"Professor Gates then shows his id to show that this is his house".
Here is a photo of a Harvard I.D. Card that I was able to find online.
As you can see, it is a student's id, not a professors. However, I have been unable to find any source claiming that a Professors I.D. would have his address, so I assume it is in a similar format. That having been said, President Obama was probably unaware of the fact that it was his Harvard I.D. that was presented. That having been said, notice how Obama lies when questioned about his initial statement? He claims that he answered in that manner because he was asked if it "made sense to escalate to the levels that it did" when in fact he was asked "what the incident [said] about racism in America". The result was President Obama going off half-cocked about an incident he knew nothing about. In the video, we see President Obama reverting to his Community Organizer days. Yet here are the facts of the case, as shown from the police report.
For roughly the last seven years, Barack Obama and other members of the liberal left have asked "Where are the WMD"? The claim, of course, is that President Bush lead us into the Iraq war on a false claim. They say he fabricated the evidence to get us to follow his personal will for war with Iraq. The claims vary from settling a score over a failed Iraqi attempt to assassinate his father to the good old war for oil claims. It should be noted that Barack Obama was the only democrat candidate who had not supported the war, and he used this fact as a large part of a campaign to lead him to the Presidency. Now, he wishes to initiate health care reform. Republicans and Moderate Democrats need to learn a lesson from this little piece of history.
President Obama is using lies and distortions to push us down the road to Socialism, and the American people flat out don't want it. FactCheck.Org has reviewed the President's Prime Time News Conference and checked many of the claims he has made. Starting with his claim that the overhaul "will be paid for", they site the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
More access and broader coverage do not save money, however. Greater coverage will increase health spending. Unless major changes are successfully implemented in health care delivery and payment systems, costs will continue to rise from a larger base at a rapid pace. Moreover, potential savings are speculative, while costs are far more certain. That imbalance suggests that unless there is broad popular support for the measures that will be required to achieve savings, the nation’s health care bill could become that much more unaffordable.
This is a basic human understanding. When President Obama sites how we spend x out of y dollars on health care costs as a reason for the Federal Government to take over the system, understand what he is saying. Let's run with his number that 47 million Americans are without access to health care, and we are currently spending one out of every five dollars on health care. Understand that by adding in those 47 million people, the latter number doesn't go up. Those individuals who don't have health care are already figured into the GDP. Hence, it is insanity to claim that you can raise the number of people who have access to a system without raising the overall income of the people accessing the system and give the same quality health care without the cost per person going up.
Example. If your family has four people, and your current budget for food is $150 a week, then that is what it costs you to feed a family of four. If you have another child, you will then have to raise the amount you spend on food every week or you will have to reduce either the amount of food consumed by each person or the quality of the food offered. So when the 47 million uninsured are added into the system with the 253 million insured, the question becomes does President Obama intend to cut the amount of services available to you, or does he intend to spread the same amount of service that is currently available across a broader group? The third option is to raise the amount of money we spend in proportion with the number of people that we add to the system, but Obama has already declared that to be not an option.
Here are a few quick updates on some stories I have been following.
Birth Certificate News
Two updates here. First, WND is reporting that Army Major Stefan Frederick Cook has been fired from his job after winning his case against his deployment orders based on his claim that President Obama is not a natural born citizen and hence is not legally authorized to serve.
According to the CEO of Simtech Inc., a private company located in Tampa, Fla., and contracted by the Defense Security Services, an agency of the Department of Defense, the federal government has compelled the termination of Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook.
Cook's attorney, Orly Taitz, wrote in her blog that Simtech CEO Larry Grice said he would try to find another position within the company for Cook, but nothing is currently available.
The Department of Defense does contracting in the general field of information technology/systems integration, at which Cook, a senior systems engineer and architect, was employed until taking a military leave of absence on July 10 in preparation for his deployment to Afghanistan.
"Grice told plaintiff, in essence, that the situation had become 'nutty and crazy,' and that plaintiff would no longer be able to work at his old position," Taitz wrote.
Grice made clear that it was Defense Security Services that had compelled Simtech to fire Cook, Taitz wrote.
On the same front, Modern Ghana news has changed their article (pictured below) that declared President Obama's trip to Africa to be a return to the Continent of his birth. The updated article now reads that it is the Continent "of his father's birth". In addition, they highlighted this edit in the new article. A little pressure perhaps?
President Obama has been going around attempting to sell his healthcare plan that is facing bipartisan opposition. In a conference call with some bloggers today, President Obama showed that even he doesn't know what is in the bill.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSg1oFLfa4Y
While the claim that this Bill would make private insurance illegal is false, the truth of the matter was broken down by Heritage here.
In order to qualify as an “Exchange-participating health benefits plan,” all health insurance plans must confirm to a slew of new regulations, including community rating and guaranteed issue. These will all drive up the cost of health insurance. Furthermore, all these new regs would not apply just to individual insurance plans, but to all insurance plans. So the House bill will also drive up the cost of your existing employer coverage. Until, of course, it becomes too expensive and they just dump you into the government plan.
So IBD is wrong: individual health insurance will not be outlawed. But it will be effectively regulated out of existence… which is effectively the same thing.
Now I don't want to call the guy a liar, so perhaps he has his eye on a future Mrs. Obama that he met in class? In all seriousness, that's not quite how it happened.
Obama seemed to be playing off an introduction that referred to him meeting his future wife, Michelle Robinson, while he was a student. But the truth is that the couple met not “in class” but at a law firm in Chicago, Sidley Austin, in 1989. Obama was a summer associate (essentially a legal intern) there and Robinson was an attorney completing her first year at the firm. Both attended Harvard Law School, but Michelle graduated in the spring of 1988, while Barack Obama did not arrive at the Cambridge, Mass., campus until that fall.
It was unclear what prompted Obama’s confusion or lapse of memory, though he does have the excuse of jet lag. It was about 4 a.m. in Washington as he spoke.
In addition to forgetting where he met his wife, President Obama also forgot his youngest daughters age. He furthermore repeatedly referred to Prime Minister Putin as President, and mispronounced the real President's name (Medvedev) several times.
While Obama gaffes are certainly nothing new, and I believe his average has to be over one a week, he is certainly setting a high bar lately. While trying to establish his longstanding status as a White Sox fan by referring to either the old ballpark or the old name for the new one, Obama had another moment. He called the park "Cominsky Field". It was in fact called "Comisky Park" (old) since the original stadium was built in 1910 until it (new) was renamed U.S. Cellular Field (affectionately called "The Cell" by Sox fans) in 2003.You can see the video of this gaffe here.
As hard as it may be to believe, things got worse for the President at the All Star Game. For those who are a bit amused at how Obama's gaffes seem to be more frequent and egregious than his predecessors, this comparison is perhaps the best yet.
See video #'s 2 and 3.
Let's avoid the question of the pitch hitting the dirt. Notice, Albert was on top of home plate, and he had to lunge forward and put the glove in the dirt to pick it out. And what is with that camera angle? Were they afraid of the straight on shot? So while the media claims the fans were booing the White Sox jacket, and Pujols claims it was a "great pitch", one of the more interesting quotes I saw was from a random Obama supporter who took it all in stride and declared "Mr. President, don't quit your day job". Looking at the economy, I would like to add "On second thought..."
I have some friends and family who supported President Trump from early on in the process. From time to time they will ask me when I will admit that I was wrong about him. "If Trump does x... If Trump gets y... If Trump supports a policy that results in z... will you admit that you were wrong?" My answer is always "no", because I wasn't wrong. To be clear, I could be wrong in practical application, but that isn't what an election is about. Elections are about theory and speculation and, generally speaking about judging records. Trump had no record to speak of, and his history of stances on issues was all over the map. I opposed his candidacy for several major reasons, all of which are proven valid in this single issue we now refer to as the "travel ban". Here were my reasons.
If you're not familiar with Justice with Judge Jeanine, it is a show on the FOX News Network starring Jeanine Pirro. She is known for her over-the-top rants where she serves up gobs of fresh red meat for her largely hard right wing audience. While it's not unusual for her to be a little fast and loose with the facts, she has been known to occasionally return from the break with a correction from her producers. Last night, however, there was no such correction to an outright lie she told on the show, and the matter being discussed should have (at the very least) contained a disclaimer from the host. I would cut her some slack, but as a former prosecutor and judge, she should be well aware of what proper protocol should have been here.
It's not cute anymore, Republicans. The President of the United States is completely detached from reality, and you can't fix that. You can't cover it up, you can't explain it away, and let me make this as clear as I possibly can for you. You cannot possibly undo the damage you are doing to the party brand by trying to pretend this man is anything other than completely unhinged. I'm watching Sean Hannity borrow guests from the Alex Jones show in an attempt to bolster Trump's conspiratorial claims. I'm seeing relatively mainstream conservatives make themselves look like the crazed fringes of the paranoid right wing. Don't believe me? Look at this.
