The Alchemy of Democrat Cover-ups

I have no idea whether Barrack Obama is a natural born American. I'm not a "birther" and I haven't spent a lot of time on the issue, but I have noticed a lot of people are curious, not just fringe "kooks", but reasonable people who seem to have logical reasons for their curiosity. I do not know if Obama fits the constitutional requirements for the Presidency, but I do know Democrats, and when then work hard to hide something, that something is usually a doozy.

Think for a moment of other recent examples of Democrat cover-ups. John Kerry comes to mind. The press excoriated anyone who questioned his military record. Yet, despite the very public promises to release his full record, most notably to the late Tim Russert, he has never done so. He never will, because in that record one would find just what a liar John Kerry is. Apparently, he never actually made the trip to Cambodia that is seared in his memory, but he did take one to Paris to talk to the Viet Cong.  So far, thanks to President Carter reinstating his medals, it has been a very successful cover up. 

John Edwards portrayed himself as the quintessential husband and father. His boyish good looks, his empathy for the downtrodden and his abiding love for his cancer stricken wife made him a vice-presidential shoo-in, except for that mistress and love child that he visited regularly. Despite his staffers covering for him and the press spiking reporting on the affair, it came out, a very unsuccessful cover-up for Edwards. We are assured however, that even though he admits the affair, the child is not his. Oh, and there will be no DNA testing of the child. 

How about all the assurances that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in good order? No audits or reforms necessary, everything is just fine. How many members of Congress blocked meaningful regulation for many years? The Democrats have profited and continue to profit greatly from the two enterprises, costing the taxpayers billions. Yet a majority of Americans blame President Bush for the financial crisis. Yet another successful cover-up, as well as an effective propaganda campaign courtesy of the party of coincidence. Do you remember that financial crisis that miraculously popped up last November? You know, just before the election. Pure coincidence, really, you can trust the Democrats.

And last but not least, is the record of the Clinton administration's contribution to 9-11. We know that members of the administration actively built barriers to data sharing between intelligence and law enforcement. We know the Clintons viewed terrorism as a law enforcement matter. We know that Madeleine Albright warned Pakistan before Clinton's half-hearted cruise missile strike on Bin Laden, thereby giving days of warning to Al Qaeda. 

We know that soon after the formation of 9-11 commission was officially announced the Clinton administrations National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, went to National Archives over a period of weeks to steal and destroy highly classified records of the Clinton administration decision-making process in handling Al-Qaeda and terrorism. He stuck them in his pants and socks and later burned and shredded them. You can bet they held incriminating evidence, evidence that would have tanked the Democrats on security issues and ripped away the "Clinton Legacy." It was a very successful cover-up, about which the press is remarkably silent. Berger received what amounts to a wrist slap, while old Bill laughed it off saying; "That Sandy, he's so absent minded." 

By all reports, Obama and his administration have gone to great expense to prevent examination of his birth record outside of carefully staged statements from loyal Democrats. When Presidential spokespersons ridicule and demean Americans, even political enemies, in a public forum, they are purposely inserting ideas into the public psyche, and when those ideas are choreographed with the press you can bet it was cooked up among the likes of ABC's George Stephanopoulos, CNN's James Carville, CNN commentator Paul Begala, and Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. The message appears on leftist web-exchanges like Journo List and it is off to the political smear races. If you say a thing often enough, people will eventually believe it, for example; the press is in the Democrats' pocket, the press is in the Democrats pocket, the press is in the Democrats pocket... Well, that one is real.

Now, conveniently, we have Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii's Department of Health, telling us she's seen the documents and they are legitimate. If one wanted to conspire to protect a Democrat President, who is from Hawaii, where else would you go for eager supporters. So the controversy continues until impartial credible observers review the documents.  Maybe Obama was indeed born in Hawaii. Could the controversy be more accurately about who his father was and not his birthplace? It would certainly be an embarrassment after all the "Dreams of my Father" hagiographies and "my souls from Africa" shtick.  

Conservative elites sniff in arrogant distain at the birth document "conspiracy theory, "of course, and admonish us not to fall into the Democrat trap.  The controversy is not helping us they complain, the left is painting us as kooks.  I hate to break it to you Professor, but the left always paints conservatives as kooks.  They also fabricate, lie, manipulate and intimidate.  It is standard practice, it will not stop, and you will see any conservative personality that gets traction get the "Ann Coulter" treatment for anything they say.  Sarah Palin for example is the target of a well funded, well attended (by the press) smear campaign.  It is organized, focused and financed by the Democrat machine.  They view her as the chief threat to Obama in 2012.  We have years of Sarah smearing to look forward to.  The Obama birth records controversy will be similarly exploited for any political advantage, and used to demean and ridicule any on the right who pursue it.  I'm no"birther," but I smell a cover-up, I'm just not sure of what. With the Democrats you can be sure, where there's smoke, there's fire, and they are working overtime to hide it. 


I have no idea whether Barrack Obama is a natural born American. I'm not a "birther" and I haven't spent a lot of time on the issue, but I have noticed a lot of people are curious, not just fringe "kooks", but reasonable people who seem to have logical reasons for their curiosity. I do not know if Obama fits the constitutional requirements for the Presidency, but I do know Democrats, and when then work hard to hide something, that something is usually a doozy.

Think for a moment of other recent examples of Democrat cover-ups. John Kerry comes to mind. The press excoriated anyone who questioned his military record. Yet, despite the very public promises to release his full record, most notably to the late Tim Russert, he has never done so. He never will, because in that record one would find just what a liar John Kerry is. Apparently, he never actually made the trip to Cambodia that is seared in his memory, but he did take one to Paris to talk to the Viet Cong.  So far, thanks to President Carter reinstating his medals, it has been a very successful cover up. 

John Edwards portrayed himself as the quintessential husband and father. His boyish good looks, his empathy for the downtrodden and his abiding love for his cancer stricken wife made him a vice-presidential shoo-in, except for that mistress and love child that he visited regularly. Despite his staffers covering for him and the press spiking reporting on the affair, it came out, a very unsuccessful cover-up for Edwards. We are assured however, that even though he admits the affair, the child is not his. Oh, and there will be no DNA testing of the child. 

How about all the assurances that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in good order? No audits or reforms necessary, everything is just fine. How many members of Congress blocked meaningful regulation for many years? The Democrats have profited and continue to profit greatly from the two enterprises, costing the taxpayers billions. Yet a majority of Americans blame President Bush for the financial crisis. Yet another successful cover-up, as well as an effective propaganda campaign courtesy of the party of coincidence. Do you remember that financial crisis that miraculously popped up last November? You know, just before the election. Pure coincidence, really, you can trust the Democrats.

And last but not least, is the record of the Clinton administration's contribution to 9-11. We know that members of the administration actively built barriers to data sharing between intelligence and law enforcement. We know the Clintons viewed terrorism as a law enforcement matter. We know that Madeleine Albright warned Pakistan before Clinton's half-hearted cruise missile strike on Bin Laden, thereby giving days of warning to Al Qaeda. 

We know that soon after the formation of 9-11 commission was officially announced the Clinton administrations National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, went to National Archives over a period of weeks to steal and destroy highly classified records of the Clinton administration decision-making process in handling Al-Qaeda and terrorism. He stuck them in his pants and socks and later burned and shredded them. You can bet they held incriminating evidence, evidence that would have tanked the Democrats on security issues and ripped away the "Clinton Legacy." It was a very successful cover-up, about which the press is remarkably silent. Berger received what amounts to a wrist slap, while old Bill laughed it off saying; "That Sandy, he's so absent minded." 

By all reports, Obama and his administration have gone to great expense to prevent examination of his birth record outside of carefully staged statements from loyal Democrats. When Presidential spokespersons ridicule and demean Americans, even political enemies, in a public forum, they are purposely inserting ideas into the public psyche, and when those ideas are choreographed with the press you can bet it was cooked up among the likes of ABC's George Stephanopoulos, CNN's James Carville, CNN commentator Paul Begala, and Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. The message appears on leftist web-exchanges like Journo List and it is off to the political smear races. If you say a thing often enough, people will eventually believe it, for example; the press is in the Democrats' pocket, the press is in the Democrats pocket, the press is in the Democrats pocket... Well, that one is real.

Now, conveniently, we have Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii's Department of Health, telling us she's seen the documents and they are legitimate. If one wanted to conspire to protect a Democrat President, who is from Hawaii, where else would you go for eager supporters. So the controversy continues until impartial credible observers review the documents.  Maybe Obama was indeed born in Hawaii. Could the controversy be more accurately about who his father was and not his birthplace? It would certainly be an embarrassment after all the "Dreams of my Father" hagiographies and "my souls from Africa" shtick.  

Conservative elites sniff in arrogant distain at the birth document "conspiracy theory, "of course, and admonish us not to fall into the Democrat trap.  The controversy is not helping us they complain, the left is painting us as kooks.  I hate to break it to you Professor, but the left always paints conservatives as kooks.  They also fabricate, lie, manipulate and intimidate.  It is standard practice, it will not stop, and you will see any conservative personality that gets traction get the "Ann Coulter" treatment for anything they say.  Sarah Palin for example is the target of a well funded, well attended (by the press) smear campaign.  It is organized, focused and financed by the Democrat machine.  They view her as the chief threat to Obama in 2012.  We have years of Sarah smearing to look forward to.  The Obama birth records controversy will be similarly exploited for any political advantage, and used to demean and ridicule any on the right who pursue it.  I'm no"birther," but I smell a cover-up, I'm just not sure of what. With the Democrats you can be sure, where there's smoke, there's fire, and they are working overtime to hide it.