Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.
Follow @WestJournalism
Michele Bachmann: My Birth Certificate Is Legitimate
December 9, 2011 by 31 Comments
Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.
Follow @WestJournalism
About Floyd BrownFloyd Brown is a political innovator, writer and speaker.
Time magazine wrote: “Brown has a stature among devoted conservatives that almost matches his physical heft (6 ft. 6 in. and 240 lbs.)”.
Floyd has written for publications as diverse as the San Francisco Chronicle, the Washington Times, Townhall.com and WND.com. His latest book is Killing Wealth/Freeing Wealth, published in 2010 by WND Books. Floyd writes a weekly syndicated column about politics, culture and the economy with his wife, Mary Beth Brown. Floyd also is chairman of the Western Center for Journalism www.westernjournalism.com.
Comments
Speak Your Mind
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Loading ...
Her campaign's death certificate also is legitimate–she just hasn't realized it yet.
Maybe her campaign is dead, but at least she speaks the truth and doesn't resort to lies like our campaigner in chief ! Her social security is also legitimate, is his ?
"Her social security is also legitimate"
How would you know?
" is his ?"
How would I know?
So that's your journalistic words of wisdom? I went to your blog to see your heart and you sir have know idea who you have teamed up with and when you find out it may be to late to cut your loses.
I could smell the stench from my monitor on your site, you are not looking for truth, fairness or our countries restoration you are here to spew BS to create more civil unrest, go ahead many of us wear boots because of folks like you.
One difference between many of us and you is we don't look at the GOP or DEMs as our savior, so you might want to consider what happens if your guys fulfill there dream of some Godless Utopia do you really think you will rule with them will there be enough room for you too? And even more do you really think these losers have the same dream you do?
Look at the history of groups like theses you are not an idiot that is very obvious but you do seem to be quite foolish to buy liberalism hook line and sinker.
Michelle will do fine she is a patriot you are not. You sir are the loser from your own words and you do not know it yet!
"You sir have know idea who you have teamed up with."
Actually I know my wife, my church and my employer pretty well–outside of God, those are my only "teammates."
"we don't look at the GOP or DEMs as our savior"
Good–and if you'd really spent any time at my site, you'd know that I don't, either.
Your Blog states its purpose:
About the blog
This blog considers issues related to the mass media and the political process, particularly as those two intersect. As a media scholar, I believe that the primary reason for the First Amendment, and for American journalism, is to help U.S. citizens govern themselves. But unless the new media choose to accept that role, and unless media users have some degree of media literacy, journalism can do relatively little in promoting a democratic society. Because of those factors, and because the United States is the most media-immersed culture on earth, this site also will discuss issues related to media literacy in general.
90 percent of your blog on the first page is all about how vile the GOP candidate are and how the Dems are just doing enough to be more liberal from what I saw? Did I miss something?
So basically we as the general public are ignorant and our illiteracy makes to slow to catch on is what you are saying, well actually the media is basically to slow to catch on and the so called elitist would like us to believe its our ignorance because we don't buy the crap you and them are pushing on us? Hey by the way haven't the liberals been in-control of the schools for the last 30 years, so I guess that kind of makes your team the problem not the answer doesn't it.
And since you bring your Church into this would it agree with your personal attacks of and on the GOP candidates?
I'd question your numbers, but I grant you that much of my recent blog activity has been aimed at the current collection of clowns running for the GOP nomination–in case you hadn't noticed, there's a campaign going on, and with a blog "related to mass media and the political process," that's a pretty big deal.
"So basically we as the general public are ignorant and our illiteracy makes to slow to catch on is what you are saying,"
Yep–we are the most media-immersed culture in the history of mankind, and yet one of few Western nations not to required media literacy courses. If you spend a little time on my blog, you'll see I'm highly critical of the media–hardly buying what they're "pushing on us."
I suspect my church is as tolerant of my "attacks" on dishonest candidates as your church is agreeable about your attacks on me–thanks for your concern, though..
1st account: You claim to be blogging to to help us illiterates to honestly understand what is going on.
2nd. You did not add yourself into the illiterates class until your response to clean up your fair appearances.
3rd. Would that be media literacy or propaganda training courses?
4th. I am more concerned in what my Lord says and maybe yes I did let my disgust of your comments here and on your blog let my passion out a little more than I ought. But sir its obvious you are not what you claim, equally fair and only concerned for us ignorant folks out here.. I do believe you think we don't get it and you know better maybe because of your education in liberal colleges it seems..
Maybe you could clear this up by telling us what you ideal plan for the USA would be? Just so you would know mine is less government, less overseas involvement, less entitlements and more individual and state rights. One term limitations in all public offices to keep the people safe..
You have a liberal agenda and just because you throw bones to the GOP on occasion and lobs softballs to the Dems does not change that. And since you made it clear you rarely if ever agree with your Conservative baptist friend its likely we have limited paths to walk together.
Don't get me wrong I do think you believe what you are saying is best for the country I want what is best for the people of our country and I don't see how our paths can run in the same direction looking at your words. You would be powerful if less biased and more equal in your thinking.
"you are not what you claim, equally fair and only concerned for us ignorant folks"
Though I don't know what "equally fair" means, I never claimed to be anything other than liberal. Nor is my concern for "ignorant folks" (to use your term) my "only concern"–though it's a big one. Here are some more: http://jmcpherson.wordpress.com/2008/06/09/beggin…
And by the way, ignorance isn't a crime–it's inevitable for all of us, in many ways. I'm ignorant when it comes to many other languages cultures, rocket science, and the conservative "Christian" mindset. I keep trying to understand the last of those, however, because of how it influences my own life.
"ideal plan for the USA"
That's not possible to discuss fully here, though obviously I disagree with almost all of your "ideals."
"likely we have limited paths to walk together"
I can live with that. Thanks for the comments–and feel free to stop by my blog, anytime.
Sorry Equally Fair is kind of a joke on the word FAIR used by the left to show compassion when they really mean control of the outcome. –
The word should read "Equal" as far as I am concerned because there is no room to show bias like the word "fair" can be anything a person in power wants it to be.
Like fair trade – fair education or environmental justice or any other stretch of the imaginations on the word fair.
You posted your reasons for the blog in a way to look unbiased but like I said that I don't agree from my conservative perspective.
We all know words are very important and since most of the guys in power are Lawyers words mean even more. Its called giving no absolutes and lots of wiggle room.
Not PC wrote:
"Just so you would know mine is less government, less overseas involvement, less entitlements and more individual and state rights. One term limitations in all public offices to keep the people safe."
NsPCfT, you are a man after my own heart. Well stated. It is both uplifting and inspirational to see other people put such common sense to print. Really agree about the term limits. I wonder if even a saint could resist the temptation to corruption after more than just a few terms in Congress. I would wager that 80+ percent of democrats and 60+ percent of republicans should be serving their next terms as jail terms if all their nefarious activities were brought to light and the law were fairly applied.
Personally, I would also like to see the IRS abolished and federal funding come totally from each of the several States, with each State collecting their share as they see fit. Also would like to return to Senators being selected by the individual State legislative bodies. And the feds should be completely downsized back to their strictly enumerated powers per the Constitution. Of course, the federal indoctrination sys…, er I mean education system should be abolished, too.
As Jefferson famously said, "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."
PS: I am applying "term limits" to my own personal voting selections – always vote against a multi-term incumbent with the only exception being those who have a track record of strictly supporting the Constitution (including the natural born Citizen eligibility clause for POTUS).
"Really agree about the term limits."
The problem with that, of course, is that it means that Congressional staffers and lobbyists–who already run too much of Congress–will have even more power in dealing with clueless newbies.
And I notice that even you have an "exception"–which is the biggest problem: Most people hate Congress, but like their own Congressman.
"federal funding come totally from each of the several States"
Those of us who live in "blue states" should be especially excited by this idea, since most blue states pay more in federal taxes than they get back and most red states collect more than they pay in. Your Congressman won't point that out in either case, of course.
JM wrote:
Perhaps each state would shoulder a share of the federal funding burden proportional to state population.
However, let's assume we've returned to the founding principals so that Senators are selected by the various state legislative bodies (as the Founders intended) and the federal government has had its authority restricted to those few powers enumerated in the Constitution (as the Founders intended). Now consider that each state must fund 1/50th of the federal budget (as you implied). That actually would be a tremendous motivation for most states to only select very budget frugal Senators. Hmmmm… that's a great idea you came up with there, JM. Thanks.
I like it I like it a lot! There are simple answers to the problems if lifers can be replaced and anyone coming in will not have a free ride for life after the one term they get.
Not so PC from Texas wrote:
Very good point. We need to get back to true public service as a solemn duty and sacrifice. No bennies at all.
Another fantasy I have is that we somehow limit the total body of federal laws to certain number of pages (or characters of text, whatever) – maybe about three feet of pages (I am being generous). Once their bureaucracy budget became used up and the limit exceeded, Congress would have to rescind/retire an equal amount of old law before they could pass a new one.
"The problem with that, of course, is that it means that Congressional staffers and lobbyists–who already run too much of Congress–will have even more power in dealing with clueless newbies."
I don't think the people that would run for one term in office is going to be the kind of people that are going to listen to the BS. And anyway why can't we the people require term limits on staffers and lobbyist if it could encourage dishonesty of elected officials. Its our country we should be able to fix the problem correct?
"And I notice that even you have an "exception"–which is the biggest problem: Most people hate Congress, but like their own Congressman."
Well I personally don't have any exceptions as far as a change in the term limitation law anything less would not work. But until we have a change in the law I see your point for sure. I am not married to any of them in any position from the top federal to individual state reps. its time for a new breed of elected official one called a servant! At least we would get a full 4 years instead of the 2.5 we get before they are running again in this ones case he never stopped running.
"At least we would get a full 4 years instead of the 2.5 we get before they are running again"
Indeed. And members of the House, who are elected every two years, are running/fundraising constantly. That's why every two president tries to push through whatever he can in the first 100 days–after that, everyone in the House is geared too much toward their next election.
We are not alone!
1kings:
Elijah said,
14. He said, I have been very jealous for the Lord God of hosts, because the Israelites have forsaken Your covenant, thrown down Your altars, and slain Your prophets with the sword. And I, I only, am left, and they seek my life, to destroy it.
Father Jehovah said,
18.Yet I will leave Myself 7,000 in Israel, all the knees that have not bowed to Baal and every mouth that has not kissed him.
If we were to open our eyes to see we will find that we are the majority! That may have to sink in a while for some to except it or understand it. I know thinkwell will get it though.
Regardless of the outcome, Michele Bachman will continue to be a voice and leader of those who stand for truth, freedom and our constitution. Eventhough she will not win the GOP nomination, she may be chosen to be part of the next President's cabinet. I believe that's why some of them stick around. Or even V.P. Her career is far from dead.
Michelle: You were in Congress in 2007-2008. Please tell us why Obama was not vetted; his records allowed to be hidden.
Actually check your records on that one to see how little input she had.
Excellent question and not just of Bachman. The way things stand, it is the responsibility of Congress, as you say, to vet presidential candidates. Man, did they all fall down on the job!!
Will Obama be subject to prison time once the fraud of his birth certificate is exposed? How long will it take to impeach Holder for "Fast and Furious"? Was Obama in on that fraud as well? Did Obama lie on his application to Occidental College as a foreign student under the name Barry Soeero (Sp>?)? Is that a felonly as well? How many felonies are stacking up now against Obama and Holder? Are there any potential felonies against Pelosi, Boxer, and Reid? I know that Reid served on the Nevada Gaming Commission during the "mob days" as one of the people who granted gaming licenses? Anything on Pelosi and Boxer? I know that they are very wealthy, and the question is "were they wealthy before they went to Washington" or did they acquire this wealth during their tenure there?
obama was not vetted in 2008 because:
1. His ineligibility was already known.
2. He was the ONLY Democrat who had a chance of defeating McCain.
Correct Daniel its well excepted knowledge and common sense if that counts for anything in Washington that both parents were required to be US citizens to run for President of the US from everything I can see but of course the same people that twist the US Constitution and want our guns confiscated seem to read it all a little different.
After all I am some what illiterate by many current standards. I am also on the watch list because I am a conservative white christian guy that hates abortion loves our military and country and thinks married still means a man and a woman.
That does not mean I hate the pro-abortion pro-gay or atheist people I just hate what they do. Please don't leave that part out of any hate filled reply.
Also I grew up on the poor side of town with the Mexicans as my best friends and have two beautiful mixed race B/W grandchildren. I am a proud and blessed man not a racist for your replies too.
I say this because I am used to seeing the left attack anyone to silence them by calling us names and twisting any and everything I say or was that said? I don't mind liberals if they fess-up to what they are that is.
The 'civilian security force' he refered to, is provided for in the 'Health Care Bill'. One of my own Senators didn't know it was there until I gave him the section, paragraph, etc to find it. I'm sure most Americans, let alone our gov't 'reps' don't either.
Now you know why the bill was passed behind closed doors ,remember the wicked witch of the west , saying that it needed to be passed now, it could be read later.
Everyone…check with the Secretary of State in your state to see who is on the ballots for 2012, check the applications to appear on the ballots for the actual state requirements and ask if they are actually verified, or just accepted by signature of testament.
In New Hampshire, the Secretary of State accepted Obama's signature that he was eligible according to the included, printed requirements of Art II, sect 1 of the Constitution. No actual proof given or asked for. If not properly challenged, it stands. Orly Taitz challenged it on the grounds of forged BC and falsified Social Security number…neither of which are requirements according to NH law. So she failed.
The photo implies a lot more than the interview. She did not say the certificate was false. She did not say her certificate was false. Our Arrogant Ass president has more to hide than citizenship
There is NO "President" Obama: http://www.thepostemail.com/09/17/2010/there-is-n…
Michelle would make a GREAT president. Add Sarah or Herman to the ticket as VP. Gets my vote.