BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 239644 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

#195670 Jul 12, 2014
I had a NCO that had a Korea wife that assaulted a Korean policeman because he demanded his wife show her "VD-health" card and he was insulted. You see, "working girls" had to carry their VD-health card and it could not be over one month old. But this did not include non-working girls.
All I know is that my sergeant got beaten up by the Korea police and I do not think he was punished under "SOFA" for the alleged assault on the Korean police officer.
I never had the reason to have to check a girls VD card as I did not have a body-rubber on!!! I mean, if I was going to do the wild thing with one of them I would want to wear a scuba outfit on!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#195671 Jul 12, 2014
Because I was on flight status I had to see the flight surgeon for a simple head cold TWICE. The first when I got the cold and then again when I was over it. I would go on sick call and there were two lines. One for STDs and the other for everything-else. And the everything-else line was ..... shorter!!!
I remember one Monday morning I had a lieutenant scheduled for a training flight when the flight surgeon called and told me to send the LT back to the clinic. When I asked the Doc if he could wait until after his flight he said "no" and that he could not fly for another 24-hours. I think the LT had been down in the Ville!
I also had a SSG get gonorrhea from a BJ. He said he did not know how he got it and I told him, "well, she does BJs for a living so it was Unsafe to assume she did not have the infection in her ..... mouth!!! OMG!!!!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#195672 Jul 12, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Did the Mount Pinatubo eruption in 1991 effect our climate? Was that during the MWP? In fact there are a lot of documented volcanic eruptions in the past two decades that are well documented!!! In each case the temps went DOWN for a year or so and NOT up!
R U taking your meds? Does illiterate Rougetard think I said volcanic activity acts to increase global temperatures? Please, where oh where did Rougetard ever get that idea?

And yes, Rougetard, Mt. Pinatubo did cause some cooling, but the overall trend over the decades was warming.

Rougetard:
" In fact there are a lot of documented volcanic eruptions in the past two decades that are well documented!!! In each case the temps went DOWN for a year or so and NOT up!"

Is that supposed to be news?

Please, Rougetard, learn to read.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
It may seem that way, if you're scientifically illiterate.
Pure BUNK:
"It is much more realistic and reasonable to believe that it was the result of a millennial-scale oscillation of climate that is global in scope and driven by some regularly-varying forcing factor."
Current computer models account for the Medieval Warming period and Little Ice Age. There is no mysterious magic unknown forcing factor.
Furthermore, the Medieval Warming period was in part caused by changes in volcanic activity which combined with increased solar irradiation. Thus even if it were global in nature, it in no way indicates that the current climate change trend is not caused in significant part by anthropogenic CO2.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#195673 Jul 12, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
1. He did it by not enforcing our laws and the word got around that if you make it to America and you are a child, or have a child with you, you will NOT be turned away.
2. The law was written about the trafficking of SEX slaves. These children coming into the U.S. now are not sex slaves!!!
Interesting, your response, to wit : "He did it by not enforcing our laws " Are you sure you don't want to recall that one? Sounds like a GM one lol. Can see the extract where and when he said that " if you make it to America and you are a child, or have a child with you, you will NOT be turned away".

"The law was written about the trafficking of SEX slaves." It was? I sure don't remember any such provision. It MAY have been a part of it, but....Can you please elucidate?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#195674 Jul 12, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
When I was in S. Korea in 1980-81 I do not recall them being called "Juicy bars" but it was understood that the girls were 1) Koreans and 2) they had been sold into servitude by their parents and 3) they would be released as soon as their bond had been paid off.
Apparently things have changed as now there are young women who are brought from places like the Philippines, Russia, etc. and are in a similar system and only recently has the U.S. gotten involved. This is the trafficking in sex slaves. Not what is happening in our southern border.
Juicy bars: Air Force puts squeeze on businesses linked to human trafficking
http://www.stripes.com/news/juicy-bars-air-fo...
Do you have any idea where these KOREAN multinationals, namely Hyundai, Khia, Samsung, LG etc are from, Rogue? South Korea, economically and otherwise speaking is on a par with us now, and in certain areas like health care, ahead. Your homey little stories and sexual adventures are irrelevant today.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#195675 Jul 12, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Tell us Wotard, how did these Forrest grown 1,000 and 2,000 odd years ago and why there are none younger than about a thousand years ago?
It seems these dates coincide with not only the Medieval Warm Period but also the Roman Warm Period of 2,000 years ago. So it is safe to make two assumptions.
The first is it was actually warmer during those periods than it is today and secondly.... it is currently to COLD now for the forests to resume growing!!!
Are you rally that stupid?
Alaska Glacier Thaws: Ancient Forests Uncovered as Mendenhall Glacier Retreats
By Zachary Stieber, Epoch Times | September 22, 2013
As a glacier in Alaska steadily thaws, remains of ancient forests are left uncovered.
The remains have been frozen beneath the Mendenhall Glacier for up to 2,350 years.
As the glacier initially advanced long ago, it snapped off treetops in its path, Cathy Connor, a professor of geology at the University of Alaska Southeast told the Juneau Empire. The stumps were buried and protected in gravel.
Now, as the glacier melts, the melt water reveals the remains of trees, she said.
She’s dated some stumps between 1,400 and 1,200 years old–the oldest she’s tested so far are around 2,350 years old.
http://www.utexas.edu/know/2010/11/11/climate...
It is safe to assume that Rome and parts of the North Atlantic and even Alaska were warmer during the Roman Warm Period. The nutty idea that it means the current warming is not significantly due to anthropogenic CO2 is irrational and not connected to the observation.

"If Northern Hemisphere temperatures have been in an overall cooling trend for two millennia due to ”orbital forcing”(i.e. reduced solar irradiance), then the burden of proof becomes greater on those who attribute the warmth of recent decades to solar variability rather than rising greenhouse gas concentrations."

http://www.globalwarming.org/2012/07/26/is-to...

http://tinyurl.com/ot8skuv
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#195676 Jul 12, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
HATE is disregarding posters' logical and factual argumentations and responding with vituperation. Words like dumbazzbastard, dumbazzbitch, butt flapper, FOS, etc come to mind. THOSE are words of frustration from one who has nothing better to offer,. but most telling, they are words of anger. Fascist, nazi, racist anger, no less.
So much for examples of YOUR anger. Now, give me ONE example of MY anger. Not 3 or 4 or 5 like I constantly do with you, but ONE, just ONE. That oughta do it. Can't? I understand.
Oh, I could name plenty that you hate, you're simply not man enough to admit it, Jacqueline! BTW, those words are perfect descriptions of your ilk. No frustration whatsoever. LMAO!!! Oh, how Jacqueline wishes he had the power to be able to "make" others feel one way or the other. Unfortunately (for you), you are not capable. Spew some of your undying love for Bush! Here's an example of one of my words (according to you) and how it most appropriately describes you - YOU'RE FOS! really Destroyed and reduced to rubble. Even more so than I first thought! You reap what you sow, boy!
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#195677 Jul 12, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have any idea where these KOREAN multinationals, namely Hyundai, Khia, Samsung, LG etc are from, Rogue? South Korea, economically and otherwise speaking is on a par with us now, and in certain areas like health care, ahead. Your homey little stories and sexual adventures are irrelevant today.
I've been telling you for almost a year that you're irrelevant and insignificant, everyday!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#195678 Jul 12, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
What I think is funny is all the short Frenchmen and Italians. People like Sylvester Stallone are only 5' 7" tall. It is all because of WWI when France and Italy put all their tall guys in the infantry so they were killed by the hundreds of thousands while the short guys did not.
Germany did not do that. Germany sent all their criminals and crazy people into the Infantry. But a few like Hitler survived.
Total nonsense. Women and children did not serve during WWI. Grow a brain.

I'll bet Rougie has no clue what I'm talking about.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#195679 Jul 12, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Good for you.
2. Unlucky? In NASCAR they do not call them accidents are you are expected to get involved in crashes. Same goes for drunk divers. They are never involved in accidents because drunks are expected to crash and that is why they should not drive.
3. "it is rumoured" and then you say "(badly-kept secret)". It all depends on what the definition of "is" ....... ain't it!!!
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
1.Merci;
2. Nascar drivers drive drunk? Did I miss the relevance here?
3. How about this? Where's there's smoke...and, coming from a close Repbu aide...hmmm
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/49470
1. You are welcome.
2. They do NOT call them accidents because part of racing are CRASHES (not accident). An accident is something you do not anticipate and racers anticipate they will crash sooner or later.
3. You always talk about the source so I will bring it to your attention that this is a loony-lefty site. but I will address the allegations anyway. Bob Ney has a felony conviction and sounds like his has a chip on his soldier and the other guy is UNnamed so I will brush off both of their allegations. Do you have other more reliable sources and individuals?
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#195680 Jul 12, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Total nonsense. Women and children did not serve during WWI. Grow a brain.
I'll bet Rougie has no clue what I'm talking about.
Who would? And, better yet, who cares?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#195681 Jul 12, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
What I think is funny is all the short Frenchmen and Italians. People like Sylvester Stallone are only 5' 7" tall. It is all because of WWI when France and Italy put all their tall guys in the infantry so they were killed by the hundreds of thousands while the short guys did not.
Germany did not do that. Germany sent all their criminals and crazy people into the Infantry. But a few like Hitler survived.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Total nonsense. Women and children did not serve during WWI. Grow a brain.
I'll bet Rougie has no clue what I'm talking about.
No, but who fathered children after WWI? The short war survivors!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#195682 Jul 12, 2014
Short France Jokes Q: How does every French joke start? A: By looking over your shoulder. Q: What is the Guillotine? A: A French chopping centre. Q: Which ghost was president of France? A: Charles de Ghoul. Q: Whats the difference between a smart Frenchman and a unicorn? A: Nothing, they're both fictional characters Q: Did you hear about the Frenchman who jumped into the river in Paris? A: He was declared to be in Seine. Q: Did you hear about the winner of the French beauty contest? A: Me neither. Q: What do you call an Frenchman in the knockout stages of the World Cup? A: A Referee. Q: Why wasn't Jesus born in France? A: He couldn't find 3 wise men or a virgin. Q: What do you call a Frenchman advancing on Baghdad? A: A salesman. Q: Where can you find 60,100,000 French jokes? A: In France.

source: http://www.thedirtyjoke.com/

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#195683 Jul 12, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
2. Unlucky? In NASCAR they do not call them accidents are you are expected to get involved in crashes. Same goes for drunk divers. They are never involved in accidents because drunks are expected to crash and that is why they should not drive.
Expected?

"Selzer et al (12) studied 50 alcoholics and found that the majority of them had not been involved in more than 2 collisions in their lifetime - a record many of us envy."

"Filkins et al (6) studied 1,247 hospitalized alcoholics who were known to be drivers and found that 86 per cent of them had not been involved in more than one collision in the 6-year study period; 83 per cent had neither a DWI charge nor more than one driving conviction in the 6.year period."

"Clay (5) examined the driver and hospital records of nearly 1,400 hospitalized alcoholics and reported that:

...from a total sample of 1,273 chronic alcoholic drivers. 94 (7%) probably qualify as prime candidates for a traffic safety countermeasures program. The other 1,179 according to their driving records, drive much like the rest of us. At most, if we include medium risk drivers, we should be concerned about the driving habits of only 34 per cent."

-Mass Arrests for Impaired Driving May Not Prevent Traffic Deaths
Richard Zylrnan

"The evidence at least suggests that our index is measuring a potential for risk-taking behavior which may exist in a person independently of his use of alcohol and which manifests itself as aggressive irresponsibility. Such people may frequently use their cars as weapons rather than as means of transportation. The role of alcohol with such a person may simply be to more readily allow expression of that potential.... the high risk drinking driver may be a very different kind of problem than we thought [as opposed to the garden variety drunk]."

Please don't mistake this as an apologia for drunk driving. I merely point out that most people don't have a clue that the "killer drunk driver" generally is someone with psychiatric issues that are expressed when they are drinking. The average drunk drives home without getting into a serious accident because he doesn't go careening down the road at high speed like the angry nutball. And studies show that the psycopathologic driver is more dangerous than the average driver whether drunk or sober.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#195685 Jul 12, 2014
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, I could name plenty that you hate, you're simply not man enough to admit it, Jacqueline! BTW, those words are perfect descriptions of your ilk. No frustration whatsoever. LMAO!!! Oh, how Jacqueline wishes he had the power to be able to "make" others feel one way or the other. Unfortunately (for you), you are not capable. Spew some of your undying love for Bush! Here's an example of one of my words (according to you) and how it most appropriately describes you - YOU'RE FOS! really Destroyed and reduced to rubble. Even more so than I first thought! You reap what you sow, boy!
You : "Oh, I could name plenty that you hate"

Well, I named plenty of reasons that prove your HATE. May I add some more to your singular vocabulary? How about your hoping that something goes wrong with my plane on my way to LasVegas?, on telling wojar and me to go back across the pond, calling him a Pollack, musing that yes, even Air Force One could have something go wrong with it? All those HATE wishes just because you could not intelligently and logically bring forth a logical response. You are all about hate and I've proved it.

Now, repeat. "Oh, I could name plenty that you hate". Calling your bluff. Name ONE.Not two or three or even four, just ONE. Can't? Okay.

Here , I'll help . I do hate something, yes. I hate HATE. How's that?

Now get off the pot and tell me what I hate. And try to do it minus obscenity and vulgarity.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#195686 Jul 12, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
You : "Oh, I could name plenty that you hate"
Well, I named plenty of reasons that prove your HATE. May I add some more to your singular vocabulary? How about your hoping that something goes wrong with my plane on my way to LasVegas?, on telling wojar and me to go back across the pond, calling him a Pollack, musing that yes, even Air Force One could have something go wrong with it? All those HATE wishes just because you could not intelligently and logically bring forth a logical response. You are all about hate and I've proved it.
Now, repeat. "Oh, I could name plenty that you hate". Calling your bluff. Name ONE.Not two or three or even four, just ONE. Can't? Okay.
Here , I'll help . I do hate something, yes. I hate HATE. How's that?
Now get off the pot and tell me what I hate. And try to do it minus obscenity and vulgarity.
I named one, you nitwit. Do you not read? Hey, what can I say, azzholes get what they deserve. The world dislikes azzholes. Take that as a tip, Jacqueline.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#195687 Jul 12, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
What I think is funny is all the short Frenchmen and Italians. People like Sylvester Stallone are only 5' 7" tall. It is all because of WWI when France and Italy put all their tall guys in the infantry so they were killed by the hundreds of thousands while the short guys did not.
Germany did not do that. Germany sent all their criminals and crazy people into the Infantry. But a few like Hitler survived.
<quoted text>
No, but who fathered children after WWI? The short war survivors!!!
Tall children who didn't go to war didn't father children after the war? Females who were tall didn't contribute to the gene pool?

You're an IDIOT!
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Total nonsense. Women and children did not serve during WWI. Grow a brain.
I'll bet Rougie has no clue what I'm talking about.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#195688 Jul 12, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Expected?
"Selzer et al (12) studied 50 alcoholics and found that the majority of them had not been involved in more than 2 collisions in their lifetime - a record many of us envy."
"Filkins et al (6) studied 1,247 hospitalized alcoholics who were known to be drivers and found that 86 per cent of them had not been involved in more than one collision in the 6-year study period; 83 per cent had neither a DWI charge nor more than one driving conviction in the 6.year period."
"Clay (5) examined the driver and hospital records of nearly 1,400 hospitalized alcoholics and reported that:
...from a total sample of 1,273 chronic alcoholic drivers. 94 (7%) probably qualify as prime candidates for a traffic safety countermeasures program. The other 1,179 according to their driving records, drive much like the rest of us. At most, if we include medium risk drivers, we should be concerned about the driving habits of only 34 per cent."
-Mass Arrests for Impaired Driving May Not Prevent Traffic Deaths
Richard Zylrnan
"The evidence at least suggests that our index is measuring a potential for risk-taking behavior which may exist in a person independently of his use of alcohol and which manifests itself as aggressive irresponsibility. Such people may frequently use their cars as weapons rather than as means of transportation. The role of alcohol with such a person may simply be to more readily allow expression of that potential.... the high risk drinking driver may be a very different kind of problem than we thought [as opposed to the garden variety drunk]."
Please don't mistake this as an apologia for drunk driving. I merely point out that most people don't have a clue that the "killer drunk driver" generally is someone with psychiatric issues that are expressed when they are drinking. The average drunk drives home without getting into a serious accident because he doesn't go careening down the road at high speed like the angry nutball. And studies show that the psycopathologic driver is more dangerous than the average driver whether drunk or sober.
Psychobabble! Don't you think any psycopathologic person is likely to be more dangerous in all situations, not just driving? All this to toss some mud Boehner's way. LMAO! Toss it where it belongs, on Lil "o"! He is the problem, not Boehner.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#195689 Jul 12, 2014
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Who would? And, better yet, who cares?
Who would? Anyone with a clue about human genetics, MORON.

Who cares? Illiterate morons certainly don't care.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Total nonsense. Women and children did not serve during WWI. Grow a brain.
I'll bet Rougie has no clue what I'm talking about.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#195690 Jul 12, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Expected?
"Selzer et al (12) studied 50 alcoholics and found that the majority of them had not been involved in more than 2 collisions in their lifetime - a record many of us envy."
"Filkins et al (6) studied 1,247 hospitalized alcoholics who were known to be drivers and found that 86 per cent of them had not been involved in more than one collision in the 6-year study period; 83 per cent had neither a DWI charge nor more than one driving conviction in the 6.year period."
"Clay (5) examined the driver and hospital records of nearly 1,400 hospitalized alcoholics and reported that:
...from a total sample of 1,273 chronic alcoholic drivers. 94 (7%) probably qualify as prime candidates for a traffic safety countermeasures program. The other 1,179 according to their driving records, drive much like the rest of us. At most, if we include medium risk drivers, we should be concerned about the driving habits of only 34 per cent."
-Mass Arrests for Impaired Driving May Not Prevent Traffic Deaths
Richard Zylrnan
"The evidence at least suggests that our index is measuring a potential for risk-taking behavior which may exist in a person independently of his use of alcohol and which manifests itself as aggressive irresponsibility. Such people may frequently use their cars as weapons rather than as means of transportation. The role of alcohol with such a person may simply be to more readily allow expression of that potential.... the high risk drinking driver may be a very different kind of problem than we thought [as opposed to the garden variety drunk]."
Please don't mistake this as an apologia for drunk driving. I merely point out that most people don't have a clue that the "killer drunk driver" generally is someone with psychiatric issues that are expressed when they are drinking. The average drunk drives home without getting into a serious accident because he doesn't go careening down the road at high speed like the angry nutball. And studies show that the psycopathologic driver is more dangerous than the average driver whether drunk or sober.
Typical Libtardian response Alcoholic = DRUNK! Not so. There is a difference between driving buzzed and driving drunk.
BTW, the NSC defines Alcohol IMPAIRED as having a BAC of over 0.10% whereas a driver can get a DUI ticket with 0.08% unless you are driving a commercial vehicle in which it is 0.04% which is the same for Commercial pilots, Commercial boats/ships and Rail Road Trains (I think they are all considered commercial).
But here in Jacksonville, January 2000) they will not prosecute a police lieutenant who totaled out his patrol car and then at the hospital had a blood test which indicated he was a 0.239%(almost three times over 0.08%) two hours after the accident so it was probably higher when he had his "crash".

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) 1 min positronium 1,510,291
Give liberals a stroke! Fight for coal powered... 56 min Trump is the man 1
News Sessions: DOJ will crack down on federal grants... 59 min Trump is the man 1
News Scientists say they have proved climate change ... (Dec '08) 1 hr Patriot AKA Bozo 8,080
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 1 hr CrunchyBacon 105,074
Southern Ill will vote to expell Chicago From S... (Sep '15) 2 hr Peoria 5
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 3 hr SweLL GirL 10,506

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages