Well, What Do You Think About This Obama’s Birth Certificate?

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Wait, you did ask a short question, right? Well, here’s my not so short answer: I could expound on this as most conservatives would, but I will say that I think that we are on a train where the conductor, the brakeman, and the engineer (you could use the analogy of these as the three branches of our government) are all in agreement to run the train (our country) completely off the track (our Constitution).

These are the same people that claim the Constitution is a “living document” that can and should be changed at will (theirs), and they are determined to design and implement one to suit their agenda. They do not believe in truth as an absolute – or for that matter, period! Truth is only a perception…. Depends on what the definition of “is” is! So it’s no wonder that they believe a Hawaiian hospital certificate of live birth should suffice as “proof of birth”. Yeah, Hawaii, we all know he was born… the question is WHERE. Our Constitution has a restriction in that regard.

 

Through ignorance or design, those who agree with the agenda proposed by the Obama Campaign, and now Obama Administration, have succeeded in achieving part of the extreme liberals’ agenda by getting a man elected who refuses to be “transparent” not only about his birth or about his education – but anything about his personal history for that matter.

His offshore birthplace would obviously set a precedent that one does not need to be born in the US to “rule the US”, and is, in essence, the first step in re-writing the Constitution. Breaking down the foundational principles of the Constitution, like this very thing, is what is necessary to begin the total transformation of the United States of America (the only campaign promise Obama really intends to keep). I believe that the “shady way” that this topic has been dealt with is akin to acknowledgement of the fact that he was not born in the US. Further, I believe that a lie or at least a half-truth is being perpetrated, and with that lie they are forcing a perception of what is true for this situation. (I feel a blog article topic of situational ethics coming on! ) Because of bogus “legalities” and roadblocks (read Holder), though, there is no way that there is going to be any serious action taken to clear up the matter until it is too late and the precedent is fully established. And you know what? The entrenched GOP is just as guilty as the Dems, because they run around paying verbal homage to the “birther” concerns and liberal agenda issues, but they don’t really and genuinely care.

It certainly doesn’t stop with where Obama was born. Taking over corporations, banks, and regulating Wall Street make up Step Two, and a big move toward Wealth Distribution. Then Obamacare, Socialized Medicine, is Step Three and takes the US into a Social State….. and so on and so on. So, now we are coming quickly to the end of the track… Nov 2, 2010! The results of the mid-term elections will determine whether we have the same nation that was founded in 1776, in my humble opinion.

Got on my soapbox a little.  Sorry.  Short answer: I know that I can recreate a document like the one in the picture with Photoshop and a typewriter, plus a couple other tools. The ONLY way to verify its authenticity is to compare Obama’s footprint to that one on the certificate, which he will gladly do to clear up the matter – when Arabs kiss a pig.

Advertisements

Obama and Kharsai: “Pot Calling Kettle Black”?

Sunday, March 28, 2010

I first started this article a couple months ago, but didn’t post it thinking that I would expound upon my thoughts; but even today, it’s relevant.  So, here goes. 

Not too long ago, Obama made a “surprise” visit to Afghanistan to meet with Hamid Kharsai.  It was also reported that Kharsai was told that he MUST (and the emphasis here is mine, although apparently it is the underlying purposed of the visit), MUST do more clean up the corruption in the Kharsai government.  The old saying of “the pot calling the kettle black” came instantly to mind.  If you don’t like old clichés, then here’s a better descriptor:  Hypocrisy.

Here is an example of a “leader” who builds a regime of corruption by implanting and empowering czars to run his government while saying that another leader must clean up the corruption in their government.  For example, Obama’s czars are neither confirmed by Congress nor elected by the people, and as a general rule, have never experienced leadership in any type of major business, capitalistic venture, or industrial enterprise.  However, Obama’s czars now literally have control over large portions of the nation’s economy (the automobile industry, banking industry, etc.) – let’s not mention how the affectation of their decisions have far-reaching implications, impacting  the daily lives of ordinary individuals.  In fact, Obama recently put 15 more people into important positions while Congress was on a 2-week spring break, blaming the GOP for the timing of his actions.  How absurd is that?  These positions were not so critical to the function of the government that they could not be put off two more weeks for Congress to have the opportunity to at least put on their “show” of Congressional investigation prior to affirmation.  He just circumvented “the old system” with his new one. 

So, how is this different from some of the shenanigans that are done in countries like Afghanistan or Venezuela or Russia or, for that matter, any other country where there is supposed to be some form of democratic practices –  if only in theory?  Rather than standing apart, being ” a light in a dark world”, being an example to be followed as the US once was, the Omabanation (AKA, the USA) has made enormous steps toward blending in with countries led by thugs, vandals, and despots. 

How is being just like other countries that suppress the wishes of the majority of its people a good thing?  Who will now be able to hold up a standard against corruption in those countries, or in this one?  It will all be the same modus operandi, only now known by different monikers, depending upon which country and which leader.  The difference used to be that in this country was the standard-bearer with checks and balances to help limit corruption in its government.  However, this administration has made its own brand of corruption the standard from which to perpetuate their “change” while trying to persuade others to conform – but conform to what, the US form of corruption?  A rose by any other name!

So, will all this said,  and with obvious corruption in his own administration, how can Obama in any form of conscience make demands on the Kharsai regime?  There’s another quote that comes to mind:  “How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye’, when you fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” 

While the US is in an obvious downward spiral, morally and ethically speaking (with the corruption which now is more blatant and commonplace at the highest levels of our government), and with places like Afghanistan and others are being touted as “supposedly” on an upward trend (though we’ve seen no difference in their behaviors), will that mean, again ethically and morally speaking, that our countries will meet somewhere in the middle?   If so, the US loses big.  Why?  Because the US will no longer be the “example” that other countries have looked up to.  Where the US once was the country who led the world by example, they now will be “eye to eye” on a lower plane – down in the muck and mire with corrupted countries. 

So, there you have my take on it.  Simply stated, Obama is trying his best to lower the prestige and moral strength of this country while trying to compel other countries – who, by the way, don’t respect his leadership – to behave according to his set of standards for behavior.  He suggests that the US should lower its “standards” and compel others to “meet us halfway.”   Thousands of years of history tells us that this won’t happen.  So, who really comes out ahead in this situation? 

In my opinion, as far as the US is concerned, mediocrity is not a good thing.  NOT A GOOD THING AT ALL!


Obama’s Transparency – It’s Not Clear to Me

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

I have finally figured it out….

I have finally figured out just what President Barack Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid mean by “transparency”.  Mrs. Pelosi has said repeatedly that this is the most open and transparent Congress to date.   How can she claim transparency when there are closed-door sessions where deals are cut with special interest groups and bribes for legislators?   I’ll tell you what Ms. Pelosi means.  She looks right into the eyes of the media and says, “We’re going to do this, and it’s going to be done this way, by this time, and we won’t accept any change or compromise.”   That’s pretty clear.

Harry Reid has his own version of transparency.  His transparency is that he tells people what the Senate is going to do (that’s the transparent part), then in closed-door sessions he buys a vote or two that will put his plan over, and then ultimately proclaims the success he predicted.   Come on, who cannot see what’s really happening when senators exchange their votes for millions of dollars for their states?  When Senators Nelson and Landrieu took Reid’s bribes for their healthcare votes and support, it was well publicized on conservative talk shows on radio and TV, and through conservative blogs on the web.  It became really transparent to Americans at that point that what was going on in Washington was “politics as usual” – or maybe on politics on steroids!   The audacity of the Democrats was that they believed that they can get away with such underhanded dealings  — even out in the open — because, after all, they had control in the White House, Senate, and the House of Representatives.  Who was going to stop them?   Seriously, who can expect real transparency when deals are negotiated behind closed doors, especially when only those of like-minds are invited inside and those holding opposing views are banned from participation in the sessions?   

Obama’s lack of his promised transparency has cost him in the polls, and yet he still spouts the same old rhetoric from his campaigning days, still tossing the blame for  everything on Bush, still holding closed door meetings with special interest groups and congressional leaders, and still has his czars and others with far-left political views in policy-making positions who are not confirmed by Congress or elected by voters.  Is that transparency?  Not in my book.  When Obama campaigned on transparency, the people took him at his word… And why was that?  Because that would truly be the  promised change and hope for a new way for  Washington to operate.  Who wouldn’t vote for that?  Only it hasn’t happened – and it won’t under THIS administration, for sure!

We were forewarned by deeds rather than words.  Obama certainly didn’t display any transparency during the campaign…. not about his collegiate career, college applications and transcripts; not by producing his actual birth certificate, not by explaining how he traveled about the globe as an unemployed individual of non-existent means, and other things – things that could be easily produced and would end the suspicions and speculations once and for all, assuming he really wanted to be transparent!   

How can Obama proclaim his administration is transparent when there are special considerations for individuals and certain groups, and when what should be public information is hidden from the public?  Again, what about the campaign promise of transparency, of the CSPAN-televised negotiations on healthcare reform which never materialized?  In fact, Obama has laughingly shrugged that one off as a “just one of those many campaign promises politicians make” – and as everyone knows ALL campaign promises can’t be kept, right?   At this point, it’s pretty obvious that we will never see the kind of transparency we had hoped for from this Administration or from Congress.  Rather, the type of transparency now being promoted is the transparency of some of our national secrets under the guise criminally trying enemy combatants in our federal courts – the kind of transparency that can cost us our national safety – or de-classifying important documents and publicizing interrogation techniques used on terrorists.  Just who is that transparency for?

As I’ve pointed out previously, Democrats say there is (by their own definitions) transparency in our government.  I have noticed, though, there are some differences in the “applied definition” of transparency between the Legislative and Executive branches.  The Obama White House tends toward (unintended) transparency where the various members of Obama’s staff inadvertently reveal things simply because the players can’t keep their stories in synch – or their mouths shut.  The Senate Majority Leader and Speaker of the House do their “dirty” dealings behind closed doors, usually with a group of like-minded persons, and try to come up with a more palatable way of force-feeding their “transparency” to the voters.   (Occasionally, politicians seeking the limelight will spill some beans though.   I happen to be thankful that at least this kind of transparency has occurred because it has made for a wiser American public.)  

Perhaps the differences between the White House and Congress “transparency successes” are because the Legislative branch happens to have had a lot more experience with “covert transparency” than the intellectuals and academics who are presently making up the Executive Branch and staff.  Congress is full of professional politicians.  The White House is amateurish on governing in this way, having their strength in organizing groups.  However, because of the closer scrutiny by those on the right, and even independents, who have their eyes and ears open,  both branches have come up short on executing their types of transparency. 

For instance, remember the healthcare bill and the people who went to townhall meetings to express their opposition to HR 3200 and make their concerns known?  When it came time to literally push through controversial legislation on healthcare that apparently was in direct opposition to the wishes of the majority of the American voters (you’ll recall the uproar of the summer and fall townhall meetings!), Pelosi and Reid showed a surprising lack of understanding of the tenor of the public’s sentiment and their grasp of what the bill actually contained.  But they made no bones about what they were going to do …. that’s their transparency!  They had dismissed the fact that the voters were becoming more educated on the issues and beginning to become active in the process by using their freedom of speech to contact their legislators and following the examples of other grass roots organizations to come together.   The conservative and independent voters have educated themselves on the issues as well as having gained a better understanding of  “the game” of politics.  While these newbies to politics began paying close attention to the activities of their legislators, they are also began to groom their own to rise up to replace those entrenched and out-of-touch members of Congress.   

The legislators dismissed the American people and the subsequent polling that resulted from the discontent.  However, with the strong showing in NYC 23 and with Scott Brown’s senate seat win, there is a transparent national “routing out” of those who do backroom deals or who refuse to listen to their constituents.   One only has to read the handmade placards at the rallies and look at the polls to see this is true.  Concerned Americans are being transparent in their plans to unseat those who are not listening to the people who sent them to Washington.   The people are outraged that their own legislators don’t read the bills they are voting on, or even know what was in them.  Yet the legislators will still push for a bill’s passage while the people are aggressively telling them no!  The people  have had enough.   

The biggest mistake made by the Democrats, which  will cost them dearly in the mid-term elections is that they wouldn’t consider that the emotion which was demonstrated in the townhall meetings was genuine, and that it would still rage strong or be as widespread this long.  The people, who had placed their hope in the promises of transparency and openness and of a different Washington than previous administrations, were transparent when they expressed their concern all summer and fall.  They had grown tired of Washington’s favors and bribery, and they were expressing strong opposition to the Democrats’ type of “transparency”, yet they got more of the same.

Unfortunately for the Democrats,  the polls now reflect a sharp downturn for long-time incumbents who are up for relection in 2010.   (Just as a reminder, it’s not just Democrats who will find the going rough.  Some Republicans should watch themselves as well.)  Recently, public backlash has prompted several prominent, long-term, entrenched Democrats to”called it quits” rather than run for re-election and face certain defeat, and why?  Perhaps they’ve seen the “handwriting on the wall”.  Or, as Rep. Snyder (D- AR) said, “I want to spend time more with my family”.  Perhaps they’ve come to realize that there really IS a grassroots movement —  NOT the “astroturf”, as Nancy Pelosi called it — that has taken hold and spread all across this nation and it will affect real change in our government and restore hope to American citizens.  

When people band together in groups called “tea parties” and have an announced agenda of becoming politically savvy and involved for the purpose of routing out the politicians who don’t really care about preserving the principles upon which this country was founded, but rather make a political career for themselves, I call this a type of transparency, too.  Don’t you? 

The Scott Brown win has the Democrats scrambling to “embrace” the other side of the aisle, but they’re still missing the transparency issue.  They want the Republican “participation” but they don’t want to hear Republican input!  What they all should be doing is listening to the people!  We’ll see what happens over these next few months until the next election.   At this point, though, what the Democrats are doing is  pretty clear and transparent to me – more political games, not more transparency!


UPDATE On the Reuter’s Article That Was… Wasn’t

Saturday, February 6, 2010

See my posting on  2/2/10 http://tinyurl.com/yjgrkg6 .  It has now been reported that the person who wrote the article that was taken down almost immediately is longer with Reuters – under unknown circumstances.  Terri Cullen, wrote an article that wasn’t favorable at all to the way the Obama Administration has broken out how his social programs will be paid for.  How this information was obtained isn’t clear, but the article in question, which is no longer available on Reuters, was removed with supersonic speed (though some of the article has been reposted on blogs and elsewhere) amidst speculation that the White House ordered it removed.  Why?  Because it reveals that every working American will see a significant increase in the income taxes they pay.  That is a direct and flagrant about-face from the campaign promises Obama made… and one of the main reasons that MOST of the Americans who voted for him gave him their support.  Indeed, most of the people who supported Obama were the working middle class, the very ones who will shoulder the bulk of the cost of his programs — and the trillions and trillions of dollars of debt. 

I don’t  claim that this is MY interpretation of policy as presented by the Obama Administration.  I’m just saying that anyone who can add 2 and 2 and come up with 4 should be able to see that money has to come from more than just the very small percentage of “wealthy” to pay for all this spending the Obama Administration is bent upon.   Thus, I am issuing this statement as Liza Doolittle did:  Just you wait, ‘Enri Higgins’, just you wait!”  Just don’t let it be too late before you wake up to the fact – WE ALL WILL BE PAYING HIGHER TAXES – very soon!


Obama’s Promises to Not Raise Taxes on Middle Class – YOU LIE!

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

If you were actually stupid enough to believe  what Obama promised as far as who was going to pay for all this socialist programs, you will VERY SHORTLY be feeling the full impact of your stupidity.  Why?  Because YOUR taxes are going up.  Yes, YOURS!  And you probably aren’t in the bracket of $250,000 annual income bracket.  Check this out…. and see who’s going to be financing Obama’s programs:  http://bit.ly/c4IZyk

The White House, I’m sure, didn’t want this information out.  They haven’t even constructed their political “spin” yet to “sell it to the masses.”  However, Reuters put out an article from which the information in the link above comes.  But mysteriously, the article was immediately pulled.  This is not the FIRST time that some unfavorable reporting on what’s really going on with this Administration has been squelched.  Who’s pulling the plugs on these news items – and more importantly, WHY?  It would stand to reason that it’s  probably because the Obama administration has seen what happens when concerned citizens find out the truth and share it with one another.  They get angry.  They get together.  They make a difference.  And they put the brakes on those runaway programs.  A case in point is  what happened to Obamacare. 

So, now that you have read what lies ahead for your tax situation, share that information with others and let’s see what will happen when concerned Americans take on Obama’s agenda once more.


Tareq and Michaele Salahi Attend Dinner by Executive Order

Friday, December 11, 2009

With today’s reality show wanna be’s, it’s easy to jump on the band wagon of accusations when someone turns a public or media event into a faux pas.  When, Tareq and Michaele Salahi recently appeared at an important White House Dinner, it was said that they were looking for publicity for a possible reality show, or perhaps a book, or maybe both.   Adding to the mystique was Michaele’s reported gushing to her hair dresser of her invitation to the dinner, but somehow she was never able to produce that invitation – especially at the White House when they arrived!

Well, that was enough to set tongues a waggin’.  Who had allowed this “security breach”?  Was it the fault of the White House Social Secretary Desiree Rogers?  Was it the fault of the Secret Service?  The Salahis insisted they were invited and not “party-crashers”, so who had actually invited them?  Where was that mysterious invitation?  Were these people really able to slip through the tightest security known to the US? 

Here’s something I want you to look closely:

Look at the expression on Obama’s face.  This is not his normal “formal” smile  that he uses when saying, “Hi, how are you?” to people he’s not familiar with.  In fact, the expressions on all three of their faces suggest that they are sharing some intimate information.
 
Now, the buzz has been about how these people could get into this event with no formal invitation.  No one is confessing to having any knowledge of them being on the guest list.  Again, they haven’t produced that formal invitation that everyone was required to have and they weren’t on the list that had been approved and cleared for attendance.
 
Now, look at this picture VERY CLOSELY:
 
 
Just who is that guy in the center?  Who is that man in the white jacket?  Who is the blonde on the right?  Hmmmm.  This picture was taken – at a fashion event or a “get out the vote” event or something or other – in 2005 when Obama was a Senator.
 
It’s obvious that this couple who are under suspicion of “crashing” a White House dinner event, weren’t strangers to the occupants of the White House.  So, if it wasn’t any of the White House staff who approved their attendance, and the Secret Service let them it – it obviously had to be by EXECUTIVE ORDER!
 
Again, when you “hear” the campaign rhetoric from Obama echoing in your ear about transparency and everything above board, add this incident to the multitude of “behind closed doors”, back-room deals, etc. 
 
Face it, America.  We’ve been hoodwinked by a pathological liar who lives by his own devised set of rules of conduct and propriety while governing by a totally different set.   The old political machines of which we had all grown tired have given way to a newer, but much more insidious one – and it’s rolling over us at an alarming speed.
 
I’m asking you to judge someone by their actions, not their words.  Make your decisions based upon facts, not emotions.  In regards to our national and even our local leaders – particularly the ones who have been in office a while – evaluate what they have done and are presently doing that isn’t in agreement with what they have proclaimed they would do.  Don’t listen to their promises, because as we have found from this last election, politicians will say whatever it takes to keep their positions of power – and they have shown, especially this year, that they have no intention of listening to the people they are supposed to represent.  
 
Remember, too, that all of them, including the President, are employees of We the People!   Therefore, as their employer, we must demand that they do what we want – that being open and transparent – or risk being fired and replaced with someone who will.  We will have a chance in the near future to drive this point home. 
 
 
 

Obama Opens US Courts to Citizens of the World

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

As you are probably aware, President Barack Obama claims himself a citizen of the world.  Not only does he view himself as a citizen of the world, but he views the world as citizens of the United States, with the same rights to US housing, US financial aid, US protections, US freedoms, et al, as any natural born or naturalized citizen.  In fact, he has ordered the military to Mirandize the enemy in the throes of war.  That’s insane!  The Miranda warning is a right for US citizens, to give them protection against making incriminating statements against themselves.  It never was – and should never be – intended as blanket protection for all people of the world, anywhere in the world, and especially in time of war – for our enemies!

People with half a brain should know that before the US declared war on the terrorists, war was declared on the US by the terrorists.  Their actions were notched up way beyond what could be called civil disorder, way beyond a protest against major socio-political or religions positions.  They slaughtered thousands of innocents with their carefully orchestrated attack on the US.  Their actions should strongly suggest to Obama and his other Progressive/Liberal cohorts that the terrorists established the rules – the rules of war – and that they did not perpetrate a civil crime as of one US citizen against another US citizen, and therefore should be treated and tried differently – by the conventional rules of war, and not in civil courts.

I found this blog while scrolling through Blogsurfer.  I hope they don’t mind me using it here because it demonstrates the Obama Administration’s version of the Miranda Rights for our enemies at Gitmo and those on the battlefield:

FEDFILTER

Post-War on Terror” Miranda Rights Posted in In the News by tymothyson on November 19, 2009

“You have the right to remain silent or shout any obscene, blasphemous religious propaganda you may want. Anything you say or do could, but will not be used against you in a court of military law. You have the right to a[n] civilian attorney who could leak information to terrorist cells outside of your terrorist jail cell, though you should really be tried as an enemy combatant war criminal and never again see the light of day. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed to you as part of the $75-100 Million of our tax dollars to move your keister from Gitmo to the land where our fathers died. Do you understand these rights as they have been read to you? Of course you don’t, you didn’t even have to learn English to take up residency on the dole, plant a dirty bomb, or get a license to fly a jumbo jet.

“If you are not a United States citizen, you need not contact your country’s consulate prior to any questioning because we will treat you like one anyway.”

Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder sees Al-Qaeda in the same light as Obama.  He has made it abundantly clear that he plans to try five of the main Gitmo terrorists/detainees as if they mugged an old lady in Central Park. 

Our laws require that accused US citizens be tried before a jury of their peers.  WHO, then, are the peers of these men, these non-citizens?  Holder himself said that if Khalid Sheikh Mohammed pleads guilty and testifies the same as he has before, Holder can guarantee a conviction.  What conviction?  He’s an enemy combatant and has admitted to his role in the planning of the 9-11 attack.  He declared jihad against the US… that’s a declaration of war!

Further, Holder is also getting pressure from Germans that the testimony they may contribute during the trial not be used if the prosecution plans to seek the death penalty.  So, has Holder created his own Catch-22?  If KSM and the four others are given life in prison, what prison will they be sent to?  If in the US, the US citizens will pay again for the crimes of this man by providing him with three squares (a special diet by the way) special prayer times, and more civil rights that most US citizens exercise in their lifetime — for the rest of his!

In another instance, Navy seals are being prosecuted for bloodying the lip of another terrorist/enemy who is known to be responsible for the atrocious murders and abuse of the corpses of four civilian US security personnel in Iraq.  Now, during this declared wartime, every action of our military personnel is under the microscope of liberal interpreters, and the enemy is afforded US Citizens rights when they aren’t US citizens.  It’s NOT war anymore – it’s insanity!