Saturday, November 15, 2008

'Constitutional crisis' Looming Over Obama's Birth Location

The California secretary of state should refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until President-elect Barack Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office, alleges a California court petition filed on behalf of former presidential candidate Alan Keyes and others.

read more digg story

While reading through the comments over at Digg, I found a Peter Hitchens article. Here's a copy:

Quote:
The night we waved goodbye to America... our last best hope on Earth

Last updated at 5:57 PM on 10th November 2008

Anyone would think we had just elected a hip, skinny and youthful replacement for God, with a plan to modernise Heaven and Hell – or that at the very least John Lennon had come back from the dead.

The swooning frenzy over the choice of Barack Obama as President of the United States must be one of the most absurd waves of self-deception and swirling fantasy ever to sweep through an advanced civilisation. At least Mandela-worship – its nearest equivalent – is focused on a man who actually did something.

I really don’t see how the Obama devotees can ever in future mock the Moonies, the Scientologists or people who claim to have been abducted in flying saucers. This is a cult like the one which grew up around Princess Diana, bereft of reason and hostile to facts.

It already has all the signs of such a thing. The newspapers which recorded Obama’s victory have become valuable relics. You may buy Obama picture books and Obama calendars and if there isn’t yet a children’s picture version of his story, there soon will be.

Proper books, recording his sordid associates, his cowardly voting record, his astonishingly militant commitment to unrestricted abortion and his blundering trip to Africa, are little-read and hard to find.

If you can believe that this undistinguished and conventionally Left-wing machine politician is a sort of secular saviour, then you can believe anything. He plainly doesn’t believe it himself. His cliche-stuffed, PC clunker of an acceptance speech suffered badly from nerves. It was what you would expect from someone who knew he’d promised too much and that from now on the easy bit was over.

He needn’t worry too much. From now on, the rough boys and girls of America’s Democratic Party apparatus, many recycled from Bill Clinton’s stained and crumpled entourage, will crowd round him, to collect the rich spoils of his victory and also tell him what to do, which is what he is used to.

Just look at his sermon by the shores of Lake Michigan. He really did talk about a ‘new dawn’, and a ‘timeless creed’ (which was ‘yes, we can’). He proclaimed that ‘change has come’. He revealed that, despite having edited the Harvard Law Review, he doesn’t know what ‘enormity’ means. He reached depths of oratorical drivel never even plumbed by our own Mr Blair, burbling about putting our hands on the arc of history (or was it the ark of history?) and bending it once more toward the hope of a better day (Don’t try this at home).

I am not making this up. No wonder that awful old hack Jesse Jackson sobbed as he watched. How he must wish he, too, could get away with this sort of stuff.

And it was interesting how the President-elect failed to lift his admiring audience by repeated – but rather hesitant – invocations of the brainless slogan he was forced by his minders to adopt against his will – ‘Yes, we can’. They were supposed to thunder ‘Yes, we can!’ back at him, but they just wouldn’t join in. No wonder. Yes we can what exactly? Go home and keep a close eye on the tax rate, is my advice. He’d have been better off bursting into ‘I’d like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony’ which contains roughly the same message and might have attracted some valuable commercial sponsorship.

Perhaps, being a Chicago crowd, they knew some of the things that 52.5 per cent of America prefers not to know. They know Obama is the obedient servant of one of the most squalid and unshakeable political machines in America. They know that one of his alarmingly close associates, a state-subsidised slum landlord called Tony Rezko, has been convicted on fraud and corruption charges.

They also know the US is just as segregated as it was before Martin Luther King – in schools, streets, neighbourhoods, holidays, even in its TV-watching habits and its choice of fast-food joint. The difference is that it is now done by unspoken agreement rather than by law.

If Mr Obama’s election had threatened any of that, his feel-good white supporters would have scuttled off and voted for John McCain, or practically anyone. But it doesn’t. Mr Obama, thanks mainly to the now-departed grandmother he alternately praised as a saint and denounced as a racial bigot, has the huge advantages of an expensive private education. He did not have to grow up in the badlands of useless schools, shattered families and gangs which are the lot of so many young black men of his generation.

If the nonsensical claims made for this election were true, then every positive discrimination programme aimed at helping black people into jobs they otherwise wouldn’t get should be abandoned forthwith. Nothing of the kind will happen. On the contrary, there will probably be more of them.

And if those who voted for Obama were all proving their anti-racist nobility, that presumably means that those many millions who didn’t vote for him were proving themselves to be hopeless bigots. This is obviously untrue.

I was in Washington DC the night of the election. America’s beautiful capital has a sad secret. It is perhaps the most racially divided city in the world, with 15th Street – which runs due north from the White House – the unofficial frontier between black and white. But, like so much of America, it also now has a new division, and one which is in many ways much more important. I had attended an election-night party in a smart and liberal white area, but was staying the night less than a mile away on the edge of a suburb where Spanish is spoken as much as English, plus a smattering of tongues from such places as Ethiopia, Somalia and Afghanistan.

As I walked, I crossed another of Washington’s secret frontiers. There had been a few white people blowing car horns and shouting, as the result became clear. But among the Mexicans, Salvadorans and the other Third World nationalities, there was something like ecstasy.

They grasped the real significance of this moment. They knew it meant that America had finally switched sides in a global cultural war. Forget the Cold War, or even the Iraq War. The United States, having for the most part a deeply conservative people, had until now just about stood out against many of the mistakes which have ruined so much of the rest of the world.

Suspicious of welfare addiction, feeble justice and high taxes, totally committed to preserving its own national sovereignty, unabashedly Christian in a world part secular and part Muslim, suspicious of the Great Global Warming panic, it was unique.

These strengths had been fading for some time, mainly due to poorly controlled mass immigration and to the march of political correctness. They had also been weakened by the failure of America’s conservative party – the Republicans – to fight on the cultural and moral fronts.

They preferred to posture on the world stage. Scared of confronting Left-wing teachers and sexual revolutionaries at home, they could order soldiers to be brave on their behalf in far-off deserts. And now the US, like Britain before it, has begun the long slow descent into the Third World. How sad. Where now is our last best hope on Earth? /quote

Wow...That's quite a hard hitting piece. A lot of truth, though. Funny how an outside observer from the UK had the audacity to actually state the real truth - unlike our Media of Mass Deception here in the U.S. The author hit the nail right on its head:


They grasped the real significance of this moment. They knew it meant that America had finally switched sides in a global cultural war. Forget the Cold War, or even the Iraq War. The United States, having for the most part a deeply conservative people, had until now just about stood out against many of the mistakes which have ruined so much of the rest of the world.

[T]hese strengths had been fading for some time, mainly due to poorly controlled mass immigration and to the march of political correctness. They had also been weakened by the failure of America’s conservative party – the Republicans – to fight on the cultural and moral fronts.

They preferred to posture on the world stage. Scared of confronting Left-wing teachers and sexual revolutionaries at home, they could order soldiers to be brave on their behalf in far-off deserts. And now the US, like Britain before it, has begun the long slow descent into the Third World. How sad. Where now is our last best hope on Earth?



HT: Mail Online

8 comments:

Sosthenes said...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article5142206.ece

spud tooley said...

if you can find one single fact in amongst all the hyperbole and screeching grandiosity both you and the author himself are supposedly railing against, please break it out into bulleted points, please.

one thing you've yet to do, if you really feel like americans are 'dazed and confused', is apologize for the ignorance, intolerance and incompetence you foisted among not only america but the entire world the past eight years, which has made possible this wholly reasonable frenzy for ANYONE who could step forward and fog a mirror. any blame for the insanity the 'obamaborgs' are showing lies first at the feet of the right-wing who were blinded by their own 'man put here by God's hand' eight years ago.

and, having reached that conclusion, i guess in retrospect you shouldn't be too hard on yourselves - after all, God must not be that great of a judge of character or capability, either.

if the sky is falling, chicken little, it's due in large part to a lot of loud, frenzied hammering you've been doing on the floor above us for so many years. all of us down here have grown rather tired of having to move the pails on this floor from one dripping leak to another. if we decided to try another landlord, it's only because you first worked to prove the adage about a house divided against itself.

mike rucker
fairburn, georgia, usa
mikerucker.wordpress.com

Gary Baker said...

"all of us down here have grown rather tired of having to move the pails on this floor from one dripping leak to another."

I know what you mean Mike. When John McCain and other Republicans first raised the red flag about the mortgage crisis, Barney Frank had to slap him away from that red herring. They had important business to do about investigating why US attorneys were fired. It didn't matter tat no laws were broken. Or all of those hearings that congress held declaring that Bush and Cheney leaked confidential information, only to ignore the conclusion because it turned out that it was a democrat that did it.

If the democrat controlled congress really cared about the people of this country, they would have pursued real problems. Instead, they ignored their own faults, seeking only to pursue things that would gain them power. Not that I'm claiming the republicans were much better. I am simply stating that any of the democrats claiming to be acting in the best interest of the country are being completely dishonest. Just like you.

I don't blame you that much anymore. I realize that when you lie, you simply speak the only language you know.

Christinewjc said...

Mike -

It is not only me that is concerned about Obama's citizenship. Go read Citizen Wells today. Link is on my sidebar.

It may not matter to you, personally, whether or not your "guy" is a natural born citizen. But it does matter to thousands - and once the word gets out in the MSM - hopefully it will matter to millions, that our Founding Fathers had the extreme intelligence to place in our Constitution that natural born citizenship status is necessary for POTUS.

spud tooley said...

gary, unlike you, i'm concerned enough about things other than how bad another comment writer always makes me look. so i'll look past yet another childish swipe you copied from 'witty comebacks for dummies' at the end of your last comment and try to educate the readers of this blog; i can't keep you from reading it yourself, so if you learn a thing a two, i will not claim responsibility.

to think that ANY one occurence of the past eight years is THE reason for the ever-deepening hole we're end is two things: 1, stupid, and 2, just what i bet the fat cats trying to get taxpayer money into their suddenly empty pockets want us to waste time doing. the real start of the mess goes back to 2001, when the fed chairman began dancing at the end of puppet strings to lower interest rates to insane levels. this was done in part at the administration's direction, who knew that the economy was soon to look like a humongous mess, and wanted to get an overheated housebuilding segment going to make it look like things were going ok. what we've seen, though, is that even the veneer of that wore away, and further exacerbated the problem when all was said and done.

both sides of the aisle have no doubt danced their normal steps as the piper has played. the talking heads on both sides - talk radio on the right, and your beloved MSM on the left - want to keep repeating one or two factors over and over and over so that people who cannot think for themselves (i won't mention his name) continue to redirect the interrogation lamps from where they really need to shine.

when you begin to realize how we continue to parrot lines that others seem to have already written for us, it gets pretty scary.

where in scripture is the passage where it talks about things getting so bad that even the elect could have been deceived if the days had not been cut short? there's a possible fulfilled prophecy for you, christine. i might even go along with you on that one.

i'm just not so sure the days will be cut short in time...

mike rucker
fairburn, ga, usa
mikerucker.wordpress.com

Gary Baker said...

Hi Mike,

I can understand why you might resent the idea of thinking, whether of one occurrence or many. Still you might give it a try. If you did, you would realize that the administration had zero traction to make the Fed dance. Period. Lower interest rates were entirely justified considering the hit that the financial sectors had taken after 9/11. Had Clinton done anything to actually pursue terrorists, that might not have been the case, but he had his opportunities and, like so many cigars, they went up in smoke.

The simple truth is that the democrats were in control of congress and had the regulatory responsibility for ensuring that the checks for safe lending were observed. They either ignored those responsibilities or actively worked against them, pushing loans to un-credit worthy borrowers for the sake of lobbyist cash and political paybacks such as we have just observed. As for parroting talking points, best check your feathers. I can see a few cracker crumbs. The only part of your last comment that I really give much credence to is that you do not care how you look on line since dishonest and ignorant are generally the appearance you represent. For example, in your comment prior to that, you mention something about others trying to put buckets under leaks caused by the Bush administration. False. Period. The democrats were alerted to major leakage. Their response was to slap down the messenger. About the only issue of note that I can really recall the democrats addressing was increasing the minimum wage, a move which many conservatives guessed would raise unemployment. Guess what? Unemployment went up, only the democrats blamed Bush for that too. Buy a clue, Mike. You can either swallow the garbage that the liberals put out and watch things get really worse, or you can start to open your eyes.

Christinewjc said...

Here's an interesting website and video to view:

How Obama Got Elected

It made me embarrassed for my country to see proof about how uninformed so many people were about Obama and many aspects of this election.

spud tooley said...

that's pretty funny.

but it gave me an idea for another man-on-the-street Q&A. picture a sunday morning, standing on the steps of a white-columned church, parking lot full, the bell rings at noon, and the pews empty. you grab a couple of people, hang the mic over their heads, hit 'record' on the camera and ask:

"Hi. You just came out of church, right? What happens at death to someone who's not a Christian?"

hemming, hawing.

"Did you tell anyone about that this morning - maybe when you stopped and got gas, or a cup of coffee, or waved at the neighbor?"

we can make videos that prove all kinds of positions. just ask michael moore. and oliver stone. and the folks who did zeitgest.

this clip proves a couple of things: (1) most people think the federal government is not a factor in their lives; (2) regardless of whether it's left-leaning or right-leaning, the media has never really cared about substance.

unless we get involved, we will continue to get the government we deserve. i'm going to an 'end the fed' rally here in atlanta on saturday ... not sure what kind of waco whackos might show up, but i guess any assemblage of people that would allow me to intrude is already suspect...

-mr