Birth document: The liars lost — who won?

Renew America

Alan Keyes

The other shoe has dropped. As I predicted in a previous column:

    When truth is being suppressed, people who refuse to accept the deception have every reason to be grateful to a well-known public figure who loudly trumpets his similar skepticism. But once the grateful public gathers behind him in sufficient numbers, his response to events can be portrayed as authoritative. Then it’s just a matter of trotting out some contrivance intended to placate public opinion, one that superficially appears to resolve the matter, but without addressing what’s really at stake. By the time the bellwether conveniently announces that he’s satisfied, the grateful grassroots support he has received will have made him enough of a public opinion authority to discourage and stigmatize those tempted to challenge him. This will assure that, unlike Don Quixote’s pasteboard helmet, the placatory contrivance is never made to undergo anything like real scrutiny.

On Wednesday this week, after refusing the simple request for several years; after expending several million dollars in lawyer’s fees to battle anyone who dared pursue it; after vindictively engineering the court-martial and imprisonment of an honorable soldier who stood by his sworn oath to defend the Constitution of the United States — Barack Obama finally gave in and released what purports to be a copy of his full and complete birth certificate.

This constitutes incontrovertible proof that he, his media claque (including snopes.com, etc.), and the gullible or cowardly politicians (Democrat and Republican alike) who repeatedly claimed that he had already done so, were lying. The people they derided and ridiculed as “birthers” were telling the truth. The Certification of Live Birth published on the Internet, which these liars repeatedly referred to as his birth certificate, was an abridged certification that omitted the vital information needed to verify that he was born on U.S. soil, and could therefore claim, jus soli, to be a citizen at birth.

Continue reading

Hospitals in Hawaii to Obama: You Were Not Born Here!

I’d like to point out that Facebook will not allow the contents of this article on their site so I have taken it upon myself to help get the information out there. This story did come out some 2 years ago but with recent events over the last few days, I thought it was important and re-posted it.

1 Dragon

Earth Frisk

UPDATE February 2009 Click Here

Supposed Conspiracy Claim Turns REAL on Obama

It is becoming painfully obvious that we may very well have a criminal President in 2009.  No this isn’t a joke. What I speak of is the curious developments in the supposedly racist, biased, dumb,  as well as insane case of where Obama was born.  Why the Barack Obama Birth Certificate Issue Is Legitimate

A strange development indeed is how it is that every time Barack Obama or a family member tells of where Obama was born, they seem to have no idea as of December 2008.

They seemed to know what hospital quite a few times months ago when it was claimed that Obama’s mother gave birth to him at Queens Medical Center in Honolulu – Obama and Mom Never Here


Continue reading

Obama Lied About His Father’s Service

In a campaign speech Obama says his father served in WWII. Barack Hussein Obama Sr. was 5 years old when WWII started, and less than 9.5 years old when it ended.

Source:

Tracking Your Taxes: Defense Bill Pays for Prostate Screenings, Sprinkler System

Fox News

President Obama pledged in August to cut all pork barrel projects from defense spending, threatening to veto any swollen bills that came across his desk — a pledge shattered by nearly 2,000 pet projects that have made their way into the defense budget.

“If a project doesn’t support our troops, we will not fund it,” he said to a meeting of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Phoenix. “If a system doesn’t perform, we will terminate it. And if Congress sends me a defense bill loaded with that kind of pork, I will veto it. ”

Just last week, Obama broke his promise as he signed into law the 2010 Defense Appropriations Bill — a $636 billion behemoth loaded with $4.2 billion of pork.

“We should be concerned that we’re getting ripped off,” said Ryan Alexander, president of the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense.

“The earmarking process is the beginning of figuring out whether or not we’re getting ripped off. Absolutely dollars are being directed, not based on the best decision making process.”

In all, Congress added in 1,720 pet projects, including:

$5 million for a visitors center in San Francisco
$23 million for indigent health care in Hawaii
$18 million for the Edward Kennedy Policy Institute in Massachusetts
$1.6 million to computerize hospital records in Oakland
$47 million for anti-drug training centers around the country
$20 million for the World War II Museum in Louisiana
$3.9 million grant to develop an energy-efficient solar film for buildings
$800,000 for minority prostate cancer research
$3.6 million for marijuana eradication in Kentucky
$2.4 million for handicap access and a sprinkler system at a community club in New York

Lawmakers also added $5 billion for two destroyers, 10 C-17 cargo planes and to develop a jet engine the Pentagon neither wants nor needs. Critics call it classic pork — projects that may save jobs, but not money.

“There is a reason they are added to the Defense appropriations bill, because everyone in Congress knows this is a must-pass piece of legislation”, said Todd Harrison, a budget studies fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

Despite the billions in pork, the White House says it’s making progress. The earmarking total is 14 percent lower than it was on last year’s defense bill, and the Obama administration says federal agencies found more than $19 billion in contract savings for 2010. The president has also succeeded in killing funding for the pricy F-22 Joint Strike Fighter and a new presidential helicopter.

Members of Congress are also defending their earmarks. Senator John Kerry, D-Mass., who added the Ted Kennedy Institute to the defense budget, says it is a tribute to the late Senator’s leadership on military technology and safety for our troops.

Senator Mary Landrieu, D-La., says she was “proud” to secure $20 million for a new wing of the National World War II museum in her home state.

But a study by the Center of Defense Information says earmarks like those in this bill — including those for the solar film, prostate cancer research, and the New York sprinkler system — mean less money for pilot training, supplies, repairs and ammunition.

Harrison is especially disappointed Congress cut $300 million from a successful counterinsurgency program used by Army field commanders.

“That money is used by commanders on ground in Iraq and Afghanistan to fund small projects that help win over the local population,” he said.

Arguing With “Global Warming” Idiots

Canada Free Press

By Jim O’Neill  Sunday, December 13, 2009

“Two thousand scientists, in a hundred countries, engaged in the most elaborate, well organized scientific collaboration [scam] in the history of humankind, have produced long-since a consensus that we will face a string of terrible catastrophes unless we act to prepare ourselves and deal with the underlying causes of global warming.” Al Gore

“As public opposition continues to stall Congress’s cap-and-tax legislation, Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] bureaucrats plan to regulate carbon emissions themselves, doing an end run around the American people.” Sarah Palin

GeoCraft posted a simple ten-question test online, concerning AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming).  If you familiarize yourself with the correct answers to this quiz, then you will have the “ammo” to deal with the deceitful criminals behind the global warming racket.

It’s your money—don’t let them continue to steal it.

For the sake of those who don’t have the time, or inclination, to take the quiz, I have supplied an abbreviated version of the test questions and answers below.

(1) Question True or False.  “Global warming” is a real phenomenon: Earth’s temperature is increasing.

Answer True.  “Global warming” is a real phenomenon: Earth’s temperature is increasing.  From a geological perspective, global warming is the normal state of our accustomed natural world. Technically, we are in an “interglacial phase,” or between ice ages. The question is not really if an ice age will return, but when.  If Global Warming stops, then you can start worrying!  It means our warm interglacial phase is over and we may be heading into another Ice Age.

(2) Question True or false.  The “Greenhouse Effect” is real and contributes to global warming.

Answer True.  The “Greenhouse Effect” is real.  The “greenhouse effect” helps to moderate temperatures—especially nighttime temperatures. Without the greenhouse effect, the average temperature of the Earth would be -18 degrees C (around zero degrees Fahrenheit).

(3) Question Multiple choice.  The main cause of Global Warming is:

Answer Orbital eccentricities of Earth and variations in the Sun’s output.  Global Warming occurs in cycles caused mainly by changes in the sun’s energy output, and the sun’s relative position to the earth.  [NOT industrial pollution, automobiles, airplanes, and CO2].

(4) Question Multiple choice:  The Greenhouse Effect is caused primarily by:

Answer Water vapor.  The world’s natural wetlands produce more greenhouse gas contributions annually than all human sources combined.  [That’s worth re-reading].

(5) Question Multiple choice.  Which most accurately describes the effects of Global Warming in the United States over the last 100 years?

Answer Temperatures have risen less then 1° C during the past 100 years.  During the period 1900 to 1940 temperatures were increasing. Then from 1940 to 1980 temperatures were decreasing. Currently, temperatures are increasing back to about where they were in the 1930’s.  Overall, the total average annual temperature increase in the U.S. in the last century is so slight the actual amount is uncertain—maybe 1/3° C

(6) Question Multiple choice.  How much carbon dioxide (CO2) is in Earth’s atmosphere today?

Answer Less than 1/10th of 1%.  Most CO2 comes from natural terrestrial and ocean biologic activity, and compared to former geologic times, Earth’s atmosphere today is arguably “CO2 impoverished.”  There has historically been much more CO2 in our atmosphere than exists today.

(7) Question True or false.  Carbon dioxide from coal-fired power plants damages forests.

Answer False.  Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the principal gas that trees and other plants need to survive, just like oxygen (O2) is the principal gas that humans and other animals require.  Carbon dioxide is invisible.  The fat, curvy towers that look like they are belching white smoke are really only emitting pure water vapor. They are in effect making clouds.

(8) Question Multiple choice.  Which answer below provides the best explanation for the temperature record [over the past 1,000 years]?

Answer Natural variations in global temperatures may occur in roughly 500-year cycles.  The primary cause of variations in global temperature is due to the cycles of the sun and Earth’s orbit about the sun. In addition to 40-year cycles and 500-year cycles, other temperature cycles include:

  • 21,000 year cycle: Elliptical orbit of the Earth around the Sun
  • 41,000 year cycle: Cycle of the +/- 1.5 degree wobble in Earth’s orbit
  • 100,000 year cycle: Variations in the shape of Earth’s elliptical orbit

(9) Question Multiple choice.  Which of the following is not true about an increasing greenhouse effect?

Answer The idea that most scientists think that “global warming” warrants drastic action—is false.  President Clinton and others [e.g. Al Gore—see above] cite a letter signed by 2600 scientists that global warming will have catastrophic effects on humanity. Thanks to Citizens for a Sound Economy, we know now that fewer than 10% of these “scientists” know anything about climate. Among the signers are: a plastic surgeon, two landscape architects, a hotel administrator, a gynecologist, seven sociologists, a linguist, and a practitioner of traditional Chinese medicine.

Over 17,000 [real] scientists have signed the Global Warming Petition to express their view that “there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”

(10) Question Which temperature measuring method most accurately measures global warming?

Answer Orbiting weather satellites provide the most accurate temperature measurements.  The real signature of greenhouse warming is not surface temperature but temperatures in the middle of the troposphere, about 5 kilometers up.  Interestingly, in the 5 years leading up to 2007, the temperature of the mid troposphere actually decreased slightly and surface temperatures ceased warming—even as CO2 concentrations continued to increase. This should not have happened if CO2 increases to the atmosphere are the primary driver of global warming.

So there you have it.  You are now armed with sufficient knowledge to insulate yourself from The Big Lie, and defend yourself against its vociferous, duplicitous proponents.

Don’t expect them to back off, simply because intelligent, sane people prefer the truth to their b.s.  They will continue to lie—more stridently than ever—and their propaganda arm, the liberal press, will continue to trumpet their falsehoods.

But we are hip to the con.  Time to start suing yet?

Jobs or Snow Jobs?

Right Side News

Written by Thomas Sowell – FrontPageMag.com

Tuesday, 09 December 2009
//
President Obama keeps talking about the jobs his administration is “creating” but there are more people unemployed now than before he took office. How can there be more unemployment after so many jobs have been “created”?

unemploymentLet’s go back to square one. What does it take to create a job? It takes wealth to pay someone who is hired, not to mention additional wealth to buy the material that person will use.

But government creates no wealth. Ignoring that plain and simple fact enables politicians to claim to be able to do all sorts of miraculous things that they cannot do in fact. Without creating wealth, how can they create jobs? By taking wealth from others, whether by taxation, selling bonds or imposing mandates.

However it is done, transferring wealth is not creating wealth. When government uses transferred wealth to hire people, it is essentially transferring jobs from the private sector, not adding to the net number of jobs in the economy.

If that was all that was involved, it would be a simple verbal fraud, with no gain of jobs and no net loss. In reality, many other things that politicians do reduce the number of jobs.

Politicians who mandate various benefits that employers must provide for workers gain politically by seeming to give people something for nothing. But making workers more expensive means that fewer are likely to be hired.

During an economic recovery, employers can respond to an increased demand for their companies’ products by hiring more workers- creating more jobs- or they can work their existing employees overtime. Since workers have to be paid time-and-a-half for overtime, it might seem as if it would always be cheaper to hire more workers. But that was before politicians began mandating more benefits per worker.

When you get more hours of work from the existing employees, you don’t need to pay for additional mandates, as you would have to when you get more hours of work by hiring new people. For many employers, that makes it cheaper to pay for overtime. The data show that overtime hours have been increasing in the economy while more people have been laid off.

There is another way of reducing the cost of government-imposed mandates.

That is by hiring temporary workers, to whom the mandates do not apply.

The number of temporary workers hired has increased for the fourth consecutive month, even though there are millions of unemployed people who could be hired for regular jobs, if it were not for the mandates that politicians have imposed.

Economists have long been saying that there is no free lunch, but politicians get elected by seeming to give free lunches, in one form or another. Yet there are no magic wands in Washington to make costs disappear, whether with workers or with medical care. We just pay in a different way, often a more costly way.

Nor can these costs all be simply dumped on “the rich,” because there are just not enough of them. Often people who are far from rich pay the biggest price in lost opportunities. A classic example is the minimum wage law.

Minimum wage laws appear to give low-income workers something for nothing- and appearances are what count in politics. Realities can be left to others, so long as appearances get votes.

People with low skills or little experience usually get paid low wages. Passing a minimum wage law does not make them any more valuable. At a higher wage, it can just make them expendable. Raising the minimum wage in the midst of a recession was guaranteed to increase unemployment among the young- and it has.

None of this is peculiar to the current administration. The Roosevelt administration created huge numbers of government jobs during the 1930s- and yet unemployment remained in double digits throughout FDR’s first two terms.

Constant government experiments with new bright ideas is another common feature of Obama’s “change” and FDR’s New Deal. The uncertainty that this unpredictable experimentation generates makes employers reluctant to hire. Destroying some jobs while creating other jobs does not get you very far, except politically. But politically is what matters to politicians, even if their policies needlessly prolong a recession or depression.