Democrats knew Obama was ineligible

Which is why the Hawaiian Democratic Party changed its statement regarding Mr. Soetoro/Soebarkah’s Constitutional qualifications:

In choosing Al Gore and Joe Lieberman in 2000, this was their statement:

“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice-President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution and are the duly chosen candidates of both the state and the national Democratic Parties by balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held March 7, 2000 in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 14-17, 2000 in Los Angeles, California.”

The wording was almost identical on behalf of John Kerry and John Edwards in 2004:

But in 2008, the words missing include “the provisions of the United States Constitution.” It states, “THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the national Democratic Parties balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held on February 19th, 2008, in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 27, 2009, in Denver, Colorado.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, but “the provisions of the United States Constitution” are not synonymous with “the provisions of the National Democratic Parties balloting”. In other words, the Hawaiian Democrats were covering their posteriors in the event, as is gradually coming to pass, that it was discovered Obama is Constitutionally ineligible to hold the office of president. At this point, there can be little doubt that Obama is not hiding his records due to any grand strategery “to make his opponents look foolish” – his abysmal approval ratings show the absurdity of that defense – but because they will reveal his Constitutional ineligibility for the office he is illegally and illegitimately holding. It is worth noting, too, that the Democratic National Committee did not certify Obama’s eligibility in any other state despite the false ex posto facto claims of Nancy Pelosi.

Given that this is arguably the greatest political scandal in American history, it is remarkable that the mainstream media is so loathe to touch it. Especially considering that it’s already made a #1 New York Times-selling bestseller for Jerome Corsi.

Culling the weak and simple

From the blogosphere:

As an observer to this blog controversy, I am reminded of many similar incidents over the past six years of my blogging. I can certainly remember posts that I authored that (1) were taken the wrong way; (2) really upset folks in an unpredictable way or to an unpredictable degree; and/or (3) prompted personal and quite vindictive attacks. I remember the awful way I would feel for a day or two, afraid to even look at my email for fear of comments that felt like knives being thrown my way. The feeling (let’s call it “bloghorror”) is hard to describe. First, bloghorror is in part just a reaction to being attacked, but it’s also a shame at having hurt someone else, even unintentionally, and it’s also an anger at the completely unfair nature of the response. But most of all it’s this feeling of being misunderstood. And unfortunately, there’s no way to cure this. In 2005, my first reaction would be to explain myself, so that the blog audience would say, “Ah, I understand now.” It took me a year or two to learn that once your audience has concluded that you are the devil saying devil things, any effort to explain will just add to the arsenal of the ammunition that will be hurled back at you.

As I read this, I was filled with a mix of incomprehension, amusement, and scorn. Needless to say, an AWCA feels no shame at the idea of having hurt someone else, intentionally or unintentionally, because sometimes an emotional evisceration is the entire point of a post. As it is said, no pain, no gain. By inflicting pain, I am merely helping others to grow. The humiliation that is felt by an interlocutor whose arguments have been methodically carved up by remorseless logic is my gift to them.

I ask for no thanks. Artistry is its own reward.

And there is no shame in being misunderstood. Being misunderstood is the norm. It is to be expected because it can be no other way in a world where Most People Are Idiots. Millions of people genuinely believed that Barack Obama was going to bring hope and change. Millions of people genuinely believe that the Republican Party has been chastened by its 2006 and 2008 defeats and will lead the charge for small government when it again holds the upper hand in Washington. Millions of people genuinely believe that America is advancing “democracy” and “freedom” by repeatedly invading and occupying portions of the Umma.

One will find no understanding on the part of these people. Their illusions must be shattered before they are even capable of listening, let alone comprehending. There is no “bloghorror”. Let the critics cavail and hurl what they will. The Dark Side is only there to be devoured.

WND column

The Pledge of Irrelevance

Sensing victory this fall, the Republicans have released a Pledge to America in imitation of the Contract With America that helped trigger the 1994 congressional landslide. Although Obama’s unpopularity is such that a blind and flatulent wombat with a criminal record could probably win election so long as it was running as a Republican, the Republican leadership clearly wants to set the stage for claiming some sort of mandate should they take control of both the House and Senate, as appears likely.

But the mandate they are seeking is not exactly the one that the nation is demanding. Consider what they claim to be their first and most urgent domestic priority, which presumably is not their most urgent priority or it would not require the disclaimer. Is it addressing the staggering amount of public debt owed by the U.S. government? Is it dealing with the crippling $40 trillion in private debt that has millions of homes underwater on their mortgages? Is it combating the mass invasion of Central and South Americans that has altered the very socio-political structure of the nation?

No. What is on offer is nothing more than a promise for even more federal micromanagement of the economy that we witnessed during the course of the Bush and Obama administrations. Only this time, they’re going to do it righ

The police cover-up continues

Confederate Yankee reports on the inquest:

So it would appear that the prosecutors and the police are indeed on the same page in this case. Whatever animosity they might bear toward each other is being put aside and a common front presented. What is the significance of the apparent approach of the police and prosecutors to date? Even if one accepts their theory that Scott was a drug addict and an aggressive gun nut intent on carrying a gun wherever he wanted, who, through gross drug-induced impairment, brought about his own death, all of this should rightfully be nothing more than mitigating evidence that might have some bearing on the severity of a charge to be brought against the officers, or to be considered only after a potential future conviction as mitigating factors relating to sentencing.

What still remains is what the officers knew or reasonably could have known or inferred at the time they confronted Scott at the main entrance of Costco and made the decision to pull the trigger. It is this event, compressed in time, that should be the prosecutor’s foremost concern. Scott’s life history and his physical and mental health status could have, in at least some way, put him on a collision course with the police that day. But the ultimate question is whether they, knowing nothing about Scott but what they heard on the radio on the way to Costco, and apparently finding themselves surprised when a Costco employee suddenly pointed out a man they had never before seen, were justified under the law by his actions in the handful of seconds before they fired at least seven rounds into him. Under this, the only standard that truly matters, the evidence presented at the Inquest does not yet tend to favor or conclusively exonerate the police.

There is no question that the police are lying. The fact that the man was shot five times in the back, and that an ambulance driver saw them take Scott’s holstered weapon out of his waistband and put it on the ground, is enough to condemn them of not only an unlawful and lethal shooting, but obstruction of justice as well.

One police officer commented: “Seems as if many here are not willing to give Law Enforcement the benefit of the doubt until the inquest is over. This saddens me as a Police Officer and retired Marine.”

No, we’re not. Because Law Enforcement doesn’t merit it anymore. Not all cops are murderers, thieves, and pedophiles, but most cops are willing to look the other way whenever their “brother” cops commit crimes. And that is why they fully merit the contempt in which they are now held by so many Americans. A badge is not a license to commit more crime than the average civilian, it is an indication that the police are to be held to a higher standard of behavior, not a lower one.

Sailer on Chesteron

On willful short-sightedness:

Why do people think it intelligent to say, “I can see no difference!” It is nowadays quite a mark of culture to say that one can see no difference between a man and a woman, or a man and an angel, or a man and an animal. If a man cannot see the difference between a horse and a cow across a large field, we do not call him cultured; we call him short-sighted.

It is rather amusing to witness the contortions that people, even those who are supposedly dedicated to materialism and science, will go through rather than simply admit what they are observing. Because there is no such thing as equality of any kind, not material, not legal, not social, not cultural, nor spiritual, it is provable nonsense to declare that women are equal to men, that white Americans are equal to [insert color here] [insert national identity here], or that cows are equal to horses.

We’re #37

The Right Wing News has named Vox Popoli the 37th best conservative blog. I appreciate that Mr. Hawkins thinks well of the blog, but I do find it to be somewhat ironic in that I am not a political conservative. But, I suppose that I am somewhat of a religious reactionary and there are a lot of conservatives who comment here, so it’s not a totally unreasonable inclusion.

VPFL Week Two

79 Blackmouth Banksters (2-0)
49 Mounds View Meerkats (0-2)

77 Winston Reverends (2-0)
54 Judean Rhyneauxs (1-1)

52 Bane Sidhe (1-1)
36 RR Redbeards (1-1)

85 Valders Quixotes (1-1)
50 MS Swamp Spartans (0-2)

76 Meigs Marauders (1-1)
49 Greenfield Grizzlies (1-1)

It is suddenly beginning to look like my much-ballyhooed first-year starting RBs are worthless. Considering that I picked them up in lieu of two keepers, this appears to have been a very poor decision.

The 10-percent myth

Putting the statistical nail in Kinsey’s coffin:

More than 480,000 people or one per cent of the UK?s adult population regard themselves as gay or lesbian while a further 245,000 or 0.5 percent say they are bisexual, according a study published by the Office for National Statistics. The data has been collected by the new Integrated Household Survey (IHS), which is the largest social report ever produced for the ONS. The 450,000 individual respondents to the survey provided the biggest pool of UK social data after the national census, the statistics service said.

Despite having a) played in a band signed to a gay music label, and b) having a gay fan club, I have never subscribed to the myth that ten percent of the population is gay. First, because I don’t trust round numbers. Second, because of the thousands of people I’ve met over time, far fewer than 10 percent of them were not normally oriented despite the fact that I was acquainted with a lot more gay men and bisexual women than nearly anyone else I knew.

And, of course, no one could ever provide a credible citation. I’ve always assumed the correct number was around 2 percent, which appears to be more in line with the statistical reality. The fact is that gays tend to lead very troubled lives, not because of homophobia or the contempt of the normally-oriented as many would like to believe, but because abnormality of any kind is not easy. Gays do not deserve approval for their inclinations but neither do they merit contempt. I think the correct response to someone announcing they are gay is “I’m sorry”, not because homosexuality is hateful, but because it’s not an easy journey through life.

Sham democracy in Sweden

In case it’s not already sufficiently apparent to you that neither the American nor European political elites actually give a damn about democracy, the Swedes are underlining this observable fact:

Members of several Swedish political parties are calling for a restructuring of the Riksdag [the Swedish parliament] to minimize the influence of the far-right Sweden Democrats. The parties are investigating whether it is possible to shift the make-up of parliamentary committees to reduce the sway of the far-right, anti-immigrant party which was voted into parliament for the first time at the weekend’s general elections, several Swedish dailies reported. Both Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt’s Moderate [center-right] Party and the main opposition Social Democrats are reportedly involved.

“Democracy” in both Europe and America is a complete sham. It’s nothing more than rhetorical propaganda; countries like Iraq and Afghanistan are invaded in the name of bringing democracy to their peoples even as genuine democracy is routinely crushed through the use of the courts in the United States and parliamentary rules in European countries.

In the USA, it doesn’t matter if you vote for Democrats or Republicans because you’re going to get essentially the same government either way. The differences are only at the margins and it is more accurate to think of them as a single bi-factional ruling party rather than two rival parties that subscribe to different ideologies. As Sweden is demonstrating, if it were possible to significantly transform society against the will of the trans-party political elite through voting, voting would be made irrelevant.

At this point, it is clear that despite all of the genuine dangers of democracy, representative democracy is actually worse. Since the tactic of expanding the franchise has rendered the limits of representation worse than toothless, the best strategy is to support real democracy. Therefore, I am thinking of changing my party identification from Christian Libertarian to Technodemocrat. But not Democrat in the sense of the modern U.S. Democratic Party, I mean a full and open democracy that dispenses with all of the limitations on the will of the people imposed by representative democracy in favor of technodemocracy.

The unfortunate fact is that the idea of protecting the minority against the will of majority has been utilized to impose the will of the corporatist oligarchy on the majority. Therefore, it would be a significant improvement to remove all limits on the will of the majority.

Feminists get their kneepads

Albeit this time they are peace camp rather than presidential:

Two activists have exposed a disturbing phenomenon that they say is an open secret within the “peace camp”: female “peace” activists are routinely harassed and raped by the Arabs of Judea and Samaria with whom they have come to identify. They say the phenomenon has gotten worse lately and that many foreign women end up as wives of local Arabs against their will, but cannot escape their new homes…. Aloni-Sedovnik cites two specific cases which she has knowledge of – one is a case of rape and another is “severe sexual harassment.” The attackers in both cases, she stresses, were familiar with the victims and knew that they were “peace activists.” The rape occurred several months ago in the village of Umm Salmona, near Bethlehem. The victim, an American activist, wanted to press charges but leftist activists put pressure on her not to do so, so as not to damage the struggle against the ‘occupation.’

With feminism, as with other left-wing movements, the ideology always trumps the individual.