Thursday, April 28, 2011

Convincing Proof: Obama Is A Phony

You can fool some of the people all the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time. ~ Abraham Lincoln

At long last, Barack Hussein Obama has released his birth certificate, and now the issue of his citizenship and subsequent eligibility to be President is finally put to rest, right?

Of course, who could argue with this solid proof?

Click to enlarge.

Seriously, folks. This astounds me. Who, besides the willfully ignorant, could accept this obvious forgery as legitimate?

I won't lie. I have thought this issue a mere distraction for a long time. There has been no question in my mind that Obama is indeed a natural born citizen of the United States. Of that, I had no doubt. All the suppositions and assumptions and convincing arguments could not convince me that Obama is not a legal natural born citizen of the United States.

Now that he has released his "actual birth certificate", I'm no longer so sure. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to see the obvious problems with this "document".

Look at the upper left hand corner. And then, compare the left border with the right border. See anything strange?

The so-called birth certificate was obviously and poorly cut and pasted onto a background with a nearly identical pattern. My God, the forger didn't even bother to trim the edges to complete the illusion of authenticity. He simply cut the forgery out and pasted it onto a nearly identical background pattern.

One would think in three years the forger could have perfected his art.

My 7-year old grandson could do a better, more convincing job.

Next, and probably most damning, look at the box labeled, "Race" beside his father's name.


Since when is Africa a race?

There are white people native to Africa. I'll bet there are Asians who are native to Africa. Is the continent of birth their race?

Obama was presumably born in 1961. (I say "presumably", because after this fallacy, nothing about the origins of Obama is certain) No one has ever disputed that fact.

But, I digress. Does anyone want to venture a guess as to what the proper and accepted term for a black person was in 1961? I'll spoil the fun for you.

It was "Negro".

Or, if that box on the document were to be consistent with the mother's race (which is recorded to be, "Caucasian") the race should read, "Negroid". Regardless, it certainly wouldn't be "African".

See, back in 1961, there were three sub races within the all encompassing human race:

Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongoloid, although the third was sometimes called Asian instead. I have never heard of a fourth race called "African".

I really don't know what to think about Obama's intent here.

I can't decide whether I think Obama is stupid or he thinks we are stupid, or if he is simply so arrogant and narcissistic, he doesn't really care if we buy his flim-flam or not.

At any rate, I am no longer convinced he is legitimate.

And, I know I am not alone.

Cross posted at American Descent

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Potential Candidates I Like

"Give no decision till both sides thou'st heard." ~ Phocylides

Now, for the promised post on potential Republican Presidential candidates that I like.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I like Rick Santorum. He has already declared his candidacy. Democrats and their puppets in the media have long attacked him for his strong family values. I don't see them lightening up. If he is to prevail, he'd better not have any skeletons in his closet, and he'd better not utter any word that could conceivably be misunderstood. He will need to be squeaky clean and above reproach.

Just advocating family values is enough to set the hounds loose on him.

Michele Bachmann. I admit, I didn't think anyone would suggest she couldn't be President because Republicans won't nominate a woman, but Commenter Glenn Chatfield offered exactly that opinion in the comments section of my previous post. Perhaps Glenn buys into the Democrat propaganda that Republicans are sexist. I'd hate to think that. Perhaps he will clarify. I believe, for true Conservatives, Ms. Bachmann is an ideal candidate. She espouses not only the family values Conservatives cherish, but she embraces sound fiscal policies as well.

I like her.

That said, the Democrat attack machine media would have a field day with her. She is a woman, and an attractive woman to boot, and that combination scares the heck out of the Liberals:

A woman with a mind.

To Liberals, that is something with which they are unfamiliar. Contrary to what Democrats say, they are secretly sexist. If Bachmann runs for president, the Democrats true colors will likely be revealed. They will say, as a woman, she can't be as strong and decisive as a man would. She will have to prove her strength and tenacity to win the necessary respect from the American voters. Remember what I pointed out previously:

The average American voter knows little, if anything other than what the leftist media tells them.

Again, like Rick Santorum, Michele Bachmann will have to be squeaky clean to avoid the media's character assassination tactics

My favorite candidate in the previous election was Duncan Hunter, U.S. Representative from California. I still like him, though it is highly doubtful he will even consider running. However, his son, Duncan Hunter Jr, has taken his father's place in the House of Representatives, and he is as Conservative as his father.

I would gladly vote for either if either of them chose to run.

Name recognition is a huge problem for the Hunters, though. Senior wasn't able to garner much of a following in the last election, but that's largely due to being nearly completely ignored by the most influential Republican pundits. Ann Coulter supported Hunter, and even scolded Sean Hannity for not giving Hunter equal support. He clearly represented my personal views better than any other candidate, and still does.

Probably the most viable potential candidate, in my humble opinion, is Herman Cain. This guy (along with Alan West) is the Democrat's worst nightmare:

A black man who is a Conservative.

And, not only is he a Conservative, but a man with real solutions to the problems created by the history making Barack Hussein Obama. A Herman Cain candidacy will almost certainly force the Democrat run media to fish or cut bait. Will they treat Cain with the respect he deserves as a black American (who they claim they revere)? Or will they spit out cleverly but thinly disguised racial epithets in their attacks on Cain?

I'm betting they will do the latter. Then, pretend they didn't really mean it the way it sounded.

He also may present something of a dilemma to the black voters. In 2008, 96% of black voters voted for Obama.

Two years later, after proving himself both incompetent and inept, a recent poll reported 96% of black voters said they would still vote for the liar-in-chief.

It is painfully clear blacks overwhelmingly voted for Obama simply because he is black.

If Herman Cain, a black man with obvious superior intellect runs against Obama, the choice will be a difficult one for those who vote based strictly on skin color. Especially if Cain can convince black voters that his economic recovery plan is the better of the two. And, he also has the added advantage of offering something Obama promised but failed to deliver:

True hope and change.

Obama had his chance and failed. Hopefully, enough black voters will recognize that fact and vote accordingly to make a difference. Many black voters may well throw their support in Cain's direction.

Obama won on a promise.

So can Cain. And, unlike Obama, Cain can deliver.

Alan West. This freshman Republican Representative from Florida has impressed Conservatives in the short time he's been a Representative. A former Marine Corps Lieutenant Colonel, he is skilled in military strategy which would be a great advantage while we are still engaged in three wars. Additionally, he is a brilliant man with brilliant ideas that could help alleviate the financial situation the nation now faces.

Also, like Herman Cain, West is a black man. And, being black, he has the same advantage Cain does. The only significant drawback is his relative inexperience in politics. Although, it could be argued that attaining the rank of Lieutenant Colonel in the Marine Corps requires the utilization of a certain amount of politics.

As we know, being inexperienced is not an issue for the media as their fawning love for Obama clearly indicates. Unless, of course, the candidate is a Republican. Then, it's open season.

Regardless, the Liberal media attack machine will find an easy target in Alan West. He will be derisively referred (as will Herman Cain, of course)to as an "Uncle Tom" or brainwashed by the White Republican rich man establishment. And, the obligatory attacks on West's lack of experience, thus demonstrating how low into the depths of hypocrisy the Democrats are willing to sink to champion their hero, Obama.

My dream ticket thus far? Herman Cain and Michele Bachmann.

I know there are others we can discuss, but I can't think of any more off hand.

If my two readers wish to add other potential candidates to this post, feel free.

I'd like to hear what you have to say.

Monday, April 25, 2011

Sometimes, No Choice Is Better Than Poor Choice

"The more alternatives, the more difficult the choice." ~ Abbe' D'Allanival

Ive been thinking of what it will take to unseat Barack Hussein Obama in the next Presidential election, and, from where I sit, the prospect is not particularly rosy.

Short of some miraculous Devine intervention or Obama somehow self destructing, I don't think he will lose.

The current crop of Republican Presidential hopefuls fails to impress me.

Don't get me wrong. Many of them are very capable of leading this country out of the mess Obama has created, but between the Liberal state run media attack machine and the inability of Republicans to repel such attacks, in addition to the leading candidates lack of the necessary charisma, it appears those candidates have a long row to hoe. And, it's uphill all the way.

We have Donald Trump.

The Donald? Are you kidding me?

Trump may be a fiscal Conservative but he's no Conservative. His interest in running for President is a publicity stunt.

The only American that would benefit from a Trump presidency is Donald Trump.

We already have a Narcissist in the oval office. We don't need another one. He isn't serious and he shouldn't be seriously considered for president.

Chris Christie. I thought for a while that the New Jersey Governor would be a good choice, but now, after learning more about his more moderate positions on various social issues, I no longer support him. He isn't Conservative enough for me. We've had enough of these middle-of-the road Presidents. The last thing we need is another George H. W. Bush. Christie's a good man, but he's not Conservative enough.

Sarah Palin. I love Ms. Palin. I love her strong Conservatism. She has a Conservative fire in her belly that will never be quenched or watered down by compromise.

But, she is unelectable. She made one huge mistake:

She quit.

Yes, I know why she quit, and I understand she had very good solid reasons for resigning as Alaska's Governor. I don't fault her for that. At the time, it was probably the best decision she could have made, but it destroyed any presidential aspirations she may have had. If she runs for President on the Republican ticket, all you will hear from the Democrats and their supportive comrades in the media will be "Yes, but, she quit."

That's just too big a disadvantage considering most voters know little more than what the mainstream media tells them. She wouldn't stand a chance of being elected.

Tim Pawlenty. Remember the relatively uninformed American voters mentioned above? Pawlenty doesn't have name recognition. I don't know enough about him to have an opinion. And, unfortunately, neither does the average voter. If voters don't know about him, they won't vote for him.

Haley Barbour. I like him but, he has the same problem as Pawlenty's. Not enough name recognition.

Newt Gingrich. He's already been a victim of the Media attack machine. There's simply been too much negative press about him. It doesn't matter if it's true or not. He cannot overcome the negative stigma attached to him. He cannot win.

Mitt Romney. He couldn't even defeat half-Liberal John McCain in the Republican primaries of the previous election. How has he improved his status since then? By implementing his own version of Obamacare in Massachusetts? I think not.

Mike Huckabee. I can't figure this guy out. He's all over the board. I like his social Conservatism, but would he increase the taxes or decrease them? I get mixed messages from him depending on which interviewer interviews him. I just don't know what to think. And, if the average American voter gets the same vibe, he's unelectable.

I know I haven't covered all the potential candidates. Who have I missed? There's several more on whom I have opinions, but this post is already too long to hold my two readers attention.

There are some I like, but so far, the ones I like have indicated they will not seek the nomination at this time.

I will cover them in a future post.

But, tell me what you think so far. Am I reading these potentials wrong?

Who do you like? Who don't you like?

Sunday, April 24, 2011

He's Alive!

"Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.
And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.
And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus.
And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:
And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?
He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee, Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again."
~ Luke 24:1-7

The founder of Islam, Mohammed, is dead. The founder of Buddhism, Buddha, is dead. The founder of Confucianism, Confucius, is dead. All founders of all the world's religions are dead.

Long dead.

Dead and gone.

Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity, is alive.

And that is the reason we celebrate this day.

Have a blessed Easter.

Friday, April 22, 2011

Good Friday

"Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed." ~ Isaiah 53: 4-5

The events that transpired on that day changed everything. Nothing has made more of an impact on the world and mankind as the death of this one solitary man.

And, nothing ever will.

Sunday, April 17, 2011

Politics Explained

One of the comments:

Water represents "the law". Banana represents God-given rights to pursue happiness, or your natural rights if you're atheist. These are rights you're born with, not "granted by government". We instituted our government (the constitution) to PROTECT our INDIVIDUAL rights - not "democratic rights" (majority rule). We're the monkeys. Evil men & women have turned it upside down and we've allowed it. Now, like the monkeys, we have been trained to think government is our master. Protest & get hosed.


Wednesday, April 06, 2011

National Tartan Day

"It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom – for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself." ~ Excerpt from the Scottish Declaration of Independence, signed at Arbroath Abbey, April 6, 1320.

On April 4, 2008, President George W. Bush signed a Presidential Proclamation making April 6th National Tartan Day.

This is the day set aside to celebrate the contributions made to the world by Scots and people of Scottish descent. April 6th was selected as National Tartan Day because it is the anniversary of the day that Scotland declared their independence from Great Britain.

On this day, Scots are supposed to wear their clan's tartan plaid, so, if any of you happen to see someone wearing a kilt today, that is the reason.

I am a descendent of Clan Gunn from the Northern Highlands of Scotland in the area around Caithness, in Sutherland. As yet, I cannot afford a kilt (they are expensive!), but I have a clan Gunn tartan plaid tie. It's somewhere in my house but I can't find it, so, instead of wearing my tie today, I am posting this graphic, which is the clan Gunn tartan plaid:

The clan Gunn motto is "Aut Pax aut bellum" which means "Either peace or war".

This is a picture of me wearing my clan Gunn tartan tie:

Ladies, go out and kiss a Scotsman today. Men, go out and kiss a Scottish Lassie, but get her permission first.

Everyone is a Scot today.

Saturday, April 02, 2011

Obama's Assault On The Second Amendment

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." --Second Amendment to the United States Constitution

My friend from High School sent this to me in an e-mail. I am suspending my self imposed rule about not copying and pasting other commentaries so I can copy and paste this:

Project Gunrunner Backfires on the Left

Barack Hussein Obama and his Socialist cadre, in their enthusiasm to "fundamentally transform the United States of America," have redoubled efforts to do what all tyrannical governments must do to establish absolute state supremacy and usurp Rule of Law -- disarm the people.

Leftists accomplish this through incremental implementation of gun confiscation measures, most of which are overt political machinations. These include legislation written and promoted by Leftist groups such as the American Bar Association, Physicians for Social Responsibility, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, the Violence Policy Center, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, and the Brady Campaign.

Current legislation under consideration includes H.R. 308 to limit rounds in magazines, S. 35 to lock in gun show registrations, S. 436 designed to "fix gun checks," and, most disturbing, the reauthorization of Section 215 of The Patriot Act, which permits the FBI to seize gun sale records (4473's) pursuant to "an authorized investigation." Regarding the latter, the Inspector General estimated that between 2003 and 2006, the FBI exceeded its authority under Section 215 in more than 6,000 instances.

The objective of most of this legislation is centralized registration, which provides the federal government with data on the owner of every gun in the U.S. Then, under the duress of, say, the collapse of our economy, Leftists will "justify" confiscation by way of such nefarious measures as an Executive Order -- just as they justified weapons confiscations after Hurricane Katrina.

"Rule one: Never allow a crisis to go to waste," right?

The generation that witnessed the adulteration of our Constitution by Franklin Roosevelt and his Useful Idiots during the Great Depression know exactly what I mean. Fortunately, growing ranks of Patriots across our nation are awakening to this very real threat against our Second Amendment rights.

As FDR aptly demonstrated, the primary method in the Left's playbook for advancing its agenda is to convert tragedy into political capital. That is precisely what they did with the shooting of Democrat Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and others in Tucson in January of this year, and that is the rallying point for current gun control legislation.

Of course, claiming "gun violence" is the problem, rather than social entropy institutionalized by FDR's policies and those of his Socialist successors, is a better fit with the Left's agenda.

Another case in point, and one that is now backfiring on the Obama administration, is Project Gunrunner, a government program run by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). As you may recall, ATF is an agency that exposed itself as a puppet for political agendas in the botched and bloody assaults at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992 and Waco, Texas, in 1993.

The ATF implemented Project Gunrunner in 2006 as a strategy to track weapon distribution networks between the U.S. and Mexican drug cartels -- a worthy goal on the surface. Problem is, once the guns crossed into Mexico, ATF lost most of its tracking capability, which is to say that efforts to follow the distribution trail and stem the tide ended at the border.

Enter the Obama administration's gun control agenda, which breathed new life into Gunrunner and re-established the ATF leadership's standard ops tempo: SNAFU.

While Project Gunrunner failed in charting weapons distribution channels south of the border, Democrats saw its utility as a means to implement new gun regulations north of the border by asserting that all the violence in the region is the result of gun sales in the U.S.

The Obama administration hoped to make a case that Mexican organized crime syndicates depend on illegal U.S. sales of so-called "assault weapons." In doing so, they hoped to revitalize their political agenda to register and regulate the sale of those weapons -- a major Leftist goal for the last two decades.

With its mission transformed, in 2009 and 2010 the ATF expanded Project Gunrunner offices to McAllen, Texas, El Centro, California, Las Cruces, New Mexico, Sierra Vista, Arizona, and Brownsville, Texas, and added new Gunrunner teams in Tucson and in El Paso, Texas. Project Gunrunner's focus became exposing the illegal sale of guns in the U.S. in support of Obama's political objectives.

But the ATF's Gunrunner is now the subject of a political firefight.

On 28 December 2010, I was contacted by a career federal agent who, like many of his colleagues, honors his oath to "support and defend" our Constitution, whose support and defense is contingent on the Second Amendment's prohibition against government infringement on the right of citizens to keep and bear arms.

The contacting agent, who has a good track record of identifying government agendas designed to thwart 2A rights, told me that he suspected the weapon used in the murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry on 14 December was among those lost by the ATF during the Gunrunner operation a few months earlier. Senior career agents in Phoenix and Tucson confirmed that some of the weapons recovered at the scene of the murder of Agent Terry were, indeed, Project Gunrunner weapons, but because the ATF took control of the weapons, it could evade the establishment of any ballistic link between Project Gunrunner and the bullet that killed Terry.

Further, the agent I spoke with confirmed that the mission of Project Gunrunner was now purely political, an effort to "implement the registration of 'assault-type' rifles purchased anywhere in the United States." Obama's political appointees at ATF rejected numerous objections from field agents, including supervisory agents. Some objections were career terminators, including that of the ATF's attaché in Mexico City, Darren Gil, whose objections resulted in forced retirement on 31 December 2010, just two weeks after the murder of Brian Terry.

Now, in response to the ATF's stonewalling on ballistics related to Agent Terry's murder, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, is demanding answers. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), ranking minority member of the Judiciary Committee, is leading Senate inquiries into the connection between Gunrunner and Terry's murder.

Additionally, Grassley has also inquired about the murder of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agent Jaime Zapata on 15 February, which may also involve weapons connected to Project Gunrunner.

For the record, a search of the ATF website, which prominently promotes Project Gunrunner, makes no mention of the murders of CBP Agent Terry or ICE Agent Zapata other than mentioning their names in off-the-shelf condolences.

For his part, Obama says of Gunrunner, "There may be a situation here which a serious mistake was made. If that's the case, then we'll find out and we'll hold someone accountable." He then asserted, "I did not authorize it; Eric Holder, the attorney general, did not authorize it. He's been very clear that our policy is to catch gunrunners and put them into jail."

(Note from the blog administrator: Obama is passing the buck as usual)

Obama and Holder may have enough cutouts to provide political insulation from Gunrunner fallout, but their politicization of its mission has not only been responsible for countless deaths in Mexico (more citizens were murdered in the city of Juarez in 2010 than in the nation of Afghanistan), but very likely the murder of two front-line U.S. agents trying to do their job in accordance with their oaths.

The attention focused on Project Gunrunner has been motivated primarily by politics: first, Obama's gun control agenda to politicize the operation, and now the Republicans' agenda to see how far up the chain of command knowledge of the operation went.

Upcoming testimony from Adam Price and Jeffrey Stirling, program managers for Gunrunner at ATF headquarters, may lead to appearances by Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, FBI Director Robert Mueller, DHS Director Janet Napolitano, Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

All the political shenanigans aside, the Left's assault on the Second Amendment is a much bigger contest: Liberty versus Tyranny.

To that end, it's worth recalling the words of James Madison: "The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation ... forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition."

James Madison's appointee to the Supreme Court, Justice Joseph Story, wrote in his 1833 "Commentaries on the Constitution," "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."

(Footnote: It is no small irony that as Obama endeavors to disarm the American people, he is contemplating how to arm "freedom fighters" (who are revealed, more each day, to be al-Qa'ida operatives or their useful idiots) in Libya. "I'm not ruling it out," says Obama. "If we wanted to get weapons into Libya, we probably could.")

Indeed, just call the ATF!

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander
Publisher, The Patriot Post

Note from me, the blog administrator: While I agree with the overall theme of the article, I believe there must be some regulation of guns in the United States. Records of ownership should be available for purposes of identifying perpetrators of violent crimes. Although probably most violent crimes are committed with stolen or unregistered weapons, some such crimes have been solved primarily because the weapons used in the commission of them were traced back to the owner. And, obviously, individuals with a criminal record should not be allowed to own guns.