World News Korner

Pastor James David Manning claims the woman gunned down by authorities in DC, Miriam Carey, was the mama of Obama's love child. Carey's family have demanded an investigation into her death. Pastor Manning and Miriam’s sister, Valarie Carey, a retired NYPD police sergeant, are also demanding Obama submit to a paternity test.


Excerpt via Dr. Eowyn @ DC Clothesline:

In the video below, Rev./Dr. James David Manning refers to a phone interview he had with Miriam’s sister, Valarie Carey, who is a retired New York City police sergeant, and points out many oddities about Miriam’s death:

• Why did Capitol Hill police, who are trained to be temperate, instead shot to kill an unarmed woman who had a baby in the back seat of her car? No guns or bombs or threatening letters were found in her car. (To that I’ll add this: If police thought Miriam’s careening car was a public hazard, why didn’t they shoot out the car’s tires?)
• Why did police not follow the usual procedure of notifying the next of kin first? Instead, according to Valerie Carey, police released Miriam’s identification to the public before notifying her family. Valerie found out about her sister from a reporter’s phone call.
• When the Carey family traveled to Washington, DC, they were told they couldn’t see Miriam’s body but were just shown a photo of her body.
• To this day, the Carey family has not been given an official notification of Miriam’s death, or of the autopsy report, or how many times she was shot.
• Why are black race-agitators like Al Sharpton and Charles Rangel silent about Miriam’s shooting death when they normally raise a hue-and-cry about any alleged police mistreatment of blacks? Sharpton’s silence is especially noteworthy because Miriam’s sister, Valerie Carey, is on the executive board of his National Action Network. Did somebody get to Sharpton?
• Why did the police intimidate and silence Carey family attorney Eric Sanders?
• Why is Miriam being discredited and portrayed as a mentally-ill, deranged woman when there is no evidence as such? On the contrary, Miriam was highly functional, being a dental hygienist. The only medication she was taking was prescription med for post-partum depression.
• And the biggest question of all: Why did Miriam Carey drive to Washington, DC that day, and specifically to the White House?

That last question is what prompted Valarie Carey to wonder if her sister’s 18-month-old daughter is Barack Obama’s “love child.”

To answer that question, Valarie Carey and Rev. Manning are demanding a paternity test of Miriam’s daughter, and that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder conduct an investigation into the death of Miriam Carey.
Click here for Valarie’s petition. [...] Continued @ The D.C. Clothesline.



Haven't followed this issue but Manning raises some legitimate concerns and he's definitely right about the media. A DNA test would clear up the love child claim and it wouldn't be the first time it's been done. President Clinton was forced to give DNA during the Lewinsky scandal. Too bad Obama isn't held to the same standards.




Response to The Raw Story piece about Birther Preacher James David Manning's claims about President Obama, Miriam Carey, her minor child and the wishes of the Carey family:

There is no suggestion, nor has there ever been any suggestion by the Carey family that President Obama is the child's father. Please in the future, contact me directly if there are any questions about anything related to Miriam I. Carey's untimely death or the Carey family.

In the meantime, the Carey family has called for the DOJ to investigate the Shooting Death of Miriam Carey (Note: The DOJ letter and police affidavit are included for your review):
http://www.thesandersfirmpc.com/request-doj-investigation-for-the-shooting-death-of-miriam-carey

Source

Courtesy of Chuck Heath's Facebook page.

Here was the description under the photo:

Sarah and my son Teko carving the turkey. We had a wonderful family get together at the Palin house. We've all had our ups and downs this year but we have so much to be thankful for.

Now some of you may remember that Palin claimed too have watched an instructional video on how to carve a turkey correctly, even though she has been saying for years that SHE is the official turkey carver in the family.

Well here is that video, I have watched it, and I cannot figure out for the life of me why she is carving that bird upside down. That was NOT in the video, and I personally have never seen anybody approach the job in that fashion.

I carved the turkey at my Mom's house yesterday, as I do every year, and I did not require a video, nor did I feel the need to flip the bird over and stab it in the back. But now that I think about it how ELSE would we expect Sarah Palin to wield a knife?




Source

Courtesy of CNN:

First Lady Michelle Obama, along with daughters Sasha and Malia and dogs Bo and Sunny, welcomed the official White House Christmas tree Friday.

The 18.5-foot-tall Douglas fir will go in the White House Blue Room. Chris Botek, the third-generation Christmas tree grower from Crystal Spring Tree Farm in Lehighton, Pennsylvania, and his family, were at the White House when the tree from his farm arrived. Last year's tree was from a farm in North Carolina.

A White House tradition, the tree was delivered by carriage to the North Portico.

"We're honored to have it. This is the best part of the holiday season is when our tree comes," the First Lady said.

To be honest I usually avoid posts about these silly fluff stories about the President and First Lady, you know the whole pardoning the turkey, Easter egg hunt, and Christmas tree decorating thing.

However this year with the Right Wing ramping up the War on Christmas, and the book by "She Who Must Not be Named" falling like a flaming turd down the Amazon best sellers list (Right now at #438 as of this posting), I think of this kind of thing as a giant FU to the forces of darkness who attack this President and his wife at every opportunity.

So yeah, the Obama's got themselves a big ass Christmas tree, just like most other American families.

And I am sure that once decorated it will be spectacular. Just like the family in whose home it will now reside.



Source

It is like watching a road show version of the Jerry Springer Show.

Look if you find yourself in handcuffs after fighting with a woman over a 25 inch flat screen TV you may want to reevaluate your damn life.The cost of the TV may be dramatically reduced but your dignity should have a higher price tag.

The other day at my Mom's house I had a couple of female relatives tell me they were heading over to stand in line and take advantage of the Black Friday sales.

I told them they did not have to bother, and that I would gladly hold up a flaming hoop for them to jump through right there in the living room. I also filled them in on why they should avoid shopping at Wal-Mart.

But it did no good, these are my relatives who get all of their information from Facebook, and refuse to read my posts because there are "too many words." (Yeah there's simply no helping some people.)

Let me just say that I have three flat screen televisions in my home, of varying sizes, and that I did NOT ONCE stand outside in the cold for six hours, nor bitchslap a fellow consumer, in order to get my hands on any of them. Perhaps I am simply not a good example of the American capitalist, but I think I would feel some sense of shame if I had injured another human being or froze my testicles off in order to watch reruns of "How I Met Your Mother" on a slightly larger screen.

Source

Courtesy of Truthout: In 1980 Carter thought he had reached a deal with newly-elected Iranian President Abdolhassan Bani-Sadr over the release of the fifty-two hostages held by radical students at the American Embassy in Tehran.

Bani-Sadr was a moderate and, as he explained in an editorial for The Christian Science Monitor earlier this year, had successfully run for President on the popular position of releasing the hostages:

"I openly opposed the hostage-taking throughout the election campaign.... I won the election with over 76 percent of the vote.... Other candidates also were openly against hostage-taking, and overall, 96 percent of votes in that election were given to candidates who were against it [hostage-taking]."

Carter was confident that with Bani-Sadr's help, he could end the embarrassing hostage crisis that had been a thorn in his political side ever since it began in November of 1979.

But Carter underestimated the lengths his opponent in the 1980 Presidential election, California Governor Ronald Reagan, would go to screw him over.

Behind Carter's back, the Reagan campaign worked out a deal with the leader of Iran's radical faction - Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini - to keep the hostages in captivity until after the 1980 Presidential election.

This was nothing short of treason. The Reagan campaign's secret negotiations with Khomeini - the so-called "October Surprise" - sabotaged Carter and Bani-Sadr's attempts to free the hostages. And as Bani-Sadr told The Christian Science Monitor in March of this year, they most certainly "tipped the results of the [1980] election in Reagan's favor."

Not surprisingly, Iran released the hostages on January 20, 1981, at the exact moment Ronald Reagan was sworn into office.

The "October Surprise" emboldened the radical forces inside Iran. A politically weakened Bani-Sadr was overthrown in June of 1981 and replaced with Mohammed Ali Rajai - a favorite of Khomeini's. These radical forces today are represented by people like former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, hard-liners who oppose any deal with the United States and, like Khomeini in the 1980s, will jump at any chance to discredit the current moderate presidency of Hassan Rouhani.

The October Surprise also led to the deaths of thousands of innocent people around the world, and in Central America in particular. Reagan took money from the Iranians and used that money to kill nuns in Nicaragua.

But those are just the most obvious results of the October Surprise. Again, if Carter were able to free the hostages like he and Bani-Sadr had planned, Carter would have won re-election. After all, he was leading in most polls in the months leading up to the election. And if Reagan were never elected, America would be a much more progressive nation.

I am sure that many of you are old enough to remember when all of this went down, however with the President's new deal with Iran on their nuclear program taking such heat from the Right Wing it is important to remember that they have a history of sabotaging deals with Iran, and that we should keep a wary on them at all times.

Could you just imagine how different the world would have been if Carter's deal had been implemented? How much better our relationship would have been with Iran, as well as Iraq and Pakistan?

How many American lives could have been saved if Iran had not been manipulated by the Republicans into becoming the bogeyman to replace the newly democratized Russia?

And while we are on the topic it should be remembered that not only were the Republicans instrumental in getting the Shah of Iran into power in the first place, their were also instrumental in laying the groundwork for his overthrow and the eventual fundamentalist Islamic uprising that saw those American hostages taken in 1979.

Remember "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it." We are close to creating a new deal with Iran which might go a long way toward quelling violence in the Middle East, and laying the groundwork for a future where terrorism is a thing of the past, and none of that works in the Republican's favor.

Source

Courtesy of the Obama Diary:

President Obama listens to hunger striker Eliseo Medina as he and the First Lady visit with immigration protesters in their tent on the Washingon Mall November 29. Since November 12, immigration advocates comprising “Fast for Families” have abstained from food as they call on congress to take up action on the immigration issue.

I'm sorry, but how cool is it to see the President kicking it in a tent, with protestors who came there to convince Congress to do something for the millions of undocumented immigrants in this country, by starving themselves during Thanksgiving weekend?

Could you imagine George Bush doing that? Hell no!

Update: And this really ought to blow the minds of the religious right.





Source

Courtesy of the Washington Post:

Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin are starting to sour on the new pope.

In response to Pope Francis’ first Apostolic Exhortation, in which the pontiff denounced “trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world,” these two paragons of the far right – both of whom regularly invoke the teachings of Jesus to bolster their own political views – have suddenly turned their backs on the man whose actual job description is to speak for Jesus.

Sarah Palin complained that Pope Francis sounded “kind of liberal” in his statements decrying the growing global income equality between the rich and the poor (she has since apologized).

Rush Limbaugh went one step further. “This is just pure Marxism coming out of the mouth of the pope,” he harrumphed into his giant microphone.

Limbaugh, in his trademarked conspiratorial style, speculated that the pope’s tirade against “widespread corruption and self-serving tax evasion” must have been forced upon him by somebody else. “Somebody has either written this for [the pope] or gotten to him,” he said.

Limbaugh is right. Somebody did get to Pope Francis. It was Jesus.

Self-styled “defenders of Christianity,” like Palin and Limbaugh, peddle a profoundly unhistorical view of Jesus. Indeed, if you listened to those on the far right you would think that all Jesus ever spoke about was guns and gays.

Aslan then goes onto point out just how different the Jesus of the Bible is from the conservative version that is bandied about by the Right Wing.

While modern Christianity has tried to spiritualize this message of Jesus, transforming his revolutionary social teachings into abstract ethical principles, it is impossible to overlook the unflinching condemnation of the wealthy and powerful that permeate Jesus’ teachings.

“How hard it will be for the wealthy to enter the Kingdom of God!” (Mark 10:23).

As one can imagine, such a radical vision of the world would have been both profoundly appealing for those at the bottom rungs of Jesus’ society, and incredibly threatening for those at the top. The fact is not much has changed in two thousand years, as Palin and Limbaugh have proven.

Yet if these “culture warriors” who so often claim to speak for Jesus actually understood what Jesus stood for, they would not be so eager to claim his ideas for their own. In fact, they’d probably call him a Marxist.

I do not always agree with Reza Aslan, but on this topic he is quite correct. And the truly pitiful thing is how Christianity, on its face a religion of acceptance and social justice, was so easily hijacked by those who used it as an excuse to amass great wealth and power and then use it to subjugate those who they considered dangerous to their ambitions or unworthy of their charity.

And who does THAT remind you of?

Source

I really think that THIS has much to do with the rise of Atheism and the increase in secular education these days.

Information has never been more readily available, and the excuses for being unaware of other cultures, other religions, and other philosophies are simply no longer viable.

And that is also why we are seeing such extremism among those whose way of life is directly threatened by education and increased intelligence.




Source