The Urban Grind

In a time where reality shows are considered entertainment, I guess it would only follow for self absorbed people to take things to the next level, such as a woman who gave birth to a baby at a Brooklyn art gallery.

Personally, I think reality shows are for idiots. Why should I, or anyone else with half a brain, care about a typical day in the life of a former Playboy centerfold, or a group of no talent, slutty sisters, each wearing ten pounds of makeup, whose late father defended OJ Simpson? But I guess it should be obvious by now that many people have a voyeuristic streak, which is why reality shows are so popular. I guess that also explains why someone would go to see this woman giving birth in an art gallery.

Now on another note, why is it that some of these pregnant women become total exhibitionists? Granted, children are usually a blessing. But how does this woman translate that into thinking that strangers will want to come see her swollen naked body, and her stretched out labia? (For that matter, I don’t understand pregnant women having their husbands join them in the delivery room either.)

Anyway, here’s what Marni Kotak had to say:

Marni Kotak, 36, planned the very public end to her pregnancy at Microscope Gallery in Bushwick on Tuesday, witnessed by about 20 spectators, as a bit of performance art.

“The overall message that we will communicate to the child,” she told the Associated Press, “is that he or she was born in an art gallery because, as artists, that is our sacred space, and in doing this we are telling the world and our child that his or her life is a precious work of art.”

It’s the latest in a strange string of stunts by Kotak, including re-enactments of her own birth, her grandfather’s funeral and losing her virginity in the back of a blue Plymouth.

{snip}

As part of the performance artwork, entitled “The Birth of Baby X,” Kotak videotaped the event-a film that will later be added to gallery’s upcoming exhibition.

“It’s a healthy baby boy!” read a message posted on the gallery’s website last night under the title heading, “BABY X HAS ARRIVED.”

The concept piece began Oct. 8, with Kotak hanging out at the gallery, talking up visitors about motherhood and art, among other things.

Those who left their contact information behind with her were then notified when she went into labor so they could attend the birth.

The “artwork” included the transformation of much of the gallery into a de factor delivery ward, complete with soothing, ocean blue-colored walls and photo-imprinted pillows.

Chances are, if you’re reading this blog, the answer is yes. Still, you might want to check out the results of these questions that were asked of the occutards.

His opponent was Democrat so-called Orthodox, self hating Jew David Weprin. I say self-hating for the following reasons:

Weprin, who is nominally an Orthodox Jew, supported legalizing same-sex marriage, upsetting Orthodox Jews, who comprised about a third of the Jewish voters in the district according to a New York consultant.[14] In a 2011 debate against Bob Friedrich, his opponent for the New York Assembly, Weprin defended the Park51 project. Turner had hosted a demonstration against Park51 and attempted to use Weprin’s comments to ensure support of Jewish district residents opposed to Park51.[15] Former New York mayor Ed Koch supported Turner to send a message to Barack Obama about his disagreements with the Israeli government.[16] Turner was also supported by Assemblyman Dov Hikind, a Democrat and an orthodox Jew, and local rabbis.[4]

Here’s some background on Bob Turner.

This win appears to be all about Obama’s sagging approval ratings, due to his massive spending, and his pressuring of Israel.

{snip}

The heavily Democratic district, which spans parts of Queens and Brooklyn, had never sent a Republican to the House. But frustration with the continued weak national economy gave Republicans the edge.

Turner has vowed to bring business practicality to Washington and push back on spending and taxes.
The race was supposed to be an easy win for Democrats, who have a 3-1 ratio registration advantage in the district.
Weprin, a 56-year-old Orthodox Jew and member of a prominent Queens political family, seemed a good fit for the largely white, working-class district, which is nearly 40 percent Jewish.
But voter frustration with Obama put Weprin in the unlikely spot of playing defense. A Siena Poll released Friday found just 43 percent of likely voters approved of the president’s job performance, while 54 percent said they disapproved. Among independents, just 29 percent said they approved of Obama’s job performance.

Weprin became embroiled in New York-centric disputes over Israel and gay marriage, which cost him some support among Jewish voters.
Orthodox Jews, who tend to be conservative on social issues, expressed anger over Weprin’s vote in the Assembly to legalize gay marriage. In July, New York became one of six states to recognize same-sex nuptials.

Former Mayor Ed Koch, a Democrat, endorsed Turner in July as a way to “send a message” to Obama on his policies toward Israel. And Weprin was challenged on his support of a proposed Islamic center and mosque near the World Trade Center site, in lower Manhattan.

Now while this is good news, word is the 9th congressional district is expected to be eliminated in about a year.

Whoever wins Tuesday’s special election may not serve for long.

The seat is expected to be targeted by state lawmakers who will be forced to eliminate two districts next year.

Here’s what a Manhattan conservative acquaintance emailed to me about this elimination:

I LIVE IN DISTRICT 9 WHERE THE NY GOP HAS TOLD NY 1 THE LOCAL TV NEWS STATION AND THE TURNER CAMPAIGN STATED LAST NIGHT, THAT THE NY GOP WILL DISSOLVE THE NEWLY REPUBLICAN DISTRICT IN ONE YEAR AND TURN IT OVER/MERGE IT INTO THE ADJACENT LIBERAL DEMOCRAT, OBAMA LOVING DISTRICT. TURNER SPOKESPERSON STATED THE GOP DID NOT BELIEVE IT COULD RETAIN THE 9TH DISTRICT SEAT IN 2011 AND SO PREFER TO MERGE IT WITH THE ADJACENT DISTRICT FIRMLY IN THE HANDS OF LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP.

TURNER HIMSELF STATED IN HIS VICTORY SPEECH, “WE WILL SEND A MESSAGE FOR 1 YEAR.” TURNER AGREED TO COME OUT OF RETIREMENT TO RUN FOR WEINERS SEAT WITH THE PROVISO THAT HE WAS ONLY WILLING TO GO TO WASHINGTON FOR 1 YEAR. THE NY GOP AGREED TO TURN THE DISTRICT OVER TO THE DEMS AT THAT POINT BY DISSOLVING IT INTO THE ADJACENT DISTRICT.

THE REASON THAT THE DEMS HAVE HELD THIS DISTRICT AND MANY OTHER ONES LIKE IT IN QUEENS AND BROOKLYN IS BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN A FINANCIAL DEAL BETWEEN THE LOCAL GOP AND THE DEMOCRAT CLUBHOUSE TO KEEP THESE DISTRICTS IN DEMOCRATIC CONTROL.. THAT HAS BEE THE CASE IN NITA LOWEYS AND CHUCK SCHUMERS DISTRICTS AMONG THE MANY.

IN EXCHANGE FOR THE GOODS FROM , GOP HAS ALWAYS RUN LOSER CAMPAIGNS WITH LITTLE PR IF ANY, WITH LOSER CANDIDATES WHO LIKE A PAID OFF PRIZE FIGHTER, DO NOT MENTION THE WORD REPUBLICAN AND PLAN TO LOSE.

THE ONLY REASON TURNER WON THIS TIME IS BECAUSE 1. THE VISIBILITY OF THE WEINER SCANDAL AND 2 THE DEAL WITH THE DEMOCRATIC CLUB HERE WAS MUCH MUCH BIGGER…LET TURNER WIN, AND IN ONE YEAR HE WILL RETIRE AND WE WILL CEDE/MERGE THE ENTIRE 9TH DISTRICT TO THE LIBERALS.

LAST NIGHT TURNER SAID IN HIS ACCEPTANCE SPEECH, “WE WILL SEND A MESSAGE FOR 1 YEAR.”

THE FIX IS IN AS USUAL, AND THE LOSERS ARE UNFORTUNATELY THE VOTERS OF THE 9TH DISTRICT WHOSE CORRUPT GOP LEADERSHIP IS GOING TO SELL THEM OUT NEXT YEAR.

Under a new Florida law, people applying for welfare must take, and pass a drug test. Scott Cohen, writing for Time.com thinks this law is bad since it stigmatizes the poor.

Drug testing proponents like to argue that there are large numbers of drug users going on welfare to get money to support their habits. The claim feeds into long-standing stereotypes about the kind of people who go on welfare, but it does not appear to have much basis in fact.

Several studies, including a 1996 report from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, have found that there is no significant difference in the rate of illegal-drug use by welfare applicants and other people. Another study found that 70% of illegal-drug users between the age of 18 and 49 are employed full time.

What Mr. Cohen conveniently ignores is that this welfare money is coming from hard working, law abiding tax payers, who don’t want their money used to finance the drug use of bums. So as bad as drug use is, drug addicts who are employed full time are least flushing *their own* money down the toilet, as opposed to the money of other people, forcibly taken from them by the government.

Also, why shouldn’t welfare recipients have to undergo drug tests when many working people have to also get tested in order to get hired?

Apparently, $174,000 a year plus generous health benefits and pensions is not enough for these grossly overpaid mooching bums on both sides of the aisle. Here’s what RINO Congressman Steve Southerland had to say about his salary:

“He said his $174,000 salary is not so much, considering the hours a member of the House puts in, and that he had to sever ties with his family business in Panama City. Southerland also said there are no instant pensions or free health insurance, as some of his constituents often ask him about in Congress.
“‘And by the way, did I mention? They’re shooting at us. There is law-enforcement security in this room right now, and why is that?” Southerland told about 125 people in an auditorium at the Westminster Oaks retirement community. “If you think this job pays too much, with those kinds of risks and cutting me off from my family business, I’ll just tell you: This job don’t mean that much to me. I had a good life in Panama City.’

“…He added that ‘if you took the hours that I work and divided it into my pay,’ the $174,000 salary would not seem so high.”
Southerland, a freshman, ran a family funeral home business in Panama City and earned about $90,000 before joining Congress in January.

His feelings are shared by Wisconsin Congressman Sean Duffy.

His sentiments were not unlike those expressed by Sean Duffy, a Republican representative from Wisconsin, when he said in March it was a “struggle” to pay his mortgage and student loans with his congressional salary. “At this point, I’m not living high on the hog,” Duffy, a father of six, said. (Compared to his colleagues, Duffy is one of the least wealthy members of Congress.)

And last but not least we have Aztlanist California Donkey Congresswoman Linda Sanchez.

At the height of the debate over a possible government shutdown last spring, Linda Sánchez, a Democratic representative from California, said during an MSNBC interview that she was living “paycheck to paycheck” on her congressional salary. And she wasn’t the only one. Renee Ellmers, a Republican representative from North Carolina, was asked if she would forgo her pay in the case of a shutdown. Ellmers declined, saying, “I need my paycheck.”

So who forced these people to run for public office? If $174,000 a year, with generous health benefits and a pension is too meager for them, why don’t they just take another job in the private sector? Let’s see how they would feel about an 80 hour work week at roughly half the salary or less. I personally think their salaries should be reduced, at least by half. If they don’t like it, let them quit. On another note, I can’t believe people actually elected these whiners to public office.

Fox News is finally asking whether or not there is a racial component to attacks where groups of black teenagers pounce on unsuspecting individuals going about their lives and beat them apparently for fun. The Mayor of Philadelphia, Michael Nutter, who is black, believes it’s about race.

Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter, who recently imposed a stricter curfew in response to the city’s latest attack, addressed black youths directly from the pulpit of his church on Sunday, reportedly saying, “You have damaged your own race.”

“If you want …anybody else to respect you and not be afraid when they see you walking down the street, then leave the innocent people who are walking down the street minding their own damn business. Leave them alone,” Nutter told a mostly black congregation at Mount Carmel Baptist Church in West Philadelphia, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer.
Nutter, the city’s third black mayor, spoke after a mob attack July 29 in downtown Philadelphia during which 20 to 30 black youths allegedly beat and robbed innocent bystanders, according to law enforcement. Several people were injured, including one man who was reportedly hospitalized for a fractured skull, and police arrested four people.

Here’s a web site listing even more flash mob attacks/wildings.

Thanks to social media sites like Twitter and Facebook, these feral teens have been able to organize their hoodlum activities on very short notice. It’s also likely that they organize where to meet using either their cell phones or Blackberries. Now being that our government has been working with telecommunications companies like Assurance Wireless (for one) to provide these “poor, oppressed, underprivileged” families with free cell phones/plans, some people are wondering whether they’re being forced to pay for the devices used to organize these attacks.

Personally, I think these flash mobs are all about getting back at whitey, since they have one of their own in power now. After all, we have as our POTUS a black Muslim communist with a chip on his shoulder, who hates America, hates white people, and Jews. This is all courtesy of liberals who wanted to prove they weren’t big bad racists (which includes crazy Jews in Name Only), and so-called conservatives who believed there would be no difference between a McCain or an Obama presidency. Anyway, thanks to Obama, we have as our Attorney General Eric “My People” Holder, who, among other things, refused to prosecute a group of club wielding Black Panthers intimidating white voters in Philadelphia back in 2008. So far, Holder has not uttered a peep about these flash mob attacks. I think Hell will freeze over before he says anything remotely critical of “his people.”

What does a woman in her mid to late 40′s, who has had years of fertility treatments in a desperate attempt to have a child do when she discovers she’s pregnant with twins or triplets?

If your answer is “celebrate and be happy,” then you’re dead wrong.

For some self-absorbed women, it’s all about “me me me me me me!!!”

Never mind that they’ve spent years trying to conceive. And never mind the fact that they should have known that with fertility treatments, they could end up with multiple fetuses. Instead of being grateful for finally being able to have children, these vile (and most likely liberal) women choose a procedure called “reduction,” where only one or two of the multiple fetuses is aborted. After the woman can only deal with having one child (snort!). Get a load of one such woman:

As Jenny lay on the obstetrician’s examination table, she was grateful that the ultrasound tech had turned off the overhead screen. She didn’t want to see the two shadows floating inside her. Since making her decision, she had tried hard not to think about them, though she could often think of little else. She was 45 and pregnant after six years of fertility bills, ovulation injections, donor eggs and disappointment — and yet here she was, 14 weeks into her pregnancy, choosing to extinguish one of two healthy fetuses, almost as if having half an abortion. As the doctor inserted the needle into Jenny’s abdomen, aiming at one of the fetuses, Jenny tried not to flinch, caught between intense relief and intense guilt.

Check out her excuses.

“Things would have been different if we were 15 years younger or if we hadn’t had children already or if we were more financially secure,” she said later. “If I had conceived these twins naturally, I wouldn’t have reduced this pregnancy, because you feel like if there’s a natural order, then you don’t want to disturb it. But we created this child in such an artificial manner — in a test tube, choosing an egg donor, having the embryo placed in me — and somehow, making a decision about how many to carry seemed to be just another choice. The pregnancy was all so consumerish to begin with, and this became yet another thing we could control.”

{snip}

Jenny’s decision to reduce twins to a single fetus was never really in doubt. The idea of managing two infants at this point in her life terrified her. She and her husband already had grade-school-age children, and she took pride in being a good mother. She felt that twins would soak up everything she had to give, leaving nothing for her older children. Even the twins would be robbed, because, at best, she could give each one only half of her attention and, she feared, only half of her love. Jenny desperately wanted another child, but not at the risk of becoming a second-rate parent. “This is bad, but it’s not anywhere as bad as neglecting your child or not giving everything you can to the children you have,” she told me, referring to the reduction. She and her husband worked out this moral calculation on their own, and they intend to never tell anyone about it. Jenny is certain that no one, not even her closest friends, would understand, and she doesn’t want to be the object of their curiosity or feel the sting of their judgment.

So it’s better to kill her unborn child for fear of not being the perfect mother? Puh-leeze!

Now check out one Shelby Van Voris, who was pregnant with triplets when she wanted only one child.

…Shelby Van Voris was pregnant with triplets when she discovered this for herself. After she and her husband tried for three years to get pregnant, they went to a fertility doctor near their home in Savannah, Ga. He put Shelby, then 30, on fertility drugs, and when that didn’t work, he ramped things up with injections. By then, her husband, a 33-year-old Army officer, had been deployed to Iraq. He left behind three vials of sperm, and she was artificially inseminated. “You do weird things when mortars are flying at your husband’s head,” she said. She soon found out she was carrying triplets. Frantic, she yelled at the doctor: “This is not an option for us! I want only one!”

Notice how it’s all about “me me me me me!”

Her fertility specialist referred her to a doctor in Atlanta who did reductions. But when Shelby called, the office manager told her that she would have to pay extra for temporary staff to assist with the procedure, because the regular staff refused to reduce pregnancies below twins. She contacted three more doctors, and in each case was told: not below two. “It was horrible,” she says. “I felt like the pregnancy was a monster, and I just wanted it out, but because we tried for so long, abortion wasn’t an option. My No. 1 priority was to be the best mom I could be, but how was I supposed to juggle two newborns or two screaming infants while my husband was away being shot at? We don’t have family just sitting around waiting to get called to help me with a baby.”

Assuming this woman is happily married, don’t you find it odd that she describes her pregnancy as a monster? Also, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, shouldn’t she have known that one side effect of fertility treatments is multiple fetuses? Yet she went ahead with the treatments anyway? Whatever happened to taking responsibility for your choices? And to top it off, she was was happy after the procedure.

She paid $6,500 for the reduction and left Evans’s office incredibly relieved. “I went out on that street with my mother and jumped up and down saying: ‘I’m pregnant! I’m pregnant!’ And then I went and bought baby clothes for the first time.”

Here’s what reduction entails:

…The procedure, which is usually performed around Week 12 of a pregnancy, involves a fatal injection of potassium chloride into the fetal chest. The dead fetus shrivels over time and remains in the womb until delivery. Some physicians found reduction unnerving, particularly because the procedure is viewed under ultrasound, making it quite visually explicit, which is not the case with abortion.

Read the rest here if you like.

Across the pond in Britain, a young diabetic woman named Heidi Withers got engaged to a Freddy Bourne, and then went to meet her future in-laws. Unfortunately, Withers and her future mother in law got off on the wrong foot, so much so that Mrs. Bourne sent the young woman a scathing email, outlining her rudeness, three times. Here’s the full text of the email:

Via The Blaze

It is high time someone explained to you about good manners. Yours are obvious by their absence and I feel sorry for you.

Unfortunately for Freddie, he has fallen in love with you and Freddie being Freddie, I gather it is not easy to reason with him or yet encourage him to consider how he might be able to help you.

It may just be possible to get through to you though. I do hope so.

Your behaviour on your visit to Devon during April was staggering in its uncouthness and lack of grace.

Unfortunately, this was not the first example of bad manners I have experienced from you.

If you want to be accepted by the wider Bourne family I suggest you take some guidance from experts with utmost haste.

There are plenty of finishing schools around. You would be an ideal candidate for the Ladette to Lady television series.

Please, for your own good, for Freddie’s sake and for your future involvement with the Bourne family, do something as soon as possible.

Here are a few examples of your lack of manners:

When you are a guest in another’s house, you do not declare what you will and will not eat – unless you are positively allergic to something.

You do not remark that you do not have enough food.

You do not start before everyone else.

You do not take additional helpings without being invited to by your host.

When a guest in another’s house, you do not lie in bed until late morning in households that rise early – you fall in line with house norms.

You should never ever insult the family you are about to join at any time and most definitely not in public. I gather you passed this off as a joke but the reaction in the pub was one of shock, not laughter.

I have no idea whether you wrote to thank [your future sister-in-law] for the weekend but you should have hand-written a card to her.

You should have hand-written a card to me. You have never written to thank me when you have stayed at Houndspool.

[Your future sister-in-law] has quite the most exquisite manners of anyone I have ever come across. You would do well to follow her example.

You regularly draw attention to yourself. Perhaps you should ask yourself why.

It is tragic that you have diabetes. However, you aren’t the only young person in the world who is a diabetic.

I know quite a few young people who have this condition, one of whom is getting married in June. I have never heard her discuss her condition.

She quietly gets on with it. She doesn’t like being diabetic. Who would? You do not need to regale everyone with the details of your condition or use it as an excuse to draw attention to yourself. It is vulgar.

As a diabetic of long standing you must be acutely aware of the need to prepare yourself for extraordinary eventualities, the walk to Mothecombe beach being an example.

You are experienced enough to have prepared yourself appropriately.

No-one gets married in a castle unless they own it. It is brash, celebrity style behaviour.

I understand your parents are unable to contribute very much towards the cost of your wedding. (There is nothing wrong with that except that convention is such that one might presume they would have saved over the years for their daughters’ marriages.)

If this is the case, it would be most ladylike and gracious to lower your sights and have a modest wedding as befits both your incomes.

One could be accused of thinking that Heidi Withers must be patting herself on the back for having caught a most eligible young man. I pity Freddie.

Withers forwarded this email to her friends, one of whom posted this on the internet, which is how this email went viral.

What do you guys think? Do you agree with the future mother in law? Or do you think she was out of line? As I see it, Mrs. Bourne may have had some valid points. But she could have said something nicely to her stepson in private. After all this is a young woman who (presumably) loves her stepson, and who will be the mother of Carolyn Bourne’s future grandchildren. So even if Bourne has some issues with the girl, I think it’s always best to be diplomatic.

I got this over at Texas Fred’s

Obama: Where are his girl friends?????

Where are his girl friends? Strange that none have popped up!!!!

Strange to the point of being down right WEIRD!

OK.. this is past the ‘birthers’ questions…this is just plain old common sense, no political agendas for either side.

Just common knowledge for citizens of a country, especially American citizens, who even know that Andrew Jackson’s wife smoked a corn cob pipe and was accused of adultery, or that Lincoln never went to school or Kennedy wore a back brace or Truman played the piano.

We are Americans! We are known for our humanitarian interests and caring for our ‘fellow man.’ We care, but none of us know one single humanizing fact about the history of our own president.

Honestly, and this is a personal thing…but it’s niggled at me for ages that no one who ever dated him ever showed up. The simple fact of his charisma, which caused the women to be drawn to him so obviously during his campaign, looks like some lady would not have missed the opportunity….

We all know about JFK’s magnetism, McCain was no monk, Palin’s courtship and even her athletic prowess were probed. Biden’s aneurysms are no secret. Look at Cheney and Clinton…we all know about their heart problems. How could I have left out Wild Bill before or during the White House?

Nope…not one lady has stepped up and said, “He was so shy,” or “What a great dancer!” Now look at the rest of this…no classmates, not even the recorder for the Columbia class notes ever heard of him.

I just don’t know about this fellow.

Who was the best man at his wedding? Start there. Then check groomsmen. Then get the footage of the graduation ceremony.

Has anyone talked to the professors? It is odd that no one is bragging that they knew him or taught him or lived with him.

When did he meet Michele and how? Are there photos? Every president gives to the public all their photos, etc. for their library.

What has he released?

And who in hell voted for him to be the most popular man in the world?

Does this make you wonder?

Ever wonder why no one ever came forward from Obama’s past, saying they knew him, attended school with him, was his friend, etc.? Not one person has ever come forward from his past.

VERY, VERY STRANGE. This should really be a cause for great concern. To those who voted for him, you may have elected an unqualified, inexperienced *shadow man*.

Did you see a picture called The Manchurian Candidate?

Let’s face it; as insignificant as we all are…someone whom we went to school with remembers our name or face…someone remembers we were the clown or the dork or the brain or the quiet one or the bully or something about us.

George Stephanopoulos of ABC News said the same thing during the 2008 campaign. He questions why no one has acknowledged the president was in their classroom or ate in the same cafeteria or made impromptu speeches on campus. Stephanopoulos also was a classmate of Obama at Columbia — the class of 1984. He says he never had a single class with him.

While he is such a great orator, why doesn’t anyone in Obama’s college class remember him? And, why won’t he allow Columbia to release his records?

NOBODY REMEMBERS OBAMA AT COLUMBIA

Looking for evidence of Obama’s past, Fox News contacted 400 Columbia University students from the period when Obama claims to have been there, but none remembered him.

For example, Wayne Allyn Root was, like Obama, a political science major at Columbia, who also graduated in 1983. In 2008, Root says of Obama, “I don’t know a single person at Columbia that knew him, and they all know me. I don’t have a classmate who ever knew Barack Obama at Columbia …EVER!

Nobody recalls him. Root adds that he was also, like Obama, “Class of ’83 political science, pre-law” and says, “You don’t get more exact or closer than that. Never met him in my life, don’t know anyone who ever met him.”

At the class reunion, our 20th reunion five years ago, who was asked to be the speaker of the class? Me. No one ever heard of Barack! And five years ago, nobody even knew who he was.

The guy who writes the class notes, who’s kind of the, as we say in New York, ‘the macha’ who knows everybody, has yet to find a person, a human who ever met him.”

Obama’s photograph does not appear in the school’s yearbook, and Obama consistently declines requests to talk about his years at Columbia, provide school records, or provide the name of any former classmates or friends while at Columbia.

NOTE: Root graduated as valedictorian from his high school, Thornton-Donovan School, then graduated from Columbia University in 1983 as a political science major in the same class in which Barack Hussein Obama states he was.

Some other interesting questions.

Why was Obama’s law license inactivated in 2002?

Why was Michelle’s law license inactivated by court order?

It is circulating that according to the U.S. Census, there is only one Barack Obama but 27 Social Security numbers and over 80 aliases.

WHAT!?

The Social Security number he uses now originated in Connecticut where he is never reported to have lived.

No wonder all his records are sealed!

Unbelievable!

Via The New York Daily News

A Florida woman claims a TSA officer forced her wheelchair-bound, 95-year-old mother battling leukemia to strip her off diaper for a pat down.

Jean Weber said the horrific incident occurred last weekend at the Northwest Florida Regional Airport, the Northwest Florida Daily News reported.

“It’s something I couldn’t imagine happening on American soil,” she told the newspaper.

Weber claims her mother, who is in the final stages of leukemia, was on her way to Michigan to visit family members. She needed a wheelchair because she did not have the strength to travel through the airport.

The 95-year-old was then subjected to an extensive search, Weber told the News Herald, but she wasn’t sure why.

Her mother was taken off the line to a partitioned area for a search, then moved into a private room for a more elaborate examination, Weber claims. She noted she was not in the room at the time.

A TSA officer came out to tell her that her mother had soiled her diaper, and it needed to be changed for them to complete the search, she said.

To add insult to injury, the TSA is defending their abuse of this poor 95 year old woman in the final stages of leukemia!

“While every person and item must be screened before entering the secure boarding area, TSA works with passengers to resolve security alarms in a respectful and sensitive manner,” the agency said in a statement Sunday. “We have reviewed the circumstances involving this screening and determined that our officers acted professionally and according to proper procedure.”

Unfortunately, this kind of thing is to be expected given our government’s refusal to profile Muslims, who are the real threat. Remember, Janet Napolitano actually said there’s no logic in profiling Muslim men under the age of 35. So instead of stopping all immigration from Muslim countries, our government goes out of its way to be politically incorrect, rather than offending a hostile minority group.