Shortly after the death and funeral of President John F. Kennedy, Jackie Kennedy agreed to a brief interview about the assassination and the Kennedy legacy. When the First Lady was asked how she wanted the Kennedy White House years to be remembered, she thoughtfully said that she likened it to Camelot.

 

“Don’t let it be forgot, that once there was a spot, for one brief shining moment that was known as Camelot.”…There’ll never be another Camelot again…

Interview with T.H. White on November 29, 1963

at Hyannis, MA, for LIFE Magazine

         Now, 45 years later, in the midst of another election period, it is important to remember that it is just words to equate one’s candidacy to the legacy of our fallen leader. It is History that will determine the true legacy of the candidates in this election, the winners and the losers. Instead of trying to be likened to the iconic Presidency of John F. Kennedy, perhaps the better strategy would be to be fully forthright in one’s own accord.

 

 

The following is a synopsis of the timeframe and social climate that possibly existed in 1961, and what might be involved in the “mystery” that the Obama campaign has created around the “Birth Certifcate” issue:

In 1961, biracial marriages were illegal in 22 states. Albeit, Hawaii was not one of them; there laws were silent on the matter, primarily because Hawaii had just been admitted to the USA as a state, and cultural mores dictated the rules of marriage. Biracial marriages were not recognized throughout the USA until the Supreme Court made its decisive ruling in the Loving v. Virginia case in 1967.

As a family from Kansas, one would have to think that the Dunham family was not thrilled with their daughter’s choice in a male companion, and even less thrilled when she became pregnant.

Circa 1961, mixed race pregnancy, married man from Africa– can we figure that the young Miss Dunham was ultimately shipped out of Hawaii to have her child; would this fall into place with her documented visit to Mercer Island WA just weeks after her son’s birth? Air travel in 1961 was not what it is today, so it is hard to believe that her middle class parents put her and her child on a plane to fly to WA to visit friends. It is more plausible that they put their daughter on a plane in March or April of 1961 headed for an unwed mother’s home, probably in Vancouver or such– far enough away from friends and family that may have been in WA. Could the plan have been that she was not supposed to return to Hawaii with the child? Remember this was all 1961, and the social views were quite different than they are today.

This is all supposition, but when one takes into account that in 2004, Obama and his sister mention one hospital as the place of his birth, and in 2008, both parties mention a different hospital as the location of his birth; and NEITHER hospital will confirm that Obama was born there.
In 1961, a child born to an unmarried woman would have her surname. In 1961, if the unmarried mother listed the father’s name, the father from Africa would have been listed as Negro, not African.

So, again, can we ask Senator Barry Dunham for some truth with regard to his birth certificate. With his father NOT being a US citizen, the campaign had to expect this issue to come forward, and if Obama was born in Hawaii or Washington State, just show the damn thing– or this issue is not going away

With the Obama campaign insisting that the birth certificate that they are displaying on their “AntiSmear” website is real, and there being some “discrepancies” in the Dreams of My Father storyline, I would think that there would be one source that could settle some of the discrepancies.

So, if I could interview anyone right now, the FIRST person that I would like to sit down to talk to would be Madelyn Dunham. The press has “flocked” to Kenya to talk to Obama’s Kenyan grandmother. But Grandma Madelyn– the woman who raised the Senator to be the “man” that he is– has only been seen by a handful of people.

These would be some of the questions I would pose to her:

• Even though Barack “threw you under the bus” when he gave his Rev. Wright race speech, were you offended by his disrespect for you?
• Michelle Obama refers to your daughter, Stanley Ann Dunham, as an unmarried, single woman when she had Barack. Was there ever a marriage between your daughter and Barack Obama?
• Where was Barack born?
• Were you and your husband there for the arival of your first grandchild? Was Daddy Obama there?
• Where was this birth?
• If you say he was born in Hawaii, which hospital? Why do they not have any record (either of the two that have been mentioned so far)?
• Given the era, circa 1961, wouldn’t it be accurate that Barack’s birth certificate would not have his last name as Obama, since his parent’s weren’t married?
• Given the “race” issue, wouldn’t Barack Obama (Sr) have been listed as “Negro”, not “African” on the birth certificate?
• Would it be safe to say that, in 1961, given jobs, people “talking” and such, that your daughter was sent back to the mainland for her pregnancy?
• Would it be safe to say that Barack was probably born in a home for unwed mothers in Canada, perhaps Vancouver?
• How did your daughter travel to Mercer Island, WA with a 5-6 week old child, and at whose expense?

    It is factual that Stanley Ann Dunham was in Mercer Island WA in mid to late September 1961 with an infant “Barry”, visiting high school friends. There is no mention of Barack Obama (Sr) being with her. It is hard to fathom an 18 year old travelling from Hawaii with an infant alone. It is more believable that the stop in Mercer Island was enroute BACK to Hawaii after “Barry’s” birth.

   Barack Obama is once again making what should be a “small” question turn into a major ISSUE because he thinks that he does not have to answer such trivial questions like “can we see your birth certificate”? Knowing that is father WAS NOT a US citizen, it had to be a “given” for the campaign that this issue would surface.

   Maybe we can get Grandma Madelyn to go with us, the American public, to Hawaii’s Bureau of Vital Statistics to get a copy of the ORIGINAL birth certificate of Barack Obama. She is, after all, FAMILY, and therefore entitled to it!!

Both Senator John McCain (R-AZ) and Senator Barack Obama (D-IL), as the presumptive nominees of their respective political parties, have taken off the gloves and plunged full force into the general election campaign. With 119 days (7/8/08) until the November 4th election, defining themselves through the issues if now imperative.

Already, Sen. Obama has changed the rhetoric of his position on the Iraq war, which, in the primary races, he vehemently stated he would without reservation withdraw and end our presence in Iraq withing 16 months of January 20, 2009. Now, with the fact that the surge strategy is actually working, his plans are more in line with those of Sen. Clinton, in that a change in strategy would be based upon the consultation with commanders, etc.

So what are some of the other key issues, and where do the nominees stand (today):

ABORTION:

      McCain:    anti-abortion; conservative values;

      Obama:     supports abortion rights, and even voted for partial-birth abortions.

                       The next President will be essentially defining the Supreme Court for the    next twenty years, so it is important that our conservative values be reflected on the Bench.

IRAQ

       McCain:   We may need a presence in the Persian Gulf region for a long time, just as we have in Japan, Germany, Korea, and so forth. But the ultimate safety of our troops is tantamount.

       Obama:  We need to get out as quick as possible, almost like a “cut the losses and run”.

EXPERIENCE:

     McCain:   He has served in public service since his return from Vietnam, after his years as POW in Hanoi.

      Obama:   Brief time as an Illinois State Senator, and has not yet completed one full term as a United States Senator. Barabck Obama has an attendance record of about 150 days since his term began in January 2005.

SERVICE to COUNTRY:

         McCain:   The military record of Senator McCain is undisputable, and any attack on his service to our country would be without merit. McCain is a graduate of the US Naval Academy, and is a true leader.

        Obama:  Failed to register for the Selective Service as was required of all males upon reaching 18.

FOREIGN POLICY:

        Where McCain has served this country for decades, and has been involved in numerous issues regarding foreign policy, Obama’s extent of foreign policy is centered on his ancestral home in Kenya.

 

     These are just brief snippets of some of the issues, and over the next few weeks, these will be discussed in greater detail. One of the key things to keep in mind and to pay attention to is that Senator Obama campaigned in the primaries on the extreme liberal left, but now as the presumptive nominee, he is “centralizing” his positions.

As we light up the grills, join family and friends for the afternoon BBQ, and then watch the skies light up across this great nation, filled with sparkling fireworks, we need to also reflect on the importance of this day in our history, our INDEPENDENCE DAY!!!!

Our troops are stationed all over the world, honoring their commitment to serve and protect the citizens of the United States of America. The allow us to freely enjoy the freedoms we hold so dearly.

• We are free to pursue life, liberty, and happiness
• We are free to practice the religion of our choice
• We are free to express ourselves and our opinions
• We are free to protect ourselves and our family

So this day, as we celebrate 232 years of America’s Independence, let us remember those who gave us our freedoms, and let us “Let FREEDOM RING!!!!”

http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/7202/america.html

While the storm clouds gather far across the sea, Let us swear allegiance to a land that’s free, Let us all be grateful for a land so fair, As we raise our voices in a solemn prayer:God Bless America. Land that I love Stand beside her, and guide her Thru the night with a light from above. From the mountains, to the prairies , To the oceans, white with foam God bless America My home sweet home. God Bless America, Land that I love Stand beside her, And guide her, Through the night With the light from above, From the mountains, To the prairies, To the ocean, White with foam, God bless America, My home sweet home. God bless America, My home sweet home.

Irving Berlin’s

“God Bless America”

 

 

As the internet age has grown, the idea of putting our thoughts into writings and sharing them in an open forum has been intriguing. The main thing that has enabled this is the ability to be anonymous. In the context of anonymity, many inhibitions and fears are put side because those reading your writings do not know the “personal” you.

There remains in the ever-evolving area of internet law the defining and melding of standard legal concepts and how they apply with regard to internet writing. One key area is that of Defamation. BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY, 6th ed., defines defamation as:

An intentional false communication, either published or publicly spoken, that injures another’s reputation or good name. Holding up of a person to ridicule, scorn or contempt in a respectable and considerable part of the community; may be criminal as well as civil. Includes both libel and slander. Defamation is that which tends to injure reputation; to diminish the esteem, respect, goodwill or confidence in which the plaintiff is held, or to excite adverse, derogatory or unpleasant feelings or opinions against him. Statement which exposes person to contempt, hatred, ridicule or obloquy. McGowen v. Prentice, La.App., 341 So.2d 55, 57 (La. 3d Cir. Ct. App. 1976) rehearing denied Jan. 26, 1977. The unprivileged publication of false statements which naturally and proximately result in injury to another. Wolfson v. Kirk, Fla.App., 273 So.2d 774, 776 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973). A maliciously written or printed publication which tends to blacken a person’s reputation or to expose him to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule, or to injure him in his business or profession. Corabi v. Curtis Pub. Co., 441 Pa. 432, 273 A.2d 899, 904 (Pa. 1971).

It is very easy, in the anonymity of cyberspace, to cross that line and defame an individual. Thus, we see litigation in the District of Columbia where Larry Sinclair is suing three bloggers (referred to on certain sites as the “3 poor bloggers whose lives have been destroyed by this lawsuit) because they posted comments, not just once, but numerous times on numerous sites, and those comments contained knowingly false information about Mr. Sinclair.

The “poor 3″ are hiding behind their anonymity in the attempt to avoid legal service, and thus keep the lawsuit from being tried in the Courts on its merits. To this extent, others have gone on viscious attacks to aid the 3 bloggers. So who are these bloggers.

TubeSockTedD is a Democrat from New York. When the lawsuit was filed by Larry Sinclair, he sent meassges to Mr. Sinclair that were basically showing that he was on the verge of hysterics. Then again, who wouldn’t be, given the $1 million dollar price tag. Though trying to have his legal counsel, Ray Beckermann, keep his name hidden.

MzMolly is presumably a woman from Minnesota whose name is Denise Lee. Paul Levy of Public Citizens Litigation Group is representing her ONLY to the extent of keeping her name anonymous. The question then becomes “Why?” when her name has already been ascertained through her ongoing blogging on numerous sites for numerous causes. Ironically, many of her comment posts have been “deleted” and scrubbed from the internet. Confirmation of who mzmolly is can be found in comments on Bigheaddc and other blog sites where thsoe protecting the “poor 3″ have confirmed the name.

OWNINGLIARS has no legal counsel at the moment, but is perhaps the easiest to take out of anonymity. By doing a Google search on OWNINGLIARS, his online profile comes up and shows that OWNINGLIARS is a 34-year old male residing in the Baltimore, MD area, whose name is Mark Pendleton ( http://digg.com/users/OWNINGLIARS ).

With 2 of the 3 “Poor 3″ bloggers names actually known, one should wonder why, if they are so sure that they did not defame Larry Sinclair, do they not want to get this case moving forward so that they can be heard, and exonerated. Further, in following the saga of Larry Sinclair as he attempts to bring forth the truths about Sen. Barack Obama’s drug usage that has gone on beyond his college years, one can see that Mr. Sinclair has been subjected to verbal and written abuses that would further fall within the legal definition of defamation.

My prediction: the blogger lawsuit will soon begin a new phase, where names will come forward, and the issues will be meritoriously heard.

 

On August 25th, 2008, IF Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) receives the nomination of the Democratic National Convention in Denver, he will step to the podium, in a prime-time televised speech t accept the nomination. The date is not being lost on historians, particularly civil rights movement historians, as it will be the 45th anniversary of Rev. Martin Luther King’s famous “I Had a Dream”  speech. We can be assured that Obama will make more than one reference to Rev. King.

And the hype will ensue leading to the general election on November 4th, with the eye on the 1st Black President possibility. But, lets put Barack Obama into his own perspective AS WELL AS a historical perspective.

First, as for Obama himself. Barack Obama Jr. is not black. He is multi-racial. In an earlier time, he would be a mullato, and would have been discriminated against by the black race as much if not more than the Caucasians. Realistically, Obama is more white than black, if one wants to be specific. Though his “alleged” birth certificate lists his father as “African”, Barack Obama Sr.’s birth record actually lists him as Arab. So we can just as easily say Obama would be our first Arab-American President, if elected.

From a historical perspective, there is a vast amount of information regarding the black lineage of several of our forefathers. In the book “Black People and Their Place In World History”, Dr. Leroy Vaughn has a chapter entitled “Five Black Presidents.”

Thomas Jefferson	Andrew Jackson	Abraham Lincoln
Warren Harding	Calvin Coolidge

The following is the excerpt of the chapter:

 Joel A. Rogers and Dr. Auset Bakhufu have both written books documenting that at least five former presidents of the United States had Black people among their ancestors. If one considers the fact that European men far outnumbered European women during the founding of this country, and that the rape and impregnation of an African female slave was not considered a crime, it is even more surprising that these two authors could not document Black ancestors among an ever larger number of former presidents. The president’s names include Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Warren Harding, and Calvin Coolidge.

The best case for Black ancestry is against Warren G. Harding, our 29th president from 1921 until 1923. Harding himself never denied his ancestry. When Republican leaders called on Harding to deny the “Negro” history, he said, “How should I know whether or not one of my ancestors might have jumped the fence.” William Chancellor, a White professor of economics and politics at Wooster College in Ohio, wrote a book on the Harding family genealogy and identified Black ancestors among both parents of President Harding. Justice Department agents allegedly bought and destroyed all copies of this book. Chancellor also said that Harding’s only academic credentials included education at Iberia College, which was founded in order to educate fugitive slaves.

 

Andrew Jackson was our 7th president from 1829 to 1837. The Virginia Magazine of History Volume 29 says that Jackson was the son of a White woman from Ireland who had intermarried with a Negro. The magazine also said that his eldest brother had been sold as a slave in Carolina. Joel Rogers says that Andrew Jackson Sr. died long before President Andrew Jackson Jr. was born. He says the president’s mother then went to live on the Crawford farm where there were Negro slaves and that one of these men was Andrew Jr’s father. Another account of the “brother sold into slavery” story can be found in David Coyle’s book entitled “Ordeal of the Presidency” (1960).

Thomas Jefferson was our 3rd president from 1801 to 1809. The chief attack on Jefferson was in a book written by Thomas Hazard in 1867 called “The Johnny Cake Papers.” Hazard interviewed Paris Gardiner, who said he was present during the 1796 presidential campaign, when one speaker states that Thomas Jefferson was “a mean-spirited son of a half-breed Indian squaw and a Virginia mulatto father.” In his book entitled “The Slave Children of Thomas Jefferson,” Samuel Sloan wrote that Jefferson destroyed all of the papers, portraits, and personal effects of his mother, Jane Randolph Jefferson, when she died on March 31, 1776. He even wrote letters to every person who had ever received a letter from his mother, asking them to return that letter. Sloan says, “There is something strange and even psychopathic about the lengths to which Thomas Jefferson went to destroy all remembrances of his mother, while saving over 18,000 copies of his own letters and other documents for posterity.” One must ask, “What is it he was trying to hide?”

Abraham Lincoln was our 16th president from 1861 to 1865. J. A. Rogers quotes Lincoln’s mother, Nancy Hanks, as saying that Abraham Lincoln was the illegitimate son of an African man. William Herndon, Lincoln’s law partner, said that Lincoln had very dark skin and coarse hair and that his mother was from an Ethiopian tribe. In Herndon’s book entitled “The Hidden Lincoln” he says that Thomas Lincoln could not have been Abraham Lincoln’s father because he was sterile from childhood mumps and was later castrated. Lincoln’s presidential opponents made cartoon drawings depicting him as a Negro and nicknamed him “Abraham Africanus the First.”

Calvin Coolidge was our 30th president, and he succeeded Warren Harding. He proudly admitted that his mother was dark because of mixed Indian ancestry. However, Dr. Bakhufu says that by 1800 the New England Indian was hardly any longer pure Indian, because they had mixed so often with Blacks. Calvin Coolidge’s mother’s maiden name was “Moor.” In Europe the name “Moor” was given to all Black people just as the name Negro was used in America.

All of the presidents mentioned were able to pass for White and never acknowledged their Black ancestry. Millions of other children who were descendants of former slaves have also been able to pass for White. American society has had so much interracial mixing that books such as “The Bell Curve”, discussing IQ evaluations based solely on race, are totally unrealistic.

Thus, if Obama is campaigning as the “Candidate of Change”, let’s make sure he changes the commentary, and takes “Race” out of the Presidential race. Remember, despite the claims that Bill Clinton threw down the race card in South Carolina (another mutated news blurb), it is Barack Obama who has consistently played the race card…. “and did I tell you I was black!” (Fl. speech 6/20/08)

.

 

 

One of the most recent campaign ads running with Sen. John McCain as its target is the footage of a young mother with her toddler son on her lap. In the ad, she talks about her son being her everything, and how each day is a new adventure. Then, with a snippet from a McCain speech, she says “John McCain, when you were talking about us being in Iraq for 100 years, were you talking about Alex (the toddler), because if you were, you cannot have him!!” Of course, what is more gripping than a mother’s love!

The ad brings up several key points. First, it shows how things can be twisted to say something completely opposite of the speaker’s intent. In this case, John McCain DID say it wouldn’t matter if we were in Iraq 100 years. But the FULL statement went on to say that we’ve been in Japan for 60+ years, in Korea for 50+ years, and we can be in Iraq for 100 years SO LONG AS our soldiers are not being injured or killed. But the last part NEVER makes it into the rhetoric of the Democratic Party.

The other point that the ad brings up, and one that I believe is highly significant, is that John McCain, as our Commander in Chief, would not be asking the American soldiers and their families to do ANYTHING that he would not ask of himself. This, in my opinion, is what sets John McCain’s leadership capabilities far above those of Barack Obama. (A side note: Obama’s charisma does not translate to McCain’s leadership values).

By now, unless you have been living under a rock, John McCain’s heroic story as a POW in the Vietnam War is well documented. McCain’s grandfather, John Sr. and his father, John Jr. were both military officers. Now, with troops on the fronts in Iraq and Afghanistan, McCain has made an extremely conscious decision NOT to allow his campaign to publicize that his two youngest sons are both serving in the military. Jack McCain attended the US Naval Academy, and Jimmy McCain, now 20, enlisted at 18. Like their father, grandfather, and great-grandfather before them, they are proudly serving there country. And like thousands of wives, mothers, fathers, husbands, children, siblings across our great nation, the McCain family worries about their sons.

So, yes, John McCain hopes that “Alex” might want to serve his country, in whatever capacity he might be drawn to in his adult life, but, as I said, he will not ask any more of the American people than he himself would be willing to do.

Larry Sinclair has been referred to by many names since he posted is now infamous YouTube video in January 2008. It was in this video that Sinclair basically “called out” the Obama campaign, challenging the campaign to have Obama correct his statements about when he had last used drugs. Obama has stated in speeches, as well as in his books, that he used some drugs in high school, perhaps college. Mr. Sinclair challenges that by saying he had an encounter with Obama in November 1999 where they had drugs and sex. Larry has always claimed that objective of his allegation is to have Obama be honest about his drug use.

It is important to note that Larry Sinclair makes no political affiliations, and says he is not a supporter of any particular campaign.

So to the question, why is the Larry Sinclair story important?

This saga has highlighted the manner in which the media has manipulated the new stories to reveal only positive items about Obama, while at the same time having a complete disregard for the type of press given to other candidates like Sen. Clinton. The press has been so “in the tank” for Obama that it took debate skits on Saturday Night Live to get the mainstream media to understand how awful they were being.

As the media manipulated the electorate, they chose which items to use in their vetting of Obama. (Note: this author does not think they have yet begun to vet Sen. Obama). In their choices, they have chosen to ignore the Larry Sinclair story. He has been brushed off as “a con man, no credibility, no corroboration to the story”. What is interesting is the fact that, while John Crewdson of the Chicago Tribune did some research on Larry’s claims, he opted not to do the story. I cannot quote Mr. Crewdson, but it is not a stretch to say that the powers that be would not permit the story to go further.

At his press conference last week, despite the attempts to cancel the event, Larry outlined his claims, and gave the basic challenge to the media. He said “To be honest with you, its not so much whether you believe me or not, as much as you hear me.” He challenged them to DO THEIR JOBS and investigate the story, check the facts. The silence from the Obama camp speaks volumes, and that in itself is worth pursuing within this story. The strange scenario of the aftermath of the press conference only adds to the many twists that Larry’s claims have revealed. When he reveals the facts of the past week, we can be assured that it will lend even more credibility to Larry and the Obama drug and sex story.

For our democracy to remain true to itself, the information of the press must be fair and honest, not tainted to the ideology of the corporate entity that owns the media oulet.

 

In the continuing political drama that is Larry Sinclair/Barack Obama, news generated from his blog just now that………Larry Sinclair has been released!!!!

Despite the stories in the blogosphere where attackers of Larry Sinclair were dispersing information that they had arranged his arrest (although they were surprised that it pertained to a Delaware warrant, not the Colorado issue they had harassed Larry about), that he would be taken from DC jail, to Delaware, then to Colorado where they claim they had arranged for his warrant to be changed to an extradictable warrant, never to see the light of day again, Mr. Sinclair is no longer in jail, no longer in custody.

Larry Sinclair’s arrest has many facets to it, having occurred in a very public forum, the National Press Club, immediately after he gave a press conference to discuss his 1999 meeting with Barack Obama, during which time they shared drugs and had sex. The days leading up to the press comference prompted an outcry from media sources who do not permit any negative stories regarding the annointed Democratic presumptive nominee, Sen. Barack Obama. Daily Kos, Firedoglake.com, and others inundated the National Press Club with emails, phone calls, and petitions demanding that the NPC cancel the conference.

There are sure to be many details that have been unknown to most that will be revealed by Larry Sinclair in the coming days. Suffice it to say that the anti-Sinclair blogs will be burning up after having this “egg on their face”, and one can only assume that this is just the beginning of a new chapter!