...but, having been called a liar, I just have to ask:

Jamiso, why are you so hysterical? Why are you calling people names? Why are you opposed to a comprehensive investigation now that 9/11 is eight years behind us? When so much more information has come to light in the ensuing years? When some central unbiased entity - free from the pressure to keep secrets that was the nature of the previous administration - can be free to dig through the various conflicting arguments, pull them all together, analyze them, and produce a comprehensive report? What are you afraid of? Frankly, your level of emotion worries me. If I'm wrong in some of my beliefs, then why are you concerned that an investigation might prove me and the other doubters wrong?

As to why this posting comes so far away timewise from your original comments regarding my posts and your silly, childish name calling, it's because I've been busy all day doing other things. Normal things. That's what normal people do. Do you understand the concept?

Normal people like me want to know what happened on 9/11.

(P.S. To cab driver, thanks for trying to inject some degree of sanity into the dialog.)

Thanks cabdriver and scorpio... for the info. on John Farmer's GROUND TRUTH. I went immediately to Amazon and ordered a copy. Would love to read what the senior legal counsel to the 9/11 Commission has to say. Maybe it will provide us with some answers. Being an oldster, I would hope to find some answers to be questions and doubts before I die, and put a halt to the Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire silliness that seems to consume some folks. Again, thanks.

Oops. Forgot to thank you, too, 23skidoo, for providing the information on GROUND TRUTH.

I'm coming late to this discussion, but today it has its benefits because a google search turned up a couple of interesting things.

Yesterday Captain Connie Rhodes -- one of the military personnel Orly Taitz has recruited and on whose behalf Taitz filed a lawsuit claiming that Barack Obama has no authority to deploy this military doctor because he isn't really Commander-in-Chief, being ineligible for the presidency because of the birthers' claim that he's wasn't born in the U.S. as required by the Constitution as a qualification for the presidency -- sent a letter to the judge chastizing Taitz for filing an appeal motion and saying she's fired Taitz for misrepesentation and acting without consultation with the client. Captain/Doctor Rhodes also said she intends to file a complaint with the California Bar Assn. It's all right there, in an easy search, folks. Check it out for yourself here: http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/breaking_news/story/844811.html.

Initially I began the search because I wanted to check out something that was lurking in the back of my brain. Just who is Calif. Mike? Could he be Orly's son, who is named Michael or Michaeladam, and who lives in California? Or, perhap, it's Orly herself writing under the moniker of her offspring? Just speculating, of course...

Finally, while Calif. Mike was challenging folks as to their educational background, level of knowledge with regard to Taitz' multi-state lawsuit activity, and commitment to the "birther" issue itself, I kept remembering that the original effort didn't involve any of these poor schmucks recruited by her. (By the way, that recruitment and donation-request website doesn't exist anymore--again, check it out yourself: www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1.) Her initial client was Alan Keyes, a person who is definitely certifiable, and even further off the charts of DSM-IV mental illness interpretations than Taitz herself.

But what do I know since I'm not a dentist, a realtor or a lawyer---nor a kook. Just a curious old woman who likes to check things out for herself.

If any of the above comments are wrong, I'm certain Calif. Mike will be correcting them---after, of course, checking with... Oh, well, you get the idea.

Taitz has a new blog: http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/

....and passed it on yesterday to a couple of dozen addresses on my e-mail list, asking them to pass it on (along with the Baccus "lemon" project). Surprisingly, two friends had already posted a link to it on their Facebook pages.

But there is a drawback. I fear that with our dumbed-down society, some may not realize it's satire.

Why does anyone need 12 guns?????????????

It's not President Obama who is crushing Democratic dissent. It's Rahm Emmanuel, his so-called Chief of Staff who, in reality, appears to be both the policy and the political adviser to the president. Emmanuel is incapable of keeping his nose out of local politics---or using them for his own agenda (which may or may not be Obama's agenda).

The President has shown he's naive when it comes to local politics. Does anyone here need to be reminded of his speech at a Connecticut democrat party fundraiser where he urged those present to pull out their checkbooks and write one for Joe Liebermann's campaign----while Ned Lamont sat in the audience? Need I also remind readers how Liebermann said "thank you" to Obama by actively campaigning for John McCain?

I've always disliked the use of "we" by elected officials. An old saying is that the only people qualified to use the word "we" when referring to themselves are pregnant women and those with tapeworms. Voters don't elect a group. They elect a single PERSON, and the buck should stop with that person. Unfortunately, in the case of the Obama administration, we seem to have acquired an administration full of individuals who we didn't -- or WOULDN'T -- vote for!

I think Emmanuel (who is nothing more than an appointee) should be sent back home to Chicago before he gets more full of himself than he already is--before he becomes a mini-Cheney whose personal ideology and politics -- and, yes, his personal grudges -- affect any more decision-making by the elected president. Then maybe we'll see the real change promised in the campaign.