Main Menu

Birther blogger tries to seal records

Blog radio host and vocal critic of President Obama’s citizenship documentation Sharon Ann Meroni (aka Chalice Jackson) filed a motion with the court in McHenry County Illinois to impound the court records of her recent petition (reported here last December) asking the court to intervene and require the McHenry County Grand Jury to hear her complaint of election fraud, claiming that disclosure of the records may subject her to harassment and eminent harm.

The court, citing Nixon v. Warner Communications and other cases, said that there was a common law presumption of public access judicial records. My take on it is that the court told Meroni that she’s responsible for her own actions, including suffering the displeasure and criticism of others.

MERONI v McHENRY COUNTY GRAND JURY (09mr399) – Memorandum Opinion and Order – 27471545 in the Circuit Court… by Jack Ryan

42 Responses to Birther blogger tries to seal records

  1. avatar
    myson March 1, 2010 at 3:10 am #

    Good, The birthers call Obama the nastiest they can think of but want to hide on the internet even wen they go to crt, no way osay !!!

  2. avatar
    Kathryn N March 2, 2010 at 6:34 pm #

    Well,let’s see. A wacky birther loon, who accuses President Obama of “sealing” every single document connected with his entire life, is now going to court to “seal” documents that are a matter of public record everywhere in the country.
    That makes perfect sense.

  3. avatar
    Black Lion March 3, 2010 at 12:54 pm #

    Interesting article…

    “Still, the issue succeeded in shaking up the GOP primary in Arizona. The “Identity” video sparked a war of words between Hayworth’s and McCain’s press shops, with the former accusing the latter of desperation. But there’s a reason for the “birther” resurgence: a bill in the Arizona state legislature, co-sponsored by most Republicans, that would demand “documents that prove” that any future presidential candidate “is a natural born citizen.” The existence of that measure lengthened the news cycle for McCain’s attack, with Hayworth saying he’d support a version of that kind of legislation and McCain taking a pass, his spokesman Brian Rogers telling TWI that the senator “generally doesn’t tell the state what to do.” Hayworth’s campaign called that a dodge.

    Stringer was bearish on the chances of his legislation — he doubted it would pass in 2010, though he plans to introduce it again in 2011. The “birther” movement itself has been just as persistent. At last month’s Conservative Political Action Conference, two leading “birther” attorneys drew a mixed response from attendees and a negative response from politicians. Phil Berg, the Pennsylvania attorney who filed the first suit against Obama in 2008, handed out advertisements, occasionally finding sympathy. But Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli pulled out of a panel because Gary Kreep, a California attorney who has represented Alan Keyes in a “birther” lawsuit, would be on the podium.

    After chatting with Berg, Ken Timmerman, a reporter and former editor of Reader’s Digest, told TWI that the media’s blackout on the conspiracy theory had affected him, too. He’d had articles about the subject spiked. Conservatives, he said, were worried about tackling it.

    “What they do is use the Saul Alinsky response,” said Timmerman, “just to ridicule us. ‘Well, it’s the birthers again, the crackpots.’ I think that’s what a lot of the hesitation is about. They don’t want to allow the left to dismiss a legitimate movement because of something like this.” Timmerman understood the thinking of conservative leaders, and understood why liberals thought it was a target for mockery. He just thought they were both going to proven wrong.”

  4. avatar
    SvenMagnussen March 3, 2010 at 1:04 pm #

    Breaking News:
    Oh For Goodness Sake Blog

    Chalice Jackson of Patriot’s Heart Network, who is quickly becoming the Orly Taitz of Illinois, ran a taped interview with Birther lawyer Gray Kreep on her radio show Monday night, March 1.

    She “can’t wait to look into Judge Lamberth’s eyes” when she and Kreep’s US Justice Foundation join up to bring yet another Quo Warranto to the District Court in DC.


    Chalice says big news will be announced Wednesday (today).

  5. avatar
    Scientist March 3, 2010 at 7:21 pm #

    Alinsky and Vattel, the 2 birther bugaboos. I challenge all birthers to demonstrate the following:

    1. That you had heard of either one before 2008.
    2. That you have read either one (one or two sentence extracts on birther web sites don’t count, I’m talking a complete book or large portions thereof).

  6. avatar
    SFJeff March 3, 2010 at 8:07 pm #

    I think I would pick the “Alinsky” response over the Karl Rove method.

  7. avatar
    BatGuano March 4, 2010 at 9:51 am #

    birthers to demonstrate the following:

    3. that your family tree forks.

  8. avatar
    misha March 4, 2010 at 11:34 am #

    “your family tree forks”

    It does not fork for any conservative. See Limbaugh, or Beck.

  9. avatar
    SvenMagnussen March 4, 2010 at 12:27 pm #

    Thursday, Mar 4, 2010 @10:38am CST

    (Ozark, MO) — A judge has ordered the Christian County, Missouri Assessor be removed from office, for failing to report her own personal property for assessment.

    The State of Missouri filed the paperwork to remove Sandra Bryant-Littles from office, after an investigation determined she failed to report her own personal property for 2007 and 2008. Little’s husband, Lonnie Littles, also did not report to the county about property he owns, investigators claim, and that Bryant-Littles knew that.

    Because elected officials can not be impeached in Missouri, the Missouri Attorney General’s office filed to have Bryant-Littles removed from office, using a process called a “quo warranto”.

    Full Article

  10. avatar
    Scientist March 4, 2010 at 12:39 pm #

    Because elected officials can not be impeached in Missouri, the Missouri Attorney General’s office filed to have Bryant-Littles removed from office, using a process called a “quo warranto”.

    But, the President can be impeached. You lose again.

  11. avatar
    BatGuano March 4, 2010 at 12:39 pm #

    Because elected officials can not be impeached in Missouri, the Missouri Attorney General’s office filed to have Bryant-Littles removed from office, using a process called a “quo warranto”

    honestly, correct me if i’m wrong, but wasn’t that one of the points that only an attorney general can file for quo warranto ( be it state or federal level ) ???

    dunno. either way i predict another sven smack-down about to hit.

  12. avatar
    SvenMagnussen March 4, 2010 at 2:08 pm #

    honestly, correct me if i’m wrong, but wasn’t that one of the points that only an attorney general can file for quo warranto ( be it state or federal level ) ???dunno. either way i predict another sven smack-down about to hit.

    USDC DC Chief Judge Lamberth has made it clear he will accept the presentments from the SAGJ, but it is up to the AG to prosecute. Orly has made it clear her request to the AG and the US Attorney of DC have ignored her written demand for quo warranto.

    What is Lamberth waiting for? Smack it! Stomp it! Kick it to the curb!

    And why is Kreep suddenly interested in filing Quo Warranto in DC? Doesn’t he realize this issue is dead?

  13. avatar
    Black Lion March 4, 2010 at 2:30 pm #

    This came over from another site…I guess out buddies are not happy with being marginalized…So to become semi-relevant they have decided to do the following…

    “Happy Birthday American Grand Jury. We are officially 1 year old in March. It is amazing how time flies.

    Now I have some important news to share with you. We are going to take our organization in a direction we have never been before. We have an event planned that will open many eyes in an attempt to wake-up the Judiciary. Nothing irritates a Judge more that a group of people showing up at a courtroom questioning their integrity and authority. Serving our Grand Jury Presentments have always made the courts mad. With what I have in mind it should really burn the bark right off a few of these liberal Judges.

    Here is the plan. We are going to sponsor a road trip in May to personally serve 10 Federal District Judges in 10 different States. The project is also designed to take advantage of the Columbia Trial, the Philip Berg “birth certificate” event and the Tea Party movement. This will be a business trip and leadership get-together for American Grand Jury. I will personally lead the group. We would start in Texas and end up in South Carolina (maybe further depending on finances). You can see by the map below which States we would visit. Each State we go through will have a Federal District Court located in a major city. As we drive through these cities we will make a stop and personally process-serve each court. The idea is to make a spectacle out of ourselves as 50 to 60 American Grand Jury members file out of a bus and descend upon the Clerk of the Court’s office to hand-deliver the Grand Jury Presentments. We will verbally inform the court we are here to formally serve Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi for criminal fraud and treason.

    Half-way through the trip we will stop for a few days to take part in the Columbia Treason Trial being sponsored by Dr. James Manning in New York. The idea of a bus full of American Grand Jury members arriving at this important event makes a credible statement. As we head south from New York we intend to stop at the Law offices of Philip Berg to hand-deliver to him copies of our birth certificates. As you all know Philip Berg has planned a march on Washington DC later in the year to demand that Obama step down as President. We would also have Philip Berg personally go with us to serve the Federal District Court in Philadelphia. As we continue south on our trip we would make a very important stop in Washington DC to visit our old friend Judge Royce Lamberth. That should be exciting. I am sure he would be overjoyed to see us coming. I should also mention that we would like to get as many Tea Party groups involved in our excursion as possible. As we make a stop each night to eat and rest we should attempt to visit and speak at local Tea Party gatherings.”

  14. avatar
    Scientist March 4, 2010 at 2:36 pm #

    Sven, you fool, it’s not up to the judge or the AG or the US Attorney. The statute (and likely the Constitution as well) bars Quo Warranto against a sitting President. You and Orly and Kreep and Leo can write all the letters you want, but the law is the law.

    As for why Kreep is interested, he, like the other birther “attorneys” has a nose for ridiculous losing cases. They are the New Jersey Nets of the legal profession (actually they make the Nets look like the Chicago Bulls in the days of Michael Jordan0.

  15. avatar
    SvenMagnussen March 4, 2010 at 2:54 pm #

    But, the President can be impeached.You lose again.

    Bryant-Littles couldn’t be impeached for alleged acts committed while in office. Consequently, a quo warranto proceding was initiated.

    A President cannot be impeached for acts prior to taking the oath of office. An impeachment is parallel to an indictment in criminal law. The Senate cannot try a Federal officer for alleged acts prior to being sworn in.

  16. avatar
    Scientist March 4, 2010 at 3:23 pm #

    “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

    There is nothing (beyond good sense and political conseiderations) limiting the impeachment powers of Congress. Many felt that impeaching Clinton for his actions in a civil lawsuit unrelated to his official duties was inappropriate. That didn’t stop it from happening and had a few Senators changed their vote, he would have been removed for precisely that.

    By the way, the title of that section of the Constitution (Article II, Section 4) is “Disqualification”. When there is a clear road, you shouldn’t try to cut through the forest-you might get eaten by wolves. Why are you guys afraid to follow proper procedures? I maintain that it is because if you did and lost, as you would, even you would be out of excuses.

  17. avatar
    SvenMagnussen March 4, 2010 at 3:42 pm #

    By the way, the title of that section of the Constitution (Article II, Section 4) is “Disqualification”.

    You seem determined to convince the public you’re right. If only Congress can remove a sitting President, then why doesn’t Judge Lamberth end this so with a sua sponte order?

    Judge Carter wrote, “The writ of quo warranto must be brought within the District of Columbia because President Obama holds office within that district.”

    Why didn’t Judge Carter merely state the writ of quo warranto cannot be used against the President of the United States?

  18. avatar
    Scientist March 4, 2010 at 3:43 pm #

    Sven-Let’s see if you can focus your “mind’ on this one simple question-Instead of following all of these exotic and useless legal “strategeries” and getting shot down at every turn, why didn’t you guys recryit an actual candidate and file a ballot challenge prior to the election? You’d have lost, but then you could have gone home and saved yourself a whole lot of disappointment.

  19. avatar
    Scientist March 4, 2010 at 3:49 pm #

    Why didn’t Judge Carter merely state the writ of quo warranto cannot be used against the President of the United States?

    If there are 10 valid grounds to dismiss a case, a judge doesn’t necessarily have to go into all 10 of them, since 1 suffices. Plus maybe he thought sending Orly on a wild goose chase would be deserved punishment for her bad behavior and might be entertaining. Judges are human too.

  20. avatar
    SFJeff March 4, 2010 at 3:51 pm #

    “You seem determined to convince the public you’re right.”

    The public is already convinced that President Obama is our President, and that impeachment is the only way to remove a sitting President. Didn’t you get the memo?

  21. avatar
    SFJeff March 4, 2010 at 3:52 pm #

    “Why didn’t Judge Carter merely state the writ of quo warranto cannot be used against the President of the United States?”

    I am just guessing, but then again so are you, so I think my guess is fair- I would guess that Judge Carter didn’t think it was his responsibility to decide on what quo warranto could be used against, once he decided that he didn’t have jurisdiction.

  22. avatar
    Scientist March 4, 2010 at 4:01 pm #

    Sven, let me put things in simple terms that even you can understand. You ask a woman out. She has many very good reasons not to want to go. Among these are:

    -You’re a moron
    -You live in your parents’ basement
    -You smell bad
    -You don’t have a driver’s license
    -You’re a birther

    Instead of running down the list, she just tells you that she has to do her laundry. The judges who are ignoring these silly birther “cases” are just trying to spare your feelings.

    Got it now?

  23. avatar
    Bovril March 4, 2010 at 4:10 pm #

    Err, how are they goimn to “personally serve” these amazing works of fiction? Storm in to a running case, run up to the bench and go “AHA, you’re served SUCKA”…..?

    And which judge? there could be 20 different ones. are they going to pick one out of a hat or play birther “spin the bottle” to select one?

    And they seem to want to serve the court, do they yell USURPER at the building itself then leave satisfied. I assume they won’t use any electronic case filing system….too like;y the Obots (or Venezuela) have gotten to it.

    Considering some of the jurisdictions they want to play Birther Ding Dong Ditch…they’ll be lucky not to be shot…….>8-)

  24. avatar
    Rickey March 4, 2010 at 6:13 pm #

    SvenMagnussen says:

    USDC DC Chief Judge Lamberth has made it clear he will accept the presentments from the SAGJ, but it is up to the AG to prosecute.

    Don’t you get tired of being wrong all the time?

    That’s not what Judge Lamberth said. He said that the SAGJ can FILE its presentments if the fee is paid. But he never said that he would then ACCEPT the presentments. In fact, he said just the opposite – if the presentments are filed, he will dismiss them because the SAGJ has no standing.

  25. avatar
    SFJeff March 4, 2010 at 6:20 pm #

    You know that has the makings of a really fun road trip.

  26. avatar
    Rickey March 4, 2010 at 6:24 pm #

    SvenMagnussen says:

    Why didn’t Judge Carter merely state the writ of quo warranto cannot be used against the President of the United States?

    Because the defendants didn’t raise that issue. The defendants decided that the easiest way to have Orly’s quo warranto claim dismissed was the attack it on jurisdictional grounds, since the law is clear that a quo warranto action against a Federal official has to be filed in D.C.

    It’s really that simple. If you know that you are going to win on jurisidiction, there is no point in bringing up additional arguments.

  27. avatar
    nbc March 4, 2010 at 9:41 pm #

    USDC DC Chief Judge Lamberth has made it clear he will accept the presentments from the SAGJ, but it is up to the AG to prosecute.

    That is definitely not what Lamberth said.

    Fantasy and ignorance, a lethal combination my friend

  28. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 4, 2010 at 10:24 pm #

    I think Carter picked the simplest to apply.

  29. avatar
    Black Lion March 5, 2010 at 11:43 am #

    Interesting video from the Rachel Maddow show regarding the birthers….

  30. avatar
    Black Lion March 5, 2010 at 11:49 am #

    Good article from Bob Cesca regarding the teabaggers and their motives regarding the so called movement…

    I was going to open this piece with an analogy about the tea party groups and why they’re treated seriously by the press and the Republicans. The analogy would go something like: “Imagine [insert left-wing activist group here] getting a serious profile in a mainstream newspaper, and imagine serious Democratic politicians appearing at their convention.”

    The problem is, when I really evaluated what the various far-left activist groups are all about and compared them with the tea party movement, there really wasn’t any equivalency. At all.

    Because when you strip away all of the rage, all of the nonsensical loud noises and all of the contradictions, all that’s left is race. The tea party is almost entirely about race, and there’s no comparative group on the left that’s similarly motivated by bigotry, ignorance and racial hatred.

    I hasten to note that I’m talking about real racism, insofar as it’s impossible for the majority race — the 70 percent white majority — to be on the receiving end of racism. That is unless white males, for example, are suddenly an oppressed racial demographic. But judging by the racial composition of, say, the Senate or AM talk radio or the cast members playing the Obamas on SNL, I don’t think white people have anything to worry about.

    This isn’t an epiphany by any stretch. From the beginning, with their witch doctor imagery, watermelon agitprop and Curious George effigies, the wingnut right has been dying to blurt out, as Lee Atwater famously said, “nigger, nigger, nigger!”

    But they can’t.

    Strike that. Correction. founder Dale Robertson brandished a sign with the (misspelled) word “niggar.” So they’re not even as restrained as the generally unstrung Atwater anymore.

    Most of the time, they merely imply the use of the word. Rush Limbaugh referring to the president as a “black man-child,” for example. Every week, a new example pops up on the radio and somehow the offenders are able to keep their job while Howard Stern is fined for saying the comparatively innocuous word “blumpkin.” Limbaugh, on the other hand, can stoke racial animosity on his show by suggesting that health care reform is a civil rights bill — reparations — and no one seems to mind. And no, the impotence isn’t an adequate Karmic punishment for Limbaugh’s roster of trespasses.

    The tea party is an extension of talk radio. It’s an extension of Fox News Channel. It’s an extension of the southern faction of the Republican Party — the faction that gave us the Southern Strategy, the Willie Horton ad, the White Hands ad and the racially divisive politics of Lee Atwater and Karl Rove. It’s an extension of the race-baiting and, often, the outright racism evident in all of those conservative spheres.

    But unlike the heavy-handedness of Dale Robertson and others, the tea party followers are generally more veiled about why they’re so outraged by our current president.

    In the New York Times this past weekend, David Barstow profiled a teabagger from Idaho:

    SANDPOINT, Idaho — Pam Stout has not always lived in fear of her government. She remembers her years working in federal housing programs, watching government lift struggling families with job training and education. She beams at the memory of helping a Vietnamese woman get into junior college.

    But all that was before the Great Recession and the bank bailouts, before Barack Obama took the White House by promising sweeping change on multiple fronts, before her son lost his job and his house. Mrs. Stout said she awoke to see Washington as a threat, a place where crisis is manipulated — even manufactured — by both parties to grab power.

    Now you might be saying to yourself, I don’t see the racism here. But if you eliminate all of the reasons for Stout’s participation in the tea party movement as being contradictory or nonsensical, all that’s left is race.

    Let’s deconstruct.

    She claims to be against the bank bailouts, but the tea party is against the president’s bank fee designed to recover the TARP money. They also appear to be against financial regulatory reform. None of this makes any sense. If tea partiers are against the bailouts, basic logic dictates that they ought to be in favor of getting the money back. Or do they prefer that the banks keep the money and orchestrate further meltdowns? Honestly, I’m not even entirely sure they realize that the bailouts and the recovery act (stimulus) are two different things. But they’re also against the recovery act — you know, whatever that is.

    She also told the New York Times that she’s tired of politicians “manufacturing crisis.”

    Right. Three things here.

    First, where was she — where were the teabaggers — when the far-right endorsed and supported a massive increase in the size of government, unitary executive power grabs and unconstitutional measures fueled by fear-mongering over the very remote threat of terrorism? Crickets chirping. The odds of being killed in an airborne terrorist attack are literally 1 in 10 million. You’re much more likely to kill yourself than to be killed by a terrorist.

    Second, I refuse to believe that health care is a “manufactured crisis.” People are going broke and dying every day. Even the most conservative estimates show that there are 9/11-level casualties each month due to a lack of adequate health insurance. The horror stories are readily available online. Just Google “health insurance horror story” and see how manufactured the crisis is.

    Third, look at any bar graph of the economy as of one year ago or any basic jobs number and tell me if the crisis is manufactured. Hell, Pam Stout’s son lost his house! How can she possibly suggest the economic crisis was manufactured?

    I hate to single out one person, but Stout’s incongruous anger is indicative of the entire movement.

    From the outset, the tea party was based on a contradictory premise (the original tea party was a protest against a corporate tax cut). And when you throw out all of the nonsense and contradictions, there’s nothing left except race. There’s no other way to explain why these people were silent and compliant for so long, and only decided to collectively freak out when this “foreign” and “exotic” president came along and, right out of the chute, passed the largest middle class tax cut in American history — something they would otherwise support, for goodness sake, it was $288 billion in tax cuts! — we’re left to deduce no other motive but the ugly one that lurks just beneath the pale flesh, the tri-corner hats and the dangly tea bag ornamentation.

    Irrespective of whether the president passed a huge tax cut or went out of his way to bring Republicans into the health care process, the seeds of racial animosity from the far-right were sown during the campaign. In those lines waiting for then-vice presidential candidate and current tea party heroine Sarah Palin, their loud noises spread the pre-scripted lies, lies that entirely hinged on the president’s African heritage. A white candidate would never be accused of being a secret Muslim. A white candidate would never be accused of being a foreign usurper. Only a black candidate with a foreign name would be accused of “palling around with domestic terrorists.”

    In the final analysis, when you boil away all of the weirdness, it becomes clear that the teabaggers are pissed because there isn’t yet another doddering old white guy in the White House — like they’re used to. That’s what this is all about.

    By way of a postscript, one of the many faceless radio talk show wingnuts, Jim Quinn, this week called President Obama a “Kenyan wuss” who should be “slapped silly.” The Kenyan lie and the “slap silly” insult aside, this president is no wuss. You know how I know? He’s a black man who ran for president and won despite the growing mob of gun-toting militant white bigots like Jim Quinn who are sucking air in America. President Obama achieving this despite the hatred and threats against him takes serious guts. Guts that Jim Quinn and the tea party movement will never understand.

  31. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 5, 2010 at 1:16 pm #

    While informative, I don’t buy the central argument: the tea party is contradictory in its views therefore it must be about race. Since when are people immune to irrational propaganda?

    They might as well have said if you strip away all the irrational and contradictory rhetoric all you have left is: a) race, b) a general angst, c) fear, d) hatred of anything labeled “liberal,” e) pineapple f) nothing — it’s all irrational and contradictory rhetoric.

  32. avatar
    Dave March 5, 2010 at 1:32 pm #

    To clarify a bit, what Judge Lamberth said is that the presentments could be filed as a civil complaint. This is because anything written on a piece of paper can be filed as a civil complaint.

    If you like, you can take one of your blog comments and file it as a civil complaint (if you feel inclined to pay the fee), and then you can go around telling everyone that your opinions have been accepted by a Federal judge.

  33. avatar
    Black Lion March 5, 2010 at 2:44 pm #

    Agreed. I think the author makes a huge leap in logic to come up with his conclusion. I do feel that some of it does have to do with race, but some people are also upset with the government in general, and some are attracted to the extreme views of the tea party leaders. I think the tipping point for the tea partiers will be in national elections. Will they be enough to change the direction of a national race? And will the GOP candidates that embrace them be affected in the polls. And where they are not embraced by the GOP and possibly run their own candidate, will that also affect elections? It will be interesting to see.

  34. avatar
    Black Lion March 5, 2010 at 4:29 pm #

    Another person that remembers the President at Columbia…I wonder how long our friend Dr. Manning’s trial is going to last? His so called investigation has got to be the worst joke ever…The birthers don’t need any help making themselves look stupid…

    A Columbia Classmate Remembers Obama

    Thank you for refuting the crazed claims that Barack was not at Columbia [“Obama at Columbia University,” Feb. 16].

    I knew him while he was there. He was remarkable then, but not in the way that most people think of as “remarkable.” He was not trying to be noticed — he was studious and thoughtful. I said of him: “Whatever Barack decides to do for a career, he will be the best at it.” When he left our group he was often on his way to a library.

    We played soccer on the lawn in front of Butler — I was usually the only woman playing and he treated me as equally as the others: if I was open, he sent the ball into the space in front of me, if I wasn’t open — he never made the silly passes that some men did to try to act like they were being egalitarian. The “into the space” passing was consistent — he was a superior strategist — and many of us had been college or semi-pro players. We always wanted him on our team.

    After games we had discussions — and we found that the same thoughtfulness of play was evident in his thinking about policy and social issues. He was a serious guy, but always had a ready laugh or twinkle in his eye.

    I was doing my Ph.D. — I assumed he was a fellow grad student. When I saw him on television at the Democratic Convention I was only surprised that I knew him, but entirely not surprised at his achievement.

    The people who are making these claims, Fox et al, do not understand Columbia. I recently told a father of a current student that he should visit the campus on a warm Friday night to see the school environment that is uniquely CU — it is the same as when I studied there: hundreds of us sitting on the library steps doing school work on laptops.

    Cathie M. Currie, Ph.D.
    New York, N.Y.

  35. avatar
    thisoldhippie March 5, 2010 at 5:02 pm #

    They are also absolutely terrified of the words “progressive,” “liberal,” and “socialized,” without any understanding of any of them.

  36. avatar
    Greg March 5, 2010 at 5:22 pm #

    No wonder this hasn’t come out before! Obama played soccer? With women? And he treated them like equals on the field? Proof positive that he’s a communist!

  37. avatar
    misha March 5, 2010 at 11:45 pm #

    Sarah Palin is a communist!!

    Sarah Palin: “And Alaska-we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs…It’s to maximize benefits for Alaskans, not an individual company, not some multinational somewhere, but for Alaskans.”

  38. avatar
    misha March 6, 2010 at 2:02 am #

    Hey conservatives: Obama is a deep intellect, and we are fortunate to have him. Read this and weep.

  39. avatar
    Black Lion March 6, 2010 at 6:09 pm #

    That must be the reason that Manning is holding his so called “trial”…Can you imagine Obama treating people equally…What a radical concept…

  40. avatar
    SwampMop March 6, 2010 at 7:03 pm #

    BHO Opposition to Strunk’s Motion to Intervene with Strunk’s reply Interpleader Verified Cross Complaint

    Strunk wants the Kenyan BC entered into the Court record.

  41. avatar
    Ima Obot March 6, 2010 at 7:08 pm #

    BHO Opposition to Strunk’s Motion to Intervene with Strunk’s reply Interpleader Verified Cross Complaint Strunk wants the Kenyan BC entered into the Court record.

    10 percent of $1.9 Trillion is … ahhh … 3 carry the one … ahhhh … $190 Billion to Strunk for exposing the usurper.

  42. avatar
    Gretta Kurter May 25, 2010 at 1:42 am #

    Oh Gerard, such a guy