Is Barack Obama eligible to be President?

There is a great video on Youtube of a man questioning whether or not Barack Obama even meets the criteria to be President of the United States. More specifically, he questions Obama's citizenship status and is actually suing Obama to produce a valid birth certificate. Barack Obama has some serious questions to answer that thus far have been swept under the rug or completely ignored by the mainstream media. The first is his association with Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Father Michael Pflegler, and Louis Farrakhan. You can't tell me that Barack Obama sat in the pews at Trinity Church for 20+ years and never knew the hate filled, racist, America hating rants that were coming from his pastor and "father figure". The second is William Ayers. It has been proven by hundreds of sources that Barack Obama's political career began with a fundraiser in the living room of terrorist William Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dorhn. Why has his relationship with a man who set bombs in the US Capitol, the Pentagon and several police stations never questioned by the mainstream media? How can an unrepentant terrorist be good friends with a man running for President and that relationship never be questioned? The third is Rashid Khalidi. Rashad Khalidi is a whack job professor at Columbia University in New York who has connections with the PLO (a terrorist organization according to the State Dept) and a man who preaches violence against Jews. The LA Times currently has a tape of Barack Obama at a function with Khalidi where he toasts Khalidi and his good work. The LA Times will never release this tape however because it would hurt the chances of "The Messiah" of getting elected. Fourth, it has recently come to light that SAUDI Prince Al-laweed Bin Talal paid for Obama's Harvard tuition and got him appointed to the Harvard Law Review. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWH9P57qg3k. There is so much about Barack Obama and his past that the American people simply don't know and will never know since the media is in his pocket. Still, most Americans know a little bit about these relationships and are still going to vote for him. Why? Because they hate George Bush so much? I always hear far left nuts talking about George Bush and his ties to big companies and how he is part of the so called NWO. I've got news for those people, maybe they should take a little closer look at the man they are supporting before they make such accusations about our current President. I have a feeling Obama has many more skeletons than GWB could ever dream of. If one bases their vote on their disdain for the current President then it says a lot more about their character than anything else. All of these revelations beg the question "Who is Barack Obama?" If you don't know the full answer maybe you shouldn't vote for the man to be President.

Obama and the irony of liberalism

Barack Obama has tried tirelessly to tie John McCain to George W Bush. For the non-thinking liberals Bush and McCain are basically the same person. Barack Obama blames the Bush administration for the economic mess that we are in now despite the fact that the mortgage crisis and subsequent market crash were a direct result of the failed, liberal policy of extending credit to those who can't afford it. Liberals in this country put up a front as if they are the guardians of compassion in America. They say that it's not fair that some individuals can't get a mortgage because they don't make enough money or even if they have defaulted on previous loans. Is it fair that hardworking, taxpaying Americans have to foot the bill for this failed policy? Is it fair that millions of hardworking Americans nearing retirement will now have depleted 401(k)'s because the Democrats in Congress handed out money to those who didn't deserve it? Barack Obama says he will create jobs. How will jobs be created if virtually every company in America will have higher operating costs as a result of an increase in taxes? Doesn't he understand that when a company's cost of doing business goes up that the higher cost is passed onto the consumer? Barack Obama said he will tax the wealthy and send checks to the poor. Is it fair that Joe the Plumber could potentially buy his company through hard work and dedication and then be penalized for his own success? How did we get to the point where Joe the Plumber could build a business and then the government says "Sorry Joe, you are making too much money, there are people on welfare who are going to get several hundreds of thousands of your dollars"? The Democrats are described as the party that champions women's rights. Yet the NY Times runs article after article slamming Sarah Palin for everything from her choice in clothing to her decision to run for public office. Can you imagine the uproar if a conservative newspaper questioned Hillary Clinton's choice to run for office, saying that she should be at home with her children instead? That newspaper would be labeled as sexist and supporting 19th century gender roles. But since the NY Times is a liberal publication and Sarah Palin doesn't agree with their views on the world then she is open to criticism and outrageous accusations that Democrats would never be subjected to. The thing about liberals is they act as if they uphold and defend the Constitution, especially when it comes to free speech, as long as you agree with them.
What will the world be like with President Obama? Can you imagine the Pelosi, Reed, Obama trifecta? The Fairness Doctrine will be passed immediately which demands that liberals get equal time on airwaves to counter conservative critics. The Dems have had many radio personalities over the years and even their own network (which eventually went bankrupt) in Air America, however, the American public just doesn't want to hear the far left ranting about how much they hate America. When will the Dems realize that fact.
If Obama wins this election, it is not due to his own greatness but rather to the poor job by the McCain campaign coupled with the low approval rating for the Bush administration. I guarantee that there will be a deep sense of buyers remorse in a year or two if Obama does succeed in winning the White House. He promises change but he supports the very policies that have gotten us into this mess in the first place. Barack Obama is the most liberal Senator in Congress and if he is elected, unfortunately we will see the hypocrisy first hand.

Voter Fraud

Why does the same thing happen every October in an election year? There is currently a situation in Ohio where ACORN and other far left organizations are attempting to register hundreds of thousands of dead, fraudulent and fictitious individuals to vote. Anyone who has ever been pulled over by the police, bought cigarettes, cashed a check, bought a beer, flew on an airplane, opened a credit card account, applied for membership at Blockbuster, used a debit card, applied for a job, applied to college, applied for foodstamps, applied for housing assistance, went to the social services office, or applied for a loan at a bank has had to produce a drivers license or some sort of photo ID that shows that they are who they say they are. Why should it be any different for voting? If you are over 18, not a felon and are a legal US citizen you should have the right to vote and you should have the right to vote one time. The Democrats say that requiring identification at polling stations would be a form of discrimination. They say that people are required to show ID for those other things I mentioned because it is either prudent when lending money or serving beer to minors or a matter of national security. Excuse me but I think it is most definitely a matter of national security when voting for the man who will become, arguably, the most powerful man on the planet. Maybe I would understand this thinking if it were before WWII when there were farmers who lived so far from anything resembling a city that they just learned how to drive out of necessity and didn't bother a license or maybe around the time of the Civil War when only the wealthy or those in the military could afford a photograph or any form of identification. However, we live in the 21st century. A century where we have executives speaking with each other through teleconferencing on 3 different continents. A century where we can live in New York, have a business meeting in San Francisco at 9am and still be home in time for dinner. A century where CEO's can go to bed at night and while they are sleeping have presentations created in India and faxed to them so they will be on their desk when they get to work the next morning. Why, in this day and age can we not make voters provide identification when voting. It is our civic duty to do 2 things. Number one to vote for those who will represent and lead us. Number two, require that those elections are held in a fair and ethical manner.

The Economy

The United States' economy, and the world's for that matter, is in shambles right now. Both Republicans and Democrats are pointing the finger at each other and there is plenty of blame to go around. The root of this problem is the housing crisis. Homeowners are defaulting on mortgages, that they couldn't afford in the first place, leaving banks left without the cashflow that they so desperately depend on. A couple of decades ago, anyone who wished to purchase a home could do so. All they needed was to have about 15-20% to put down in order to get the bank to lend them money. In 1977 the Community Reinvestment Act was passed by the Democratic controlled Congress. This act required banks to expand their mortgages into areas where the economic fundamentals indicated borrowers would not be likely to make mortgage payments. The the Democratic Party started to complain that lower income families weren't able to purchase homes and that this was unfair and began to relax the rules required for individuals to get a mortgage. Shortly afterward, the banks decided that they weren't going to be left out in the cold and they wanted a piece of this trillion dollar pie; finally resulting in the mess we are in today. HELLO!! Don't loan money to people who can't pay it back. This isn't rocket science people. This is the liberal elite attempting to right all the wrongs in the world and it just might lead to one of the largest economic crisis' in US history. Above is a letter signed by John McCain in 2006 pleading for regulatory reform legislation for Fannie and Freddie so the American taxpayer wouldn't bare the brunt of the impending economic collapse. This is right around the same time that Barney Frank stated that Fannie and Freddie were doing "just fine". Barack Obama and the Democrats have been trying to tie John McCain to the economic policies of George Bush for the last month or so and according to the polls it is an effective strategy. It is a lie, but it is effective. In fact, not a single Democrat signed the above letter. John McCain again broke party lines in order to save the American taxpayer from economic collapse but of course this would never be reported by the mainstream media. Furthermore, in 2004 Democrats in Congress tried again to increase home ownership through further easing of mortgage requirements. Anytime the government interferes with the free market, it is almost always a very bad idea. Free markets are the basis of our economy. Changing lending rules got us into this mess and unfortunately it will be you and I who will have to dig ourselves out.

Sarah Palin

Over the last few weeks I have been hearing a common theme among undecided voters. They have been saying "I would've voted for John McCain had he not gone with Sarah Palin as his running mate." Why? What is it about Governor Palin that turns people off? Honestly I knew absolutely nothing about Sarah Palin before she was chosen by McCain, however, the things that I've learned about her over the past few months have actually endeared her to me not turned me off to her. Before running for Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin saw corruption within her own party and took matters into her own hands. She got onto the ticket, took on the incumbent Republican Governor and won the election. This is in stark contrast to Barack Obama who is embroiled in a scandal involving voter registration fraud with ACORN. Sarah Palin originally got into politics because she was concerned that a tax increase in her hometown of Wasilla was going to be improperly disbursed. Sarah Palin, throughout her career, has put her morals and the good of the people ahead of her political ambitions. Barack Obama wasn't even able to answer the abortion question at the Saddleback forum asked by Pastor Rick Warren, stating "That's above my pay grade," because he was afraid to offend ANYONE. Your morals are your morals, your values are your values and anyone running for office should have the guts to stand up to corruption and dishonesty, party affiliation be damned. Sarah Palin trumps Barack Obama in the integrity department, when will the voters finally realize this fact?