I can pull DA's string anytime I want and he will launch thousands of out of context words that show only that he knows everything but understands nothing.

Ah, don't be so jealous, you've had some success in that area as well:

I am starting to wonder...is Obama native born?

Indeed. Why?

You know, when all the "Hussein wasn't born in the US" stuff first came out, I just dismissed it.

Then when I read a Hillary supporter's blog for a bit I started to wonder...

And when the PA Democrat filed the suit I said... is this guy a nut, or what?

Now we have this to consider.

    HONOLULU, Hawaii - Although the legitimacy of Sen. Barack Obama's birth certificate has become a focus of intense speculation - and even several lawsuits - WND has learned that Hawaii's Gov. Linda Lingle has placed the candidate's birth certificate under seal, and instructed the state's Department of Health to make sure no one in the press obtains access to the original document under any circumstances.

I mean what's the deal? Why doesn't Hussein just pick up the phone and have it released?? I mean if he did it would:

1. Make those who claim he wasn't born here look like fools.

2. Make people like me who are queasy about him feel better.

3. Appease a lot of people he will need to have happy with him should he be elected...

I mean it would be a total win-win.

Yet he doesn't. And this from a man who people call super intelligent with great judgment.

And then we have this:

    In Kenya, WND was told by government authorities that all documents concerning Obama were under seal until after the U.S. presidential election on November 4.

Why?? Why if there isn't information there that says he was born there.

    In a startling development, Obama's Kenyan grandmother has reportedly alleged she witnessed Obama's birth at the Coast Provincial Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.

What happens if he is elected and then it is proven that he wasn't native born? The country would be in turmoil and Biden would become President elect because Hussein wouldn't be qualified, plus he would be guilty of fraud which clearly falls under the high crimes and misdemeanors standard for impeachment.

Only 336 words, PPJ, to do what I couldn't have done in less than, I dunno, 100?

But, along with this gem, you do get close to that magic number of 100:

Happy Something ... New Year? Fox News watching?
The year ends.

I'm not much on the "big story" baloney. Most would have said that the stock market crash of 1929 was the story, yet the real story was the "Talkies." From that technological advance came a string of motion pictures that moved and shaped the world as nothing else before or since.

There were many stories in 1944, yet THE story was the reining in of Patton in favor of Monte's pipe dreams. The result being "The Battle of the Bulge" with 20,000 killed and the Soviet Union being allowed a full share of Germany. God only knows what misery that ultimately caused.

Later the stories were the defeat of the US in Vietnam by its own Congress but even there we find only a smidgen of truth. Goldwater may have midwifed conservatism and Reagan took it to the altar but it was the Left's antiwar actions that allowed the simmering hatred of them to take a political child and turn him into a man.

So pardon me if find the stories about the evil Bush and the glorious Hussein both juvenile and boring. Come back in a few years and we can talk. In the meantime, I find myself continually reminding my Leftie friends of some of the oldest saws in the world.

Success, dear chums, is getting what you want.

Happiness is wanting what you get.

Many people will soon understand the truth of that.

And while it is true that Bush has been all but destroyed by the hater's of the Left, especially those in the media. He, like Truman, will see his presidency ascend over time.

I myself find him flawed, as was Truman. He has been too loyal to those who weren't capable and he failed to fight back at the utter nonsense spewed by the Left over the war on terror. Failing to do this has allowed the Left's unpatriotic attacks give comfort to an enemy who became convinced that they could, like the communists in Vietnam, win a political battle given to them by the Left's hand maidens in Congress.

In the meantime only 20% approve of a Democratic Congress, less than the approval of Bush. That it is Democrats who control Congress is why you hear almost nothing about this.

But now the Democrats have it all and it is their right to govern. It is their war on terror. Their recession. Their housing crisis. Their failed energy policy. Their failing school systems. Their "homeless" sleeping under bridges. Their "everything."

There is no evil Repub in charge and no racist in the White House, although the new occupant was elected because of his race. All the claims of the Left, all the charges, all the social theories can now be tested.

In the meantime all we know for sure is we have a youth going to the White House that has never been tested. He is the first of the "no one loses, everybody wins" generation. As such his natural narcissism gives us a man who has never lost so he doesn't know how to win. He will be too gracious to our enemies and too harsh on his critics, He will confuse our allies and enemies alike. The results will most likely be death and destruction here in the US.

We truly suffer from the Chinese curse. We live in interesting times.

God help us all.

or this:

A friend advises that the Jackson Sun, a small newspaper in a small city in western Tennessee has made referring to Hussein as Hussein in their Opinion and Forum sections a banning offense.

The usual suspects are trotted out for this suppression of speech. As for the reasoning...

    So the only reason people have for using it is to stir up racial or anti-Muslim sentiments,

Given that being a Muslim has nothing to do with race, and given that Husseins first and last names are Muslim types, shouldn't we no longer use them? Perhaps we should just say, "The President." The "For Life" can come later.

But onward to more "reasons."

    It's not racism ... but it is a tactic that started on the campaign trail with Republican officials invoking the middle name as an epithet, using it to link Obama to a religion that he doesn't even embrace

I never knew that invoking epithets was always illegal, immoral or fattening. And when is it evil or illegal to remind the voters of the background of the candidates?

Facts be facts. Hussein has a background and an early childhood that is, if nothing else, different.

A better question would be, if it is a campaign tactic, what right does a newspaper have in banning it?

And more.

    ....newspaper represents free speech ... it also is a business, and as such we reserve the right to ask people not to engage in hate speech or try to stir up tensions against a particular group of people.

What is referred to here is commercial free speech, which is limited. The First Amendment forbids prior restraint of political speech by the government. Not the right of, say, an Opinion writer to call Hussein, Hussein.

    It's the same principle as not shouting fire in a crowded theatre -- perpetuating the lie that Obama is a Muslim...is just stoking the hatred of mentally unstable people.

Of course there is no connection between the two. Shouting fire in a crowded theatre leads to demonstrable and immediate harmful results. Saying bad things, if using some one's middle name can be called "bad," does not. And if it is, what shall we say about the millions of nasty things said about Bush? Where is the army waiting to attack Bush?

And while the newspaper can claim they are a commercial enterprise, they are the only enterprise named in the Constitution. As such they should have a higher tolerance for free speech that a business making widgets might extend to a worker making widgets deciding the competition makes better ones....and says so.

Even worse, in this case Hussein is now the "government" and by the newspaper doing what he and his political allies want, they have become an arm of the government, and the Constitution has been harmed.

Free speech carried by free newspapers and other media outlets is the best defense against dictators that has ever existed.

As I have often stated, I refer to Hussein as Obama when I am on blogs owned by people I know do not like him to be called Hussein. That is simple courtesy. I am in their home.

But a public newspaper is not a "home."

I started calling him Hussein after reading that he didn't want to be called it, and then reading some comments by various members of the Left.

I never, never, never intend to let a politician tell me what I can call him or her. They work for me. I am superior to them in that relationship and while it may be just my Scot Irish stubbornness towards accepting anyone as my "better," it is what it is.

I think that all of this is part of a bigger picture. We are involved in a shooting war and a culture war. Hussein may not be a Muslim, and I don't believe he is, but these new political rules serves them well and will be trotted out again in the not too distant future. I ask that you examine the PC courts in Canada and the EU to see the logical end of such.

Indeed, I think Churchill said it best and it applies as directly to us on this chilly November day as it did to England sixty six years and two days ago.

    Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."

We can now clearly see the future what it may become and how it may happen. It is up to us to reject it.

BTW, the reference to narcissism is really funny coming from someone who has to reference one of the few things he's good at, can't be just Jim because why?