ACTION

http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/04/critics-obamas-latest-long-form-birth-certificate-is-a-fake/

http://teapartyorg.ning.com/video/forgery-obama-birth?xg_source=activity

http://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2011/04/27/obamas-long-form-birth-certificate-not/

“. . . if an adroit 12-year old computer geek had master-minded this fraud it would, of necessity have been 96% more difficult to discover.”

“Before there were “birthers,” all this began with Hillary Clinton’s campaign allegations in late 2007 and early 2008.”

FoxNews and Mainstream Media Drop Ball

New Obama Birth Paper an Obvious Fake

They’re called “Techies” or “Geeks” and their research indicates that this week, whoever came up with the White House document purporting to be the valid and true long-form birth certificate from August, 1961 for Barack Obama was either extremely inept or deliberately wanted to be shown up as a fraud.  Where did all this “birther” controversy come from?

Before there were “birthers” as we know them, all this began with Hillary Clinton’s campaign allegations in late 2007 and early 2008.  The Democratic Party National Committee muckety-mucks were unwilling to get involved and later when obvious corruption such as bussing-in illegal voters from out of state won Obama 14 of the 16 caucus states whereas Hillary won 26 of the 42 voting states (some states use both processes on the same day), Barack Obama won the Democratic nomination with the Democratic Party machinery again unwilling to step into the fray and make a ruling. The mainstream media refused to cover the story and then when Hillary lost the nomination began to attribute it strictly to “conspiracy-theorizing conservatives” never mentioning that Hillary’s people had first seen the problem for what it was: a threat to the Constitution of the United States and an audacious fraud.

For quite some time all Obama-doubters regardless of party had to content themselves with reports that his Social Security number on file for many years and many uses was one the Social Security Administration never actually issued to anyone; and that IF IT HAD BEEN ISSUED it would have been issued to a Connecticut resident not to one in Hawaii, back when Obama was still attending prep school on the Island on the issue date (when he was only sixteen).  The most helpful document was unavailable at that time.   And they’ve had to content themselves with a short-form birth certificate which was, if nothing else, internally-consistent although out of numerical order with earlier and later births in the same hospital.  

To repeat: all this began with Hillary Clinton’s campaign allegations in early 2008.  Let us be perfectly clear, IF HILLARY’s campaign in early 2008 had the evidence presented to the American people this week on WhiteHouse.gov . . . she and not Barack Obama would be the president of the United States . . . that is not a guess or a theory . . . that is virtually incontrovertible fact (barring a miracle, no Republican could win in 2008 with the economy as fouled as it was). However, if John McCain had this information in October, 2008, that would have proven miraculous and he would be the president . . . that’s how important the fraudulent information provided by that long-form birth certificate is . . . .

 All that changed with the surprise release this week of the long-requested, long-form document. Obama-lovers immediately said, “There, we knew it all along.” Obama doubters bit their tongues. Meanwhile the mainstream-lamestream media began crowing and they and even the always more vigilant FoxNews all simultaneously failed to investigate the document.

                This posting of the long-form document changed everything. Soon it was apparent that something akin to lunacy is going on. Whatever the absolute truth about the recently revealed “long-form” Obama birth certificate turns out to be  . . . one thing is obvious, the document we’re looking at is an inexpert computer-generated fake purportedly showing the truth from 1961 when no computers existed except in the military. Many sources on the internet have given highly credible evidence that the new document has been fraudulently created using “photo-shop-type” technology. Truly that document is so very obviously phony that it’s INCONCEIVABLE that anyone closely politically connected with Barack Obama could have deliberately created such an obviously phony “record” with any reasonable faith that its fakery would not be discovered within hours: a lot is at stake after all. This is the great mystery, why? And why now?  

The TRUE document, if such exists is thus still hidden from the American people. We repeat:  it’s INCONCEIVABLE that anyone closely politically connected with Barack Obama could have deliberately created such an obviously phony “record” with any reasonable faith that its fakery would not be discovered within hours.

ITEM: Posting of the long-form document linked above was a complete surprise to Obama’s political opponents and his allies alike. Why was it released this week? As a distraction from other chicanery?

ITEM: After thirty months of dodging the birth certificate issue and over $1.2 million spent by Obama and the Democratic National Committee to prevent efforts to have any documents at all released, suddenly the timing is right this week?? And suddenly this counterfeit long-form birth certificate is posted for all to see. How “inexpert” is this fake document . . . even at first viewing, Rajjpuut immediately had doubts . . . for example . . . .

ITEM: Rajjpuut’s first impression was that the “paper” was computer paper not generally available until at least a dozen years after Obama’s birth in 1961. . . but there was no proof of that, just some vague recollections from the past and the fact that of the perhaps 500 birth certificates he’s dealt with (verifying athletes’ and chess players’ age and eligibility) over the years, he’s never seen anything quite like that.  Perhaps a copy of an original birth certificate is now routinely produced on that paper . . . but he felt the original never could have been . . . in the end not having expertise in this area no definite conclusions could be made.

ITEM: His second impression was that the background computer pattern had been deliberately “woven” into the central “content” part of the document itself and did NOT match the external paper’s apparent newer age and higher contrast . . . it was as if the whole central image with its writing had been deliberately “cut and pasted” onto the larger paper expanse and carefully lined up with the external design pattern. Again, not having expertise in this area no definite conclusions could be made.

Item: Third impression -- the document presented appears very different from contemporary 1961 long-form records of birth for others in Hawaii (and in the supposed hospital where Obama was born) which the earlier revealed Obama short-form has often been compared to all these years. To be precise, it appears like someone took a modern COLB blank and filled in the “proper information” from 1961 and the information appears to be printed consistent with a modern computer rather than with a 1961 or earlier typewriter. This was sufficient to Rajjpuut to indicate that the item was probably phony . . . but he lacked expertise to make any authoritative conclusions.

ITEM: Certainly the data Rajjpuut had seen on 60’s era birth certificates such as the baby’s length and weight was not provided . . . data which one would expect on a legitimate birth certificate.

ITEM: Within a day, actually within five or six hours, people a lot more involved in the “documents field” and a lot more expert on computer graphics modification were pouring out their souls on the internet proving (by finding as few as three and as many as thirty-four different inconsistencies) that the document was fake and so stupidly faked that, in their opinions, no reasonable expert could doubt the counterfeiting.  Rajjpuut got the impression that if an adroit 12-year old computer geek had master-minded this fraud it would, of necessity have been 96% more difficult to discover.

ITEM: Many of the alleged inconsistencies were graphic; others were logical or even numerical; others were a combination of graphic and logical. Of some approximately sixty distinct critics, Rajjpuut opines that only one in twenty was dubious in its presentation (not necessarily in its conclusions – just unconvincing in its “science”).

ITEM: How were these examinations done?  The 95% of these experts who Rajjpuut found “convincing” all began the same way, they blew up the page by perhaps 300%-400% (kind of like Sherlock Holmes with his magnifying glass) and at that size a whole host of features about a document you weren’t aware of before come into sharp relief. At that size the “uneasy” feeling Rajjpuut got from his first and second impressions of the life-sized document become clearly manifest so that all the inconsistencies jump out at you. Rather than belabor the point here are five helpful websites and you, the reader, can judge for yourself:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/27/president-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate

http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/04/critics-obamas-latest-long-form-birth-certificate-is-a-fake/

http://teapartyorg.ning.com/video/forgery-obama-birth?xg_source=activity

http://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2011/04/27/obamas-long-form-birth-certificate-not/

http://marbiesblog.wordpress.com/2011/04/29/obamas-long-form-birth-certificate-is-another-fraud/

Now the problem with all this “birther” stuff (they prefer the term “Constitutionalists”) appears to the uninitiated to smack of a half-baked conspiracy theory of fifty-years duration (from 1961-2011). In actuality, however, the root cause of the matter seems to be a flighty self-described Marxist known as Stanley Ann Dunham (Barack’s mother) who lived 2/3 of her lifetime as a scatterbrained-communist always  thumbing her nose## at the United States and all it stood for. It’s not known where she delivered her son.  Given all the facts that we won’t go into, Canada is far more likely than Kenya (she was traced to Seattle and Vancouver back about the time Barack was purported to have been born) . . . but it is literally unknown. It is known that Stanley Ann’s mother (Barack’s maternal grandmother) Madeline (yes, that is the correct spelling, NOT Madilyn as given by hundreds of less thorough sites) who was a very industrious and conventional person put in the paperwork in Hawaii that generated the short-form; and that she had a birth announcement put into the newspaper (normally handled by the hospital and reporters) a few days after the reported birthday of Barack Obama. Because all the information on this short form is generated by the parents or grandparents and not state records  . . . it is thus how the controversy arises . . . and it arises because of Stanley Ann Dunham.

Whether or not Barack Obama was actually born in the United States, it appears that his mother Stanley Ann Dunham deliberately lost him his citizenship when she moved to Indonesia (which did not allow dual citizenships in those days) and once there married a high-placed local petroleum official, Lolo Soetoro, and the stepfather soon adopted the boy. So American citizenship, something which most of us value quite highly – was possibly deliberately put at risk for her son Barack not once, but twice by Ms. Dunham. Much of the sketchiness of Barack’s nebulous past can be attributed to the fact that he seems to have spent a good part of his youth under various names, most likely-provided by his mother. Barry was the most common given name but Obama, Soetero, Soweto and several other last names seem to have been used indiscriminately.

The mainstream media would have you believe that birthers/ Constitutionalists believe that Barack Obama is the devil and a worldwide conspiracy exists just to put him into control over the world . . . nothing of the sort, it is clearly Ms. Dunham who is the central personage in this little birther-drama. She may have even told Barack he was born in Kenya. Certainly she spent an awful lot of his early life telling him all the great things about his father Barak (that is correct spelling) Hussein Obama, Sr. a Marxist official** in the Kenyan post-colonial government (who lost his job when his very vocal demands for more “scientific socialism” a.k.a. communism) conflicted with the more moderate socialism of the Kenyata government. His paternal grandmother says our president was born there and she witnessed it, but no evidence has ever been produced documenting this claim.

Certainly, the Associated Press following a debate during his senate campaign relying on Obama-provided information called him a “Kenyan-born U.S. Senate hopeful” and this information was reprinted with the bigger story in Kenyan papers; and later Michelle Obama referred to her husband’s native land as Kenya.  This explains the context of the often-cited debate, in which Keyes faulted Obama for not being a “natural-born citizen”, and in which Obama, by his quick retort, “So what? I am running for Illinois Senator, not the presidency”, with Obama self-admitting that he was not eligible for the office of president. All this rather quickly became known by some in the Hillary campaign. Later, probably much later, someone decided that Barack’s maternal grandmother’s short-form indicating Hawaiian birth was essential to an Obama presidential effort . . . that’s when, in 2007, the short-form generated in 1961 first appeared as “evidence” in Obama’s favor and inconsistencies were brought to the Hilary Clinton campaign’s attention and the whole “birther” argument arose.

            It appears that the bottom line is this: Americans disgusted with the way the Republicans had governed from Washington, D.C. voted for a pig –in-a-poke known as “hope and change” and thanks to the mainstream media’s refusal to vett Obama, we don’t actually know who the present President of the United States actually is. On the one hand there’s the birth issue . . . which could be small potatoes or absolutely huge. Then there’s this sealing of all his records and college credentials and his frankly, slippery life narrative (Why did they build a statute to ten-year-0ld Barack in Indonesia and place it in the Muslim school he attended?) for both himself and for his mother and maternal grandfather. Then there’s the vast amount of radicals he’s installed into the government and especially as unvetted czars. And next is his apparently unashamed political dirty tricks and the brave promises for fairness, openness, transparency, oaths about turning his back on the corrupt old ways that dominate in D.C., and his pledge of bi-partisanship all added to government takeover of virtually everything possible . . . all of that makes Americans very suspicious. And now we have this phony document . . . .

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

## in fairness, Stanley Ann appears to have been very smart, just not “level-headed,” and she did do some good by helping indigent natives in the Eastern Hemisphere learn some really important skills like smithing while indoctrinating them into Marxism and anti-Americanism. Once she stopped studying Revolution she eventually got a degree in anthropology and, as mentioned, played a helpful “Peace-Corps-like” role.  Once she left America she never returned for any length of time. And she left Barack, Jr. to be raised by her parents.

Time to Strain Your “Belief Muscles” Again?

You may have trouble believing this story IF you believe the following lies propagated by Progressive politicians for the last 20-50 years:

A. We’re running out of oil in the world. This blog will change that notion for you.

B. We’ve long ago run out of oil in the United States. This blog will set you straight.

C. Man-made global warming is endangering the planet. Most real scientists here in America and almost all real scientists in Europe are positive that statement is Untrue (see the top link below this paragraph). In fact our American media silence in the United States on those two facts (the truth about global warming itself; and America’s scientists’ convictions about global warming even before the Climategate conspiracy was unmasked) amounts to a huge betrayal of the American people and of our U.S. Constitution. The “Climategate” e-mail release thirteen months ago in Europe has only been covered here in the United States by the Wall Street Journal and FOX News among the media but the internet, both here and in Europe, is alive with it. While Americans have believed that Global Warming is dooming us, Europe over the last year has almost totally discredited these alarmists (in case you missed out on the Climategate revelations and upon the biggest scientific fraud within the global warming lie: the next two links will put you onto the truth).

http://www.petitionproject.org/index.php

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936289.ece

http://www.prisonplanet.com/medieval-warm-period-rediscovered.html

D. Environmental leaders (known in Europe as “Watermelons” and “mean greenies”) have your health, prosperity and happiness in mind always.

E. Only Green-Tech can save our planet and our economies in the long run.

The lies associated with items D and E immediately above are a bit complicated, but will roll out of the information below. Before we get to the meat of the blog, let’s clear up the key source of almost all of the lies you’ve been fed about energy over the last 50 years; and the source of the great majority of the political lies spread about the world over the last 162 years. American “Progressivism” (which called itself by that name for about a quarter century and then called themselves liberals for over 80 years) is based upon English Fabian Socialism. The key group pushing these ideas for almost 130 years now is called the Fabian Society:

http://theweathereye.wordpress.com/2010/06/27/the-fabian-society/

The key belief of American progressives is that we must “progress” beyond the outdated and ill-conceived U.S. Constitution so that we can “progress” toward their notion of an earthly Utopia where, they say, we’ll take from each according to his ability and give to each according to his needs (the 162 year old desire of Karl Marx writing in Das Kapital). If you have never before seen the Fabian Society unmasked; and “kindly” George Bernard Shaw stripped naked beyond Pigmalion and My Fair lady, you owe it to yourself, to America and to our future to visit the website just above. The Fabian Society also gave us the London School of Economics closely tied to the American progressive desire for a single global ruling elite. The London School of Economics also gave us George Soros.

http://teapartyorg.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=4301673%3ABlogPost%3A131804&commentId=4301673%3AComment%3A131864&xg_source=activity

http://annarbor.craigslist.org/rnr/2061662101.html

At the risk of seeming racist, let Rajjpuut say this: George Soros can aptly be called “Barack Obama’s MASSA.” He is the puppet master pulling the strings of Obama, Pelosi, Reid and American progressivism.

The eighty year old Mr. Soros can accurately be compared to the ageless Emperor in the Star Wars movies. He grew up as a fourteen year old capo, a Jew working with Hitler’s Nazis, getting other Hungarian Jews to “report” for their transportation to the death camps. He’s only become more sinister since.

Known as “the man who broke the Bank of England” super rich Mr. Soros went from hundred-millionaire and became a multi-billionaire by profiting from wrecking four countries’ currencies over the last 24 years). Mr. Soros has said on more than one occasion, “The number one obstacle to world stability is the United States.” He aims to destroy our currency, impoverish the country, and with the help of the 48 progressive American non-profit foundations he’s created (start with the Tides Foundation; Center for American Progress; and his Open Society Institutes and spread your research from there . . . Mr. Soros is one helluva busybody at a time in his life when most people are content to go fishing) Georgie is seeking to push us all into one-world government led by elites like . . . well, George Soros), he may well succeed.

Progressives in general and Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and George Soros, who have all broken bread together on many occasions, now want to break your back. That’s where the lies come from. Back to our main points of interest . . . .

Item #1 At this present moment, Green-Tech is a flim-flam.

True.

Natural Law (mentioned in our Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution, and Federalist Papers and applying to such things as the Law of Gravity as well as to human behavior) discoveries in the area of wind tech; solar tech; etc. are 300 million years behind fossil fuel. We’re NOT saying that some new Edison in five years won’t or can’t revolutionize the entire green-tech picture and eliminate the need for fossil fuels overnight. What we are saying is that green-tech right now right here is science-fiction from a viable nationwide standpoint. Is that a serious problem? If the underlying scientific principles required to make PRACTICAL energy on a grand national scale don’t yet exist . . . everything based upon saying that “YES, YES THEY DO TOO EXIST!!” is a scam and a national betrayal. How big a national betrayal? Consider this: In 1997, Spain had the healthiest economy in Europe and was creating the most jobs on that continent with unemployment about 4%. Today Spain is one of seven seriously near-bankrupt European countries with unemployment at 2o.8%. How did that happen?

Spain bought into green-tech in 1998 and began to heavily subsidize clean energy jobs. Results of a Spanish green-tech study done three years ago show that 2.2 jobs in the real economy were lost for every single green-tech job created. Like Obama with the stimulus (where jobs lasting one week were credited the same as permanent jobs), the Spanish exaggerated the job creations via green-tech. Only 10% of Spain’s green-tech jobs proved permanent and most paid between U.S. $10-$14. Mr. Obama has promised to give us “five million new green-tech jobs” which extrapolated toward the Spanish example would lose us eleven million real jobs; only 10% of those newly created green jobs would prove permanent meaning that only 500,000 permanent jobs would be created and we would have an American version of the Spanish green-tech experience on our hands . . . a 22/1 debacle in lost jobs compared to jobs created (11 million real jobs lost; only 500,000 modestly-paying green-tech jobs created).

So for those of you who thought Mr. Obama was exaggerating when he told the San Francisco Chronicle that his policies “would bankrupt the coal industry” and “under my policies of cap and trade the price of electricity would necessarily skyrocket” . . . he was a straight-shooter on coal and the cost of electricity, but he was hugely exaggerating about the “benefits” of green-tech jobs at this point in time because the technology does NOT exist.

Item #1.5 The oil critics are NOT asking the right questions . . .

. . . that’s why they keep giving you and me only the answers they want us to hear and never tell us the truth . . . .

The answers they want us to hear are wind, solar power and other “Magic Clean Green” energy sources that do NOT actually exist in any meaningful way on a national scale. The truth is that fossil fuels are and have been the preferred source of power because right here and right now only fossil fuels make sense. In a nutshell, the question comes down to practical, efficient and cheap energy. Fossil fuels are all three and they’re getting cheaper (except for artificial barriers thrown in our way by environmental regulations to make slow, inefficient and expensive green vehicles look somewhat more attractive) by the day. For example the Swedes have come up with a cheap way to make extraction much more efficient for getting out 60% of the unreachable oil. For example the Canadians have “trained” a tiny microbe to allow them to take previously worthless coal tar and turn it into clean-burning methane gas. If the only answer the media and the politicians and the greenies want you to hear is so-called “green-energy” (solar power requires huge pollution and energy use in the manufacturing stages) then the truth will not get to you and the actual dollar savings you’d be expecting can just be taxed away.

Item #2 Would you believe our conventional oil supplies will quadruple or quintuple in your lifetime if we want them to?

It’s true.

As the price of oil rises and the technology for extracting it improves dramatically, we are every day returning to old “dried out wells” and eventually harvesting two to three times the original yield of those wells. Besides that, exploration methods seeking new wells are now about 400% more accurate, so less money is wasted drilling “dry-holes.” Here in the United States and southern Canada we have also discovered the Bakken Formation, which is the largest oil reserve ever found, bigger in area than the entire Middle East . . . of course we’re not allowed to drill there thanks to ridiculous prohibitions and only the reservation Indians are taking advantage of it so far. It’s also true that the same people who are limiting our drilling have seen to it that this country has not built a new oil refinery since 1974! By the way, the oil is there if we choose to go after it. We may reasonably NOT want to go after it, however, read on . . . .

Item #3 Would you believe that if we want it, Colorado, Utah and Wyoming could supply the energy needs of this country for five to six hundred years?

Also true. Keragen or Marlstone (usually MISnamed: “oil shale”) deposits in western Colorado as well as Utah and Wyoming hold that much stored energy. These deposits require a “mining” approach rather than a conventional oilman’s drilling etc. The Indians told the Whites about the “rock that burns” 155 years ago, now if we want it, we’ve got boundless energy sources using that keragen. We may, however, reasonably decide we don’t want it. Read on . . . .

Item #4 Would you believe that Items #2 and #3 above quite possibly are going to prove unattractive within a dozen years?

Without the government’s interference and without resorting to fraudulent energy sources such as ethanol (which costs much, much more in pollution start to finish; and significantly more in money –if subsidies are added in - than oil), it appears that the recent discovery of the Natural Law underlying MAN’S creation of oil in the near future will bear huge fruit. Unlike ethanol and other plant-based synfuels subsidized by the government, the cost of foodstuffs like corn will not skyrocket if and when these new technologies are perfected. You’ve heard of things like Castrol’s synthetic oil . . . this is something different, using algae to replace the 300 million year process of creating oil, coal, natural gas, etc. When this becomes reality, then a point will be reached where the price of oil says that keragen and oil in the ground will become far less desirable than letting nature take its course under the watchful eyes of man above ground.

Item #5 Would you believe that new technology called “cellular oil” could make all drilling and oil shale exploration moot questions?

That’s the name of the new technology.

Item #6 Would you believe that someone has a vested interest in our not hearing the terms “watermelon” or “mean greenie” here in America?

Thanks to the American media’s blackout of the Climategate scandal revelations in East Anglia, England, Americans have not been privy to the revolution in thinking going on in Europe over the last thirteen months. Two terms, in particular: “Watermelons” and “Mean Greenies” have come to dominate the Europeans’ new evaluation of the leaders in the environmental movement in general and of the Global Warming alarmists in particular. The term “mean greenie” has been around in England for some time. It describe folks who burn SUVs, deliberately foul fishing nets, destroy ski resorts, drive six inch spikes into trees in hopes of killing lumberjacks using chainsaws, and others who commit crimes against humans in the name of ecology. Lately “mean greenie” has seen a sudden upshot in popular usage in the media all over Europe. But the term “Watermelon” is something special that’s only become common since the Climategate e-mail revelations.

A “watermelon” is a so-called environmentalist who’s “green on the outside and pink to bright red on the inside.” That is, the leaders of much of the environmental movement are now seen in Europe as using the environment for pushing their real but hidden agenda, a heavily socialist or even Marxist agenda. What???? You see it’s like this, all of the Cap and Trade ideas needed (the progressives say) to stop Global Warming in its tracks can only efficiently be executed by a near totalitarian state . . . an all-powerful national government run as part of an even more powerful global government. And what is the basis of all this fraud?

The progressives are pretending that Natural Law no longer works. They want a crisis so they manufacture one with manufactured “science.” They want oil eliminated from the world scene so they pretend that Natural Law has advanced to the level that green-tech is viable, even though it’s not. Right now, the only Natural Law in force capable of providing energy for the whole planet at a practical price and effort is fossil fuel energy. Because of advances in Natural Law (laws we discover and use; NOT laws we make up!) tomorrow, man-made fossil fuel energy appears ready to supplant 300 million year old fossil fuels, and that is semi-green tech created by capitalism and individualism . . . not by a political elite defrauding the people** of the world.

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

** These are the same people who had DDT banned because of false science (a la Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring) at a time when DDT had dropped malaria deaths (not to mention suffering from a lifetime of episodic three-day fever fits) down to 44,000 annually. The American and United Nations DDT ban has killed more than 70 million souls just to malaria, never mind all the other scourges that DDT avoids, since 1974. Today 2,100,000 people die from malaria every year and tropical nations are finally seeing the light and going back to DDT. If you read the Fabian Society material given above and the words of George Bernard Shaw you see this for what it is: deliberate population control a la eugenics . . . or if you’re a sucker for progressivism, you could call it just plain incompetence . . . and the more you check progressivism the more incompetence you find . . . consider our $113 TRillion in unfunded liabilities via Social Security, Medicare and the federal side of Medicaid; or the unfunded liabilities created by the state side of Medicaid by the Obamacare Law which will bankrupt all 50 states by 2024 . . . or the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 requiring home lenders to deliberately make known bad loans which was expanded five times (four times just by ACORN President Bill Clinton: once by regulatory edict and three times via legislation) and took us from one “bad” loan in every 404 loans in 1975, to 2005 when 34% of all home loans were bad: thus giving us our sub-prime lending crisis and financial meltdown.

Whether you consider it incompetence or a deliberate attempt to undo capitalism and create chaos so that progressivism can step in offering their neat, sweet big government solutions . . . progressivism is the lethal cancer dominating the American scene and needs to be eradicated posthaste. Thankfully, the voters in November, 2010, saw that clearly.

“There is wash water. There are babies. And throwing babies out with the wash water is always a very bad idea . . .” Rajjpuut

“O’ ye of little faith . . .” is a common quote criticizing those who supposedly won’t get with the program, whatever the program might be. However, that all too infamous “NO-man,” Rajjpuut, has found in his life that for every time a supposedly well meant, “Yes, that sounds like a good idea” works out well, there’s about twenty times when a soundly conceived “Hell, No!” will work out best for all considered. 94% of inventions don't make it and only lose a lot of money for their inventors, truly good change is very hard to find and needs to be well-thought out and implemented wisely. Searching for a country of “Yes-voters,” Barack Obama is touring the country calling for unity, calling for tolerance, (while himself falsely calling Conservative patriots “racists”), calling the Republican minorities in the House and Senate “the Party of No,” and saying House Minority Leader John Boehner “hasn’t come up with one new idea.” To which, Rajjpuut says, AMEN and HURRAH! Thank God for the “Party of ‘NO! and not only that, old ideas like Warren G. Harding changing Woodrow Wilson's Depression into the "Invisible Depression" by cutting taxes 47%, government spending 49% and reducing the National Debt 30% is indeed an old idea, but it works!

As Barack Obama continues to defecate upon the Constitution, Rajjpuut says, “There is wash water. There are babies. And throwing babies out with wash water is always a bad idea . . . so much for “hope and change and ‘fundamental transformation’ of a land that only needs to restore and rededicate itself.”

Like Barack Obama, way too many people talk a “great game” without knowing what they’re talking about, Barack Obama is a case in point when it comes to knowledge of the United States** Constitution; when it comes to economics; when it comes to jobs and business; when it comes to foreign relations; when it comes to the oath of office he swore on Inauguration Day, 2009. Unfortunately, on election day, 2008, for every Rajjpuut who already recognized Barack Obama for the grave danger that he represented, about sixteen other voters, even those who voted against Obama, thought the man with the audacity of hype just wanted the best for America.

Like King Priam in the Odyssey as he stood before the Trojan Horse on the sandy beach west of Troy, America had a decision to make. Like Priam we have brought the Trojan Horse into our midst; and like Priam we are paying mightily for it. More Americans have begun hearing sounds from within the lethal horse, sounds that resemble, not spoken Greek, but silent and poisonous Marxism.

According to best-selling author David Limbaugh, talking about his latest book, Crimes Against Liberty: An Indictment Against Barack Obama, “President Barack Obama’s leftist ideology” has made him “the most destructive president of all time.” Rajjpuut can only criticize that comment with faint praise, “David, you ain’t seen nothing yet . . . .”

Limbaugh says the president has disdain for America’s superpower status and wants to undermine the country. Tracing Obama’s personal history, Limbaugh adds, “He thinks that we’re too big for our britches, that we have consumed too much of the world’s resources, that we’re unnecessarily provocative, and that we even contributed to bringing on 9/11,” says Limbaugh, the younger brother of Talk Radio host Rush Limbaugh. Limbaugh contends the president has been raised to hate America by a communist mother and grandfather; and by his mentor, the poet and card-carrying communist Frank Marshall Davis, to distrust Whites and to love Marxism.

He attended school for part of five years in a Muslim school. Then “he attended church for twenty years with Reverend Jeremiah Wright saying things like ‘God damn America!’ and constantly preaching about White oppression against Blacks and saying “America’s chickens have come home to roost’ and ‘we brought 9/11 upon ourselves’ . . . and Omaba overuses the obvious Marxist euphemism “fundamentally change America” to describe making America a Marxist nation. Limbaugh’s new book outlines in some detail the way Obama’s agenda is destroying our country.

Rajjpuut would say, Limbaugh’s book does NOT go far enough especially in not only describing Obama’s shackling of the free market and statist takeovers of business . . . but also needs to reveal more about Obama’s out and out betrayal. Just yesterday, Rajjpuut uncovered documentation showing that far from getting involved with ACORN sometime between 1993 and early 1995, Barack Obama was already working as an outreach community organizer for ACORN in 1989 at the Developing Communities project in Chicago and then joined ACORN’s Project Vote by 1992 before later using his law degree for them as he brow-beat and shook down mortgage lenders to make bad loans to poor clients with no hope short of winning the lottery of ever repaying their mortgages. In other words, Obama played a key role in bankrupting our country via the subprime lending disaster -- not nearly the important role played by President Bill Clinton who passed three expansions to mortgage-guarantee legislation during his eight years in office – but a key role nevertheless. Read Limbaugh’s book; know our Trojan Horse president.

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

** Obama actually taught a Constitutional Law class in Chicago and several semesters on Saul Alinsky’s book “Rules for Radicals.” He has ZERO feel for what it means to be an American and what the Constitution is all about just as he would find the following econmics truths incomprehensible:

http://www.econlib.org/library/Essays/rdPncl1.html

http://fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/#0.1_L3

http://fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/#0.1_L2

http://fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/

Dear Barack Obama,

You once held a job as a senior lecturer in Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School. Rajjpuut takes that to mean that the University of Chicago Law School must have the least competent staff in the world because you, Mr. Obama are clearly the greatest Constitution-Trasher and Constitution-Basher in American presidential history. Everything the Constitution is and desires, you are clearly against. You, in fact, clearly despise the very spirit of that document.

Now some of this can be foregiven (the leftists running much of the media would say “can be understood”) merely by calling you a “progressive” which means among other things that you are “someone who believes the Constitution is a very flawed document which you in your far greater wisdom than the founding fathers realize America must clearly ‘progress beyond’ if the country is to be properly served.” You’re the man, Barack! And since “the man” is actually so much wiser than the founding fathers or so much more in tune with the ”Twenty-first Century needs” of the American Republic . . . then, by all means DO transform us. However, do it up front -- like a man -- don’t continually seek to sneak by every contrived change as something done for our own good engineered for our own good by the shadiest of processes. For example, tell us that you, in your greater wisdom, regard a “Republic” as far inferior to a Marxist state. Tell us that you in your greater compassion, realize that the Bill of Rights is totally outdated and you’ve got better stuff to eventually replace it, oh and by the way, you might even tell us what that replacement would be and what pages of “Das Kapital”** it comes from. Tell us, up front, that you regard capitalism as an abomination that enslaves people and exploits them and then describe the full nature of the communistic state you’re planning for us. It’s really the proper and honest thing to do.

You see, Barak, one reason we Americans, silly of us I know, respect the U.S. Constitution, is that the framers of it and the Declaration of Independence were so open in all their actions and all their words . . . so forgive us if, silly us, we’d like you to be 100% open and above board and admit exactly who and what you are and where you plan on dragging us? Your birth-father whatever his other faults might have been, was an open and honest communist. While deploring his beliefs, Rajjpuut admires his integrity. The same canNOT be said for you, Barack.

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

** In “Dreams From My Father” our president showed clear reverence for the man (Barak Hussein Obama, Sr.^^) who wrote the 1965 article linked below, “Problems Facing Our Socialism.” The paper extolls, among other communistic virtues, the proper role of “100% taxation.” On the very first page of the essay, Barak, Sr. even lists his own favorite ideology, “scientific socialism” and immediately makes it precisely clear that to him the term scientific socialism means “communism” and nothing else. In the essay, over and over again he makes obvious his preference for 100% public, rather than private, ownership of land, produce and other property saying “We have to look at priorities in terms of what is good for society and on this basis we may find it necessary to force people to do things they would not do otherwise.” Here is the paper in its entirety:

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM41_eastafrica.html

Notice how often Barak, Sr. openly uses the name “Marx” and the words “tax” and “nationalization” (confiscation of the businesses of foreigners as well as those of non-African Kenyan citizens) in this brief paper. This is the man, his father, whom Barak admired above all others. His hero, instead of George Washington, Lincoln, Reagan, Truman or Kennedy, is this man. And the dreams expressed in this paper and other published works are his dreams . . . dreams from the man (who proved too radical even for a socialist Kenya and was kicked out of his job in the office of Economic Development for “not being able to keep his mouth shut” according to Barak’s half sister in “Dreams From My Father”) he admired most in all the world. For God’s sake, if you wanted to know who Hitler was, read “Mein Kampf,” If you want to know who Barak Obama is, read “Dreams From My Father” (where he deliberately omits the words communist and communism and never tells you about the communist environment he was raised in) and then read Barak H. Obama, Sr.’s dreams in this tiny essay. What he says on page 31 (page 8 of 10 in the article) in particular delineates his dream for Kenya, which is his son’s dream for us. The fact that this dream has not changed, and is NOT likely to change, can be surmised from our president’s twice interrupting his own presidential campaigning to visit Kenya and campaign for the communist candidate for Kenya’s president, his cousin Raila Odinga, and even to twice wearing Muslim attire during that Kenyan campaign as well as ordinary suit and tie at other times.

^^ notice Barak, Sr. spelled his first name without a ‘c’ and apparently never changed his name in any fashion during his life. This Barak without a ‘c’ is how his son’s name was spelled at birth. Barak, Jr., unlike his father, has gone under Barak Obama as well as Barak Sotero (taking on the surname of his mother’s second husband) Barry Sotero, Barry Obama, “Barry Soweto,@” and now Barack with a “c” Obama rather than again being open and honest about who he actually is and what he actually believes in and what he plans for America. Just as Barak, Sr.’s name has now been officially westernized (over about 85% of the internet including Wikipedia) to be the same as his son’s with the “c” changing history . . . Barack Obama believes it is by such little and big changes to transform America into communism: the longheld dream of his father for Kenya.

@ there seems to be nothing beyond sheer whim explaining where the name Barry Soweto came from, but Obama used it exclusively during his undergraduate college years