What’s Wrong With the Teeth?

On the night of November 20, 2014 President Barak Obama gave his much anticipated speech regarding immigration.  However, as I watched the the speech I noticed something didn’t seem right with the President’s teeth.  Those perfect pearly whites were different.  There were gaps, some teeth seemed crooked.  I got out my my digital SLR and started shooting pictures right off the screen.  I have no DVR to record the speech.  On display here is the results of these photos.  The bottom image is the standard Obama smile.

The TV I have is a plasma Samsung 43”.  I shot directly off the screen.  A plasma TV has a heavy contrast which results in inky black shadows with little shadow detail.  That may be the case here.  None of the video’s of Network feeds on YouTube show the deformities in the President’s teeth.

However, if these are his real teeth then it makes no sense not to wear temporary caps for such an important event.

Barack Obama, International Man of Mystery

There has probably never been a more mysterious man to occupy the White House than Barack H. Obama.  A man, none of us really know.  And he doesn't want us to know him, apparently afraid of what we might find there.   Even the people that have been closest to him, other politicians to his person physician, depict a distance that none of them could breach.  He extends this chilliness to supporters and political allies much to their chagrin.  Behinds the scenes, he and his wife Michele are notorious for snubbing the very people that helped launched them to the oval office:  Oprah Wintry, the Kennedy clan, and the wealthy upperclass blacks of Chicago, among many others.

Sometimes it seems like there are two different men here.  There is the narcissistic, prickish, thin-skinned, duplicitous Barack getting even with his enemies Chicago-style, doing it all with a charming toothy grin as he twists the knife.  He schemes about remaking America into a country most American's don't want or relate to.  Then there is the other Barack, the one that is a total goof in public, fuzzy headed, bordering on dementia.  Such as when he called a Navy corpsman a "corpse man," or signs a guest book with the wrong year, or can't remember his daughter age in a speech.  A man that can't get a visiting city's name right, a man that has traveled through 57 states, a man who bows to other world leaders as if they are his superiors.  He seems befuddled at state dinners and embarrasses himself by not following protocol as if he doesn't know what to do, how to act, or has little in the way of manners for international gatherings.  A prime example: Toasting Queen Elizabeth while the British national anthem played.  In an embarrassing episode, he finally had to sit down and shut-up till the music stopped playing and try a reboot.   Wasn't there a staffer there to tell him about the timing and proper manners?

So here is a man so two-sided, it's hard to tell who's who.  Part brilliant and part stupid; a great campaigner but incompetent at governance; an articulate orator, but a poor communicator; a Noble Peace Prize winner, with a kill list, a leader with no leadership skills or for that matter, a compunction to lead.  

Campaigning and Governance
Campaigning is his thing.  It's his gift.  He's awesome at it.  But when it comes to the details of being a leader and guiding legislation along, the contacting of key Congressmen or Senators and sweet talking them, guilt tripping, arm twisting, handing out gifts in exchange for support. Obama does none of this.  He acts above the fray, which often leads to failure.  There is a lot more legislation he could have gotten passed and signed into law if he had made these efforts.  

This stance follows him to the international scene as well.  An example was his canceling a meeting with Russian leader Validmir Putin over the Stowden affair.  He could have gone, showed his displeasure with Putin for thumbing his nose and stood him up at a press conference.  But Obama played the cowardly lion and tucked tail.  One could never image a Reagan or Clinton doing such a thing.  Confrontation is not his way.  Kim Zigfeld at American Thinker put it succinctly:

"As Hitler could not have wished for better than Chamberlain, Putin could not have dreamed of more than Obama.  The president won't make the highest American values part of his relationship with Russia, maybe because he doesn't share them, and he won't stand up for American values and honor by making Putin pay dearly for crossing them, maybe because he doesn't care about them."

And there you have it.  The American traditions and ideals most Americans cherish, Obama doesn't believe in.  As Ed Klein said of Obama in his book, The Amateur, Obama is out to save America from itself.  He thinks America has lost its way and needs to remodeled into a socialist utopia, which of course, has never worked anywhere that it has been tried.  

Barack Obama and the Flat Earth Society
One of the early controversies of Barack Obama's presidency had to be the question of his citizenship.  It's a mirky area and too long and drawn out to go into all of the details here. Check out Jerome Corisi's well sourced book, Where is the Birth Certificate? to explore this topic in greater detail.  Basically, since Obama delayed releasing his long form birth certificate, and apparently no one running for president has to show his or her proof of citizenship, the issue gained momentum with every passing day.  It looked suspicious to spend millions of dollars to keep it sealed, which is still is along with a host of other files. No, those released birth certificates are fake and I don't care what those shills over at Snopes say,  especially the last release, which is revealed not be a scanned document but a nine-layer Photoshop digital file.)  In fact Obama early on set up a PAC to raise money to fend off all challenges which are handled by the Perkins Coie law firm.  Over three million dollars and counting.  

Who does something like this?  Why is such simple information withheld from public release?  What is there he doesn't want us to know?  Since then, there are issues with his SSN and selective service registration and no educational, health, or passport records have ever been released.  

Another issue is the number of lawsuits have been filed trying to determine what was his origin of birth and the courts have decided that these suits have no standing.  In other words, they are not going to touch it.  It's tainted with plague.  Congress will not make a move, nor will the Supreme Court.  Justice Clarence Thomas said to a sub-committee of the Congress that they were evading the eligibility issue but never said why. They are all in on it.

Being a seeker of the truth, I have been long disappointed that the chief critics of Obama, namely conservative talk radio did not run with this.  If Limbaugh, Hannity, Levine, Beck, and many others had pursued this issue, such as Joseph Farah and Jerome Corsi did over at WND.com, they could have gotten some real traction on this issue.  Instead, by holding back, they allowed Obama's supporters in the media--and they are legion--to control how this issue was defined.  

Now anybody that doubts Obama's citizenship is called a Birther and treated as a member of the Flat Earth Society.  It's fringe stuff.  Ironic, considering there is no real documentary proof that Obama was born in the United States and so many close to him have claimed birth in Kenya.  That would include his paternal grandmother, the Kenyan ambassador Peter Ogego, and even Obama's wife Michelle, in several public speeches.  Obama in his early promo literature also mentioned being Kenyan born.  Senior Elections clerk Tim Adams had access to state birth records and said that there was no birth certificate for Barack Obama.  And the list goes on and on...

If Barack Obama is not a legitimate US citizen, then it's likely impossible for most people to fathom a conspiracy this vast, this illegal, that could actually happen. The legal checks and balances are supposed to prevent something like this from happening.  It would mean the government is a criminal  enterprise, lost from the will of the People.

Another thing to consider if this happened, there are a lot of helpers here to cover up a crime.  So don't be bewildered by the vastness of an operation like this.  Besides Obama's friends in the mainstream media are made up of a host of liberal websites, bloggers, cable news networks and to a certain extent, even the conservative media (Fox, talk radio) to help in burying the issue as well.  

Controlling The Puppet
There odds are that Barack Obama was not born in this country.  In many ways what defines a "natural born" American citizen can get very murky.  It's not clearly defined in the Constitution.  Sen. John McCain had to be investigated but the Senate to determine if he was eligible to run in 2008. 

Never the less, what better way to control a man if you have a flaw, or any flaw in his character, lifestyle, etc, over him?  There are plenty of real-life examples of this; just read Robert Caro's bio's of Lyndon Johnson and how he called in his "cards."  Even better, watch the political drama, House of Cards, to see this sort of thing in action.  Actor Kevin Spacey plays the character of Frank Underwood, a conniving congressman manipulating people and events.  And in the story he finds the perfect man to control––another congressman who gets in trouble with a hooker and Frank fixes and covers up the crime for him.  The man is now beholding to him.  Then Frank forces this poor guy into all kinds of things, eventually running him for governor.

You don't run the best man for the job...you run the best man you can control for the job. That's Politics 101.

If Obama is not a citizen of the Untied States and has other proclivities (i.e., drug addiction, heath issues, homosexuality, etc.) then this is a man that the rich and powerful would love to run.  He has enough fraud in his character and past to keep him on a tight leash.  No wonder others have to supply millions of dollars to fend of all legal challenges he faces.

Barack Obama has been called a puppet.  He's been called out for being little interested in the job.  A man who starts his day at 10:30 AM, has a few meetings and calls it day.  If one can spend 5 hours or more playing golf, then here is man with little to do.  And you would think the job of president would fill all of one's waking hours.  But not this man.  Maybe because all the heavy lifting is being done by others?  All Barack has to do in that case, is play president on TV.

The First Act Is The Last Act
Barack Obama's first official act as president which was to sign Executive Order #13489 sealing up his files.  That includes the files of the vice president as well.  (It is unclear to me what records are sealed––his documents as president or his past life records?  Colleges, health, travel, and so on?) Not bad coming from a man who promised the most open Administration in history.  

So much for that.  



Sources
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/08/russia_makes_a_fool_out_of_obama_over_and_over.html

Barry Soetoro registered to vote in D.C.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/barry-soetoro-registered-to-vote-in-d-c/

Books
Where is the Birth Certificate? by Jerome Corsi
The Amateur by Edward Klein
The Secret Life of Barack Obama by Mondo Frasier.  

A True Skeptic is Skeptical of Snopes

Snopes.com, launched in 1995 by Barbara and David Mikkelsen, has become the premier “urban legend” debunking site on the Internet.  Run out of their home in California they have developed a lot of mainstream credibility and are routinely quoted everywhere from the mainstream media to the halls of Congress.   They do a good job at setting the record straight on numerous rumors that spread like wildfire on the Internet with what seems like a good ole dash of common sense.  However, I thought from early on when visiting the site that there something was not quite right about any of this.  Of course we need a healthy dose of skepticism in the Internet age which the Mikkelsens excel at.  It’s just when it comes to certain persons and events that the skepticism seems to falter.

I am also constantly amazed how people use them as a “trusted” source, because if you look into what they say, or in many cases don’t say, there are holes exposed in their arguments.

Besides favoring last century web site design, one thing I find peculiar about the Snopes web site is its web page text is coded so as not to allow any copy, cut and paste of anything written there.  Few sites do this.  You have to download the source (View menu on any browser) and dig through the code to find a quote to easily post in an article.  I can understand this for copyright reasons, but one can still get the text one needs anyway with a little extra work, so why bother?  It’s particularly onerous for anybody that wants to quote Snopes for any written work.

Love Us Some Obama!
Snopes has now become a very large repository of debunking just about anything said about Barack Obama that is negative or controversial.  With Obama the list is a long one from his early childhood, career, birth records, educational records, statements he’s made in his two biographies and current statements and actions. This is a man that keeps a large gaggle of lawyers employed, costing millions of dollars to keep important records on his early life withheld from the public.  If that doesn’t make people suspicious about him I don’t know what will.   It’s ironic that Scopes is so skeptical about everything until it comes to their Obama and then the skepticism flies out the window.  An example of that is Obama’s 50 Lies where they precede to debunk most of the 50.  Their reasons are sourced, which is sound procedure, but it should be noted that none of the original accusations are sourced so one cannot inspect the root of the original allegation.

Never the less, not all are debunked.  They did honestly point out that Obama stated in 2004 he wouldn’t run in 2008.  However, all Scopes does is point the reader to a YouTube link.  They don’t actually admit any deception on Obama’s part, though it clearly was, unless he simply had a change of heart.  It’s as if they hate to admit that Obama will bare a false witness.  Of course, the easily provable lies of Obama are not covered.

One of the growing problems with Snopes constant defending of President Obama involves using his autobiography, The Dreams of My Father as a debunking source.  There are quite a number of books coming out now showing it’s a complete fraud.  The recent news that a New York girlfriend was a “composite” character of several people is an example of a deception.  Who does this in their own life story?  Only a phony would.  It’s a deliberate falsehood but you won’t see that whopper in the Obama’s 50 Lies article.

Here is another example of how Snopes deals with the list of lies:

20.) Without Me, There Would Be No Ethics Bill - LIAR, you didn't write it, introduce it, change it, or create it.

It's unclear what ethics bill this statement references.  Obama did help pass a major ethics reform bill as an Illinois State Senator, and 110th U.S. Congress passed the Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act, which "closely mirrored and drew key provisions from a bill (S. 230) that Senators Obama and Feingold introduced in January 2007."  We could find no reference to document Obama's supposedly having said that neither of those bills would exist if not for him.

This is the example of a classic Straw Man arguing style.  Notice the statement, “It's unclear what ethics bill this statement references.”  The Mikkelsons are the researchers of this information.  Why don’t they know the origin?  Who is the author of this?  Since the original assertion is not sourced it would be easy to put words in Obama’s mouth that he never said as a way to shoot down a gadfly.  I think that is what they did here as my search does not reveal anything about Obama’s alleged statement.  It’s a Straw Man to knock over.  

Obama’s 1981 Trip To Pakistan
In another disputed matter in Barack Obama’s life is his 1981 trip to Pakistan in 1981 with a college chum.  He apparently traveled first to see his mother and half-sister in Indonesia before traveling on for a three week stay in Pakistan.  The controversy Snopes addresses here stems from an anonymous email that made the rounds stating that Pakistan was on a “no travel” list issued by the U.S. State Department.  This has been widely discounted which Snopes accurately points out.

But they end it by saying the following:

“In short, if Barack Obama did visit Pakistan in the summer of 1981, he – like all other Americans – could have openly done so bearing a U.S. passport.”

Interesting that they used “if” in this instance.  ABC News verifies that Obama traveled to Pakistan in 1981. I don’t know why there is an implication that this didn’t happen.  It obviously did.  The wording here shows a twitchy position held by Snopes as if they are not comfortable with Obama’s excursion to Pakistan.  That trip does raise a host of other questions, such as, what was the future Senator and President doing over there for three weeks?  Another mystery in this mysterious man’s closeted life.

And the second part–“...could have openly done so bearing a U.S. passport,” is just speculation and ignores what other passport he might have had and used.

Primarily, they fail to answer an important question–did Barack Obama travel in 1981 with an Indonesian passport under the name of Barry Soetoro?  And not his American passport?  And it’s unknown with so many records not released or sealed by the lawyers for the President.

It’s important because if Obama did travel to Pakistan under his Indonesian passport as Barry Soetoro he committed a felony.  For while it is not against the law for an American citizen to own a passport to a foreign nation he or she cannot travel with it outside of the United States.  That’s against the law.  An interview with John Carman, a former Secret Service and Custom’s Agent confirms this significant detail.  (See link below to download the MP3 of this interview conducted by James Fetzer.)  However, if Obama is not and American citizen he would not be breaking the law.  So maybe that is another reason for Barack Obama to keep these particulars concealed from the public.

The Birth Certificate
This is probably the mother of all controversies that have surrounded Barack Obama from the start.  The whole matter is a mess and I don’t seek to add clarity as I don’t know how anybody can.  It boils down to a long, drawn out, Constitutional debate of what defines a natural-born citizen as opposed to a native-born citizen according to the eligibly requirements of the 14th Amendment.  Dr. Jerome Corsi has a detailed exposé of this in his book, Where is The Birth Certificate?, chapters 4 and 13.  That’s a good place to start.  Who knows what the truth is when Obama’s own grandmother says he was born in Kenya?  When his agent’s promo brochures say he was born in Kenya.  When his wife Michelle is on YouTube giving a speech saying he was born in Kenya...

Snopes.com follows the typical path of Obama defenders which is to shoot down the critics, label them “Birthers” and then once again, source anonymous Internet quotes for a quick brush-off.  It all makes them look good and in turn makes the critics appear as a bunch of gullible, superstitious peasants who will believe anything.  There is no sense of a fair-minded approach to any of this.

In a notable example, Snopes mentions the work of digital imaging specialist and graphic artist Mara Zebest.  Her investigation is published in a 12-page report in which she concluded that the last released birth certificate is a fraud. Snopes allows for no link back to this work and insists it’s “...simply recycled old arguments that had long since been thoroughly debunked in detail.”

Instead of a fair examination of Zebest’s findings Snopes instead links to a 9-page rebuttal by a Frank Arduini.  And who pray tell is he?  A noted online OBOTS, a term used for online Obama defenders.  Arduini stays busy defending all things adverse of Barack Obama, especially debunking fraud in the birth certificate issue and can be traced to numerous forums around the Internet posting under such monikers as HistorianDude and Epectitus (Greeley Gazette for a bio on this guy).

Arduini, who describes himself as a IT Business Partner Director with CareFusion and apparently doubles as a supposed expert on digital imaging precedes to dismiss Zebest’s work in a 9-page drubbing. He launches with the barb that Zebest is “not an forensic digital image analyst.” Is Arduini?  No, and lists no credentials for a digital image analyst but that doesn’t prevent him from raking this poor woman over the coals.  However, Arduini’s credibility comes under attack from the various reader comments taking him to task for supposed flaws in his rebuttal.   The various comeuppances to this digital imaging know-it-all make for a lively read.  A good example of why one should not throw stones if one lives in a glass house.  Particularly a hypocrite throwing the stones (see below).

He goes on to label Mara Zebest a Birther and states, “She wrote her analysis not because she is an Adobe expert, but because she is a Birther.”  Horrors!  In Arduini’s view, this biases her ability to properly analyze the digital version of Obama’s birth certificate (three have been released so far).  This opinion is spurious at best and Arduini provides no facts to back up this silly Birther claim.

And this Obama shill accuses other people of being biased?  What audacity! This guy is a well established Obama partisan.  Does Snopes make any mention of this conflict of interest?  No, they don’t.

(Keep in mind the last birth certificate that was released was a 9-layer Photoshop PDF file.  It was a sloppy job with some layers using different using different DPI settings.  Somebody forgot to use the ‘merge layers’ option when they saved it out.  It was not a scanned document.  It was in effect, a fraud.  Not something Snopes will tell you.)

Whatever is going on here, Barack Obama has spent millions of dollars keeping his birth records, and many other records as well, sealed up from public disclosure.  This, from the man that promised complete transparency.  As Dr. Corsi found, all Barack Obama has to do is go to the hospital in Hawaii and order the release of the records.  He’s never done it.

Take It As It Is
The Mikkelsens are smart people.  But the taint of partisanship smothers their alleged independent work at Snopes.  I don’t think they are as autonomous as they portray themselves.  I can see why they are accused of being in league with the Democratic Party or financed by George Soros (both charges untrue–so far).  They are skilled players at the game of politics under the guise of seeking truth. There are numerous incidences, just a few mentioned here, that disclose that favoritism.  Any criticism or negative found with Barack Obama, his life or his character is shot down which borders on the fanatical.  They use every trick in the book to achieve this from straw man arguments, nonexistent allegations for easy dismissal, allegations made in anonymous emails from anonymous senders also easily dismissed, ignored evidence of counter-claims and at times, inaccurate or suspect interpretations of the law.  Their dismal of Mara Zebest’s report without even linking it so others can read for themselves what she has uncovered, and then use an Obama shill to repudiate it really exhibits how partisan they are. They don’t take seriously any assertion by any critic when it comes to President Obama.  If they did, they would look into and quote the work of researchers such as Dr. Jerome Corsi who has accomplished yeoman work in researching topics surrounding this President.

In short, I don’t think the Mikkelsens are seekers of the truth.  They are more defenders of the status quo.

As Jeffery Phelps said at Examiner.com:

“Snopes, not unlike any other quasi-‘mainstream’ source, takes advantage of the fact that people in general want to believe the government is good and is aiming to do the right and just thing.”

Amen, brother.  It honors all to be skeptical of everything.

Addendum  1.13.15
Someone asked me on Twitter why I don’t allow for comments since Snopes has a forum.  I don’t get the question and find it irrelevant.  I don’t see a contradiction if that is what the person was hunting for.  I am just writing articles here.  I think I’ve pointed out enough issues with Snopes and how they operate.  Feel free to do your own research.

But I will say this.  I don’t allow comment sections because I don’t have the time to monitor it or maintain ongoing debates with people.  People get nasty.  I was on a writer’s blog once and the comments section got so unruly that the author had to shut it down.  Too bad as it was one of the most entertaining parts of her blog!  I learned a lot from that experience of what she went thru and it won't be repeated here or on my other blog.


Sources
Mom-And-Pop Site Busts The Web's Biggest Myths.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124958817

Obama’s trip to Pakistan - ABC News - 4/8/08.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/04/obamas-college/

Snopes.com on Obama’s passport.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/passport.asp

John Carman interview  - 1/30/12
http://radiofetzer.blogspot.com/search?q=john+carman

Snopes.com on the Birth Certificate Issue.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/birthcertificate.asp

Greeley Gazette article on Frank Arduini’s background.
http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=10572

Mara Zebest Birth Cert Report.
www.wnd.com/files/Obama_LFBC_Report_final_draft.pdf

Frank Arduini, “The Barack Obama Long Form Birth Certificate - A Response to Mara Zebest”

http://www.scribd.com/doc/59087668/Response-to-Zebest

Jeffrey Phelps, Obama officially ineligible?
http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-officially-ineligible