The National Association of Gals, the NAG’s has a mighty selective sensitivity to women’s issue. No news in that. Well at least the girls of the View has some sense of decency, from Byran Preston, Pj Tatler:
S.E. Cupp appeared on The View today to discuss the Hustler fake explicit photoshop of her. Here’s the video, from which there are two pieces of actual news. One, the only conservative on The View, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, called up the National Organization of Women to get a statement or reaction from them. They didn’t take her call and haven’t said boo about this disgusting attack yet.
Video:
No film expected at Eleven.
Some bitter clingers continue to cling to cherished liberal myth fable that some how Barack Obama is supposed possess an intelligence somewhat above average. That is an opinion of President Fifty-Seven States that I neither share nor even respect. Charles C. Johnson boldly go where no liberal dare tread, from Big Hollywood:
In his autobiography, Dreams from My Father, Barack Obama describes himself as an unfocused high school student whose mother scolded him for being a “loafer” (142). He describes his attitude toward his studies at Occidental as “indifferent” (146), calling himself a “bum” who abused drugs (138) and who was notorious for partying all weekend (165).
That has raised questions about how Obama earned a place at Columbia in 1981, paving the way to Harvard Law and beyond. Indeed, like much else in his biography, Obama seems to have fictionalized the process through which he gained admission to Columbia. Obama writes in Dreams: “[W]hen I heard about a transfer program that Occidental had arranged with Columbia University, I’d been quick to apply”(172).
However, there is no record of such a “transfer program” existing at either Columbia or Occidental
Reax, Bookworm, Bookworm Room:
I mean, think about it: Obama has already confessed that he was a drug-user and a slacker, so no one could reasonably expect him to have decent grades. Transcripts with low grades could be explained away, especially Obama he matured and proved his brilliance later.
Transcripts stating that Obama was a foreign student, however, are impossible to explain away. And since I believe Barry was born in Hawaii, why would the transcripts say he was foreign-born (assuming, of course, that they do)? Self-identifying as a foreign national makes sense only if it was to Obama’s advantage to state that kind of lie — and the only advantage would be easier college admission. Further, the only reason in an affirmative action world that a black guy would need an admission advantage is if he was getting into college during that very small historical window when, thanks to Bakke, affirmative action wasn’t available.
Mean while in an alternative liberal universe, Outsde the Beltway, Doug Mataconis:
James Joyner says:
It continues to boggle the mind. While I’m narrowly disposed to vote for Romney over Obama, the performance of either man as undergraduates is well outside my interest. And I say that as a former college professor. They’re both obviously quite intelligent. Both did well enough at elite institutions to go on to Harvard Law. Romney also got into Harvard Business. Both men managed to get through Harvard Law. Romney also got through Harvard Business. Both are, to use the vernacular, grown ass men. Why is their undergrad performance still relevant?
Given that Professor Joyner has never seen Barack Obama’s college transcripts, how does the Professor determine that both Romney and Obama “did quite well?”
Clarice Feldman, 27 July 2009, from American Thinker:
I have another purpose. I do not believe that someone [Barack Obama] with such a consistently weak understanding of economics, history, and the guiding legal document of our nation and its language merited admission to Columbia University or Harvard law school. Nor can I imagine how anyone could have merited graduation from these institutions (let alone edited the Harvard Law Review, the most prestigious legal publication of its kind) with these deficiencies.
Did his professors give him a special pass along the way? Or was he assisted in school, as Jack Cashill suggests he was assisted in his literary endeavors by ghost writers? Did others write his essays? Did he take only open book exams?
My vote i is, and long has been, with the lady.
Says the polling firm:
Most voters continue to prefer a more hands-off government in return for lower taxes.
A newReports national telephone survey finds that 64% of Likely U.S. Voters prefer a government with fewer services and lower taxes over one with more services and higher taxes. That’s unchanged from last month and consistent with findings in regular surveys since late 2006. Just 25% prefer a government with more services. Eleven percent (11%) are not sure which size government they prefer. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
So does anyone still think Obama would lose to a real conservative, assuming the GOP had the actual courage to run one in a Presidential race? How this will play in a race between socialist and liberal lite, remains a question, however.
Twilla Barnes, Thoughts from Polly’s Granddaughter:
What Elizabeth Warren Should Have Said
Even though the questions on her ancestry won’t go away, Elizabeth Warren continues to ignore the fact that this is an issue that we would like her to address. I guess we Cherokees, the very people she falsely claimed to be, don’t really matter to her unless she can use us to get what she wants out of life. I have thought about what she needed to say to end this matter. I wondered if she could end this and manage to get out of it gracefully and with some dignity intact. I believe she could have, had she have dealt with this immediately, but she didn’t
Hat tip: William A. Jacobson, Legal Insurrection.
I do not have respect the so-called anti-bullying movement They are liars and hypocrites. One Tanya Dixon-Neely took offense at Mitt Romney alleged bulling some fifty years ago which was created out whole cloth by the Washington Post Yet the same Dixon-Neely professes ignorance, of which has in vast supply of Barack Obama’s admitted bullying cited in Bill Ayer’s best selling book “Dreams of My Father. Then Ms Dixon-Neely attempted to bully her students who question her liberal hogwash, from Headmistress, Common Room:
Tanya Dixon-Neely’s classroom at North Rowan High School is apparently no place for students who want to gain an actual education.
Headmistress adds:
Furthermore, whether the student knew he was pushing her hot buttons or not- and I agree he did, she shouldn’t have such easily pushed hot buttons about anything, but especially not about politics, and certainly her heart is on her sleeve when it comes to her man Obama- which is fine in almost any other context, but not she is teaching students in a state school on a state salary.
Buttons are about power, if I can push your buttons but you can’t push mine, I have power over you. Ms Dixon-Neely is powerless in her own class room. Let us hear it for home schooling.
The video is horrible and the sound is not very good. But the message does strike homem from Siister Toldjah, video:
Reax from the Sister:
I listened to the audio. I think it’s pretty obvious the student was not “trying to pick a fight” nor was the teacher trying to encourage “respectful” conversation. It’s not very long into the audio after the student asks about Obama allegedly being a bully in response to the teacher’s assertion about the “Romney bullying” that the teacher gets extremely agitated and starts yelling
Sure sounds like a Cherokee to me, Dixon-Neely sounds like a Kenyan and she thinks like a Kenyan
I believe Dixon-Neely should be fired. She lost control of her class, she lost her self control. and her knowledge of law and history is horrible. Hint, slander is not a criminal offense. Nobody gets arrested for slander. Slander is civil tort.
Over at OTB, we find Doug opining:
Two Democratic Senators have introduced legislation that seems designed solely to punish people like Facebook’s Eduardo Saverin:
Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin recently relinquished his U.S. citizenship just ahead of Facebook’s massive initial public offering. But if Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer has anything to do with it, as the senator said today, “Mr. Saverin’s social network is about to get a lot smaller.”
The 30-year-old entrepreneur, whose shares in Facebook are expected to be worth around $3 billion after the social network goes public on Friday, is now residing in Singapore. Conveniently, Singapore does not have capital gains taxes, so his move could save Saverin anywhere from $67 million to $100 million in U.S. taxes.
Presuming that Saverin moved to avoid paying taxes, Schumer and Democratic Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania on Thursday unveiled legislation to stop what they called a “despicable trend.”
Under their legislation, any American who renounces his or her citizenship for the purpose of avoiding taxes will be punished in two ways: They will be barred from re-entering the U.S., and their future investments in the U.S. will be taxed at a 30 percent rate.
Taking advantage of every Facebook one-liner available, Schumer said of Saverin, “Sen. Casey and I have a status update for him: Pay your taxes in full, or don’t ever try to visit the U.S. again.”
(…)
Current law says that a person who renounces his U.S. citizenship for the purpose of avoiding taxes can be barred from re-entering the country, as Talking Points Memo pointed out this week, but Schumer said there have been problems enforcing the law.
Under Schumer and Casey’s bill, if an American with a net worth of $2 million or a tax liability of $148,000 renounces his or her citizenship, the IRS will presume that person is moving in order to avoid paying taxes. The person in question will be responsible for proving otherwise.
If a former citizen wants to return to the U.S., Schumer said, he could pay all the taxes he owes in order to return.
OTB's Doug Mataconis
Call it Eduardo’s law, I suppose. Before I get around to discussing what is so horribly stupid about this idea from Schumer and Casey, it’s worth noting that this bill is unlikely to ever see the light of day. For one thing, it’s not going to get past the Senate thanks both to the filibuster, and it’s likely that there will be more than a few Democratic Senators who aren’t going to be too eager to support this kind of legislation. Even if it did somehow make it through the Senate, it won’t ever pass a Republican-controlled House. And if Mitt Romney is President next year, he’s not going to sign it into law. If we ever get to the point where Congress and whoever is in the White House are talking about comprehensive fiscal reform, it may be on the table as a bargaining chip for the Democrats, but it’s likely to be sacrificed in negotiations far sooner than the Buffett Rule would be. What we’re looking at, then, is pure politics on the part of Schumer and Casey meant to take advantage of all the publicity this week about Facebook’s Initial Public Offering.This proposed law has nothing to do with fixing any problems involving our tax code, and everything to do with using Eduardo Saverin, who has likely contributed more to the American economy than Chuck Schumer and Bob Casey combined, as a convenient whipping boy.
In short, the socialist left is doubling down on the class warfare rhetoric, since it’s all they have to go with in the next election. But more;
Leaving that aside, though, there are several serious problems with the proposal that Casey and Schumer are making. Right off the bat, the fact that the law creates the presumption that someone has renounced their citizenship for the purpose of avoiding taxes constitutes a near-unprecedented modification of the burden of proof. Ordinarily in such situations, it is the government that has the burden of establishing that the act was done for an improper purpose, but this bill would create a different burden of proof for people based solely on their income level, something that should be profoundly disturbing to anyone concerned with civil liberties.
True enough, but precisely the response to expect from a group of people who figures that “social justice” is the end all and be all, and of greater worth than freedom. We had a revolution over taxes, and the freedoms eliminated in the way of maintaining their flow to an ever larger government. The Senator, apparently, has forgotten. Perhaps more likley, he never knew, or doesn’t believe in those freedoms.
You see, even assuming that Schumer is legally correct, in that the reason the gentleman left was because of taxes, it should be noted that something obvious is going missing here. Of course, the obvious answer that will never occur to the likes of the appropriately rat- faced Schumer is to adjust things so that such money stays in the country. IE; Lower taxes. Thereby, providing jobs here as opposed to elsewhere.
Ol Chuckles is in a snit because he thinks that’s money HE’S entitled to. He wants to erect a wall, to keep people in. I seem to recall Ronald Reagan telling Premier Gorbachev to tear down his wall, also designed to keep people in. And for the same reasons.
Perhaps a worthy comparison, would be people leaving particular states for the same reason. Consider, for example, the plight of California. This is a plight of their own making….Their tax and spend policies.. the growth of government… are what is You leading to people flee the state in droves.
As goes California yeah, so goes the country.
And the same with Maryland, where the moronic Democrat governor there, has decided to play into the class warfare business as well. in their case, the people are leaving for places like Florida. So bad was the exodus, that the tax increase the governor signed into law on the idea that it was going to raise revenue by a certain amount actually lost twice that amount from people leaving.
And the left, still hasn’t gotten the message. I suppose the assumption is that when there’s a one-world government in place, there will be no place left to escape to.
Perhaps the more important message here, is that this is the kind of anti freedom, pro socialist, dictatorial, and totalitarian nonsense that one can expect so long as Democrats remain in any position of power…. down to and inclusive the position of dog-catcher.
from Robert Reich, San Francisco Chronicle:
Wall Street’s immorality crux of crisis
Some want the 2012 election to be about regulating America’s bedrooms. But it really ought to be about regulating the nation’s boardrooms.
Let me translate Riech speak into plain English. When Riech says some, he means imaginary voices in his head. Proof, while Reich babbles about opposing same-sex marriage or limitations on abortion, Reich cites no example where any republican, or anybody has proposed any limitation on what any activity in either Sandra Fluke’s bed room or Dan Savage’s tea room. I simply do care what Fluke or Savage do in their respective bed rooms, nor to care to have to forced to pay for it either. I don’t oppose t heir bed room activity. I do oppose their bed room activity as an excuse to raid my wallet.
More Reich:
We’re in trouble because CEOs are collecting exorbitant pay while slicing the pay of average workers, because the titans of Wall Street demand short-term results over long-term jobs, because America’s biggest banks continue to make irresponsible bets with other people’s money, and because of a boardroom culture that tolerates financial conflicts of interest, insider trading and the outright bribery of public officials through unlimited campaign “donations.”
[…]
Consider last week’s admission by Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, America’s biggest bank, that the bank had lost at least $2 billion in trades that were “poorly executed” and “poorly monitored,” the result of “many errors, sloppiness and bad judgment.”
But not to worry, said Dimon: “We will admit it, we will learn from it, we will fix it, and we will move on.”
Who we Paleface? James Dimon’s compensation is a problem if, and only if, you are a share holder in JP Morgan. I am not. So unless Reich is, Dimon’s compensation is simply not Reich’s problem. If it is, Reich should sell his shares of JP Morgan.
Dimon will get to the bottom of the London Whale well before either Eric Holder gets to the bottom or Fast and Furious, or Barack Obama even become vaguely aware of it.
More Reich:
What’s truly immoral is not what adults choose to do with other consenting adults. It’s what those with great power have chosen to do to the rest of us.
It is immoral that top executives like Dimon are richly rewarded no matter how badly they screw up while most Americans are screwed no matter how hard they work.
If you don’t like what JP Morgan pays her employees,l don’t work for Morgan. End of problem.
Aside to Mr. Reich: You know what is immoral? Greed You sir are a greedy little man.
Media Splatters attempts take to take down Roger L. Simon, from PJ Tattler:
The Palace Guards over at MediaMatters are taking nasty swipes at me this morning — “Right-Wing Media’s Latest Embarrassment: Obama Lied About Birthplace to Get Ahead.” I suppose that’s to be expected when Rush Limbaugh quotes your article (“The Mystery of the Kenyan Birth“) on his show.
What’s amusing is that the MM crew takes at face value the assertion by Obama’s agents that the “born in Kenya” statement at the top of Barack’s biography was just a 1991 mistake that for some reason went unnoticed until 2007, although numerous other entries in the same pamphlet had been updated. (The literary agency, Acton & Dystel, has explained that the “born in Kenya” line “was nothing more than a fact checking error.”)
Hello? Are you kidding? In my informal poll of several authors of numerous books in the last day or two, not a single one of them had ever heard of such a thing or could have imagined it.
From Jack Cashi;, American Thinker:
“This was nothing more than a fact checking error by me – an agency assistant at the time,” Miriam Goderich, now a named partner in the literary agency, Dystel & Goderich, wrote in an emailed statement to Yahoo News, which was then picked up ABC News. “There was never any information given to us by Obama in any of his correspondence or other communications suggesting in any way that he was born in Kenya and not Hawaii. I hope you can communicate to your readers that this was a simple mistake and nothing more.”
This confession rings false to the point of preposterous for any number of reasons.
Do you remember routine events in exacting detail what from sixteen years ago? I don’t. Yet Ms Goderich expects us to believe that she remembered in detail a mistake she made some sixteen years earlier. In 1991, Barack Obama was just one of some ninety clients of Dystel & Goderich. Obama’s fauxography was published in 1991 and not corrected until 2007. In other words, in took sixteen years for Goodrich, or somebody, to discover that she had posted a false biography.
Goderich’s purported biographical description is not only wrong in Obama’s place of birth, but is also wrongly conflates Obama’s job as little more than a clerk to some kind of executive. As Goderich biography is counter-factual, that is full of lies, the source can only be the deluded narcissist himself, one Barack H. Obama.
Moreover, Obama admits that his purported girl friends were fictional, albeit he called them compressed. Compressed or composite, no matter, it still amounts to fiction. So given that Obama has admitted to using fictional characters and calling them biographical, there is no reason not to believe that Obama would limit his fictionalization to non-autobiographical characters. In other words, if Obama was willing to lie about his purported girl friends, there no reason to believe that he would not lie about himself as well. Honesty is simply not Obama’s strong suit.
Addendum: Doug Ross piles on:
The biography provided by Barack Obama to his literary agent specified his birthplace as “Kenya”. And, over the course of 17 years, despite multiple revisions by Obama, the Kenyan birthplace remained a fundamental part of the bio on the agent’s website.
[…]
Old media’s feeble handling of this issue — parroting the laughable assertion that clerical errors caused Obama’s birthplace to be incorrectly listed, when former clients and the agency’s policy itself states that authors provide the biographical briefs — is pathetic.
As I’ve demonstrated here, Obama’s bio was carefully edited over the course of 17 years to reflect his various accomplishments.
Goderich’s one mistake might explain a single mistake circa 1991. A single mistake can not explain seventeen years of erroneous information.
From Fox News:
Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, a Libyan intelligence officer who was the only person ever convicted in the 1988 Lockerbie bombing, died at home in Tripoli Sunday, nearly three years after he was released from a Scottish prison to the outrage of the relatives of the attack’s 270 victims. He was 60.
Ronald Reagan: Trust but verify. Show me the body!
I note DavidL’s post on this subject. I must confess, I too find “Was Dumbo lying then, or is Dumbo lying now?” to be an important question. But it seems to me there’s far more going on here.
Let’s re-establish. with David’s help:
In 1991,in order to sell books, Barack Obama was described as having been borne in Kenya, from by Joel B. Pollak, Big Hollywood:
Barack Obama, the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review, was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii. The son of an American anthropologist and a Kenyan finance minister, he attended Columbia University and worked as a financial journalist and editor for Business International Corporation. He served as project coordinator in Harlem for the New York Public Interest Research Group, and was Executive Director of the Developing Communities Project in Chicago’s South Side. His commitment to social and racial issues will be evident in his first book, Journeys in Black and White.
OK. That done…
What David doesn’t say is that this “error” if “error” it was, made it through several iterations of printing… there are several generations of this brochure out there. It initially showed up in promotion of Obama’s anticipated first book, Journeys in Black and White… a project that Obama abandoned, and was also used later in the promotion for Dreams from My Father. Funny how nobody…. and I mean nobody, Obama himself included, thought it wise not to remove this “error”.
That leaves one of two possibilities; either they lied because it made a better “Poor boy makes good against all odds” narrative, or, it wasn’t an “error”, and they were telling the truth. In short, he was lying then, or lying now. And as far as I’m concerned we still don’t have proof either way. Frankly, given the record of this individual called Obama, I’m inclined to believe the worst of it.
At best, we’re left with the question of what what this administration and his supporters will not lie about…. what they will not fabricate in the way of stories to make him appear better than he is. In reality, it’s worse. Far worse.
Breitbart’s site, Big Government, actually broke this story. but even they couch it in terms that attempt to deny what it clearly indicates.
from Breitbart.com
Andrew Breitbart was never a “Birther,” and Breitbart News is a site that has never advocated the narrative of “Birtherism.” In fact, Andrew believed, as we do, that President Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, on August 4, 1961.
Yet Andrew also believed that the complicit mainstream media had refused to examine President Obama’s ideological past, or the carefully crafted persona he and his advisers had constructed for him.It is for that reason that we launched “The Vetting,” an ongoing series in which we explore the ideological background of President Obama (and other presidential candidates)–not to re-litigate 2008, but because ideas and actions have consequences.
It is also in that spirit that we discovered, and now present, the booklet described below–one that includes a marketing pitch for a forthcoming book by a then-young, otherwise unknown former president of the Harvard Law Review.
It is evidence–not of the President’s foreign origin, but that Barack Obama’s public persona has perhaps been presented differently at different times.
Hmmm.
Well, granted that it is at least that.
Certainly, as Big Government suggests, it is proof of the degree to which the mainstream press has been covering for Obama. Let’s be realistic; The story we have here, where this a Republican president, would be considered a smoking gun by every individual in the press and on the left. (Granted, a repetition.) It fascinates me that even some on the right aren’t willing to consider as such. (And yes, I know I’m opening myself up for a hate filled response from the leftie keepers of sweet and light. So be it.)
But it strikes me as even more proof of the degree to which anyone who has any problems with Obama’s (Lack of) documentation has been demonized. This CYA language being employed here by the denizens of Big Government is absolutely fascinating. The demonization of anyone who questions Obama’s very shaky documentation is so complete that even those on the right, Big Government included, refuse to even suggest what this rather clearly points to.
Consider it the way this is going; the depth of the problem, and the mortal fear being displayed. Anyone who dares suggest that Obama was telling the truth, is attacked. Even bringing up the mere possibility is subject to attack from the usual suspects, including the White House itself.
I am reminded of the man accidentally caught in the bear trap, who is additionally and ironically confronted by a bear. He removes his own foot in an attempt to escape the bear. (Or if you prefer, the guy at the end of the movie “Mad Max”.) So it is with the Obama White House at the moment. My instinct tells me that the idea that Obama was telling the truth when he said in these brochures that he was born in Kenya, becoming commonly accepted, is the bigger fear. It is the only logical explanation for the reaction of the White House. They would be hardly willing to admit that Obama had lied in that brochure, otherwise. Yet, here, they’re insisting on it. Certainly, given his record, the concept that Obama was telling a lie, is easier one to believe than that he told the truth.
But that insistence does not make sense until you consider what it is that they are possibly protecting. Clearly, they believe the political cost of the electorate believing he was telling the truth is larger than believing he was telling a lie.
And of course anyone falling outside that narrative is demonized ridiculed etc.. What I find annoying is that Big Government is among those who are apparently so afraid of being demonized that they’re willing to play along. It is that same fear of demonization that we saw in the McCain campaign where McCain suggested that we have nothing to fear from an Obama presidency. That all of these negative stories that were coming up about him were beneath us. McCain did that because he was afraid of being demonized himself. We see where that got him. And by extension, us.
Interestingly, we see that same fear in Romney, today. But that’s another post.
Meanwhile, the question becomes “Is there anyone with the courage to speak the truth?” Specifically, why are so many going to such lengths to avoid the obvious conclusion in this matter? There’s an elephant in the room, people. It does not serve our purpose to be looking around and saying “What elephant?”
Addendum 1: By way of McPhillips, we find this statement on the point from Moochelle Obama, saying Obama was born in Kenya.
Seven, count em, NAG’s (National Association of Gale) showed up to protest Rush Limbaugh’s views on the gentler sex. For one, Darleen Click “Behold the multitudes” was somewhat less than impressed, video:
Hat tip video: Protein Wisdom
Snark to Erin: Community by foot. Next time yo9 claim to speak for all women, I advise you to show up with more than seven, far more.
In 1991, in order to sell books, Barack Obama was described as having been borne in Kenya, from by Joel B. Pollak, Big Hollywood:
Barack Obama, the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review, was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii. The son of an American anthropologist and a Kenyan finance minister, he attended Columbia University and worked as a financial journalist and editor for Business International Corporation. He served as project coordinator in Harlem for the New York Public Interest Research Group, and was Executive Director of the Developing Communities Project in Chicago’s South Side. His commitment to social and racial issues will be evident in his first book, Journeys in Black and White.
Not to say that Dumbo, b/k/a Barack Obama was actually born in Kenya. Why did Dumbo make such a claim. I posit four reasons:
- One, Dumbo was actually born in Kenya..
- Two, Dumbo was in fact born in Hawaii but lied in order to sell more books.
- Three, the description was published by Dumbo’s agent, without Dumbo knowledge. Sure.
- Tour, Dumbo was, and still is, too stupid to know that Kenya is not in Hawaii. Geography is not President Fifty-Seven States long suit.
Was Dumbo lying then, or is Dumbo lying now?
I don’t believe they still take scalps but one certified Cherokee, Twila Barnes, has figuratively scalped Fauxasquawa, a/k/a Lying Lizzie, b/k/a Elizabeth Warren, via William E. Jacobson, Legal Insurrection:
I am writing this letter in the hope it will help end the current situation you have found yourself in. It seems you are being ripped apart in the media because of your claim of Cherokee ancestry and you don’t like it. According to a recent article in the Boston Globe, you believe your opponent is “creating a distraction” by “ridiculously” attacking you “with questions that have already been answered.” It seems you would like the “attacks” against your claims of Cherokee ancestry to stop so I thought I would offer some advice on how to make it stop.
Tell the truth….
While you cling to a family story and the inaccurate report that ONE document was found that supports your claim, we real Cherokees understand that those things mean nothing. You see, we Cherokees have lots and lots and lots of documentation supporting our claims of our ancestry. Our Cherokee ancestors are found on every roll of the Cherokee Nation (30+ rolls!) dating back to before the removal and in all sorts of other documentation, including but not limited to claims against the US government for lost property; the Moravian missionary records; ration lists before and after the forced removal, etc…yet your ancestors are found in NONE of those records.
I don’t think too many Oklahoma Cherokee Indians are registered to vote in Massachusetts any how, but don’t suggest that Fauxasquawa travel to Oklahoma any time in the near future.
Irenic, that the supposed beneficiaries of Harvard’s supposed affirmative action, are raising the loudest objections. The if Fauxasquawa was attempting to steal your heritage, you would be mad as well.
Karen, the Lonely Conservative reports on Political Whore of the Day, one Maggie Haberman, link:
The Mitt Romney campaign released an ad featuring a few of the people the Obama economy has left behind. Within hours, Politico’s Maggie Haberman published a piece full of dirt on one of the men who appeared in the ad.
[…]
Well, at least he didn’t lie about being unemployed! The guy who did that appeared in an Obama ad, but nobody went digging up his criminal record, they only took a glance at his facebook page. His name is Brian Slagle, and a search at Politico brings up zero stories about Slagle. So I guess Politico is only interested in researching people who appear in Republican ads.
Ace of Spades wonders if Haberman had a source
If appears that Haberson is using Obama campaign opposition research and pawning it off as her own reporting.
The White House talking point and media meme that George Zimmerman was some racist white guy who gunned down a poor black child out of racist spite, keep running into those stubborn facts, from WFTV, Sanford, Florida:
WFTV has confirmed that autopsy results show 17-year-old Trayvon Martin had injuries to his knuckles when he died.
The information could support George Zimmerman’s claim that Martin beat him up before Zimmerman shot and killed him.
Of course the media lynching of Zimmerman started when they thought Zimmerman was white.
