Radio Show at 5:30pm EST

Wow 6:30 est?

that early? ok great I’ll try to be there!

Bear with me for a second. The following is a cross-post from another site where the question of Barack Obama’s dual citizenship is being explored.

That is another question but wanted to share some thoughts — not about citizenship — but about a question the examination of that issue raises.

# # #

We’ve been asked, why not stick to the issues and get off this thing about dual citizenship.

For me, I’ll skip the obvious reasons for the Constitution’s concern for people who are citizens of another country serving as the leader of ours. That sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

But, to a second point this entire debate raises, a serious problem that seems to permeate the entire Obama candidacy. That is veracity. Openness. Basic truthfulness.

For a time, I was a state (and cross-designated federal) prosecutor. There is a time-honored and oft-proved tenet of witness examination. There are no small lies. If someone is untruthful, it taints their entire testimony. Because you can never know (without independent verification) when they’re lying.

The examples in Barack Obama’s case are legion. There is direct evidence, in his own words, in video tape after video tape, of saying something and later denying it was ever said. That should have been the end of the story right there. But, there are only spoon-fed excuses for real reporters out there, at least in at the major media outlets (with the rare, and very welcome exception and we appreciate them all), so none of these almost daily conflicts are ever explored, certainly not by asking the candidate.

But, I’ll take only one. The original statement, in a primary debate, later repeated to ABC news in an interview, that he (Barack Obama) barely knew William Ayers and passing him off as a “guy” who “lived in [his] neighborhood.”

Whether you like or don’t like William Ayers is irrelevant (to this point, not to the larger question of associations). The fact is (a/k/a the “truth”) that Barack Obama’s association with William Ayers, his wife and his father, were long-standing and deep.

It would not have taken a Perry Mason to end his campaign then and there, if Barack Obama had been willing to swear an oath (and, again, I don’t care if it’s to God, Allah or the Holy Chicken, just some oath that will trigger a perjury conviction if violated) and take the stand.

So, yes, I’m concerned if the man’s carrying dual citizenship but, for me, it concerns me more that he can’t be trusted.

He is a classic Machiavelli and I wouldn’t trust him as far as I could throw him. I certainly wouldn’t trust him with my country.

If you wonder whether or not his willingness to say anything (e.g., claiming McCain was against stem cell research — patently false — doesn’t care — says it anyway) has subsided, just call Henry Kissinger this morning.

Obama cites Kissinger (knowing what that name still seems to mean in our collective consciousness, whether or not well-deserved) in the debate. Kissinger says, as soon as the debate was over, McCain is right, Obama is wrong, and I don’t appreciate my position being misrepresented.

Again. His actions and statements do not hold up under the lightest level of scrutiny. A qualified prosecuted would eat him for lunch and save room for dessert.

# # #

See ya there. TruthTeller

You know what I think happened. Obama steals lines and platforms from the other candidates. At the beginning, Obama said he stood against Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac when it was actually McCain that did that. Obama stole a couple of other issues as well.

I think McCain stole the bracelet thing from Obama and it put him off guard. McCain likely only intended to use it if Obama stole his stances. Once he did, McCain told his bracelet story.

I still don’t know why Obama would lie about Kissinger though. That was just dumb.

Obama’s own words are the best reflection of his “ME TOO-ITIS” affliction:

“I’VE GOT A BRACELET TOO!!!”

Check out this TV segment from St. Louis Missouri that describes how law enforcement are forming truth squads to go after those who post “misleading ads” about Obama. This is REAL SCARY guys!
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=182623

did anyone post this?

RCP: CNN Credibility Factor
CNN Poll Vs. CNN Spin on Presidential Debate
Buried way, way down at the bottom of the story — hopefully, one surmises, past the point where anyone would read — is the following:
The results may be favoring Obama simply because more Democrats than Republicans tuned in to the debate. Of the debate-watchers questioned in this poll, 41 percent of the respondents identified themselves as Democrats, 27 percent as Republicans and 30 percent as independents.
http://countusout.wordpress.com/2008/09/27/cnn-credibility-factor/

how i wish PUMAS etc could get right in the face of the corpmedia. perhaps small groups handing out flyers with BO corruption details outside corpmedia offices.

If they try to pass the bill with Acorn’s payout in it, are there any planned protests for the Hill? And has anyone in the media pointed out the connection with Obama yet? Or asked him to explain his involvement?

Gotta pass this along:

Obama Threatening Critics with Fines and Jail

Reports continue to come in that Barack Obama’s Presidential Campaign is threatening legal action against his critics.

On Tuesday (September 23), CBS affiliate KMOV reported that Obama had enlisted a number of Missouri law enforcement officials, including local sheriffs and prosecutors, “to target anyone who lies or runs a misleading television ad [against Obama] during the presidential campaign.”

http://www.federalreview.com/2008/09/obama-threatening-critics-with-fines.htm

Truthteller,

I wanted to thank you for your brilliant commentary on the open thread during the debate last night. Usually, I can’t stand the sight nor sound of Obama, and your summary helped to make it tolerable. Will you be here for the next 2 debates?

I enjoyed the show tonight!

Thanks again

Hi! certified hoodia