Barack Obama, our next President

"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep," Obama cautioned. Young and charismatic but with little experience on the national level, Obama smashed through racial barriers and easily defeated ... Full Story
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#855063 Feb 6, 2013
Death of Tenzing wrote:
<quoted text>
I know, I try to invest only in profitable companies.
You should buy stock in green energy companies like Solyndra, the wave of the future.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#855064 Feb 6, 2013
History 101 wrote:
<quoted text>
Menendez just might be the bullet that ends up shooting his party in the foot.
that Caller story is already falling apart.

the folks over there are not happy with me.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#855065 Feb 6, 2013
History 101 wrote:
<quoted text>
The entire article was only about Obama using drones to kill American citizens on his command.
I'm just glad the tables have turned. This president was ready to prosecute GW Bush and Cheney for helping him get the credit for killing Osama after waterboarding only 3 bad guys.
But you probably don't have any problem with the accelerated use of drones by this president either.
Told you to read the White Paper, do I have to do everything for you?

Here:

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/ne...

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#855067 Feb 6, 2013
History 101 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's just a bit hypocritical. Actually, it's a lot hypocritical.
Drones can cause suffering and mutilations to a lot of people who are just too close to the target if it doesn't kill them right off the bat - but that's more acceptable than pouring water up 3 bad guys' noses with an M.D. standing by.
If you read the White Paper maybe you'll get the point.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#855068 Feb 6, 2013
Nuculur option wrote:
The Post Office is required by the Constitution. DUH
Obamacare was found to be Constitutional by the Conservative Supreme Court.
You lose again.
<quoted text>
You are an idiot.
The Constitution allows the government to create a post office.
The Constitution does not command the government to create a post office.
If the government WANTS to create a post office, the Constitution gives the government the authority to do so.

As for the constitutionality of ObamaKare, there are many grounds on which it is unconstitutional. The ruling of the Supreme Court actually blatantly emphasized one point in which the law is obviously unconstitutional.
Vagueness and ambiguity.
As ruled by the Supreme Court:
"Vague laws offend several important values. First, because we assume that man is free to steer between lawful and unlawful conduct, we insist that laws give the person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited, so that he may act accordingly. Vague laws may trap the innocent by not providing fair warnings. Second, if arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement is to be prevented, laws must provide explicit standards for those who apply them. A vague law impermissibly delegates basic policy matters to policemen, judges, and juries for resolution on an ad hoc and subjective basis, with the attendant dangers of arbitrary and discriminatory applications."

Let's put the ObamaKare law to this test:

Those that wrote the law, the ultimate authority on what the law means, and the intent of the law: "It's not a tax. It's a penalty."

Those that read that same law, the interpretation from the text: "It's a tax."

If those who wrote the law specifically state their intent that the provision isn't a tax, but it is a penalty, then the intent of the law is a penalty.
But, when the law is read, which the Supreme Court obviously did (or should have done), their interpretation of the law is it is a tax.

You cannot have a better example of a law that demonstrates vagueness and ambiguity than this.

Just on this basis, aside form all the other contentions, the entire law is very obviously unconstitutional.

So, now wew are faced with the question of why the Supreme Court ruled an obviously unconstitutional law constitutional.

Congress isn't the only institution we need to fix.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#855069 Feb 6, 2013
Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said Tuesday that "there is oversight" on the Obama administration's drone strikes against U.S. citizens who are believed to be senior al-Qaeda leaders.

"I review all of the air strikes that we use under this title of the law," he told MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell. Rogers added that Americans who decide to join al-Qaeda become enemies of the U.S. "If you have someone who has joined this organization, and they may not be engaged in plot a today, but part of an organization plotting to kill Americans, and so they've joined the enemy. So you don't just kill the enemy when they're at the gate."

Rogers insisted there is not a long list of Americans on any "kill list." "I can candidly tell you that," he said.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/g...
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#855071 Feb 6, 2013
Death of Tenzing wrote:
<quoted text>
That's exactly what it means.
Thought so.

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#855072 Feb 6, 2013
Nuculur option wrote:
<quoted text>
That's a whole 'nother topic.
Alaska makes oil companies companies pay Alaskans for the resources they took out of the ground. It's called royalty payments.
Yet the oil companies still made tremendous profits!!
Palin was all for it, too! So it should be part of the TP plank!!
The oil and ng belongs to all Americans, not oil companies.
They should be allowed to drill for it and sell it, but just as in Alaska, we the people should get a share of the money.
But the Rclowns don't even want to take away big oil's tax breaks and subsidies, much less make them pay royalties to Americans.
The oil, ng, and coal belongs to whoever has the mineral rights to that piece of property. Can't you ever get anything right?

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#855073 Feb 6, 2013
discordian wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, those poor babies, if only you could have been there with one of your many hair dryers to dry them off after their horrible experience. Oh wait, they might have strangled you with the cord, given the chance.
Would you be talking like that if you were imprisoned and tortured? How about if you were dodging the executioner drone? I know, you right wingers have so much faith in your government that you're certain they'd never use this power inappropriately.

Gee, wish I had that kinda faith.
Nj raider 1

United States

#855074 Feb 6, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Once again, for the really, really slow (stupid) people in the class, if you can't remember this please write it down.
The Treasury isn't a source of money. It is a repository for money collected from a source of money.
To say "debt of the treasury" you are referencing either money that has already been spent and doesn't exist anymore, or additional debt to be incurred by accepting money from some source of money.
To answer the question, you actually have to identify a source of money.
Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?
I truly am sick & tired of you & this stupid ass question. There is no more stee source of revenue generated than taxes. You explaining what thee Treasury is doesn't explain away the fact that taxes is indeed gov't income, so to swear your question for the umpteenth, the US economy will be paid for by the people of the United States of America though an income generating process " paying taxes." Now you answer these questions. How did Bush pay for his gov't ? 2 wars he committed this country to for his selfish agenda & tax cuts that he wrote into law without a plan how the bills would be paid! Answer those questions! Your response should be 1 word!

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#855075 Feb 6, 2013
Death of Tenzing wrote:
<quoted text>
Because I was paying attention when the debt went over $1 trillion for the first time in our history under Reagan. I was paying attention when the debt went over $4 trillion under HW Bush. I was paying attention when Clinton produced 4 years of budget surplus. I was paying attention when once Bush was given the WH with Clinton's Congress they promptly drove up the deficit and ultimately doubled the debt. You can make all the excuses you want but recent history tells us that if you gave them all three houses again you'd have to dream up an entirely new set of excuses.
I'm sick of excuses.
If you weren't such a party hack you'd be even more sick of making excuses for the people YOU elect.
I've got a question. What is two times five?
It isn't 8.5, you goddam idiot.
When Bush took office, Congress had authorized a grand total of 5 trillion dollars of debt.
dot-come bust and the Arabs declaring war on the United States...
When the Democrats took control of all the purse strings of govenment in January, 2007, the total debt was 8.5 trillion dollars.

You either need to learn arithmetic, or learn how our government works.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#855076 Feb 6, 2013
flack wrote:
<quoted text> no
I hope you're just playing dumb. A lot of these folks on here can't help it.

“It's all about the struggle”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#855077 Feb 6, 2013
carlos dead husband wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi, you crazy little paranoid fkhead! "aisling," huh? You can't fool me, I know the rhythm and tempo (not to mention the sh!t and run content) of your semi-literate scribblings. It's like a virtual fingerprint. It's almost as if I'm incapable of being wrong. And each of you, to the disaffected idiot, is republiscum.
lol, "me" crazy? You're the idiot who swallowed the "Semen is brain food" scam.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/20030...

I know old habits are hard to break, but Just Say No the next time you get weak from lack of protein.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#855078 Feb 6, 2013
Liberalsare Sick wrote:
<quoted text>
What part of the article posted did you NOT understand.
Get a clue.
You didn't post any link.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#855079 Feb 6, 2013
Death of Tenzing wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you be talking like that if you were imprisoned and tortured? How about if you were dodging the executioner drone? I know, you right wingers have so much faith in your government that you're certain they'd never use this power inappropriately.
Gee, wish I had that kinda faith.
I submit that left wingers have much more faith in government than do right wingers.
Truth is no SIN

Bronx, NY

#855080 Feb 6, 2013
Until the 1830s, such accounts invariably referred to “white” slaves in the American South. Before then, none used terms like “white-looking” slaves. But by 1840 travelers’ accounts had shifted to the modern form of expression.
That “white-looking” is the current form of expression is indisputable. With one exception, every textbook or monograph, published since the turn of the twentieth century refers to “white-looking” slaves.Few modern authors can bring themselves to state the obvious fact that many thousands of White people (by the usage of the time) were enslaved in the antebellum South. Today’s academic canon is that they were merely “white-looking”(whatever that means).[The exception is Lawrence Raymond Tenzer, The Forgotten Cause of the Civil War: A New Look at the Slavery Issue (Manahawkin NJ: Scholars' Pub. House, 1997).]But such anachronistic backwards-projection of today’s ODR was not the case before 1830. John Ferdinand Dalziel Smyth who toured the South in the 1770s wrote about “female slaves who are now become white by their mixture.”Jacques Pierre Brissot de Warville in 1788 reported a “white boy” in a Philadelphia school for Negro children. Dr. Jesse Torrey in 1817 wrote about “a decently dressed white man” who was also a slave.
In 1839, reverend Francis Hawley of Connecticut wrote,“It is so common for the female slaves to have white children, that little or nothing is ever said about it.” No account before 1830 has yet turned up that employs modern (“white-looking”) terminology.The change in paradigm from “white” to “white-looking” apparently took less than a decade. In 1837, Captain Frederick Marryat wrote that “said boy is in a manner white, would be passed by and taken for a white man.”The following advertisements for runaways tell the same story. Take into account that the descriptions in these ads are the most accurate that the unhappy owners could produce. They wanted their valuable property found and returned, after all. 1.[$100 reward will be given for my man, Edmund Kenny. He has straight hair, and a complexion so white that it is believed a stranger would suppose there was no African blood in him. A short time since, he was in Norfolk with my boy Dick, and offered him for sale. He was apprehended but escaped under pretense of being a white man.— Anderson Bowles, The Richmond Whig, Va. Jan. 6, 1836.] 2.[$10 reward for the apprehension of William Dubberly, a slave belonging to the estate of Sacker Dubberly, deceased. He is about nineteen years old, quite white, and would not be readily taken for a slave.— John J. Lane, The Newbern Spectator, N.C., March 13, 1837.]3.[Runaway from the subscriber, a bright slave named Sam; light sandy hair, blue eyes, ruddy complexion. He is so white as to pass easily for a white man.— Edwin Peck, Mobile Ala., April 22, 1837.]4.[Runaway, a bright woman, named Julia, about twenty-five years old. She is white and very likely may attempt to pass for white. She is a good seamstress, dresses fine, and can read a little.$200 reward, if caught in any Free State and put into any good jail in Kentucky or Tennessee.— A.W. Johnson. The Republican Banner and The Nashville Whig, Tenn. July 14, 1840.]5.[Runaway from me, a woman named Fanny. She is as white as most white women; with straight light hair and blue eyes, and can pass herself for a white woman. She is very intelligent; can read and write, and so forge passes for herself. She is very pious, prays a good deal, and was, as supposed, contented and happy. I will give $500 for her delivery to me.— John Balch, Tuscaloosa Alabama, May 20, 1845.]6.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#855081 Feb 6, 2013
TheIndependentMajority wrote:
<quoted text>
CHINA
Talk about stupid..Duhmazz.
How much US public debt does China own?
Truth is no SIN

Bronx, NY

#855082 Feb 6, 2013
[Runaway from the subscriber, a very bright boy, twenty-two years old, named Wash.He might pass himself for a white man, as he is very bright, has sandy hair, blue eyes, and a fine set of teeth. — George O. Ragland, The Chattanooga Gazette, Tenn. Oct. 5, 1852.]7. [$25 REWARD. Ranaway from the plantation of Madame Duplantier, a bright boy named Ned, about thirty-five years old; speaks French and English. He may try to pass himself for a white man, as he is of a very clear color, and has sandy hair. — The New Orleans Picayune, Sept. 2, 1846.]lololo RACISM BIGOTS lololololol

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#855083 Feb 6, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Flactonomics:
Getting a credit on your account is totally different than a refund check.
Getting a Discount is totally different than getting an instant rebate.
Handing someone $200.00 and him giving you $20 back is totally different than just giving him $180.00
Flactonomics.
I have a feeling some of these people are stumped by shoelaces.

“It's all about the struggle”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#855084 Feb 6, 2013
flack wrote:
<quoted text> I know but I have nothing better to do at the moment. It's kind of fun watching them spin themselves into the ground.
Our government manipulates Wall Street everyday, so does China's. You ass.

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
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 16 min lides 50,646
Four letter word game (Dec '11) 23 min boundary painter 1,312
amy 1-25 26 min boundary painter 3
Song Titles Only (group/artist in parenthesis m... (Mar '10) 31 min boundary painter 7,825
abby 10-25 38 min boundary painter 2
Mike Brown Deserved What He Got 54 min ShinesRGuilty 8
Hoffa tells Chicago Teamsters they play pivotal... 57 min HE AINT JIMMY 2
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr jacques Ottawa 179,464
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 ]