So I am listening to Rush and he is recounting the ‘Birther’ story and how it was started by Hillary’s 2008 Presidential campaign. After all these years of listening to Limbaug tell us how many secrets the Clintons know and how they use them to coerce their political allies and opponents into doing their will, why does Limbaugh dismiss the ‘Birther’ issue? It would seem to me that, if there were any truth to these allegations, the Clinton’s would not only know it, they would be among those most likely to use that information for their own political gain. What’s more, the majority of the ‘Birther’ theory — as Rush calls it — has been confirmed. Furthermore, Obama’s actions have affirmed many of the accusations. We now know that Obama did spend time in an Islamic Madrassa, which would have required him to have renounced his US citizenship. It would also mean that Obama was raised as a Muslim and to believe in Islam. We know Obama has huge holes in his past. There is good evidence to believe he has more than one passport and Social Security number. There are still good reasons to question his birth certificate. And the idea that a person with dual citizenship can be considered “Natural Born” would seem to contradict with the spirit of this requirement in the Constitution. Now, if you are the Clintons and you know all of this and you think this Manchurian Candidate is about to steal something away from you that you believe to be owed to you, what are the chances you would use this information to end the imposter’s career?
I know this post will discredit me with many, but I also know that there is no rational reason to discount this subject — other than the fact that those who ‘discount’ it have ‘disproven’ it simply by dismissing and shouting it down. But for those who are governed by reason and not emotion, the fact remains: the ‘Birther’ issue was started by people who would be in position to know if it was true, and the issue has never been resolved in a way that even comes close to satisfying the basic tenants of journalistic or legal due process. This means the issue — founded or not — cannot be rationally said to be irrelevant or false — because we honestly cannot say we know the truth of this issue, one way or the other.
Personally, however, I am less interested in whether or not the ‘Birther’ claims are real than I am in the way so many people on both sides of the issue have attacked it. Now THAT is a genuine curiosity to me, as the implications would tend to support the Clinotn’s allegations — as well as my argument that we have one Party pretending to be two 😉
4 thoughts on “Why Does Rush Doubt The Clinton’s?”
Reblogged this on BLOGGING BAD ~ What Folks Are Saying/Thinking!…Gunny G….
For starters I would recommend reading “The Communist” by Paul Kengor, “The Post American Presidency” by Pamela Geller, “The Manchurian President” by Aaron Klein, “The Roots of Obama’s Rage” by Dinesh D’Souza and one of many by Jerome R. Corsi, “Where’s the Birth Certificate?”
After reading these books (and many more), I have extremely strong convictions about what you
have stated to be my opinion also.
Discussing Black Hussein Obama with Liberal, Progressive democrats is NOT the way one becomes
informed or knowledgeable about this “president!” I think we will have a major revelation of Obama
when Hillary is defeated in her quest for “Queen!”
I mentioned in an earlier post that many of my doubts about Black (his skin color matters more to him
than the “Content of his Character”) Hussein Obama became evident after reading Obama’s first
book “Dreams From My Father.”
Have already read several of those books. Hence my skepticism toward the ‘Party Line’ about his being what we’re told he is.
Besides, one need only watch what he is doing to know he is not what we are told he is.
Your skepticism toward the “Party Line” about his being what we’re told he is?
Everything he is doing is an abomination to America!
This president is unethical, dishonest, solipsistic and a liar!
What am I missing?