Saturday, October 11, 2008

Two videos that are worth way more than any words I can produce

Today is a video day, because I've watched two videos that shine light on a couple of problems Obama has. The first is a very short video, in which Obama promises that ACORN and related groups will help shape his presidential agenda -- something that matters if ACORN's view of America doesn't accord with your view:

The second video is a bit longer (at about 10 minutes), but bears watching. It's basically an interview with Philip Berg, the slightly crazy Democratic operative who, in August, filed a lawsuit against Obama accusing him of being foreign born.

If you've been paying attention, you know that rumors have been swirling endlessly about whether Obama was born in America (in which case he can be President) or in Kenya (in which case he can't). Most reputable bloggers have been ignoring this meme, but there's one thing that keeps it coming back again and again: Faced with these accusations, Obama won't take the easy out and just produce his birth certificate. Instead, he does anything and everything to avoid producing any documentation (including his educational records) that might put this rumor to rest. In other words, don't look at Berg, who may be a tinfoil hat guy (despite his denials). Instead, look at Obama, who is hiding something:

Incidentally, there's also the potential that evidence will emerge showing that Obama was, in fact, born in a Kenyan hospital.

Let me say this again: Normally I'd relegate this "non-citizen" rumor to the dustbin of desperation. It's Obama's (and the DNC's) own bizarre conduct in the face of these accusations that keeps it alive. If Obama would simply produce his documents, the whole thing would instantly, finally and completely be dead in the water.


Ferny for McCain at Stanford said...

I am no friend of conspiracy theories either but this video raises very interesting questions.

And what is most astonishing is that Obama could put easily all those questions to rest by releasing any of the records demanded: his birth certificate or his college records at Columbia and Harvard.

Gee, I rememer in the 2004 election both candidates released their college records (on a side note those records showed that both Kerry and Bush did equally well (actually equally average) when they were college students at Yale). Is he really afraid that his grades are not as good as he has been bragging about or what???

What is he really hiding? Whatever it is must be serious because frankly, I don't see what is the big deal of releasing a birth certificate!

Ferny for McCain at Stanford said...

And BTW, for those who want to follow up on the case, this is Phlip Berg's website

Pablo said...


You surely know that McCain was not a "natural born citzien" when he was born. He was born in the Panama military base, which according to the law when he was born, was the only base whose babies were not considered natural born citziens. A change in the law was made and it was decided to make it with retroactive effect, and that is why today McCain can run for president.

A retroactive change in the law... what a clusterfuck concept from a law point of view. I wonder if we could make a law with retroactive effect to hang by the balls those bank executives that lead us to this crisis.

I am just telling you this because that bit of information makes it very funny when people question the origins of Obama.

The McCain campaign is spreading the fear and the hate towards Obama, up to the point that today he had to ask people to tone it down. And when I say the McCain campaign I am not talking strictly about the organization and paid employees, but about blogs like this one. Unpaid volunteers that are trying to talk like rednecks and spread doubt in a desperate attempt to scare people away.

I leave a video here:
Hate in the McCain campaign

Ferny for McCain at Stanford said...


Whatever it is that Obama is hiding, even if it is unrelated to his citizenship, must be serious enough when the guy refuses to release records that every other candidate has released. Obamanism (I am glad it hasn't clouded my thinking) might have made you forget the meaning of "the rule of law". If Obama doesn't have anything to hide, he should be producing those records, if anything to show Americans that he is worth their trust. He is the only one responsible for fueling conspiracy theories for not producing records that most ordinary Americans have no problem issuing to prospective employers.

He wants the top job of the land so it's only fair that he shows those who will be paying him that he is qualified for the position.

I have to correct your record here on naturalization. You make it sound as if Congress had changed the law so that McCain could qualify as natural born citizen, allowing him to run for President. As you can see from the previous page, the change you refer to was made in 1952, when John McCain was 16!

Finally, your mention to Rachel Maddow and NBC News as "credible" news sources makes all of us laugh out loud. Even NBC decided that MSNBC had crossed the line during the RNC by deciding that neither Olbermann nor Matthews would be anchoring political events for the remaining of the Presidential Campaign. Next time, you can give it a try to brining Daily Kos' "investigative" reports as "credible sources" :DDD.

Why Obama refuses to release "innocent" documents such as his birth certificate or his college records should be more of a concern to the MSM than the circus they created against Palin and his family.

Obama is a disgraceful candidate. I disliked him early on in the primaries and his winning the Democratic primaries is the only reason I am volunteering during the campaign. It's just bad luck that the markets collapsed in mid-September instead of mid-November otherwhise Obama wouldn't have had a chance of winning.

You are very prone to make analogies between Spanish /European politics and US politics. Imagine the outrage there would be in Spain or the UK if most media would have decided to not investigate credble associations of a PM candidate links to former unrepentant (YES the key word is UNEPENTANT), ETA or IRA terrorists (or to claim that such associations have no bearing on the candidates themselves). This is the situation we have with Obama and most media in the US. A disgraceful media courting a disgraceful candidate. If this was Spain, I wouldn't care much. Now, this is the United States of American, the last bastion of freedom in the world; as such, it's a very sad drama in the making.

Pablo said...


First of all, I never said or make it sound like the change was recent. I just pointed out that McCain would not be able to be candidate if the law had not been changed retroactively. As you may know, changing a law with retroactive effects is not only unusual, but is actually unconstitutional in most of the countries.

Secondly, it was not MSNBC the one that asked the McCain campaign to tone it done with the accusations, recism and hate, it was McCain itself. You are so desperate to attack Obama that you miss your candidate point when he asks you to stop questioning Obama's patriotism or decency to become the next president of the USA. You should listen to your "maverick" and stop pretending the last 8 years in the US have made a redneck out of a foreigner like you.

It is just hillarious when you say that Obama would not win if the markets had not collapsed. Since Obama is a candidate McCain has only been 8 days ahead in the polls for God sake, and it was right after the Republican convention. He has always had a very slim possibility of winning and I am surprised that you have ever seriously believed that he was going to win. Just think about it, you have a candidate that wants to stay in Iraq when the polls give the american people 80% against staying, that chooses as a vice-president the dumbest woman in the republican party (shit if he wanted to attract the women vote he could have chosen Condolezza Rice, at least no one would question her intelligence) that becomes the national joke, and says that he does not understand the economy when we face (even back at the beginning of the campaign) a economic crisis due to the burst of the house bubble (and later the subprime crisis and now the whole world-wide credit crunch). How the hell did you expect him to win?

Finally, regarding your analogy to the spanish politics, I should remind you that former president of Spain and Bush's friend, Jose Maria Aznar, before being elected a second time negotiated with ETA up to the point that without ETA giving anything he moved all the prisioners to the Iberic peninsula and he called the terrorist group freedom fighters (actually Movement for the liberation of the basque country). And let me further remind you that you have actively supported him.

Let me ask you something, do you think that the people that voted for Bush feel sorry now? It is obvious now, with a 25% approval rating, that the judgement of many many republican voters (actually 50% of them to be exact) failed and they have changed their minds. They were wrong when they voted for Bush. They accept now that Bush policies including the Iraq invasion, the denial of anthropogenic global warming, the economics of ownership, were wrong. Given that McCain has actively supported all those (except, thanks god the denial of anthropogenic global warming), how do you expect that people to vote for him?

To summarize, the two main points are that from the very beginning, a candidate like McCain had very little chance of winning because of the ideas that he defended. The constant tracking of Gallup polls is the proof of that. And secondly, it was McCain and not MSNBC the one that asked the supporters, including you, to stop attacking Obama's patriotism, decency or race.

Right Wing Diva said...

Wow Pablo!
The rhetoric! The name calling...racist...redneck...tsk..tsk..tsk..
Where is the party of idea here?
Since it looks like you're one of The One's foot soldiers, please enlighten us here in answering few of the questions below:
1) Why do you think The One...oopps...Barack Obama is qualified to be the president of the US of A? Other than he's charismatic, charming, one of minority and it's time for minority to be a prez...bla..bla..bla...
2) What has he done during his tenure in the senate that makes him or you think he deserves this job?
3) What were his accomplishments in the Illinois senate other than voting "present" (i.e. not Yes not No..No accountability there...) more than 100 times?
4) Why has he not been real truthful to the American people? Few months back, when asked about Bill Ayers, his answer was: O...he was just some guy who lives in the same neighborhood as me. Few months after that: O...we served in the board together (the annenberg challenge). What's next?
That's Ayers. How about Rev. Wright? One day, he's a
friend and a great leader and someone he and Michelle consulted to when it comes to family matters.

The next day, when there's a lot of political pressure and of course, because of political expediency, all of a sudden Rev. Wright is someone
"whose remarks about America"
is to be denounced. He couldn't even say plainly that he denounced the rev! Everything has to be nuanced.

In a way, once again, he wants to have it both ways - denouncing Rev. Wright's remarks so that he can hopefully fool the American people and at the same time not hated by the members of the Trinity Church!

During his tenure in the senate:

- NOT ONE time, ,
he has ever voted for the tax cut. And now he's a tax cuter?!?
Yeah..and I'm Giselle Buenchen!

- NOT ONE time, he has ever voted to cut spending. And now he wants to cut "unnecessary" what..our defense & military spending? This is coming from someone who's rated 10% (low score) by the Councils for Citizen Against Government Waste

- He's #3 senator in the senate that received bribe money of $106k from Fannie Freddie during his some 1 year tenure in the senate. And now he goes around blaming the illusive "deregulation" imposed by the Republican party that has been all along begging for more regulations on the housing practice!

The thing is Pablo, if the American people know what Barack Obama truly stands for, it would scare the sh**t out of them! It does not have anything to do with his race or the color of his skin. It has a lot to do with what he stands for. He is an avid liberal. US history has proven time and time again, that the American people never accept an extreme ideology, especially the extremely liberal one. Prove: McGovern, Dukakis, Kerry, Gore. Therefore, any slight traces of liberal idea has to be disguised as center to conservative idea (i.e. tax cut, cut spending, free speech etc.) so that it could widely accepted.

Yes, Pablo. John McCain's supporters deserve to be angry! I am angry...and worried at the same time! I am angry because the Main Stream Media and John McCain's campaign itself have been giving Obama a pass on virtually everything! His shaky past with bunch of folks that hate America and his thin resume! It makes me angry that someone with such thin resume and questionable ideology can be where he is right now!

Obama's not been truthful on his 95% tax cut for the middle class plan. 40% of this 95% DO NOT pay tax cut. Last time I checked, 0 x 0 = 0. So, is it really true that this 95% will get tax cut OR the 40% will get tax 'something' perhaps...WELFARE?

Obama's tax policy will kill jobs growth and innovations! After all, why would anybody want to be innovative and possibly earn more than 250k if they know that Prez Obama is on the other side ready to pounce on their 'excess' pay? Why would anybody want to work hard at all, knowing that if they work hard and God forbid if they get promoted and earn more than $250k, Prez Obama will tax them more? I sure would like to just chill and hang out..what do I need to work harder for? As long as I'm below the $250k threshold, I'm cool!

Well, I don't expect for you to change your mind. I would love it for you though, to be open minded and tolerant (all these that liberals have been preaching over and over again!) to other ideas without having to call people names!


PS: You mentioned that Bush has 25% approval rating. Did you know that the Democratic Congress has 15% approval rating?

The American people were tired of the incompetence of the Republican congress, so they decided to vote for Democratic congress in 2006 and look where they took this country. From bad to worse! It would be so scary to have the tax and spend Democratic congress and potentially a tax and spending Democratic president! It will turn this country into Cuba. Because, if that happens, we'll lose our freedom and liberty, since our being will be, slowly but sure, determined by our benevolent government.

And no...I'm not just McCain's foot solder..I can actually think for myself!

No Sheeples Here! said...

Thanks for posting this video. I posted it at my blog yesterday at 4:29 PM and also linked it at Real Clear Politics. Some time between 10:30 and 11:00 PM it was SCRUBBED from the RCP website. Concerned citizens MUST keep this video in the public eye.

It is troubling that Obama’s campaign doesn’t care if we find out about his association with ACORN, his support of infanticide or his deep connections with Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers but they go to great lengths to quash any reference to his birth certificate.

Why won’t Obama provide a “vault” copy of this birth certificate? What is being hidden from the American public? Let’s stand guard over liberty together.

Ferny for McCain at Stanford said...


It's obvious that Obama wouldn't have had a chance of winning without the crisis. You say that McCain had only been 8 days ahead in the Gallup poll, and after the RNC. You forget to say why he began to go behind, and there even your leftists friends agree that it's the economic crisis that is responsible for that reversal. Just after the RNC I remember the words of panic "oh it's happening again" of many leftists with reference to what happened in 2004 or 1988. And you should to because I forwarded you some of those articles. And even you during those days thought that the race was competitive (I have one of email from you to that regard).

In 2004, the war of Iraq was already unpopular, yet, Americans decided not to vote for Kerry.

Again, I am happy that I dont' suffer from the Obamanism desease because comparing Obama's relationship with Ayers with whatever Aznar did in regard to ETA's prisioners in 1998 just questions your ability to think clearly. Any Aznar supporter (for those who don't know he was Spain's PM until 2004), and BTW even his non supporters will tell you that Aznar has never had a relationship with a former UNREPENTANT ETA member such as that Obama had (HAS??) with Ayers. A former unrepentant ETA terrorist launching Aznar's career, really? A former unrepentant ETA terrorist giving Aznar responsibility for leading a multi million dollar effor to politically influence schools? Really?

Stop taking the Kool Aid! You certainly don't know what you are talking about.

Finally, Right Wing Diva, don't bee too hard on Pablo, he's been doubly brainwashed by Spanish academics (which in some respects are even more recalcitrant than the American ones) and by Stanford academics. Note that he belongs to one of those age groups that overwhelmingly support Obama (young and educated). It's like the black demografic which consistently supports democrats in presidential elections. The news would be that Pablo wouldn't be an Obama supporter, not the other way around :D.

Pablo said...

"young and educated"
"The news would be that Pablo wouldn't be an Obama supporter"

I agree, one has to be either old or completely uneducated to support a candidate like John McCain.

I am glad that it seems that this time Americans are not going to act like the stereotype that people like you spread around.

For once, many lives here and abroad will be saved in each american vote for Obama and in a few years Fernando, I will remind you who you were supporting and who you were attacking.

Ferny for McCain at Stanford said...


Twisting my words doesn't make you look any better. Yes, young people have been known for decades to be shallow and prone to manipulation. So it isn't very surprising that your arguments are blind repetitions of the messages designed by the Obama campaign for the people in your demographic. It just shows your lack of political independence. I guess that if you continue along the lines of what is typical for the people in one's demographic, sometime in 10 to 15 years, you'll feel betrayed by the "leftist, surreal, non pragmatic" ideals you embrace now and you'll became a Republican!

The problem with those arguments is that they don't stand any serious criticism. The Right Wing Diva has already addressed some of them, such as the fact that the Democratic Congress elected in 2006 is the most unpopular Congress in history, and of course it's even more unpopular than Bush.

Now you bring up the issue of "peace loving Obama". Not sure what debate you watched last Tuesday, but in the one I watched Obama said that he will not allow Iran to have nuclear weapons and that he keeps all the options in the table, including the military option but he is favoring diplomatic options first. How is that different from what Bush has done on the Iran issue? The Bush administration even met with Iran a year ago but Iran refuses to give up his Uranium enrichment activities.

But what's even more important, Obama said that as president he would reserve the right to act militarily and unilaterally in situation of national interest or those in which for instance there is genocide going on. Why the MSM cares more about Palin not knowing what is Charles Gibson's definition of "the Bush doctrine" than the fact that Obama seems to embrace it, is mind boggling to me.

And your reference to "Kumbaya saving lives" is really laughable. Makes you look really bad. Obama oposed the surge in Iraq, which has been acknowledged (including by Obama in an August 2008 interview) to have decreased dramatically the death of Iraqui civilians and US military personnel. Had the US pulled out of Irak with the deadline Obama wanted (and I already sent you a few videos from 2007 where he explicitely mentioned March 2009), we would have chaos and civil war in Iraq.

Anyway, I am looking forward to your future conversion to a right wing guy...

Anonymous said...

Pablo is mistaken again. PCZ was considered to be a U.S. Protectorate, so John McCain's parents were in U.S. Territory at the time of his birth. This was upheld in a court decision. There was no law, but an interpretation by the courts. Pablo has it wrong again... No surprise.

Pablo said...

To the last anonymous:

Actually you are the one who got it wrong. Section 1403 of the federal law was changed in 1952 stating the following:
"Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States."

You can look in the link the law yourself and the dates. You should be ashamed to receive american law lessons from a foreigner.

Cameron said...

Even if Obama was born in Kenya, it doesn't mean that he would be disqualified from serving for president. You can be born in a foreign country, but if you're born to American parents, you may still be considered a natural-born citizen. Obama's mom was an American citizen. The constitution is vague on this point, and I'm not sure whether any laws have been passed to clarify it. Although I want McCain to be president, I don't think Obama's right to be president as a natural-born citizen should be questioned.