It was reported on Obots.org that a 2004 web article from the Sunday Standard newspaper in Kenya mistakenly used the phrase “Kenyan-born” referring to then senatorial candidate Barack Obama. (The anti-Obama web site WorldNetDaily devoted a major article to fanning suspicion and raising doubts about Obama over the thing.) Since then, the Kenyan newspaper has issued a correction, saying:
A major sign of hope is embodied in Obama’s personal background as a product of at least three civilisations (American, African and Islam), with a wider multiculturalism in Indonesia, when he was a child, and in Hawaii, where he was born and spent much of his childhood.
Any fool knows Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, August 4, 1961. Nevertheless, Birthers are going into orgasms of delight over a mistake printed on a Kenyan web site back in 2004, describing the then Senate candidate Barack Obama as “Kenyan-born.” Blogs, forums and message boards are awash with hype and speculation that this finally is the key they need to unlock the hoard of incriminating evidence that they imagine lies behind the iron curtain of Obama’s perceived intransigence.
Speculation abounds about how the birthers found this obscure article which doesn’t appear to be on any search engine, and it has been suggested that the article is a fake; but that’s not likely. More likely is the fact that Barack Obama (the President’s father) was born in Kenya just led to a little confusion. I mean after all, if folks today can’t find a shred of evidence to support the crazy idea the President was born in Kenya today, how could a newspaper back in 2004 have found anything (particularly when the article was just a small Kenya-twist embellishment on an AP story).
Oh, you say, there is a great conspiratorial cover-up of the evidence? Sure, OK. [Obot1 backs away slowly, making no sudden moves.]
The nutty nobot blog, Repubx.com, reports an odd story. It says that Phil Berg has subpoenaed the Kenyan Ambassador for Obama’s birth certificate. Repubx even has pictures of the HANDWRITTEN subpoena. (What’s wrong Phil, you have to hock your typewriter?)
I’m not a lawyer (I did finally learn that there is no “u” in attorney), but I thought Berg’s cases were filed in Pennsylvania. So why is this subpoena coming out of California? Did the Third Circuit run out of blank subpoena forms? Given that Berg knows more lawyering than certain other nobot lawyers, maybe this is actually right.
But Phil, Phil, Phil. You can’t subpoena a foreign ambassador! It is just not done. Why didn’t you subpoena the North Koreans for their nuclear plans — get something USEFUL. It won’t work. You need one of those rogatory thingies.
So what’s going to happen (pick one)?
- The ambassador will ignore the subpoena (most likely)
- The ambassador’s legal counsel will ask the court to quash the subpoena (which they will)
- The ambassador will reply to the subpoena that President Obama was not born in Kenya and that there is no birth certificate, which will convince the birthers that Obama was born in Kenya–as evidenced by the coverup.
I wonder if this isn’t a hoax. It’s too nutty to be true. And who is this “Private Attorney General” clown Paul Mitchell?
Categories: Uncategorized Ambassador, attorney, California, foreign ambassador, Kenya, lawyer, legal counsel, Obama, paul mitchell, Pennsylvania, Phil Berg, President, Private Attorney General