Obama Supports Birthers

Birther, the name for those who question the legitimacy of BHO's presidency under the constitutional American birth requirement, have gained more fuel. The newly elected governor of Hawaii reopened the controversy by vowing to release what ever documentation he can under Hawaiian law. Left wing pundit, Chris Matthews, of the tingling leg fame, has also called on the president to release his birth certificate. A recent poll found that only 58% of the respondents were convinced that BHO was born in the United States and therefore eligible to be president. The president has produced what is essentially an affidavit from Hawaii stating that the certificate is on file. Although this is not the best evidence that he claims is available, he says it is adequate to meet constitutional requirements. This is considered a 'short form' Hawaiian certificate. The left leaning press, have not press him, until now.

In the view of Chickenshit New World, the debate has been ended by the president himself. In the recent election he accused the US Chamber of Commerce of illegally accepting foreign campaign contributions. He reasoned that this was something the people deserved to know and therefore he would not drop his accusations until they produced their records to the contrary. His left leaning media sycophants accepted and reiterated this logic. Therefore it appears that the president supports the birther claims until he produces his birth certificate or other definitive proof to the contrary.

See the Washington Post article from the election campaign:

'President Obama, speaking at a rally in Philadelphia, said "the American people deserve to know who is trying to sway their elections" and raised the possibility that foreigners could be funding his opponents.
"You don't know," Obama said at the rally for Senate candidate Joe Sestak and other Democrats. "It could be the oil industry. It could even be foreign-owned corporations. You don't know because they don't have to disclose."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/10/AR2010101004009.html?wprss=rss_politics

Obama Kicks Arse

President Obama says he wants to kick some ass regarding the Gulf oil leak. He has certainly been kicking arse regarding foreign policy. The Obama doctrine is ARSA.

A: Appease
R: Retreat
S: Surrender
A: Apologise

Will War Save the Obama Presidency?

The nations of the world are disingenuously venting their indignation toward Israel just as our press is wrongly characterizing the Arizona matter. The negativity directed toward both is unfounded when the facts are actually considered. The Arizona law is no more stringent that the US Code. It calls for enforcement by state police of illegally present foreign nationals, which is nothing that is not already being done. Moreover, the law itself, by its own terms, several times states that racial profiling is not allowed. Anyway, the opponents admit to not even knowing what the law actually says. Neither do the opponents of Israel seem to know what actually happened regarding the boarding of the Turkish ship by Israeli commandos. Israel has been stopping all shipping to the Gaza strip for three years. "Humanitarian aid," which means almost anything short of weapons or terrorists is allowed in.

The captains of these Turkish flagged ships knew that there was a blockade. They were either trying to get contraband in or trying to create an incident. It appears that both motives may have been involved. The worse result would be for Israel to cave to international pressure and stop the blockade, thus allowing their enemies in Gaza to rearm. They may be forced to do just that if the Turkish or some other power's navy protects the next convoy and no power supports Israel.

A strong US foreign policy response is called for. Such as: inform Great Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Greece, maybe a few others, that the US requests their moral support for Israel in the UN. If not, we should advise them that we intend to withdraw from the UN. We should indeed withdraw if we do not receive some support for the US and Israel.

A great speech opportunity for a senior US diplomat would then arise. He or she could recount, before the UN, the various failings of that organisation over the years and its refusal to support the US at critical junctures. (Our diplomat should attempt to sound like an offended Frenchman as much as possible.) The speech would then briefly touch on the relevant details of the current Israeli incident and the frankly disingenuous response of most of the world. Our diplomat should then gather his notes into his attache case and walk out. Of course the current administration is joining in the unfounded attack on Israel so there is little chance of the proper response. On the other hand, even Obama may see a strong response as the best chance to avoid war. War of course probably saved the FDR presidency but that would not happen for Obama. The nation's voters would recognise that he is the last person, along with his cohorts, to be in office during a serious war.

Dubai Leads the Way

Dubai, which is essentially an independent city state in the United Arab Emirates is experiencing severe economic troubles. Why would that be? It is a beautiful place, in part because of the vast government and government related investment in infrastructure and other public building, including the creation of a whole new island. It's apparently hard to walk down the wide new sidewalks without bumping into a fabulous palace-like structure. Dubai is, after all, one of the fabulously rich oil nations on the Arabian Sea (or Persian Gulf if you prefer).

Maybe the vast 'investment' in infrastructure is part of the problem. Those fabulous palaces are apparently for the most part vacant. This situation is similar to the financial panic of 1837 in this country. Free market economists have blamed that on over investment in infrastructure. This had been spurred on by the inflation of the central bank before Andy Jackson was able to close it down. (He was the first one to abolish the Fed.) Like FDR, Barack Hussein Obama's economic theorizing says that 'investment' by the government in infrastructure and related projects is just what we need. Actually it is not what we need but I do not blame the president for not knowing the unknowable. That is why the market, without government intervention, is the only mechanism for deciding what needs to be produced to satisfy society's most urgent needs. If you do not understand that, I have a bridge to nowhere that you might be interested in.

Bill Cunningham's Rating Set To Improve

According to Billy Cunningham on his Sunday radio talk show, he is only number 19 on the Barack Husein Obama [BHO] enemies list. After some of his remarks tonight, I think he may make the top ten. He says that Al Gore is a fake, a fraud, and a farce (also a clown and a sycophant). Jimmy Carter is an old fool and BHO did nothing to deserve the Nobel Prize. He later noted the Nevile Chamberlain was considered for a Nobel Prize just before the start of WWII, which he helped to start by backing down from Adolph Hitler. BHO appears to be an appeaser in like manner.

I note that in some translations of "The Emperor's New Clothes," the fake tailors are awarded a prize for their beautiful work, which no one had the courage to admit they could not see.

Mr. Cunningham talked about BHO organizations ACORN and the Apollo Alliance and the evils inherent therein.

Mr. Cunningham goes on to discuss the past calls from feminists for the resignation of various Republicans and conservatives for sexual contact with younger female employees. (Or even foolish allegations, as in the case of Clarance Thomas.) According to feminists, these relatively innocuous actions were the epitome of exploitation. He asks why the rules are different for liberals such as Bill Jefferson (B. J.) Clinton and Dave Letterman. He also asks why the remarks of Letterman regarding Sarah Palin and her daughters are regarded as OK by feminists and liberals and the press. He asks about the lack of concern about Roman Polanski, of which Oprah says that he was not guilty of rape rape. Mr. Cunningham and his guest, John Ziggler, discuss many other interesting examples.

I wonder about these things. Obviously many feminists are not really concerned about the treatment of women just as many environmentalists are not concerned about the environment. They are using their feigned outrage as a means of advancing their political aims. The press is obviously going along because it supports the same political aims, as does BHO. I should be on that list too.

Lack of Consistancey or Just Plain Lying

Paul Krugman says: Bush deficit - bad. Obama deficit - good.

How to understand it all?

see von Mises Institute's recent article http://mises.org/story/3691

Why Sarah?

The reason that I opposed the candidate Obama from the start was not for any of the reasons that the media, the democrat propagandists (which is really the same thing), or even the average Democratic voter (including some of my relatives) said that I opposed him. That is, because he was part black, the son of a young white mother seduced by a successful foreign black intellectual, a past dope smoking student radical, a secret Muslim, and the Antichrist. (I may not have these quite right and probably am leaving out a lot, but really, I cannot be bothered with remembering a lot of irrelevant nonsense.) The reason that I opposed him then and now is that he is a socialist. I stated that in a letter to the editor, (which the Seattle PI actually published) in response to an offensive cartoon that they ran alleging the above motives to McCain supporters. I thought that there was evidence, based upon his past affiliations, that he would attempt to destroy the last vestiges of our free market capitalism and I was right.

There is not a lot on which to base ones support of Sarah Palin either but there is enough evidence for hope. With her also, we cannot look to the democrat influenced press for much help defining her important qualities. They are stuck on stupid as usual, as they were with Barack Obama. I do not care about her clothing, her diction, or her family as much as I care about her opinions. I recently did see a web news article that quoted her facebook. She apparently wrote that her political views were: "less government intervention, greater energy independence, stronger national security, and much-needed fiscal restraint." Additionally, "whatever her plans, they definitely include continuing to run against the media," according to Melinda Henneberger http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/07/05/sarah-palins-higher-calling?icid=sphere_blogsmith_inpage_poldaily

When Sarah Palin was chosen by John McCain as his vice presidential running mate, I finally felt some optimism in that dismal time of foreboding catastrophe. So far, I have not been disappointed with Sarah, or with the foreboding. The press and the Democrats (again, I repeat myself) are apparently in agreement that she is a strong and promising force for change, otherwise why would they attack her?