The Assumptions that we make: How much will it cost us?

Assuming makes an ass out of you and me!

Have you ever taught a teenager to drive?

If you have, you may have noticed that the fresh mind makes certain assumptions. Driving is a battlefield where expectations can come back to haunt you in a heartbeat:

I thought he was going to stop

I didn’t realize the driver wasn’t paying attention

He should not have cut me off

I didn’t know she couldn’t see me

And on and on we go…..

Assuming, as so eloquently put makes an “ass” out of “u” and “me” (ass-u-me).

In driving it can wreck your car, cause bodily harm, and create financial and other issues, especially if the accident is severe enough to affect your quality of life, or ability to work, and earn an income.

So, it would be prudent to understand that “assuming” something is not a good idea, and can put you at risk.

Let’s take this principle to what we have all around us in the world today. What could be more important than the issues of freedom, liberty, of corruption, lies, deceit and potential criminality in high places.

Through the following series of videos, we are going to take a look at aspects of current events that have missed the radar of mainstream media. And, the question you must ask yourself first is why?

The next question you should ask is should I assume that the reason they are missing the beat in mainstream press and TV is because they are non-issues, or is there some other reason “news” of this magnitude and importance is absent?

Could mainstream media be covering up truths or important issues because of the people they serve? And, logically, you should not assume that news is impartial and not biased. If you believe in politics in the fundamentalist of examples, take a look at kids’ sports as a glaring example to prove it isn’t what you know, it’s who you know. Or in the case of crony capitalism, it’s who strokes your campaign, or business, and how you suck up to those in power to get favor. But that gets us ahead of ourselves here. Back to the issue of what’s reported in the news, and if people for the most-part trust what they read in the paper or see on T.V.

To test my theory that big important issues that are taboo are off the radar of most, I asked a group of family members if they knew there might be impeachment proceedings in the offing for U.S. President Barack Obama over his eligibility as president. The absence of  valid birth records and answering to the U.N. not congress to justify war should have been a massive elephant in the room, but not too many were aware in the slightest these were in the works.

Most people would sooner assume what’s not right in their face  can’t be significant, and any “conspiracy theory” outside the mainstream must be nutty and not true. It is easier to assume the powers that be are looking out for our best interest, and they have no ill harm towards us.

Don’t rock my view of the world as presented to me sir – –  it’s just fine the way it is

Or, put another way

It hasn’t affected me, I don’t care, and what are you going to do about it anyway?

Take a look and listen to this clip with the “no spin” Bill O’Reilly, and his reasoning for not covering any kind of investigation on the Obama birth certificate issue:

Two separate birth announcements in Hawaii is good enough for Bill O’Reilly. And those, he should “assume” are proof positive of a natural born U.S. birth? Better yet, that is supposed to have you side with the man that you have watched for years as Mr. No Spin – – the guy that is hard hitting, and in your face. (No, not the guy who really does that – – Sorry Christopher Greene for the use of your phrase with O’Reilly in the same breath).

Perhaps then, by O’Reilly’s logic, we should just need to produce newspaper clippings to support our own birth, and birth certificates and other information should not be required when obtaining driver’s licenses, passports, or becoming a leader of a country. No spin Mr. O’Reilly? In the words of your friend Glenn Beck, “really?”.

If that was the case, they wouldn’t be groping us, and certainly not our kids at airports, nor would they be suggesting you snitch on your neighborhood Wal Mart shopper as a potential terrorist. Interesting to note, in Nazi Germany, only 15 % of all arrests were as a result of true police work. The majority (85%) were because someone was suspected of wrongdoing and snitched upon by a neighbor, or friend, or family member. Evidence wasn’t necessary or sought after. They were looking for excuses to lock people up. And in Canada, with lowering crime rates, the Harper government’s mandate is also to lock as many away as possible without hope of rehabilitation, parole, and other means to put people back into society who have paid the price. And, to justify the new prisons, the introduction of Bill C-10, the omnibus crime bill.

It’s only the jews and Gypsies they are taking away honey, we are good….doesn’t affect us. Trust the government dear. They must have a reason to take those people away, and lock them up.

It has to start with some excuse, and then gets a little bigger and bigger, and finally, we are all subject to tyranny. Sorry, not a word you heard in the news lately? Me bad!

So you could assume what they tell you is for the benefit of mankind, and not see it as a means to work toward the politically dissident types.

Bill C-10? Yes, that is for the victims of child pornography, and to lock up those nast drug dealers, keeping them from affecting society. Yes, it’s justifiable.

Could it be a first step along the Nazi German handbook to strip people of rights, and control those opposed to whatever the government wants to do to it’s citizens. But what if your assumption gives way too much credit for honesty, and doesn’t look at the big picture with clarity?

Now, O’Reilly cites the first reason that he has not looked at the birth issue for Obama as being important, was his reasoning that Sheriff Arpaio had no real evidence. Okay, let’s take a look at what he has:

Having seen this, how’s the excuse of a couple of newspaper birth announcements sounding now?

What are the implications of this alleged identity fraud? What possible inferences would this have to suggest there is more beneath the surface of how a President gets elected? Should you continue to assume that the powers that be are honest, looking out for your best interest, and fair?

Turning now to financial corruption, Mark Melin (Uncorrelated Investments) asks the very important question: Has the MF Global fiasco exposed the “Damnation of the U.S. Financial Industry”?

Before Mark has his 15 minutes with Max Keiser, please note the first segment also explains the state of many in the U.S. – – the “Unbanked” – – those without a bank account, credit, or means to grow financially.

The roots of the takeover of the financial sector were well served when  Larry Summers apparently talked Bill Clinton into repealing that silly Glass-Steagall Act. I guess we can either look at Clinton as “assuming” it was not important and trusting Summers, or if you were to dig deeper, way beneath the surface of mainstream media, you would find that there is far more to his ties to the dark side.

But, if you didn’t want to be bothered, and still chose to trust the system and the people elected as, gosh, golly, gee, shucks, nice people, this little show you love so much would have you going out and buying a Clinton dolly to place on your bed:

We will have more to say on this, but I will leave you with this. The more you bypass mainstream press, the less you assume, and the more you dig for facts, the greater the chance you will critically measure the news you see, and the more likely you will be to seek the reason they don’t tell you everything.

Advertisements

25 responses to “The Assumptions that we make: How much will it cost us?

  1. Re: “is there some other reason “news” of this magnitude and importance is absent?”

    Answer: The reason, of course, is that they do not believe the birther lies.

    Re: “Perhaps then, by O’Reilly’s logic, we should just need to produce newspaper clippings to support our own birth, and birth certificates and other information should not be required when obtaining driver’s licenses, passports, or becoming a leader of a country..”

    Answer: You seem to have missed something. The birth notices in the Hawaii newspapers were IN ADDITION to Obama’s birth certificate, which he has shown twice–short form and long form (both images of the documents on the Web and the actual physical copies of the documents themselves)–and in addition to the THREE Republican officials in Hawaii confirming the facts on it repeatedly.

    And, in addition to the fact that there is absolutely no evidence that Obama was born in Kenya or in any other country.

    In contrast, not one of the Republican candidates for president has shown his birth certificate–not one of them.

    No official in Hawaii–—and they are the authorities after all—–has said that there is anything wrong with Obama’s birth certificate or that there is anything different in the published image of it from what they sent to Obama.

    Other research done on this issue:
    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/03/book-revie
    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/03/obama-cons
    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/03/decoding-t
    http://www.thefogbow.com/arpaio-report/
    http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:/www.obamabirt

    • benefitsontario

      Please see my post below, and come forward with facts that dispute the Arpaio led investigation….

  2. benefitsontario

    I disagree on most of your points. Arpaio’s investigation has asked for microfiche evidence from Hawaii and has received none.
    The document posted in pdf, by the experts they had examine it was cut and pasted in 9 layers, the last being the green safety paper (applied as a final element). As the evidence shows, if the original document existed, and was scanned into the computer, it would have produced only one layer – – not 9 different ones containing cut and paste material. The arguments that there was OCR applied, or other enhancements were also discredited. The date and registrar stamps could be moved at will to any spot on the document making them incredibly suspect at best, and strongly backs up the discrediting of the document as original. Take an original of your birth certificate and scan it into a computer, and see if you get the same results. You will not.

    A child in arts and crafts could not have done a better job pasting the information into what can best be described as a “collage” document.

    Mike Zullo, the lead cold case investigator has stated that the long form birth certificate has never existed in paper form. If you can provide hard evidence to the contrary bring it forward. It has not been presented. A simple he said, she said it exists is not good enough. Anyone can cover up for someone, and “he said” it exists is not evidence – – show America the real document that matches the computer generated document that was obviously born in cyberspace.

    You may choose to “assume” that what you have heard is true.

    I prefer hard evidence and fact to back things up.

    Additionally, the Selective Service Card issue of 1980 was another obvious forgery, the “80” on the date stamp not matching in any way the actual date stamps shown on several other samples with “1980”. The argument as to why the forgery came off the way it did (i.e. they could not find a 1980 stamp in 2011, and therefore had to trim a new stamp (2008) and invert the ’08’ to ’80’ makes more sense. If you can come up with evidence to support why the selective service card was different than all others, please come to the table with that evidence too.

    I personally cannot wait until more evidence surfaces, and to see if proof of birth is required to be on the ballot in Arizona.

    Jerome Corsi was asked to go to Washington to find records from 1961 for a certain date range that would have been significant. Mysteriously, the documents were missing for that date range, and the White House has not provided an explanation.

    There is simply too much criminal investigation by experts in the field pointing to forgeries and cover ups that cannot be ignored by someone “saying” that something exists, or a “verbal” note from someone. Your arguments are too vague and lack evidence to support them.

  3. Re: “Arpaio’s investigation has asked for microfiche evidence from Hawaii and has received none.”

    We have no proof that they really asked (in a letter or other communication), and they certainly did not send investigators to Hawaii.
    They could have asked Hawaii whether there was anything different between what Obama published and what was in the document in the files, but they did not even do that.

    By the way, the original is not on a microfiche. It is still on paper, and it is in the bound files. That is the one that the director of health of Hawaii stated that she had seen being copied and that the copy was accurate and that that was the document that she had given to Obama’s lawyer.

    And, since the crimes the allege are not Arizona crimes, they are not really an official investigation at all. IF the posse were really convinced that a crime had been committed, they would have referred the case to the police authorities and district attorney in Hawaii–who deal with the forgery of Hawaii official documents and to the FBI.

    The following experts say that there is nothing wrong with Obama’s birth certificate, and the State of Hawaii, which is the real expert, has not said that there is anything wrong with it.

    Dr. Neil Krawetz, an imaging software analysis author and experienced examiner of questioned images, said: \ldblquote The PDF released by the White House shows no sign of digital manipulation or alterations. I see nothing that appears to be suspicious.

    Nathan Goulding with The National Review: We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it. \’85 I\rquote ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.

    John Woodman, independent computer professional, said in a series of videos that the claims of fakery that he examined were unfounded.

    Ivan Zatkovich, who has testified in court as a technology expert, and consultant to WorldNetDaily: “All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document.”

    And the National Review says that Sheriff Joe is biased.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/292780/conspiracy-again-editors

    You are giving the argument of “optimization” which was covered in the investigation. Optimization would not produce the results seen in this ‘cut and paste’ document. The selective service card is also a forgery. The authorities can have in place a bunch of cronies that will attest to accuracy. We need not look any further to Popular Mechanics view of 911. Still not seeing the evidence you have as credible compared to that which the criminal investigators has uncovered, in a more unbiased way. Bring on all the “Ivan Zatkovich” types you want. Everyone has an opinion. Show me his explanation that counters the Arpaio argument, and then we have a discussion.

  4. Since you have not yet published the facts, I will not continue.

    The facts show that at least three officials in Hawaii SAW the long form birth certificate. There is a fourth, whose name we do not know, the clerk who prepared the short-form birth certificate, which is done by copy the FACTS from the original document in the file onto the computer form that generates the short-form birth certificate.

    Unless all four of these officials were lying, and unless there is some kind of an explanation for the birth notices in the Hawaii newspaper in 1961 (which at the time were sent to the papers only by the DOH and only for births in Hawaii) then the evidence is overwhelming that Obama was born in Hawaii. And there is no evidence that Obama was born overseas. If he were there would have been INS and State Department files on the admission of Obama and his mother into the USA in 1961 and the issue of a passport or other travel document for Obama, which the Bush Administration would easily have found–but no such document has been found.

    Re the Selective Service document. Most importantly, the posse did not obtain this document itself, so we do not know whether or not it may have been manipulated by the birther who obtained it.

    Then, the claim of it being forged is also wrong:

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/04/canceling-the-cold-case-posse/

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/03/selective-service-to-arpaio-you-can-take-your-evidence-and/

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/03/sheriff-joes-selective-service-fraud-debunked/

  5. My comments with the reference citations are STILL in moderation.

    • benefitsontario

      Sorry, still not buying it Mr. Hancock. I guess we will see as the evidence continues to paint whichever picture it does.

      If the mainstream press were unbiased, they would have covered the news conference and covered the story. It is very suspect that there would be a media blackout, and if you want to give me the argument that all of them collectively saw this as a ruse, I will whole heartedly disagree with you as being close to impossible.

      The truth is the mainstream press does not seem to want to expose debate on the subject. Just like the “science is settled” argument of Al Gore backed up in Copenhagen by Obama, this matter is far from over.

      Your comments are no longer in moderation, but remain far from conclusive.

  6. Re: “all of them collectively saw this as a ruse,..”

    Yes, they all did. None of them considered Sheriff Joe to be impartial. They knew that the experts that he sited were WND’s “experts”–who have not proven their expertise and certainly have not shown that they were impartial.

    The officials in Hawaii, including two Republican officials commenting in writing before the election when there was a CONSERVATIVE Republican attorney general in Hawaii who could have prosecuted them for lying, have repeatedly stated that there is an original birth certificate in Obama’s files. Moreover, and this is also important, there were birth notices for Obama in the newspapers in Hawaii in 1961. At the time the Hawaii newspapers ONLY took their birth notices for that section of the newspaper from the DOH of Hawaii, and the DOH of Hawaii did not send out birth notices for children who were not born in Hawaii in 1961.

    The reason that there will be no hearings on Obama’s eligibility and the reason that dozens of senators and congressmen have sent letters saying that Obama was born in Hawaii, and the reason that all the declared Republican presidential candidates say that Obama was born in Hawaii, and the reason that Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly call birthers crazy is that the evidence that he was born in Hawaii is overwhelming.

    For those of you who still believe that Obama could have been born in Kenya, or in fact in any foreign country, a question for you:

    I’ll bet that you know (but, actually, you may have forgotten) that the US government requires, and has long required, that a child being carried into the USA must have some kind of official travel document to be admitted. This is usually a US passport for the child. Or, it could be the fact that the child is entered on the mother’s US passport. Or, it could be a US visa for the child on a foreign passport. Without one of those, we would not let the child into the country.

    So, IF Obama really had been born in Kenya (or in any country other than the USA), he would have had to have one of those documents–wouldn’t he? His family would have had to show the passport, wouldn’t they? To show the passport, they would have had to have applied for the passport or the visa for Obama. And, if Obama really were born in Kenya (or another country), they would have had to have applied for it in the US consulate or embassy there, wouldn’t they?

    Such applications are FILED by the US government. The documents exist in multiple files, the actual application itself, communication about it with Washington, entries in the passport file, entries in the application file, entries in the places where the child is carried into the USA. The Bush Administration was in charge of the State Department and the INS for eight years before Obama was elected. Don’t you think that they would have checked the claim that he was born outside the USA?

    All they had to do was find one of those files and McCain would win the election.

    Well, they never did. There is no such file.

    So the question is, do you think that the Bush Administration was part of the plot?

    Do you think that the files, the documents, the application for the documents, the communications about the documents were all lost or hidden? Remember, they are in multiple files, the file of the passport holder, the files of applications for passports, the files in the US embassy in foreign countries, the files in the State Department and in the INS (which would have checked in Obama at an entry point if he had actually traveled in 1961)–and yet no document has been found. Why not?

    The absence of the travel document, plus the Hawaii birth certificate, plus the confirmation of the facts on it by three Republican (and several Democrat) officials, plus the birth notices in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961, plus the witness who remembers being told of the birth and writing home about it (to her father, named Stanley, about the unusual event of a birth to a woman named Stanley). All this is evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii. Oh, and by the way, Obama’s Kenyan grandmother NEVER said that Obama was born in Kenya. That was the first of the birther lies. She said repeatedly in the taped interview that he was born in Hawaii. And she said in another interview, with the Hartford Courtant newspaper, that the first that her family had heard of Obama’s birth was IN A LETTER FROM HAWAII.

    • I give you an ‘A’ for persistency.

      This is not a partisan issue.
      Politicians it would seem for the most part are bought and paid for by the same special interests that control the media. The false left right paradigm can have a whole bunch of Republicans supporting terrible policy. Policies set by an agenda toward the New World Order.

      The birth certificate issue, that has lent itself further to the selective service card issue supports the bigger notion that Obama is a puppet of the global elite, and answers not to the American people, but the likes of the Rockefellers, the Rothchilds, the Queen of England, and to the United Nations. Bush himself took orders from the U.N., and similarly Obama is doing the same. This is not about why Bush would challenge Obama’s birth certificate, this is about the left and the right being part of the same team — all Presidents allowed to be the mouthpiece of the elite.

      When one slips by them, such as John Kennedy, packing a speech about the perils of “secret societies”, and a challenge to the future of the privately held Federal Reserve, they end up being assassinated or disposed of.

      Dear ‘old Bill Clinton ensured that Larry Summers was his excuse for the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, that paved the way for banks to become investment houses, allowing Goldman Sachs and others effect the mortgage crisis, the credit default swap fiasco, and the ultimate global derivative meltdown we are experiencing today.

      In sort, it comes as no surprise that there is an investigation to the very suspect legitimacy of Obama (Barry Soetoro). If he was planted as the next President from the meeting that night in 2008, where Hillary and Barack slipped off to the Bilderberg bosses, while reporters were left scratching their heads on the flight to Chicago, anything that comes from this investigation will almost be expected.

      I know you are a Democrat and probably a huge supporter of this man, especially coming from a very pro Democratic State. I might suggest you expand your comprehension of what has fooled many of us over the years — the belief at we were free and had control of our futures.

      If Obama gets re-elected, we will be in for e greatest of Tribulations, and hopefully at least, we might witness the return of Jesus of Nazareth.

      God bless your innocence Mr. Hancock.

  7. Re: “If Obama gets re-elected, we will be in for e greatest of Tribulations, …”

    Answer. You are entitled to vote against him and to support his opponent, and I would fight to the death for that right for you.

    It is, however, unnecessary–since the goodness or badness of Obama is sufficient–and in fact false to claim that Obama was born outside of the USA. It is immoral for people who believe in the commandment against lying to keep repeating the birther claims that Obama was not born in Hawaii.

    Getting back to Bill O’Reilly. This is what you said about him: “Two separate birth announcements in Hawaii is good enough for Bill O’Reilly. ”

    What you did NOT say was that the two separate birth announcements were in addition to the two copies of the birth certificate–short-form and long-form—that were shown and the confirmation of the facts on them by three Republican (and several Democrat) officials in Hawaii. Also, there is absolutely no evidence that Obama was born in Kenya or in any other country, and the Bush Administration looked into the matter, as did the McCain campaign.

    What you also did not say was that the Republican candidates for president have not shown their birth certificates at all, so their chances of having been born outside the USA is many many times higher than Obama’s chance.

    O’Reilly and the rest of the media and the National Review, have looked at these facts, considered Sheriff Joe’s background, and drawn the logical conclusion. They do not believe the birther lies. As a result, they pay little attention to the birther claims.

    • The Obama Administration has the likes of Cass Sunstein who will ensure we will have our chance to fight to our death to maintain our rights. In other words, this Administration wants to close down free speech, and “nudge” us incrementally to become controlled by an ever growing power-hungry dictator.

      There will be no rights left, and the Constitution will be toast.

      Obama is already acting like a dictator in his policy to use the EPA to effect carbon legislation when it he argument that global warming is a reality wains.

      Trust me friend, another term with Obama will spell further disaster.

      What freedom you hold dear will be lost if the global elite have their way.

  8. Re: “The Obama Administration has the likes of Cass Sunstein…”

    You have every right to vote against Obama for that reason, or for any reason or for no reason. You have every right to support Obama’s opponent.

    But it is not moral to lie about Obama’s place of birth, no matter how much you hate him. And it is hardly moral to imply that there are facts showing that Obama was not born in Hawaii, when the facts show overwhelmingly that he was born in Hawaii.

    This is what you said about Bill O’Reilly: “Two separate birth announcements in Hawaii is good enough for Bill O’Reilly. ”

    What you did NOT say was that the two separate birth announcements were in addition to the two copies of the birth certificate–short-form and long-form—that were shown and the confirmation of the facts on them by three Republican (and several Democrat) officials in Hawaii. Also, there is absolutely no evidence that Obama was born in Kenya or in any other country, and the Bush Administration looked into the matter, as did the McCain campaign.

    What you also did not say was that the Republican candidates for president have not shown their birth certificates at all, so their chances of having been born outside the USA is many many times higher than Obama’s chance.

    • Sorry, there is no absolute proof to say the documents are not forgeries. I will wait for more evidence to come forward from the investigation, and see if Obama can intimidate Arpaio with his contrived lawsuit and the request for “monitor”. These are simply desperate attempts to intimidate or otherwise stop Arpaio, but I can assure you he and the posse are not going to stop. The next step is to find who is responsible for the forgeries.

      I will reserve my judgement when the final t is crossed and I is dotted.

  9. Go ahead. Hold your breath, if you want. Everyone is laughing at the birthers. And they continue to beat the drum claiming that Obama’s birth certificate is forged without even asking to see the birth certificates of the Republican candidates for president–none of whom have shown their birth certificates (and all of whom, by they way, have said that they believe that Obama was born in Hawaii).

    • I don’t know what evidence of the other candidates’ eligibility exists, but the question on the table is if the current dictator crushing the Constitution is eligible to be president let alone dictator.

      Under normal circumstances, if he was upholding the Constitution, there may have been no cause to search. But then we had Michelle Obama spilling the beans too — another bright light.

      It will be interesting to say the least if this imposter can hold on.

  10. Obama has shown his birth certificate twice. The Republican candidates have not shown it even once. Three Republican and several Democrat officials in Hawaii have confirmed the facts on Obama’s birth certificate. The Republicans have not even shown their birth certificates.

    In addition to the birth certificates and the confirmation, there is the additional confirmation of the birth notices in the Hawaii newspapers.

    You have every right to vote against Obama if you feel that he is not upholding the Constitution. But he was born in Hawaii and is a Natural Born US Citizen.

    • I can hear the argument now….
      You have every right to want to start a revolution and overthrow the government and put an end to the power hungry dictator. And, you have every right to be upset that he has destroyed the Constitution and acts just like the Antichrist. And, you are free to see the new health care bill as a means to not only pull the plug on grandma, but start the eugenics movement, but whatever you do, don’t question the birth certificate. What kind of donkey dung is that???

    • benefitsontario

      Here’s another loaded piece supporting the Kenyan-born Obama. http://www.wnd.com/2010/04/139481/

  11. Re: “You have every right to want to start a revolution and overthrow the government and put an end to the power hungry dictator.”

    You can try that, but revolutions need leaders and none of the Republican candidates for president are birthers nor is John McCain, nor is George Bush or any of the former candidates for president. (And none of them are calling for a revolution for other reasons either. Nor do they call Obama “the Antichrist.”)

    Re: “whatever you do, don’t question the birth certificate.”

    YOu can continue to “question,” but your questions have already been answered. It has been shown that Obama was born in Hawaii, as three Republican officials (and some Democrat officials) in Hawaii have confirmed and as further confirmed by the birth notices in the Hawaii newspapers.

    • Mr. Hancock, you are blowing smoke. Let’s wait until the investigation ends. You continue to be fooled by the false left-right paradigm, and it is obvious we are getting nowhere. Let it be, and let time bring forth the truth.

  12. Time has already brought forth the truth.

    If there were any facts or hints that the birthers were right such conservative commentators as Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly and the National Review would be supporting the birthers. Instead they all call birthers crazy. Three Republican (and several Democrat) officials in Hawaii have confimed that Obama was born there, and there is no evidence that he was born anywhere else or that he traveled in 1961 or that his mother traveled in 1961.

    • Mr Hancock, don’t you get it? The two parties are opposite sides of the same coin.

      • Wasn’t JFK a “democrat” when he was assassinated by the banking cartel that control the Fed, the two party system, and you?

        Education please!

  13. Re: “Mr Hancock, don’t you get it? The two parties are opposite sides of the same coin.”

    What does that have to do with Obama’s place of birth?

    The facts are that there is NO evidence that Obama was born in any place other than in Hawaii and an official birth certifciate from Hawaii and the confirmation of officials in Hawaii and birth notices in Hawaii newspapers in 1961 that all show that he was born IN Hawaii.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s