'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Se...

'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate

There are 259232 comments on the thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com story from Oct 1, 2010, titled 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate. In it, thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com reports that:

"Fox News Sunday" is heading to Louisville, Ky. Jack Conway, Kentucky's attorney general and the Democratic candidate for Senate , and Rand Paul, the Republican nominee and son of Representative Ron Paul, Republican of Texas, have agreed to a live debate on "Fox News Sunday" on Oct.3 at 9 a.m. (Eastern time).

Join the discussion below, or Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com.

Uncle Tab

United States

#129972 Oct 17, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! The USSC can not change the meaning of the constitution, that takes an amendment.
Here is a little thing out of Wong Kim Ark v. US, para 34, that completely shows the USSC violated the constitution.

Nor can it be doubted that it is the inherent right of every independent nation to determine for itself, and according to its own constitution and laws, what classes of persons shall be entitled to its citizenship.

The very moment that Obama was born he was a citizen of his father's country, this automatically invalidated his ability to become a citizen of the US, unless he be naturalized. Yep, you have a communist alien sitting in the White House.
Hmmm
Please post where they changed the Constitution please?

(Next excuse coming right up lol)

“A proud Kentuckian ”

Since: Aug 13

At Your Mama's House

#129973 Oct 17, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! The USSC can not change the meaning of the constitution, that takes an amendment.
Here is a little thing out of Wong Kim Ark v. US, para 34, that completely shows the USSC violated the constitution.
Nor can it be doubted that it is the inherent right of every independent nation to determine for itself, and according to its own constitution and laws, what classes of persons shall be entitled to its citizenship.
The very moment that Obama was born he was a citizen of his father's country, this automatically invalidated his ability to become a citizen of the US, unless he be naturalized. Yep, you have a communist alien sitting in the White House.
Psst. Come closer, I got a secret for you.
More than one country can consider a person a citizen.:P (These amateur Constitutional experts are the worst)
THAT is what that case was about genius.
It matters not one iota who another country considers a citizen.
We go by our laws and our laws only when determining citizenship and no matter how you look at it, a person born on US soil to a US citizen IS a citizen without question.
LMAO part of the whole immigration debate is because of "anchor babies" (look it up), and they were NOT born to US citizens,

“A proud Kentuckian ”

Since: Aug 13

At Your Mama's House

#129974 Oct 17, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! The USSC can not change the meaning of the constitution, that takes an amendment.
Here is a little thing out of Wong Kim Ark v. US, para 34, that completely shows the USSC violated the constitution.
Nor can it be doubted that it is the inherent right of every independent nation to determine for itself, and according to its own constitution and laws, what classes of persons shall be entitled to its citizenship.
The very moment that Obama was born he was a citizen of his father's country, this automatically invalidated his ability to become a citizen of the US, unless he be naturalized. Yep, you have a communist alien sitting in the White House.
Why do you start every post with "LMAO!!!"?
Are you one of those people who has a nervous laugh?
I know you cannot consider every post funny because that would indicate a sever psychosis, in which case I implore you to seek professional help.

“A proud Kentuckian ”

Since: Aug 13

At Your Mama's House

#129975 Oct 17, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! The USSC can not change the meaning of the constitution, that takes an amendment.
Here is a little thing out of Wong Kim Ark v. US, para 34, that completely shows the USSC violated the constitution.
Nor can it be doubted that it is the inherent right of every independent nation to determine for itself, and according to its own constitution and laws, what classes of persons shall be entitled to its citizenship.
The very moment that Obama was born he was a citizen of his father's country, this automatically invalidated his ability to become a citizen of the US, unless he be naturalized. Yep, you have a communist alien sitting in the White House.
They didn't change it. They just understand it better than you.
Uncle Tab

United States

#129976 Oct 17, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!! You posted everything that needs to be known about communism on page 5699, post 129901.

GO FISH!!
Republican Math

On that page there isn't a 129901.

Typical republican deception.

LMAO

What else can they do but lie when put on the spot?
Dale

Wichita, KS

#129977 Oct 17, 2013
Uncle Tab wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmmm
Please post where they changed the Constitution please?
(Next excuse coming right up lol)
LMAO!! That is the best part, the USSC can't change the Constitution, they have to rule under its jurisdiction and the intent of the framers of it and all of the amendments.

All persons born or naturalized in the US and subject to the jurisdiction, thereof are citizens. Obama was a citizen at birth of the UK, his father's country of origin and being a citizen of a foreign power prevents him from ipso facto citizenship in the US.
Uncle Tab

United States

#129978 Oct 17, 2013
Hugh Jasoal wrote:
alright, here we go. this is gonna be fun since i went back and read it all again. please notice the difference in the amount of name calling between you and me k?

it all starts at page 5667. again, as i said. you were saying fed funds were being used for peoples "mistakes and transgressions", actually calling people "pompous asses". didn't you accuse someone else of that? again, please note the name calling in your posts.

page 5669 is the first time i reply to you. with link to executive order by pres. And no name calling.

page 5670 is where you made your abrupt party jump and proceeded to call Uncle Tab, and i quote, "DumbAssssssss". now that's not like you. i eluded to the fact that you can be an asshole on that same page but didnt really call you one.

on to page 5671 where you had this nugget
Dr Kno wrote, "<quoted text>ummm, owned. Hehehehe both. lol taxpayers paying for abortions via Medicaid."

when i had already shown you that only rape, incest, and danger to mother is covered federally. you then called UT a bitch. hmmm
i responded to the above reply with the link to factcheck showing you how much federal funds to PP are spent on abortions. 3% in case you forgot. and with no name calling. but, later on the page you called crow___, you guessed it....dumbassss then more of your superior debate skills are displayed

5672 starts with me asking you to pick a topic to discuss (i am still going by american man at this point) i did call you an idiot later, but you WERE accusing me of being someone else and going on with a bunch of nonsensical gibberish, so i feel it was warranted. the rest of your replies, well you can see for yourself.

on 5673 you claim to be some kind of hacker that can trace ips lmao

5674 is where i give you my mission statement (with no names) and officially switch back to Hugh

nothing for a couple pages( licking wounds i imagine) 5676 you respond to the above by calling me an imbecile and blaming me for other peoples posts. then call those other posters a "sick bitch" and a "tard"

in 5677, i respond to you without calling you one name.
5678 your response includes calling me a "moron" and your favorite "dumbassss" and calling CONS, what was it "Clueless uneducated trash"

you can read on from there, its just more dribble from you trying to get my attention. i really dont have the time to keep pointing out how hypocritical you are. you can see that for yourself.

so, for the last time. if you want to have an adult conversation. lets do it. i will call you no names if you afford me the same courtesy. if not, like i said, this gets old to me after a while. just because of childish behavior like you have displayed. and i am about done with it.

thank you, and i will looking forward to hearing from you.

sincerely
Hugh
LMFAO!!

Talk about owning someone!

Sorry dumbass, Hugh owned you like a loaf of stale bread on the clearance rack when you cash in your food stamps!

:-D
republiCONS

Elizabethtown, KY

#129979 Oct 17, 2013
Uncle Tab wrote:
<quoted text>
Republican Math
On that page there isn't a 129901.
Typical republican deception.
LMAO
What else can they do but lie when put on the spot?
Run away....hahaha

RIP TEABAGGING GOP CONS

DITCH MITCH
Dr Kno

Switzerland

#129980 Oct 17, 2013
Hugh Jasoal wrote:
<quoted text>
alright, here we go. this is gonna be fun since i went back and read it all again. please notice the difference in the amount of name calling between you and me k?
it all starts at page 5667. again, as i said. you were saying fed funds were being used for peoples "mistakes and transgressions", actually calling people "pompous asses". didn't you accuse someone else of that? again, please note the name calling in your posts.
page 5669 is the first time i reply to you. with link to executive order by pres. And no name calling.
page 5670 is where you made your abrupt party jump and proceeded to call Uncle Tab, and i quote, "DumbAssssssss". now that's not like you. i eluded to the fact that you can be an asshole on that same page but didnt really call you one.
on to page 5671 where you had this nugget
<quoted text>
when i had already shown you that only rape, incest, and danger to mother is covered federally. you then called UT a bitch. hmmm
i responded to the above reply with the link to factcheck showing you how much federal funds to PP are spent on abortions. 3% in case you forgot. and with no name calling. but, later on the page you called crow___, you guessed it....dumbassss then more of your superior debate skills are displayed
5672 starts with me asking you to pick a topic to discuss (i am still going by american man at this point) i did call you an idiot later, but you WERE accusing me of being someone else and going on with a bunch of nonsensical gibberish, so i feel it was warranted. the rest of your replies, well you can see for yourself.
on 5673 you claim to be some kind of hacker that can trace ips lmao
5674 is where i give you my mission statement (with no names) and officially switch back to Hugh
nothing for a couple pages( licking wounds i imagine) 5676 you respond to the above by calling me an imbecile and blaming me for other peoples posts. then call those other posters a "sick bitch" and a "tard"
in 5677, i respond to you without calling you one name.
5678 your response includes calling me a "moron" and your favorite "dumbassss" and calling CONS, what was it "Clueless uneducated trash"
you can read on from there, its just more dribble from you trying to get my attention. i really dont have the time to keep pointing out how hypocritical you are. you can see that for yourself.
so, for the last time. if you want to have an adult conversation. lets do it. i will call you no names if you afford me the same courtesy. if not, like i said, this gets old to me after a while. just because of childish behavior like you have displayed. and i am about done with it.
thank you, and i will looking forward to hearing from you.
sincerely
Hugh
no, let's start with posts from page 5666. Those who wanted to disagree started the name calling namely the Crow and the RepubliCONS posters then UT pitched in. Notice how I used their own words back! You said I had been some where else and debated you? Even on this forum. Now you have shown what I had already said. You will not find it. Dr Kno, and not the poster several accused me right off as being. I also made my first post a few days ago by now with the abortion issue as the topic. Like I stated. Thank you and you proved nothing.

Look at where I told Crow to FU hick and what she/he said. Hehehe. She, might be a he, but took it down the dirty road. FU in Chinese, means good fortune as I explained. Good fortune hick.

Thanks but you wasted your time. You did not prove what you set out to do. Quick change artist! ;) You switched to who called who names first and still proved yourself to be wrong. Thanks, oh and FU. Good fortune chump.
republiCONS

Elizabethtown, KY

#129981 Oct 17, 2013
S&P 500 at record as traders cheer Washington deal

NEW YORK (Reuters)- The S&P 500 hit a record intraday high on Thursday as traders were reassured about a bullish market following an overnight deal in Washington to avoid a U.S. default and reopen the government.

The Dow Jones industrial average dipped 25.69 points, or 0.17 percent, at 15,348.14. The S&P 500 Index was up 8.09 points, or 0.47 percent, at 1,729.63. The Nasdaq Composite Index was up 15.82 points, or 0.41 percent, at 3,855.25.

The intraday high on the S&P was 1,730.24 and the index was on track to set a record closing high.

http://money.msn.com/business-news/article.as...

RIP TEABAGGER GOP

DITCH MITCH
Dale

Wichita, KS

#129982 Oct 17, 2013
Newport Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
Psst. Come closer, I got a secret for you.
More than one country can consider a person a citizen.:P (These amateur Constitutional experts are the worst)
THAT is what that case was about genius.
It matters not one iota who another country considers a citizen.
We go by our laws and our laws only when determining citizenship and no matter how you look at it, a person born on US soil to a US citizen IS a citizen without question.
LMAO part of the whole immigration debate is because of "anchor babies" (look it up), and they were NOT born to US citizens,
LMAO!! Nor can it be doubted that it is the inherent right of every independent nation to determine for itself, and according to its own constitution and laws, what classes of persons shall be entitled to its citizenship.

See it does matter, if you are born subject to a foreign power, you are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US, since you already have a citizenship.
Dale

Wichita, KS

#129983 Oct 17, 2013
Newport Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you start every post with "LMAO!!!"?
Are you one of those people who has a nervous laugh?
I know you cannot consider every post funny because that would indicate a sever psychosis, in which case I implore you to seek professional help.
LMAO!!! I do consider each post from libs funny, most of you are low information voters.

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#129984 Oct 17, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!! That is the best part, the USSC can't change the Constitution, they have to rule under its jurisdiction and the intent of the framers of it and all of the amendments.
All persons born or naturalized in the US and subject to the jurisdiction, thereof are citizens. Obama was a citizen at birth of the UK, his father's country of origin and being a citizen of a foreign power prevents him from ipso facto citizenship in the US.
Quick get out an email to Ted Cruz before he blows a lot of money on running in 2016. He may not know under your interpretation he cannot be President. Hurry !

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#129985 Oct 17, 2013
whitehair wrote:
May be sitting here on my three legged stool with a blindfold over the eyes, but, in most conservatives opinion, the real losers in the cat fight over the CR and the shut down, will be the middle class and the poor folks out here.
The debt goes higher.
Obama Care will penalize the poor and middle class, and maybe get a reimbursement or a fine if you do not comply . Forced (fine)or tax as it might be. First time ever we have been forced by the gov`t to buy their product . Single gov`t insurance is on the way.
The gov`t will only grow larger.
Taxes have to increase as the Gov`t spends more and we still have the debt.
Congress and the POTUS are excluded from Obama Care , it is only for the peons.
The conservatives lost. and the big spenders won.
I heard a plan just the other day that would solve Medicare. Make it mandatory for everyone as there insurance paid for based on income. Problem solved.
Dale

Wichita, KS

#129986 Oct 17, 2013
Newport Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
They didn't change it. They just understand it better than you.
LMAO!!! That is right, they didn't change it, the 14th amendment reads the same as it did in 1868.
The only people that receive citizenship into the US by birth are those that are not subjects of or subject to a foreign nation. This is why the phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction, thereof" was placed into the 14th amendment.
Dr Kno

Switzerland

#129987 Oct 17, 2013
Uncle Tab wrote:
<quoted text>
LMFAO!!
Talk about owning someone!
Sorry dumbass, Hugh owned you like a loaf of stale bread on the clearance rack when you cash in your food stamps!
:-D
Here we have THAT " owned" mentality. Hugh assholeeeeee, the very name speaks volumes. Where does the food stamps issue come in? Who owns those, you? Have no need for government hand outs. Check out the Mr. Senior from the class of 69 in that town that your buddy Huge has a location from at times. That's me. My wife is a physician. We live where she is from, met in college. Now you can top that or shut up with the crapola. Like I told your buttbuddy, you just want to argue. You also like to try and one up your opposing side. You are a BSer of the highest order with no intentions of debating those you disagree with. That is not debating, when you twist a persons words purposefully.

Talking about owning, you own ignorance.

“A proud Kentuckian ”

Since: Aug 13

At Your Mama's House

#129988 Oct 17, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!! Nor can it be doubted that it is the inherent right of every independent nation to determine for itself, and according to its own constitution and laws, what classes of persons shall be entitled to its citizenship.
See it does matter, if you are born subject to a foreign power, you are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US, since you already have a citizenship.
Here's where you are confused.
What matters is who WE CONSIDER subject to foreign power.
ANY child born on US soil (with a couple specific exemptions. Ambassadors, military personnel stationed here, ect) is considered a US citizen and not subject to any foreign power.
Show me ANY law or Amendment that says otherwise.(be specific please)
American Lady

Danville, KY

#129989 Oct 17, 2013
WASHINGTON, October 17, 2013 — Raw, naked power politics.
Ugly and brutal while pretending to be noble and principled.

President Barack Obama still tries to play the role of a good guy, but the public is unconvinced. So what, since he doesn’t need their votes? He shouldn’t expect any Oscars although he followed a fight script.
Moviegoers will remember this classic scene from “Rocky IV.” It is like nuclear war in the boxing ring: America vs. the Soviet Union. The towering Soviet giant Drago sneers to Rocky as they’re introduced,“I must break you.” That is how President Obama approached this October showdown with Republicans.
Under the Hague Convention, it is a war crime to say that no quarter will be given to the other side. But the Hague Convention does not apply to American politics so Obama will claim he can still keep his Nobel Peace Prize.

He refused to negotiate; he demanded complete surrender and he got it.

Except for those Republicans who have joined the Rebel Alliance, the GOP capitulation is complete. Not only did they gain nothing in 2013, but they’re also giving back budget concessions they won in 2011.

Sequester savings seem to be evaporating, a total breach by all sides of the promises given to the country in 2011 to justify raising the debt ceiling by $2.1-trillion.

Every penny of that $2.1-trillion has been borrowed and spent but only a tiny fraction of the promised “savings” has materialized.

Most of that sequester savings was not to happen until years from now anyway, but even that pretense may disappear. In any event, it wasn’t true budget cuts; it was merely slowing down the rate of growth of spending.

...

Read more: http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighb...
Follow us:@wtcommunities on Twitter

BUT ...
Only until obotdontcare really kicks in ...
THEN the dwIdioTic libTARDS will SEE!

There WILL BE another FIGHT ...

The can was just kicked down the road apiece ...
[the 'fights' still THERE]

;~)
Dale

Wichita, KS

#129990 Oct 17, 2013
Injudgement wrote:
<quoted text>Quick get out an email to Ted Cruz before he blows a lot of money on running in 2016. He may not know under your interpretation he cannot be President. Hurry !
LMAO!!! Why do you think Cruz is in the Senate?
American Lady

Danville, KY

#129991 Oct 17, 2013
In other words the libTARDS were GIVEN ...
enuf rope to HANG themselves ...

)8~D>

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.

Citizen Sound-Off Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Election Who do you support for U.S. Senate in West Virg... (Oct '10) 26 min Billy 99,117
Election Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Missouri ... (Oct '10) 45 min Stupid Obama Bitches 108,997
Election Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Georgia i... (Oct '10) 4 hr The WB 93,991
Election Who do you support for Governor in Texas in 2010? (Oct '10) 5 hr Myra 20,066
Election Who are you voting for in the Texas Governor race? (Oct '14) 5 hr Myra 162
Election Who do you support for State Board of Education... (Oct '10) 16 hr OnePhart 1,123
Election OK Health Care Freedom Amendment, State Questio... (Oct '10) 19 hr Gods 83,935
More from around the web