Chat Away

For old time’s sake 🙂

103 Responses to “Chat Away”

  1. 3 amk for obama
    January 10, 2016 at 12:04 pm

    Hi. Bye.

  2. 6 Nena20409
    January 10, 2016 at 12:25 pm

    Hello Beautiful TOD on a Sunday Sunny Crisp Bitterly Cold day……Winter in MN is here, baby 😉
    $1.3B and counting for Power Ball 😉 ❓ Wow! I was speechless.
    Congrats to all the Gold, Silver and Bronze winners since last night.
    It’s going to be some week this week. Thanks for the week ahead, Chips.
    Buckle up folks, It’s going to be quite a Ride!

  3. 7 Nena20409
    January 10, 2016 at 12:26 pm

    • 8 catrst
      January 10, 2016 at 1:57 pm

      Ah yes but I have read that the same aversion to thinking that your trust has been violated produces a powerful sense of revulsion and betrayal once that knowledge can no longer be avoided or denied. Propaganda artists never think that their false witness will backfire but I believe it does. Once it is established in a person’s awareness that the lies have occurred, continued attempts at propaganda create a firm rejection of the lie and the person telling it. So there is a shelf life to these lies and very bad reprecussions when the truth is out.

      I have such a violent revulsion now to the propaganda (like for example when the President is misrepresented or vilified) that I really never want to go back and revisit the thoughts of anyone engaged in it. They literally make me sick. I think the Clinton campaign should be very aware of this.

  4. 9 Nena20409
    January 10, 2016 at 12:27 pm

    • January 10, 2016 at 1:34 pm

      it is not up to SCOTUS but the Congress to decide
      the media should know this

      Re: “Natural born citizen”


      The Constitution does not define the phrase natural-born citizen, and various opinions have been offered over time regarding its precise meaning. The consensus of early 21st-century constitutional and legal scholarship, together with relevant case law, is that “natural born” comprises all people born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, including, generally, those born in the United States, those born to U.S. citizen parents in foreign countries, and those born in other situations meeting the legal requirements for U.S. citizenship “at birth”.[2]

      Who has the authority to define what is a Natural Born Citizen….it seems it is not up to the Supreme Court….but to Congress…very interesting


      In American Constitutional law, the political question doctrine is closely linked to the concept of justiciability, as it comes down to a question of whether or not the court system is an appropriate forum in which to hear the case. This is because the court system only has authority to hear and decide a legal question, not a political question. Legal questions are deemed to be justiciable, while political questions are nonjusticiable.

      A court can only decide issues based on law. The Constitution dictates the different legal responsibilities of each respective branch of government. If there is an issue where the court does not have the Constitution as a guide, there are no legal criteria to use. When there are no specific constitutional duties involved, the issue is to be decided through the democratic process. The court will not engage in political disputes.

      As Mr Spock would say: Fascinating

      • 11 Nena20409
        January 10, 2016 at 1:54 pm

        The Natural Born is an Amendment.
        On the EarlyBird Post per Anjo:
        Natural born citizen was placed in the constitution to prevent Alexander Hamilton from becoming President and at that time it meant you had to be born in what is actually US territory. Did the definition change, or did politicians change the meaning and citizens didn’t bother to question things as they approved the candidate, or more likely they weren’t paying attention. Of course it only became an issue when the candidate was not the ‘right’ colour. If the original intent (albeit racist) of the clause is to be followed, George Romney, John McCain and Ted Cruz would not be eligible to be President. Founding fathers suspected Alexander Hamilton of having “black blood”, hence the clause; some enterprising lawyer need to challenge ‘natural born’ vis-a-vis the original intent. Any thoughts or observations on this are welcome as perhaps some legal change etc was made that I am not aware of.

        My sole Objection here…….My Main an ONLY Reason ever: Is Fairness.
        Equal Treatment to apply to All, all of the time.
        Cruz was Mute while his party benefited and so did he with the Teabaggers and their Birtherism. The US News Media helped in generating unprecedented Hatred directed at Pres Obama, for what exactly? Racism. Bigotry. Political Gain. Division. Etc.
        I am sick of the GOP are allowed to Mess Up the US and Dems are asked to always resuscitate, revive, calm and Fix USA while GOPers are Never Held accountable.
        Yes, Congress can Fix it along with 2/3 of the States. I would want the Roberts’ SCOTUS to once again, show their ineptness.

        • 12 rikyrah
          January 10, 2016 at 2:24 pm

          I disagree about McCain. He was born on an American Military Installation – isn’t that the same as an Embassy abroad – considered United States territory proper?

        • January 10, 2016 at 2:35 pm

          The Constitution did not explicitly define natural born citizen…and there has never been a law that defined it…there has been much conversation about what it is….but there is nothing in the constitution or a law that actually defines it

          • January 10, 2016 at 2:47 pm

            In addition…the President should never have come under scrutiny…because what has held under pass agreements is that a person has natural born citizen status if either of their parents were US citizens….or that person was born in the USA…

            amazing that this issue comes up because the losing “demographics” want to “cleanse” the so-called non white folks born in America or to American parents…from America…aka TEX refusing to issue birth certificates for the children of undocumented people…

        • January 10, 2016 at 2:41 pm


          The Constitution does not define the phrase natural-born citizen, and various opinions have been offered over time regarding its precise meaning.

          The natural-born-citizen clause has been mentioned in passing in several decisions of the United States Supreme Court, and by some lower courts that have addressed eligibility challenges, but the Supreme Court has never directly addressed the question of a specific presidential or vice-presidential candidate’s eligibility as a natural-born citizen.

          Additionally, some experts have suggested that the precise meaning of the natural-born-citizen clause may never be decided by the courts because, in the end, presidential eligibility may be determined to be a non-justiciable political question that can be decided only by Congress rather than by the judicial branch of government.[3][4]

          Because there is no law that defines what is a natural born citizen….and it is not defined in the Constitution…only Congress can define it by enshrining the definition into law….

          I find this whole thing rather Fascinating

    • 16 Nena20409
      January 10, 2016 at 1:41 pm

    • January 10, 2016 at 1:53 pm

      I agree. take it to the Supreme Court

  5. 18 Nena20409
    January 10, 2016 at 12:35 pm

  6. 19 MightyPamela
    January 10, 2016 at 12:46 pm

    ❤ Powering through! ❤

  7. 20 Nena20409
    January 10, 2016 at 12:50 pm

    This, my TOD Friends illustrates how Bitterly Cold it is in MN, 🙂

    • 21 Nena20409
      January 10, 2016 at 12:53 pm

      The Game will be played outside, Today.
      The Viks had a Doom. The Doom is no more. The New one is being built and this Game with the Hawks is being played OUTside at the Gopher Stadium.

      • 22 Roberta in MN
        January 10, 2016 at 1:57 pm

        Neena, I am watching the game, I am cold just watching inside my apartment. LOL. The sound is awful because of the cold.

        • 23 Nena20409
          January 10, 2016 at 2:24 pm

          Enjoy, Roberta 😉
          I am going to get lunch, then cuddle up and watch a Cary Grant movie. I have yet to watch any Football this season. Later, TOD.

  8. January 10, 2016 at 1:16 pm

    WRITING A WRONG: U.S. publishers shunned books about important African-Americans for decades because of racism


    Saturday, January 9, 2016, 12:00 PM

    A clarion call of civil rights activists is that black lives matter. What would happen if they were essentially written off entirely? The question is far from rhetorical, because the U.S. publishing industry cast most African-American life stories into oblivion for much of the country’s history.

    Before demands for racial justice rocked the nation in the 1960s, leading publishers produced stunningly few biographies or autobiographies of black figures, no matter how triumphant or tragic, virtuous or vice-ridden their life stories.

    Founded in 1924, Simon & Schuster published its first African-American biography in 1968. The work was an illustrated children’s book, “Harriet and the Promised Land,” which tailors the story of Harriet Tubman’s heroism on the Underground Railroad for juvenile readers.

    When Holt, Rinehart & Winston marketed Coretta Scott King’s memoir, “My Life with Martin Luther King Jr.,” in 1969, the company and its predecessor firms had previously accepted just three blacks as subjects for biography or autobiography.

    When Random House brought out Maya Angelou’s “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings,” also in 1969, the firm had published five African-American narratives since it was founded in 1927.

    The book industry’s aversion to black biographies and memoirs extended even to celebrities who would presumably have generated the greatest popular interest.


  9. January 10, 2016 at 2:18 pm

    Good afternoon, Ms. Chips, Danny and TOD family, I hope all is well with everyone this lovely Saturday mid-day. Congrats hf, on being first this lovely mid-day..

    The greatest start of the day is when you wake-up in the morning and have all your faculties and mobility. If you don’t think so, try not waking up.

    To all, I hope your countenance shows your blessings, glorification, and absolute God’s mercy, today. ❤ ❤ ❤

    Thank God that President Obama is still the President of The United States of America. ⭐🏆 ⭐🏆 ⭐🏆

  10. January 10, 2016 at 2:24 pm

    Chips! Chips! I think I have found the perfect thing for Danny! It will take care of all that excess energy and make your life sooooooo much easier too! I know he will be really enthusiastic about that aspect of it! All it will take is a little training, easy-peasy really. (I really hope this video posts properly!)

  11. January 10, 2016 at 2:26 pm

  12. 47 desertflower
    January 10, 2016 at 2:26 pm

    bbl…off to you know where!

  13. January 10, 2016 at 2:26 pm

    As usual, very thoughtful list:

  14. January 10, 2016 at 2:28 pm

    • January 10, 2016 at 4:19 pm

      Yes, because they all were fixated on seeing the bankers’ heads on pikes up and down Wall Street, and reviving Glass-Steagal. Elizabeth Warren keeps shaking her finger and demanding Glass-Steagal be restored, even though when directly questioned she said it wouldn’t have made a difference and she was really just using it as a ‘symbol’.

  15. January 10, 2016 at 2:31 pm

  16. January 10, 2016 at 2:31 pm

    Yet ANOTHER major W screw-up:

  17. 60 vcprezofan2
    January 10, 2016 at 2:34 pm


  18. January 10, 2016 at 3:10 pm

    My favorite pics of the Potus with children….

    • 62 jackiegrumbacher
      January 10, 2016 at 4:14 pm

      Pf, every time I see one of these pictures I think they’re my favorite until I see the next one. Every single one of PBO’s interaction with children is magical.

      • January 10, 2016 at 4:23 pm

        I love the little one clinging to his leg. His hand is on her head and he continues to chat just as if she were his own child. Also the smile on the shyer girl is delightful. I love the fact that he obviously has no worries that having the babies and children around him does not detract one whit from the dignity of his position. And that is because his dignity comes from within. “Suffer the little children to come to me”, Jesus said. These are the people for whom he is working every day.

      • January 10, 2016 at 4:26 pm

        That is the word…”Magical”

  19. January 10, 2016 at 3:20 pm

    and two of my all time favorite videos…of the President…the baby whisperer

  20. January 10, 2016 at 3:50 pm

  21. 80 donna dem 4 obama
    January 10, 2016 at 3:59 pm

    • 81 jackiegrumbacher
      January 10, 2016 at 4:18 pm

      Donna, he’s right to do this. It would just set up a lot of resentment among primary voters and would not be healthy for the party. Let the best person win and then PBO will go like gangbusters to help in the general election.

    • 83 sjterrid
      January 10, 2016 at 4:57 pm

      I don’t Know why they even consider this “news”. No one expects the President to make an endorsement in a democratic primary. Of course, this is Meet The Press and everything he does is treated differently than any other president.

      • 84 donna dem 4 obama
        January 10, 2016 at 5:22 pm

        I think it’s a reaction to PBO’s oped where he says he won’t campaign for any Dem that doesn’t fully support his gun control measures ala Sanders. Of course the punditry then tries to extrapolate that to mean he’s endorsing Clinton because of Sanders gun record.

        • 85 sjterrid
          January 10, 2016 at 5:29 pm

          Sander’s backed his Executive Action, So I don’t know why anyone assumed he meant he wouldn’t support Bernie. I think Sanders, also, voted for the bill in the senate that was filler busted .

      January 10, 2016 at 6:28 pm


  22. 87 globalcitizenlinda
    January 10, 2016 at 4:06 pm


    did regan push any anti-gun-violence laws when he, his chief of staff, and the USSS agent were shot?

    how did the gop treat the gun manufacturers;

  23. 88 Nena20409
    January 10, 2016 at 4:10 pm

    10-9 Seahawks win over the Vikings. Temp was at -3F. Brutal bitter Cold, Minnesota style 😉
    I just heard. I didn’t watch.

    • 89 MadameSoph
      January 10, 2016 at 6:04 pm

      Thanks Nena! I checked/lurked into TOD just now, hoping someone would post the final score. Was DVRing, hoping my Hawks would win, but fully ready to let them slide, knowing the Vikings were more used to weather like that. Although, I don’t envy either team playing in freezing cold like that. Damn, I can barely move when the temp is in the 30s or 40s here 🙂 Looking forward to watching my DVR of the game later game tonight. My neighbors here consist of folks from: Kansas City, Minnesota and Chicago, so I will celebrate quietly 🙂

      • 90 MadameSoph
        January 10, 2016 at 6:56 pm

        P.S. Sorry Roberta in MN! Just saw your post from earlier. Sorry for my exuberant cheerleader pic. Didn’t mean to rub it in…..I’ll go quietly now 🙂

  24. January 10, 2016 at 4:24 pm

    h/t meta … up thread ….

  25. January 10, 2016 at 4:28 pm

    I truly wish that our Constitutional Scholar, President Obama, would explain to the entire world the reality of why Madison HAD to insert the 2nd Amendment and why he had to edit it to change the language from anything referring to the Republic – e.g., Nation, Country, USA, etc – to the specific insertion of “STATE.”

    Because the Southern States, for certain, would never have ratified the Constitution and risked any Federal authority over their Slave Patrols, aka, their Militias.

  26. 94 Nena20409
    January 10, 2016 at 4:30 pm

  27. January 10, 2016 at 5:39 pm

    • January 10, 2016 at 6:15 pm

      Hypocrite enables profiteering by the weapons industry is hardly a candidate for anything who’d receive my vote ….

    • 99 MadameSoph
      January 10, 2016 at 6:40 pm

      Just read this article in its entirety. Thanks for bringing it here PF!

      These three points stood out:

      “On October 20, 2005, Sanders voted against the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act….aimed at protecting McDonald’s and other fast-food restaurant chains from lawsuits filed by plaintiffs who blamed the companies for causing obesity. The next day, he voted in favor of protecting gun manufacturers and sellers from lawsuits.”


      “…he opposed bills that would have barred Americans from suing over Y2K computer failures, underperforming securities and machine tool manufacturers. He supported legislation allowing Americans to sue telemarketers, health insurers and dietary supplement makers.


      “He also voted in favor a 2002 bill creating a program in which commercial pilots would be deputized as federal law enforcement officials and allowed to carry guns aboard planes. Pilots and airlines would have been exempt from legal liability for defending planes from terrorist attacks except in cases of gross negligence or willful misconduct.”

      It seems to me that Bernie Sanders is a one issue voter when it comes to liability.


  28. January 10, 2016 at 6:25 pm

    January 10, 2016 at 6:34 pm


  30. January 10, 2016 at 6:45 pm

Comments are currently closed.







Enter your email address to receive notifications of new posts by email.



RSS Obama White House.gov

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS WH Tumblr

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Steve Benen

  • Rev. Al: We will stand and fight in the name of Tyre Nichols
  • Russia's mercenary Wagner Group sanctioned by U.S.
  • Jordan Klepper crashes a Trump 'intimate event' in South Carolina
  • Joy Division, Missy Elliott, Willie Nelson are 2023 Rock Hall nominees
  • 'My expectations are modest': Oversight member on coming meetings



Blog Stats

  • 43,330,391 hits

%d bloggers like this: