For Ted Kennedy it was Chappaquiddick. For Gary Hart is was Monkey Business. For John Kerry it was swiftboat crews. At any rate, the Democrats have a long and distinguished history of failed Presidential hopes resulting from explosive discoveries coming to light that torpedoed their aspirations to the highest office in the land.
Ok, with Kennedy it wasn’t so much an explosion as just a sinking ship (or car).
Which brings us to the point of today’s post. Something came to my attention today that all of you obamaniacs need to pay attention to. Someone posted a response to a Sedalia Democrat letter today: “I feel whats scary is to support a divisive, war mongering de-regulator such as Senator McCain and an unvetted, extremely intellectually challenged, naive Sarah Palin!”
In responding to this I let the McCain stuff pass because except for the divisive part it’s true. As a Republican he is far closer to the Democrats than Obama is to the Republicans. When Jim Jeffords switched parties to become a Dem, the negotiations were for either him or McCain. Jeffords won the poker hand so he became the Democrat. While McCain has voted with more moderates and Dems, Obama has voted a straighter ‘Crat party line, managing to attain the most unwavering liberal record in the current Senate and possibly in its history. I say this not to point out his status as King Lib, but to point to his failure (or refusal) to work with conservatives anywhere near the degree of that war mongering Mr. Mc worked with the liberals, so no reasonable person can label him divisive and Obama as a uniter. But I digress.
My real issue here is with his comments about the most popular governor in the US today.
Follow up:
He said she’s stupid and naïve, both of which are subjective observations that he’s entitled to. What I take issue with is his characterization of her as unvetted. He did a great job learning the talking points, but factually that one is incorrect. From the time she was announced, the liberal media has dug everywhere they could think of to find the dirt, literally swarming her hometown and state with reporters hell bent on digging up the piece of dirt that would lead to her undoing, and this mass media slam-fest is still going on. In her case they couldn’t find any dirt, so they call her “unvetted”. Factually incorrect because she has been thoroughly vetted, but they just can’t find anything to hammer her on.
I’m not going to go into her accomplishments because that’s just so much blah, blah, blah. I want to stick with this vetting thing and ask you about the messiah, lord Barack, the Obama. Has he been thoroughly vetted? And I’m not talking about the Ayers-Dohrn, Wright, Flager stuff. That’s been beat to death and if you choose to ignore it, who am I to judge. I’m a constitutionalist who believes in a strict interpretation. The constitutional requirements for the office of the President are: 1. 35 years old. Status: He qualifies; 2. US resident for the 14 year period preceding his presidency. Status: He qualifies; and 3. Must be a natural-born citizen of the US. Status: UNVETTED. The Obama camp brought up this very concern regarding McCain’s birth in Panama, and McCain responded by producing certified documents verifying his citizenship from birth.
Obama was asked the same questions and has responded by providing uncertified photocopies to friendly websites, but continually refusing to provide any valid documents that could indicate his citizenship. I wondered why he never released his college records. I thought it was because it might indicate his socialist leanings, but as it turns out, you have to declare your citizenship on your admissions and enrollment forms. So Obama would rather be labeled a socialist than let the real reason for the silence be known because that would literally blow his campaign apart. He has been sued in Federal court to produce a certified birth certificate and has, with the help of the DNC, blocked the court action. There is only one possible reason for him to so adamantly refuse to prove his compliance with this basic qualification of the constitution. He is not a US citizen.
I would never level these accusations without some form of credible evidence, so I ask all of you intelligencia to check out this article on americanthinker.com and watch the video. It is totally up to you, but as is the case with Barack, the only possible reason for your refusal to do so would be fear of the truth seeing the light.
The following disclaimer was the last statement on the webpage:
“The important point is that the Obama campaign has not chosen to confront Berg’s claims in a straightforward manner. That is a fact. Posting two different electronic images of an alleged birth certificate does not carry weight in court. Nor do the opinions of organizations like factcheck.org or snopes.com. The only version of a birth certificate that would matter is one submitted to court and attested to as valid, under penalty of perjury, and subject to forensic examination.
“It may be the case that Berg is completely wrong. If so, the Obama campaign could have submitted documentation to the court quashing this case. Instead, it has chosen to engage in a legal strategy of delay. Why would they do this if Obama’s documentation were in order? Why would they only provide electronic (so far as I know) copies to friendly sources? Perhaps someone can explain that satisfactorily, but I cannot.” – Thomas Lifson, editor and publisher of American Thinker
So why is the media unwilling to go after Mr. Obama’s documentation with the same zeal they show for every aspect of Gov. Palin’s life? Could be they’re afraid that Obama is not the god they’ve held him up to be. Maybe he’s just a man like the rest of us, capable of lies and deceit and scared of his dirtiest little secret being vetted to the world.
The BlacKnight
Comment feed for this post
sgm