Tag Archives: eligibility

Anti-Birther Socialist Hawaii Gov Is Lying Or Delusional

Hawaii’s newly elected Demonrat governor, Neil Abercrombie, has vowed he’d silence the so-called “birthers” with proof of Barack Obama’s Hawaiian birth. Abercrombie told the Los Angeles Times just before Christmas, “Maybe I’m the only one in the country that could look you right in the eye right now and tell you, ‘I was here when that baby was born.'”

Abercrombie is not just a registered Democrat, he’s a socialist. As Aaron Klein of WorldNetDaily writes on December 29, 2010:

Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie has a radical history that ties him to a U.S.-based socialist organization with deep connections to President Obama and to a “Marxist-socialist” bloc in Congress.

Abercrombie is tied to the Marxist-oriented Democratic Socialists of America. WND previously reported that issues of the organization’s official magazine, the Democratic Left, list Abercrombie as a member of the socialist party…. The magazine states the group’s political-action committee endorsed two congressional candidates, “DSAer Democrat Neil Abercrombie seeking to regain the House seat representing Honolulu and Vermont independent candidate Bernie Sanders”…. Abercrombie’s wife, academic Nancie Caraway, was listed in 1985 as a member of the Democratic Socialists of America’s Feminist Commission….

In response, Abercrombie’s campaign website denied the politician was ever a member of a socialist party…[but] Abercrombie’s campaign site did not explain why the politician was listed as a Democratic Socialists of America member in the organization’s official literature, nor did the site respond to his close ties to the organization.

A few days after Abercrombie told the L. A. Times that he was present when the baby Obama was born, Abercrombie backtracked, telling the Associated Press that he didn’t exactly see Obama’s parents with their newborn son at the hospital, but that he “remembers seeing Obama as a child with his parents at social events.”

Alas, Abercrombie is either lying or is delusional. As Jack Cashill points out in Will Obama Silence Blundering Abercrombie?,” Townhall, January 3, 2011:

Although the major media have questioned why Abercrombie would raise an issue that, according to the Los Angeles Times, “most people see as resolved,” they take Abercrombie at his word as to what he knows about the young Obama family.

They shouldn’t…. Abercrombie is remembering a past that never happened.

A member of the House’s progressive caucus before his election as governor, Abercrombie has been talking excitedly about the relationship for years, playing John the Baptist to Obama’s Jesus. “Little Barry, that’s what we called him,” Abercrombie told the Chicago Tribune while “recalling his days with Obama Sr. and his future wife, Ann Dunham, at the University of Hawaii.” If Obama were born on August 4, 1961, however, there could not have been many such days. 

As is thoroughly documented, Ann and little Barry were in Seattle two weeks later [after the baby’s birth], where she enrolled at the University of Washington. By the time she returned to Hawaii in late summer or fall 1962, Barack Sr. had left for Harvard for good….

According to divorce papers filed in 1964, Barack Sr. and Ann married in Wailuku, Maui on February 2, 1961. But one has to wonder whether it was a marriage in anything but name, or whether there was a marriage at all.  Obama himself writes in Dreams, “In fact, how and when the marriage occurred remains a bit murky, a bill of particulars that I’ve never quite had the courage to explore.”

No one attended the wedding — not Abercrombie, not Ann’s parents. In fact, no one in Barack Sr.’s clique seemed to know there was a relationship, let alone a wedding. Neil’s brother Hal never saw Ann and Barack Sr. together. Another clique member, Pake Zane, who had distinct memories of Barack Sr., could not recall Ann at all. When Neil Abercrombie and Zane visited their friend in Nairobi in 1968, Barack Sr. shocked them by never once inquiring about his putative wife and 6-year-old son.

The 17-year-old Ann had met the 24 year-old Barack Sr. in Russian class at the University of Hawaii. Why they were studying Russian (in 1960, people like Lee Harvey Oswald studied Russian) is a question for another day. In Dreams, Ann provides only the sketchiest detail of their first date — Barack Sr. came an hour late and with friends — and nothing more. A high school friend of Ann’s claims to have received a letter or two from Ann in which she spoke about Barack Sr., and there is no reason to doubt her. But beyond this, there is no evidence of a relationship, and the only evidence for the marriage are the divorce papers, which are real and have been posted online. 

One reason people marry in a county other than their own — Maui County, for instance — is to keep the announcement of the marriage license out of the local paper. By claiming a Maui wedding, and perhaps even attaining a Maui license, the Dunhams could have assured the baby an identity without drawing attention to the relationship.

If Obama had, in fact, been born out of wedlock, or if his father had been someone other than Barack Sr., that would not have affected Obama’s eligibility for higher office, but it would have surely de-glamorized him.  “Barry Dunham” does not exactly tease the imagination. 

Whatever his contribution, Obama Sr. lent young Barry a name, an identity, and a romantic storyline.  Obama’s mother and grandparents sustained this narrative throughout Obama’s childhood. Barack Obama repeated this story in his memoir Dreams from My Father, and to good effect.  When Obama hooked up with campaign guru David Axelrod in his 2004 race for the U.S. Senate, his story crystallized into a marketing strategy. In the retelling, little Barry is always two years old when Barack Sr. reluctantly leaves wife and son for Harvard. This is a lie.

Guided by Axelrod, Obama held off in his breakthrough keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic convention for all of 46 words — including “Thank you.  Thank you so much.  Thank you so much” — before sharing his story with the world. At the 2008 Democratic Convention in Denver, Obama leaped into the story in the very first sentence. “Four years ago,” he began, “I stood before you and told you my story — of the brief union between a young man from Kenya and a young woman from Kansas who weren’t well-off or well-known, but shared a belief that in America, their son could achieve whatever he put his mind to.”

In between the two convention speeches, the story of Obama’s birth was told more often than that of anyone’s since Jesus….

Obama and his operatives would invest enormous political capital in what sympathetic biographer David Remnick calls his “signature appeal: the use of the details of his own life as a reflection of a kind of multicultural ideal.”  From the beginning, they worked hard to protect the investment and did what they had to do to keep the storytellers in line….

The truth is that the storied little family never lived together. Any fact that blew the storyline could have derailed Obama’s candidacy before it got going. Expect the Abercrombie fuss to just sort of fade away.

H/t beloved fellow Tina!



New Hawaii Governor Vows to Stop Birthers

Hawaii’s newly elected governor, Demonrat Neil Abercrombie, is vowing eternal enmity against those nasty birthers who doubt Obama’s undocumented insistence that he’s a “naturaL born citizen” as required for the presidency by the United States Constitution.

I say: “By all means! Just show us Obama’s original long-form birth certificate!”

Below is an L.A. Times article on Abercrombie written by an Obama stooge, Michael Memoli. My rebuttals to Memoli’s misleading and outright erroneous assertions are in purple.

H/t beloved fellow Tina.


Neil AbercrombieAging hippie Neil Abercrombie.

Michael A. Memoli of the Los Angeles Times reports from Honolulu on December 24, 2010:

Neil Abercrombie knew Barack Obama’s parents when the future president was born here in 1961, and he has been aggravated by the so-called birther movement, which alleges Obama was not born in the United States and thus should be expelled from office.

Now Abercrombie has an office of his own — he became governor of Hawaii on Dec. 6. — and he intends to do something about it.

What, exactly, is unclear. But in an interview this week at the state Capitol, he left little doubt that torpedoing the conspiracy theorists was a priority. “What bothers me is that some people who should know better are trying to use this for political reasons,” said Abercrombie, 72. “Maybe I’m the only one in the country that could look you right in the eye right now and tell you, ‘I was here when that baby was born.’ ” [Hmm, what does “here” mean? Was Abercrombie actually in the delivery room and is a percipient witness to The One’s birth? Or does “here” mean Honolulu? LOL]

One of Abercrombie’s aides said the governor is voicing the frustration of many Hawaiians who continue to be troubled by the rumors, which they see as emblematic of the view that Hawaiians are not Americans in the same way as those who live in the continental United States.

Abercrombie’s Hawaiian pride may be trumping practical politics. Ample evidence has been produced to discredit the “birther” movement, so in the view of the White House, the Democratic governor’s comments are reviving an issue that most people see as resolved. [The “evidence” consists of (1) an image posted online of Obama’s purported certificate-of-live-birth, which is a SECONDARY document generated from the presumed ORIGINAL long-form birth certificate; (2) a blurry photocopied image, posted online, of a personal ad in a Honolulu newspaper announcing The One’s birth; (3) an oral claim by a Hawaiian government official that she has seen The One’s birth certificate. Calling this “ample evidence” is ludicrous. Calling this even “evidence” at all will get you thrown out of any U.S. courthouse.]

Although Abercrombie’s goal may be to support Obama, experts who study political extremism [So now being faithful to the U.S. Constitution is “political extremism”?] say the release of additional evidence would only perpetuate the conspiracy theory. They say people who embrace such theories are guided by suspicion and, therefore, view any contrary evidence as part of the conspiracy. [Since the “contrary evidence” consists of none other than Hawaii’s Democrat Party, the National Democratic Party, and Congress itself admitting they had not vetted Obama’s birth eligibility, as well as a U.S. military judge at a court martial denying discovery documents to the Defense — documents including Obama’s birth certificate and kindergarten records — because she does not want to “embarrass the President,” any sane person would conclude that IT IS A CONSPIRACY!]

Abercrombie, a native of Buffalo, N.Y., arrived in 1959 to study sociology at the University of Hawaii. As a teaching assistant, he met and befriended Obama’s father, a native of Kenya. Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, was born in Kansas and met and married his father, also named Barack, when the two were college students in Hawaii. Obama was born at Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu on Aug. 4, 1961. [Make up your mind: Is it Kapi’olani Hospital or is it the earlier-claimed Queens Medical Center? One thing we do know is that no hospital in Honolulu or all of Hawaii actually has admitted Obama was born there. Why is that?]

But in 2008, as Obama ran for president, critics posted allegations online, without proof, that he was born in Kenya. [Obama’s paternal grandmother said she was an eye-witness to his birth in Kenya. Kenya government official and member of parliament James Orengo said Obama was  born in Kenya. As did a Nigerian newspaper and America’s own National Public Radio! They must all be lying!]

That June, the Obama campaign released a certificate of live birth, an official document from the Hawaii Health Department certifying the facts of a person’s birth, as proof of his birthplace. [Scientist Dr. Ronald Polland maintains the certificate-of-live-birth is a forgery.] Investigations by two prominent fact-checking organizations, PolitiFact and FactCheck.org, concluded that the certificate was authentic. [Neither PolitiFact nor FactCheck is a court of law. The next time I apply for a passport and the government demands my birth certificate, I’ll just show them an online image of a secondary document generated from my real birth certificate and tell the government that two websites have “certified” it’s true!] FactCheck also turned up a 1961 birth announcement in the Honolulu Advertiser marking the birth of a son to “Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama of Kalanianaole Hwy.” [Hey, Michael Memoli! You do know that anyone, ANYONE, can pay a newspaper to publish a personal ad, right? And you do know that such an ad is not acceptable as documentary evidence in court, right?]

But the Hawaii birth document, dated 2007 and generated at the request of the Obama campaign, was insufficient for some of Obama’s detractors. [We’re not “detractors”. We are “truth seekers.”] They demand the release of his original birth certificate, which in Hawaii is not a public record. Several lawsuits have been filed seeking to force Obama to disclose more information, but they have been routinely dismissed by courts.

Bills have been introduced in state legislatures that would require presidential candidates to document that they were born in this country. One was passed by the Arizona House of Representatives in April. Similar legislation was introduced in Congress in 2009 and failed to gain traction, but the attempt troubled Abercrombie.

“More than demonization — this is self-evisceration of politics,” said Abercrombie, who raised the birthplace issue unprompted during the interview. “Empires fall and countries fall when that takes the place of discourse.”

In Hawaii, the efforts to challenge Obama’s birthplace still burden the state government with endless requests for further documentation, officials have said. Abercrombie’s predecessor, Republican Linda Lingle, in May signed legislation that allowed the state to ignore repeated nuisance inquiries.

“If I were the governor, I would call a press conference, I’d pull out all the records I have and show the world he was born in Hawaii,” said state Sen. Will Espero, a Democrat who sponsored that bill.

But the state has consistently held that releasing all of Obama’s records would be a violation of its citizens’ confidentiality, and that privacy rights should not be sacrificed to appease extreme views. Espero said he understands that stance and noted that the conspiracy theories have ebbed.

But the movement made news this month, when a former Army officer, Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, was dismissed from the military and sentenced to six months in military prison after he refused to deploy to Afghanistan because he claimed Obama may be ineligible to serve as president.

“When you look at the certification of live birth … you don’t find the name of the doctor, hospital or signature,” said prominent “birther” Orly Taitz, a California lawyer and dentist. “We’ve asked to see the original one that is still sealed.” Taitz said she is willing to debate Abercrombie on national television and “let the American people decide.”

An Abercrombie aide said the governor has not taken action to address the birth issue because he is focusing on his transition and preparing a budget for a state facing a deficit.[But Abercrombie has the time to complain about “birthers” to the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, on CNN, as well as the local Star Advertiser and Hawaii News Now!]

Any action by Abercrombie, who spent 19 years representing Hawaii’s 1st District as one of the more liberal members of Congress, would not be his first response to the “birther” controversy. Last year, he sponsored a congressional resolution honoring the 50th anniversary of Hawaiian statehood, which included language stating, “Whereas the 44th president of the United States, Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii.” It passed unanimously. [Then Congress lied. None other than the Congressional Research Office has admitted that noone in Congress vetted Obama’s birth eligibility!]

Questions About Obama’s Birth Certificate Won’t Go Away

Last Monday, December 6, 2010, on his radio show Rush Limbaugh wondered where Wikileaks’ “real good stuff” is, including Obama’s original, long-form hospital-generated birth certificate, which has still never been released two years into his presidency.

A day after, December 7, 2010, at the end of a 20-minute Answer Man session about baseball, hunting, firearms, personal responsibility and smaller government, Baltimore Orioles slugger Luke Scott said: 

“(Obama) was not born here. That’s my belief. I was born here. If someone accuses me of not being born here, I can go — within 10 minutes — to my filing cabinet and I can pick up my real birth certificate and I can go, ‘See? Look! Here it is. Here it is.’ The man has dodged everything. He dodges questions, he doesn’t answer anything.”

And when the birth certificate becomes fodder for late-night comics, then we know it’s really gone mainstream. Last night, it was the butt of Jay Leno’s mockery. Leno said:

“I’ll tell you how bad things are getting. Now Democrats want to see his birth certificate.”

Click HERE for the Leno video.

A big h/t to beloved fellow Tina and WesternJournalism.


Obama Eligibility Is Now a Conspiracy

A conspiracy is a secret agreement by two or more persons to perform an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.

Somehow, conspiracy theories have become synonymous with kooky nutcases, sneered at by the MSM. But there are real conspiracies, for example, the assassination of Julius Caesar, the Dreyfus Affair, Nixon’s Watergate scandal, and the Iran-Contra Affair.

It is now incontrovertible that there is a massive conspiracy about Obama’s eligibility. Every branch and institution of our government is covering up for Obama.

First, it was the Democratic Party at both the state and national levels who looked the other way in 2008, choosing not to vett Obama’s birth documents to ensure he indeed is constitutionally eligible for the presidency. This was followed by the McCain campaign and the Republican Party acting like the eunuchs that they are in not questioning Obama’s eligibility.

Then, it was Congress that failed to screen his eligibility, using the lame excuse that no law requires them to do so, conveniently forgetting that the Constitution itself is the highest law of the land.

Next, the courts failed us. Beginning in 2008 even before Obama was elected president, American citizens brought one lawsuit after another challenging Obama’s constitutional eligibility. But judge after judge in state after state refused to even grant a hearing to the lawsuits, using the lame excuse that the litigants “lacked standing” and in so doing, effectively said that the constitutional eligibility of the President of the United States is not a matter of concern or interest for We the People.

Last Monday, November 29, 2010, the judicial branch of the American government completed its surrender to Obama when the Supreme Court denied the Kerchner v Obama’s petition for a writ of certiorari (translated into ordinary English: SCOTUS refused to review/hear the case). Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., the lead plaintiff, is a retired Commander of the US Naval Reserve.

Then there’s the United States Army. It, too, capitulated to the Mighty Obama when the top military brass decided to court martial decorated (Bronze Star) Army surgeon Lt. Col. Terry Lakin who defied his deployment orders on the grounds of the dubious constitutional eligibility and authority of the top of the command chain — his Commander In Chief. To complete the Army’s self-castration, the military judge in Lakin’s court martial, Denise Lind, refused to grant the defense’s discovery request of Obama’s concealed documents (original long-form birth certificate, kindergarten and college records…), thereby making impossible Lakin’s defense.

The latest government agency to join the Conspiracy of Silence and Coverup is the Social Security Administration.

Last May, private investigators discovered that not only are multiple social security numbers associated with Barack Obama (when we are all supposed to have only one number each), the social security number that Obama is presently using is one that’s set aside for residents of the state of Connecticut — a state in which Obama has never lived and with which he has no association. As I explained in my post of May 13, 2010, Obama Uses Dead Connecticuter’s Social Security Number“:

The first three (3) digits of a person’s social security number are determined by the ZIP code of the mailing address shown on the application for a social security number. (See Q. 18 of “Frequently Asked Questions” on the Social Security Administration’s website, HERE.) Connecticut’s SS numbers begin with 040, 041, 042, 043, 044, 045, 046, 047, 048, or 049. Obama’s SS number begins with 042.

The most plausible explanation is that Obama’s Connecticut SS number once belonged to a Connecticuter, born in 1890, who is now diseased. This means that Obama is using that number illicitly because the SS administration says a SS number is never re-issued or re-used. (See Q. 20 of “Frequently Asked Questions” on the Social Security Administration’s website, HERE.)

Furthermore, since Obama’s first job was in a Baskin-Robbins ice cream shop in Oahu, Hawaii, when he was 14 or 15, he would have obtained a SS number then as a Hawaii resident. Hawaii’s SS numbers begin with the prefix 575 or 576. This means that he has used at least TWO different SS numbers, which is against the law, because the law says a person can have only one SS number in a lifetime.

Now, the Social Security Administration is introducing a new policy in an attempt to conceal, obfuscate, and evade Obama’s curious Connecticut social security number. Jerome Corsi of WorldNetDaily reports on November 30, 2010: 

Without addressing questions regarding the apparent assignment of a Connecticut-based Social Security number to President Barack Obama, who reportedly spent his growing-up years in Hawaii and Indonesia, the federal agency now is moving quickly to make certain such questions never come up again about political figures.

The administration is starting down a path that is intended to randomize all future Social Security numbers – a move critics allege is designed to make it impossible to tell where any future Social Security number is issued.

In a notice currently published on the Social Security Administration website, the SSA announces Social Security numbers issued in the future will be randomized starting on or about June 25, 2011.

A spokeswoman in the Social Security press office confirmed to WND the plan is moving forward.
“In an effort to increase the number of Social Security numbers (SSNs) available for use by the Social Security Administration (SSA) and in order to help reduce identity theft, SSA plans to change the methodology by which SSNs are issued. In June 2011, we will begin to issue SSNs randomly, regardless of the address on the application. As a result, we will have the ability to continue to issue SSNs in all areas of the country for many more years without having to make additional changes,” said Trish Nicasio….

Ohio licensed private investigator Susan Daniels says the government policy change is an attempt to cover up in retrospect the controversy over Obama’s Social Security number by making it impossible in the future to trace where a Social Security applicant lived at the time the person applied for a Social Security number.
“Now all the Social Security Administration has to say is that they have been experimenting with randomized numbers for some time,” Daniels said. “How would anybody prove differently?”

She continued, “With Obama, there is obviously a case of fraud going on here. In 15 years of having a private investigator’s license in Ohio, I’ve never seen the Social Security Administration make a mistake of issuing a Connecticut Social Security number to a person who lived in Hawaii. There is no family connection that would appear to explain the anomaly.”

The White House has refused to answer queries about Obama’s social security number.

If Diogenes were alive today, he’d be consigned to an eternal and fruitless wandering in his search for just one honest man in the U.S. government. Sadly, there is none.

H/t beloved fellows Tina & FS.


White House Insider: Obama Not a Democrat, Maybe Not an American

Someone who calls himself “White House Insider” has been talking to NewsFlavor blogger Ulsterman, à la the Nixon Watergate scandal’s Deep Throat. 

Below are excerpts from DeepThroat2’s latest interview with Ulsterman, November 20, 2010.


Nancy Pelosi has something incriminating on Obama’s birth/eligibility:

“yeah, I was told somethin’ related to that birther stuff.  Directly or indirectly, hell if I know. Speaker Pelosi been mouthin’ off against the president for some time now, right? Well, she was at it again and then she says something along the lines of, ‘How about I just hand over the goddamn certification file. They want me to go there?  Because that’s where they’re pushing me.’

Hell if I know – no…it was certification file – assume it has something to do with the whole birther thing – eligibility maybe? Just thought you might want to hear it. Just thought you might find it…interesting! It’s an odd thing to say, right? And it’s even odder that it was said like that period. The person who shared it with me thought so….  

Hell, fact is people are talking about this subject. Nobody wants to admit it in the open, but they are talking about it. Or whispering at least – but I want nothing to do with that -expletive-. Something like that will get your ass killed.  No joke.” 

What is the big Obama scandal that is about to burst?

“I ain’t touchin’ the birther garbage or the missile garbage or the gay club in Chicago garbage, or the gay lover -expletive- , or anything else that the nutjobs out there have thought up. No different than people running around saying Bush caused 9-11, or Cheney goes around shootin’ people in the face! (laughs)  -Expletive- country needs to grow up! No, let’s just stick to the real deal, right?  Because THAT is what is going to kick the president’s ass – and I’m talking kick that ass right to the goddamn curb! You got that?  TO – THE – CURB. You hear the reporting – it’s out there. You read it, right? We got the DOJ, we got the bank closures, we got the Rezko sentencing, we got the Blagotrial…all this -expletive – and more…everything is coming together. Everything that has been ignored for too long is finally getting some attention. And these dogs will hunt – I guarantee you that. Those Republicans on the Hill? Oh yeah, those little -expletive- are gonna bring the hammer down on this. They are gonna break every damn thing open until they find it – and they are gonna get help from some Democrats along the way. And you know the president knows it. His people know it. They are all hunkered down, eyes shifting this way and that, wonderin’ if it’s gonna be this scandal or that scandal or this, that, and the other scandal. One is gonna lead to one is gonna lead to the other….

Developing? Hell, it’s developed! It’s a living, breathing monster out there right now! What did I tell you before – what was it – weeks ago? Months ago? That was you, right? I said watch the DOJ  -that place is a mess and it’s about to get a rash of -expletive- come down on it. That is where I said all of this will start to unravel… I said it’ll start in Washington DC and then move on out to Chicago – and when that happens, this White House is in some deep -expletive-. They are gonna be swimming in it. And dimes to dollars Pelosi has some of the information. And when she steps aside, or is voted down, or whatever form it takes, then that information will be heading to the people who want to see it do the most damage to the Obama White House. And then the calls for someone to lead the party back to relevance will happen. And then comes the primary challenge in 2012. First the ice breaker challenger, and then the real deal – Hillary Clinton. And God keep her safe because we need her. How many people who voted Obama in those primaries, how many of those people now regret it? Oh man, there are a ton of those people!  A ton of ‘em. Course, if this scandal goes into overdrive mode sooner rather than-than later, hell, you might just see Barack Obama say he don’t wanna run for a second term. I’d call it a long shot at this point, but you never know. You never know.”

DT2 getting nervous about being wrong about Pelosi keeping her leadership position (as Minority Leader in 2011) in the House:

“we got more and more people telling her to step the -expletive- down. Stand aside. Don’t be surprised to be surprised on that. I said she was done as Speaker, and I was right on that. I said she-she didn’t have the support to be party leader and I still stand by that. Still standin’!

[But if DT2 is wrong and Pelosi stays on as Minority Leader] The number one impact is on the Democratic Party – and it would be a terrible-terrible thing for us. It’s inconceivable. Do you get that? Keep in place the same damn party leadership that cost us to lose 60 odd seats in the House? Why in the hell would we do that? Why? There is just no damn way the party is that stupid. No. Cannot be….

Plenty. For one, it makes me question myself – my information, and that would make me very-very nervous. I don’t like to receive surprises. Like to give them. Don’t like to get them.  That would be a nasty little surprise come my way…. I was told Pelosi was gone. “DC toast” I was told. Many times, by people who should know. If she were to actually stay on, that throws the whole process into suspicion. Now I can’t trust my own judgement, let alone what someone else is telling me, right? You get that-that, what I’m sayin’? Pelosi being gone is part of the deal, the-the-the process by which the White House is in for a real old fashioned Washington D.C. ass kicking. Hell, from my perspective, her staying on might very well signal a deal breaker. A goddamn deal breaker!  But that ain’t gonna happen. No sir. Unless I’m wrong of course – then this thing is a cluster -expletive- multiple times over.” 

But DT2 is wrong because Pelosi is staying in the House as Minority Leader. DT2 thinks this means Pelosi has cut a deal with Obama:

“I strongly suspect Nancy Pelosi has certain information, or parts of information, that-that would be essential to helping certain investigations against the White House. Investigations that could lead all the way to the top.  It was my understanding that Pelosi had decided to let this information be known to others, say members of a committee, in her…absence. She would be gone, living the good life out there in California, not part of the investigations, not the cause of the disclosure, you know, that kind of scenario – though I think she has let some stuff get out there already as a way of telling the White House to back the -expletive- off. But by laying back on all of it, she would have necessary separation from it all. Do you understand?

so if I’m being told this, being told repeatedly that Speaker Pelosi has had it with the White House, has had it with the president, is gonna help send them all packin’ away to political has-been street, and then she actually stays on as party leader, that means something happened. Something changed from what I am being told. Or somebody got it wrong – and either way, I can be -expletive- over on this whole thing. Do you realize how powerful a Speaker of the House really is? And Pelosi is about as tough a Speaker as I’ve seen. Tough-though lady. Not someone you wanna make an enemy of, right? So…if-if…if she stays on as party leader, that means she was got to. That means she made a deal. And if she was gonna help crack heads over at the White House, that means she probably made a deal with them, right? And that means this information she was supposed to help leak out there to the rest of us, to others, will probably disappear.

…Because the only way the White House would agree to a deal is if they were given that information to keep for themselves or had assurances it as no longer available. They are not going to just allow Pelosi to keep holding it over them. You see, the White House was sending out strong signals that Pelosi must go. I know this.  I heard it first hand from members of Congress. She is gone. So if she all of a sudden stays, and stays as leader of the party, that means the White House stopped pushing for her to be gone. And that means a deal was made. And THAT means I’m left scrambling for cover in all of this. And so is everyone who has been talking to me. The Republicans don’t take over until 2011, right? Whatever information Pelosi has on Obama – and she has it. Don’t you doubt that. She’s got it. Well, that information could easily be no more by January. Bye-bye, gone. Replaced, misplaced – never was, never will be again.  That -expletive- happens all the time.  I mean all the time.”

DT2 on Obama:

“Did you see the guy on TV the other day? He looked like he was runnin’on ’bout two hours sleep! You ever see clips of Elvis tryin’ to talk to an audience in those last years of his? The slurring, mumbling, the unfocused eyes? That’s our president! God help us all – that’s Obama! President Elvis -expletive- Obama! He’s either really-really tired all the time, or he’s over medicated, or he’s both. I keep waitin’ for him to say, “Thank yah…Thank yah very much,” at end of one of his speeches! (laughs) Ladies and gentlemen, Obama has left the building!  We all wish, huh?

…I don’t know what he is, but he ain’t no Democrat. He’s Barack Obama. He’s in it for himself, but he ain’t no Democrat. He’s an entirely different thing altogether. People are seeing that now – more are anyways. No, this guy is destroying Democrats, destroying the party. He ain’t no Democrat. Hell, maybe, just maybe, all that birther -expletive- is right…. Maybe he ain’t even an American.”

Bills in 4 States Require Birth Certificates For 2012 Election

Obama, you can run but you can’t hide.

Due to the unconscionable failure of Congress, state governments, and the Demonrat Party, you got away with not providing documentary proof of your constitutional eligibility to be President of the United State of America in 2008. But you will not in 2012!

Republican legislatures in four states — Texas, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona — have or plan to introduce bills that would require all candidates for president or vice president of the United States to show his or her birth certificate to be on the state ballot.


State GOP leaders grab issue of Obama eligibility

By Bob Unruh – WorldNetDaily – Nov 18, 2010

The GOP members of Congress who booted Democrat Rep. Nancy Pelosi from the speaker’s seat when they took the majority in the U.S. House this month may be the least of President Barack Obama’s concerns as the 2012 presidential campaign assembles.

That’s because in Pennsylvania, and in at least a couple of other states, there are Republican-controlled Houses, Senates and governors’ offices where being developed right now are plans to use state law to demand proof of constitutional eligibility from presidential candidates before they would be allowed on the state ballot.

From Pennsylvania, Georgia and Texas there already is confirmation of such plans. Arizona is likely to have the same plan, and other states are expected to be in the works as legislatures approach the dates when they will convene.


In Pennsylvania, there was excitement over the GOP majority of both houses of the state legislature as well as the governor’s office.

Assemblyman Daryl Metcalfe told WND he is preparing to circulate a memo among his fellow GOP lawmakers for cosponsors for his proposal that would demand documentation of constitutional eligibility. “We aren’t sworn in until Jan. 4,” he said. “Once we’re sworn in we’ll be introducing the legislation that would require presidential candidates to prove their natural born citizenship before they are allowed to file petitions to have their name on the state ballot.” He described it as a “problem” that there has been no established procedure for making sure that presidential candidates meet the Constitution’s requirements for age, residency and being a “natural born citizen.” “We hope we would be able to pass this legislation and put it into law before the next session,” he said. He said any one of the states imposing such a requirement would be effective in solving his concerns. “I think the public relations nightmare that would ensue if any candidate would thumb their noses at a single state would torpedo their campaign,” he told WND.


Another state that will be in play on the issue is Georgia, where Rep. Mark Hatfield confirmed to WND that he will have a similar proposal pending. He had introduced the legislation at the end of last year’s session to put fellow lawmakers on alert that the issue was coming.

“I do plan to reintroduce the bill,” he told WND today. “We’ll move forward with trying to get it before a committee.” In Georgia, Republicans hold majorities in both house of the legislature as well as “every constitutional statewide office,” he noted. “I would be optimistic that we can [adopt the legislation],” he said.

Hatfield said if only one or two states adopt such requirements, it readily will be apparent whether a candidate has issues with eligibility documentation or not. And while he noted a president could win a race without support from a specific state, a failure to qualify on the ballot “would give voters in other states pause, about whether or not a candidate is in fact qualified,” he said. “My goal is to make sure any person that aspires to be president meets the constitutional requirements,” he said. “This is a first step in that direction.”


It was last session when the Arizona House of Representatives adopted a provision that would have required documentation of eligibility from presidential candidates, but the measure died through the inaction of the state Senate in the closing days of the session. Sponsor Rep. Judy Burges told WND at the time that her plan would be renewed this session.


WND reported just days ago on a bill prefiled for the Texas Legislature by Rep. Leo Berman, R-Tyler, that would require such documentation. His effort was the first wave of a surging tide of developing questions that could be a hurdle to a second term for Obama, who escaped such demands last year when the Arizona Senate failed to act on a similar plan after the House approved it.

Berman’s legislation, House Bill 295, is brief and simple. It would add to the state election code the provision:

The secretary of state may not certify the name of a candidate for president or vice-president unless the candidate has presented the candidate’s original birth certificate indicating that the person is a natural-born United States citizen.

It includes an effective date of Sept. 1, 2011, in time for 2012 presidential campaigning.

Berman told WND he’s seen neither evidence nor indication that Obama qualifies under the Constitution’s requirement that a president be a “natural-born citizen,” a requirement not imposed on most other federal officers. “If the federal government is not going to vet these people, like they vetted John McCain, we’ll do it in our state,” he said. He noted the Senate’s investigation into McCain because of the Republican senator’s birth in Panama to military parents.

Berman also said there will be pressure on any lawmaker who opposes the bill, since voters would wonder why they wouldn’t want such basic data about a president revealed. And he said even if one state adopts the requirement, there will be national implications, because other states would be alerted to a possible problem.

“If Obama is going to run for re-election in 2012, he’ll have to show our secretary of state his birth certificate and prove he’s a natural-born citizen,” he said. “This is going to be significant.” Berman said he’s convinced there are problems with Obama’s eligibility, or else his handlers would not be so persistent in keeping the information concealed.

…much more continued at WND here

Wikipedia Took Down Entry on LtC Terry Lakin

Lt. Col. and Dr. Terrence (Terry) Lakin is a distinguished US Army surgeon and recipient of a Bronze Star who is undergoing court martial for refusing deployment orders on the grounds that his Commander in Chief (CIC) has not proven he is constitutionally eligibile to be CIC and President.

One would think that Dr. Lakin merits an entry in Wikipedia. And indeed, Wiki did have an entry on him; the URL for the entry is http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php\?title=Terrence_L._Lakin&oldid=396351151.

If you click the URL however, you won’t find the entry because Wikipedia has removed it, ostensibly because Lakin is not a noteworthy person. That is most curious because the same Wikipedia find three other Lakins sufficiently noteworthy to warrant each an entry. They are:

Have you ever heard of them, especially “American actress” Christine Lakin? Me neither!

H/t beloved fellow Tina.