Wishful thinking or conspiracy..?

One of the hottest stories in the world of blogging right now is the lawsuit concerning Barack Obama’s citizenship.While intriguing I have to believe that this issue comes from the Tin Foil Hat Brigade Anyone that reads this blog knows that I am no supporter of Obama. Further, that an Obama win could very well split this nation to the point of an actual civil war. Not to mention that a loss will lead to widespread rioting. We are in for a rough ride irrespective of who wins the election.

Then again, the popular election notwithstanding, we are not a democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic thank God! With a Bill of Rights that protects minorities from the majority.

Is, or has the United States ever been perfect? Of course not. This nation was, and is, a dynamic experiment in self governance. We do not have a King, although Chicago appears to have an aristocracy. We do not seek via government to impose religion upon the people by force of arms, although that has occurred in our past, and to a degree still do. Current laws seek to legislate morality in the conduct of religion. Least we not forget what happened at Waco.

Then we have the issue of effectively being able to defend ones self, family, and community. can you say gun control..? I knew you could!

So, after Obama is enthroned, what brand of tin foil should I make my hat from, so that I get the best reception for such mundane ideas as Liberty and Freedom..?

Tags: , , , , , , ,

2 Responses to “Wishful thinking or conspiracy..?”

  1. patricksperry Says:

    related from the Patriot Post;

    Speaking of the Leftmedia, The Los Angeles Times is aiding the Obama campaign this week by refusing to release a 2003 video of then-Illinois state senator Obama at a farewell banquet for Rashid Khalidi, whom the Times calls “an internationally known scholar, critic of Israel and advocate for Palestinian rights.” Khalidi, also a former Palestine Liberation Organization spokesman, was leaving Chicago for New York. He had been a neighbor, friend and dinner guest of the Obamas in Chicago’s upscale and ultra-liberal Hyde Park neighborhood.

    In April, the Times ran an article titled, “Allies of Palestinians see a friend in Barack Obama.” It mentioned the banquet and the video, which the Times will not release—unless Obama loses Tuesday. One of many anti-Israel moments that voters might just be interested in hearing was a young Palestinian’s recitation of a poem accusing Israel of terrorism and criticizing the U.S. for allying with Israel. Obama has publicly declared his support for Israel, but many Palestinians think he’s really on their side based on things he has said in private. In light of his relationship with Khalidi, that’s a safe bet. No doubt the events of the evening would hurt Obama’s case, providing the Times more than enough cause to withhold the evidence.

    John McCain, however, didn’t let the opportunity slip by, saying, “I’m not in the business of talking about media bias, but what if there was a tape with John McCain with a neo-Nazi outfit being held by some media outlet? I think the treatment of the issue would be slightly different.”

    Meanwhile, the Obama campaign has ousted three major newspapers—The Washington Times, Dallas Morning News and The New York Post—from its campaign plane. What do all three have in common? They endorsed John McCain.

  2. patricksperry Says:

    more from PP:
    Court Jesters: Berg’s suit thrown out

    Last Friday, Judge R. Barclay Surrick dismissed Philadelphia attorney Philip Berg’s lawsuit, which had challenged Barack Obama’s eligibility for the presidency. Berg contended Obama was born into his father’s Kenyan citizenship and thus was not a natural-born citizen of the United States, within the meaning of the Constitution’s Article II, section 1 requirement, and he requested full disclosure of pertinent documents by the Obama campaign.

    The objectionable aspect of the court’s decision is not so much its result as its reasoning. Berg’s claim seems weak; even if Obama had been born abroad, he could still be a natural-born citizen based on his mother’s U.S. citizenship. (8 U.S. Code, sec. 1401.) But the dismissal rested not on the suit’s weakness but a citizen/voter’s lack of standing to object. The court found a citizen’s interest “too vague and its effects too attenuated to confer standing on any [voter].” In other words, although a citizen has standing to challenge the government any time she is “disturbed” by the sight of a public park accommodating a Christmas tree or a Boy Scouts picnic, no such standing exists where a voter objects to a man’s assuming the presidency of the United States in violation of the Constitution.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: