Journolist Truth Assassins Issue –
It would be a great service to America if the Daily Caller would release the parts of the ‘Journolist’ Truth Assassin’s discussion of Obama’s lack of eligibility to serve as President and Larry Sinclair’s allegations that he and Obama did drugs and engaged in consensual sex in 1999.
I feel confident that the effect the 400 Journolist Truth Assassin had on the rest of the media was like throwing a stone into a still pond, the resulting ripples involve many, many, more ‘journalists’ who continue to undermine the Constitution and America’s future (MS-NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, etc.)
From The American Thinker:
July 26, 2010
The disinfectant properties of sunshine appear to be causing uncertainty and fear among members of the now-defunct Journolist cabal. Some of the emails demonstrate certain liberal journalists willing and eager to employ malice as part and parcel of their professional duties.
The fact that such open malice of at least a few of the four hundred “professionals” on Journolist did not result in their expulsion from this professional Listserv, and indeed seemed tolerated at the time by its members and now by its defenders, would seem to indicate a more widespread problem. The dog doesn’t bark when it’s comfortable with the visitor.
Jonathan Strong of The Daily Caller broke the news about left-wing journalists conspiring on Journolist to kill the stories during the 2008 election about Barack Obama’s relationship with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Strong writes,
In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, “Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.”
Ackerman skipped the intermediary suggestion of even asking loaded questions of Obama’s conservative critics and proceeded directly to proposing false accusations against figures — “who cares” — on the right.
Strong reports that others on Journolist objected to the strategy proposed by Ackerman — not because what Ackerman suggested involved malice, but because strategically it did not aid their cause:
Kevin Drum, then of Washington Monthly, also disagreed with Ackerman’s strategy. “I think it’s worth keeping in mind that Obama is trying (or says he’s trying) to run a campaign that avoids precisely the kind of thing Spencer is talking about, and turning this into a gutter brawl would probably hurt the Obama brand pretty strongly. After all, why vote for him if it turns out he’s not going change the way politics works?”
Fred Barnes wrote a measured, thoughtful response to the report. Barnes’ style isn’t provocative or satirical, as Rush Limbaugh’s or Ann Coulter’s can be. All three, however, face the malice of the left because they advocate for less government.
The malice exhibited in the e-mails is about more than journalistic ethics, and it may have legal consequences, with the immediate potential to cause jitters in the bars of Georgetown and Manhattan….Continue Reading
See also The Daily Caller:
….”“Open question: Would it be a good use of this list to co-ordinate a message of the week along the lines of the GOP? Or is that too loathsome? It certainly sounds loathsome. But so does losing!”….
By Jonathan Strong – The Daily Caller | Published: 3:12 AM 07/26/2010 | Updated: 4:22 AM 07/26/2010
Sarah Palin’s speech to the 2008 Republican convention impressed more than a few doubters, including even some members of Journolist, an online community for liberal journalists.
“This speech is gangbusters,” wrote Ari Melber of the Nation. “Her tone is pitch perfect.” Adele Stan of the Media Consortium agreed: “Palin is golden.”
The exuberance appeared to unnerve the Guardian’s Michael Tomasky. “People get a hold of yourselves!” Tomasky wrote to his fellow Journolisters. “It’s a very good speech with good lines. But there’s very little substance.”
Rebecca Traister of Salon wrote to say she was grateful for Tomasky’s message discipline. (“This is a reassuring sentiment, since at the moment, I feel like we’re in End Times.”) But the rest of the country apparently didn’t agree. Polls a few days later showed Obama’s lead in the race had narrowed to virtually nothing.
Palin’s speech had been remarkably effective. This troubled members of Journolist….Continue Reading
Larry Sinclair’s Journey –
Drip, drip, drip – the more we know, the more it is apparent that a vindication of Larry Sinclair is just around the corner.
From Fellowship of the Minds:
Mom of Murdered Obama Gay Lover Speaks Up
July 25, 2010 ·
In late May, investigative journalist Wayne Madsen had a bombshell revelation about Obama’s membership in a Chicago gay man’s club. Madsen also reported on the Sociopath’s sexual relationships with other men, including politicians and Donald Young, the openly gay choir director of the church in Chicago of which Obama was a member for some 20 years — Jeremy Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ black liberation theology. Obama’s relationship with Young was confirmed by Larry Sinclair, who claims to have had two sex-concaine trysts with Obama.
There were two other openly gay men in Wright’s church: Larry Bland and Nate Spencer. In late 2007, as Obama began his ascent to be the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee, in a span of 1½ months, all three men “conveniently” died:
Bland was murdered execution-style on November 17, 2007;
Young was murdered execution-style on December 24, 2007;
Spencer reportedly died of septicemia, pneumonia, and HIV on December 26, 2007.
Death certificates of Bland and Young, HERE.
Now, Young’s elderly mother is speaking out about her suspicions that her son was murdered to protect Obama’s reputation and assure his political future as President.
Wayne Madsen Report – July 19, 2010
The story about President Barack Obama’s bi-sexual past will not go away….Continue Reading
Natural Born Citizen –
Abandon plans to penalize attorney whose clients challenged eligibility
Posted: July 25, 2010
7:51 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
Judges on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals suddenly have abandoned plans to assess damages against an attorney whose clients are challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president after he argued that if there was to be punishment, he would have the right to know whether the defendants could have mitigated their injury by publicly releasing Obama’s birth documentation.
The decision came from Judge Dolores Sloviter in the Kerchner vs. Obama case handled by attorney Mario Apuzzo. The court had ordered Apuzzo to explain why defense costs shouldn’t be assessed against him for the “frivolous” appeal.
However, her newest order denied Apuzzo’s request to reconsider the case and stated “based on Mr. Apuzzo’s explanation of his efforts to research the applicable law on standing, we hereby discharge the Order to Show Cause.”
The case was filed against Obama, Congress and others just before Obama was sworn into office, arguing that Obama was a British subject and not a U.S. citizen. …Continue Reading
Fellowship of the Minds is on a roll:
July 25, 2010 ·
In a mere 17 months, this man has turned the United States upside down, bitterly divided Americans along racial lines, and spent us and our grandchildren into debt servitude.
Do you really know who he is?
Here’s one more reason Americans have so many questions about Obama’s loyalty. That’s why the Founders insisted those holding the Office of President be ‘natural born citizens’ (born in America to parents who were Ameican citizens).
From the Guardian:
Scottish officials say US memo giving grudging support to freeing Abdelbaset al-Megrahi undermines president’s criticisms…Continue Reading
…”How to best spend the health care dollar? Well, if it’s my dollar, I get to make the call. But if it’s somebody else’s dollar, I guess that person has the right to spend it on a more productive cow.”…
Ms. McCauley of the American Thinker has painted a very informative picture of what we can expect from ObamaCare.
July 26, 2010
While the health care debate rages on, few seem to have noticed a functioning American health care system that has operated successfully for decades. Patients enjoy a spectrum of choices ranging from plain vanilla to cutting-edge. Practitioners openly discuss expected outcomes, complication rates, benefits, and costs ahead of time. Fees, established entirely by the marketplace, are reasonable enough so that everyone who truly seeks care can obtain it, and the lifespan and quality of life are excellent and improving every day. This system is veterinary medicine.
It is important to recognize the two major divisions of veterinary medicine.
In companion animal medicine, care is paid for with the pet owner’s discretionary income. Owners — the clients — make decisions regarding the pet’s care — the patient — based on finances, emotional attachment, and their personal philosophy about pets. For some, it’s “just a dog,” while for others, the family dog is considered a member of the family. More than a few spouses are careful not to probe too deeply about their own rank in comparison to a beloved pet.
Large animal medicine takes a different tack. These animals are used for industry — food production, breeding farms, racing, and so on. (The lines are blurred in some cases, such as horses that are really pets, and greyhounds used for racing.) “The client” here is the manager, producer, or trainer, while the “patient” is the dairy herd, the swine operation, or the overall breeding potential of a winning stallion. While humane treatment is an important factor, the goals are maximizing performance, productivity, and profit. Large animal medicine focuses on designing a Herd Health Program, where the outcome of an individual case takes a backseat to the cost and benefit for the overall group.
An individual’s value to the herd determines what level of treatment that individual receives….Continue Reading
Lt. Col. Lakin’s Journey –
This next article, written by a former Detective in Scotland Yard is a must read.
This quote rang especially true:
….As I stated at the beginning, I believe in the Constitution of the United States. It is a brilliant and well reasoned document which contains immeasurable knowledge. Including, I firmly believe, the answer to today’s dilemma.
ELIGIBILITY! ELIGIBILITY! ELIGIBILITY! ELIGIBILITY! ELIGIBILITY! ELIGIBILITY! ELIGIBILITY! ELIGIBILITY! ELIGIBILITY!….
Where do the American Military, the FBI, and the CIA stand? America is lost if a few brave men and women in positions of power and influence continue to act like sheep.
From www.International.to News
WAKE UP AMERICA, Unless you want to live under a MARXIST regime ! Monday, 26 July 2010 01:22 Neil SANKEY
I am not an extremist, right or left, I love the USA we used to know. I believed enough in the USA to leave my native England thirty years ago at age thirty-five, settle here and become a Citizen. To me, the USA, then, was the freest Country in the World and England was already beginning to fall to the influence of the Socialist and Islamic extremist invasion. I had been a Detective at New Scotland Yard specializing in what was then called “Revolutionary Criminality” I had studied the subject (Marxist influence on the prison population) and seen enough happen all around me to be worried, very worried. “They”, Marxists, were succeeding, and nobody cared….
Britain, through the seventies was in the process of turning hard left. The very word “Marxist” had emerged from whispers in shadows into the light of day. The population was beginning to realize that such people really did exist, and that they lived amongst us.
The next ten years, much of it after I left England, saw the era of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. Unfortunately, they were but a brief respite from the ravages of Socialism. What these two brilliant leaders had failed to react to was that Communism did not collapse, it changed tactics. It became clear to the Soviets that they could not compete with the wealth and resources of America, particularly with the strong attitude of the leader, Ronald Reagan. So it was made to appear that we were no longer in danger from Communism.
But we were. Communism (or Marxism) changed appearances and strategy “From confrontation to infiltration” with the emphasis, initially, on “infiltration” (Rules for Radicals by Saul D. Alinsky, Rule ten: “You do what you can with what you have and clothe it in moral garments”)
The infiltration has been largely accomplished with much assistance and the remarkable influence of an extremist, Marxist and Community organizer, Saul D. Alinsky. Mentor of Barack H. Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton and two University Professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven.
The infiltration phase is almost over, it was largely successful.
So, now the confrontation returns. What they cannot bully us into accepting, they will take over, control first and so win anyway!, or vice-versa. The “end” justifies whatever the means. (Rules for Radicals, Alinsky, Rule three: “The “ethics of means and ends” is that in war the end justifies almost any means”)
“So who is this Saul Alinsky, and how did we get here?” you may well ask….Continue Reading
In support of Lt. Col. Lakin’s courage in seeking the ‘Truth’ (and as a former In-Flight Tech in the Navy), I urge all who have served or have friends/family in the military to ask the following question of those currently serving.
Brothers and Sisters in the Military, when are you going to demand Obama establish that he is a Natural Born Citizen, eligible to serve as Commander In Chief?
The military is the only government organization that I continue to have respect for and it pains me criticize those serving. And I understand the consequences of challenging Obama’s eligibility directly, but the continuing attacks against our Constitution by the left cannot be allowed to pass without objection in some form or another. Acquiescence is not the only option.
Consider this please. What if every serviceman or woman went to his or her Chaplin, stated their concerns and provided the basic evidence (direct and circumstantial, links, former statements by NPR etc. indicating a Kenyan birth, etc., etc.) that would cause most reasonable persons to have legitimate questions about Obama’s lack of eligibility to serve and issue lawful orders? What if requests were made to each Chaplin instructing them to pass these concerns up the Chain of Command? Would there come a point, a number of requests that would cause the leadership to demand proof of eligibility?
Maybe military leadership could utilize the following provision?
§ 935. Art. 135. Courts of inquiry
(a) Courts of inquiry to investigate any matter may be convened by any person authorized to convene a general court-martial or by any other person designated by the Secretary concerned for that purpose, whether or not the persons involved have requested such an inquiry.
If the Oath to protect the Constitution is not important today, why don’t we just change the oath of allegiance to reflect our current level of commitment?
I, _______, do solemnly swear to protect ME and I will try to defend the Constitution as long as it doesn’t adversely impact the aforementioned ‘ME’.
Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.
Official Disclosure – Just to be clear, my graphics depict almost all members of the BOPAC Administration as being full of crap. They do not actually look like turds – one needs special ‘full of crap’ glasses to be able to see the core of those who continually feed America BS. I treat everyone equally – when Glenn Beck goes off on those who reasonably question Obama’s eligibility, he gets a half-full of crap depiction.