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.  

Police State In Full View

Early forerunner of the TSA hassling an old man in Europe.

Police State reports from around the country.

Rise of the Warrior Cop

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323848804578608040780519904.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories#articleTabs%3Darticle

The death of Marine Sergeant Derek Hale

http://theantigov.com/2012/02/page/3/

Florida Nurse Terrorized by US Marshals in Warrantless Raid

http://www.infowars.com/florida-nurse-terrorized-by-us-marshals/

Index of outrageous police actions

http://www.infowars.com/index.php?cat=4

The Real Flight Plan

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Underwear Bomber

“The effect this matter has had on my life has been astounding and due to this case, I will never trust the government in any matter, ever.”

Kurt Haskell

I was watching the Jodi Foster movie, Flight Plan, in which her character, a widow, traveling from Europe to the United States for the burial of her husband, takes a nap only to awaken with her daughter missing.  So a big hunt ensues to find the girl aboard the airliner inflight.  Without giving away too much of the plot, the main bad guy is running a scam and (never explained) gets the girl hidden onboard. As part of his plot, he arms and attaches C-4 explosive.  Okay, some parts of the plot are a bit of a stretch, but I was immediately reminded of the famous terror event form Christmas of 2009 featuring the “underwear bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.  Umar was supposed to have tried to blow up an airliner by trying to set fire to some explosive powder hidden in his underwear.  It failed, he badly burned himself, and was later convicted and sent to prison.

I had originally heard it was packets of C-4 but as I have learned, it was PETN, a powered substance that needs a chemical catalyst of acid, which apparently Umar added while in the lavatory.  However, his method of detonating it was way off as it is difficult to ignite and burns slowly.  Basically, like C-4, it needs an mechanical or electrical detonator.  Was Umar then, using a fake bomb?  Apparently so, and it’s been documented in other terror related cases.  Take a look at this one at the Huffington Post link.  Do a study of terrorist arrests and it’s nearly all driven by government agencies using informants to coerce people, generally ne'er-do-wells and unfriendly immigrants of the Muslim faith, to commit acts that they generally wouldn’t have been involved with.

Ironically, the movie got it right–the bad guy is shown inserting an electrical detonator into the C-4.  Setting it on fire will not cause an explosion.  The government’s official account of the underwear bomber attempt to set off a bomb with fire was completely wrong.  PETN will not explode if lit up either.

However, Something Is Off Here

The government’s narrative runs into difficulty with the eye witness report of Kurt Haskell, waiting with his wife to board his flight in Amsterdam, who claims to have seen Umar’s attempts to board the plane without a passport rebuffed till a “smart dressed man,” as Haskell describes him, negotiates with airline personnel to allow Umar onboard. Some news accounts stated that Umar did actually have a proper visa and passport and photos of a passport have been shown.  If that was the case, then why did the man in the suit that Haskell saw, need to intervene?  Haskell believes the passport is phony as is the picture of the underwear.  

In fact, Umar is supposed to have been badly burned in the escapade.  Ever seen any burn marks on that grungy pair of drawers?  Of course not.

After the attempted bombing, Kurt Haskell documents a long, frustrating, aftermath of trying to get his story recognized by the authorities both at the Department of Homeland Security, FBI, and the news media.  He is mostly dismissed, and sometimes called a liar.  Dutch officials claim to have examined many hours of surveillance footage and never saw the man in the suit (no word if Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was spotted on their footage either).  Haskell said he was shown a large batch of photos of the men suits, but none of them matched the guy he saw.  Haskell also had a hard go of getting other witnesses to come forward.  A lawyer such as Haskell knows what his rights are is not easily intimidated.  Unfortunately, many people are.  

Media’s Coverage of the Story

Kurt Haskell says that Chris Hanson of NBC’s Dateline, came to his office twice for interviews to later dismiss his account of events as “unsubstantiated rumor dispelled as myth.”  That was harsh.  Naturally, his story is ignored by Dateline on their report on the attempted bombing attack.  This is typical of a mainstreamer such as Chris Hanson, to make sure the government’s wacky narrative stays in play.

Another story I found, by Lee Ferran of ABC News entitled, “Stink Bomb: Underwear Bomber Wore Explosive Undies for Weeks, FBI Says,” borders on the ridiculous.  This bit of news reporting is basically an FBI release claiming the bomb failed to go off because Umar wore the underwear for three weeks, to presumably get used to wearing them.  As FBI agent Ted Peissig states in the piece, “We think ultimately, that probably is what caused a little bit of separation in the sequence of events in the explosion.”  Uh-huh, that makes sense.  It’s amazing how these people can declare this hogwash with a straight face.  It’s about as bad as Janet Napolitano saying “the system worked” after a bomber, or in this case a phony bomber, was allowed to get through security and board a commercial flight.  They must think us dumb as sheep.  And once again, we have a so-called journalist in Lee Ferran passing this rubbish off as news reporting.

Notice how the mainstream press functions these days–they just regurgitate a government press release without question.  They have traded integrity and critical thinking for access.  As Haskell said on his blog, “...the media is nothing but a mouthpiece for the U.S Government.”  I think he’s right.

Ultimately, Kurt Haskell is restricted to his blog, a few articles here and there and  a series of prominent radio interviews with Rollye James and Alex Jones, both friendly to conspiracy.  When the trial of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab went down, Haskell was to be the only and hence, star witness till Umar suddenly declared his guilt and was put away in four consecutive 50-year sentences.  Shades of James Earl Ray, pleading guilty to the murder of Martin Luther King.  When a defendant does that, anything controversial, or for that matter, the real truth, gets buried.

The End Result

As freely admitted but authorities, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab  was on the terrorist watch list.  Yet he was allowed to board.  As Kurt Haskell wrote on Infowars.com:

“I became further saddened from this case, when Patrick Kennedy of the State Department during Congressional hearings, admitted that Umar was a known terrorist, was being followed, and the U.S. allowed him into the U.S. so that it could catch Umar’s accomplices. I was once again shocked and saddened when Michael Leiter of the National Counter terrorism Center admitted during these same hearings that intentionally letting terrorists into the U.S. was a frequent practice of the U.S. Government. I cannot fully explain my sadness, disappointment and fear when I realized that my government allowed an attack on me intentionally.”

I find Kurt Haskell’s account of what happened that day in Amsterdam to be highly credible.  He’s always told the same story without contradiction.  It’s similar to stories told by witnesses to events where authorities have another agenda and they do everything to sweep a conflicting witness testimony (and any evidence) under the rug.  People like Haskell suffer the slings and arrows of intimidation, ridicule, slander, and probably the worst slight, to be simply ignored.  His story is given no credibility or acknowledgement pertaining to the history of the event.  Somebody even had one of the other passengers contact him to tell him he didn’t really see what he saw.  To their credit, the editors of Wikipedia do mention Kurt Haskell’s experience but only in passing and they never say it was true.

Probably the lamest stunt ever done but with a coordinated government PR campaign, coupled with an unquestioning mainstream press it was actually easy to pull off.  The underwear bomber represents the classic patsy.  A gung-ho young man willing to self-sacrifice for his Holy War, he was told by handlers how to set off a bomb that wasn’t meant to go off.  Similar to Oswald using a junky rifle with a telescopic sight not properly aligned. 

What Kurt Haskell and other other passengers of Flight 253 experienced was the duplicity of government.  They say and do one thing in public and say do just the opposite in private.  And innocent people sometimes get hurt or killed. The coverup ensues.  The Benghazi scandal is an example of that duplicity.  

Only with the independent Internet media and certain talk radio shows was this fraudulent event exposed for what it was.  A false flag in the supposed war on terror.  And the end result?  A renewal of the Patriot Act, the introduction of full body scanners at the airports, and a general lessoning of liberty and the absurd groping of genitals and breasts at airport security lines. 

All as a result of a fake terror event.

Sources

Kurt Haskell’s account of witnessing the Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab boarding without a passport.

http://www.infowars.com/breaking-kurt-haskell-exposes-government-false-flag-operation-during-underwear-bomber-sentencing/

Silly ABC News report.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/09/stink-bomb-underwear-bomber-wore-explosive-undies-for-weeks-fbi-says/

Kurt Haskell’s blog and his account of the man in the suit.

http://haskellfamily.blogspot.com/2010/01/truth-about-flight-253-has-been.html

Wikipedia entry on PETN. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentaerythritol_tetranitrate

Mohamed Osman Mohamud Arrested In Portland Car Bomb Plot

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/27/mohamed-osman-mohamud-portland-car-bomb_n_788695.html

Snopes Got Snoped

Good article at WorldTruth about the Snopes debunking web site.  I've had my own issues with the site and how they operate and arrive at their conclusions.  Read my article HERE.  Read this piece and be aware that all is not what is seems on the Internet.

http://worldtruth.tv/snopes-got-snoped/

We’ve Crossed The Rubicon

An example of a public servant pointing a loaded weapon at a tax payer in Boston.

After seeing the horrific news that the Boston Marathon had been bombed I started dwelling on what new draconian laws were going to be created as a result of this attack.  I was soon to see that the no new laws were needed.  The State had now become the law with the Boston police aided by various Federal agents (troops?) started invading and marching people out of their homes at gunpoint.  It was an outrageous violation of constitutional and civil rights.  Most of the more shocking images of this event are found online, because as usual, the Fourth Estate let us down.  Even the conservative radio media, no fans of Mr. Obama, have made hardly a mention of this unconstitutional police state gambit in rounding up a lone teenager.  Conservative talker, Mark Levine, who passionately reports on constitutional abuses of the Federal government says not a thing about this. 

As usual with these tragic affairs, the story of what happens changes with every passing day.  The Colorado and Sandy Hook shootings of last year, the rouge LA Police office Chris Dorner of early this year, to now this latest event, the Boston Bombing follow a familiar pattern of oddball happenings, strange anomalies, and never answered loose ends.  I’ve lost count with the number alterations of the Official Narrative.  We started out with two Russian Moslem brothers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev being discovered at the culprits quickly, to the dramatic Friday night shootout with law enforcement. 

There really are too many plot shifts to document here but just tale one little episode, the shootout and capture of the younger brother, Dzhokhar.  He and his older brother were supposed to have robbed a 7-Eleven.  That is now denied by the 7-Eleven corporation, from Margaret Chabris, the director of corporate communication who reported that their surveillance video did not match the brothers.  The car they are driving has change make and model several time.  Finally, Dzhokhar, was supposed to be confined in a boat shooting it out with the police.  It’s implied he tried to commit suicide by shooting himself in the mouth.  Now we are told he had no gun on him when apprehended.  So his wounds come from the police, who undoubtedly would out to kill an unarmed man.  Can’t take any chances, now can we?

Another oddity in the is the video clip of the naked man, apprehended by police.  A Tsarnaev family member said it’s the older brother, who is supposed have been shot up in a police firefight.  If he is not Tamerlan Tsarnaev then who is the naked guy?  I suspect he’ll never come forward and will be another phantom in an endless parade of them.  It could also be one of those clever diversions that our three-letter agencies are capable of performing.  There is a large band of conspiracy buffs on the Internet, with Alex Jones the lead husky, and I sometimes think they are unwittingly used to lead us off the right path. The operatives are clever–they can make a person telling the truth look like a crazy fool.

And to add another thing almost as troubling is the crowd that gathered after Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was arrested chanting “USA...USA...!”  A crowd gone mad, seemingly not caring that their rights had been violated, that for a day they were held captive in their homes.  Witness the image above with the police officer (I assume) dressed like a soldier, and may be one, pointing a gun at someone looking at him through their window.  This level of intimidation is outlandish and unnecessary.  They had clear pictures of the culprits and a man on the run is not going to be taking their picture through a window.  This is an image not from the future but from now.  It’s here.  Tyranny has arrived.

Ironic that it happens in the state that helped birth the revolution.

And one more thing...more security does not mean more safety.  These idiots cannot keep us safe.  

Addendum 4/29/13
Excellent article on this issue here by THOMAS J. LUCENTE Jr., HERE

Female DNA found on bomb...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323798104578453190708251284.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories

Further Reading...

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-boston-bombing-web-of-lies/5332981

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/04/29/300815/mystery-still-enshrouds-boston-bombings/

Warning:  graphic images....
http://xavianthaze.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-brothers-tsarnaev-why-you-shouldnt.html

Who are you going to believe?

From Infowars.com.  http://www.infowars.com/boston-bombing-culprits-found/

Just wait, the Lone Bomber will be the official story.   Believe it if you want....

Taylor, Wherefore Art Thou?

Taylor Guitar's marketing dept. thinks this image defines cool.

I bought my first really good guitar, a Taylor acoustic guitar in the summer of 1991.  I still have it and it's been a wonderful guitar to play and own.  It's in the vintage class now that it's over 20 years old and even though some frets need to be redressed, it's tone has grown richer over time.  Since then I've owned several more Taylor guitars and they were all outstanding.

Robert Taylor shook up the industry in 1980s with quality made acoustic guitars famous for one main innovation–thin necks like one would find on an electric guitar.  For years acoustic necks were a thick and round as a club.  The thinner neck made the guitar easier to play since the low profile neck–as it became known–reduced hand tension and strain.  Complex chords were easier to place and position.  The old guard of acoustic guitars in America, Martin and Gibson, followed Taylor's lead and starting make thinner necks for their instruments as well, although Martin's necks still aren't as thin as a Taylor.  It was innovation long in coming.  

By the 1990's Taylor guitars were being widely seen played by noted country artists and they are popular among prayer and praise Christian bands.  Many rock musicians use them as well.  Besides the necks, the tone on a Taylor guitar features a   good balance between the bass and treble.  Another innovation was the introduction of the Baby Taylor.  For years guitars for kids were cheap, junky things and basically unplayable.  Taylor fixed that by introducing small guitars for children that adults learned to like as well.  I had one for a while and they are very nice guitars even if the string spacing is a bit too tight for my hands.  They make great travel guitars.  Soon, Martin had out the Little Martin.

But lately, I'm wondering where Taylor is headed.  A few years ago they came with the acoustic-electric T series which are very good performance based instruments even if they are a bit pricy.  Now they have a whole line of solid body electrics.  Who plays those things?  Fender and Gibson had cornered the market and have for years.  Taylor is not introducing anything that is innovative with these guitars such as when they started with the low profile necks.  Not only that but the established forerunners feature better prices.  The Taylor electrics are just too high priced for what they are.  Fender and Gibson have been around for years and many great players have owned them.  Their guitars like the Stratocaster and the Les Paul feature iconic designs.  Nothing says rock and roll like a Strat.

The latest catalog for 2013 shows just about every guitar now sports onboard electronics complete with a preamp and transducer installed.  I was surprised to see this.  While amplification is a great need for preforming musicians great and small, what about us traditionalists that want to play unplugged?  Well, there's Martin who still produces a large number of acoustic guitars free of this stuff.  Gibson's acoustic guitar line and a host of other manufacturers do as well.  I own two Martins now neither of them has a pickup installed and besides they are a much better fit for where I'm at musically.  And best of all, they are both more affordable that an equivalent Taylor.

So I wonder where Taylor is going.  I have always liked them as a company.  They practice good conservation with the environment.  Robert Taylor is an innovator and his success is a classic American story.  But the marketing picture above, showing an aging hipster (Hector Penalosa, Taylor employee) with Taylor hung around his neck, could almost be a metaphor of a company that is loosing its way.  It looks silly. You would never see Martin producing such an embarrassing marketing archetype.  But then Martin seems to have a better sense of who their customers are.  (Not to mention their long and deep connection to American musical history–Williams, Elvis, Cash, Dylan, Baez, Young, Stills, etc.)  People buy acoustic guitars to sound natural, to make acoustic music.  That's why you see so many bluegrass musicians playing Martins.  I don't know of any bluegrass band that has a guitarist with a Taylor and if there is, they are few in number.

Sure, you can still buy a Taylor a la' natural, most likely used and sometimes new, maybe order a custom one with nothing onboard.  And I will add another Taylor in the future as they still make the best 12 string guitars available.  I just hope in the coming days they stick to a course of solid acoustic innovation and don't get bogged down trying to compete where giants have already tread.   Acoustic guitars are what made the company so great.