Rotating Header Image


It’s not remotely entertaining. It isn’t any indication of leadership quality. It’s like reading and hearing about the out-crowd in junior high school who prided themselves in who could spit the biggest ball and not fall over in the last, back row of seating, a sort of obnoxious element that bespeaks of bad attitudes that everyone else easily sees and walks a wide berth around if and when they don’t want to be sucked into some downward spiral of rue.

Donald Trump’s done a good thing here, providing himself as catalyst to open the issue of discussing Barack Obama’s clouded self-report of his weirdly conflicted life story. So far, up to yesterday, the public’s been provided with two “Certificates of Birth” by Obama and handlers, despite we the public being told now many a time that no “Birth Certificate” for this guy even exists (state of Hawaii’s position, followed by “it can’t be released, even to the individual”), yesterday it’s being said by the guy in the White House (for now) that he’s released his “Birth Certificate” — he has not released his Birth Certificate but don’t let that stop the Barack Obama Lying Train.

Enough of the snarking and attempts at non-funny-abuses-of-humor because anything sensible is lost or buried by “political class” persons who fear this and that and mostly fear public comments and one another, from the look of things. Most media figureheads are mostly complicit with this fear campaigning and provide useful fools their useful foolery: you are this, that or the other if and when you raise the questions about…who they describe (and have made entire campaigns out of promoting) as “a black President.”

The very description — and the Obama 2008 campaign itself — was and remains entirely racialist. He was sold as and enthused over as “a black President”. His race-type was used synonymously with his name, his policies were (and continue to be) generally race-divisions, racially distinguished, appeals based on racial kind and antagonistic about racial kind other than his own. Yet anyone questioning this or him as an individual, then, is “racist” as per this wonky nonsense.

Moreover, there are so many conflicting bits and dudlies about the life-story as reported by or for Barack Obama, that only the least inquisitive or most dictatorial mind would ever refuse inquiries. Yet inquiries are denigrated.

Today’s spate of useful foolery — perhaps more appropriately, of ugly damning of the public — was a pinheaded snarl on the airways by a big fool who exclaimed (I paraphrase), ‘questioning Barack Obama is due to those who hate Obama — if you hate him, that’s why you’re questioning him, it comes down to the fact that you hate the man.’

If that’s what represents an educated opinion, then let all reasonable, decent people, please, remain uneducated and wise because of it.

The other campaign of foolery unleashed recently is (again, I paraphrase), ‘it’s racist, you’re a racist, if you question Obama’s (birth circumstances, academic history, legitimacy).’

Because — attempting here to figure out this foolery — because Barack Obama is “a black man” then questioning his various identifying aspects as to character, behavior, overall ethical nature, because he’s “black”, then, if you press for any unanswered questions or more information, you are somehow “racist” for asking.

To question anyone who is “black” about anything — when they’re in or asking for the U.S. Presidency (or any other public office or responsibility) — is “racist”? Asking for evidence of assertions that remain clouded or even conflicted — if someone is “black” — means the request is “racist” as is the one requesting the information?

Isn’t THAT racist? A person who may be “black” is not to be questioned? A “black” individual is not to be challenged, questioned, substantiated? That sure sounds like the only racist behavior, that a person with Negroid DNA somehow is exempt from evidence as to the declarations they make, particularly when they assert themselves into some semi-or-full-on-dictatorial capacity over the American public? NOT questioning them or, worse, being ridiculed and further harmed for asking for substantiation to the Presidency (or any other public office and/or position of influence over the public) is irresponsible. And it’s utterly racialist to be so irresponsible because of someone’s DNA, and to use a person’s DNA to avoid accountability (“because he’s black” or of any other race).

About the Left’s not-being-funny, are they ever? Have they ever been? They mostly deploy sarcasm and insults which fail the humor test and although many of the rest of us often find ourselves wanting to get away from their pitiable attempts to self-satisfy, it’s becoming generally far more pitiful daily to witness, like when the out-crowd in junior high school fails a class and tries to laugh about it: we sorta’ want to pat their hands and encourage them to use the library after school but otherwise, we just don’t want to be them.


Boy, isn’t the Constitutional eligibility issue funny?

“GOP ‘Political Class’ on Perpetually Losing Campaign
calling voters “fringe” and “nuts” is surefire way to lose an election, especially when you cite a GOP adviser to the California Republican Party (what a track record, there).


Evil Doesn’t Take a Holiday: “Today Was a Fun Day”, Says Obama After Tornado Rampages Through Six States Killing 250

C O M M E N T S : now closed