BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 237210 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

#195772 Jul 14, 2014
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
Well we are half way through in 2014 and the current unemployment is 6.1%, inflation rate is 2.1% through the 12 months ending May 2014 and bank's interest rate is .08%
Do you want th change your prediction for 2014 yet?

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:<quoted text>
Ah, he quotes the U-3 Unemployment Rate again. How about the U-6 which is 12.1%?
http://portalseven.com/employment/unemploymen ...
Or how about the Labor Participation Rate which is at at 37 year LOW of 62.8% which means SEVEN MILLION FEWER AMERICANS ARE UNEMPLOYED NOW THAT WHEN BUSH WAS PRESIDENT!!!
Tell all those people who have given up looking for work that things are great! Or the record number of people who are on welfare and food stamps!!!
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Your LPR was blown apart yesterday, Rogue. Why do you come back with it?
Huh? June's LPR for June was 62.8%. Are you looking at something else? The LPR was 65.7% in Jan. 2009 and now it is just 62.8% which is a drop of .....2.9%. What is 2.9% of 313 MILLION? Ah, NINE million!!!!
And, the AVERAGE family's income, corrected for inflation, is down 15% from Jan. 2009 also. Now, if you can not rebut without facts and links, shut the F-up!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#195773 Jul 14, 2014
harmonious wrote:
Success?
47 million STILL on food stamps
92 million unemployed
Border being over ran
Not in my book is that a success.
I did blow some smoke up Jackeau's but butt he is to stupid to know it. The Labor force is not 100% of the American population but only those between 16 and70 years old. So instead of NINE Milion fewer ADULT being unemployed it is about SEVEN MILLION.
But I did that on purpose just to see if Jackeau could catch it but he was just to plain .....STUPID
Oh, now that full time unemployed means only 30 hours of work per week, that drops the U-3 and U-6 unemployment rates. So the actual unemployment rate is about 17% and Jackeau thinks that is just dandy!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#195774 Jul 14, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, just about everyone has predicted that just as soon as QE1, QE2 and QE3 end, the interest rates will spike and and the stock market will take a nose dive!!!!
<quoted text>
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Another prediction, Rogue? Will you finally be right? I wager not. You've been wrong on this whole thing for the last 3 years now, wrong on the DJIA, wrong on the economy, wrong on the Supreme court, wrong on everything. And you dare advance another one?
Not MY prediction. It is the prediction of just about every economist. I notice you deleted the attached Bloomberg article. Did "I" write it?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#195775 Jul 14, 2014
Hey Jacqueau,
Do you remember blowing Bubbles in the bath tub when you were little?
Well, I ran into Bubbles and he said to say 'Hi'!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#195777 Jul 14, 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.
harmonious wrote:
<quoted text>
Likely a complete fiction, but I'd be willing to look at the proof of your claim.
The average height for men in the following countries.
U.K. 5' 9.6"
Germany 5' 10"
Belgium 5' 9.5"
Netherlands 6' 0.6"
France 5' 8"
Italy (Northern) 5' 9.7'
Italy (Southern) 5' 8.0"
Note, the only country cut in half for this survey was Italy as their height difference is so pronounced.
The reason why French are shorter is that during WWI most of the tall guys were put in the infantry and were killed at far higher rates. Why Charles de Gaulle was wounded three times before he was captured.
In Italy most of the tall guys in Southern Italy were put in the Infantry during WWI while in the Northern part only poor tall guys were put in the infantry with the same higher causality rates.
http://www.disabled-world.com/artman/publish/...

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#195778 Jul 14, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, just about everyone has predicted that just as soon as QE1, QE2 and QE3 end, the interest rates will spike and and the stock market will take a nose dive!!!!
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Not MY prediction. It is the prediction of just about every economist. I notice you deleted the attached Bloomberg article. Did "I" write it?
This is great. Now you can already begin to blame these guys even before you're proved wrong.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#195779 Jul 14, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
I did blow some smoke up Jackeau's but butt he is to stupid to know it. The Labor force is not 100% of the American population but only those between 16 and70 years old. So instead of NINE Milion fewer ADULT being unemployed it is about SEVEN MILLION.
But I did that on purpose just to see if Jackeau could catch it but he was just to plain .....STUPID
Oh, now that full time unemployed means only 30 hours of work per week, that drops the U-3 and U-6 unemployment rates. So the actual unemployment rate is about 17% and Jackeau thinks that is just dandy!
You read too many studies and cannot understand terms like "baby boomers" and export of jobs. You also ignore the fact that the LPR in the US is higher than the rest of the OECD average. That doesn't mean the number is acceptable , it just means you're doing better than most. You cannot understand that the 2008 GWB recession was, if you discount the "modern'" worker benefits that did not exists then, yes, the 2008 GWB recession, was worse than the 1929 great depression.

Off to Vermont (montagnes vertes)

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#195780 Jul 14, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
Well we are half way through in 2014 and the current unemployment is 6.1%, inflation rate is 2.1% through the 12 months ending May 2014 and bank's interest rate is .08%
Do you want th change your prediction for 2014 yet?
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:<quoted text>
Ah, he quotes the U-3 Unemployment Rate again. How about the U-6 which is 12.1%?
http://portalseven.com/employment/unemploymen ...
Or how about the Labor Participation Rate which is at at 37 year LOW of 62.8% which means SEVEN MILLION FEWER AMERICANS ARE UNEMPLOYED NOW THAT WHEN BUSH WAS PRESIDENT!!!
Tell all those people who have given up looking for work that things are great! Or the record number of people who are on welfare and food stamps!!!
<quoted text>
Huh? June's LPR for June was 62.8%. Are you looking at something else? The LPR was 65.7% in Jan. 2009 and now it is just 62.8% which is a drop of .....2.9%. What is 2.9% of 313 MILLION? Ah, NINE million!!!!
And, the AVERAGE family's income, corrected for inflation, is down 15% from Jan. 2009 also. Now, if you can not rebut without facts and links, shut the F-up!
If you claim to be college educated with an A.A degree I am surprised with your last sentence. I assumed that anyone who attended college as you claim would be civil in articulating his or her comments without additional gratuitous expressions that doesn't add to the discussion.

As for the LPR in recent years, there was an article entitled "LABOR FORCE PROJECTIONS TO 2014: RETIRING BABY BOOMERS published in the November 2005 issue of the Monthly Labor Review in which the author Mitra Toosi, an economist in the Office of Occupational Statistics and Employment Projections, Bureau of Labor Statistics predicted that in 2014 that LPR will be lower because of retirement of baby boomers.

He wrote "Over the last three decades, as the number of births diminished
and the baby boomers moved to ages older than 16, the economic dependency ratio decreased. Most of the 28- percentage-point decrease for the total population between
1975 and 2004 stemmed from the decline in the number of births. The portion of the ratio attributed to children is projected to continue its downward slide. The 16- to 64-yearold
age group also experienced a decrease, of 11 points, from 44 per hundred in the labor force in 1975 to 33 per hundred in 2004. The economic dependency ratio for this
group is projected to continue decreasing and reach 31 in 2014"

http://www.cse.sc.edu/~buell/References/Burea...

Mr. Toosi's prediction was made in November 2005 almost 10 years ago.

In an article entitled "Explaining the Decline in the U.S. Labor Participation Rate" published in the monthly CHICAGO FED LETTER issue March 2012 by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. the authors Daniel Aaronson, economists Jonathan Davis and Luojia Hu noted that half of the decline of the LPR was due to demographic patterns such as retirement of baby boomers.

In fact, the authors concluded that the downward trend of the LPR will continue to 2020 even if there is improvement in the economy.

http://chicagofed.org/digital_assets/publicat...

As such, the decline of the LPR is due in large part by the retirement of the baby boomers.

See I can write a comment without additional gratuitous expressions can you?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#195781 Jul 14, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
You read too many studies and cannot understand terms like "baby boomers" and export of jobs. You also ignore the fact that the LPR in the US is higher than the rest of the OECD average. That doesn't mean the number is acceptable , it just means you're doing better than most. You cannot understand that the 2008 GWB recession was, if you discount the "modern'" worker benefits that did not exists then, yes, the 2008 GWB recession, was worse than the 1929 great depression.
Off to Vermont (montagnes vertes)
And you have yet to explain what G.W. did to cause the recession while I have shown you what Obama did to turn it into the Great Recession! You do know that you Democrats were running Congress at the time the crapola hit the fan, don't you?
Oh, and just because we are doing better than most other countries, that is okay with you? We are AMERICA. Stop trying to turn us into another European0style OECD!!! That is what caused the recession to become The Great Recession!!!

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#195782 Jul 14, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
You read too many studies and cannot understand terms like "baby boomers" and export of jobs. You also ignore the fact that the LPR in the US is higher than the rest of the OECD average. That doesn't mean the number is acceptable , it just means you're doing better than most. You cannot understand that the 2008 GWB recession was, if you discount the "modern'" worker benefits that did not exists then, yes, the 2008 GWB recession, was worse than the 1929 great depression.
Off to Vermont (montagnes vertes)
As for the LPR in recent years, there was an article entitled "LABOR FORCE PROJECTIONS TO 2014: RETIRING BABY BOOMERS published in the November 2005 issue of the Monthly Labor Review in which the author Mitra Toosi, an economist in the Office of Occupational Statistics and Employment Projections, Bureau of Labor Statistics predicted that in 2014 that LPR will be lower because of retirement of baby boomers.

He wrote "Over the last three decades, as the number of births diminished
and the baby boomers moved to ages older than 16, the
economic dependency ratio decreased. Most of the 28-
percentage-point decrease for the total population between
1975 and 2004 stemmed from the decline in the number of
births. The portion of the ratio attributed to children is
projected to continue its downward slide. The 16- to 64-yearold
age group also experienced a decrease, of 11 points,
from 44 per hundred in the labor force in 1975 to 33 per
hundred in 2004. The economic dependency ratio for this
group is projected to continue decreasing and reach 31 in 2014"

http://www.cse.sc.edu/~buell/References/Burea...

Mr. Toosi's prediction was made in November 2005 almost 10 years ago.

In an article entitled "Explaining the Decline in the U.S. Labor Participation Rate" published in the monthly CHICAGO FED LETTER issue March 2012 by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. the authors Daniel Aaronson, economists Jonathan Davis and Luojia Hu noted that half of the decline of the LPR was due to demographic patterns such as retirement of baby boomers.

In fact, the authors concluded that the downward trend of the LPR will continue to 2020 even if there is improvement in the economy.

http://chicagofed.org/digital_assets/publicat...

As such, the decline of the LPR is due in large part by the retirement of the baby boomers.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#195783 Jul 14, 2014
Yep, Australia is just now undoing with the Libtards F-ed up when they ran the government!

Australia's carbon tax repeal set for final showdown
Reuters By Matt Siegel 6 hours ago

SYDNEY (Reuters)- Australia's lower house of parliament on Monday voted to scrap the country's controversial carbon tax, setting up a final showdown in the Senate as early as Tuesday to decide the scheme's fate.

Abolition of the carbon tax was a centerpiece policy of Prime Minister Tony Abbott's 2013 election, but he has struggled to repeal the tax as his government does not control the Senate.

Last week the Senate rejected the repeal legislation after lawmakers from mining magnate Clive Palmer's Palmer United Party (PUP), which holds the balance of power in the upper house, withdrew support at the last minute
https://www.google.com/search...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#195784 Jul 14, 2014
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
If you claim to be college educated with an A.A degree I am surprised with your last sentence. I assumed that anyone who attended college as you claim would be civil in articulating his or her comments without additional gratuitous expressions that doesn't add to the discussion.
As for the LPR in recent years, there was an article entitled "LABOR FORCE PROJECTIONS TO 2014: RETIRING BABY BOOMERS published in the November 2005 issue of the Monthly Labor Review in which the author Mitra Toosi, an economist in the Office of Occupational Statistics and Employment Projections, Bureau of Labor Statistics predicted that in 2014 that LPR will be lower because of retirement of baby boomers.
He wrote "Over the last three decades, as the number of births diminished
and the baby boomers moved to ages older than 16, the economic dependency ratio decreased. Most of the 28- percentage-point decrease for the total population between
1975 and 2004 stemmed from the decline in the number of births. The portion of the ratio attributed to children is projected to continue its downward slide. The 16- to 64-yearold
age group also experienced a decrease, of 11 points, from 44 per hundred in the labor force in 1975 to 33 per hundred in 2004. The economic dependency ratio for this
group is projected to continue decreasing and reach 31 in 2014"
http://www.cse.sc.edu/~buell/References/Burea...
Mr. Toosi's prediction was made in November 2005 almost 10 years ago.
In an article entitled "Explaining the Decline in the U.S. Labor Participation Rate" published in the monthly CHICAGO FED LETTER issue March 2012 by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. the authors Daniel Aaronson, economists Jonathan Davis and Luojia Hu noted that half of the decline of the LPR was due to demographic patterns such as retirement of baby boomers.
In fact, the authors concluded that the downward trend of the LPR will continue to 2020 even if there is improvement in the economy.
http://chicagofed.org/digital_assets/publicat...
As such, the decline of the LPR is due in large part by the retirement of the baby boomers.
See I can write a comment without additional gratuitous expressions can you?
Oh wow, THREE DECADES? I thought it was only FIVE years. What does "due in large part" mean to you? It means not the only cause. And you think the lower U-3 Unemployment rate had nothing to do with Obama redefining what FULL TIME work is. It use to be 40 work hours a week but Obama made it just 30 HOURS a week.
I guess it all depends on what the definition of "is" is, don't it!!!!
Learn to Read

United States

#195785 Jul 14, 2014
Take Your Country Back wrote:
It wouldnt matter where the President was born, He just has to be a citizen, so there is no loop whole, you would have to Impeach him and no one will do it
You can't impeach the POTUS just because. No basis means just another failure in Birfistan
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#195786 Jul 14, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
We now have TWO federal judges demanding the IRS provides sworn deposition about what happened to those missing emails. What is the chance of having seven hard drives from the same seven people who are under Congressional investigations all crap out at the same time?
Besides, our NSA should have backups?!?!
Having worked on computers for 15 years, I'd say the chances of that happening are nil. Even if the drives all died, the info can more than likely still be recovered. Did they manage to physically lose the drives as well? Obviously, their excuse is 100% BS.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#195787 Jul 14, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Foxnews.com is the plain truth.That's the problem with mediocre people like you - they read and look at stuff with lots of pictures, often as gory as possible. they gravitate around crap like Foxnews.com and other turdish media. Stay mired in your ooze, Curly.
I'll keep listening to the truth and disregard the media propaganda. I'm just not one of those, get-in-line, shutup and follow types. Reminds me of a bunch of baby ducks waddling behind their mother! I prefer individualism, it's what makes Americans great. No rebuttals to the article, huh? You know it's true, don't you? Sarah is one of your favorites, right?

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#195788 Jul 14, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
Well we are half way through in 2014 and the current unemployment is 6.1%, inflation rate is 2.1% through the 12 months ending May 2014 and bank's interest rate is .08%
Do you want th change your prediction for 2014 yet?
<quoted text>
Ah, he quotes the U-3 Unemployment Rate again. How about the U-6 which is 12.1%?
http://portalseven.com/employment/unemploymen...
Or how about the Labor Participation Rate which is at at 37 year LOW of 62.8% which means SEVEN MILLION FEWER AMERICANS ARE UNEMPLOYED NOW THAT WHEN BUSH WAS PRESIDENT!!!
Tell all those people who have given up looking for work that things are great! Or the record number of people who are on welfare and food stamps!!!
The Labor Participation Rate is “'really driven by demographics more than anything else,' John Canally, economist and investment strategist at LPL Financial Corp., said before the report.'If you look back and think about it, the participation rate has been falling for 15 years and will continue to fall for the next 15 years as the baby boomers age.'”

http://tinyurl.com/pneonba

So Obama is responsible for demographics of an aging population?

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#195789 Jul 14, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
The Labor Participation Rate is “'really driven by demographics more than anything else,' John Canally, economist and investment strategist at LPL Financial Corp., said before the report.'If you look back and think about it, the participation rate has been falling for 15 years and will continue to fall for the next 15 years as the baby boomers age.'”
http://tinyurl.com/pneonba
So Obama is responsible for demographics of an aging population?
Economist Ben Casselman wrote on May 7, 2014:

"Nearly a quarter of Americans were born between 1946 and 1964, the typical definition of the baby boom generation. That’s more than 75 million people. In their heyday, the boomers were an unprecedented economic force, pushing up rates of homeownership, consumer spending and, most important of all, employment. It’s no coincidence that the U.S. labor force participation rate — the share of the adult population that has a job or is trying to find one — hit a record high in the late 1990s, when the boomers were at the peak of their working lives.

It’s been downhill ever since. The participation rate hit a 36-year low last month, and while there are multiple reasons for the decline, the aging of the baby boom generation is a dominant factor. In 2003, 82 percent of boomers were part of the labor force; a decade later, that number has declined to 66 percent, and it will only continue to fall."

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-baby...
Frank

Spokane, WA

#195790 Jul 14, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
The Labor Participation Rate is “'really driven by demographics more than anything else,' John Canally, economist and investment strategist at LPL Financial Corp., said before the report.'If you look back and think about it, the participation rate has been falling for 15 years and will continue to fall for the next 15 years as the baby boomers age.'”
http://tinyurl.com/pneonba
So Obama is responsible for demographics of an aging population?
Obama is responsible for his agenda and his policies. Obama is also responsible for the consequences of his policies,his executive decisions,and his abuse of executive powers. No one forced Obama to take an anti jobs stance and to push his anti jobs agenda.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#195791 Jul 14, 2014
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't impeach the POTUS just because. No basis means just another failure in Birfistan
No, but you can for high crimes and misdemeanors and unlike Bill Clinton you can not blame Monica Lewinsky unless Lois Learner was also giving Pres. Obama lip service too.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#195792 Jul 14, 2014
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
Economist Ben Casselman wrote on May 7, 2014:
"Nearly a quarter of Americans were born between 1946 and 1964, the typical definition of the baby boom generation. That’s more than 75 million people. In their heyday, the boomers were an unprecedented economic force, pushing up rates of homeownership, consumer spending and, most important of all, employment. It’s no coincidence that the U.S. labor force participation rate — the share of the adult population that has a job or is trying to find one — hit a record high in the late 1990s, when the boomers were at the peak of their working lives.
It’s been downhill ever since. The participation rate hit a 36-year low last month, and while there are multiple reasons for the decline, the aging of the baby boom generation is a dominant factor. In 2003, 82 percent of boomers were part of the labor force; a decade later, that number has declined to 66 percent, and it will only continue to fall."
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-baby...
So these people who were born between 1946 and 1964 (18 yeas) all retired between 2008 and 2014 (five years)? I don't think so!!!

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) 2 min Copout 1,496,574
IT'S Really really true, nancy pelosi............ 31 min HasALargePenis 10
The Mexicans stay home 37 min More-Truth NoLies 24
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 2 hr Well Well 10,332
Review: Skydiving In Chicago 3 hr Bjohns 1
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 6 hr Ashley 63,269
News Off-duty Cook County correctional officer shot ... 6 hr former democrat 1

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages