I work for a newspaper. A small town newspaper, but a newspaper nonetheless. This week we got a letter from a “Freedom of Information Officer” from one of the small towns in the area. It seems we are “making too many mistakes in reporting the minutes of their meetings.” But no one has ever, not once, called in to tell us that; not one complaint has ever come. We would gladly print a retraction if we are wrong about something. This baffles me. They want the right to preview our reports from now on before we print.
This is a government board. How much would they want retracted from the original report? And who the heck is a “Freedom of Information Officer?” The Freedom of Information Act is there to guarantee that citizens are allowed to see and hear what their government is doing. In another town, they threatened to do all their meetings in executive session, just because we brought a recorder. The recorder is to guarantee we get it right, not to do a “gotcha.”
Imagine if the Federal Government or the State government asked for the right to preview everything that gets printed about them. It would be gridlock!
Like most of what we see in politics these days, someone throws out a vague accusation against another, but never gives the details, and when asked to give one, they usually can’t think of anything. I suspect that may be what this is. Being a newspaper employee, I intend to have them put all those details, list every single error they think we have made, in writing, because if we did make a mistake, we need to correct it, right? This also validates our decision to record the meetings. It’s benefits both of us, media and government. It protects both of us.
The Obama campaign of 2008 has now stepped it up a few notches. Remember that net neutrality thing the government was talking about as so necessary for fairness reasons? Well, now it’s entirely possible your personal emails will now be delivered with an ad for Obama’s 2012 re-election.
See the Canada Free Press article by Judy McLeod here.
This photo shows what one email-er did with her outgoing emails once she found out about the hijacking.
There has been much endless ridiculing, mostly by those on the left, of those who would question the President’s natural born status. But not only did the former senator tell us in his book “Dreams From My Father” that he was a dual citizen at birth (which disqualifies one from attaining the presidency), but it has now come to my attention that a post written at America.gov, a blog site maintained by the Department of State agrees. How far from understanding our constitution have we come? This blog site was set up to dispel the rumors, myths and fabrications….and now it unwittingly confirms what a lot of us have been saying… a duel citizen is not eligible to be President of the United States. The Founders intended that no one with divided or foreign loyalties could occupy that office for obvious reasons, the safety of our nation.
Todd Leventhal is the author of the post which was posted on the 21 August 2009. I guess Todd was trying to dispel the rumors that Obama was not born in the United States and not so much if he was a natural born citizen or not. Todd evidently doesn’t even know what a natural born citizen is! High schools may not be teaching the Constitution these days. But the times they are a’changing…interest in our republican form of government and the constitution has risen. People are reading history and our founding historical documents. It is an amazing time. And it means the end of the shenanigans that have been put over on the electorate. It will mean the end of the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people.
I just got done reading Richard Poe’s book “Hillary’s Secret War, The Clinton Conspiracy to Muzzle Internet Journalists”. I am much wiser now than I was before reading it. If anyone dares to think that Hillary Clinton would be a different president than who we have now, think again. She would be Obama II. There are too many dead bodies left in the wake of the Clinton’s rule and Hillary was right in the middle of it. The destruction they unleashed on our country was massive. I recommend the book.
This should keep you busy for a while.
The President has said in the past that to know how he thinks, look at who he surrounds himself with. Ok, we will. Here’s the list and it’s not comprehensive:
Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, radicals who blew up buildings in the 1960’s and ’70’s and killed a few people,
Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Black Liberation Theology preacher,
Van Jones, admitted Communist and former green jobs czar,
Cass Sunstein who believes that animals should be able to sue humans,
Need I go on?
…and for dinner last week at our White House one of the guests was…
ISNA was named as an unindicted co-conspirator of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, an Islamic “charity” which was convicted in 2008 by a federal jury for giving more than $12 million to the Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas.
One month after 9/11, Dr. Mattson described the extremist Wahhabism ideology that inspired the 9/11 terrorists this way:
It is the name of a reform movement that began 200 years ago to rid Islamic societies of cultural practices and rigid interpretation that had acquired over the centuries. It really was analogous to the European Protestant Reformation.”
from Joe Klein at FrontPageMag.com
Ok, let’s think about this….a suspected or known supporter of terrorism came to the White House for dinner. It sounds pretty far out there to me. What does “unindicted co-conspirator” means? It sounds like a known conspirator that wasn’t indicted for whatever reason.
If I can trust Wikipedia, it says this: “An unindicted co-conspirator is a person or entity that is alleged in an indictment to have engaged in conspiracy, but who is not charged in the same indictment. Prosecutors choose to name persons as unindicted co-conspirators for a variety of reasons including grants of immunity, pragmatic considerations, and evidentiary concerns.”
Let’s go on…again from Joe Klein…
“The second radical Islamic White House dinner guest was Salam Al-Marayati, a co-founder and director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council. This is an individual who likes to speak about building bridges and inter-faith dialogue, but only as a cover for his more radical views. What Islamists such as Al-Marayati like to do is invert the meaning of American ideals and history to suit sharia (Islamic law) and the Islamic narrative of the oppressed victim. For example, he said that:
When Patrick Henry said, ‘Give me liberty or give me death,’ that statement epitomized jihad [Islamic holy war].”
And there’s more here. Al-Marayati’s council has put forward policy papers requesting the removal of Hamas and Hezbollah from U.S. terrorist designation.
My grandma always told me that “birds of a feather flock together” and “you are known by the company you keep”. The president’s grandma must not have told him that. Either that, OR, he doesn’t care. But the American people care very much. And our tax dollars paid for this special dinner with radical Muslims in their holy month of Ramadan.
“These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us – that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: It is dearness only that gives everything its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as freedom should not be highly rated. Britain, with an army to enforce her tyranny, has declared that she has a right not only to tax but “to bind us in all cases whatsoever,” and if being bound in that manner is not slavery, then is there no such a thing as slavery upon earth. Even the expression is impious, for so unlimited a power can belong only to God.”~~Thomas Paine, 1776 (emphasis mine)
I love the fact that in the electronic age we live in, everything one says is either on a YouTube video or in print and on the internet. Yesterday I was following some links and reading about the Obama birth certificate controversy when I came across an abc report by Jake Tapper from July 27, 2009. It was a press conference with Robert Gibbs and he was being asked questions about the birth certificate and why the controversy lives on…and this was in 2009. Much has happened since then. For those of you who don’t know, a certification of live birth purportedly from Hawaii was posted on the internet and has been repeatedly pointed to as the evidence that the President does, indeed have a birth certificate. And apparently it was Gibbs’ idea to post it there.
Here’s Gibbs’ answer to one of the questions:
“Gibbs said there were 10,000 more important issues than to be debating a the president’s citizenship, “which has been proven ad nauseam.”
Why does it keep coming up? Gibbs was asked.
“Because for $15 you can get an internet address and say whatever you want,” Gibbs said.”
Er…Robert, you’re making the point.
Did he really mean to say this?
Open mouth, insert foot?
Funny how easy it is to attack others for the same things we ourselves do.
In more recent news, a teacher from a university in eastern Kentucky is now speaking out about his time working in Hawaii’s elections office and how everyone there knew that Hawaii had no birth certificate for the President in their records. Sheesh. Read about it here.
And all caught on a hidden camera. James O’Keefe is at it again and good for him. Now we can all get a bird’s eye view of your tax dollars at work. And this is just one snapshot.