Irrepressible Orly All Over America

Feb 11 2012 Published by under salt

Below is the latest from “birther queen” Orly Taitz. I hate the term “birther” and I’m not particularly fond of “queen” and I especially don’t like them together, but everyone understands them, so…

This is excerpted from an update she posted on her site (very) early Saturday morning.

God/Gaia/HigherPower/It/Tree Love her. She’s doing a very hard thing, at great personal cost & peril.

 “…So far I filed challenges in NH, HI, GA, IN, LA, MS, (and) there are ongoing cases in CA and DC.

…Other individuals filed challenges in IL, PA, CA, FL, MA, TN, AZ, TX, DC. Similar challenges are expected all over the country.

My main concern … (is) that no judge will remove Obama from the ballot based on Minor v Hapersett only… It will take more, than that. It will take a combination of showing malfeasance, criminal behavior by Obama in conjunction with bringing forward the issue of eligibility based on his father’s foreign citizenship. The judges understand that the citizens will not accept removal of a siting President from the ballot based on the interpretation of the Constitution only, as the reasonable question will be: why was he allowed in the WH in the first place? …Just as it happened in Watergate, evidence of flagrant criminality on part of the sitting President will do him in at the end…”

No responses yet

Born Twice?

Feb 08 2012 Published by under salt

The birthers may get a second bite at the apple… and the last laugh depending upon who the V.P. pick is.

Reading this article on Marco Rubio, it occurs to me that the Democrats, who started the whole birther thing though nobody ever remembers it that way (the Clintons lit that match during the primary), may challenge whoever the pick is, because I’d bet my last dollar it will be a politically correct minority in order to kneecap Obama’s certain playing of the race card.  That’s not to say Bam won’t use it anyway, but an “ethnic”  V.P. will add a helpful strain of incredulity to every card in his deck.

The really hard core birthers assert that because Obama’s dad was a British citizen at the time of birth, and his mother was not yet the age of majority, his citizenship is British.  They keep pointing to this SCOTUS precedent of Minor v Happersett that supposedly settled it, and I can see their point, but I can’t get past the whole “anchor baby” problem inherent in it.  In order to believe that their argument is sound, you would then have to believe that every baby born on American soil not of two parents who are citizens, is not a “natural born citizen” and that’s millions of precedents literally walking around…  I just don’t see how you can get past that.  There’s paper law, then there’s law with “lungs” – millions of them, living and breathing, with rights.  How do you strip them of them?

I just don’t know how it would all work, but I’m not a lawyer, I have the added complication of having Asperger’s which makes me very literal, and given to huge misses.  I’ve been known to miss BIG on things that are obvious to others, so I’ve long ago stopped be so damned certain about everything.

No responses yet

Sam LaHood and the Sins of the Father

Feb 05 2012 Published by under salt

This poor young man.

I fear he will be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness.

That’s Sam LaHood (at left), son of “Transportation Czar” Ray LaHood (at right). Sam was doing “humanitarian” work in Egypt. The Egyptians, as they are currently constituted, don’t have much use for humanity. They are going to put this young man “on trial.”

It was just a few short weeks ago, when news first broke that he was being “detained” that Mr. LaHood the elder said “there were a lot of good people working very hard” to get his son out of Egypt safely. (I’m paraphrasing, but that was nearly it to the word.)

Both LaHood men have put their faith in soulless, bloodless despots.

The younger can be forgiven for being, well, young.

The elder might warrant forgiveness, if only for the fact that one does not typically find soulless, bloodless depots in the Oval Office.

But I’m not in a forgiving mood.

He should have known. He’s old enough to have been educated properly, before the progressives had completely soaked the books in their foul urine. He could have known had he spent a single minute outside the bubble and talked to some Tea Party. He could have known before his precious boy got on a plane and left America without the other safety net the White House despot never, ever talks about… FEAR & RESPECT for America.

It’s kept us safe in every corner of the world for a very long time.

Until now.

I’ll light a white candle for the peaceful transport, however it transpires, of the bodies & souls of all involved.

UPDATE:  American Thinker has some good reporting on this, too, with Fox info embedded.  See it here.

No responses yet

Irrepressible Orly

Feb 04 2012 Published by under salt

Orly Taitz has filed an Emergency Appeal to the Georgia Secretary of State, providing a nice summary of the evidence presented in court. So if you missed it, here is the “Cliff Note” version.
Taitz/Obama GA Emergency Appeal FEB 2012

No responses yet

Taitz, Obama & What Judge Malihi Wishes He Saw?

Feb 03 2012 Published by under salt

It seems the merits weren’t so meritorious.

Obama will remain on the GA ballot.

The judge’s order is here.


Not being a lawyer, I’m rather out of my depth reading these things, but it seems to me he gave the (theoretical)  next group that tries this in his courtroom a very clear threshold to meet to be convincing to him the next time.  He was very generous detailing precisely what the problems were with Orly Taitz’s identity fraud witnesses, and – I could totally be wishing this but – it seems to me his problem wasn’t so much with the evidence as it was with the caliber of the expertise of the people presenting it… i.e. “Get me a couple of qualified Feds in the box and I’m listenin’…”

No responses yet

The Evil Boy-Prince of the Church

Feb 03 2012 Published by under salt

There’s no love lost between me and the Catholic Church, heaven knows (pun intended). But I think we can all agree, Catholics, lapsed, non, and otherwise, that what Obama did this week was beyond the pale. If you somehow missed it, he is forcing them to provide & pay for abortion, contraception, and sterilization. Quite apart from whatever you may feel about any one of those individually, it’s the principle being threatened that’s of deep concern here, and Peggy Noonan nails in WSJ today. Here’s an excerpt:

 ”…The Catholic Church was told this week that its institutions can’t be Catholic anymore… There was no reason to make this ruling—none. Except ideology. The conscience clause, which keeps the church itself from having to bow to such decisions, has always been assumed to cover the church’s institutions… The ruling asks the church to abandon Catholic principles and beliefs; it is an abridgement of the First Amendment…

They say they will not bow to it. They should never bow to it, not only because they are Catholic and cannot be told to take actions that deny their faith, but because they are citizens of the United States…

(Even) Catholic liberals, who feel embarrassed and undercut, have also come out in opposition. The church is split on many things. But do Catholics in the pews want the government telling their church to contravene its beliefs? A president affronting the leadership of the church, and blithely threatening its great institutions? No, they don’t want that. They will unite against that.

The smallest part of this story is political. There are 77.7 million Catholics in the United States. In 2008 they made up 27% of the electorate, about 35 million people. Mr. Obama carried the Catholic vote, 54% to 45%. They helped him win. They won’t this year. And guess where a lot of Catholics live? In the battleground states.

There was no reason to pick this fight… There was nothing for the president to gain, except, perhaps, the pleasure of making a great church bow to him.

…You have awakened a sleeping giant.”

4 responses so far

Why is Obama Warning Iran Against Israel?

Feb 03 2012 Published by under salt

What POSSIBLE good does it do for America to announce to the world that Israel MIGHT attack Iran this spring?

I ask you:  WHO stands to benefit from making that public?

Israel? …NO…


Way to go, you evil bastard.

No responses yet

Motion for Obama Contempt in Georgia

Feb 01 2012 Published by under salt

From The American Thinker:

Obama Got Served

February 1, 2012 | Cindy Simpson

Obama was served a subpoena to appear in a hearing last week in Georgia over his eligibility to appear on the state’s ballot.  Obama’s attorney, Michael Jablonski, immediately filed a motion to quash the subpoena, which was denied by OSAH Judge Michael Malihi.  In his denial, Judge Malihi seemed to leave open the possibility for a quash, if Jablonski had only offered appropriate legal authority in support.  The judge asserted that “Defendant’s motion suggests that no President should be compelled to attend a Court hearing.  This may be correct.  But Defendant has failed to enlighten the Court with any legal authority.”

Instead of respectfully following procedure, however, Jablonski went over the judge’s head and straight to Secretary of State Brian Kemp with a letter, sent the day before the hearings were scheduled, arguing that the entire matter should be dropped as it was “baseless, costly and unproductive[.]”  Jablonski’s letter concluded: “We await your taking the requested action, and as we do so, we will, of course, suspend further participation in these proceedings, including the hearing scheduled for January 26.”

Kemp responded that his office lacked authority under Georgia law to suspend the hearings, and warned Jablonski that “if you and your client choose to suspend your participation in the OSAH proceedings, please understand that you do so at your own peril.”

Jablonski remained true to his word — neither he nor Obama showed up for the January 26 hearing.  I noted last week that Obama was not scheduled to be anywhere near Atlanta on the date of the hearing, although I had wondered if still, perhaps, Georgia might be on his mind.  According to reports in the blogosphere, the president’s schedule on the morning of the 26th was open, and according to an unnamed source, Obama watched the live feed of the hearings.

Perhaps Obama, as well as the several mainstream media news outlets I spotted at the hearing, were merely watching in hopes that the “crazy birthers” would really do something…well, crazy.  Or unlawful.  In fact, though, it was the president himself and his defense team who were the ones defying the rule of law.

The mainstream media, in lockstep with Obama, reported nothing of the events, in a stunning blackout on a truly historic hearing — one that discussed the eligibility of a sitting president to run for a second term.  And more troubling was the fact that the media failed to acknowledge the even more sensational news — that the president and his defense attorney snubbed an official subpoena.

Today, Attorney Van Irion, on behalf of his client, Georgia resident David Welden, filed a “Motion for Finding of Contempt” with Judge Malihi.  Irion asserts that “… Defendant Obama willfully defied this Court’s order to appear and testify[,]” and his “actions represent a direct threat to the entire judicial branch and the separation of powers between the branches of government.”  Irion argued that “[s]uch a declaration cannot go without response from this Court” and moved that the Court refer the “matter to the Superior Court of Fulton County for confirmation that the Defendant violated Administrative Rules of Procedure … and to determine appropriate sanctions.”

Now, will we get the opportunity to debate the meaning of “subpoena” — or whether the law even applies to this president?

h/t American Thinker

No responses yet

Pre-ObAmerica? Cool. Now? Spooky.

Feb 01 2012 Published by under salt

I’m such a girl geek. I absolutely love this stuff.  Too bad it’s certainly going to be used to help populate Obama’s Gulags, still with that fresh, new Gulag smell. But, hey, 3 hots & a cot?  It could be worse, right? … … … *Sigh*

h/t Jonah Goldberg for Tweeting this.

No responses yet

Bravo, Mr. Olson.

Feb 01 2012 Published by under salt

This needed to be said – badly – and this well. Too bad it’s in invisible ink – as it is on the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal, thus, invisible to Democrats, but it made me feel better reading it! Enjoy.

February 1 2012

Obama’s Enemies List

David and Charles Koch have been the targets of a campaign of vituperation and assault, choreographed from the very top.

How would you feel if aides to the president of the United States singled you out by name for attack, and if you were featured prominently in the president’s re-election campaign as an enemy of the people?

What would you do if the White House engaged in derogatory speculative innuendo about the integrity of your tax returns? Suppose also that the president’s surrogates and allies in the media regularly attacked you, sullied your reputation and questioned your integrity. On top of all of that, what if a leading member of the president’s party in Congress demanded your appearance before a congressional committee this week so that you could be interrogated about the Keystone XL oil pipeline project in which you have repeatedly—and accurately—stated that you have no involvement?

Consider that all this is happening because you have been selected as an attractive political punching bag by the president’s re-election team. This is precisely what has happened to Charles and David Koch, even though they are private citizens, and neither is a candidate for the president’s or anyone else’s office.

What Messrs. Koch do, in fact, is manage businesses that provide employment to more than 50,000 people in North America in legitimate, productive industries. They also give millions of dollars to medical researchers, hospitals and cultural institutions. Their biggest offense, apparently, is that they also contribute generously to nonprofit organizations that promote personal liberty and free enterprise, and some of those organizations oppose policies advocated by the president.

Richard Nixon maintained an”enemies list” that singled out private citizens for investigation and abuse by agencies of government, including the Internal Revenue Service. When that was revealed, the press and public were outraged. That conduct will forever remain one of the indelible stains on Nixon’s presidency and legacy.

When Joseph McCarthy engaged in comparable bullying, oppression and slander from his powerful position in the Senate, he was censured by his colleagues and died in disgrace.”McCarthyism,” defined by Webster’s as the “use of unfair investigative and accusatory methods to suppress opposition,” will forever be synonymous with un-Americanism. Army counsel Joseph Welch’s “Have you no sense of decency?” are words that evoke the McCarthy era and diminish the reputations of his colleagues who did nothing to stand up to him.

In this country, we regard the use of official power to oppress or intimidate private citizens as a despicable abuse of authority and entirely alien to our system of a government of laws. The architects of our Constitution meticulously erected a system of separated powers, and checks and balances, precisely in order to inhibit the exercise of tyrannical power by governmental officials.

Our Constitution even explicitly prohibits bills of attainder so that Congress may not single out individual citizens or groups for disfavored treatment or unequal application of the force of government. Prosecutorial power is rigidly constrained and judicially supervised so that government may not accuse private citizens of crimes or investigate them without good cause.

Whoever may be the victim of such abuse of governmental authority, the press and public almost invariably unify with indignation against it. If a journalist, labor-union leader or community organizer on the left can be targeted today, an academic or business person on the right can be the target tomorrow. If we fail to stand up against oppression from one direction, we abdicate the moral authority to challenge it when it comes from another.

This is why it is exceedingly important for all Americans to respond with outrage to what the president and his allies are doing to demonize and stigmatize David and Charles Koch. They have been the targets of the multiyear, carefully orchestrated campaign of vituperation and assault described above—and much more. It has been choreographed from the very top. When the president personally takes leadership, his political surrogates and army of allies in the press and Congress quickly and surely follow the direction and tone he sets.

The misuse of government power to damage or demean one’s political enemies is abhorrent and the very antithesis of a free society and a government of laws, not men. It is time for the public to ask those engaged in these practices, “Have you no sense of decency?”

Mr. Olson, a lawyer in Washington, D.C., and a former solicitor general of the United States, represents Koch Industries.

No responses yet

A-n-c-h-o-r is not Spelled E-m-i-l-y P-o-s-t

Feb 01 2012 Published by under salt

What was that about moral indignation at the appalling lack of protocol from Brewer to Obama, big guy? Whah? Read NewsBusters delicious bitch-slap here.

No responses yet

DONE with Classless-in-Chief

Feb 01 2012 Published by under salt

Call me superficial, but I’m done with the lack of civility in the White House and the fact that Newt (according to Drudge) did not call Mitt after his landslide victory in Florida tears it. Mitt is not perfect, but he is the only candidate standing who has the requisite experience turning giant, ailing economic organisms around from sickness to health… And I’m ready to have a little class back.

See ya, Newt. You’ve just proven yourself to be little better than Obama, only fatter with a worse tailor.

No responses yet

What’s the Over/Under on Obama Golfing this WKND?

Jan 31 2012 Published by under salt

I’m watching the W.H. Daily Briefing right now and Carney opened with mention that the weather is gorgeous in D.C., at 6o degrees.  If that holds (and I have no idea what the forecast is, as I am in New England) will it be one, or two rounds of golf this weekend for Bam?

Guess that depends on fundraising commitments.

No responses yet

The Obama Doctrine of Foreign Policy

Jan 31 2012 Published by under salt


h/t IBD – Michael Ramirez Cartoon

The only thing wrong with this depiction of Obama is that the fear he expresses is ours, not his.  Obama, I have no doubt, believes that we can drop our military pants and continue to be safe behind the firewall of his awesomeness.  Handy thing, sociopathic narcissism.  Makes it possible to drone bomb half the f*cking Middle-East without a single declaration of war on any of the multiple sovereign nations he turns into rubble, and still go to sleep at night sure they don’t mind.  Also helps you sleep at night when you make yourself judge, jury, and executioner of American citizens.  Yup.  Sure is nifty to be Bam-Bam.

No responses yet

Education, Obama Style = $1.5M+ with Math & Links

Jan 27 2012 Published by under salt

My previous post has upset liberals.  

My bad.

I should have been cognizant of the fact that the mere observation of fact upsets them.

It’s not enough to say “The sun rises in the morning and sets at night.” You have to cite The New York Times to prove it.  

Below, links (not the NYT but to Ivy-covered primary sources) to all my math proving that the Obamas really are the incoherent, hypocritical, fascist despots I have asserted that they are; at least as regards what their little snowflakes are entitled to have via their parents’ checkbook versus what your little snowflakes are entitled to have via their parents’  checkbook.

Oh – and to all those who doubted me:  Stuff your sanctimony and grab your calculators.  (Please note:  I actually did this research about a year ago, so the rates have surely risen since then, only further bolstering my case.)

“We need to offer our children the best education in the world.”

December 15, 2010 President Obama

$966,684.00 = Tuition for 2 children to get the education President Obama presumably regards as “the best education in the world.” (We know this because it combines the education he, himself had, and the education he and The First Lady have chosen for their two daughters.  It would be “imperial” would it not, if they meant their daughters are entitled to “the best education in the world” and your children are not?  That sounds like something Bush would say! So by that standard, surely shared by every Obama-loving liberal, we will proceed.)


Sidwell Friends School (which encompasses grades 5 through 12) + Columbia University + Harvard University Law School.

Sidwell Friends School is where the President & First Lady have enrolled their two children. The President is a graduate of Columbia & Harvard.

TOTAL:  $966,684.00

$966,684.00 was calculated, for simplicity’s sake, as if the 2010 tuition rates would not rise for the duration, were simply doubled (to account for 2 children), and represents their tuition *only*. It does *not include* housing, food, books, fees, or *any* of the other certain, necessary and related expenses involved in financing such an education in New York City and Boston.


|| $32,069 annual tuition at Sidwell Friends x 2 children for 8 years = $513,104

|| $22,610 annual tuition at Columbia University x 2 children for 4 years = $180,880

|| $45,450 annual tuition at Harvard Law School x 2 children for 3 years = $272,700


|| Sidwell Friends School

|| Columbia University – General Studies, B.A., B.S., JTS Joint Program

|| Harvard Law School


President Obama & The First Lady did not enroll their two children in the school they chose for them because it’s not the “best” they could find because, obviously, no parent would do that if they could do anything at all to help it.

One then could also safely presume the President & The First Lady would like to see all American children (of ALL parents who “work hard and play by the rules” whose wealth he swears he doesn’t “begrudge”) enjoy the pride of being able to provide their children a “world class” education, just like they do – by writing a check on funds they have earned & saved by their own talent and hard work – releiving Sasha & Malia from the nightmare of having to navigate the maze of government loans, funds, grants, etc in order to afford an education worthy of their potential — and, thus, empower that college to use its discretion to confer admission to other smart kids without money, by virtue of dropping that big fat pile of cash in the admissions office.

Given that we have left out 18 years of rises in tuition (which lately have averaged 9% per year!) and that we have left out every single solitary ancillary expense like rent, food, transportation and books, it’s not at all unreasonable to assume another 50% – at least – on top of that (nearly) $1M as it stands, today, in 2012.

Bring it, kool-aid drinkers.  Review the problem, then tell me how Obama’s h*rd-on to get his hand in the pocket of every American who earns a single penny over $250k squares with them buying a $1.5M dollar education in THEIR HOUSE while making harder for YOU in YOUR house for your children – while, just as a bonus, calling you a selfish pr*ck just for wanting it and further characterizing your prudent saving “hoarding.”

You know what I hear?  I hear:  SCREW YOU I GOT MINE.  You’ll get NOTHING except the scraps off my politically correct table and like it.

I can’t wait.


No responses yet

« Newer posts Older posts »