The World’s Greatest Welfare Recipients: Barack And Michelle Obama!

Obamas SC The Worlds Greatest Welfare Recipients: Barack and Michelle Obama!

As most of the taxpayers in America are upset with the low information voters who game the welfare system and refuse to work an honest day in their life to contribute, one thing stands clear. They have great teachers.

Your typical professional welfare gamer has no problem using their food stamp card to purchase steak and lobster; we have seen this with our own eyes many times in the supermarket. They are handed free housing, free medical care, free child care for the many illegitimate children that they may have, cash assistance, and any other perk that may be available. All without working a day in their life.

Sound familiar? We have a man and his family (including his mother-in-law) living in a house that is owned by the American taxpayer, being fed with food supplied by the American taxpayer, who is able to party with the rich and famous on the American taxpayer’s dime and take separate vacations from his wife, also at the taxpayer’s expense.

Now for his work history. He was absent when Americans were being killed in Benghazi, Libya. He was absent and had to be brought in from the golf course during the Osama Bin Laden raid. He was absent from the funeral of the great American sniper Chris Kyle, who died while trying to help fellow vets.  He has been absent from the conversations concerning America’s fiscal and employment problems. Instead, he concentrates on things that will give more perks to him and his fellow welfare recipients.

A short time ago, Rush Limbaugh referred to Barack Hussein Obama as “Santa Claus“. At this point, I beg to differ with Rush. Obama is just another welfare recipient; it is the American taxpayer who has become “Santa Claus.”

So as Obama continues to train up his fellow welfare recipients, all I can say at this point is to be sure to show up for work tomorrow because someone has to pay for it. As always, stay safe and be aware of your surroundings.

Photo credit: Justin Sloan (Creative Commons)

Obama’s Gone Jack Bauer On Us

Jack Bauer SC Obamas Gone Jack Bauer on us

The Obama administration seems to have gone Jack Bauer on us, which would be okay if we were just talking about non-American enemy combatants on some far-flung battlefield.

It seems the administration danced its way around case law and the Constitution in an attempt to justify the assassination of three American citizens it refuses to acknowledge it had any part of, post execution. In September 2011, Anwar al-Awlaki, the mastermind behind the failed December 25, 2010 airplane BVD bombing, and his cohort, Samir Khan were killed. Two weeks later, in a separate drone attack, the 16-year-old son of al-Awlaki (a Denver native) followed his father’s fate.

According to the Washington Post, “a recently leaked ‘white paper’ from the Justice Department…permits the government to kill its citizens in secret while refusing to acknowledge, even after the fact, that it had done so.”

No matter how evil someone is, it is unnerving that any president wouldn’t hesitate to blatantly disregard an American citizen’s constitutional right to a trial and then make the decision to become prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner of that same citizen — and not man-up afterward.

To be clear, the use of drones on the modern battlefield has proven effective; but great ideas in the wrong hands can sour quickly.

In the recently crafted white paper, the administration makes a weak argument to justify its seeming extrajudicial power grab by suggesting “the use of lethal force” against an American citizen is equivalent to George W. Bush’s detention of foreign enemy combatants.

It seems like only yesterday a then-junior senator from Illinois repetitively repudiated Bush’s actions that included the capture, detention, and questioning of non-American enemy combatants, and a military-style christening of a few. Many say Bush’s actions led to information regarding Osama bin Laden’s whereabouts and eventual elimination.

What a difference a little (or a lot of) power makes. There’s a new sheriff in town and, suddenly, the North Star we Americans call the Constitution is no longer the effective navigational tool it once was. Now it’s okay to assassinate citizens and grant due process to non-citizens.

After Obama’s election, his administration became obsessed with lavishing constitutional rights on Guantanamo Bay terrorists and tried to move them to New York City where they’d be granted due process. Back in August 2012, Attorney General Holder told Bloomberg he still regrets the “missed opportunity.”

To complicate things, the white paper extends the battlefield to any foreign country. Page 7 suggests “clear evidence” — that a specific act will occur in the near future — is not required. Page 11 supports killing those simply in the scheming stage, leaving no room for a change of heart. They are guilty because they thought about it. To be fair, the paper does identify potential targets as high level leaders; and it also lists “capture” as an option but contradicts itself considering what supposedly happened to the 16-year old Denver resident. Guilty by association?

Throughout the 16-page document, the white paper intermittently leaves out the word “al-Qaida,” and uses the term “terrorist groups” (or variants thereof), which would be of no concern were we dealing with a more transparent and less paranoid administration. Lest we forget, they put out the “Right-wing extremists” watch list in 2009 secretly informing police forces to look out for those who love God, celebrate freedom, adhere to wholesome values, and cherish the Constitution.

What one generation does in moderation the next does in excess; the same goes for presidents. Baby steps. As simplistic as it is, two wrongs will never make something right. We are now witnessing liberals using Bush’s so-called extra-judicial activities as case law to justify stepping deeper into the darkness in support of third world-like capital punishment without trial. So what might this president, or his successor, try next?

Photo credit: Aubele (Creative Commons)

A “What Difference, At This Point, Does It Make?” Update

Hillary Clinton on the Hill A “What difference, at this point, does it make?” update

For pure arrogance and quintessential liberal hubris, it’s hard to beat Hillary Clinton’s “What difference, at this point, does it make?” When asked about how four innocent Americans died during the attack in Benghazi, she cleverly gave the media a way to write her guilt away with that line. It was too bad that the timid Republicans were unable to muster the courage to turn the line around on her and ask: “If that is the case, why do we do autopsies?” or “Why does the NTSB investigate airplane crashes if, at this point, it makes no difference ?” “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Since the Republicans allowed this outrage to pass without challenge, it seems fitting to ask a few other questions that SHOULD matter; but of course, since asking them would embarrass Democrats, we never will.

Each should be read followed by “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Three more Americans were killed by Islamist murderers in Algeria:

The GDP fell to -.1%:

It will cost $20,000 a year for Obamacare’s free medical coverage:

Pump prices are at their highest level on record for this time of year:

Chuck Hagel knows nothing about anything:

Bob Menendez sleeps with underage hookers in the Dominican Republic:

Kathleen Sebelius violated campaign finance laws:

Osama bin laden is dead, but Al Qaeda isn’t:

Military women can’t do the same things military men can:

There are no women in Obama’s top ruling circle:

Obama has killed 175 children with drone strikes:

Democrats want to track guns, but not voters:

Welfare cards are being used at strip clubs:

Abortions have reduced the number of Black people in America by 33%:

Anti-gun Democrats send their children to schools made safe by armed guards:

More Red States than Blue States run budget surpluses:

Black unemployment is twice White unemployment:

Seven of ten Americans say we are on the wrong track:

What difference, at this point, do the answers to these questions make? Well, actually a lot; but since these questions will never be asked, no difference at all.

House Conservative Leader Gives Al Jazeera Deal A Pass

521px Steve Scalise House Conservative Leader Gives Al Jazeera Deal a Pass

Rep. Steve Scalise, a Republican from Louisiana who is the new chairman of the Republican Study Committee (RSC), believes Al Jazeera has a First Amendment right to expand its broadcasts in the United States and that a congressional investigation of Al Gore’s deal with the channel is not warranted.

Scalise, a self-described “staunch conservative,” is the new chairman of the RSC, which is the “caucus of House conservatives.” His action makes it increasingly unlikely that the House will exercise any oversight of Al Gore’s controversial sale of his Current TV channel to the mouthpiece of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The buyer is the Middle Eastern regime of Qatar, which owns Al Jazeera. The Qatar regime advertises itself as “America’s Strongest Partner in the Gulf” but has supported terrorist groups such as al Qaeda, Hezbollah, and Hamas. Osama bin Laden aide and 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who is currently in U.S. custody in Guantanamo Bay for acts of terrorism, lived and worked in Qatar but was allowed to leave for Pakistan as U.S. authorities were trying to apprehend him, according to the report of the 9/11 commission.

In Pakistan, Mohammed planned 9/11 and decapitated Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who was kidnapped while investigating the al-Qaeda networks in the Middle East.

Sarah E. Makin, Director of Conservative Coalitions and State Outreach at the House Republican Study Committee, told this journalist on Tuesday afternoon that she received an explanation of Scalise’s position on the Al Jazeera deal after consulting with aides to the congressman.

Conservatives had been asking Scalise to support an investigation on the grounds that a foreign-funded channel based in the Middle East, with a reputation for airing terrorist propaganda, should be examined for its ties to terrorist groups.

Foreigners are entitled to First Amendment protections in the United States, except when they run afoul of existing laws and engage in criminal or terrorist activities.

By offering the First Amendment excuse in favor of the deal, Scalise is ignoring the evidence that Al Jazeera is not a legitimate news operation but rather a conduit for propaganda from terrorist groups, with whom it has intimate and ongoing relations.

In the United States, it is against the law to provide material support to terrorists, with “material support” defined as including expert advice or assistance and communications equipment.

In World War II, Tokyo Rose and Axis Sally broadcast their anti-American diatribes from overseas and were apprehended by U.S. authorities after the war and sent to prison for treason. In the more shocking Al Jazeera case, the U.S. is officially still at war with global terrorism, but Al Gore is giving the channel a base of operations on American soil with access to 40-50 million homes.

Although it will be called “Al Jazeera America,” the channel will still be totally controlled and funded by the government of Qatar, which doesn’t permit freedom of the press in its own country.

Existing federal law requires that foreign propaganda broadcasts in the U.S. be labeled as such, a provision of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) that the Obama Administration has decided to ignore.

Independent television producer Jerry Kenney has filed complaints over the non-enforcement of the FARA law, as well as violations of Federal Communications Commission rules that have given Al Jazeera access to taxpayer-funded public television stations.

Despite these outstanding legal questions, Scalise, the top conservative leader in the House, doesn’t even want an investigation of the deal. “Who got to him?” is the question being asked by conservatives.

It is a known fact that Big Oil interests in the U.S.-Qatar Business Council are very powerful on Capitol Hill, and that the regime and/or Al Jazeera have used expensive public relations firms to lobby Congress and the federal government, and manipulate the press. These firms include Barbour Griffith Rogers, Fenton Communications, and Qorvis Communications.

Another law being ignored in the Al Jazeera case is CFIUS, named for the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. When the Chinese bought AMC movie theaters last year, they went through CFIUS. Al Jazeera has decided, apparently with the acquiescence of the Obama Administration, that it can ignore the law.

In 2006, members of Congress from both political parties, including then-Senator Barack Obama, objected to a company based in the Arab state of Dubai operating U.S. ports. Public criticism forced the company to drop the deal.

Al Jazeera’s ties to al Qaeda are highlighted in the new film, “Zero Dark Thirty,” where the plot involves the CIA locating Osama bin Laden in Pakistan in part by examining his courier’s proximity to an Al Jazeera office, where terrorist tapes were dropped off for worldwide distribution.

After 9/11, the terrorist attacks on America that claimed almost 3,000 American lives, Al Jazeera correspondent Tayseer Alouni conducted an interview with bin Laden in which he denied being involved in terrorism. Alouni was later convicted of being a courier for bin Laden and al Qaeda.

In his book, Terror and Consent: The Wars for the Twenty-first Century, Philip Bobbitt described how, in the 2004 case of the kidnapping and murder of Margaret Hassan, a humanitarian aid worker in Iraq whose captivity was taped by an Islamist group, Al Jazeera “appears to have carefully screened and edited the tapes to protect the deteriorating image of the Iraqi insurgency.” He wrote that Al Jazeera “moved from being passive collaborators in achieving the political objectives of torture to acting as editorial advisors for the terrorists.”

More recently, Al Jazeera ran a story about the “gentle” al Qaeda terrorists in Mali who kidnapped and killed three Americans.

Another major concern about Al Jazeera’s presence in the U.S. is the danger of inciting home grown terrorism.

Dr. Judea Pearl, father of the slain journalist Daniel Pearl, has been committed to increasing understanding with the Arab/Muslim world, but he recognizes that Al Jazeera does not contribute to real dialogue. He supports an investigation of Al Gore’s deal with Al Jazeera.

His statement supporting an investigation was included in a letter to Rep. Michael McCaul, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, and reads as follows:

“A decade of watching over its programs has left me no doubt: Al Jazeera is the main propaganda machine of the Muslim Brotherhood. Posing as a benign alternative communication medium, Al Jazeera choreographs a world stage in which the West is a perennial villain, Hamas is the ultimate role model, and entire societies are dehumanized to a lower form of life, stripped of any mark of dignity or empathy. While refraining from explicit incitement to violence, Al Jazeera weaves the ideological structure and combustible angers from which Jihadi recruits eventually emerge.”

McCaul received this letter, signed by media critics, journalists, academics, and national security and Middle East experts, on January 9. He has yet to respond.

The Scalise response to calls for an investigation may shed light on McCaul’s striking failure to act against the Al Jazeera deal. It appears to some observers that Republican leaders in the House have made a conscious decision to let the deal go through without a peep of protest.

Another House member who has decided to do nothing is Rep. Paul Broun, a member of the House Homeland Security Committee preparing to run for the U.S. Senate from Georgia as a strong conservative.

Friends of Broun have asked him to take a stand against Al Jazeera but he has told them that his staff doesn’t want him to.

Critics of the deal say that if Congress won’t do its job and prevent the emergence of this homeland security threat, the American people will pressure the cable and satellite providers and the advertisers.

The cable and satellite providers of Current TV/Al Jazeera America currently include Comcast, DirecTV, Dish Network, Verizon FiOS and AT&T U-verse.

  • If you wish to protest his wrong-headed position in favor of a “hands off” approach to the Al Gore deal with Al Jazeera, Scalise and the House Republican Study Committee can be contacted at (202) 226-9717.

Read more articles like this one at AIM.org.

What Difference Does It Make, Madam Secretary?

Hillary Clinton Jabba SC What Difference Does It Make, Madam Secretary?

It makes a huge difference, and I will explain why. President Obama and most in his Administration would like us to believe that we are winning the war on terror. He has repeatedly told us during his campaign that “Osama Bin Laden is dead” and “Al Qaeda is on the run”. In order for the American people to believe this, they needed to make sure we were not attacked again, especially so close to the election. Unfortunately, we were. And four Americans were murdered, so something needed to be done to keep up the facade. They chose to fabricate a story about a video and some random protests to mislead the public and keep up the illusion that we are winning this war instead of having an open and honest discussion on what the real threat is.

This is not only a military war; this is an ideological war that has been going on for centuries. The jihadists believe they are superior and want to bring back the caliphate. They are patient. They see no rush and honestly do not care if it takes hundreds of years to accomplish. They believe it is the will of Allah and will continue to attack us at home, abroad, and even by infiltrating our own government. In their own words, we are the “Great Satan”; so it really should come as no surprise that they would plan an attack. And it would be very foolish not to realize more are on the way.

This Administration refuses to recognize this threat and call it what it is. Instead, we have outed dictators by arming Islamic militants. We have bowed to the Muslim Brotherhood and groups like CAIR by changing our rules of engagement on the battlefield and rewriting handbooks to appease their needs. We have even put our enemies above our relationship with one of our strongest allies, Israel.

All of this matters because our national security is at risk. It matters because we were lied to. It matters because our government is being infiltrated by an ideology that is a clear and present danger to our way of life. It matters because there is an all-out attack on our freedom of speech. It matters because Americans died to save a campaign slogan. It matters because men and women are still in harm’s way and are giving their lives to keep the rest of us safe. And most of all, Madam Secretary, it matters because if we do not identify this enemy for what it is, we will lose in the end.

Photo credit: Dave Merrick

Senators: ‘Zero Dark Thirty’ Film A ‘dangerous’ Mix Of Fact, Fiction

John McCain Official SC1 Senators: ‘Zero Dark Thirty’ film a ‘dangerous’ mix of fact, fiction

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) says the film “Zero Dark Thirty” is a combination of “fact, fiction and Hollywood” that dangerously links the use of torture with the killing of Osama bin Laden.

Feinstein and Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Carl Levin (D-Mich.) are sending a letter to Sony Pictures, the film studio distributing the Oscar contender, to make their complaints known.

“I thought it was terrible,” said Feinstein, one of a handful of lawmakers to see the film ahead of its limited release this week. “It is a combination of fact, fiction and Hollywood in a very dangerous combination.”

McCain, who was tortured as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, said Tuesday that he was “sickened” by the film when he saw it, according to The Associated Press, saying the filmmakers fell hook, line and sinker for the torture storyline.

“Zero Dark Thirty,” which has already been named the film of the year by the New York Film Critics Circle and the National Board of Review, opens with an extended waterboarding scene.

Read More at The Hill . By Carlo Munoz and Jeremy Herb.

Obama Leaves Marine Hero Rotting In Mexican Prison

Barack Obama loves to give speeches in front of our troops.

He stood on the shoulders—or rather the necks—of the SEALS who took out Osama Bin Laden, taking the credit for himself, even inviting Hollywood in to produce the Ode to Obama, aka Zero Dark Thirty.

But after the troops have served their purpose, they are discarded as garbage.

Case in point: Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, the two former Navy SEALS under fire at the CIA annex in Benghazi, who begged Washington to send help to the consulate to save Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, and a number of others. When Obama refused to send help to the consulate, they went themselves, risking their lives, saving Americans, and making their way back to the CIA safe house, where they met their doom after a second wave of the terrorist attack took them out after several hours.

They cried out for help but nobody came. Obama had no use for them anymore.

Another hero that Obama has left flapping in the wind is Jon Hammar. Hammar served several tours in Afghanistan and Iraq, had been honorably discharged in 2007, and was still trying to recover from “internal” wounds—PTSD and a host of other psychological problems.

He and a buddy decided that a surfing trip in Costa Rica would serve as a salve to the demons that they couldn’t leave behind in war—seeing buddies slaughtered before their eyes.

They loaded up an RV with supplies and headed south. One thing Jon Hammar took along was an old rifle that had been owned by his great grandfather. It was a link to his past. A comfort to him. He was planning on using it for hunting.

U.S. customs had assured him that on his trip through Mexico, he would simply have to declare it, and they supplied him with the “proper” paperwork.

The government bureaucracy, as usual, got it wrong. It was the wrong paperwork. It was the wrong advice. It was the wrong country to go through.

Jon Hammar was arrested in Mexico after declaring the rifle, immediately taken to the infamous CERES prison (infested with drug cartel members) and chained to a bed for four months.

Oh, and the drug cartel members in the prison gave a “courtesy” phone call to Jon’s parents, demanding that they send money or they would kill him.

Jon is now rotting in prison, awaiting a Mickey Mouse trial, facing fifteen years in prison.

Where is Obama in all of this? Olivia Hammar, Jon’s mother, has pleaded with Obama to do something after the State Department has done what most U.S. government departments do—nothing.

Obama’s response to Jon’s mother? Well, Obama’s too busy right now. He’s doing a Kabuki dance with John Boehner at the edge of the fiscal cliff and can’t take any phone calls right now.

When Barack Obama is one day fighting off the enemy or chained to a bed, and he calls out to the military for help, there will be heard an old refrain: “I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”

Conspiracy To Hide Obama’s Eligibility Problem

Watching the Obama eligibility issue play out is like walking into a carnival house of mirrors—everything increasingly becomes warped and distorted.

In 2008, a huge media circus developed over John McCain’s “eligibility problem” because he was born on a military base in the Panama Canal region. Congress went to the trouble of voting on a resolution declaring McCain eligible to run for President; but oddly, no mention was made of Barack Obama’s eligibility problem. Obama, as was apparent to the majority of Americans, was born with dual citizenship, with his father, Barack Obama, Sr., being a citizen of Kenya. Obama was therefore not a natural-born citizen as required by the Constitution.

Of course, there were the other oddities, such as Obama’s Kenyan grandmother (Sarah Obama) having a giant 2005 calendar in her home, emblazoned with the text “The Kenyan Wonder-Boy in the US—Senator Barrack [sic] Obama.” Or the Kenyan road signs with the message “Welcome to Kenya, Birthplace of Barack Obama.”

After repeated questions of Obama’s birthplace and citizenship arose, Obama released a PDF of the so-called short-form birth certificate to the left-wing blog Daily Kos that was essentially a computer printout.

Then the George Soros-funded FactCheck.org got into the game, taking photos of the birth certificate in order to “prove” it authentic. It’s a computer printout! What’s to prove?

This went on for three years with dozens of court challenges and calls for Obama’s long-form birth certificate. On April 27, 2011, Obama released the long-form birth certificate, which turned out to not only be a forgery, but a bad forgery.

The pinnacle of this Obama house of mirrors finally came on May 1, 2011 when, after the dozens of court cases challenging Obama’s eligibility, a challenge that finally wasn’t treated as a carnival sideshow was going to see the light of day. The judges were actually going to listen to the litigants and call Obama’s lawyers out for not presenting a case.

According to witnesses, there was a huge media presence, including C-SPAN (which planned on carrying the hearing live.) This was also the largest eligibility challenge yet to date that included twenty state representatives and thirty members of the military. The courtroom was overflowing with TV cameras everywhere.

But America was too busy at the time carrying Obama on their shoulders for singlehandedly (according to Obama) taking out Osama Bin Laden the day before. The mainstream media, as could be expected, buried the story because of the “coincidence” of Obama ordering Bin Laden to be taken out on the day before the most important and most publicized eligibility challenge to date.

C-SPAN in fact did videotape the hearing but ended up burying it on their website, consigning the most pressing issue of our time to the dustbin of history.

Barack Obama, with the mainstream media’s help, is involved in a cover-up so huge that if he is not successful in destroying this nation, schoolchildren will marvel at it for generations to come.

Watch the full 5/2/11 Obama eligibility hearing:

Pearl Harbor (And September 11th) Awakened Admiral Yamamoto’s Sleeping American Giant

Pearl Harbor SC Pearl Harbor (And September 11th) Awakened Admiral Yamamotos Sleeping American Giant

I was raised by members of what newsman Tom Brokow called ” the Greatest Generation.” My maternal grandfather helped build Liberty Ships (supply vessels), and my grandmother’s oldest brother was wounded during the Normandy Invasion.

World War II is a life-long fascination, especially the sneak attack that prompted America’s official entry into the war. I’m probably the only Black kid who had his own set of Time Life’s Encyclopedia of World War II.

September 11th, 2001 now probably comes to mind now when the phrase “sneak attack ” is mentioned. Americans should connect the two tragedies, though one was done by a nation while the other was committed by terrorists.

Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto commanded the Japanese fleet during World War II and led it to this and other decisive victories against America.

He also knew his nation couldn’t defeat the United States. His famous quote, “I fear all we have done is awakened a sleeping giant, ” is considered more an invention of screenwriters rather than verifiable opinion.

His misgivings proved prophetic. The December 7th, 1941 surprise attack hastened his departure from this life.

American code-breakers were secretly able to decipher Japanese diplomatic and military traffic, which allowed our fighter planes to shoot him down during an inspection visit.

Dubbed “Operation Vengeance”, there’s no doubt it too came as a surprise on April 18, 1943, the day the Admiral died.

The same can be said of al Qaeda leader Osama Bbn Laden’s May 2, 2011 death when US Navy SEALS ended his terror plotting.

Whether Admiral Yamamoto actually made the famed “sleeping giant” statement or not, one fact is perfectly clear.

The cost of awakening America from her slumber is costly.

Too costly for most to even dare.

The message of these two seminal events is clear: a strong national defense is what keeps sneak attacks from becoming commonplace.

Let’s honor our dead and make sure politicians don’t let America become weak.

Let’s put the hard-won lessons of Pearl Harbor and September 11th into practice to stop more attacks in their infancy.

Does a strong national defense work?

Ask Admiral Yamamoto and Osama bin Laden what happens when you wake up the sleeping American giant.

 

Cap Black, The Hood Conservative & One Man Tea Party says:
” I’m American: first; last & always!”
(504) 214-3082

Help Cap Black Help Others!

http://www.gofundme.com/197xk8

-
” Be your OWN Superhero!”

Photo credit: escapedtowisconsin (Creative Commons)

Bin Laden Raid A Smokescreen For BHO Eligibility Hearing

(Special thanks to Pamela Barnett for helping us break this story. Original link: http://www.westernjournalism.com/obama-military-leaders-lied-about-osamas-death-date/)

Did you know that the most significant of the dozen or so Obama eligibility hearings occurred on May 2, 2011 in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Pasadena, California?

Did you know that this particular lawsuit included 2008 presidential candidate Alan Keyes, twenty state representatives, and thirty members of the military?

Never heard about it? You’re not alone.

This is odd because ABC and CBS were in attendance, not to mention C-SPAN, who announced that they were going to broadcast the hearing live.

Perhaps we didn’t hear about it because America was too busy carrying Barack Hussein Obama on their shoulders for almost singlehandedly killing Public Enemy Number One, Osama Bin Laden, the day before.

Or perhaps the media didn’t want to cover the hearing.

No, that would be a conspiracy theory.

It is sort of odd that the Osama Bin Laden raid occurred the day before the hearing.

It is sort of odd that Obama “disgorged” massive amounts of classified information to mega-director Kathryn Bigelow so she could make the Obama propaganda film Zero Dark Thirty to honor our fearless leader, but refused to offer any proof to the public that Bin Laden had in fact been killed.

It is sort of odd that the public has been pleading for some proof of the killing of Bin Laden for a year and a half with only a few crumbs forthcoming.

Photos? Videos? DNA tests to verify it was Bin Laden? Perhaps an autopsy report?

But after countless Freedom of Information Act requests, what we got two weeks ago was a handful of emails about Bin Laden’s burial that were so highly redacted that it made them all but worthless.

One odd thing was left in, however: that Bin Laden received a “traditional…Islamic burial.”

Bless Barack Hussein Obama—always wanting to mollify the Islamic extremists. We wouldn’t want them to throw any more temper tantrums—I mean, stage a protest—because they were “offended.”

No worries, however. According to these released emails, they’ll be declassified in twenty-five years. By then, Barack Hussein Obama will have completely destroyed the country, and it won’t matter.

Unless America demands proof that it was in fact Osama Bin Laden who was killed.

Unless America demands that his phony birth certificate, Social Security application, and Selective Service form be forensically analyzed. That he release all of his college records. His passport files. Explains how he got into Pakistan in 1981 on an American passport, which was forbidden at the time by the Pakistani government. (Hint: he didn’t have an American passport).

Or perhaps Barack Hussein Obama and his compliant media can let the eligibility hearings move forward so America can determine for herself whether the man sitting in the Oval Office is legitimate.

No, that would be too easy.