Posts Tagged ‘birth certificate’
I’ve not been really much into the entire birth certificate thing and, really, there hasn’t been much to the story as far as The Rabid Conservative has been concerned. But I do find it amusing that, after all the yammering from Orly Taitz and World Net Daily, what has been produced is already being torn apart as a fake.
Which brings us to The Donald. No one can now deny that Trump was able to do something that Ms. Taitz and the host of the birther movement was unable to do – get Obama to show his long form birth certificate. With the poll numbers blowing up against That One, well, it stands to reason that this whole thing was win-win for Trump. If Obama didn’t release the document, then Trump can continue to press the issue and demonstrate that Obama has things to hide. If he releases it, then Trump can claim the win and say that he was able to force the Bam-ster’s hand. (not that it was an overly big deal for Obama to do this, but it makes one wonder what the big deal was)
This is huge for Trump because he can use this to say that he doesn’t need to use the government’s bureaucratic machine to get something done – he can rally the people. Granted, Trump has a pretty big bully pulpit and can connect with the public, more than most in this country, but that’s what it’s about. That’s how Obama won in the first place – and that’s how any candidate wins.
We might like Trump or not, but no one can deny that Obama is not unbeatable and can be hit by an undeclared candidate. Well played, Mr. Trump.
Folks, I also want to caution – conservatives will never win when we lower ourselves to mudslinging and feeding into the negativity. We have a strong powerful message: lower taxes, limited government, fiscal responsibility, moral leadership in the world, strong national defense, and an American identity that makes one proud; we need to focus squarely on that.
I don’t normally relish the thought of going to bat for Barack Obama. Granted he’s still the President of the United States (which makes me just want to punch a wall every time I think about it).
Today the National Enquirer is trying to sensationalize and run a story that would equate to Lewinsky Reloaded. Turns out, the target is Barack Obama and the supposed mistress is a 35 year old campaign staffer by the name of Vera Baker. Evidently, the information got “leaked” that Baker was banished from the campaign by Michelle Obama. The story initially broke back around 2009 and it would seem that The Enquirer is trying to dredge it back up.
I don’t really take for truth most, if any, of what The National Enquirer says, since they would run stories about hybrid bat people, this celeb bedding down with that no named pool boy, etc etc. Even still, the stories that they do run – well, none of their staff has the cast iron gravitas to tie his/her name to the rubbish.
All the news that’s unfit to print, right guys?
As we all remember with rolling eyes, former President Bill Clinton got his hand caught in the proverbial nookie jar when it was revealed that he was having an…ahem…”inappropriate relationship” with Monica Lewinsky. But it would seem that The Enquirer, now out of gas from the “Tiger Woods putting on another green” story, is gunning for something a bit more juicier, edgier, racier.
More eye rolling…
Do I believe this story to be true? Not at all. And while I still have a few reservations about whether or not Obama was actually born in Hawai’i, despite all the WorldNetDaily/Orly Tait circumstantial “evidence” to the contrary (not to mention the March 25, 2010 remarks on the Kenyan Parliament floor – subsequently removed from the Kenyan Parliament website) I am pretty certain that Obama isn’t that stupid to cheat on or get caught cheating on his wife.
Considering that Michelle Obama is pretty scary to be taken lightly as a “woman scorned”.
But this post isn’t about all that. It’s about the incessant appetite that America seems to have with scandalous stories about prominent figures and mistresses. And for years on end, tabloid papers like The National Enquirer have been feeding that craving. Never mind anything about good journalistic integrity, fact checking, and responsible reporting of actual news, versus slinging slander, The Enquirer has made its money by selling stories about stuff that people want to hear, whether or not it’s actually true. And it would seem that the saucier the story is, the faster that the tabloids are looking to put it out there.
I guess the one thing that I really want to comment about, after it’s all said and done is a warning to my fellow conservatives. In theory, if Bam-ster actually got involved in such a scandal, the damage to the Democrat Party would be so extreme that it would nearly guarantee GOP control of Congress after just four years of Democrat control. And Bam would not at all be game for a 2012 run without some serious PR damage control and a widespread suspension of belief/truth by the main populace of Americans. I mean, let’s hypothesize for a moment. Let’s say that Bam Bam was just stupid enough to pull a Slick Willie…do you think someone like Robert Gibbs (fibs) would be able to tap dance that good and pull Bam’s…uh…bacon out of the fire?
Again, I’m sure Bam is not that stupid. Granted he’s very a rank amateur when it comes to being a good government executive, with all of his time in the Oval Office being on-the-job training. But I am pretty well certain that he’s not that irresponsibly brash in his arrogance that he would amount to this. We knew about Clinton, even before he got into office. Bam’s not that stupid; let me reiterate.
So why the story?
My guess, and this is the cynical, conspirator side of my psyche talking, that this little ditty is designed to grab the attention of those on the Right Wing who would just love to watch Obama go down in something reminiscent of Clinton.
Folks, I also want to caution – conservatives will never win when we lower ourselves to mudslinging and feeding into the negativity. We have a strong powerful message: lower taxes, limited government, fiscal responsibility, moral leadership in the world, strong national defense, and an identity that makes one proud; we need to focus squarely on that. If we resorted to this kind of stuff – stuff we would expect from the Hollywood-backed Left Wing,
Oh look, here’s a little nugget about Rielle Hunter, former John Edwards mistress talking about how she’s “responsible” for bringing down the only politician and presidential candidate (abeit two-time/two-timing loser) with Harpo Winfrey herself (another Obama cheerleader…).
Perhaps there’s some good dirt in there?
Oh yeah, right.
[after telling Jay that they're going to check the "hot sheets," Kay pulls up to a newsstand and buys a pile of supermarket tabloids]
Jay: *These* are the hot sheets?
Kay: Best investigative reporting on the planet. But go ahead, read the New York Times if you want. They get lucky sometimes.
Jay: I can’t believe you lookin’ for tips in the supermarket tabloids!
Kay: Not lookin’ for. Found.
So, the Supreme Court, starting today is going to actually have a look at this:
To see if the guy written thereon can have this:
I never thought that such a Hail Mary would go this far, but evidently, there are a bunch of people out there who really REALLY think that Barack Obama is not qualified to be president. So today, SCOTUS is going to look over the legal challenge and see if there’s something there.
Now, me, I don’t particularly buy all the hyperbole about Obama’s place of birth. Personally, I think it’s an overcooked turkey, personally. But still, SCOTUS is going to look at it, which tells me that either SCOTUS thinks there might be something here, or they want to put this to bed once and for all.
Either way, it should be interesting to see – considering the story has been buried for months without so much as a glimmer in the main stream media. I’m surprised that the LA Times ran this piece this morning, considering they buried the Ayers tape – but that’s another matter.
So what happens if it actually is found that Obama can’t be president? Yeah, I know, snowball in hell, but…let’s just say…
Well, this is a very enticing question because it’s a question of a procedure that has really never been used. Say the president-elect, come January, become unable to assume the office of President. Who gets it?
I would say, Joe Biden. Since the people don’t actually vote for the president, but rather, choose electors who pledge their votes to a candidate, the line of succession would apply to the president-elect and vice-president-elect, as it would to the president and vice-president formally. Biden would be sworn in as President and then would select a Vice-President, which would have to have the approval of Congress, if one wasn’t chosen before inauguration. If such a selection would have be made before January 20th, then it would fall, again, to Joe Biden to make his selection.
Let’s say the both got wiped out – what then? Well, it goes to whatever the Electoral College says. And if no candidate gets 270 votes, then, constitutionally, it goes to the House to select the President from the top three vote winners and the Senate for the Vice-President out of the top two. And if it didn’t get resolved by January 20th, then Speaker Pelosi would step up as Acting President, since she’s third-in-line as Speaker of the House. Wouldn’t that be a kick in the pants?
Have a good day, y’all.