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

“Arm the homeless!”

Since: Jul 12

The internet

#186684 Mar 17, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
It's origin is French, "Comportement" with the additional "e".It's how one comports oneself.
lol

Didn't anyone ever tell you about using the word you are defining in the definition?

"What does comportment mean?"

- Well, it is how one comports one's self.

"Outstanding, now I have to look up two words."

“Arm the homeless!”

Since: Jul 12

The internet

#186685 Mar 17, 2014
If you examine it objectively... the Tea party and progressive liberals... aren't that far apart as far as ideology.

Very modest compromise would make for a pretty tough platform.

You would not only have a new party, but what I would wager a fairly instantaneous landslide victory.

More people will jump on that bandwagon than you would imagine. MOST Americans will identify themselves as moderates. And your new party just swept up the entire center of the political spectrum.

Suddenly, the Republicans and Democrats become extremist by definition and you are the voice of reason. Who hasn't been holding their breath for it?

You are a savvy talk radio host away from office... you will likely take 20% of the house seats and a few senate seats in the first 2 years.

Then all you have to do is what you said you were going to do.

It seriously can't fail without internal sabotage.

You want to bitch and moan that your new partners differ on the death penalty.... fine, but do it while being in charge.
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#186686 Mar 18, 2014
Scrutiny wrote:
<quoted text>And... I can't argue with that either J.

The tea party realizes something has to change. Progressive liberals are tired of shit too.

And it is for the very reason that for every Reid there is a Boehner. For every Soros there is a Carl Rove... that common ground exist and needs to be expanded.

Funny how you all plainly recognize evil when it is coming from the other side of the fence.

If I were to give you and Obskeptic 10 black balls a piece. And allowed you to remove the ten people each from the political arena...

I would guarantee a better field. But bastards abound. It is the system that seems flawed to me... and it is a far cry from the ideals that found us.

There are two ways to overcome the six of one, half dozen of another problem we face.

Internally and externally.

A third party must acquire a certain percentage of the vote before they can be legally taken seriously. What that means is they have to raise money... money talks.

The tea party may lack in some areas but money isn't one of them. Progressive liberals will bring them the numbers they so desperately need. If they could put down their signs for a few hrs and think it over... it is a no brainer.

They have enough in common to congeal... it may not be the perfect marriage but they are in a rather unique position to steal the show. Worry about hating each other later.

The only other solution I think is likely an external solution. So, if you aren't talking revolution... option A seems worth a shot.
S - while I generally agree with your sentiment I can only shake my head at the futility of talking about trying to find common ground to a gaggle of fools who view absolutely every issue through a myopic "us v them" lens. At the end of the day blind party loyalty trumps sanity

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#186687 Mar 18, 2014
Scrutiny wrote:
<quoted text>
And... I can't argue with that either J.
The tea party realizes something has to change. Progressive liberals are tired of shit too.
And it is for the very reason that for every Reid there is a Boehner. For every Soros there is a Carl Rove... that common ground exist and needs to be expanded.
Funny how you all plainly recognize evil when it is coming from the other side of the fence.
If I were to give you and Obskeptic 10 black balls a piece. And allowed you to remove the ten people each from the political arena...
I would guarantee a better field. But bastards abound. It is the system that seems flawed to me... and it is a far cry from the ideals that found us.
There are two ways to overcome the six of one, half dozen of another problem we face.
Internally and externally.
A third party must acquire a certain percentage of the vote before they can be legally taken seriously. What that means is they have to raise money... money talks.
The tea party may lack in some areas but money isn't one of them. Progressive liberals will bring them the numbers they so desperately need. If they could put down their signs for a few hrs and think it over... it is a no brainer.
They have enough in common to congeal... it may not be the perfect marriage but they are in a rather unique position to steal the show. Worry about hating each other later.
The only other solution I think is likely an external solution. So, if you aren't talking revolution... option A seems worth a shot.
Your long-winded presentation can easily be resumed in these words, YOUR words : "Funny how you all plainly recognize evil when it is coming from the other side of the fence."

It's hilarious. I'm surprised, I admit it. Surprised that you cannot distinguish between "evil" and "moronic". You see, I never spoke or even hinted "evil" when qualifying the tea party. I 've always spoken incompetence, stupidity, hate and spiteful. Add moronic. Evil? So be it, if that's how you want to label progressives - it's easy, gratis and untrue. Nonetheless, far better "evil" as it's less dangerous than the 4 aforementioned tea party traits. Oh, I forgot. Intelligence, smarts, two unknown tea party qualities - and plenty around for progressives.

Reid to Boehner, Soros to Rove? Have you blown a casket?

Lastly, and this is disturbing, teaming me with Obskeptic and the 10 black balls? Shows that a superior scientific brain, namely yours, will often lack a basic knowledge of human nature. We've been cool, you and me, in spite of some reasonable disagreements. I can't figure why the unexpected insults.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#186688 Mar 18, 2014
gasket. well, casket too
Obskeptic

Farmington, MI

#186689 Mar 18, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
A Columbia professor said he was brilliant, some of his fellow students said he participated well in academic discussions. He graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law, and was a lecturer in Constitutional Law at U Chicago. But a flunky from the Midwest has decided that he is average until he sees his grades. The old birfoon "I'm right until I get the particular poof I want." Pathetic.
Where again is the "I have a pen and a phone" clause in the constitution Woj? Or maybe the clause where he is granted the power to change a law at his discretion over 35 times without the consent of congress? Yeah, he's a constitutional scholar alright. His brilliance really shines through when the TelPrompTer gets turned off. The same one he needed to speak to a class of elementary school students.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#186690 Mar 18, 2014
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
Where again is the "I have a pen and a phone" clause in the constitution Woj? Or maybe the clause where he is granted the power to change a law at his discretion over 35 times without the consent of congress? Yeah, he's a constitutional scholar alright. His brilliance really shines through when the TelPrompTer gets turned off. The same one he needed to speak to a class of elementary school students.
Get off the pot, quit obfuscating and come up with the Columbia school of journalism word, sentence , paragraph, text, where it says most of the mass media are liberal. Or just admit that 1) you were wrong or 2) you made it up.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#186691 Mar 18, 2014
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
Where again is the "I have a pen and a phone" clause in the constitution Woj? Or maybe the clause where he is granted the power to change a law at his discretion over 35 times without the consent of congress? Yeah, he's a constitutional scholar alright. His brilliance really shines through when the TelPrompTer gets turned off. The same one he needed to speak to a class of elementary school students.
And the flunky who knows jack sh-- about executive branch discretion demonstrates his sheer ignorance again.

“In deciding whether a given agency delay is reasonable, current law tells courts to consider whether expedited action could adversely affect ‘higher or competing’ agency priorities, and whether other interests could be "prejudiced by the delay.’”

"Chief Justice William Rehnquist in a leading case on this subject, Heckler v. Chaney, courts must respect an agency's presumptively superior grasp of "the many variables involved in the proper ordering of its priorities." Chief Justice Rehnquist suggested that courts could lose their deference to Executive Branch judgment if an "agency has consciously and expressly adopted a general policy that is so extreme as to amount to an abdication of its statutory responsibilities." The Obama Administration has not and is not about to abdicate its responsibility to implement the statute on whose success his historical legacy will most centrally depend."

http://tinyurl.com/n2ka23o
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
A Columbia professor said he was brilliant, some of his fellow students said he participated well in academic discussions. He graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law, and was a lecturer in Constitutional Law at U Chicago. But a flunky from the Midwest has decided that he is average until he sees his grades. The old birfoon "I'm right until I get the particular poof I want." Pathetic.
Obskeptic

Farmington, MI

#186692 Mar 18, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
And the flunky who knows jack sh-- about executive branch discretion demonstrates his sheer ignorance again.
“In deciding whether a given agency delay is reasonable, current law tells courts to consider whether expedited action could adversely affect ‘higher or competing’ agency priorities, and whether other interests could be "prejudiced by the delay.’”
"Chief Justice William Rehnquist in a leading case on this subject, Heckler v. Chaney, courts must respect an agency's presumptively superior grasp of "the many variables involved in the proper ordering of its priorities." Chief Justice Rehnquist suggested that courts could lose their deference to Executive Branch judgment if an "agency has consciously and expressly adopted a general policy that is so extreme as to amount to an abdication of its statutory responsibilities." The Obama Administration has not and is not about to abdicate its responsibility to implement the statute on whose success his historical legacy will most centrally depend."
http://tinyurl.com/n2ka23o
<quoted text>
Brilliant Woj! So what your citing is the reality that it took over two hundred years and the "modern court" to find that sweet little kernel in the text our founding fathers wrote for us. I'm sure Madison and Jefferson would be in absolute agreement with you all on that one. Checks and balances, what were those again? Maybe we should ask Sheila Jackson Lee. As for you and Jacques, the fact you can't see what has become of "journalism" and the free press is your own ignorance, not mine. Maybe you should get rid of the rose colored glasses or turn the the telescope back around the correct way.
Obskeptic

Farmington, MI

#186693 Mar 18, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
And the flunky who knows jack sh-- about executive branch discretion demonstrates his sheer ignorance again.
“In deciding whether a given agency delay is reasonable, current law tells courts to consider whether expedited action could adversely affect ‘higher or competing’ agency priorities, and whether other interests could be "prejudiced by the delay.’”
"Chief Justice William Rehnquist in a leading case on this subject, Heckler v. Chaney, courts must respect an agency's presumptively superior grasp of "the many variables involved in the proper ordering of its priorities." Chief Justice Rehnquist suggested that courts could lose their deference to Executive Branch judgment if an "agency has consciously and expressly adopted a general policy that is so extreme as to amount to an abdication of its statutory responsibilities." The Obama Administration has not and is not about to abdicate its responsibility to implement the statute on whose success his historical legacy will most centrally depend."
http://tinyurl.com/n2ka23o
<quoted text>
I hope the day arrives that a republican has the nut sack to pull this crap back on you guys, but since they are all cowards I will not be holding my breath. Dictatorship is cool with you as long as he's your dictator. All hail the king! King Obama!

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

#186694 Mar 18, 2014
Jacques,
There is nothing like a missing jetliner or upheaval in the Crimean peninsula to put the war in Syria on the back burner.

Did you know that GPS tracking of ocean-going vessels and container cargo is commonplace in the shipping industry?

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

#186695 Mar 18, 2014
Jacques,
There are people out there in cyberspace who are actually entertaining the idea that missing Flight 370 might be due to alien abduction.
This is another all-time low for aviation history.

“Arm the homeless!”

Since: Jul 12

The internet

#186696 Mar 18, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Your long-winded presentation can easily be resumed in these words, YOUR words : "Funny how you all plainly recognize evil when it is coming from the other side of the fence."
It's hilarious. I'm surprised, I admit it. Surprised that you cannot distinguish between "evil" and "moronic". You see, I never spoke or even hinted "evil" when qualifying the tea party. I 've always spoken incompetence, stupidity, hate and spiteful. Add moronic. Evil? So be it, if that's how you want to label progressives - it's easy, gratis and untrue. Nonetheless, far better "evil" as it's less dangerous than the 4 aforementioned tea party traits. Oh, I forgot. Intelligence, smarts, two unknown tea party qualities - and plenty around for progressives.
Reid to Boehner, Soros to Rove? Have you blown a casket?
Lastly, and this is disturbing, teaming me with Obskeptic and the 10 black balls? Shows that a superior scientific brain, namely yours, will often lack a basic knowledge of human nature. We've been cool, you and me, in spite of some reasonable disagreements. I can't figure why the unexpected insults.
Never intended to insult anyone J.

And maybe "the combination of greed and unfettered corruption" may more accurately describe what I tagged as "evil" however, I can state that I do consider them "evil" when weighed against who they are supposed to be.

Child molesters are a diverse group, but there is something especially sinister about one in a position of trust. A teacher, clergyman, cop or even a family member.

Our elected officials are entrusted by us to do our will... reality couldn't be further away.

The metaphor of the black balls was to illustrate that you both have a case. And as long as you guys were knocking off politicians from the other side of the fence... I trust that we wouldn't lose anyone worth keeping.

Maybe my faculties do work a bit differently, it wouldn't be even within the first hundred times I have heard it. I don't think that changes anything at all. You would all arrive at the same conclusion if you could shut out the world the media has painted.

You guys act like you couldn't share a room without violence erupting, but in reality... if you just happened to be put together by chance... say, next to each other at a bar. You would quickly realize you are more alike than you know.

Your average tea party member is NOT screaming "Traitor!" and "Communist!!" at a Sarah Palin rally. They are simple libertarians that are tired of having to go it alone. They want individual freedoms, and for the budget to be figured out with the money we have rather than the money we can borrow. They aren't asking for anything we didn't already have, and universal healthcare won't be an issue at all when they are depending on progressive liberal numbers.

They are just people. You are just exposed daily to birthers, who are an exceedingly small minority. It has affected you.(infected may be a better word)

But take heart. These people on the other side of the fence are your neighbors. The lunatics get play on television, they make for the best entertainment.

“Arm the homeless!”

Since: Jul 12

The internet

#186697 Mar 18, 2014
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
S - while I generally agree with your sentiment I can only shake my head at the futility of talking about trying to find common ground to a gaggle of fools who view absolutely every issue through a myopic "us v them" lens. At the end of the day blind party loyalty trumps sanity
Yeah... every once in a while I seriously overestimate capacity for critical thinking.

I am convinced that America will come to an end very soon.(High probability anyways)

Whether, it come from economic collapse (which is imminent) or another form of breakdown that isn't so immediately obvious.

There could be no hell worse than our current form of govt picking up the pieces to make another run at it.

There are very simple solutions that would reign us back into a Jeffersonian type govt.

But if people really think what is wrong with America is the only opposing political party... by definition you aren't American at all. There are lots of single party countries you can look up too. Like North Korea, Mexico, China, Vietnam and Cuba.
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#186698 Mar 18, 2014
Scrutiny wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah... every once in a while I seriously overestimate capacity for critical thinking.

I am convinced that America will come to an end very soon.(High probability anyways)

Whether, it come from economic collapse (which is imminent) or another form of breakdown that isn't so immediately obvious.

There could be no hell worse than our current form of govt picking up the pieces to make another run at it.

There are very simple solutions that would reign us back into a Jeffersonian type govt.

But if people really think what is wrong with America is the only opposing political party... by definition you aren't American at all. There are lots of single party countries you can look up too. Like North Korea, Mexico, China, Vietnam and Cuba.
What can I say except I agree with you much more than I disagree - and unlike far too many, that fact doesn't cause me any distress

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#186699 Mar 18, 2014
Scrutiny wrote:
<quoted text>
Never intended to insult anyone J.
And maybe "the combination of greed and unfettered corruption" may more accurately describe what I tagged as "evil" however, I can state that I do consider them "evil" when weighed against who they are supposed to be.
Child molesters are a diverse group, but there is something especially sinister about one in a position of trust. A teacher, clergyman, cop or even a family member.
Our elected officials are entrusted by us to do our will... reality couldn't be further away.
The metaphor of the black balls was to illustrate that you both have a case. And as long as you guys were knocking off politicians from the other side of the fence... I trust that we wouldn't lose anyone worth keeping.
Maybe my faculties do work a bit differently, it wouldn't be even within the first hundred times I have heard it. I don't think that changes anything at all. You would all arrive at the same conclusion if you could shut out the world the media has painted.
You guys act like you couldn't share a room without violence erupting, but in reality... if you just happened to be put together by chance... say, next to each other at a bar. You would quickly realize you are more alike than you know.
Your average tea party member is NOT screaming "Traitor!" and "Communist!!" at a Sarah Palin rally. They are simple libertarians that are tired of having to go it alone. They want individual freedoms, and for the budget to be figured out with the money we have rather than the money we can borrow. They aren't asking for anything we didn't already have, and universal healthcare won't be an issue at all when they are depending on progressive liberal numbers.
They are just people. You are just exposed daily to birthers, who are an exceedingly small minority. It has affected you.(infected may be a better word)
But take heart. These people on the other side of the fence are your neighbors. The lunatics get play on television, they make for the best entertainment.
Linear thought,(item by item, no reasoning allowed) or for the masses, tunnel vision. You. Proof of that is part of your response, namely : "You guys act like you couldn't share a room without violence erupting, but in reality... if you just happened to be put together by chance... say, next to each other at a bar. You would quickly realize you are more alike than you know. " Violence? Me? When's that? It's wrong, totally off-key. I've been called names, some not very complimentary, sworn at, threatened with expulsion, with violence, foul language and even death. I've never ever used that kind of language, and when occasionally I do use a mild insult (moron, stupid , Larry etc come to mind), it is always relevant to what I've replied and written, it is not "gratis" or ad hominem. To a brilliant scientist like you, and I mean that with sincerity, I would just say that not everything appears what you wish it to be nor is it always black on white.

CON LTR put me in the same bag as Rogue. Not a compliment.
You put me in the same bag as Obskeptic. Makes the above appear like a compliment.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#186700 Mar 18, 2014
Scrutiny wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah... every once in a while I seriously overestimate capacity for critical thinking.
I am convinced that America will come to an end very soon.(High probability anyways)
Whether, it come from economic collapse (which is imminent) or another form of breakdown that isn't so immediately obvious.
There could be no hell worse than our current form of govt picking up the pieces to make another run at it.
There are very simple solutions that would reign us back into a Jeffersonian type govt.
But if people really think what is wrong with America is the only opposing political party... by definition you aren't American at all. There are lots of single party countries you can look up too. Like North Korea, Mexico, China, Vietnam and Cuba.
You : "
There are very simple solutions that would reign us back into a Jeffersonian type govt. "

You mean like owning slaves and abusing their women? I doubt it.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#186701 Mar 18, 2014
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
Brilliant Woj! So what your citing is the reality that it took over two hundred years and the "modern court" to find that sweet little kernel in the text our founding fathers wrote for us. I'm sure Madison and Jefferson would be in absolute agreement with you all on that one. Checks and balances, what were those again? Maybe we should ask Sheila Jackson Lee. As for you and Jacques, the fact you can't see what has become of "journalism" and the free press is your own ignorance, not mine. Maybe you should get rid of the rose colored glasses or turn the the telescope back around the correct way.
Madison?

Whine, moan, piss, the ignorant fool seems to believe that judicial review was invented in the 20th century. He might check out Marbury v. Madison (1803).

Meanwhile ignorami scream "activist courts" but decry deference in judicial review even though it is a matter of judicial restraint.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
And the flunky who knows jack sh-- about executive branch discretion demonstrates his sheer ignorance again.
“In deciding whether a given agency delay is reasonable, current law tells courts to consider whether expedited action could adversely affect ‘higher or competing’ agency priorities, and whether other interests could be "prejudiced by the delay.’”
"Chief Justice William Rehnquist in a leading case on this subject, Heckler v. Chaney, courts must respect an agency's presumptively superior grasp of "the many variables involved in the proper ordering of its priorities." Chief Justice Rehnquist suggested that courts could lose their deference to Executive Branch judgment if an "agency has consciously and expressly adopted a general policy that is so extreme as to amount to an abdication of its statutory responsibilities." The Obama Administration has not and is not about to abdicate its responsibility to implement the statute on whose success his historical legacy will most centrally depend."
http://tinyurl.com/n2ka23o
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#186702 Mar 18, 2014
Ahh. I see that the moron who fantasizes that calling someone a Conservative is the ultimate insult has declared himself to be completely absent of tunnel vision.

And my point is proven yet again.

Matthew 7:5

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#186703 Mar 18, 2014
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
I hope the day arrives that a republican has the nut sack to pull this crap back on you guys, but since they are all cowards I will not be holding my breath. Dictatorship is cool with you as long as he's your dictator. All hail the king! King Obama!
And the fool thinks that federal agencies under Republican administrations were not recipients of deference from the courts for the past 30 years per Chevron USA v Natural Resources Defense Council? Blithering nonsense.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
And the flunky who knows jack sh-- about executive branch discretion demonstrates his sheer ignorance again.
“In deciding whether a given agency delay is reasonable, current law tells courts to consider whether expedited action could adversely affect ‘higher or competing’ agency priorities, and whether other interests could be "prejudiced by the delay.’”
"Chief Justice William Rehnquist in a leading case on this subject, Heckler v. Chaney, courts must respect an agency's presumptively superior grasp of "the many variables involved in the proper ordering of its priorities." Chief Justice Rehnquist suggested that courts could lose their deference to Executive Branch judgment if an "agency has consciously and expressly adopted a general policy that is so extreme as to amount to an abdication of its statutory responsibilities." The Obama Administration has not and is not about to abdicate its responsibility to implement the statute on whose success his historical legacy will most centrally depend."
http://tinyurl.com/n2ka23o
<quoted text>

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 fetch almighty 1,125,570
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 15 min David 98,501
Abby 10-22 28 min Sublime1 4
Emanuel set to outline re-election agenda in fi... 50 min Walt Kowalski 3
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 1 hr Eric 70,030
Abby 10-20 1 hr Ralph 20
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr grave digger 47,489
Chicago Dating
Find my Match

Chicago Jobs

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 ]