OnStar: Shame on you

Posted on September 22, 2011. Filed under: Business, Customer Service, Good Business, Life | Tags: , , , , , |

For the record I do not own a GM car, but have thought the introduction of OnStar emergency services was a wonderful idea.  And when I saw that you could now purchase OnStar at BestBuy for installation on any car, well I was elated.  Was even considering buying one for my wife’s car.

Now however, my high regard for OnStar has come crashing to the ground … perhaps even below ground.

In the article below it is revealed that OnStar now continuously monitors your vehicle and sells that information to insurance companies, law enforcement, and anyone else who might be interested. 

To put it another way:  Customers purchase the OnStar service and pay a monthly fee so that OnStar can profit even more by selling detailed customer information. 

 That’s just too much of an invasion of privacy for me.

Article:

GM’s OnStar now spying on your car for profit even after you unsubscribe? [UPDATE]

OnStar
 

By Zach Bowman RSS feed

Posted Sep 21st 2011 4:28Pm

 
If you’re the owner of a fairly new General Motors product, you may want to take a close look at the most recent OnStar terms and conditions. As it turns out, the company has altered the parameters under which it can legally collect GPSdata on your vehicle.Originally, the terms and conditions stated that OnStar could only collect information on your vehicle’s location during a theft recovery or in the midst of sending emergency services your way. That has apparently changed. Now, OnStar says that it has the right to collect and sell personal, yet supposedly anonymous information on your vehicle, including speed, location, seat belt usage and other information.

Who would be interested in that data, you ask? Law enforcement agencies, for starters, as well as insurance companies. Perhaps the most startling news to come out of the latest OnStar terms and conditions is the fact that the company can continue to collect the information even after you disconnect the service. If you want the info to be cut off all together, you’ll have to specifically shut down the vehicle’s data connection. If that sounds scary, you should check out a full breakdown of the new policies here.

*UPDATE: OnStar has released a statement in response to the dust up over its newest set of terms and conditions:

 
New Terms & ConditionsThe following statement can be attributed to Joanne Finnorn, Vice President, Subscriber Services

“OnStar has and always will give our customers the choice in how we use their data. We’ve also been very open with our customers about changes in services and privacy terms.

“Under our new Terms and Conditions, when a customer cancels service, we have informed customers that OnStar will maintain a two-way connection to their vehicle unless they ask us not to do so. In the future, this connection may provide us with the capability to alert vehicle occupants about severe weather conditions such as tornado warnings or mandatory evacuations. Another benefit for keeping this connection “open” could be to provide vehicle owners with any updated warranty data or recall issues.

“Of course, if the customer requests us to turn off the two-way connection, we will do as we have always done, and that is honor customers’ requests.

“Our guiding practices regarding sharing our subscribers’ personal information have not changed. We are always very specific about with whom we share customers’ personal information, and how they will use it. We have never sold any personally identifiable information to any third party.

“Keeping the two-way connection open will also allow OnStar to capture general vehicle information that could be used in future product development.

“We apologize for creating any confusion about our Terms and Conditions. We want to make sure we are as clear with our customers as possible, but it’s apparent that we have failed to do this. As always, we are listening to our subscribers’ feedback and we will continue to be open to their suggestions and concerns.”

 
Sorry OnStar, I’m not buying it . . . or your product. 
 
That’s my 2 cents
 
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Hobby Lobby, it’s June

Posted on June 17, 2011. Filed under: Business, Life, Marketing | Tags: , , , , , , |

My family and I were in Hobby Lobby today, and I was surprised to see they were putting Christmas decorations up for sale.

In June!!!!

It’s over six months until Christmas and Hobby Lobby was selling Christmas ornaments.  That’s just starting the season a tad too early in my opinion.  When I was a child, (yes, I understand we’re going back a couple of hundred years), but stores didn’t start the Christmas season until the day after Thanksgiving.  Then they started the Christmas push before Thanksgiving, and more recently the Christmas push starts in October before Halloween.

And now, it’s before the 4th of July.

At this rate it won’t be long before the Christmas selling season will start on January 1st . . . or maybe even December 26th.  Wouldn’t that be something, the day after Christmas and it’s time to start shopping for next years Christmas presents.

It’s time to slow down and be a bit more realistic.  We don’t need to start the Christmas season in July.  Come on Hobby Lobby, use some common sense.

That’s my 2 cents.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

DEAD: BIN LADEN

Posted on May 2, 2011. Filed under: Life, Politics | Tags: , , , , , |

In several news reports this morning the President has announced the death of Osama bin Laden.

My congratulations to our military and intelligence people.

However, since his body was buried at sea, no pictures (yet) of the body, and the fact that DNA test will take days to complete can we be 100% sure that we have correctly identified the body?

Here are some of the news reports:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/02/how-osama-bin-laden-found

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=13506251

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/05/01/obama_at_my_direction_us_carried_out_operation_against_bin_laden.html

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/05/former-presidents-george-w-bush-bill-clinton-issue-statements-on-osama-bin-laden-death.html

Let us pray that this symbol of terror and evil is now in another world befitting his terrorism in this one.  (And I don't mean that in a nice way.)

That's my 2 c

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Happy May Day

Posted on May 1, 2011. Filed under: Brock Henderson, Holidays, Life | Tags: , , , |

May 1st is May Day . . . or at least it was.

When I was a child the 1st of May was celebrated.  Not like Christmas or Easter, but a welcoming of spring.  There was often a May Day parade, and I can remember my Mother taking me to a few homes of elderly people, where we would leave a basket at their door with some sort of home-made treat like cookies.

At kindergarten we would hang streamers to a large pole in the ground, each child having the end of one streamer, and we would walk around the pole until it was completely wrapped.  It was the May Pole.

I have no idea what the significance of the May Pole was, but certainly taking a basket of goodies to friends and those less fortunate was a nice gesture.

The country doesn’t seem to celebrate May Day any more.  No parade, no May Pole, no May Day gift baskets. 

Sad.  It was a great tradition. 

Guess we got too busy . . . or perhaps too lazy . . . or maybe people don’t give a (bleep) any more.  I don’t know; but it was a nice tradition that has unfortunately faded away into distant memories.

So may I suggest you take a couple of minutes to sit down and call someone you haven’t spoken to in some time.  Don’t send an e-mail,or a text, or a tweet, but  reach out as one human to another and actually talk to them.  Let them know you are thinking of them and that they are special.  After all we all need to feel special.

Happy May Day

That’s my 2 cents.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Obama Admits He Was Born in KENYA

Posted on March 8, 2011. Filed under: Government, Life | Tags: , , , , , |

Here is a YouTube video with Obama in a public forum stating that he was not born in the United States but in Kenya.  This admission comes in the first minute or two of the video; in addition his wife (again in a public speaking situation) also refers to Kenya as where Obama was born.

The longer the Supreme Court dodges a ruling on Obama’s place of birth the deeper our country will sink into the brown smelly stuff.

Here’s a link to the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwhKuunp8D8&feature=player_embedded

That’s my 2 cents.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Winning?

Posted on March 8, 2011. Filed under: Marketing | Tags: , , |

As you probably know by now, Charlie Sheen has been fired from the hit series Two-and-a-half Men.  Was this intential on his part?  Were his antics and rants part of a plan to be cut loose so he could go on to more profitable activities?  He alone knows, but there is a great deal of speculation on it.

If it was intentional then I consider it highly unprofessional to leave his fellow actors, crew, and other show support employees without work.  It’s hard enough to find work these days, let alone in a town that chews up actors like snacks, and to put all those people in the unemployment line is just unseemly IMHO.

While I commend the attitude of “winning” at life and everything you do, it isn’t winning when it costs so many others their jobs. 

Now, if his actions were not part of a plan to get fired, but were just rants . . . well . . . perhaps he needs some help and a solid reality check.

His show was one of my favorites, and I hope they can find someone to step into his role.  If the writting stays at the level it has been then there is a chance the show can continue.  It will never be the same, but if they are careful I think it can continue to be a hit.

Here are some links you might find of interest:

SHEEN FIRED, VOWS LAWSUIT…
THREATENS TO ‘CUT THEIR THROATS’…
WARNERBROS Termination Letter Cites Outtakes Reel Of Forgetfulness…
MONDAY NITE: LIVE ON WEB…

Drinking, Ranting, Sweating…
Waves machete on rooftop: ‘Free at last!’…
Roseanne: He makes me look sane…

That’s my 2 cents

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Supreme Court to give Obama eligibility case another look

Posted on February 17, 2011. Filed under: Life | Tags: , , , , , , , |

Reprinted in its entirety is an article from the wnd.com web site.  This is a long article, but interesting none the less.

Stunner! Supremes to give eligibility case another look

Challenge to Obama getting 2nd conference before court


Posted: February 17, 2011
2:23 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WorldNetDaily

U.S. President Barack Obama (R) delivers remarks at the Chrysler Indiana Transmission Plant II in Kokomo, Indiana on November 23, 2010. Obama along with Vice President Joe Biden traveled to Kokomo as part of their White House to Main Street tour of areas helped by the Recovery Act and auto industry bailout.   UPI/Brian Kersey Photo via Newscom

 

In a stunning move, the U.S. Supreme Court has scheduled another “conference” on a legal challenge to Barack Obama’s eligibility to occupy the Oval Office, but officials there are not answering questions about whether two justices given their jobs by Obama will participate.

The court has confirmed that it has distributed a petition for rehearing in the case brought by attorney John Hemenway on behalf of retired Col. Gregory Hollister and it will be the subject of a conference on March 4.

It was in January that the court denied, without comment, a request for a hearing on the arguments. But the attorney at the time had submitted a motion for Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, who were given their jobs by Obama, to recuse.

Should Obama ultimately be shown to have been ineligible for the office, his actions, including his appointments, at least would be open to challenge and question.

At the time, the Supreme Court acknowledged the “motion for recusal” but it changed it on official docketing pages to a “request.” And it reportedly failed to respond to the motion.

Available to order now! The definitive answer on Obama’s eligibility, in “Where’s The Birth Certificate?” by New York Times best-selling author Dr. Jerome Corsi.

Hemenway then submitted a request for a rehearing, pointing out that the situation appeared to be violating the rules of the U.S. Supreme Court.

He also argued that if court members continue to “avoid” the dispute they effectively will “destroy the constitutional rule of law basis of our legal system.”

“We have not exaggerated in presenting the question of the constitutional rule of law being at stake in this matter,” Hemenway wrote in a petition for rehearing before the high court. “A man has successfully run for the office of president and has done so, it appears, with an awareness that he is not eligible under the constitutional requirement for a person to be president.

“Despite a vigorous campaign that he has conducted to make ‘unthinkable’ the very idea of raising the issue of his eligibility under the Constitution to ‘be’ president the issue has not gone away,” Hemenway said.

“Instead it has steadily grown in the awareness of the public. Should we be surprised that he shows no respect for the constitutional rule of law? What else would we expect?” he wrote.

The U.S. Supreme Court today did not respond to WND questions today about whether the two justices would participate in the conference, and there was no response to WND’s request that questions be forwarded to the justices themselves about their plans.

“The real question here is one of getting members of the judiciary to take seriously the oath that they swore to protect and preserve the Constitution,” Hemenway wrote in his petition for rehearing. “To continue to avoid the issue will destroy the constitutional rule of law basis of our legal system when it is under vigorous assault as surely as if the conscious decision were made to cease preserving and protecting our founding charter.”

That the justices are “avoiding” the Obama issue already has been confirmed by one member of the court. It was last year when Justice Clarence Thomas appeared before a U.S. House subcommittee that the issue arose.

Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y., raised the question amid a discussion on racial diversity in the judiciary.

“I’m still waiting for the [court decision] on whether or not a Puerto Rican can run for president of the United States,” said Serrano, who was born in the island territory. “That’s another issue.”

Yet after Serrano questioned him on whether or not the land’s highest court would be well-served by a justice who had never been a judge, Thomas not only answered in the affirmative but also hinted that Serrano would be better off seeking a seat in the Supreme Court than a chair in the Oval Office.

“I’m glad to hear that you don’t think there has to be a judge on the court,” said Serrano, “because I’m not a judge; I’ve never been a judge.”

“And you don’t have to be born in the United States,” said Thomas, referring to the Constitution, which requires the president to be a natural born citizen but has no such clause for a Supreme Court justice, “so you never have to answer that question.”

“Oh really?” asked Serrano. “So you haven’t answered the one about whether I can serve as president, but you answer this one?”

“We’re evading that one,” answered Thomas, referring to questions of presidential eligibility and prompting laughter in the chamber. “We’re giving you another option.”

Hemenway’s arguments came in the petition for rehearing that followed the decision last month by the court not to hear the arguments. However, he pointed out in the petition for rehearing that the U.S. Supreme Court appears to have broken its own rules in his case by failing to respond to a pending recusal motion.

That circumstance is enough, he argues, for another hearing to be held on the case, and this time without participation by the two justices appointed to the court by Obama.

Laurence Elgin, one of the experts working with the Constitutional Rule of Law Fund and website and monitoring the Hollister case, said the attorneys wanted Kagan and Sotomayor to remain out of the arguments since both were appointed to their lifetime posts by Obama and clearly would have a personal interest in the dispute if Obama was found to be ineligible and his actions, including his appointments, void.

Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor appears before the Senate Judiciary Committee during the fourth day of her confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington on July 16, 2009. UPI/Kevin Dietsch Photo via Newscom

 

Hemenway submitted such a motion, but since the motion never was given a response, it should be acted on as if it were granted by the court, the petition for rehearing argues.

“Petitioners would request the court to rehear their petition and in doing so to consider the consequences of their motion for recusal of December 30, 2010 being treated as conceded because it was not opposed in a timely fashion under the rules of this court,” said the document, submitted to the court.

“Rule 21 (4) of the court requires that any motion shall have an opposition to it filed, if one is to be filed, ‘as promptly as possible considering the nature of the relief sought … and, in any event, within 10 days of receipt.’ Thus by January 14, 2011, when petitioners’ petition was denied without comment, the respondents had failed to respond to the motion,” Hemenway wrote.

“Therefore, as a matter of due process of the court, petitioners suggest that the court should have on that day considered the possibility that the motion had been conceded by respondents with an examination of the consequences of that failure,” the brief explains.

“If petitioners are entitled to have their motion for recusal as conceded because of lack of a timely opposition, as petitioners contend is the case, then the court was obliged to make sure that the Justices Sotomayor and Kagan did not participate in the decision. Yet there was no statement that they did not participate,” the brief states.

The brief further argues that because of the lack of a response or acknowledgment by the court, the court should have considered “the law of nations on matters of citizenship such as the phrase in question here as placed in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, namely, the requirement that a president ‘be’ a ‘natural born citizen.'”

Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, President Obama's pick to replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens, testifies during the second day of her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington on June 29, 2010. UPI/Kevin Dietsch Photo via Newscom

 

The argument continued, “Thus, it would seem, with all due respect, that if the court is required to and does treat the petitioners’ motion for recusal as conceded the court would be required to consider the intent of the Framers of the Constitution in choosing the Article II phrase ‘natural born citizen.’

“That is, of course, assuming that the majority of its members still believe that the intent of the Framers is essential to the constitutional rule of law in this country,” the filing said.

In the original petition to the high court, the pleadings noted that if Obama is not constitutionally eligible, it will create a crisis.

“If proven true, those allegations mean that every command by the respondent Obama and indeed every appointment by respondent Obama, including the appointment of members [Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor] of this and every other court, may be only de facto but not de jure [by right of law],” stated the pleading.

“Further, his signature on every law passed while he occupies the Oval Office is not valid if he is not constitutionally eligible to occupy that office de jure,” it continued.

“Thus, it is not hyperbole to state that the entire rule of law based on the Constitution is at issue. Moreover, it would indicate that the respondent Obama ran for the office of president knowing that his eligibility was at the very least in question,” it continued.

Elgin earlier confirmed that Hemenway, as the attorney of record, got the notice from the court that the certiorari petition was denied without comment. But he said there was nothing from the court on the motion for recusal.

The order on Jan. 18 from the high court simply listed case 10-678, Hollister, Gregory S. v. Soetoro, Barry, et al as “denied” with no explanation.

It appears from the court’s documentation that Kagan and Sotomayor participated in the “conference,” the meeting at which Supreme Court justices determine which cases they will take. On other cases there are notations that Kagan or Sotomayor did not participate, and the Hollister case is without any such reference.

Although proceedings are not public, it is believed that a case must earn four votes among the nine justices before it is heard.

WND reported when another eligibility case attorney who has brought cases to the high court, Orly Taitz, approached Justice Antonin Scalia about the issue.

“Scalia stated that it would be heard if I can get four people to hear it. He repeated, you need four for the argument. I got a feeling that he was saying that one of these four that call themselves constitutionalists went to the other side,” Taitz said.

At that time, the Supreme Court was considered to have a 4-4 conservative-liberal split, with one swing vote on most issues. On the conservative side generally was Chief Justice John Roberts, Justices Samuel Alito, Scalia and Thomas. Justice Anthony Kennedy often is the swing vote. The liberal side frequently included Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and John Paul Stevens.

Stevens and Souter have departed since then and have been replaced by Obama with the like-minded Kagan and Sotomayor. Presumably, should there be only seven justices in the discussion, three votes might be sufficient to move the case forward.

Hollister’s case is one of the longest-running among those challenging Obama’s eligibility.

Elgin told WND that the case, throughout the district and appellate court levels, never was denied standing, a major hurdle that has torpedoed many of the other eligibility disputes to rise to the level of court opinions.

The petition for rehearing explains that the “certification of live birth” posted online by the Obama campaign in 2008 cannot be cited as proof, since “Sun Yat Sen, the Chinese nationalist leader,” was granted “the same type of document that the respondents have claimed on the Internet and from the White House ‘proves’ that the respondent Obama was born in Hawaii.”

It cited as an example of Obama’s disconnect from the “rule of law” his administration’s “illegal ban on offshore drilling,” which was struck down by Judge Martin Feldman.

“They immediately came back and instituted a further illegal ban, showing no respect for the rule of law at all,” the petition argues.

Further is the recent judge’s ruling in Florida that Obama’s health-care law is unconstitutional.

“The respondent Obama and those working for him have made it clear that they intend to ignore the decision and proceed as if they never opposed it vigorously in court and the decision never happened,” the argument explains.

The Hollister case made headlines at the district court level because of the ruling from District Judge James Robertson of Washington.


Judge James Robertson

In refusing to hear evidence about whether Obama is eligible, Robertson wrote in his notice dismissing the case, “The issue of the president’s citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America’s vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama’s two-year-campaign for the presidency, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a court.”

Along with the sarcasm, the evidence pertinent to the dispute was ignored.

The fact that the evidence never was reviewed and the judge based a “biased” decision on “a completely extrajudicial factor”  — twittering — prevented Hollister from having the constitutional rule of law applied, the court file explains.

The motion to recuse explained that federal law requires that judges exclude themselves when circumstances arise that would involve “even the appearance of impartiality.”

“It would seem literally to apply to Justice Kagan in any case since she was serving as Solicitor General during the pendency of this and other cases involving the ineligibility question. The U. S. Attorney did make a brief appearance in this case in the appellate document and did appear in many parallel cases,” the motion said.

The president is represented by a private law firm in the current case.

“Historical analysis establishes, therefore, that … respondent Obama, since his father was a Kenyan of British citizenship and not a U. S. citizen, was not ‘eligible to the office of president,…’ Therefore his appointment of the present Justices Sotomayor and Kagan are not valid appointments under the Constitution and they should not, therefore, be sitting as justices deciding upon our petition if this court itself observes the law it has set out under the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. Otherwise the concept of a rule of law based upon the Constitution, which we contend is at issue in our petition, is being flouted at the very outset of consideration of the petition,” the motion explained.

Neither is Hollister a novice on the issue of eligibility, it explains.

“It is a matter of record that Colonel Hollister, while on active duty in the Air Force, in a career from which he honorably retired, inquired into the legitimacy of President Clinton’s orders because President Clinton participated, while at Oxford, in communist protest marches in Eastern Europe against the Vietnam War at a time when we were at war with communism in Vietnam, something that would seem to violate the Fourteenth Amendment,” the site explains.

While the district judge dismissed the case because it had been “twittered,” the appeals court adopted his reasoning but wouldn’t allow its opinion affirming the decision to be published, the petition explains.

Hollister’s concern rests with the fact that as a retired Air Force officer in the Individual Ready Reserve, it is possible that he could be subject to Obama’s orders.

“If Congress called up the Air Force Individual Ready Reserve the respondent Obama would have to give the order … If, as it appears, those orders would not be lawful, Col. Hollister would be bound … to question them and look to the respondent [Vice President Joe] Biden as constitutionally next in succession for lawful orders,” the pleading said.

The case doesn’t have the “standing” dispute that has brought failure to so many other challenges to Obama’s eligibility, the pleading explains, because Robertson “found that it had jurisdiction of the case, and therefore that petitioner Hollister had standing.”

John Eidsmoe, an expert on the U.S. Constitution now working with the Foundation on Moral Law, has told WND a demand for verification of Obama’s eligibility appears to be legitimate.

Eidsmoe said it’s clear that Obama has something in the documentation of his history, including his birth certificate, college records and other documents that “he does not want the public to know.”

WND has reported on dozens of legal and other challenges to Obama’s eligibility. Some suggest he was not born in Hawaii has he claims; others say his birth location makes no difference because a “natural born citizen” was understood at the time to be a child of two citizen parents, and Obama’s father was subject to the British crown when Barack Obama was born.

To read the article, watch a related video and more, go to:   Stunner! Supremes to give eligibility case <I>another</i> look http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=264897#ixzz1EGMe1KUt

 

 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Prayer Power

Posted on February 15, 2011. Filed under: Life | Tags: , , , , , , , |

The other day my wife gave me a used copy of Norman Vincent Peale’s book “The Power of Positive Thinking”.  In it Dr. Peale listed ten rules for getting effective results from prayer, which are:  (and I am quoting from the book)

1.  Set aside a few minutes every day.  Do not say anything.  Simply practice thinking about God.  This will make your mind spiritually receptive.

2.  Then pray orally, using simple, natural words.  Tell God anything that is on your mind.  Do not think you must use stereotyped pious phrases.  Talk to God in your own language.  He understands it.

3.  Pray as you go about the business of the day, on the subway or bus or at your desk.  Utilize minute prayers by closing your eyes to shut out the world and concentrating briefly on God’s presence.  The more you do this every day the nearer you will feel God’s presence.

4.  Do not always ask when you pray, but instead affirm that God’s blessings are being given, and spend most of your prayers giving thanks.

5.  Pray with the belief that sincere prayers can reach out and surround your loved ones with God’s love and protection.

6.  Never use a negative thought in prayer.  Only positive thoughts get results.

7.  Always epress willingness to accept God’s will.  Ask for what you want, but be willing to take what God gives you.  It may be better than what you ask for.

8.  Practice the attitude of putting everything in God’s hands.  Ask for the ability to do your best and to leave the results confidently to God.

9.  Pray for people you do not like or who have mistreated you.  Resentment is blockade number one of spiritual power.

10.  Make a list of people for whom to pray.  The more you pray for other people, especially those not connected with you, the more prayer results will come back to you.

While I haven’t finished reading the book, (I’m about 40% of the way through it), a lot of what he says are things I already knew but had gotten away from.  If you want to change your life this book is an excellent place to start.

That’s my 2 cents.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

There Are No Obama Birth Records In Hawaii

Posted on January 26, 2011. Filed under: Life | Tags: , , , , , |

OMG   Here is a radio clip (on You Tube) where the reporter tells the host that Governor Abercrombie told the reporter that he could not find any record of Obama’s birth in Hawaii.

So the man who wanted to put the issue of President Obama’s birth to rest has done the exact opposite.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvrb7YqdvxE

But wait … there’s more.  Now the reporter, (Mike Evans), says he is remorseful  “that he appeared to have given the impression that he had discussed the search for Obama’s birth certificate with Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie.”

No sir, it was not an accidental impression, you said it loud and clear.  Below is what he is saying now.

Celebrity Journalist: I Never Spoke to Hawaii Gov About Obama Birth Certificate

By Jana Winter

Published January 26, 2011

| FoxNews.com

A celebrity journalist now claims he misspoke when he said last week that Hawaii’s governor told him he was unable to find President Barack Obama’s original birth certificate after a search of state and hospital archives.

Mike Evans told FoxNews.com on Wednesday he was remorseful and embarrassed that he appeared to have given the impression that he had discussed the search for Obama’s birth certificate with Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie.

Evans, who says he has been a close friend of Abercrombie since the 1980s, appeared on Minnesota’s KQRS radio last week and said he’d been told by the governor himself that Obama’s birth certificate was nowhere to be found. Evans told KQRS on Jan. 20:

“Yesterday, talking to Neil’s office, Neil says that he searched everywhere using his powers as governor ….. there is no Barack Obama birth certificate in Hawaii.  Absolutely no proof at all that he was born in Hawaii.”

But that’s no longer Evans’ story.

“Only this I can you tell you is 100 percent fact: that Neil never told me there was no birth certificate,” Evans told Fox News. “I never talked to him.”

Last week’s radio interview was part of Evans’ syndicated five-minute feature, “On the Road with Mike Evans,” which is broadcast on 34 stations across the country each morning.

On the morning of Jan. 20, Evans says he accidentally told one of those radio stations — KQRS — that he’d spoken directly with Gov. Abercrombie about the Obama birth certificate.

“I was on 34 radio stations that morning. That was the only station where I said, instead of saying ‘the hospital said there’s no birth certificate’ I misspoke and said Neil said that,” Evans said. “I misspoke and I apologize for that. I apologize to Neil.”

Abercrombie’s spokeswoman did not respond to Fox News e-mail and phone requests for comment.

Evans says he first noticed the story on Jan. 18, when he was reading an online article with the headline, “Hawaii governor can’t find Obama birth certificate.” The article cites an interview with a former Honolulu elections clerk who says records of Obama’s birth could not be found at either Honolulu hospital.

“Halfway down the story it said the long form certificate was not on file at the two hospitals,” Evans said. “It says the hospitals say there’s no birth certificate and says Neil says he couldn’t find it.”

Evans said he continued reading other reports online, including one that quotes a former Honolulu election official as saying no hospital has been able to find Obama’s original long form birth certificate.

Evans says he then placed a call to Abercrombie’s office in Hawaii to follow up on the reports.

“I called Neil, but Neil never called me back,” Evans told Fox News. “I haven’t talked to Neil since he’s been governor.”

In 2008, the Obama campaign provided a certification of live birth — a shorter form document that bears the same legal weight as the more detailed original certificate of live birth — to prove his eligibility to be president. That has not quelled calls by those who have asked for the president’s original, longer form birth certificate, which they maintain would more clearly prove his status as a natural-born American citizen.

The U.S. Constitution stipulates that only “a natural-born citizen,” or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of the President.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/26/celebrity-journalist-says-he-never-talked-hawaii-governor-obama-birth/

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Update #2: Hawaii Governor on Obama’s Birth Certificate

Posted on January 22, 2011. Filed under: Life | Tags: , , , , , , |

And now the Attorney General for Hawaii has told the Governor that it is against the law in Hawaii to release an individuals birth certificate without the consent of the individual. 

Here’s the entire article:

By MARK NIESSE, Associated Press Mark Niesse, Associated Press Sat Jan 22, 4:56 am ET

HONOLULU – A privacy law that shields birth certificates has prompted Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie to abandon efforts to dispel claims that President Barack Obama was born outside Hawaii, his office says.

State Attorney General David Louie told the governor that privacy laws bar him from disclosing an individual’s birth documentation without the person’s consent, Abercrombie spokeswoman Donalyn Dela Cruz said Friday.

“There is nothing more that Gov. Abercrombie can do within the law to produce a document,” said Dela Cruz. “Unfortunately, there are conspirators who will continue to question the citizenship of our president.”

Abercrombie, who was a friend of Obama’s parents and knew him as a child, launched an investigation last month into whether he can release more information about the president’s Aug. 4, 1961 birth. The governor said at the time he was bothered by people who questioned Obama’s birthplace for political reasons.

But Abercrombie’s attempt reached a dead end when Louie told him the law restricted his options.

Hawaii’s privacy laws have long barred the release of a certified birth certificate to anyone who doesn’t have a tangible interest.

So-called “birthers” claim Obama is ineligible to be president because they say there’s no proof he was born in the United States, with many of the skeptics questioning whether he was actually born in Kenya, his father’s home country.

Hawaii’s health director said in 2008 and 2009 that she had seen and verified Obama’s original vital records, and birth notices in two Honolulu newspapers were published within days of Obama’s birth at Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu.

Health Department spokeswoman Janice Okubo again confirmed Friday that Obama’s name is found in its alphabetical list of names of people born in Hawaii, maintained in bound copies available for public view.

That information, called index data, shows a listing for “Obama II, Barack Hussein, Male,” according to the department’s website.

“The index is just to say who has their records within the department. That’s an indication,” Okubo said. “I can’t talk about anyone’s records.”

The Obama campaign issued a certificate of live birth in 2008, an official document from the state showing the president’s birth date, city and name, along with his parents’ names and races.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110122/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_birth_certificate

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

« Previous Entries
  • My charming self

  • Subscribe to My Newsletters

  • Visit My Website

  • Connect With Me

    View Brock Henderson's profile on LinkedIn
  • Twitter

  • Get Increased Traffic to Your Web Site

  • August 2017
    M T W T F S S
    « Aug    
     123456
    78910111213
    14151617181920
    21222324252627
    28293031  
  • Top Posts

  • Archives

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...