Again, Davids Mom, if you would read something before replying,
this proves OBAMA a total liar.
The premise here is not that he was born out of the country, BUT
that his real lineage is COMMY PINKO..
oh yeah, you stated on here you wouldn't read that post, while praising his purported real father that you still know nothing about (FRANK MARSHALL DAVIS)
Andy Martin's lawsuit is still valid and will be heard Nov. 17th.

My wife made me canvas for Obama; here's what I learned
This election is not about major policies. It's about hope.
By Jonathan Curley

from the November 3, 2008 edition
E-mail Print Letter to the Editor Republish del.icio.us digg

Charlotte, N.C. - There has been a lot of speculation that Barack Obama might win the election due to his better "ground game" and superior campaign organization.

I had the chance to view that organization up close this month when I canvassed for him. I'm not sure I learned much about his chances, but I learned a lot about myself and about this election.

Let me make it clear: I'm pretty conservative. I grew up in the suburbs. I voted for George H.W. Bush twice, and his son once. I was disappointed when Bill Clinton won, and disappointed he couldn't run again.

I encouraged my son to join the military. I was proud of him in Afghanistan, and happy when he came home, and angry when he was recalled because of the invasion of Iraq. I'm white, 55, I live in the South and I'm definitely going to get a bigger tax bill if Obama wins.

I am the dreaded swing voter.

So you can imagine my surprise when my wife suggested we spend a Saturday morning canvassing for Obama. I have never canvassed for any candidate. But I did, of course, what most middle-aged married men do: what I was told.

At the Obama headquarters, we stood in a group to receive our instructions. I wasn't the oldest, but close, and the youngest was maybe in high school. I watched a campaign organizer match up a young black man who looked to be college age with a white guy about my age to canvas together. It should not have been a big thing, but the beauty of the image did not escape me.

Instead of walking the tree-lined streets near our home, my wife and I were instructed to canvass a housing project. A middle-aged white couple with clipboards could not look more out of place in this predominantly black neighborhood.

We knocked on doors and voices from behind carefully locked doors shouted, "Who is it?"

"We're from the Obama campaign," we'd answer. And just like that doors opened and folks with wide smiles came out on the porch to talk.

Grandmothers kept one hand on their grandchildren and made sure they had all the information they needed for their son or daughter to vote for the first time.

Young people came to the door rubbing sleep from their eyes to find out where they could vote early, to make sure their vote got counted.

We knocked on every door we could find and checked off every name on our list. We did our job, but Obama may not have been the one who got the most out of the day's work.

I learned in just those three hours that this election is not about what we think of as the "big things."

It's not about taxes. I'm pretty sure mine are going to go up no matter who is elected.

It's not about foreign policy. I think we'll figure out a way to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan no matter which party controls the White House, mostly because the people who live there don't want us there anymore.

I don't see either of the candidates as having all the answers.

I've learned that this election is about the heart of America. It's about the young people who are losing hope and the old people who have been forgotten. It's about those who have worked all their lives and never fully realized the promise of America, but see that promise for their grandchildren in Barack Obama. The poor see a chance, when they often have few. I saw hope in the eyes and faces in those doorways.

My wife and I went out last weekend to knock on more doors. But this time, not because it was her idea. I don't know what it's going to do for the Obama campaign, but it's doing a lot for me.

Jonathan Curley is a banker. He voted for George H.W. Bush twice and George W. Bush once.

Thanks for sharing. Many men(and women) in this country have joined you.

My wife made me canvas for Obama??????????

My own mother could not have made me "canvas for Barry".....much less my wife or anyone else, for that matter.

"..this proves OBAMA a total liar."

Ummm, from that link David's mom posted: "State officials say there's no doubt Barack Obama was born in Hawaii."

Birdie, were you dropped on your head as a baby or what? State officials have put the final nail in the coffin of this issue....time to move on.

I think that this proves that getting information from loquacious avians is not the basis for forming a government.

You either misread or misunderstood.

State declares Obama birth certificate genuine

1 day ago

HONOLULU (AP) — State officials say there's no doubt Barack Obama was born in Hawaii. Health Department Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said Friday she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama's original birth certificate. Fukino says that no state official, including Republican Gov. Linda Lingle, ever instructed that Obama's certificate be handled differently. She says state law bars release of a certified birth certificate to anyone who does not have a tangible interest. Some Obama critics claim he was not born in the US. Earlier Friday, a southwest Ohio magistrate rejected a challenge to Obama's citizenship. Judges in Seattle and Philadelphia recently dismissed similar suits.

If the judge hears the case it will only be to dismiss it. It'll be over in five minutes like all the rest of Martin's lawsuits.

my comment is why cant white america just get over it and face it that we may have a black president! i mean really, i have lots of white friends and during this election i have really seen another side to them, i mean so what obama is black! you guys can dig and dig and try to find negative things on him, but it really truly doesnt even matter because cause GOD has already decided.

Why can't black America understand that white America WOULD vote for the RIGHT black President? This guy is just simply WRONG for us. Do you worship the same GOD that the rest of us do? Because that was a interesting statement; even GOD knows that this is the WRONG man. If you are so big on having a black president please go out and find one who represents ALL Americans, not just the ones who are going to vote for him because of his color, no matter the content of his charater. Find a good man who will bring America together as one nation under God, indivisible, who will strengthen us and not weaken us an make us the laughing stock to the world. God help us if this one wins. I will pray to my God that she lets the democratic process work and watch over us the next 4 years. You have white friends??? I have black friends who say he is wrong no matter his color. Just remember, he is half white but that is not good enough reason for me to vote for him.

and your canidate is right because.......?

you took that bait, hook, line, and sinker. I find much amusement regarding arguments involving whose God is better, because for each of us, there are two: the one we made and the one that made us.

"I can't wait until tomorrow, because I get more lovable every day."

In addition to being insane, you are also quite ignorant....if he were a "naturalized citizen" he would NOT be eligible to be president. One must be a "natural born citizen" to be eligible to be president....For example Arnold is a naturalized citizen and therefore cannot aspire beyond California.

Funny, McCain was born outside the US, and his eligibility was slightly more open to question than is Barack's.....

Why oh why do I bother replying to these buffoons anyway?

"He is God's Chosen One, however, to begin Satan's 7 year rule as is outlined in King James and so we shall wait, watch and suffer. He does not even know how big his role is -- but he will and he too will be sorry but it will too late for him as for those who are fooled."

OMG...Do you really believe this stuff?

On November 4th, my vote will cancel out your vote

Unless, you will be voting for the anti-christ.

Berg's lawsuit was dismissed last Friday. Ho-hum.

But let me ask you this... did it ever occur to you that Obama cannot be Davis's son and an illegal non-citizen at the same time?

Again, the man who is so desperately seeking the "truth" about Barack Obama has been declared a "vexatious litigant" in numerous federal and state courts. Courts are usually rather tolerant of the pompous and arrogant in America, and to be asked not to file any more motions or lawsuits reflects something on the sanity and judgment of the individual in question.

People have been insisting that the end was near since the beginning. Every major political figure has been called the Antichrist since the first century A.D. Nothing ever changes. This is the same old song and dance.

-----
In the end, everything will work out. If it's not alright, it's not the end.

Just imagining Sarah Palin as an economic advisor...Guffaw!

so much of his time talking about William "why do we even know his name" Ayers and the fraud "Joe the unlicensed, tax evading plumber," but as soon as the illegally purchased high fashion Gov. Palin wardrobe was discovered, here comes Elizabeth Hasselbeck, Sarah Palin, and John McCain asking why we aren't talking about the "issues." Hello! Is Ayers the issue? Is your unlicensed $40k a year Sam the speeder the issue? And, weren't John Edwards' hair and John Kerry's tan pretty big issues for you folks just one presidential election ago? It's funny how , ummm, "adaptable" the GOP message has become.

...either Barney Frank or Chris Dodd can be entrusted to be Secretary of the Treasury?

Andy Martin explores the relationship between Barack Obama and anti-Semites.

Questions the mainstream media will not ask Barack Obama:
The Cover-up: Part One (first in a series)
“Why was Khalid Al-Mansour raising money to send you to law school?”

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Internet powerhouse Andy Martin asks a blunt question: Why are there so many anti-Israel, anti-Semitic associations in Barack Obama’s past?

Why has the media imposed a conspiracy of silence on questions about Obama and Khalid Al-Mansour’s fundraising activity for Obama’s law school education?

Could it happen again? Maybe it is.

(NEW YORK)(October 28, 2008) Four years ago I exposed that Barack Obama had a Muslim family history that he was concealing. I offered an explanation for this concealment, and suggested he was wary of Jewish voter backlash to his Islamic roots. Today the Jewish voter backlash that I predicted in 2004 is apparent and growing.

Over the weekend a kerfluffle arose when some Pennsylvania Republicans sent an e-mail to Jewish voters making what appear to be somewhat exaggerated remarks about Obama’s past. See:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/27/pennsylvania-republican-apologizes-for-anti-obama-e-mail/?scp=4&sq=Newman%20+%20Rudnick&st=cse

I certainly do not condone inflated or unfair accusations, and there appear to have been some exaggerations in the Pennsylvania e-mail.

But the core comparison in the e-mail between the Obama campaign today and the advent of the Third Reich in the 1930’s is an apt one. I think there is a strong possibility that if Barack Obama goes to the White House and stays eight years, the State of Israel will not be the same state that it is today. Based on my extensive sources within Israel, I can confirm that some of the anti-Obama propaganda emanates from within Israeli sources.

Some readers will find my own suggestions exaggerated or over the top. They are not. Obama, of course, has always curried favor with wealthy and prominent members of the Jewish community in Chicago, and nationally. Obama’s Jewish supporters obviously do not view their candidate as a closet anti-Semite. (To be fair to Obama, he also toadies up to wealthy Arabs as well; his mansion in Hyde Park was part of a deal where Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi lent money to Obama crony Tony Rezko. http://mensnewsdaily.com/2008/08/26/iraqi-billionaire-threatens-reporters-investigating-rezko-affair/)

Earlier today, however, the respected Middle East columnist Amir Taheri wrote in the New York Post that Arabs and Islamists consider Obama “one of them.” http://www.nypost.com/seven/10282008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obama__the_arabs_135632.htm

Both can’t be true. Obama can’t be a strong supporter of Israel and a strong supporter of its challengers.

Taheri made the interesting observation that Obama had given one of his daughters a Muslim name. Malia. Was that a silent signal?

Before he became a presidential candidate, Palestinians and the Muslim community in Hyde Park considered Obama a strong supporter and close friend. The illegal campaign contributions Obama received from Gaza have been prominently identified. Obama has also received almost a third of a billion dollars in clandestine cash with no identification of the donor, and recent confirmation that many “doors” were nonexistent. Where did this mountain of secret cash come from?

All of the foregoing is very confusing. Can a politician work both sides of the street forever? Or will he be called on to make difficult choices?

I suggest we go back further in Obama’s life for the answer.

Earlier this year an interview on the local cable channel in Manhattan passed almost unnoticed (who noticed?). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTx5fZmgwIk&feature=related

Obama was exposed in a most unusual, and significant, way.

Going to graduate school is a grind for all but the very wealthy. I had to hustle to make it through law school (and stayed at the University of Illinois because they gave me a scholarship).

Who was raising money for Obama’s law school education? Saudi agent and anti-White, anti-Israel Black Panther adviser Khalid Al-Mansour.

Can you imagine the outcry in the liberal media if someone who opposes Israel, hates Whites and helped start the Black Panther Party had raised money for John McCain’s education? McCain would be forced out of the race if such an association appeared.

Listening to the Sutton interview it is clear that as early as 1987, when Obama was 26, Khalid Al-Mansour was very familiar with Mr. Obama. That suggests their association and Al-Mansour’s fund raising efforts did not happen overnight.

What drew the Black nationalist to Obama? When did they meet? Occidental College in Los Angeles, perhaps? As part of the Bill Ayers coterie of terrorists and misanthropes? Maybe an old buddy of Frank Marshall Davis? As of today, we don’t yet know. No one is talking.

But how many media have asked Obama about the Al-Mansour connection? Zero. None. That is a known fact. There is a complete silence by the mainstream media in confronting Obama with his Al-Mansour connection. I was the first to speak on national media about Al-Mansour and, of course, Obama’s attack dogs were unleashed to smear me. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKSq2oJ0W1c&feature=related

Any time I see a conspiracy of silence imposed on a topic, I want to know why. Who is muzzling whom? No mainstream media will venture to question Obama about his ties to this anti-Semitic, anti-White Black nationalist.

In the Middle East, I am well known as a critic of Israeli foreign policy, although I am also a supporter of the continued existence of Israel under American assistance and sponsored the Andy Martin Middle East Peace Plan in 2000. http://www.israelenews.com/view.asp?ID=452

I have a large Arab and Muslim readership. When I started writing bad things about Mr. Obama last year I was also told to “shhhh.” I ignored the request. The mainstream media have not.

Is there a pattern here? Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Minister Louis Farrakhan. Khalid Al-Mansour. The mainstream media have strenuously shied away from asking even a single question about Obama’s pattern of relationships.

Earlier in this column I suggested that if Obama spends eight years in the White House the Israel of today will not be the Israel of tomorrow. When you consider Obama’s lifelong associations with anti-Israel, anti-White, Black nationalist agitators, you can see why I have formed what CNN might ridicule as an “informed opinion.”

Is 2008 1938? In a few days Germany will observe the seventieth anniversary of the tragic anti-Semitic outburst Kristallnacht. Could it happen again? Maybe it already is.

————————————————–

Footnote: Back in 1980 my property was seized by a corrupt cabal of bankruptcy lawyers in New York and Connecticut. The bankruptcy courts are infamous as cesspools of thievery and deception . I was the innocent victim of both a political kidnapping and a burglary by corrupt federal judges in Chicago, who were trying to derail my corruption fighting activity in Illinois. A corrupt Connecticut judge, cocaine addict Jose Cabranes and his supporters. including Judge John O. Newman, schemed to assist the looters in stealing my property. I have offered to make my attorneys available to corroborate these accusations.

Vicious remarks were made on all sides. Imagine how you would feel if you were the victim of an orchestrated judicial conspiracy to intimidate and silence corruption fighting activity. Cabranes was a crook that was later rejected for the Supreme Court because he had helped loot my property. The same fate befell Newman (rejection). In those proceedings I made some unfortunate remarks, originating in a civil rights lawsuit, that raised the issue of religious discrimination and was critical of Jewish lawyers. These individuals later fabricated documents to smear me.

I have testified under oath that some of these remarks were true (they were filed in court) and others were not. But the events happened twenty-five years ago. The New York Times tried to trump up these stale remarks, on orders from Obama to smear me as an “anti-Semite,” and placed them on Page One to portray me as a current anti-Semite. Nothing could be further from the truth, as anyone who knows me would confirm. The Times’ smear attacks appear to have backfired politically.

But here’s the point: Khalid Al-Mansour has made vicious anti-White and anti-Jewish remarks. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8npeYfKI_ns

How it is that my stale remarks in a 25 year-old lawsuit are front-page news in the Times, but the fact that 20 years ago an active anti-Semite was raising money to send Obama to law school are not? How is it that Obama’s campaign spokesman Robert Gibbs goes on Fox News to brand anyone who speaks to me an anti-Semite by association, and equates me with mad bomber Bill Ayers, and yet the media have no questions for Obama or Gibbs about the infamous Khalid Al-Mansour? Double standard? You get the picture. Obama and his buddy David Axelrod are master smear merchants, and they have intimidated the media into doing their dirty work. Obama is using false charges of anti-Semitism to demonize his opponents. But the New York Times and mainstream media are concealing real anti-Semitism on the part of the man who financed Obama’s law school education. Now you know why the Times is losing readers and money, and why the mainstream media are dying. People see though this type of media skullduggery and duplicity.

———————————————-

Andy Martin predicts John McCain will win the White House
October 30, 2008 by andymartinny

Andy Martin calls the election for Senator John McCain
He says if present trends continue, it’s McCain by a whisker
Andy will be staying away from the $2 million “Temple of Obama” in Grant Park, Chicago on election night

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

ATTENTION: DAYBOOK/ASSIGNMENT EDITORS

ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEW YORK NEWS CONFERENCE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Internet powerhouse Andy Martin says Senator John McCain is going to win the presidency, by a whisker.

“McCain has finally shown who he is,” Martin says. “McCain took command.”

“Forty-two years of politics at the national and state level convince me John McCain is going to squeak in,” Andy says.

“McCain is a warrior, and warriors perform at their best with their backs to the wall. McCain’s campaign—if it continues—has hit its stride at the opportune moment.”

Andy asks Sam Zell to order release of the secret L. A. Times tape.

Martin predicts the Los Angeles Times’ manipulation will backfire on Obama.

(NEW YORK)(October 30, 2008) Let me make my prediction. John McCain wins the White House by a whisker. The race could admittedly go either way. But if present trends continue, McCain will squeak through to victory. He is not George Bush, heaven forefend, and he is not Bob Dole.

I was offered tickets to the “Temple of Obama” in Grant Park Tuesday night. Thanks but no thanks. I would not go near the place. There could easily be a riot, and violence. Forty years after the first Grant Park riots, one writer was expecting a victory celebration next week: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/28/AR2008102802954.html

Maybe Bill Ayers will show up and reprise his “Days of Range” if Obama loses. There may not be a riot. But Obama’s “victory” celebration will be an unhappy congregation.

My opinion is contrarian. I saw McCain finally take off the gloves Wednesday. He started hammering at Obama’s secret cash and the mendacity and manipulation of the Los Angeles Times. Sarah Palin did the same. Finally they are fighting.

First, the Times kerfluffle. The Los Angeles Times dust up is a metaphor for the media arrogance and manipulation that have characterized the entire campaign. The Times refuses to release a tape of Obama at a controversial dinner in Chicago. The paper claims that a confidentiality agreement exists. Where is it? Is the agreement in writing? Have they asked to be relieved of the confidentiality restriction? Doubtful. Instead of working for the full truth, the Times claims a “right” to manage the news so as to conceal firsthand evidence from the public. Is that what journalistic “ethics” have come to?

I am asking Tribune Company majordomo Sam Zell to override the L. A. gang and order release of the tape.

Most of Obama’s Hyde Park barons were apparently on the tape, and all at once: Ayers and Dohrn to be sure. The “guys in the neighborhood” were having a neighborhood dinner. And trashing Israel. Such a nabe.

Now I do not want to misrepresent my own views. I have been a critic of the Israeli regime. My views are no secret in the Middle East. But what I am respected for there, and here, is being open and honest about my views, and telling the truth as I see it, qualities that are sorely lacking in Mr. Obama.

Obama on the other hand, knows nothing, sees nothing and hears nothing. Hmm. A man who is so perceptually challenged should not be in the Oval Office. I have a close friend who says Obama should be elected even if he is a crook. I do not agree.

I do not want to return the Daley machine to the White House ever again. I saw how they operated in Washington 42 years ago.

And so the tape stands as a symbolic example of how and why people no longer trust the mainstream media. “It’s mine,” cry the Times editors. “And you won’t see it.” When has that behavior ever engendered friendship, or support, on the playground? The Times is hurting Obama worse by concealing the tape than if it released the material and let the chips fall.

McCain and Palin have correctly seized on the tape for its symbolic value. Trust me, it works. Finally, someone in their entourage is thinking, watching, analyzing and acting.

I watched McCain on Larry King Live. McCain looked great, spoke well and gave me assurance that he is ready for the final bombing run. I have been flying in formation with McCain for months, swearing at the guy, throwing beer bottles at him, and telling him I am going kick his butt after the next mission.

Maybe he’s finally ready to be a warrior again. Perhaps the mealy-mouthed campaign he has been running embarrassed him.

Dan Rather was also on Larry King, and curiously subdued. Rather knows a lot about close finishes and I think he senses McCain is going to surprise.

McCain has been under attack with every dollar Obama could scrounge from his anonymous supporters, a veritable blitzkrieg of clandestine cash directed at the American people and our democracy. And McCain held up. He is making small strides even under Obama’s fire.

A campaign that is that resilient signals two critical factors: McCain is ready to come out of his bunker and spearhead the counterattack. He has taken command.

And, the other army, the Obama Gang, has not been able to win the support of the populace even while passing out inordinate amounts of cash and inundating the airwaves with propaganda.

Obama may even become a negative poster boy for unlimited fundraising. He may have inadvertently fallen into an advertising trap. Sometimes, even in advertising, you can overspend. You can overdo the advertising until it turns customers against you. Obama may have reached, and passed, that point. People do not want to feel they are under assault.

McCain has to keep hammering away from now until Election Day. He has to stay on the attack, playing on all the issues that define Obama as a cipher, a mystery, an alien. He might even demand that Obama produce a birth certificate to show who he really is. It may be impolitic, but it will work.

I make my prediction with full confidence that it reflects a trend in McCain’s favor, but with some fear that he could revert to mush again. I hope not.

Personally, I like both men. Hatred is not in my toolbox. I don’t mind bashing Obama, because I sincerely believe he does not belong in the White House. At least not until we beat his silly socialist nostrums out of him and tease some of the bitterness and anger out of Michelle. Still, I don’t hate the man.

McCain I understand. He comes from a Navy family. My father and grandfather served King and country. I received a few “dreams” from my dad. I see McCain cooling down as the race heats up. That’s the way they act in the cockpit. No place for fear or queasiness when you drop you nose and point down towards the target. McCain comes from a generation of flyers that actually saw their targets; today pilots stand off the target and direct guided bombs. I don’t think McCain will disappoint me.

I chose February 22nd, Hillary Clinton’s early low point, to rouse her to action. She started to fight, and she almost won the prize. I picked all but one of her primaries correctly.

And now I sense that the squadron commander is going to lead the attack on Festung Obama. Obama has a strong team, no doubt about that. But all of his supporters are moral mercenaries, from Axelrod on down. They all want to win to grab the spoils. Obama wants to be emperor. It is a classic Chicago combination, almost Daleyesque in its dimensions.

McCain is a patriot and so am I. We want to win for country, flag and Constitution. Nothing more than that.

In six days we are going to find out whether the mercenaries or the patriots carry the day. Me? I’ll bet on Old Glory any day.

McCain in a whisker, and not much of a whisker at that.

NEWS CONFERENCE DETAILS:

WHO:

Internet powerhouse and Obama Author Andy Martin

WHAT:

Internet warrior Andy Martin predicts a McCain victory on November 4th, by a “whisker.”

WHERE:

909 Third Avenue, public sidewalk in front of FDR Station, New York

WHEN: Thursday, October 30, 4:00 P. M.

MEDIA CONTACT: (866) 706-2639; CELL (917) 664-9329

TO PURCHASE BOOK: http://www.OrangeStatePress.com

ANDY E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com

I think you're gonna need more bandwidth and a memory expansion module for your server .

10-27 UPDATE
Andy Martin’s disclosure of Barack Obama’s real father elicits silence from the candidate

Andy Martin tangles with a TV network over investigative techniques and the truth about Barack Obama’s typewritten 1961 birth certificate. Why are the mainstream media not telling the American people the truth about Barack Obama?

Internet powerhouse Andy Martin interviewed in New York by TV network
Martin raises again the question of why Obama refuses to release his typewritten original 1961 birth certificate
New columns, new disclosures are coming—just the facts about the mysterious Barack Frank Marshall Davis Obama
ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Internet powerhouse Andy Martin is interviewed by a TV network, watch for the report (we don’t know when)

Martin opens a new series of columns on Barack Obama as a result of the TV network interview

COMING MONDAY: Barack Obama and Islam, Again

Andy explains the difference between a legal investigation and a “TV investigation”

(NEW YORK)(October 26, 2008) One of the national TV networks sent a Washington producer and correspondent to interview me in New York today (Sunday) and it was a spirited exchange. I don’t know when any part of the interview will air, but they were asking me questions for over an hour.

So, yes, the “Mainstream Media” (”MSM”) do contact me, and I respond courteously and cooperatively when scheduling permits.

But I also learn from these exchanges with the MSM. The correspondent asked me a lot of questions that represented stale information about me. I asked him what relevant stale material had to the 2008 campaign. There was no response.

And, of course, I was asked for “evidence.” In light of his remarks perhaps it is time for what Rush Limbaugh calls a “caller clinic,” and I will call, “Talking Back to the MSMs.”

First, a little understanding about my background. Most “journalists” come out of journalism school, and they are trained how to react and report when the Wal-Mart truck overturns and spills oranges in the street. Similarly, most network “investigators” have to be good looking first, and journalists second. Anonymous producers do most of the research and investigation. TV “investigations” usually involve consumer fraud types of inquiries where someone has cheated someone else and there is a contact to prove the terms. TV seldom conducts genuine investigations.

I was not trained as a journalist. I studied English in college, and went on to law school, where I learned how to investigate and prepare a case. Unlike consumer disputes, there is seldom documentary evidence to confirm a conspiracy. That is why courts permit circumstantial evidence as probative (proving) and allow adverse inferences to be drawn from refusals to produce material in civil cases.

A lawsuit investigation is an entirely different process than a TV “investigation.” How do you “interview” people that have been dead, or their living coconspirators? How do you conduct historical research? Tangible evidence can be elusive; testimonial evidence is critical. Does that mean we should suspend the search for truth? If that was the case, no criminal conspiracy could ever be prosecuted as long as the coconspirators refused to talk.

I have forty years of experience. And, I have made news over the past forty years with investigations around the world, obtaining information that no one else could elicit.

So I approached the investigation of Barack Obama’s past as a preparation for a lawsuit and not as a TV show. The results are starkly different. While the MSM’s have “investigated” Obama and found nothing, or whitewashed everything they did find, I have found a plethora of serious questions about him. In addition, I have been able to highlight material that was developed by others due to my interpretive and analytical experience.

With this preface we come to the TV production of Hannity’s America on October 5th that has caused the Obama campaign to go ballistic with smears and counterattacks on me, and sent Hannity’s rating soaring: the material involving radical anti-American revolutionary and mad bomber Bill Ayers of Chicago.

Obama exploded when I presented the first reasonable Ayers/Obama timeline on Hannity’s program. I expressed an expert opinion on Ayers and Obama based on undisputed facts, circumstantial evidence and reasonable inferences drawn from the foregoing.

Could anyone outside Chicago really investigate Ayers without understanding the bizarre local culture? In what other city in America, other than Chicago with its culture of cronyism and corruption, could the mayor say that a mad bomber was an esteemed citizen? Only in Chicago.

Do you know of any violent criminals who have been praised by local officials elsewhere and promoted to high office? Send me the names. Chicago is unique because cronyism and corruption trump everything else. That is the case with Ayers and the Mayor. Ayers may be crazy, but he’s Chicago crazy and he’s Daley crazy. The mayor loves him because the mayor’s father loved Ayers’ father. Sad but true. Only in Chicago.

For forty years I have rejected, investigated, exposed and prosecuted Chicago-style cronyism and corruption. I helped send crooked Cook County judges to jail. The local media do not like me, because I embarrass them. Writers at the bankrupt Chicago Sun-Times go into apoplexy every time I expose their paltry contribution to the 2008 campaign. One moron at the Sun-Times made a vow not to write about me, and then broke his own oath. Pathetic.

I went to Hawai’i two weeks ago to ask the questions that no else one had ever asked. Why did the pieces of the Obama puzzle never fit? We were the first investigative team to land in Honolulu to pursue these conundrums about the candidate.

And we found answers. Obama is not Obama. His father was the controversial Frank Marshall Davis, who–surprised?–rose to prominence in Chicago. I did a story disclosing Obama’s true father, a claim that he has not denied. Obama’s silence is deafening. He knows we are ready for him if he does.

Davis may have been a proverbial “bad guy” in the eyes of conservatives, but he was well-liked in Honolulu. And he had influence in city hall. His friends are saddened that Davis’ son is not being elected president, and that Davis’ son travels under the false flag of another family, “Obama”. The whole thing was a tragic fraud linked to Obama’s childish mother, Davis’ existing wife and family, and Barack Obama senior who received some vigorish in return for posing as the father.

I should point out that these family machinations and convolutions are hardly unusual or unprecedented. People discover all the time that parents they thought were their parents are not, or that siblings or cousins are not in fact the relatives they thought they were. Families do occasionally lie to each other. Obama’s is not the first “switched at birth” puzzle to unravel.

That’s why Obama’s “father” was never a father to him. And that’s why “Dreams From My Father” is devoted secretly to Obama’s real father, Frank Davis, who did give his son many dreams and pointed him in the direction of Chicago, where Davis still had many contacts and longstanding relationships. When you plug Davis into the “puzzles” about Obama, there are no longer any “puzzles” or questions. The pieces all fit together nicely.

Which brings us to Obama’s birth certificate. Obama has lied to the American people. Lied. Yes, lied. He is lying as you read this. He has released a piece of paper that is merely a computerized print-out from a data base. We provided a copy of a 1963-style birth certificate to the TV network. We will be returning to this document over and over again in the next week. Obama has concealed the original typewritten 1961 document. The original document in 1961 was typed, not computer-printed as is the sample published by “FactCheck.org.”

Of course my revelation about Obama’s real father irritated some conservatives (and Democrats) that claim Obama was born in Kenya. I have seen no admissible evidence to confirm that he was born in Kenya. One person claimed to have a “tape” of Obama’s grandmother claiming to be present at his birth. Problem? Yes. The “grandmother” is not his grandmother, a fact that has continuously confused the media (yup, the Chicago Sun-Times had the wrong photo on its website for months) because of Obama’s honorific references to her as “granny.” Obama never met his real Kenyan “grandmother” and there is no evidence she was present at his birth.

Ironically, the TV correspondent asked me if I should “apologize” to Obama for mistakenly saying he was a Muslim at birth. I responded that Obama should apologize to the American people for lying about whom his real father was. He has falsely maintained that he is an “Obama” when he is a “Davis.” I am not afraid to publish the truth as we find it, even as it may contradict what we previously thought to be true. Honesty to my audience and the relentless pursuit of the truth are my paladins. And, look for “Obama and Islam, Again,” on Monday, October 27th).

The bottom line: we have embarrassed the New York Times and run circles around the mainstream media, and they don’t like it. Obama unleashed his mud merchants to smear me, and only succeeded in making me a larger presence in the campaign. When I left for Honolulu, Obama had not been there in a while, and his grandmother was already in the hospital without any noticeable concern on his part. He was planning nothing. No MSM had ever conducted any investigation in Honolulu.

The minute my team started digging, everyone started paying attention and, surprise, Obama landed in his jet to visit his real (white) grandmother. Wonders never cease. Miraculously, she had made an instant recovery by the time he arrived. Many people feel he used his grandmother’s illness as a pretext to come to Hawai’i. I do not view that as an unreasonable theory.

In closing, I have one question for Barack Frank Marshall Davis Obama, pretender president of the United States: why won’t you allow me and the American people to see your real, original 1961 birth certificate (in Hawai’i they called a “Certificate of Live Birth.”)?

Until Obama produces the original 1961 birth certificate—typewritten, not computer generated—-he will be a pretender president to the American people and me.

Only a complete moron would vote for a presidential candidate that is afraid to release a copy of his original 1961 birth certificate.

John McCain leaves a lot to be desired as a candidate, and no doubt as a president. But he is a real person. He does not have to hide either his birth certificate or his family history.

A vote for Barack Obama is a vote for a mystery man that lives in fear of his own family history, and lives in fear of what voters would do if they saw a copy of the original 1961 typewritten Certificate of Live Birth. Who is voting for this phony? Who could vote for such a phony?

Ask the Mainstream Media. They are shoving him down our throats.

Over to you Barry (Obama/Davis).

MONDAY: Barack Obama and Islam, Again (last in a series, rescheduled from October 20)

TUESDAY: Questions the Mainstream Media will not ask Barack Obama, The Cover-up: Part One (first in a series)

HAHAHA! You just can’t make this stuff up…

Fox News and Rupert Murdoch throw Internet powerhouse Andy Martin under the bus.
The "death of Fox News as we know it," says Andy Martin

"Shameful," is the way Martin characterizes the cowardice of Rupert Murdoch. "This is the end of Fox News as we know it"

"Viewers be warned: in the future you will be seeing Obama propaganda on Fox news, as laundered by Rupert Murdoch."

Fox News attacks Andy Martin

Fox VP Bill Shine is no longer defending the use of "journalist" Andy Martin in smearing Barack Obama during a Hannity special. "Having that guy on was a mistake," Shine told Washington Post media writer Howard Kurtz. "We obviously didn't do enough research on who the guest was."

Priceless, JeffC!

You've really got to question the sanity of a grown man who always refers to himself as an "Internet Powerhouse."

But there's still conspiracy theorists out there, like our own Fred, MOC, hershey/bpr, and winby, who believe in crazies like Andy Martin, bless their lil' hearts.

Is there an empty straight jacket lying in the corner of a padded cell somewhere? Honestly (again, in my best fake British accent)?

Maybe Andy missed this- Follieri was just convicted- he pleaded guilty, to fraud and was sentanced to 54 months in jail.
"Yet Follieri's ties to McCain's orbit have been largely overlooked by the media. Follieri first met McCain when the Arizona Senator visited Montenegro from August 29-31 as part of a Congressional delegation that included Republican senators Lindsay Graham, Richard Burr, Saxby Chambliss, Mel Martinez and John Sununu." [We'll have more on what else McCain was doing in Montenegro in a forthcoming article in the print edition of The Nation.
The connection- Follieri hosted McCains 70h Birthday bash on his yacht. Guilt by association, maybe? http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080929/berman_ames

etc.
McCain hasn't even gone here..he won't need to when the real story breaks...all you have to do is look at those EARS!!
A lawsuit would be great, DNA testing...that would force the false messiah's hand or ears, whatever comes first

for someone who's arms must be absolutely numb from being constrained by the numerous straps and chains of the straight jacket you somehow escaped from. When the story breaks? Did you say that? Really? The election is week after next. Just when do you think this story is gonna take off birdie? A coo coo bird comes to mind. Are you the one Jeff C. asked how you remember to breath, or are there more of you out there?

Are you calling me or Obama a communist. Inquiring minds want to know. Are you saying that Obama himself switched his birth information? What are you saying? What is Andy saying? hee hee - WHO CARES? Just a few more days to go - and this strategy by the wise handlers of the McCain campaign will have failed! Open your eyes! The operating 'color' this year is GREEN!

if you can't read it, i ain't tellin' ya'...
(hint- neither, but another person older than O with big ears too!)

I join with Andy and urge you to contribute to his cause. Like he said, he can't do it alone.

Unstamped certificate suggests Obama may not be "natural born" US citizen
By Reuven Koret June 24, 2008

Bookmark to del.icio.usDigg This Story

The "birth certificate" claimed by the Barack Obama campaign is not certified as authentic and appears to be a photoshopped fake.

The image, purporting to come from the Hawaii Department of Health, has been the subject of intense skepticism in the blogosphere in the past two weeks. But now the senior spokesman of that Department has confirmed to Israel Insider what are the required features of a certified birth document -- features that Obama's purported "birth certificate" clearly lack.

The image became increasingly suspect with Israel Insider's revelation that variations of the certificate image were posted on the Photobucket image aggregation website -- including one listing the location of Obama's birth as Antarctica, one with the certificate supposedly issued by the government of North Korea, and another including a purported photo of baby Barack -- one of which has a "photo taken" time-stamp just two minutes before the article and accompanying image was posted on the left-wing Daily Kos blog.

That strongly suggests that Daily Kos obtained the image from Photobucket, not the State of Hawaii, the Obama family, or the Obama campaign. Photobucket is not generally known as a credible supplier of official vital records for any of the fifty states, and the liberties that other Photoshoppers took with the certificates confirms this.

Some of these oddities surfaced in Israel Insider's previous article on the subject, but new comparative documentary evidence presented below, and official verification obtained by Israel Insider from a senior Hawaiian official, provides the strongest confirmation yet.

An authentic Hawaiian birth certificate for another Hawaiian individual has since surfaced which, using the same official form as the presumptive Obama certificate, includes an embossed official seal and an authoritative signature, coming through from the back. Obama's alleged certificate lacks those features, and the certificate number referencing the birth year has been blacked out, making it untraceable.

Janice Okubo, Director of Communications of the State of Hawaii Department of Health, told Israel Insider: "At this time there are no circumstances in which the State of Hawaii Department of Health would issue a birth certification or certification of live birth only electronically." And, she added, "In the State of Hawaii all certified copies of certificates of live birth have the embossed seal and registrar signature on the back of the document."

Compare the top image presented by his campaign as evidence of Obama's 1961 birth and the other certifying the birth of one Patricia Decosta.

Click for higher resolution image.

Click for higher resolution image.

So if he were registered as being born in Hawaii, Barack Obama -- because only he or another member of his immediate family could by law request a "Certification of Live Birth" -- must have a certified paper copy, with embossed stamp and seal, or he could request one. But what his campaign has put forward as genuine, according to the senior spokesman in the relevant department of the State of Hawaii, is not in fact a certified copy. It is not valid.

Whereas the uncertified Obama document provides the date "filed by registrar", the certified DeCosta document provides the date "accepted by the registrar." The difference between filing an application for a Certification of Live Birth and having it accepted may be key here.

The Obama campaign, however, continues to flaunt the unstamped, unsealed, uncertified document -- notably in very low resolution -- on its "Fight the Smears" website, with campaign officials vowing that it's authentic, sending the image around as "proof" to reporters, and inviting supporters to refer to it as they battle against supposed distortions and calumnies against their candidate. However, the campaign refuses to produce an authentic original birth certificate from the year of Obama's birth, or even a paper version with seal and signature of the "Certification of Live Birth." Nor has it even published an electronic copy with the requisite embossed seal and signature.

The failure of the Obama campaign to do so, and its willingness instead to put up an invalid, uncertified image -- what now appears to be a crude forgery -- raises the dramatic question of why the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate might have to hide.

Until now, it has been thought that there might be some embarrassing information on the real certificate: was the candidate's name something other than Barack Hussein Obama II, as it is claimed? Was no father listed because of the uncertainty over Obama's paternity? Was his father's race listed as Arab, or Muslim, rather than African? These revelations might be embarrassing, and further undermine his credibility, but he could disavow and downplay their significance. Would revealing such embarrassment outweigh the far greater risks involved in perpetuating a palpable forgery, or passing off an uncertified official document as being certified?

There is one possibility, however, which alone might justify the risk that Obama and his campaign seems to be taking in putting forward the uncertified document image: Obama was not in fact born in Hawaii and may not be an American citizen at all, or at least not a "natural born citizen" as the Constitution defines the requirement for the nation's chief executive. Real original birth certificates, circa 1961, have all kinds of verifiable information that would confirm Obama's origins, or throw them into doubt should they be lacking.

Research has since uncovered the law, in force at the time of Obama's birth, that were he to have been born in another country, his young American mother's youth extended time abroad would not suffice to make him a "natural born citizen." Even if he were naturalized later -- and there is no evidence that he was -- he would not be eligible to run for the office of president and -- if forgery or misrepresentation were involved -- he and his staffers might find themselves facing stiff federal and state charges.

But if, at this late date, Obama has no proof of being a US citizen by law, natural born or otherwise, then he or his advisers may be tempted to try to "tough out" the allegations about his "birth certificate" or the lack thereof. He and his campaign have gotten through other embarrassments: maybe this one will go away, too.

Because the consequences were he to admit, or should it come out, that he was not born in Hawaii would be so grave as to make it tempting to take the gamble and hope that no one dares call his most audacious bluff by demanding proof. Talk about the audacity of hope.

But now the State of Hawaii has dashed those hopes by clarifying that a certified birth certificate must have an embossed seal and signature, features his claimed birth certificate image lack.

The longer Obama waits, the graver grow the consequences of waiting.

There is one simple way for the candidate to clear up the issue once and for all: produce for public inspection and objective analysis the paper copy of his original Hawaiian birth certificate -- if one exists. If he's lost the original, he can request a certified copy. Ordinary citizens are required to produce one to get a passport or a driver's license. Surely it's not too much to ask from a man who aspires to hold the highest office in the land.

The issue is not whether Obama is black or white, Christian or Muslim. It is whether he was born in the USA and thus a citizen eligible according to the Constitution to run for President.

If proof of citizenship does not exist, then surely it would be wiser to admit it now.

Because if Barack Hussein Obama II does not produce definitive proof of his "natural born" American citizenship with original, verifiable documents, he will be setting the stage for a very public battle over his personal credibility, the basic legitimacy of his candidacy, and its possible criminality.

UPDATE 6/26:
Janice Okubo, in response to an Israeli Insider question on Tuesday, would not confirm nor deny whether she had told a St. Petersburg Times reporter whether she had said the birth certificate was "real", citing the statutory stipulation that "Hawaii state law (HRS §338-18) prevents disclosure of information contained in vital statistics records except to those people who have a direct and tangible interest in the record as defined by statute." This would, however, seem to negate the propriety of any disclosure by her of confidential information.

Jim Geraghty of The National Review Online, following up on this Israel Insider report, said he had contacted Okubo:

"I spoke to Ms. Okubo late Wednesday afternoon, and she said she had seen the version of Obama's certificate of live birth posted on the sites. While her office cannot verify the information on a form without the permission of the certificate holder (Obama), she said "the form is exactly the same" and it has 'all the components of a birth certificate' record issued by the state. In other words, she sees no reason to think the version posted on Obama's web site and Daily Kos is not genuine."

"The 'embossed seal' in question is, she said, probably on the back of the document provided to Daily Kos, but not visible (as in another certificate posted on Israel Insider for contrast). She thinks the difference in visibility can be attributed to the pressure used when applying the seal."

Geraghty's interpretation of Okubo's comments is inexact and tendentious. First, her observation that "the form is the same" is not contested, here or elsewhere. No one is doubting that the form that appears on the various websites (including this one) is a replica of that used for valid certificates. Therefore Geraght's interpretation that follows "In other words" is clearly his own conclusion, not hers.

Indeed, Okubo confirms to Geraghty that the image is lacking the "embossed seal" (and the official signature) that are required for the certificate to be valid. While "she thinks" that the difference in visibility might be attributed to varying "pressure," she admits that she does not know and has not seen the original.

Contrasting the purported Obama image with the DeCosta sample, it is hard to imagine the embossed seal and signature being of such light pressure that they would become completely invisible. An inked date of June 6, 2007, in reverse, does come through. But in any event, Okubo's confirmation that the premsumptive birth certificate is lacking the required stamps makes it all the more imperative for Obama to release the original paper certification, the only valid kind, and not an easy-to-photoshop electronic facsimile thereof. It should not be hard to produce, since Hawaii provides for family members to request them.

Even though Geraghy notes that Obama "initially refused to provide his birth certificate," he has suggested that it is "rather unlikely" that Obama was born in Kenya, since it would require that the candidate and his family do a lot of lying. In fact, there were reports of Kenyati relatives claiming he was born there, and there is the mysterious disappearance of his grandmother, who may indeed know something about this subject.

After all, being born in Hawaii is part of the "family legend" and it would be unreasonable to expect this to vary from interview to interview, especially when a non-Hawaiian birth would invalidate Obama's run for the presidency.

It is indeed hard to believe that Obama could have gone through his life without having to prove that he was an American citizen. But the credulity with which the mainstream media has automatically accepted as valid the image that appears on the radical left Daily Kos blog and on the Obama campaign's polemical "Fight the Smears" website makes it clear that many have been unwilling, now and in the past, to demand proof of an authentic document. They prefer to accept on faith that the candidate or his campaign would not lie about such a thing, assuming he has nothing to hide and no motive to lie.

But until the certified paper birth document is produced -- either by media pressure or a legal challenge in any state -- the fact remains that Obama has not proven that he is a "natural born citizen" eligible to be President according to the Constitution.

Born in the U.S.A.

One last time.

There are always people with kooky ideas. My concern is this. I think it is a national security issue for no one to have allegedly seen the original. Americans who adopt children from other counries have at least 10-20 different documents to be shown,not to the press, but gov. officials in the US before they can bring the children into the US. Also,note some of the new places where we will need visas to visit. It is national security.

the truth is coming out...what'cha gonna' do when they come for O?!?!?!?

1. Who is this "they" that might come for O?

2. What makes you think we can't co-op them into the birth certificate conspiracy?

...the COPS tune ringing a bell now?...
bad boys, bad boys, what ya' gonna' do...

Is Cops a show? I've never seen it. I think I've heard of it. It vaguely rings a bell but the relevance escapes me.

Andy is right on so far..."O" is now in "H"-5-0...

I really don't think Andy is a bad boy. He has documented mental health problems so I'm giving him a break.