are attempting to censor the truth and I am the Nazi?  Think about it, and I think you will dscover who the real Nazi is. Let me repeat my opinions, based on the facts I have seen and are presenting… Obama is a liar Obama is a racist Obama is funded by and friends with terrorists Obama is a Marxist whose hidden agenda is to destroy the sovereignty of this nation.   Guess what, you do not get to censor this.  If fact I am probably not writing it for you.  

"Reality is tough for you, I know—but Birth certificates give mothers the OPTION of listing parants faith." Not in any state I'm aware of.  It wasn't an option when on either of my daughter's birth certificates here in California. Where are you getting this information from? World Nut Daily again?  In ANY case the parents religion at someone's birth is not really that reliable an indicator of what one's religion will be as an adult... ESPECIALLY given the HUGE influence of Christian Evangalism and the New Age acceptance of Eastern Religions and the return to the Earth Religions during the 1970's, 80's, and 1990's! I'm a PERFECT example of that! My Father was a Roman Catholic, my mother was an Antioch Baptist, and I was raised by my maternal Gran'ma in one of the Cherokee Native American Religions which I quit practicing when I was 13 and joined another faith (in which I became a minister) altogether! And I am FAR from unique in having such a series of circumstances though maybe not the in the same actual faiths.  My Gods man! 9 out of 11 of my closest friends have the same sort of circumstances in thier religious background! There would be no reason at all to assume that Barak Obama would not have the same circumstances in his background. Do you follow me? And one more thing Clayton. I have absolutly no problem with reality.  If you continue with the gratuitus insults I'll put you back on ignore.   "If you are going to have the bad taste to burn my flag, then at least have the good taste to wrap yourself in it first!" Walter Clarence McClure Sr. My Grand Daddy Edited for clerity and grammar.

You may want to read the case summary of the Rezko case in conjunction with the information on this thread. I think is  a very real possibility, made even more certain by the anti-semetic, pro Arab stance of his advisors.  I read the "case summary" of the Rezko case that you provided.  While you at least now refrain from calling it a "transcript" (or even a "summary of a transcript"), it is NOT a "case summary".  It is a summary of the notes taken by two Fox News Reporters who covered the story and sat in the courtroom audience.  All that your "case summary" reveals are their observations of the proceedings.  I would point out that you have now stepped so far out of bounds of the very document that you claim to be describing that you are quite possibly living in LaLa Land. "His advisors", I would assume, refer to Barack Obama (the "his" antecedent) and to Rezko (the "advisor").  The Rezko trial was not about Barack Obama.  It was about a fellow who, among other things, built and managed low-income housing units and received government money (state and federal) to do so.  He was accused of applying strong-arm tactics (extortion), fraud, bribery, and money-laundering tactics to skim money from the top of his operations.   He was acquitted on the extortion charge, he was convicted on 6 of the 9 fraud charges, he was convicted of only 2 of the 6 bribery charges, and convicted on both of the money laundering charges (for those keeping score, he was found guilty on only a little more than 1/2 the things he was accused of doing). Barack Obama was not on trial.  He is associated with this case only because Rezko, while the Senator was still attending university, offered him a job because Obama was focusing on law related to urban housing.  Obama refused the job, and went to work, instead, for a different law firm.  Because the firm handled clients involved with government contracts and housing, the firm often had dealings with Rezko's company.  Barack Obama actually spent a total of five hours on one of five cases his law firm handled.  Rezko also gave Obama a head's up about a home for sale in an exclusive Chicago neighborhood (two adjoining lots were for sale, and Rezko wanted one of them), and two separately bought them from the same owner (hence, the sale of both homes closed on the same day, which were the terms of sale demanded by the seller).  Rezko also sponsored several fund-raising events for Barack Obama's state senate and Congressional campaigns, and donated about $200,000 to those campaigns (the last being in 2004).  Obama donated that money to charity when Rezko was charged. The end. The "pro-Arab" bit comes into play based on the testimony of a single individual, Ali Ata, who testified on May 1-2 (according to the Fox News report).  During his testimony, Ata said he donated $5000 to Barack Obama's campaign for the U.S. Senate in 2003.  He said Tony Rezko also asked him to donate an additional $10,000 to that Senate campaign, but Ata declined.  This bit of testimony is referred to twice in the Fox News report (perhaps Clayton thinks that referring to it two times means that it happened two different times?) ... once on the May 1 and once on the May 2 journal entry. That's it.  That is the full report of the "pro-Arab" connection to Barack Obama in this trial.  True, Ali Ata was born in Jordan, but he immigrated to the U.S. in 1970 at the age of 18.  He attended the University of Chicago and received his Bachelor's degree in chemical engineering.  He lost his job in 2001, and Rezko convinced him that if he donated $50K to the campaign of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, Rezko would secure him a position as head of the Illinois Finance Authority.  He did.  He plead guilty to corruption charges and offered to testify in the Rezko case in exchange for a lighter sentence.  Clearly, Ali Ata is not a "terrorist" (as Clayton both implies, in this message, and has directly stated, in other threads).  But hey ... a racist finds it really hard to tell one Arab from another (they all look the same, and they all have such similar sounding names!) ... and if he came from JORDAN, he must be a Hamas terrorist! But Clayton is not a very careful reader of the "documents" he submits as evidence.  On May 12 at 5:19 PM ET (for example), Fox News producers Marla Chichowski reports, "The evidence shows Rezko spent more time in 2003-2004 fundraising for St. Jude's Children's Hospital, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama, than he did for Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich".   By his own logic, does this mean that George W. Bush is supported by "terrorists" and "gangsters"? And there's more.  On three separate occasions in the Fox News report (May 2, May 1, and April 23), the authors explain that Rezko was convinced that the case against Ata would be dropped or that the Federal Prosecutor (US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald -- the same guy who prosecuted White House criminals in the Valerie Plame case) would be replaced.  He claimed to be on good terms with Republican National Committee member Robert Kjellander, who was working with Karl Rove to remove Fitzgerald (remember the rumors that he was going to be the 10th US Attorney dismissed by the Justice Dept for not being conservative enough, and not prosecuting enough Democrats?). Since guilt-by-association is the modus operandi of Clayton, does this then implicate Karl Rove, Alberto Gonzalez, Dick Cheney, and George W. Bush in the money-laundering, "terrorist" supported antics of Tony Rezko?  Seems to be a pretty good assumption! Then again, I am a much better critical thinker than Clayton ... I do not assume that my assumptions are true, and then carry on as if they were. Your confusion seems to be in whether this is theory or fact. I am presenting it as a theory—but one with quite a bit of supporting evidence. You are doing no such thing.  Your "theory" is baseless speculation, born of selective misreading of a report issued by two Fox News producers who did a pretty good job of describing a trial from the audience's perspective.  In fact, the very evidence you provide contradicts your "theory" in multiple places.  In 13 weeks of trial, one witness testifying over two days admitted to making a small political donation to the Senatorial campaign of Barack Obama FOUR YEARS AGO.  From that tiny little factoid, you extrapolate an anti-Semitic, pro-Arab, terrorist-backed campaign to get Barack Obama elected President of the U.S. I suspect you are secretly a writer for The Onion!

He is hiding nothing.  If he is, then you must show what he is hiding by uncovering it (with real stuff, not conjecture, hearsay, rumor and speculation).  You must also show he is an American. I notice you still have not produced evidence that you are American, or (since you are not running for President), that John McCain is an American.  Nor have you produced any evidence showing that John McCain is not hiding things from his past.