Just passing on my comments I left at this post at Ace of Spades HQ with regards to the Barack Obama “birth certificate” controversy. I couldn’t even get through the first few paragraphs of Gabriel’s post before I started getting annoyed and bored, but I got the gist of his rant. Personally, I found this post at The American Thinker to be much better thought-out and in a much better tone of respect.
Also, another great article by Andrew McCarthy on this issue at NRO: Suborned in the U.S.A. — The birth-certificate controversy is about Obama’s honesty, not where he was born.
Throughout the 2008 campaign, Barack Hussein Obama claimed it was a “smear” to refer to him as “Barack Hussein Obama.” The candidate had initially rhapsodized over how his middle name, the name of the prophet Mohammed’s grandson, would signal a new beginning in American relations with the Muslim world. But when the nomination fight intensified, Obama decided that Islamic heritage was a net negative. So, with a media reliably uncurious about political biographies outside metropolitan Wasilla, Obama did what Obama always does: He airbrushed his personal history on the fly.
Suddenly, it was “just making stuff up,” as Obama put it, for questioners “to say that, you know, maybe he’s got Muslim connections.” “The only connection I’ve had to Islam,” the candidate insisted, “is that my grandfather on my father’s side came from [Kenya]. But I’ve never practiced Islam.” Forget about “Hussein”; the mere mention of Obama’s middle initial — “H” — riled the famously thin-skinned senator. Supporters charged that “shadowy attackers” were “lying about Barack’s religion, claiming he is a Muslim.” The Obamedia division at USA Today, in a report subtly titled “Obama’s grandma slams ‘untruths,’” went so far as to claim that Obama’s Kenyan grandmother is a Christian — even though a year earlier, when Obama’s “flaunt Muslim ties” script was still operative, the New York Times had described the same woman, 85-year-old Sara Hussein Obama, as a “lifelong Muslim” who proclaimed, “I am a strong believer of the Islamic faith.”
Such was the ardor of Obama’s denials that jaws dropped when, once safely elected, he reversed course (again) and embraced his Islamic heritage. “The president himself experienced Islam on three continents,” an administration spokesman announced. “You know, growing up in Indonesia, having a Muslim father . . .” The “Muslim father” theme was an interesting touch: During the campaign, when the question of Barack Hussein Obama Sr.’s Islamic faith reared its head, the candidate curtly denied it with an air of what’s-that-got-to-do-with-me? finality: “My father was basically agnostic, as far as I can tell, and I didn’t know him.” And, it turns out, the spokesman’s fleeting bit about “growing up in Indonesia” wasn’t the half of it: Obama had actually been raised as a Muslim in Indonesia — or, at least that’s what his parents told his schools (more on that in due course).
These twists and turns in the Obama narrative rush to mind when we consider National Review’s leap into the Obama-birth-certificate fray with Tuesday’s editorial, “Born in the U.S.A.”
The editorial desire to put to rest the “Obama was born in Kenya” canard is justifiable. The overwhelming evidence is that Obama was born an American citizen on Aug. 4, 1961, which almost certainly makes him constitutionally eligible to hold his office. I say “almost certainly” because Obama, as we shall see, presents complex dual-citizenship issues. For now, let’s just stick with what’s indisputable: He was also born a Kenyan citizen. In theory, that could raise a question about whether he qualifies as a “natural born” American — an uncharted constitutional concept.
[ … ]
WHEN DID INFORMATION SUDDENLY BECOME A BAD THING?
While it is all well and good to belittle the birth-certificate controversy, without it we’d know only what the media and Obama himself would tell us about his multiple citizenships, which is nothing. As noted above, we now know Obama, by operation of British and Kenyan law, was a citizen of Kenya (a status that lapsed in 1982, when he turned 21). That’s something voters would find relevant, especially when Obama’s shocking 2006 conduct in Kenya is considered. But we don’t know about his Kenyan citizenship because the media thought it was newsworthy. We know it only because of the birth-certificate controversy: Pressed to debunk the allegation that Obama was born in Kenya, his embarrassed supporters felt compelled to clarify his Kenyan citizenship.
By contrast, the question whether Obama ever was an Indonesian citizen is still unresolved, as are such related matters as whether the foreign citizenship (if he had it) ever lapsed, and whether he ever held or used an Indonesian passport — for example, during a mysterious trip to Pakistan he took in 1981, after Zia’s coup, when advisories warned Americans against traveling there. By the way, many details about that journey, too, remain unknown. Obama strangely neglected to mention it in his 850 pages of autobiography, even though the 20-year-old’s adventure included a stay at the home of prominent Pakistani politicians.
There may be perfectly benign answers to all of this. But the real question is: Why don’t the media — the watchdog legions who trekked to Sarah Palin’s Alaska hometown to scour for every kernel of gossip, and who were so desperate for Bush dirt that they ran with palpably forged military records — want to dig into Obama’s background?
Read the whole thing. Mr. McCarthy, as usual, makes some great factual points, something people who are too focused on partisan politics seem to be all too willing to not do.
But, anyway, here are my thoughts on this issue:
My gosh, Gabe, why didn’t you just post a link to this post at American Thinker and be done with it.
“The media has cast Birtherism as a conservative phenomenon — and it is fast spreading among conservative activists — but it was originally a Democrat obsession. The most prominent Birther, Philip J. Berg, is a Democrat who backed Hillary Clinton in the 2008 primary. Other rumors, such as the infamous and non-existent Michelle Obama “‘whitey’ tape,” were also weapons in the Democrats’ internal struggle.
In the same vein, left-wing pundits claim the Birther thesis reveals latent racism in the Republican Party. But it was the Democrats, not the Republicans, who made race an issue in the 2008 campaign. From the Obama campaign’s charges that Hillary Clinton was the Senator from Punjab, to the Clinton campaign’s leaking of a photo of Obama in Somali garb, right up through Bill Clinton’s “fairy tale” comment and the whole Jeremiah Wright affair, it was the left that remained obsessed with race and identity politics.
The Birther theory is likewise an artifact of left-wing squabbles. Conservatives who are tempted by the Birther theory should ask themselves why the mainstream media is now so interested in the story when they were so reluctant to give any attention to the allegations during the 2008 campaign (when, if true, they might have made a difference).
It’s not because there is any fresh evidence to support the Birther thesis, but because the Birther thesis has again become politically useful to the left.”
Posted by: Michael in MI at July 30, 2009 12:10 PM
However, misguided they may seem they are not a “Republican” or “Conservative” distraction unless the RNC officially starts to own this issue by pounding it in the press.
Exactly. As The American Thinker notes, this whole issue was started by Hillary Clinton and her supporters.
Posted by: Michael in MI at July 30, 2009 12:12 PM
“Exactly. As The American Thinker notes, this whole issue was started by Hillary Clinton and her supporters.”
Posted by: Michael in MI at July 30, 2009 12:12 PM
Also, this goes against the claim that this issue will hurt the GOP. Because when Hillary finally started getting dirty with Obama and exposing his radical past, she started winning Primaries and caucuses. The only reason this claim “hurts” the GOP/Right is the same reason everything else hurts them: because the mass media is a Democrat propaganda machine. And even when the Right points out that Obama is an idiot because he basically goes out there and says “2+2=5”, the mass media spins for him and claims that anyone out there saying “2+2=4 and Obama is an idiot” is just a conspiracy wacko.
That said, a valid reason for asking people to drop this issue is “we need to pick our battles”. One could rightly say that this is not a battle we can win and there are others we can win. But to just say that this “makes us look bad” is foolish, because just being conservative and standing up for Conservative principles makes us look bad in the eyes of the Left. Just look at the Tea Party coverage by the mass media. They said those were all about racism and bigotry and radicalism.
Also, case in point, I had someone come on my Facebook page last night and call me a “Republican racist”. When I finally got her to explain why I was a racist, it was solely due to the fact that I opposed Obamacare… and because Obama was a Black Democrat. Thus, I was a racist. This is what the Left does. This is what they have been doing for years now.
I tire of this attitude on the Left that we need to stop doing things that “make us look bad”. EVERYTHING makes us look bad. Pointing out FACTS makes us look bad. So stop the whiney ass crap that we “need to stop doing things that make us look bad”. This is becoming a trend here with the “I hope he fails” and Sarah Palin’s resignation. The “oh noes! we can’t do this, because the Left doesn’t like it!” crap is not the attitude of a movement that wants to get anything accomplished.
Pick and choose battles, but do NOT not do something simply because the Left doesn’t like it.
Posted by: Michael in MI at July 30, 2009 12:28 PM
Also, just an anecdote…
I thought I had a copy of my birth certificate that my mom gave me years ago when I left home to go away to college. She had it in a security box and wanted me to have it now that I was on my own. I never really looked at it, just folded it up and put it in a secure place with the rest of my documentation.
Well, when this whole birth certificate vs CoLB issue came up, where people were saying they were not the same, I went and looked at my birth certificate.
I found out two things: (1) I didn’t have a birth certificate, I had a Certificate of Live Birth and (2) my birth mother’s name was not listed as my mother (she died 2 months after giving birth to me), my mother’s name was listed (she legally adopted me after marrying my father).
So, based on that, I suspect there is some info on the Certificate of Live Birth that is probably either not the same as on the original birth certificate or there is info on the Birth Certificate that is omitted for whatever reason on the CoLB.
My stance is that Obama is hiding something. I believe he is probably a natural born citizen, but — like my birth mother’s name probably being on my BC, but my adopted mother’s name being on my CoLB — I believe there is probably something on the BC, which is not on the CoLB that he wants to remain hidden. I would probably dismiss this entire issue as others have, except that this isn’t some isolated case of lack of transparency and hiding Obama’s background. This is a trend. College records sealed, Chicago Annenberg Challenge records attempted to be sealed and I knew about the whole Rev Wright and Billy Ayers stuff back in JAN 2007, yet blogs and mass media were not reporting it, and didn’t get around to it until Spring 2008. I had people in 2007 tell me I was a raving kook when I tried to tell them that Obama was a radical leftist and showed them the info about Rev Wright, TUCC and Billy Ayers. Now, of course, it is common knowledge.
The fact is that Obama is hiding his background, he lied throughout his entire campaign about who he is and he is lying now trying to shove through marxist legislation. As such, I don’t have a problem with the Birth Certificate issue, so long as it is a part of an overall investigation and attempt to get this a-hole’s radical background fully exposed.
The reason I feel it is important is because this is his core. Still today, even 6 months in office pushing through Marxist legislation, corrupt and radical appointments all over his Administration, czar after czar after czar, insulting our allies, helping marxists and communist enemies, etc etc etc… there are people out there who STILL can’t believe he is a radical marxist. Why? Because we have YET to establish his radical marxist background of the past 2 decades.
I really don’t know what is finally gonna get through to the morons of this country. There is so much out there. But I’m all for hitting Obama with anything and everything to make him vulnerable.
Posted by: Michael in MI at July 30, 2009 12:40 PM
The Dems played dirty for eight years and it got them both Houses and the Presidency………..
Posted by: David Jay at July 30, 2009 12:38 PM
Exactly. This is why whenever people say “this is going to hurt us, so we can’t do thaaaaat!” it pisses me the hell off. It’s why I was so pissed off with Ace and those who took his side during the “i hope he fails” discussion and his mindset that we can’t say certain things, because it will hoit the widdle feewings of the vaunted Independents and ‘moderates’. Absolute BS. The Left and Democrats went absolute batshit crazy the last 8 years and were rewarded with the White House and unstoppable majorities in BOTH Houses of Congress.
The game has changed — has been changed the last 8 years, first Bush (lies, smears, TANG memos from mass media) then General Petraeus, the Sarah Palin, then Joe the Plumber, then Carrie Prejean — and yet some people STILL refuse to adapt. I don’t know how many people on our side need to be utterly unfairly destroyed by the Left before the Right wakes the f*** up and realizes we are in a gawddamned f***ing (political) war here. Very frustrating and disheartening.
Posted by: Michael in MI at July 30, 2009 12:46 PM
My sentiments exactly:
Actually, I do like the “selected not elected” strategy. I have a fundamental disagreement with all the concern troll crap people like Malor spout “oh, attacking the president this way makes us look bad”. Bullsh!t.
The left attacked Bush in every way, fairly, unfairly, with lies, omissions, distortions and just plain made up sh!t. And it worked. It drove his numbers into the ground and made false narratives (bush lied people died) into common knowledge.
I say we attack Obama with EVERYTHING at our disposal. He’s a closet Muslim. He’s not really an American. His plan is to wreck the US economy. He hates America.
In fact, I happen (and many others agree) to believe some of this is absolutely true. Which is and which is not is irrelevant.
We’re in a political blood sport. We should be doing ANYTHING to tear the president down. In our society today, attacks DON’T rebound onto the attackers. They slime the target and cause many to think “where there’s smoke there’s fire”.
Do you really pretend the left would not do the same thing? Ever heard of the Trig Palin controversy? Where are the leftists who are decrying it? Where is the evidence it hurt the left’s cause by pushing it? You are either dishonest, or a fool, but you aren’t helping our cause.
God, I hate f*cking concern trolls. I don’t care if you are a lawyer or not, you don’t understand our political dynamic. Justified or not, likely to succeed or not, who cares. Attack Obama by ALL MEANS POSSIBLE. It works. Period.
Posted by: ms docweasel at July 30, 2009 10:29 AM
You are right on many levels. I agree that while Obama is native born, his birth certificate MAY contain some embarrassing information that he would rather keep under the radar. Some thoughts:
Republicans who get asked about this on television should laugh and say yes, it’s just as crazy as LIBERALS believing Trig Palin is not Sarah Palin’s son.
They should also point out that Obama brings a lot of this on himself because, in spite of his promises to be open and transparent, he has failed to release the following:
Punahou school records,
Occidental College records
Columbia University records,
Harvard Law School records
Harvard Law Review articles,
scholarly articles from the University of Chicago,
files from his years as an Illinois state senator,
Illinois State Bar Association records,
baptism records (if any),
and his Soetoro adoption records.
I believe that what fuels the zeal of a lot of the Birthers is the astounding lack of information that we have on the POTUS. Can you imagine the uproar the media would be having if they didn’t have this info on Bush? For heaven’s sake, we knew Bush’s SAT SCORES. And Kerry and Gore’s for that matter.
As a lawyer myself, I cannot imagine someone becoming the head of a law review – let alone the Harvard Law Review – without some trail of scholarly writings, or academic awards.
Posted by: CC at July 30, 2009 10:36 AM
Al Bundy to his wife Peggy: “It’s not the dress that makes you look fat. It’s the fat that makes you look fat.
Reality to Obama and good buddy Skippy Gates: “It’s not your race that makes us accuse you of racism, it’s your racism which makes us accuse you of racism.”
Good comment at this post at Ace of Spades HQ which explains why the American Medical Association (AMA) bended over and grabbed their ankles for Obama’s craptacular Obamacare proposal recently:
Well I actually learned something new from Fox this morning while eating breakfast. They were discussing the obvious disconnect on why the AMA is jumping on the Obamacare train and supporting the “reform”.
First, they put a past AMA president on and discussed it with him. He opposed it for various reasons, most notably the lack of tort reform. He said that the current AMA was wrong on this bill.
Then they brought on one of their “lawyer-news babes” who said the current AMA is not the AMA of the past. She said that only 20% of doctors now belong to the AMA and that they are mostly students and interns. The “gist” of this is that the AMA is no longer a doctor organization.
So bottom line; we have been saying here that the AMA was “bought off” in some way or another. What has happened is that the real doctors have dropped out, the organization has become another liberal Democrap advocacy group like the AARP and they really don’t give a sh*t about the “doctors” they are supposed to represent.
Posted by: Vic at July 26, 2009 07:50 AM
I recently went off on an angry rant on an earlier comment thread at Ace of Spades HQ about just this issue of the AMA cowtowing to Obama. This helps explain my inquiries about the AMA, however it doesn’t alleviate my anger and frustration about the issue:
“Elmendorf doesn’t seem too intimidated by The Won. He seems like his integrity means something to him. How refreshing.”
I was just having this conversation with a friend last night. Someone smarter than me needs to explain how it is that we have, what, 535 Congressmen, 100 Senators and say 100 Executive branch minions, YET, 300+ Million American citizens — including hundreds of leaders in economics, energy, business, healthcare and law enforcement, among many other things — seem to just bend over and grab the ankles with regards to government officials, who have to be among the dumbest and most ignorant people in this nation on things that really matter (namely economics and business).
Why is that?
Why is it, for instance, that the AMA comes out criticizing Obamacare for the BS that it is, then has a meeting with Obama, and BINGOBANGO they flip — against all common sense and logic — to support the same BS they called out as BS the day before?
What the F*** is wrong with these people???
We are seeing the exact *opposite* of what happened under the Bush Administration. For the previous 8 years, everyone and their mother did nothing by blame Bush for every god forsaken thing on the planet, smeared him, lied about him, lied about and smeared every single one of his policies and even attacked him personally — nevermind if any of it was justified or not. Hell, Bush could have found the cure for cancer and the press and all the BDSers would spin it as a negative.
Now, though, we have the exact opposite. Not only are people praising Obama left and right, praising his policies and spinning everything left and right as positive, but they seem downright afraid of even criticizing him at all or calling him out on any anything at all.
The a-hole could say 2+2=5 on national television, then have the National Federation of Math Geniuses call him out on his stupidity, to which he would then invite them to the White House for a meeting, after which the National Federation of Math Geniuses would hold a press conference and say that, yes, indeed, Obama was right, 2+2 does in fact = 5.
Someone explain to me what the F*** people are so gawddamned afraid of about standing up to this racist, Marxist, incompetent piece of utter crap and his Marxist minions? The a-hole and his minions do NOT hold that much power.
There are 300 f***ing million of us Americans against less than 1000 of them. Why the f*** are people, especially those in positions of influence, afraid of challenging this fraud and taking him down???
Posted by: Michael in MI at July 25, 2009 04:03 PM
This is my kind of woman right here. If I believed that most women had this kind of attitude, I would put a lot more effort into making myself a better man worthy of a woman’s companionship. But, since I don’t believe “momma” is typical of most women, I don’t bother and just keep to myself.
Nevertheless, this is still nice to read, knowing there are such women who exist nowadays:
My guy and I only have a few rules:
1. Never drive drunk. I will leave him if he does. What has taken lots of time, love, and effort is worth more than getting behind the wheel drunk.
2. Don’t lie. If it makes me look fat, tell me. If I’m pissed, he’ll know it. Neither can cheat because we can’t lie.
3. Every decision we make must be made thinking that the other is standing right behind them.
4. Never complain about the other to anybody. Ever.
5. I always get the last piece of bacon. Just sayin’.
These rules cut out the bullsh*t. No, I won’t get my nails professionally done. Yes, he can sit on the couch in his underwear if the kids are in bed.
If you were to hear my guy and I talk, you would think we are two men shootin’ the sh*t over a few beers. We rag on each other all the time. We laugh a lot.
Like the other gals here, I hate hearing women rag on their men. Are they such p*ssies that they can’t say that sh*t directly to their man? Seriously. If they feel the need to bitch about their man, why the f*ck are they still with him?
Posted by: momma at July 26, 2009 12:34 AM
A-f***ing-men to that.
Back in my pre-cynical days, I used to be that guy who would be there for girls/women when they needed someone to talk to about their relationships. Oh, I would listen to their worries and complaints and sweet-talk them and tell them it will be okay and talk them through their problems and almost always, they would come away from the conversation feeling so much better. Of course, if I had a dollar for every time I heard “*sigh* I wish my (significant other) was more like you”, I could retire. Finally, I got so sick of this BS — where the women/girls would come to me to talk about their relationship problems, feel better, then go back to their loser guys, only to get treated the same, then lather, rinse repeat — that I started taking the tact above: “If they feel the need to bitch about their man, why the f*ck are they still with them?” Well, funny thing… when I started being this bluntly honest with the girls/women, they stopped coming to me complaining and *I* became the bad guy for suggesting they dump their loser significant others. Funny, I thought females wanted honesty. Guess not…
This discussion originated from this article “5 Lies All Women Tell“.
And it’s crap like this that has caused me to become extremely cynical when it comes to women. Seriously, men get smeared as lying bastards all the time, yet women have to be some of the most shameless freaking liars on the planet.
Think about it, ask a woman what’s wrong and they will say “nothing, I’m fine”. Ask a woman to make a decision about something and she’ll pass the buck to the man, and then if the man’s decision is one which the woman does not like, she’ll bitch at him about it, even though she didn’t have the guts to come out and make the decision herself and, in fact, lied and said she was okay with the man making the decision. Ask a woman if she wants an honest man and she will say ‘yes, most definitely’, but then, of course, when she gets that honesty from a man about anything (her clothes, her hair, advice, etc), she throws a hissy fit and complains.
And then, of course, the most infamous lie that women tell — which is listed among the Top 5 in the article — is about sex. The whole ‘faking orgasms’ thing, which I have discussed previously. Women like to act all high and mighty and put down men for being morons when it comes to pleasing women — all the while proclaiming themselves perfect as they all seem to be the best in the world at giving fellatio to a man… I don’t think I have met a girl yet who has not told me that she would give me the best bj I’ve had in my life… EVAH! — yet, I’d like to know how the F*CK women expect men to learn what the F*CK to do, when all you do is LIE by faking your damn orgasms. Yeah, brilliant. Lie and make your man believe he is pleasing you, when he really is not, and then berate him later for being incompetent. Only a woman would think that was a logical way to teach men how to please them better. Geez…
Oh, and related to that, there is the ever popular berating of men as not being f***ing telepathic mind-readers. How many guys have gotten into trouble with women because their women will lie to them about how they are feeling, the men will have the audacity to take their women at their word, only later to get beat over the head as being too stupid to pick up on subtle little hints or not being able to read the woman’s mind to know she was upset?
Women have it great. They can lie to their hearts’ content and then blame men for being too stupid to see through the lies and understand the subtle hints and signs and not telepathic enough to read their minds and know how what they are thinking so as to react in the proper manner or say the proper thing.
And people constantly ask me why I stay single. Well, it’s mainly because I don’t care who the woman is, no one is worth putting up with that much bullsh*t game playing and mind-f*cking.
A hearty A-F***ing-men to that too. Another one along those lines would be “Don’t really want an honest answer, then stop asking us what we think”.
I forgot to add one of the best movie lines ever, which applies very well for this topic:
Receptionist: How do you write women so well?
Melvin Udall: I think of a man, and I take away reason and accountability.
What a great tribute. What a great song. And dammit, this made me want to cry.
The Bush years were truly the days of my so far young life. In 1999, I graduated college, moved to Michigan and started my career at Ford Motor Company. From 2001-2008, I was ages 25-32. I grew as a person, I grew as an engineer and designer at work, I was blessed to date 2 wonderful women and in 2003 I was blessed to be able to buy my first home. I look back on those days with fond memories.
Now, here I am unemployed and on the brink of losing everything I built up the past 8 years.
The past 8 years were truly The Days of My Young Life, and, as such, it truly pisses me the hell off whenever I hear people bitch and moan and whine about the Bush years as some kind of hell of which we have never experienced in the history of mankind.
God Bless you, President Bush. I miss you, sir…
I didn’t agree with all of his policies, and his lack of defending himself against attacks aggravated me beyond belief. But… never once did I ever believe that he did not love this country and never once did I ever believe he was using the Presidency for bad reasons. (I can not say that about our current President and his entire Administration) Even with his Amnesty policy, I didn’t feel he was doing that for bad reasons, I just felt he was sorely misguided and naive about the short- and long-term implications of the policy.
But he had such a respect for the office of the Presidency and handled himself with such class. He and his family. And his love, admiration and respect for our military always made me admire and respect him even more.
I just think it is a shame that he will not be given his due as a President, and a great American, until long after he has passed on.
“I couldn’t agree more with all of you, thanks for commenting on the post. Pres. Bush was not perfect, far from it, but any of his critics with a shred of intelligence know he was doing all he could for the USA, never once did I feel he would nationalize anything, or take away anything, or worse yet round me up into some camp.
No comparison with the new pres. we are being ruled by a child, with a bad agenda. Its called Reparation, and all the fools who voted for him out of guilt will suffer worse because they didn’t see it coming.”
I think what has been sorely lacking among the American populace the last 10 years or so has been “perspective”. As you said, President Bush was not perfect. But, no politician — or person for that matter — ever is, or can be expected to be so.
I didn’t follow politics at all until 9/11/2001. That woke me out of my ignorance and apathy. Since then, since I have started paying attention and informing myself on a daily basis, there have been many things which have shocked me and which have saddened me and which have angered me. But, what I have learned and where I have matured in my knowledge and understanding of politics is that things need to be put into both context and perspective.
Unfortunately, too many people remain ignorant, remain uninformed and lack perspective. I think that is what hurt the most during the Bush Administration. He was no worse than any other President in history, but, in my opinion, was definitely the man we needed during the past 8 years to handle the tough times we faced. Did he always do the right thing? In my opinion, no. However, I believe he did the right thing more times than not, and, I believe he always did what he thought was the right thing for the betterment of this country.
I cannot say that at.all about this current Administration or anyone in Congress right now. I honestly despise all of them, in addition to the sycophantic mass media propagandists and the many kool-aid drinking American voters out there.