war with Austria in 1853, and they contributed to tensions with other German states. They flared up again with Great Britain in conflicts over conscription by the United States of British subjects in 1862, and in the Fenian conflicts of 1866. Conflict arose over the extent to which sovereigns whose subjects emigrated to the United States retained jurisdiction over those emigrants based on allegiance to their native sovereigns. This, to which I refer as the jurisdiction arising from allegiance, differed from and to some extent clashed with territorial jurisdiction. It was recognized as a matter of international law as an extraterritorial jurisdiction grounded in the relationship between the subject and the subject's original sovereign. It was vastly more extensive and expansive than its enervated twenty-first century descendant, and so, in a seeming paradox, has remained generally invisible to the modern eye. To understand it is to gain important insights into the meanings underlying both the Act and the Amendment. The citizenship clauses of the Act and the Amendment offered opportunities to relieve this international tension, even while addressing their principal purpose of making citizens of the freedmen. The congressional debates over the Act and Amendment lapsed into incoherence because one group of legislators discussed the proposed Amendment as if the word jurisdiction ' therein meant the jurisdiction arising from allegiance. That suggests that they intended to exclude from birthright citizenship the children of aliens, of persons who owed allegiance to some other sovereign at the time of the child's birth in the United States. Their opponents discussed the proposed Amendment as if the word jurisdiction' meant only territorial jurisdiction. That meant that anyone born within the United States would be a citizen by birthright, with only the most trivial exceptions, unless excluded explicitly. The greater weight of language and history favors the conclusion that the word "jurisdiction" in the Fourteenth Amendment was predominantly understood to mean the jurisdiction arising from allegiance. The weight of the evidence is not overwhelming, however, and the disposition of enormously important modern issues on the basis of that weight, without further research, might well be ill-advised.
It is the Law, since 1868
Sorry, loser, but Mensel's opinion has never been law.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#184527 Jan 24, 2014
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!!
JURISDICTION IN NINETEENTH CENTURY INTERNATIONAL LAW AND ITS MEANING IN THE CITIZENSHIP CLAUSE OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT.
Source: St. Louis University Public Law Review . 2013, Vol. 32 Issue 2, p329-387. 59p.
Author(s): MENSEL, ROBERT E.
Subject Terms:*JURISDICTION *JURISDICTION (International law)*DUE process of law *CITIZENSHIP *INTERNATIONAL conflict *UNITED States -- History -- War of 1812 *BIRTHRIGHT citizenship (United States)*ALLEGIANCE -- United States
Abstract:
This article addresses the meaning of the citizenship clauses of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Fourteenth Amendment by augmenting the historical record relevant to those clauses. It argues that the key to understanding their meaning lies in the nineteenth century concept of allegiance, the central concept in the international law of citizenship and subjecthood in the nineteenth century. International law, diplomatic history, and international conflict centered around that concept, reveal complexities not fully explored in the previous scholarly literature on the citizenship clauses. Conflicting national claims to the allegiance of subjects and citizens and to the duties they owed to sovereigns caused, in part, the War of 1812. They almost led the U.S. to war with Austria in 1853, and they contributed to tensions with other German states. They flared up again with Great Britain in conflicts over conscription by the United States of British subjects in 1862, and in the Fenian conflicts of 1866. Conflict arose over the extent to which sovereigns whose subjects emigrated to the United States retained jurisdiction over those emigrants based on allegiance to their native sovereigns. This, to which I refer as the jurisdiction arising from allegiance, differed from and to some extent clashed with territorial jurisdiction. It was recognized as a matter of international law as an extraterritorial jurisdiction grounded in the relationship between the subject and the subject's original sovereign. It was vastly more extensive and expansive than its enervated twenty-first century descendant, and so, in a seeming paradox, has remained generally invisible to the modern eye. To understand it is to gain important insights into the meanings underlying both the Act and the Amendment. The citizenship clauses of the Act and the Amendment offered opportunities to relieve this international tension, even while addressing their principal purpose of making citizens of the freedmen. The congressional debates over the Act and Amendment lapsed into incoherence because one group of legislators discussed the proposed Amendment as if the word jurisdiction ' therein meant the jurisdiction arising from allegiance. That suggests that they intended to exclude from birthright citizenship the children of aliens, of persons who owed allegiance to some other sovereign at the time of the child's birth in the United States. Their opponents discussed the proposed Amendment as if the word jurisdiction' meant only territorial jurisdiction. That meant that anyone born within the United States would be a citizen by birthright, with only the most trivial exceptions, unless excluded explicitly. The greater weight of language and history favors the conclusion that the word "jurisdiction" in the Fourteenth Amendment was predominantly understood to mean the jurisdiction arising from allegiance. The weight of the evidence is not overwhelming, however, and the disposition of enormously important modern issues on the basis of that weight, without further research, might well be ill-advised.
It is the Law, since 1868
Mensel: "This, to which I refer as the jurisdiction arising from allegiance, differed from and to some extent clashed with territorial jurisdiction."

Too bad Dufus, the founders didn't give a crap about Mensel's opinion, neither does anyone who matters.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#184528 Jan 24, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
2013 was fourth warmest year since 1880, globally.
How's that global cooling working out for you?
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/how-hot-was-it...
http://tinyurl.com/k6tr3xn
I apprised Rogue of that yesterday. It was an AP source. He didn't know what that meant, had to explain (Associated Press). And the rest of his reply was irrelevant, except he tied NASA to Colombia University, like that was a bad thing!

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

#184530 Jan 25, 2014
"Emanuel Wants One Pitch For Obama Library"

Chicago Tribune - headline
--------

Jacques,
That tells me it's going to Hawaii.
I can't log on to the tribune, because it locks me out of their webpage, but I am able to read their headlines and weather forecasts.
As far as Chicago is concerned, Obama has been like an absentee landlord.
Anyway, I have no interest in visitng any presidential library. They are simply another medium to stroke their over-inflated egos.
Obskeptic

Canton, MI

#184531 Jan 25, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
33 other OECD countries with a population of more than that of the U,S. have been, to use your prose, "herded" Obama-style into total no-premium health care. Ever thought of asking the opinions of all those folks what they think of universal govt-funded health care? Ever wondered why all of them live longer? Ever imagined what would happen to any one of those 33 govts that decided to do away with govt-funded universal health care? Would it not be useful to look outwards now and then and see how others manage? The U.S. is a fine country, but it's not the only one with answers, witness health care, 1 of 34 and yet the only one in step.
Hey, do you have highways, roads, police, armed forces, schools, research, govt departments, hospitals, prisons, food inspectors, etc? Are these not a form of socialism? Aren't your revered armed forces, like one of its soldiers in the movie that made you and your wife cry, paid for by the populace? Isn't that another form of socialism? Should you not have a privately-funded military with mercenaries?
Get used to Obama, he's gonna be around for another 3 years. As to Limbaugh, well, no woman in her right mind would ever bring such an uncouth oaf to meet her folks. He's the child the parents hid when they had visitors. I know, I know, he's successful and I' m not. I'll give him credit for, no problem.
You must not have watched that panel show with Paul Krugman that I have linked to multiple times where he asked the Canadians in the audience how many of them were happy with their government run healthcare Jacques. Not a single one raised their hand. Not one.I understand they don't represent every one of your 22 million citizens (less then the state of California), but you would think one of them would have raised their hand. As for our military, they are essentially mercenaries working through our government for the corporate oil cartels and the interests of NATO and the Saudi's.
Obskeptic

Canton, MI

#184532 Jan 25, 2014
loose cannon wrote:
"Emanuel Wants One Pitch For Obama Library"
Chicago Tribune - headline
--------
Jacques,
That tells me it's going to Hawaii.
I can't log on to the tribune, because it locks me out of their webpage, but I am able to read their headlines and weather forecasts.
As far as Chicago is concerned, Obama has been like an absentee landlord.
Anyway, I have no interest in visitng any presidential library. They are simply another medium to stroke their over-inflated egos.
I can agree with that. Barry ought to take all that library money and donate it to feed all the poor folks that have suffered under his incompetent leadership. That would be constructive and benevolent of him. 2014 is going to be a very bad year for the Golfer in Chief and the democrats.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#184533 Jan 25, 2014
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
You must not have watched that panel show with Paul Krugman that I have linked to multiple times where he asked the Canadians in the audience how many of them were happy with their government run healthcare Jacques. Not a single one raised their hand. Not one.I understand they don't represent every one of your 22 million citizens (less then the state of California), but you would think one of them would have raised their hand. As for our military, they are essentially mercenaries working through our government for the corporate oil cartels and the interests of NATO and the Saudi's.
Where was that? How about this ?:(If link doesn't work, and I apologize, just google "what percentage of Canadians are satisfied with their health care?") I dare you. Yup, 90% of us like it. I repeat, said it before, it's far from perfect, nothing is. What's YOUR satisfaction index, both before and after Obamacare?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada&a... ;
A Strategic Counsel survey found 91% of Canadians prefer their healthcare ... The proportion of Canada's gross domestic product (GDP) spent on health care will ..... Canada, like its North American neighbour the United States, has a ratio of ...
&#8206;Canada Health Act - &#8206;Publicly funded health care - &#8206;Medicare

==========
==========

NOW, OTHER 32 countries' universal health care programmes are better than Canada's. All of them. Just imagine the satisfaction percentage and how long any party of gov't that tries to dismantle universal health care would last.

Oh, yes, our population is fewer than California's, though I don't know how that is relevant. Incidentally, our population is approaching 35 million, not 22 million.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#184534 Jan 25, 2014
Ah, you Libtards are really getting worried, aren't you! If this is a frivolous lawsuit, why has it not been dismissed so far? Are you worried about what Dr. Michael Man will say under oath? The truth will set you free!!!

Harassment of climate scientists needs to stop
Climate change denialists are suing scientists, seeking access to their private emails. They will stifle inquiry and scientific progress

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014...

Oh, what happened to the lawsuit that John F-up Kerry filed against the Swift Boat Vets? Hmmmmm, Kerry dropped the suit the day before they were to take SWORN depositions!!!

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) 12 min Chicagoan by Birth 1,232,590
Steve Wilkos : talk show host ? or simple mi... (Feb '08) 12 min luvingmygirls 400
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 34 min TRD 70,019
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 35 min PEllen 99,535
amy 5-25-15 40 min PEllen 1
abby 5-25-15 42 min PEllen 1
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr scirocco 53,487
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]