Friday, August 6, 2010

The Mombosan Son: Chapter 2

CHAPTER 2 - Let There Be Right

“The bigger the lie, the more people will believe it.”

Adolf Hitler

Prior to the 2008 Presidential election, our Greatest Generation, the courageous survivors of the Great Depression who died and shed blood for our nation during World Wars I & II and the Korean War, made a commitment to freedom through their understanding and reverence for the actual price of peace. Because of their true sacrifice for human rights, they are authentic descendents of America's creators through whose spirit the founders of our great nation convey principles of liberty, and upon which their generational heirs will forever reside.

Upon establishing this impenetrable boundary of national identity, the Founding Fathers made themselves hazardous to inferior characters, then and now. Unfortunately, this inferiority has manifested in the socialized cloning of angry, liberal orphans who have reached their moment of electoral crescendo in America’s history. They have come to this place through propaganda and an obstinate, 40-year commitment to “remake America” in their image, as their leader has stated. The 250-year-old, blood-ransomed version of our nation is, apparently, no longer good enough, so they seek to morph it through a destruction of its foundational values, confiscation of monetary power, and a reinterpretation of legal permissions to commit constitutionally distorted abjection.


A half century ago, just inside the distant reaches of the United States’ Constitutional jurisdiction, a vulnerable Hawaiian statehood concluded our nation’s geographic expansion and established the final limits for the natural born status of humanity’s advanced citizenship. Less than two years into Hawaii’s new infant culture, a biracial boy, who would one day lead a bowing consensus of liberal millions, was deposited onto this island outpost under erroneous, socially illegitimate circumstances.

Today, residing well within the homeland borders, thousands of miles away, vintage Americans, whose grandfathers bled and died fighting a foreign enemy in the now secure, tropical, Oceanic haven, have discovered shocking voids in the biographical information about this boy’s origins, identity and ideology. As a result, Vintage Americans now doubt his ambiguous ascendance to power and the seemingly ominous scheme of foreign-like forces to covertly assist his moment in history.

The liberal establishment wants to aggressively force the “otherness” of Barack Obama upon an established culture under a penalty of accusations of racism for any resistance. Yet, the liberal champions of ‘tolerance’ and ‘free speech’ refuse to calm the masses by simply providing the remaining evidence and common documents proving that he is actually the man he claims to be. The documents he possesses are not being withheld as a matter of national security or personal privacy, they are being withheld because they most certainly reveal information which either compromises his constitutional eligibility to be President, or undermines his political integrity, or both. By compounding the unfavorable public perception with a menacing decision to conceal his personal information, he pushed suspicion over the psychological edge into the realm of moral certainty, sealing conclusions about his malfeasance in the minds of his more pragmatic opponents.

Most troublesome, however, instead of reaching out to vintage Americans to ease their justifiable skepticism, the response from the liberal establishment, a perennial bastion of self-proclaimed intellect, tolerance and unity, is to castigate the families of dead heroes as “rednecks” and “racists”. This is only storing up wrath toward liberals for the future and it is Obama’s fault, not the fault of those justifiably seeking his cooperation.

Given the massive amounts of suppressed information, when told that Obama was born in the new state of Hawaii in 1961; in a region 2000 miles from the modern world; attested to by no eyewitness living today; to a foreign non-citizen father who died when Obama was 23; to a mother who passed away 15 years ago; without disclosure of the name of any attending physician; in a hospital that refuses to confirm his natal records while providing no adequate document of his native birth; is it any wonder why mainstream Americans respond with sarcasm and incredulity? The appearance of a convenient obscurity and complete lack of transparency naturally causes doubts about the identity of anyone seeking power to fair-minded Americans. It requires astonishing psychopathology to deny these facts. Mainstream Americans see the ominous lack of information surrounding Obama’s biological genesis as a contrived effort, on the part of invisible influences, to mythologize the importance of this man. However, this is backfiring because Obama’s promoters are only presenting him as a ghostly antagonist which must be opposed.

Along with Obama’s ambiguous identity, Mainstream America must also reject him because of the fact that every person who was ever been a direct witness to his natal information and origins are dead, some under suspicious circumstances. His mother, his father, his adoptive father, his maternal grandparents, his mother’s obstetrician, his pediatrician, witnesses, and municipal officials alive in 1961 are separated from this world, unable to provide the answers we deserve. These phantoms of Obama’s history have abandoned our need for answers, taking with them details valuable to our questions about his biography.

We are denied access to Obama’s existing information now by members of a government who are supposed to be working for the American people, but instead, have demonstrated themselves as pawns and abettors of what may be proven to be the greatest hoax of presidential impropriety in American history.

None of that, however, is more important than the effect this opaqueness has on Obama’s image in the clear conscience of history. The facts of his personal datum may never be known for certain, but his ambiguity raises suspicion not only about his identity and origins, but also about his ideology, in the minds of everyone outside of the inner circles of political power. His tendency to over intellectualize and overuse teleprompters while offering less than the minimally acceptable, basic, personal information raises suspicion in even the most innocent of middle class Americans. When a teacher in Colorado explained the issue of Obama’s personal records to her class, one third grader asked, “Doesn’t he put his name on his papers?”

The teacher replied, “Sweetie, he doesn’t even turn in his papers.”6

Alas, Mr. Obama gets an “F” on the transparency quiz. The questions of Obama’s political legitimacy, along with the challenges to his eligibility to be President are valid and warranted. However, the point of order in this matter is not a question of whether or not he was born in Hawaii, as the deranged liberal media loves to belabor. Disingenuous Obama apologists within the liberal establishment are desperate to exploit public ridicule against what they have dubbed the “birther” movement because they have no answers for the essential questions about Obama’s true identity and its direct connection to his failing presidency.

Obama liberals have conveyed an effective lie, primarily as a result of their successful, but devious endeavor to exploit unhinged sensationalists like Orly Taitz and other tabloidish member-heads of the “birther movement”, without ever addressing the most important, most convictive, most essential question, which is: What malevolent information could possibly be contained within the secret documented history of Barack Obama that it would prompt such a vigorous labyrinth of legal counteraction, social ridicule and propagandism to prevent it from being discussed or revealed?

The liberal media knows that it has no response for the overburdening truth that doubts about Obama’s legitimacy are not based on questions about his birth place but, rather, that they are righteously and powerfully rooted in the motives to conceal his true identity from vintage Americans. The questions are less about Obama’s geographic origins, than they are about his covert demographic and ideological origins. Questions about his birthplace are merely and ignorantly exploited as a consequence of this covertness.

America understands the most important characteristics about Obama are his ideological motives and radical associations, not his residence behind a paper-thin façade of unconstitutional status. Obama has refused to dispel rumors or answer basic questions about his identity to the satisfaction of the American people.

Is it any wonder why wacko mediots like Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, David Shuster, Ed Shultz, Larry O’Donnell and the remaining slew of defamatory liberal media hacks are compelled to push so desperately hard in order to artificially promote Obama’s flimsy statesmanship and false image? Ideologically, they are so ensnared by their own lust to believe in Obama’s legitimacy without knowing the essential answers supporting authentic legitimacy, that they have no choice but to serve the reality they are given by the false truth they have chosen. Thus, they are relegated to a dissonant ideological existence enslaved by intellectual dishonesty and moral decompensation as they must persistently excuse the deficit created by Obama’s lies while bearing the increasing burden of eventual truth. Being deceived and conquered, their prideful haughtiness has rendered them soulless and tickled by malice, as a consequence of their willful, choice to be ideological blinded.

Unfortunately, during the election season of 2008, most Americans were initially unaware of the significance of any Obama eligibility issue. Most common people simply assume that every candidate seeking a position in our government must, naturally, be pre-qualified and politically legitimate. Otherwise, how could the candidate have actually won the election? Also, most Americans are not aware of the detail in the Constitution addressing the issue of our government’s political sovereignty.

However, it is more important that mainstream Americans understand Obama’s audacity and the reasons why he considers it unimportant to disclose his biographical information. Despite the paroxysms from the political left, questions about possible legal and political violations in Obama’s origins have actually been a public issue since 2004, but the media has worked insidiously to discount the actual significant threat these violations might pose to the integrity of our Constitution. In fact, the liberal media has been decidedly anti-Constitution when challenged by questions of Obama’s legitimacy, yet they were so eager to invoke the Constitution in their challenges to the legitimacy of the Bush administration.
Hypocrites in the media have also taken advantage of the fact that most Americans do not realize the size of the monetary investment into the installment of Obama and the agenda he have been elected to enact. The media bias in favor of Obama has been subsidized by political stakeholders while the propaganda was financed by those who stand to benefit financially from an Obama presidency. Therefore, Obama was positioned in such a manner that the value of his place in history was scripted to take precedence over any moral evaluation about his lack of responsible disclosure. This is how politicians justify lying.

However, the value of America is found in what the mainstream are willing to give in order to create the quality of life they aspire for. At the very origins of our essence, beginning with our Declaration of Independence and the subsequent Revolution, lies the sacrifice of blood for freedom. From there, we have earned the privilege to live in security, work, raise our families and seek prosperity through honest means.

Mainstream Americans see Obama as a threat to their essence. Therefore, he continues to draw inquiry about his identity, by way of challenges to his natal history, with renewed enthusiasm. Instinctually, mainstream Americans know something is not right about Obama. They believe he is working to undermine the sacrifice of previous generations by stealing their prosperity. They are fully aware that for every new liberal policy passed by the Obama administration, the value of their worth is diminished. For every new dollar printed to fund the massive liberal power grabs, American lives are devalued. When the supply of currency increases its value decreases if it is not backed by valuation.

Mainstream American’s are becoming aware of Obama’s deceptive ways primarily because his true identity is becoming more and more exposed through radical, shadow policies derived out of what decent Americans instinctually detect as dishonest and derisive assaults against their ancestry…and their pocket books. Therefore, in the minds of mainstream Americans, if Obama is an antagonist of vintage traditionalism, they cannot logically accept him as a legitimate representative worthy of leading a blood-ransomed nation.

Furthermore, Americans, of vintage heritage, wonder why he would ever hide documentation of his natal history when its revelation would only serve to exonerate him. This nonsensical choice by Obama is probably the most damaging to his credibility. Also, this dichotomy between a message of “hope and change” and a blatant, covert secrecy presents a violation of basic morality and logic which vintage, mainstream America is particularly sensitive to reject. They understand that eventually the truth about Obama will be exposed, one way or another, but they understand his identity will also be revealed through a failure of policy, perhaps the collapse of the American economy as a result of health care reform, which, in turn, will compromise their security and leave them financially vulnerable. However, if this failure comes in the form of a terrorist attack because of Obama’s ineffective national security policies or in the form of financial collapse due to oppressive and gigantic government spending, vintage Americans will engage a more strident rebellion.

Obama’s biographical “black out” was just the first step in a liberal agenda to confiscate the value of America and impose government control against its prosperity. By obscuring the radical identity of this man, the liberal establishment not only protects the true nature of an illicit, covert plan, which Obama identically represents, they are able to use Obama as a “living lie” to promote insidious misinformation. Without the truth, many Americans will undoubtedly capitulate to the tokens of liberal enticement. The primary way liberals will attempt to achieve this capitulation is through the manufacturing and promotion of crisis.


Essentially, the various factions of Obama’s opposition have the same goal. Glenn Beck and Joseph Farah, creator of World Net Daily, are, basically, making the same case against Obama. They are insisting that there are basic unanswered questions about the biographical content, natal and ideological, of Barack Obama. They all seek to stop Obama’s assault upon individual freedom and prosperity of Americans. Some are choosing to dig down from the top, where the mainstream battle over policy is waged while others remain poised near the dark horizon of this man’s biographical identity. In the end, without reconciliation, the final result is the same. Obama is illegitimate.

However, Glenn Beck has put himself at a disadvantage by engaging the debate about Obama’s substance without embracing the truth about his covert natal history. Beck is a wonderful media personality with a refreshing pragmatism for the stage he performs upon, but the truly courageous are those who have taken a principled position which holds to the necessity of verifying first-things-first. Obama’s natal history is the undiscovered country in which the components of his radical agenda were constructed. It is within Obama’s covert early life history where we would find the brokenness and the motives for his current ideology. The revelation of these things exist in the documents we have never seen. Glenn Beck might find even more success in his opposition of Obama’s agenda if he simply started at the beginning of the overall story.

Our grandparents taught us that the weakness of the corrupted man is found not only in the substance by which he acts, it is found in the character by which he lives. The character of a man is revealed when he thinks his behavior is not being witnessed by others. Character is defined by what you do when you think no one is a witness to it. It does not matter if he is pushing for socialized Healthcare, redistributing the wealth of free people, vying for the Olympic games in his hometown, seeking to remake a nation or concealing his identity. In the end, he is what he is…from his beginning to his end. And there is nothing he can do to change his history. All he can do is lie about it, compensate for it or seek redemption in spite of it.

Obama’s sycophantic media might ignore the ambiguity of his natal identity, or engage in juvenile name-calling, but the presence of such fundamental doubts about him will only push the matter into other vessels of alternative, more wide-spread media like YouTube, World Net Daily, Fox News and the blogosphere. As we witnessed with the destruction of ACORN, the responsibility of real journalism had to be assumed by independent, courageous citizens working in the purest possible sense of America’s interest. If the media had been doing its job in this case, there would have been no need for such a shameful destruction to ACORN.

Instead, the ‘professional’ media was humiliated by two commoners and were forced to bear witness to a story they should have been covering in the first place, beginning a long time ago. The entire media industry should be ashamed of itself for its horrifying bias and favoritism toward the liberal cause. The broadcast networks of ABC, CBS, and NBC are apparently content to permit the promotion of child prostitution, human slave trafficking and tax evasion in order to protect their liberal bias for community organizations like ACORN. We can only hope that the patriots who exposed ACORN’s criminal enterprise will receive a prestigious award for their exceptional work in uprooting the biggest government funded mafia of our time.

Likewise, since the networks are too cowardice to deal with the subject of Obama’s personal profile rationally and thoroughly, books, internet blogs, and YouTube videos have taken over as the mainstream mediums for the subject. And, quite frankly, most people like it this way. There is more opportunity to exchange information and provide input rather than having it dictated to us through a one-way leftwing broadcast. The American people are taking the responsibility out of the hands of a derelict, corrupt, mainstream media and investing it into their own forms of testing, authentication and confirmation. This will never change until Barack Obama takes appreciable steps to win the confidence of our vintage generations by being open and honest about his identity and his plan for America’s future.

Outside of liberal bastions of America, the descendents of our founders watch and wait for the opportunity to know the truth, showing real strength to find resolve against the enemies of their father's nation. Whosoever those enemies are, the power of righteous change resides in the fight against all evil, foreign and domestic, by our American sons. Vintage American’s have many questions about the current purveyors of their grandparent’s ransom. One question evolving out the entire Obama saga is: What is the ultimate result of this covert liberal agenda? For many in America, the frightening answer to this question has already been decided: reparative social justice.

If this indeed proves to be Obama’s agenda, revolution is a foregone conclusion. America will divide and collapse into opposing forces. Perhaps this is a good thing. The division of our nation has historically proven to be the final step in resolving the greatest conflicts we face by its provision for right to prevail. Independence, slavery and war are the most glaring examples in our history. Now, reparative social justice, globalism and the destruction of traditionalism are becoming the new and great divergence of America.

We should never forget who founded America and why America was created. America’s independence and sovereignty is under assault, right now! Extreme moments of historical proportions have arrived. Vital events are afoot and they are promoting an extreme willingness by vintage Americans to fight against this liberal assault on the sovereignty of our father’s America. Vintage America is a decent, peace loving people, until they believe tyranny is seeking to control their lives. Then, even their own blood becomes a willing forfeiture in order to defeat tyrants for their children. And, they are better at killing enemies than any collective force in human history. In this light, Vintage America will destroy the liberal establishment just as it has destroyed tyrannical regimes of modern history.

However, the liberal agenda seeking reparative social justice is not just for the perception of racial oppression, exclusively. There are many perceived "injustices" which Obama and the liberal establishment seek to correct at the expense of vintage America. Under the cloak of “justice for slavery”, lightening rod issues are currently exploited by the liberal establishment only as a means to gain leverage for bigger aspirations.

Liberals aspire for economic devaluation, moral redefinition, wealth redistribution, and a destruction of our founding traditions. Undermining each of these stanchions with a scheme of social engineering is a method for achieving reparative social justice.

These stanchions of American society are interconnected with one another by America’s most powerful industries. The banking and lending industries are being forced to submit to governmental control and relinquish the responsibility over private and personal assets to municipal oversight. Faith-based charities and the church are under direct assault by new abrogating tax laws and legislation designed specifically to target their activities in the world community and effectively diminish the relationship between community service and Christian-based organizations. Obama liberals consider true Christian-based charities as a threat to their power and a challenge to their agenda for controlling and exploiting the poor. Christian charities are the most generous organizations in the world contributing more than 80 billion dollars a year toward fighting poverty and disease. And, they do it tax free.

The major consumer markets like housing, auto industry, investment securities, health care services and high-tech manufacturing find themselves at a fiscal impasse with the liberal government’s mandates for fairness and provision to unqualified indigents of, not just America, but the entire migrating world. Essentially, if Obama succeeds in his liberal vision to confiscate wealth from affluent, healthy citizens it will only worsen the condition of the poor, illegal, unemployed, sick people. Liberal mandates on welfare will destroy this nation and bring an end to the American sanctuary intended by our founders.

Obama minions seek to fix what they believe is America's "brokeness". History reveals that liberals are ill-qualified and unjustified for such an endeavor because they are the breakers of America. Their dysfunction is the result of focal dissonance and an inability to define morality based on standards higher than their own.


Militant environmentalism is one example of this liberal deception. The concept that the planet needs to be protected from the activity of humanity in comparison with the environmental cataclysms that have occurred in the history of the earth’s development is the height of ignorance and arrogance. The indictments of global warming fail to acknowledge that the earth survived a molten history during which terrestrial temperatures reached more than 2000 degrees.10 And, yet, we are told by liberal environmentalists that the earth needs to be protected from a rise in temperature of 1 degree over the next 20 years? Based on the paleontological evidence of the earth’s extreme environmental conditions, it appears we might need to be protected from it. The earth will survive the era of humanity no matter what we do during our time here.

Environmentalism is just one example of how liberals act against the laws of nature in an attempt to confiscate the monetary value from productive responsible citizens while implementing laws to subjugate the most brilliant minds and enslave the most able bodies of decent, industrious people. Liberals don’t understand that affluent people achieved their success and prosperity because they were divinely equipped and willfully able to overcome obstacles those who are less successful were not able to. Obama and his supporters do not conceive that some powers of endowment are not in their control and not subject to their politics. Men may be equal in substance, but some are better than others in function and performance. Employing slavery, in any form, to fund and resource their brand of reparative justice for the past will only work to undermine their intention and destroy their place in history’s honor. A survey of historical facts reveals support for such an indictment.

The policies rendered through ambiguously identified leadership will render ambiguously defined intentions. This is no more apparent than the apocalypse of health care reform being imposed on America by Obama and the liberal establishment.

On the issue of healthcare reform, any perceived lack of insurance coverage for Americans is merely a symptom, not the illness afflicting our healthcare system. The failure on the part of our government to focus so much on the socialization of healthcare (increasing the demand) rather than addressing the fundamental reasons for rising healthcare costs is astonishingly ignorant, if not outright sabotage of America’s financial system. Universal healthcare coverage is merely a means of bailing the flooding costs at a much slower rate than the costs are sinking the ship.The problem with our healthcare system is not an absence of national insurance coverage, it lies completely in a distorted sense of entitlement to health care without the personal responsibility and individual opportunity to pay for it. We need to increase the amount of health care, not the amount of people needing it. Increase the supply and the cost will control itself.

Illegal immigration is directly connected to the problem of increasing healthcare costs. Tax paying Americans must put a stop to illegal immigration, for the sake of the future of their children. The expenditure being laid about the neck of future generations by failed immigration policy is going to kill everyone. Not only does the unmitigated flood of foreign interests compromise our financial system, it poses a threat to national security. The election of a figure like Barack Obama is merely a symptom of this chronic social pathology. America’s illegal immigration disease has festered for 40 years and now it has metastasized into a full blown need for action for the sake of our financial and mortal security.


Liberals are desperate to force Obama identity seekers into the "fringe" box. However, a recent CNN poll of 1013 adults in America, from all political parties, shows that 58% of Americans have at least some doubt about Obama's eligibility to be President. Nearly 6 in 10 people! Additionally,28% of people say he is probably, or certainly, NOT eligible to be President. More than 1 in 4 people believe Obama has violated Constitutional law in seeking the presidency.

Ideological hate is an equal opportunity affliction in American politics. The malignant sickness at the extreme edges of both sides of the political fervor drives the fringe dwellers of the ideological spectrum away from what is right. They fall into hysterical blindness when the leaders they choose oppose things, and sometimes, people, they hate. However, vintage Americans are undeterred no matter how much Obama’s defenders continue to dismiss the valid, logical inquiry about his barren biographical record. They understand that it Obama’s character is synchronized with the liberal assault on the fiscal freedom of their nation.

It is important to remember that politicians are merely idea peddlers. They do not build anything. They do not invent. They do not innovate. The do not produce goods, products or tools. They do not perform acts of spectacle or entertainment value. Most of them are not even viable leaders of business or creators of employment opportunities. Essentially, they are ideological salespeople.

One of the viable questions consumers have the right to ask any salesperson is to see the wholesale price of the product or service before they buy it. This wholesale value provides a financial orientation for the buyer to determine how far they will have to go to afford the purchase. The extent to which someone will go to accept the price of something is measured progressively through ranges of exertion. The outer most ranges of this exertion is the fringe.When a consumer buys a “big ticket” item like a car, for example, the retail price sticker includes a profit margin that the salesperson prefers to keep secret. The size of this profit margin is usually directly proportionate to the extent the salesperson will go to keep it secret. If the profit margin is unreasonably large, the salesperson may engage in fringe behavior in order to make the sell without actually revealing the profit margin. This fringe behavior may come in the form of generous offers that the buyer does not want, like a year’s worth of free carwashes or some other token offer whose value is negligible against the size of the potential profit.

On the other side of the relationship, however, in order to make a decision about buying the car, the buyer may want to see the original wholesale invoice showing the price the dealer paid to the manufacturer for the car. The buyer may actually demand it before agreeing to proceed with the sale. In this case, the buyer is trying to determine what the true value of the car is before an agreement to buy it. The buyer is attempting to prevent overpayment for a car that might not be worth what the salesperson is asking. Sometimes, the salesperson refuses to show the wholesale invoice. At, that point, the buyer can, and should, refuse to engage the deal any further. The wholesale invoice is the bottom line. It is the origin of any negotiation and it is the one value that never changes in the negotiation. The salesperson wants to keep this value a secret because he knows that if the buyer has knowledge of it, it will jeopardize the profit margin, whether or not the profit margin is unreasonable. The wholesale is the origin of any decision by the buyer to proceed and it is the origin of any decision to buy. The retail sticker is the price the salesman hopes to get.

The wholesale value of our political leaders is defined by their identity. This is the bottom line in dealing with lawmakers and rule mongers in government. Their identity is determined by the accuracy, legality, completeness and verifiability of their lifelong biographical and professional documentation. Applying this to the “car sale” analogy, this documentation is the equivalent of the “wholesale invoice”. In Obama’s case, the Health care Reform bill is the “retail sticker”.The U.S. Constitution says that by only providing America with some of Obama’s available biographical information, the liberal “salesperson” is acting in a fringe manner by refusing to show the wholesale invoice on Obama. America is only seeing the retail Obama, not the wholesale Obama. Whereas we may be conned into paying inflated value for most politicians, the constitution says we must confirm the wholesale value of our President (as a Natural Born Citizen) before he can be sold to the American public. However, in Obama’s case, the liberal sales teams are working their sleazy deal in the backroom of the dealership trying to sell Obama for as much of a profit as they can dishonestly get. They seek to rip off the American people with the sale of the biggest reparative economic equality bill in American history.

On the other side of the relationship, liberals love to proclaim that anyone asking questions about Obama’s whole sale identity is on the “fringe” of mainstream ideology. But, they easily forget the caterwauls of their own leadership defending the right of Americans to question any president for any reason.

In 2003, liberal queen bee, Hillary Clinton made the point for all those opposing the President when she shrieked:

“I'm sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic. We need to stand up and say, ‘We're Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration!’"

Amen, sister. The liberal establishment is ignorant about how to quantify the ‘fringe’ in such a matter. In every poll taken, the fringe is defined as a small percentage of participants who make logical conclusions based on unpopular reasons, not unreasonable ideology.

According to Dr. Bruce Mangan, a professor of psychology quoted in the MIT Press, fringe consciousness “…often has a very transient nature which... directs us to related information that is potentially accessible, rather than permanently inaccessible.”1

In his paper, “Sensation’s Ghost, The Non-Sensory Fringe of Consciousness”, Mangan states:

“Rightness represents degrees of context fit among contents in consciousness, and between conscious and non-conscious processes. Rightness (not familiarity) is the feeling-of-knowing in implicit cognition.”67

Using the term “fringe” to describe Obama identity seekers is only conceding that Obama has not provided potentially accessible information that is not permanently inaccessible. Obama certainly has not provided an appropriate level of information supporting a conclusion one way or the other about his eligibility to be President. When an equation produces “no resolution” to a problem, it is as false as if it produces an incorrect result, especially in politics.

The perception about Obama’s identity rests squarely upon the fact that it has not been fully resolved by those asking for it to be because he has refused to provide the existing, accessible information to do so. So, resolution is left to be determined between the conscious and non-conscious processes of discerning rightness, as described by Mangan.

Combining the absence of biographical data with an unwillingness to provide it yields not only a “no solution” as a result to his identity, but it creates derision toward Obama’s character as well. And, character, defined by identity, is the only thing that matters in the minds of decent Americans, regardless of political affiliation. Given his educational background, it’s actually surprising that Obama is so unaware of this.


What happens when the voter realizes the president they purchased is a "lemon"? What is the reaction when mainstream America realizes they voted for a “lemon”? There is always a backlash. The nature of the backlash can come in the form of the voter engaging a violent rebellion, or as something as effective of voting the lemon out of office. Sometimes the buyer will take action somewhere in between. However, there are always adverse consequences for the salesperson when the buyer discovers that he purchased a lemon.

Obama never served America's interests abroad, though he may argue that he suffered as a consequence of them. Obama never served in any branch of our civil service or military prior to an activist political career. Because of this, one of the most notable problems vintage America has with Obama is that there is nothing particularly honorable or sacrificial about the man in their mind. What grand, selfless statement has Obama made in his life demonstrating appreciation for the privileges and opportunities blessed upon him since he was covertly deposited in America? None. This is a tremendous detraction in the value of Obama in the minds of mainstream America.

For many, this, alone, puts Obama in the lemon category. Barack Obama possesses little more than education, which he was afforded by the provision of a welcoming society; a society vastly completed and sealed by far worthier path makers of American pioneering; paths of opportunity established long before Obama’s manifestation to take advantage of them. His obvious capacity for verbal delivery might serve him politically if he were, say, the reputable son of Ronald Reagan, or Abraham Lincoln, to help validate his words.

Instead, Obama speaks as the socially illegitimate reproductive consequence of a dead-beat African descendent and an indiscretionate teenaged mother conceived in the only socially unmonitored geographic location in the country where such a thing could have been committed without unwanted attention. Obama has chosen to address these circumstances in ways which do not endorse assurance in him from those rooted in traditional family.

Because of Obama’s covert nature, his ambiguously defined origins, his unaccounted travel records, and his inconspicuous approach to obtaining his current notoriety, the best the liberal establishment can do, with the complicity of a biased, liberal media, is barely shoehorn in a “change agent” so that we are too distracted to resolve a mystery about an apparent phantom than we are allowed to be confident the tangible information about a real man. Obama is not a real value, he’s just evidence of the possibility of an actual person.

Mainstream vintage American’s have been misdirected with just enough truth to prevent a decent society from taking to the streets like rampaging Iranians, or liberal G-20 Summit protesters, burning the place to the ground. When asked, most Americans say the prominent characteristic defining Barack Obama is his “otherness”; an enigmatic consistency of murky intention bathed in the lavishness of cult-like influence and coercive charm. His inflated presentation simply hides a concealed inadequacy found wandering throughout memories of a tortured past as a rejected, fatherless, biracial boy in 1960’s America. Therefore, without further consideration for any good we might believe he can bring to America, we are forced, instead, to ask the essential question about Barack Obama. Instead of being confident in the higher purposes of his effectiveness, we are unfairly forced to deal with stupid questions about his identity.

Have we been afforded the opportunity to know as much information as possible that would allow us to feel secure about Obama’s identity? For most Americans the answer is no. For the pathologic, it is ‘yes’, but not because they know Barack Obama as much as they harbor visceral hate for the previous President. Obama’s purpose as president is deeply rooted and subject to the impact George W. Bush had on liberal psychology. Obama has had to commit all of his personal resources taking cues from Bush conservatives by reacting in opposition to every action taken by the previous administration. Thankfully, this has had a dampening effect on Obama’s radical, liberal rampage against the independence of the American people and against the sovereignty of the U.S. Constitution.

A leader who attempts to rule while maintaining a covert identity is nothing more than a fugitive trying to not be exposed for what he really is; A usurper, a poseur, and an imposter…or, more simply, a “lemon”.


In January, 2009, Barack Obama addressed the subject of transparency and openness in his administration. In a briefing, he directly addressed the issue of personal information while jabbing at the policies of his predecessor:

“The way to make government responsible is to hold it accountable. And, the way to make government accountable is to make it transparent, so that the American people can know exactly what decisions are being made, how they are being made, and whether their interests are being well served.The directives I am giving my administration today on how to interpret the Freedom of Information Act will do just that. For a long time now there has been too much secrecy in this city. The old rules said that if there was a defensible argument for not disclosing something to the American people, then it should not be disclosed. That era is now over."

"Starting today, every agency and department should know that this administration stands on the side, not of those who seek to withhold information, but those who seek to make it known. To be sure, issues like personal privacy and national security must be treated with the care they demand. But, the mere fact that you have the legal power to keep something secret does not mean you should always use it. The Freedom of Information Act is, perhaps, the most powerful instrument we have for making our government honest and transparent, and of holding it accountable. And, I expect members of my administration not simply to live up to the letter, but also the spirit, of this law."

"I will also hold myself, as President, to a new standard of openness. Going forward, anytime the American people want to know something that I, or a former president, want to withhold, we will have to consult with the Attorney General, and the White House counsel, whose business it is to ensure compliance with the rule of law. Information will not be withheld just because I say so. It will be withheld because a separate authority believes my request is well grounded in the constitution.Let me say it as simply as I can. Transparency and the rule of law will be the touch stones of this presidency.”13

The words used by Obama mean nothing. His message reveals his intention to conceal as much of his own identity as possible, with contrived legal protections, under the proverbial guise of national security, while guarding his anonymity against the damage the truth will have on his agenda for power. This speech is a perfect example of how rogue leaders throughout history have risen to power, without opposition. In the statement, Obama takes a strong position against his politically unpopular predecessor by using the terms “…The old rules..”, saying that he is not going to be like the evil, mean Bush. This wins the support of clueless drones of his party. Then he leaves a way out of his own obligation by saying “…..issues like personal privacy and national security must be treated with the care they demand….”

We can only guess, indicated by the hundreds of thousands of dollars he has spent fighting lawsuits as of 2009, why Obama seeks so desperately to prevent his records from being released. It’s safe to say his records are secure in his mind under both facades of personal privacy and national security…as long as his lawyers remain on his payroll.

Obama understands the message he is sending. It is not about transparency. It is about upholding the standards of law created by liberal government policy. He is allowing the message to go forth by disseminating words that are intentionally diametric to his message. This is the quintessential nature of a lawyer turned politician, turned President. This is also the nature of a verbally adept liar. This is the reason the American people do not trust Obama. He has no intention of upholding the lavished ideals he conveyed. Transparency is a meaningless word to Barack Obama. But, as a lawyer, he is perpetually prepared to deny the truth of the message while defending the meaning of the words in it. He accomplished nothing with this demonstration. His message was exactly the same as George W. Bush’s only ideologically opposite and referential to subject matter in the street’s other side’s gutter. He would proclaim a noble message of his desire to be honest and open, but in the end, everything we want to know will remain a legally protected matter of personal privacy or national security which he has no intention of providing honorably.

In an August 4, 2009 debate on CNN’s Lou Dobbs Tonight, communications expert, Heidi Sinclair said, “Obama is everywhere…..And, I love it. It is that sense that he is everywhere and it’s reassuring at a time when most Americans want a president that is available. We are used to a president that is not so available…”

Unfortunately, Ms. Sinclair has sold out to the same dishonesty most Obama apologists have embraced. They don’t care about the character or identity of the man serving as President, they only care about the splendor of the myths about him. Obama is a fairy tale for liberal children. At least we knew who George Bush was. We knew Bush’s mother and father. Most of the people who voted for Obama didn’t even know his mother had passed away 15 years ago. Some didn’t even know her heritage. We had confidence in our respective understanding of Bush’s fallibility and his verbal challenges regardless if he was loved or hated. The lie about Obama’s legitimacy is a result of his phantasmal existence, not his tangible identity or performance. The most talented people seem have the darkest secrets. Obama has manipulated the masses with his mythology and has even gone so far as to forge a stratagem toward acceptance by circumventing not only the literality, but the spirit of the law.

Obama may not have the support of the advanced citizenry in America, but he seems to have the support of the rest of the planet. He has not only been able to ride his biracial heritage as the mantle piece of America’s domestic obsession, but his international political support as well. So much so, that many forget that he is merely the president of just one of the 286 nations in the world, and of that nation, merely of just over 50 percent of its population.

Given his international aspirations, we should not forget the fact that Obama was elected to the most powerful position in the world by less than 1% of the planet’s entire inhabitants. 99.03% of the earth’s population did not vote for Barack Obama. This somewhat changes one’s perspective on Obama’s confirmation when he stands in front of the White House and proclaims, “I won.” Relatively speaking, what does he think he has won that wasn’t already requisitioned by those before him?

Many regard Obama as a world-class figure. Much of the world has swallowed every morsel of his celebrity. How does popularity and celebrity solve problems facing security and welfare of the actual place he was elected to lead? What about America? Thankfully, the sovereignty established in the previous 250 years, before Obama arrived, may have set a protective barrier. More importantly, we can take some solace in the fact that the most essential decisions made, and actions taken against the international hordes occurred in the previous ten generations.

A Rasmussen Poll on July 29, 2009 revealed that 49% of people think that America’s best days are behind it.26 This reveals an increase in declining faith in America’s future and a sense that only the remnants of past strengths might serve us better than any attempt to remake our future.The degenerates of a fawning left lust to hold conservatives in contempt, but the fact remains that national security and the fight against global terrorism remains in the charge of America’s political right.

The entire world understands that liberals, and the democrat party, are soft on national security. This is confirmed every election cycle by the blue and red map of our nation indicating the glaring reality of America’s ideological migration. Few liberals grasp the concept that without national security, and those willing to fight, bleed and die for it, socioeconomic issues are pointless. It does no good to spend money feeding, housing and educating impoverished people...if they are dead. Then again, if terrorists only murdered poor people, the left would have no purpose. This is why liberals will never have the privilege of being seen as the strong ones on national security because they simply do not value human life enough to convince anyone that they are actually interested in stopping the murder of it.

The only non-political, professional title affording Obama with any remote credibility to hold political office is his work as a community organizer. In electing Barack Obama, the liberal establishment committed the equivalent act of promoting a janitor to the position of a corporation’s CEO. Worse, the preeminent effect of their obsessive shortsightedness is that they discounted the integrity of the Office of the Presidency. Obama revealed just enough personal information to get him elected by just enough people to achieve a minimal point of leverage to remain functionally obscure. His goal has always been to affect his brand of change without having to reveal his real agenda. Furthermore, if we go a step deeper, we see that he was able to manipulate enough resources and people needed to activate this radical agenda without completely exposing who he truly is. His insidious intention is to undermine American essence while avoiding the American consciousness. He is working to overwhelm vintage America with a blitz of government expansion while keeping them blind to the gradual change.

America must now realize that Obama, and the modern liberal establishment, are committed to the forcible, legalized confiscation of power and monetary control. They have embarked on a quest to create the most expensive, most expansive, most intrusive governmental control in the history of the U.S., at a cost to the people of America, and the free world, of more money, labor and innovation than we can possibly pay for in several generations to come.

Obama’s strategy for the fundamental transformation of America involves overwhelming our financial system and causing us to owe more money to foreign interests than we are worth. Liberals like Obama seek to exploit our national debt as a justification for the rest of the world to implement a plan of reconciliation which essentially enslaves the sovereign people of America in financial indebtedness to other nations. This is a major step in the liberal stratagem meant to force our society to willingly submit to a global-wide economic order which will eventually offer to “absorb” our debt as compensation for our submission to its enslavement. It is only through the declaration of our sovereignty and self-determined worth, which is innate to our mere existence that we will be able destroy those with such lust for evil oppression. When vintage America begins to realize its actual worth to the rest of the world, what it has sacrificed, what it has donated, what it represents, we will be free to obliterate the liberal propensity for global collectivism and justify the destruction of our enslavers.

Where is the compensation of uncountable worth owed to us for the sacrifice of brave lives fighting to free oppressed people of the world throughout history? When will the world pay us back for the trillions we have donated to disaster recovery the world over? How many hungry people have we fed throughout history? How many children have we saved who suffered under the oppression of corrupt foreign regimes? In the grand scheme of global accounting, the rest of the world owes us far more than we owe it. The inconvenient truth liberals hate to admit is that the lives of billions abroad are forfeit to the people of the United States. They owe us everything they have been able to achieve since we saved them. But, liberals fear this truth because it undermines their global fantasy for a one world order.

Simply remaining silent about socialist government intrusion, or levying accusations of racism against anyone with the courage to challenge the communist views of rogue leaders, the America liberal apparatus has enabled Obama’s government to create a one-way edict of collectivism that works to restrict, and punitively oppress any point of view that disagrees with them. It is a lie! The truth is that virtues which promote personal accountability and independence from government are particularly egregious to the Obama Administration. Such promotions of individualism act against Obama by persuading people to remove power from government and its insidious desire to maintain control over the lives of citizens by transitioning impoverished people from a need for municipal subsidy to a reliance on individual abilities to provide for their own livelihood.

Most people who serve in modern government are unqualified for their position. They are failures in private sector endeavors and lack the capability to prosper in a competitive, free market. This is a logical conclusion because it makes sense that the best and brightest of a society would pursue more lucrative opportunity with their individual strengths rather than seek to implement taxation on the prosperity of others, like liberal politicians do.

A liberal government resists individualism and personal advancement because these characteristics remove that government’s ability to justify the year to year increase of taxation for funding public assistance and social welfare programs, thus eliminating the government’s control over how, when and on what to spend the money we provide through our productivity and ingenuity. Instead, the greatest society is one which has no need for municipal services. In such an environment, the people employ the best and the brightest to meet community challenges and provide for the underprivileged through charity. In a society of self reliance, we simply cannot justify the taxation of an increasing quantity of productive members of society to fund programs for a decreasing number of poor people. Therefore, liberals are left only with exploiting race, obscuring truth, smearing character and punitive activism as contingency methods to deceive and gain power over free people.

Wake up! Obama is here now. Nevertheless, we know very little about this man. His personal datum remains concealed like some mysterious secretive oracle unfit for mortal eyes. Still, to date, no documents or accredited testimony have been provided for public consumption regarding Obama’s biographical identity, education, native born status or status of immigration after residing in Muslim Indonesia and traveling abroad to most of the destinations where a large number of America’s security problems now originate in the Middle East. As such, he renders himself as the embodiment of deception cloaked in a message of false transparency. His opaque identity reveals little about his true intention while he builds the most aggressive liberal agenda in the history of America one redundant brick at a time. Combining these truths with his migrant past to bad places, it makes one shutter to imagine what ideological virus he might bring to America once he has us walled in.

America believes that Obama is not here to help them. They believe he is here to hurt them and take from them. They believe that he is here as a rogue imposter intent upon redistributing the value of their lives by removing their worth according to his distorted liberal ideal.Obama is not helping calm fear. His lack of transparency is making it worse. He fails to bring comfort to vintage America and uphold their need for a reason to confide in him. Regardless of the mindless caterwauling from the liberal bastions, the fact remains that Obama has not provided the American people with access to the information they want to know about the man assigned to represent them into the future. Moreover, he remains obstinate, dishonest, and unwilling to demonstrate the values of the office held by someone warranting such respect and jurisdiction.


In late March, 2010, Obama signed what many Americans believe will eventually be a 4 Trillion dollar Health Care reform bill into law. The passage of this bill was unprecedented in American history for several reasons.

First, the democrat party, having a supermajority in the senate (60-vote filibuster-proof majority) beginning in January 2009, which would have allowed the democrats to pass the bill while preventing opposition from the GOP, was not able to get the bill as it was originally written off the ground. There is only one explanation for this failure. The bill was so flawed and originated from such a corrupt and perverted ideology, the internal strife it created between congressional democrats prevented passage by the more conscientious members of the majority. The bill was so poorly constructed in such a haphazard, partisan manner, even the supermajority democrats were afraid to sign off on it even though the GOP could do nothing to stop it.

Upon filing a federal lawsuit against the Obama administration over the passage of the unconstitutional bill, Florida Attorney General, Bill McCollum stated on April 2, 2010:

“We believe that all the states joining us in the 12th district of Florida, the 12 other states besides Florida, that it is unconstitutional for the federal government to mandate, or require somebody, to buy health insurance. The Federal Government does not have an “elastic” commerce clause, there are enumerated powers in the Constitution, and the Federal government has no right to require a private citizen to buy a product or service just because they are living and existing. There are a number of Supreme Court cases which have ruled this.

In additional to that, there is no right for the federal government to take the resources of the states to manipulate them and control them in the way that this bill would with respect to the Medicaid program and the other (health care) service resources in Florida and the other states.The cost to my state alone is going to be literally billions of dollars which our tax payers cannot afford and cannot assume in order to fulfill the requirements set forth by the federal government in this bill, things that the federal government should be doing itself. There are federal court cases and precedence which says the federal government may not invade the sovereignty of the state to do that. Therefore, given standing, we believe the Supreme Court will rule this bill as unconstitutional.

Every attorney general understands the impact this bill will have on their state and the problem it presents for the individual right of choice. This is unprecedented for the federal government to engage this sweeping attack not only on the rights of the individual to be free from the federal government forcing them to buy a product or service. Under this precedence, the federal government could then require citizens to buy a car or buy a membership in a club. It is also unprecedented to have not only this size of an unfunded mandate, but to conscript state’s resources and putting them to use for the federal government’s purposes and manipulating the states the federal government’s end. It simply violates the constitutional protections of the sovereignty of the states.”

Vintage Americans know that every policy coming from the Obama White House, and the liberal Congress, is intended for one purpose; To increase the burden of government entitlement spending on them and to gain more leverage over the independent consciousness of the American spirit. This is no more evident than in the intense resistance to Obama’s radical plan for health care reform.

Anyone who thinks Obama’s health care/insurance reform agenda has anything to do with improving the delivery of health care services in America is a fool. The intent of this legislation is to expand the control of government over the personal lives of independently free Source: Congressional Budget Office, “Long-Term Budget Outlook. June, 2009; Figures 1-1 and 2-1. Extended Baseline Scenerio. Retrieved from

Americans and attempt to gain greater control over the redistribution of their financial resources throughout the world. Obamacare is driven by the implementation of economic justice in favor of certain demographics, it is not intended to make America more healthy or increase the quality of life for those who earn it. By obligating the transaction of money for the purpose of health care insurance, and then taxing those transactions, Obama is effectively forcing free people to act in accordance with the perverted standards of liberal morality which proclaims that access to healthcare is a right and that the private, effective relationship between a patient and a doctor is an arrangement which should be controlled under federal jurisdiction, not an earned privilege.

The destructive consequences of this deranged legislation will be a massive decline in the quality and frequency of access to real medical professionals who are willing and motivated to be good doctors. Obama’s narrow-minded ideology to bring economic justice to poor minorities by taking money from rich people is only going to remove the incentive doctors have for creating and maintaining personal, effective doctor-patient relationships, which is the essence of real health care quality. Obama actually believes that doctors will work for less and be willing to provide the quality of care for a poor minority when they can make a better living treating affluent white people. Again, Obama’s intellectual failure is in a misguided belief that affluence is attributable to the possession of money, rather than possession of ability, decency, charity, faith and, most importantly, effective relationships.

Obama seeks to make his health care reform agenda the “crown jewel” of his presidency. In fact, it will prove to be the largest redistribution of wealth in human history. Over the next decade, the nation will undergo an unprecedented demographic change as the baby boom generation retires. Without preparation, the geriatrics of America, and vast increase in the cost of medical care to support it, will cause federal entitlement spending to explode. According to a December 15, 2009 report by The Heritage Foundation, the Congressional Budget Office currently projects:

“…federal spending on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid alone will increase from 11.2 percent of GDP in 2010 to 17.1 percent in 2030. That jump in spending--5.9 percent of GDP over two decades--is larger than the current size of the Social Security program and will be added to the nation's budgetary obligations without any additional funding to pay for it.”

Forshadowing the consequence of government intrusion on health care, a Hitler biographer wrote the following:

“…At once, free men will not take within them the mark of the beast as the result of a single intrusive, discernable moment. They will, upon that horrible day, find themselves without freedom to resist the imposition of it because of the choices they made for generations, prior to that day, to allow the methodical, incremental destruction of their independent right to take action against evil, and thereby, amidst hunger and fear, they will suddenly realize they have lost their moral and legal justification for not committing destructive acts against themselves and their own bodies…”

Remember to ask the essential questions:

If Obama’s secret natal documentation proves he is a natural born citizen, why is he hiding it?

When a leader imposes radical changes upon a society without being forthright about his identity, what impact does this lack of transparency have on the psychology of the masses when they are forced to bear destructive consequences wrought from whom they are abandoned to conclude is an anonymous “enemy”?

When a President preaches about the importance of transparency to others, should he be held to his convictions when he refuses to disclose even the most basic biographical information about his own identity?

No comments:

Post a Comment