BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 241668 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

#191964 May 30, 2014
For decades the loony-lefties have used the DEFENSE BUDGET to finance "Global Warming" research like using alternate jet fuel, which cost $67 per gallon, which inflated the Defense Budget but also takes away funding for things that actually defend our country.
If the Libtards want to fund this sort of crapola, why do they not attach it to ...... the Department of Education? Because that would take away funds that actually went to education!!!!

Paul B. Farrell Archives

May 29, 2014, 10:18 a.m. EDT
GOP climate-science deniers threaten national defense
Commentary: Republican House wants to limit Pentagon’s use of climate studies
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/gop-science-...

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#191965 May 30, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
I wonder if any of the Libtards will go to the link and watch the video?
NBC Reporter Can’t Name ONE Country Obama Has Improved Relations With; Blames Bush Anyway
Thursday morning, NBC Chief Foreign Correspondent Richard Engel was grilled by CNBC panelist and Home Depot co-founder Ken Langone, to name just one country where relations with the United States have improved under Obama (SEE VIDEO BELOW).
“Name one country with whom we have better relationships with today, than we did when he [Obama] became president almost six years ago,” Langone challenged the NBC reporter.
You would naturally want to say Europe, answered NBC’s Engel,“But generally, the relations with a lot of European countries have gotten worse because of these relationships…”
http://www.tpnn.com/2014/05/29/nbc-reporter-c...
Langone interrupted Engel saying,“I can name all the countries where the relationships have gotten worse. I’m asking to give me one country where they’ve gotten better.”
While Engel appeared clearly taken aback, and wasn’t able to name one country the Obama foreign policy had improved U.S. relations with, he didn’t hesitate to come to the defense of the Obama regime, using the old-standby, the worn-out “blame Bush” meme.
Engel answered Langone:
“Yeah, I think you’d be hard-pressed to find that, and I think this is the reason…I think the reason is our allies have become confused. For eight years, you had the Bush administration with a very interventionist policy, driving into world affairs, driving primarily into the Islamic world, army first or fist first, and that was very unpopular with most of our allies.”
WATCH FULL EXCHANGE BELOW:
http://www.tpnn.com/2014/05/29/nbc-reporter-c...
h/t: Washington Free Beacon
It's true. Relationships with other countries under Obama have not improved from the low they experienced during the GWB stewardship. Yes, GWB is responsible for even today's non-improved relations with the rest of the world. However, Obama could've done much better, squandering the huge popularity he enjoyed when he was first elected, and not improving the U.S.'s relations with the outside world. Exceptionally, GWB had excellent open relations with Canada. Gone are those days, as Obama totally ignores his neighbour and best ally to the north. The U.S. even went close to a year without and Ambassador in Ottawa. Mexico gets more attention from Obama.

Obama still has 2 years+ to go. If he doesn't improve the U.S. image around the world, if he doesn't work any harder at improving relations, he'll go down as the U.S. worst Ambassador abroad.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#191966 May 30, 2014
For decades when a rotor blade was damaged, and not reparable, they either had to change ALL of the blades or find a replacement place blade with the same amount of wear which was a hit or miss guess.
They would start with a blade that had been in service the same amount of flight hours assuming the wear was the same. So if a blade was damaged beyond repair and the set had 300 flight hours they would try and find a blade with 200-400 hours on it and see it it would balance out with the non-damaged blade. This took time and all to often you got blades that were not matched and the rotor imbalance would add wear to the whole airframe.
You could always tell if a Huey had a bullet hole in a tor blade as it whistled. At Fort Rucker I heard a Huey landing with a whistling blade and I walked over to the aircarft as the two STUDENT pilots shut down their aircraft. I reached down and fulled a tree branch out of the skids and asked them if they had been flying a little to low??? As the rotor blades coasted to a stop I pointed out a cut in the bottom of the blade which was probably caused by a tree strike!!! It should be noted that Huey rotor blades are about 11 feet above the skids and if the rotor blade was damaged. They were ore than 11 feet to low!!!

Rotor blade aging
http://www.rwas.com.au/blade-problem.html

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#191967 May 30, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
I wonder if any of the Libtards will go to the link and watch the video?
NBC Reporter Can’t Name ONE Country Obama Has Improved Relations With; Blames Bush Anyway
Thursday morning, NBC Chief Foreign Correspondent Richard Engel was grilled by CNBC panelist and Home Depot co-founder Ken Langone, to name just one country where relations with the United States have improved under Obama (SEE VIDEO BELOW).
“Name one country with whom we have better relationships with today, than we did when he [Obama] became president almost six years ago,” Langone challenged the NBC reporter.
You would naturally want to say Europe, answered NBC’s Engel,“But generally, the relations with a lot of European countries have gotten worse because of these relationships…”
http://www.tpnn.com/2014/05/29/nbc-reporter-c ...
Langone interrupted Engel saying,“I can name all the countries where the relationships have gotten worse. I’m asking to give me one country where they’ve gotten better.”
While Engel appeared clearly taken aback, and wasn’t able to name one country the Obama foreign policy had improved U.S. relations with, he didn’t hesitate to come to the defense of the Obama regime, using the old-standby, the worn-out “blame Bush” meme.
Engel answered Langone:
“Yeah, I think you’d be hard-pressed to find that, and I think this is the reason…I think the reason is our allies have become confused. For eight years, you had the Bush administration with a very interventionist policy, driving into world affairs, driving primarily into the Islamic world, army first or fist first, and that was very unpopular with most of our allies.”
WATCH FULL EXCHANGE BELOW:
http://www.tpnn.com/2014/05/29/nbc-reporter-c ...
h/t: Washington Free Beacon
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
It's true. Relationships with other countries under Obama have not improved from the low they experienced during the GWB stewardship. Yes, GWB is responsible for even today's non-improved relations with the rest of the world. However, Obama could've done much better, squandering the huge popularity he enjoyed when he was first elected, and not improving the U.S.'s relations with the outside world. Exceptionally, GWB had excellent open relations with Canada. Gone are those days, as Obama totally ignores his neighbour and best ally to the north. The U.S. even went close to a year without and Ambassador in Ottawa. Mexico gets more attention from Obama.
Obama still has 2 years+ to go. If he doesn't improve the U.S. image around the world, if he doesn't work any harder at improving relations, he'll go down as the U.S. worst Ambassador abroad.
When Bush drew a RED LINE, they did not cross it as they knew what Bush would do. Obama can draw all the red lines he wants to and they will ignore them as they know he will do ....nothing!!!
Since Obama has become presidents our friend can not trust us and our enemies no longer fear us. Speak softly, carry a BIG STICK and use it when you have to!!!
I don't want any president to be POPULAR with our enemies!!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#191968 May 30, 2014
Police officer do not worry why people RESPECT them, the just demand respect. Good people respect them as they know they are there to protect them while bad guys respect them out of FEAR!
Same goes for Counties. Japan attacked Pearl Harbor because they knew FDR was a wimp!!!! FDR did not want to rearm America to prepare for an inevitable war but he was forced to by Blue Dog moderate Democrats like Carl Vinson. Do any of you Libtards know why they named an aircarft carrier, the USS Carl Vinson, when he had never served in the military?!?

Naval Act of 1938
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The act was sponsored by Carl Vinson, a Democratic Congressman from Georgia who was Chairman of the House Naval Affairs Committee. It updated the provisions of the Vinson-Trammell Act ("First Vinson Act") of 1934 and the Naval Act of 1936, which had "authorized the construction of the first American battleships in 17 years", based on the provisions of the London Naval Treaty of 1930.[1] It was followed by the Two-Ocean Navy Act of 1940.

But Libtards gave credit to FDR when he was FORCED to sign those bills.

American Preparation for World War II

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR), like most Americans, was not eager for the United States to enter a global military conflict. But unlike the ardent isolationists, he also figured it was inevitable. Even though American troops didn't officially join World War II until December 1941, FDR started preparations in 1940.
http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/america...

FDR was a progressive and it was the Blue Dog Democrats who forced his hand. But there are few Blue Dogs in the Democrat Party any more as the DNC is actually become the Socialist Party.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#191969 May 30, 2014
At the beginning of WWII the Japanese had twice as many aircarft carriers than we did and while all of theirs were in the Pacific, only half of ours were. On December 7th 1941 our aircraft carriers were out numbered four to one in the Pacific.
Also our fastest battleship in the Pacific could do only 21 knots while the Japanese had over a half-dozen that could do 27 knots or faster. Faster means you can engage, or disengage, when you wanted to..

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#191970 May 30, 2014
We commissioned our first FAST-ATTACK battle ship, the USS North Carolina just about the time the Bismark was sortieing in the Atlantic. But the Bismark could do 31 knots and the USS NC could do only 27 knots. It was not until 1944 that we had any battleship that was equal too, or better than, the Bismark.
Thank you FDR!!!

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#191971 May 30, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
I wonder if any of the Libtards will go to the link and watch the video?
NBC Reporter Can’t Name ONE Country Obama Has Improved Relations With; Blames Bush Anyway
Thursday morning, NBC Chief Foreign Correspondent Richard Engel was grilled by CNBC panelist and Home Depot co-founder Ken Langone, to name just one country where relations with the United States have improved under Obama (SEE VIDEO BELOW).
“Name one country with whom we have better relationships with today, than we did when he [Obama] became president almost six years ago,” Langone challenged the NBC reporter.
You would naturally want to say Europe, answered NBC’s Engel,“But generally, the relations with a lot of European countries have gotten worse because of these relationships…”
http://www.tpnn.com/2014/05/29/nbc-reporter-c ...
Langone interrupted Engel saying,“I can name all the countries where the relationships have gotten worse. I’m asking to give me one country where they’ve gotten better.”
While Engel appeared clearly taken aback, and wasn’t able to name one country the Obama foreign policy had improved U.S. relations with, he didn’t hesitate to come to the defense of the Obama regime, using the old-standby, the worn-out “blame Bush” meme.
Engel answered Langone:
“Yeah, I think you’d be hard-pressed to find that, and I think this is the reason…I think the reason is our allies have become confused. For eight years, you had the Bush administration with a very interventionist policy, driving into world affairs, driving primarily into the Islamic world, army first or fist first, and that was very unpopular with most of our allies.”
WATCH FULL EXCHANGE BELOW:
http://www.tpnn.com/2014/05/29/nbc-reporter-c ...
h/t: Washington Free Beacon
<quoted text>
When Bush drew a RED LINE, they did not cross it as they knew what Bush would do. Obama can draw all the red lines he wants to and they will ignore them as they know he will do ....nothing!!!
Since Obama has become presidents our friend can not trust us and our enemies no longer fear us. Speak softly, carry a BIG STICK and use it when you have to!!!
I don't want any president to be POPULAR with our enemies!!!!
GWB drew an imaginary red line in Iraq, even took a walk on the carrier A. Lincoln.. He lost.
GWB drew an imaginary red line in Afghanistan. He lost.
GWB ignored intelligence reports on upcoming 9/11. He lost.

Obama drew a red line on Syria's chemical weapons. He won, and yet, has not intervened in what is essentially a civil war. What would Palin, what would YOU do?

Obama has not intervened in the Ukraine. What would Palin, what would YOU do?

YOU brought them up, adding Georgia to it. Still no reply from you on Syria, Ukraine, Georgia.

Once more, without thinking, you wrote : "I don't want any president to be POPULAR with our enemies!!!!" Pardon me? Improving relations with Western AND Eastern Europe, Australia, Japan, N.Z., Canada, the third and emerging world are , to you, countries that make up your enemies? Did I even mention mention enemies?

Sanctions are working pretty well against Russia. Russia is bending. Now, for the 5th time, tell me, what would Palin, what would YOU do? Why don't senior Republicans ask Obama to go to war?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#191972 May 30, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
We commissioned our first FAST-ATTACK battle ship, the USS North Carolina just about the time the Bismark was sortieing in the Atlantic. But the Bismark could do 31 knots and the USS NC could do only 27 knots. It was not until 1944 that we had any battleship that was equal too, or better than, the Bismark.
Thank you FDR!!!
Rogue, please stick to helicopters and small aircraft. Don't, please don't meddle in international affairs and recent military history. Just because you were what most of the world considers an NCO does not make you a professor of military and political history.

FDR secretly rebuilt the U.S. armed forces. He was in constant correspondence with Winston Churchill, frantically searching for ways to enter WWII. He was stymied in his efforts by both recalcitrant Houses and, most importantly, the population which had never accepted the U.S.'s participation in WWI, with no taste for another one.

Batttleships? Scoff scoff. Useless the day Pearl Harbor was bombed. Speed of battleships? No factor. Destroyers for anti-submarine warfare and battleship and convoy protection were THE thing. Battleships had very little impact on the Pacific. As to the Bismark, it was disabled by a WWI bi-planed that hit its steering rudder and forced it to go around in circles, an easy prey for the Brits.

FDR was a wimp? Are you totally nuts? As bad as calling Obama anti-American. FDR was one of your greater presidents.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#191973 May 30, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
I posted a link showing a side-by-side comparison. The figure is much closer in appearance to a sucker mouthed catfish than to any aircraft. Check out the side-by-side comparison at about 2:58. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =nPCscY4_71wXX.
They wouldn't have "wasted gold on a replica of a catfish"? They did make very close replicas of a catfish, and other animals. Sorry to bust your bubble Romper.
Check out this sucker mouthed catfish and compare it to the figure.
http://tinyurl.com/pthfnu7
and check out these other images.
http://unifiedserenity.wordpress.com/2012/09/...
http://tinyurl.com/ocroqgh
Romper, you don't know who built them? Rommper is still ASSUMING they must have see airplanes.
There are only three possibilities child.
1. Airplanes built by an advanced high tech earth civilization that developed and thrived and existed 1500 years ago unbeknownst to the rest of the world, and that disappeared without leaving a trace. No airplanes, no buildings, no nothing.
2. Aliens flew airplanes over Tolima and Peru, but were never seen by anyone in Aurope, Asia, Africa, or anywhere else.
3. The figures were not based on fantasy airplanes.
So Romper, which is it? 1 or 2, since you have ruled out 3.
What's the matter? Catfish got your wimpy tongue?
Your problem, Romper, is that your fantasy, that they were seeing aircraft in the skies, has only two solutions. So you must believe either 1 or 2. However the evidence does not support either.
So which is it, big boy?
<quoted text>
That's the point Glo! You don't know, I don't know, no one knows for sure. That's why I asked the question. You do remember it was a question, right? It must be one of three things? Why? Because you say so? Sorry, but that doesn't fly. Sorry, I don't kiss catfish. "The figures were not based on airplanes"? Says who? You? So what, all you have is an opinion, like the rest of us. There's nothing special about you, quite the opposite, actually. I suppose you have evidence that the relic is based on a catfish? Or, is that merely your interpretation? What you have written above is the most flawed example of logic I've EVER read! As you will notice, no name calling from me, this time. Your call Capt. Kirk!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#191974 May 30, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously you have no idea what AOA is! Many planes have symmetrical wings which means 100% of their lift is Newton's Third Law.
Until the late 1960 almost all helicopter rotor blades where symmetrical airfoils. We used to say that Hueys did not really fly, they just beat the air into submission. The first Army helicopter to have non-symmetrical was the OH-58 which was based on the TH-57 (Bell 206). But they had some unintended consequences and the non-symmetrical blades were never certified by the FAA.
Now the Bell 206L Longranger has non-symmetrical blades but it also has a different transmission mounts than the 206 Jetrangers called the Nodal transmission mount which dampened out the vibrations but also has a pandemonium called Nodal-beam bounce. It is not dangerous but a pilot needs to know what it is just in case he gets into it and does not panic.
I was thinking of a plane taking off from a horizontal runway with a perfectly horizontal wing such as the Tolima artifact. AOA is ZERO.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#191975 May 30, 2014
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the point Glo! You don't know, I don't know, no one knows for sure. That's why I asked the question. You do remember it was a question, right? It must be one of three things? Why? Because you say so? Sorry, but that doesn't fly. Sorry, I don't kiss catfish. "The figures were not based on airplanes"? Says who? You? So what, all you have is an opinion, like the rest of us. There's nothing special about you, quite the opposite, actually. I suppose you have evidence that the relic is based on a catfish? Or, is that merely your interpretation? What you have written above is the most flawed example of logic I've EVER read! As you will notice, no name calling from me, this time. Your call Capt. Kirk!
I sure do know Romper that the aircraft theory is baseless.

I'm sorry Romper, but it is YOUR proposition that the ancients actually saw aircraft in the sky.

It is not a matter of "no one knows". Anyone with a modicum of common sense can rule out the possibility of an advanced high tech human civilization unbeknownst to the rest of the world ~1500 years ago.

That leaves you with either figures resembling animals that are really models of alien spacecraft or are artistic stylized animals.

So if you insist they saw aircraft, what planet were they from?

Hahahahahaha!

Romper is a fool who believes in aliens space ships while saying "where did I say aliens"?

Wimp.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
I posted a link showing a side-by-side comparison. The figure is much closer in appearance to a sucker mouthed catfish than to any aircraft. Check out the side-by-side comparison at about 2:58. https://www.youtube.com/watch ....
They wouldn't have "wasted gold on a replica of a catfish"? They did make very close replicas of a catfish, and other animals. Sorry to bust your bubble Romper.
Check out this sucker mouthed catfish and compare it to the figure.
http://tinyurl.com/pthfnu7
and check out these other images.
http://unifiedserenity.wordpress.com/2012/09/ ...
http://tinyurl.com/ocroqgh
Romper, you don't know who built them? Rommper is still ASSUMING they must have see airplanes.
There are only three possibilities child.
1. Airplanes built by an advanced high tech earth civilization that developed and thrived and existed 1500 years ago unbeknownst to the rest of the world, and that disappeared without leaving a trace. No airplanes, no buildings, no nothing.
2. Aliens flew airplanes over Tolima and Peru, but were never seen by anyone in Aurope, Asia, Africa, or anywhere else.
3. The figures were not based on fantasy airplanes.
So Romper, which is it? 1 or 2, since you have ruled out 3.
What's the matter? Catfish got your wimpy tongue?
Your problem, Romper, is that your fantasy, that they were seeing aircraft in the skies, has only two solutions. So you must believe either 1 or 2. However the evidence does not support either.
So which is it, big boy?
<quoted text>

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#191976 May 30, 2014
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the point Glo! You don't know, I don't know, no one knows for sure. That's why I asked the question. You do remember it was a question, right? It must be one of three things? Why? Because you say so? Sorry, but that doesn't fly.
Question?

1. "So, what were the ancients seeing in the skies that had vertical tails?"
2. "Show me where I said the craft they saw were inspired by aliens."

1. Is based on the premise that 'the ancients" were seeing things "in the skies" with vertical tails, and the premise is not a question, Romper.

2. Is based on the premise that they were seeing "craft" flying in the air. That is a premise that Romper assumed and is also not a question.

It is Romper's assumptions that are groundless: that the Tolima people must have seen strange objects with vertical tails flying in the skies.

Total nonsense. Drivel.

If the Tolima people saw aircraft flying in the skies, it certainly was not aircraft constructed by humans. So where does Romper's theory go? He must either assert space aliens, or give up on his fantasy flying objects with vertical tails flying in the skies.

Romper simply did not realize that his assertion, that they saw strange things flying in the skies with vertical tails, is a bridge to nowhere.

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#191977 May 30, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
At the beginning of WWII the Japanese had twice as many aircarft carriers than we did and while all of theirs were in the Pacific, only half of ours were. On December 7th 1941 our aircraft carriers were out numbered four to one in the Pacific.
Also our fastest battleship in the Pacific could do only 21 knots while the Japanese had over a half-dozen that could do 27 knots or faster. Faster means you can engage, or disengage, when you wanted to..
Well I guess someone forgot to tell the U.S. Navy that we were not properly prepared because within six months of Pearl Harbor we had a turkey shoot with the Japanese at Midway with our SLOW battleships and outnumbered aircraft carriers.

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#191978 May 30, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
We commissioned our first FAST-ATTACK battle ship, the USS North Carolina just about the time the Bismark was sortieing in the Atlantic. But the Bismark could do 31 knots and the USS NC could do only 27 knots. It was not until 1944 that we had any battleship that was equal too, or better than, the Bismark.
Thank you FDR!!!
Wasn't the Bismarck sunk by the British Royal Navy in May 1941 SEVEN MONTHS before Pearl Harbor. Wasn't the Bismarck sunk by topedo bombers?

In other words, fast attack battleships can't outrun topedo bombers.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#191979 May 30, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
I was thinking of a plane taking off from a horizontal runway with a perfectly horizontal wing such as the Tolima artifact. AOA is ZERO.
There is no way of knowing that from a relic! All you can say is that it appears flat.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#191980 May 30, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
I sure do know Romper that the aircraft theory is baseless.
I'm sorry Romper, but it is YOUR proposition that the ancients actually saw aircraft in the sky.
It is not a matter of "no one knows". Anyone with a modicum of common sense can rule out the possibility of an advanced high tech human civilization unbeknownst to the rest of the world ~1500 years ago.
That leaves you with either figures resembling animals that are really models of alien spacecraft or are artistic stylized animals.
So if you insist they saw aircraft, what planet were they from?
Hahahahahaha!
Romper is a fool who believes in aliens space ships while saying "where did I say aliens"?
Wimp.
<quoted text>
If you "know", then prove it with facts. How would you know? You weren't there. I'll be waiting. You said you "know"....now, back it up with facts. Ok, I'll play your childish, name-calling game. Your major in college was masturbation and you minored in being a corn-holee, right? Wipe your crack, the last Bubba left you a creampie! LMAO @ U Your call Mr. Trekker!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#191981 May 30, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Rogue, please stick to helicopters and small aircraft. Don't, please don't meddle in international affairs and recent military history. Just because you were what most of the world considers an NCO does not make you a professor of military and political history.
FDR secretly rebuilt the U.S. armed forces. He was in constant correspondence with Winston Churchill, frantically searching for ways to enter WWII. He was stymied in his efforts by both recalcitrant Houses and, most importantly, the population which had never accepted the U.S.'s participation in WWI, with no taste for another one.
Batttleships? Scoff scoff. Useless the day Pearl Harbor was bombed. Speed of battleships? No factor. Destroyers for anti-submarine warfare and battleship and convoy protection were THE thing. Battleships had very little impact on the Pacific. As to the Bismark, it was disabled by a WWI bi-planed that hit its steering rudder and forced it to go around in circles, an easy prey for the Brits.
FDR was a wimp? Are you totally nuts? As bad as calling Obama anti-American. FDR was one of your greater presidents.
Name ONE achievement of FDR? He CAUSED the double-dip Great Depression. He gutted our military. Drawing a pink-line is meaningless. It really scared the Japanese, did 't it!!!
I would say that FDR, and his fellow Progressives, is responsible for about half of the American deaths during WWII.
It should be noted that over 70% of the deaths of Americans in Afghanistan where done under Obama's watch and because he has saddled our military with too many restrictions that increased their risks.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#191983 May 30, 2014
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
Wasn't the Bismarck sunk by the British Royal Navy in May 1941 SEVEN MONTHS before Pearl Harbor. Wasn't the Bismarck sunk by topedo bombers?
In other words, fast attack battleships can't outrun topedo bombers.
I bet you have no idea how the HMS Hood was sunk and how the USS Arizona was also sunk. I have addressed this issue before but being a Libtard you flushed that information two seconds after you read it.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#191984 May 30, 2014
Oh, the Bismark was not sunk by planes. It was DISABLED by a torpedo, dropped by a plane, that hit the rudders, disabling the ship's steering and one propeller.
She was sunk in a slug fest with inferior British battleships.

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) 9 min VetnorsGate 1,549,418
last post wins! (Apr '13) 1 hr honeymylove 2,549
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 3 hr They cannot kill ... 10,854
Why are White men obsessed with Latina women? (Feb '10) 4 hr LuvHardCock 209
America should let all immigrants in, why not? 4 hr actorvet 1
Presidential Library 6 hr Kay 1
TRUTH will be revealed, someday, maybe. 6 hr WOWsomeStory 2

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages