The Crossbow

 This blog entry was originally written on the 20th of November.  I have purposely withheld its publication, in hopes that it would not be necessary.  Sadly, it is.

Because of the delay, all time-related terms in the below entry (such as "last week", or "less than a month ago") should be mentally adjusted accordingly.

The subject of this blog entry is married to an attorney.  He tried to tell me that my previous blog entry on this topic was not true.  I told him that he was bluffing, because if it had actually been untrue then he would've threatened a lawsuit.  He hasn't, nor can he.  Legal doctrine:  "truth is an absolute defense to a charge of libel".

 ------------------------------

Believe it or not, I don't like fighting.  But, I like bullies even less.  That is why I spent a good chunk of my adult life wearing a uniform and carrying weapons to prevent terrorism and other bad things from happening.  There is a quote on my Web site from philosopher John Stuart Mill, who wrote, "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things."  (For the rest of the quote, feel free to visit my site.)

Here's some good advice for any situation:  "Don't bring a knife to a gunfight."  It is especially unwise to start the gunfight if one doesn't have a gun, or has a gun but can't shoot very well.

Such is the case with "live and local" Nashville talk-radio host Michael DelGiorno, who recently made the mistake of starting a feud with me.  And, of all things, he has picked the topic of "credibility" as the basis for the feud.  He should've done his homework.  I have.  One of the things that Michael should study is the origin and meaning of the intelligence term "blowback".

The fuse was lit — on my end — when DelGiorno jerked me around last week, after inviting me to call his program to discuss my recent book.  As documented in a recent blog entry, instead of living up to his word, Michael spent a huge chunk of the final hour of his program that day by repeatedly telling listeners that "Faith Hill smells like toilet paper".  (Then, after that blog appeared, he tried to say on-air that tens of thousands of people heard wrong, and that what he really said was that she smells like "baby powder".  Hey, paisano, "I was born at night, but it wasn't last night.")

The above might seem like a small thing, but it's the tip of an iceberg.  Michael has jerked me around for months, and I've been as gracious as possible under the circumstances.  As I said, the fuse was not lit on my end until recently, but the fuse has been lit on his end for a long time.  I'm not being "overly sensitive", either.  For about a year, friends have asked me why DelGiorno treats me so rudely on his program.  He doesn't treat other callers or guests that way, especially considering that we are both "standing up for what's right".

After my previous blog about him appeared, Michael sent me an e-mail.  The timing was quite ironic, because the week prior he had told me to "direct all further communication" to the acting program director of the station.  He wanted me to respect his boundary, but it was OK for him to trample over the boundary that he had just set ... as long as the trampling was done in my direction.  In other words, "It's all about Michael."

Well, unfortunately, Michael has some credibility problems.

In our e-mail exchange, Michael stated that "many" people had "warned" him not to give me "extended air time".  I challenged him to name even one of those people, and/or to describe what their warning said would happen.  He never replied.  And, that seems to be a pattern.

Other people have tried to rattle Michael during his program with regard to the reason that he left his previous radio station, in Tulsa, in such a hurry.  To his credit, Michael handled those cheap shots fairly well.  (Speaking of cheap shots, the publicity agency that put out my previous blog has suddenly been hit with hundreds of spam e-mails almost simultaneously.  That has never happened before this week.  The company has several e-mail addresses, but the one that was hit was the one that went out in the cover e-mail publicizing my blog about DelGiorno.  Mere coincidence?)  I knew about some of those job-destroying circumstances before he ever got on the air in Nashville.  Why?  I had applied for that same job, and I wanted to know about my competition.  (And, for the most part, his show has gone fairly well.  But, recently, there has been a noticeable decline in quality.  I have attributed the problem to his consumption of a certain caffeine-laden beverage with a bovine mascot.)

In the 19 months that Michael has hosted a program in Nashville, I have never mentioned what I knew from the beginning.  Why?  I didn't want to take any personal shots at him.  I'm an "issues oriented" fighter.  And, I had no fight with him.  But, apparently, Michael decided to pick one with me.  Well ... OK, Michael ... if you insist.

When the publicity went out about my previous blog on this topic, it included a link to an Inside Radio report.  That report quoted a newspaper article from the Tulsa World, which detailed how Michael had been banned — for the second, and final, time — from a Tulsa casino.  There are several Web pages that bash Michael for an apparent problem with compulsive gambling.  Again, I knew about those pages before he even arrived in Nashville, but I've never mentioned them.  When others have mentioned them to me, I have tried to sidetrack the topic.  Why?  "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."  (That quote certainly applies to me.)  But, when his arrogance got to the point that Michael seems to think that there is a special set of rules that allows him to trample on other people, then it's time to teach him otherwise.  (Any regular listeners to WWTN will tell you that I've turned the other cheek far more times than most people would.  Even in the best of families, sometimes the wise older brother needs to simply knock the #&*%! out of a pestering younger brother.)  In this case, my weapon of choice is a metaphorical "mirror".

Recently, I began a series of e-mail exchanges with Ziva Branstetter, who wrote the newspaper article about Michael being banned from the Creek Nation Casino — Tulsa.  Michael prompted my curiosity by telling me in his e-mail that I was spreading "lies and distortions" with regard to the casino incident.  So, just as I did with Michael in the first place, I went directly to the source.  She was cooperative and factual in documenting her experience with Michael.

When she confronted Michael about the incident, at first he denied that it happened.  Then, she told him about the casino's surveillance video.  Immediately, he switched to "no comment" mode.  Ziva related to me that she had never even shown him the video!  As soon as he heard that a video even existed, he clammed up.  (What?  He didn't think that casinos have surveillance?  Duh!  They had surveillance long before VCRs were invented.)  Ziva had been allowed to view the video at the casino's security department, but not to keep a copy.

In keeping with journalistic standards, I didn't merely accept the reporter's word.  I contacted the casino's security department for myself.  They, in turn, had to make an official request with the Oklahoma Gaming Compliance Unit.  After two days, someone from the unit called me back with their official decision.  They would not allow the casino to release the video to me, because I was planning to post it on this blog for public viewing, and the video was so detailed that it would reveal the casino's surveillance capability.  But, by their reply, that outside government agency had confirmed that such a video did actually exist.  And, Ziva had obtained affidavits from several witnesses at the casino before running the newspaper story.  (Originally, the Web version of the story also had included the security report from the casino, but that document is no longer posted.)

So much for me spreading "lies and distortions".

Speaking of distortions, Michael's program recently took a peculiar turn.  Listeners might not realize the "story behind the story".  Two days ago, on-air, Michael mocked another radio host — John Moore, a former Green Beret — who has said on his program that there is a tenth planet in our solar system.  Moore has gone on to say that the CIA is moving its headquarters to Denver, because of concerns about the sudden rise of ocean levels in the near future.  While poking fun at Moore's report, DelGiorno had the theme music from the TV series The X-Files playing in the background.  DelGiorno repeatedly emphasized the folly of there being a tenth planet in our solar system.

Here is the official NASA Web page documenting their discovery of a tenth planet in our solar system.  (Michael seems to think that, if he hasn't heard of it, then it can't exist.  Oh, yeah, I forgot – "It's all about Michael DelGiorno.")

Interestingly, that tenth planet is larger that Pluto.  Astronomers have scanned the skies for five hundred years.  But, it was only three years ago that this tenth planet was discovered.  John Moore claims that his well-placed confidential sources have told him that the yet-unnamed planet will soon cause disastrous effects upon Earth's ocean levels, etc.  The headquarters of the CIA is at Langley, Virginia, more than 30 miles inland from where the Potomac River meets the Atlantic Ocean.  A sudden and catastrophic rise in ocean levels would accompany the impact of an asteroid or comet in the Atlantic.  That precise scenario is described in my recent book.  And, another celestial event described in my book has already occurred — on the exact date when my interpretation of the Bible formula said that it would occur.  John Moore relied upon confidential government sources.  I relied upon the Holy Bible.  Moore and I have never met, nor have we exchanged e-mails.  Yet, we both seem to be predicting a similar event for the near future.  (Is it possible that scientists will name that tenth planet Wormwood?)

And, now, for the "story behind the story".  You see, John Moore happens to be a talk host on the Republic Broadcasting Network.  And, earlier this year, I also hosted an RBN talk show.  (And, out of professional courtesy, I did not call in to Michael's program during the time when I hosted one of my own.)  So, by attempting to discredit one host on RBN, it appears that Michael was attempting to set the stage to discredit me.  Oops.

But, DelGiorno's blunder doesn't stop there.  You see, RBN is owned by John Stadtmiller.  He happens to also be a principal in a company that sells gold.  John can afford his own radio network.  Michael doesn't even own one station.  So, if there were a lawsuit for slander, it appears that Michael would be seriously outgunned.

Speaking of being outgunned, there is another aspect to consider.  John Moore was a Green Beret.  The station that carries Michael's program, WWTN-FM in Nashville, has a signal the reaches well beyond Fort Campbell, 60 miles away.  Fort Campbell is home to the 5^th Special Forces Group.  (You know, the group that operated in Vietnam, where Moore served.)  Every special operator that I ever met was a straight shooter, both literally and figuratively.  It's not smart to insult the integrity of someone that wears one of those "funny-shaped hats" with their military uniform.  (I was capable of a head shot from a half-mile away, and Green Berets train even more extensively than we did.)

My beret is Air Force blue.  The WWTN signal also reaches down to Arnold Air Force base, approximately 70 miles in the opposite direction as Fort Campbell.  In prior applications to host a talk show on WWTN, I've included the selling point that my military background would appeal to audiences at both installations.  Perhaps, after realizing that Michael DelGiorno has insulted the integrity of a former Green Beret (while simultaneously undermining his own credibility), the station might reconsider putting this former Blue Beret on the air.  (You can help that process along by e-mailing:  Charley.Connolly@cumulus.com, or by calling him at 615-321-1067.)  And, if WWTN asks nicely, there might be a way to simulcast my show on RBN to expand the audience.  (Perhaps, if the station asks very nicely, then John won't sue them for slandering his host and his network.)

This isn't the first time that DelGiorno has put his employer into jeopardy of a lawsuit.  He jeopardized his employer last week by insulting Faith Hill.  He did it two days ago by insulting RBN and John Moore.  And, the reason that Michael is in Nashville in the first place is because he jeopardized his former employer in Tulsa.  In short, it seems that Michael DelGiorno is a loose cannon with a short fuse and a growing credibility problem — much like host Kevin Miller that WWTN had to fire just before DelGiorno came to Nashville.  (And, less than a month ago, Miller jeopardized his new employer in Pittsburgh by "pretending" to have been "scolded" on-air for negative remarks about Barack Obama.)  Two years ago, when I was on the Republican ballot for the 5^th Congressional District, Miller was also very rude to me on-air when I would call.  He seemed intent on discrediting me.  Did anyone pay Miller to undermine my campaign for Congress?  And, why would someone who claims to stand for certain staunch principles undermine a candidate that stands for the same things?

By contrast, my investigative work has been above reproach.  I have exposed political frauds, gone after corrupt officials (including a retired two-star general), found important evidence at a bombing scene, helped to unravel a cover-up that involved the FBI and the news media, and investigated aviation disasters.  When I still lived in Upstate NY, I organized that state's first anti-Hillary rally.  (In 2006, I did the same for Tennessee.)  Last year, I sued the governor of Tennessee.  I've gone after some powerful people, and I've never even been sued, much less had to forfeit a settlement.  (DelGiorno e-mailed me to say that my previous blog was "slander".  I replied that his wife is an attorney, and that if I had truly slandered him, then he would've threatened a lawsuit.  He didn't, and neither did any of the corrupt officials that I've confronted.  I back up what I say, and I don't suffer well with people that can't.)  I've interviewed country music stars, government officials, and TV producers — without insulting any of them.  (And, I'm available immediately, in the event that WWTN finds itself in sudden need of a replacement talk-show host with experience.  As I said in my previous blog, I would start the job at half of the $150-K/year that a host in Michael's market situation typically makes, until I can prove my real worth.  Now, there is a truly conservative idea in this difficult economy.  Competition helps businesses, including talk-radio hosts, to improve.)

As an example of the declining quality of the program, here is a direct quote from one of Michael's disjointed e-mails to me.  "This may come as a surprise to you, but caller interaction is NOT the highest priority of mine, or most talk shows."  (That is an actual quote.  I have the e-mail.)  I'm sure that his operating philosophy would also come as a surprise to all those people on hold each day.  Hello?!  It's called "talk" radio.  (Perhaps we should start using the British name, "chat radio", which keeps the perspective that the talk is supposed to go in both directions.)

In short, I have much more credibility than the person that started a feud by attacking my credibility.  He doesn't look so good in the "mirror" of facts, truth, and logic.  Attacking my truth by telling lies and half-truths wasn't a very good idea on his part.  Diverting conservative voters by being a Relief Valve hurts, not helps, our society.

Here's another old saying that Michael DelGiorno should heed ... while he still has a job:  "When you're in a hole, stop digging."  Put another way, "When you're outgunned, disengage."  The reason I don't like fighting is because it's messy and painful ... for everyone involved.  But, that doesn't mean I won't fight when it's necessary, nor does it mean that I'm not good at it.  It just means that I don't go looking for a fight.  I've finished a lot more fights than I've started.  And, I didn't start this one.

Posted by Tom Kovach at 01:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

background — Part One

In recent days, there has been a lot of Internet attention given to a Detroit rock-shock-jock radio interview with Peter Ogego, the ambassador of Kenya.  (Instead of listening to the entire 19-minute rambling segment, click this link for my 3:18 edited version.)  Two days after the American presidential election, the "Mike in the Morning" rock-radio team decided to have some fun by calling the Embassy of Kenya to "congratulate" that African country on "becoming the 51^st state" via the election of US Senator Barack Obama to become our next president.  The receptionist transferred the radio ruffians directly to the ambassador, and that led to the opening of a political Pandora's box.

Toward the end of the interview, co-host Marc Fellhauer asked this question, apparently intending it as a joke, "One more quick question:  President-elect Obama's birthplace over in Kenya, is that going to be a national spot to go visit, where he was born?"  The announcers were not expecting Ambassador Ogego to reply, "It's already an attraction. His paternal grandmother is still alive."

To clarify that the ambassador really meant what he had just said, Fellhauer altered and restated the question.  "His birthplace, they'll put up a marker there?"  The ambassador replied, "It would depend on the government. It's already well known."

examination

The ambassador of Kenya said that the birthplace — in Kenya — of United States President-elect Barack Hussein Obama II is already a well-known attraction!  If that same statement had been made by John Doe the hotel clerk (the disc jockeys also called a hotel in Kenya), then that would be inconclusive.  But, as the official representative of a sovereign government, every public statement that an ambassador makes is the official position of that government.  Therefore, the government of Kenya has now officially stated that Senator Obama was born in Kenya; and, he has stated that said fact is "already well known" in Kenya.

Because the Constitution of the United States requires that the president be "a natural-born citizen", and because the official position of the government of Kenya is that Senator Barack Obama was born in Kenya, the ambassador's interview instantly nullified Obama's chances of becoming president.  Well ... sort of.

In order for Obama to become disqualified for the presidency, Democratic Party electors would need to turn their backs upon party loyalty, which greatly resembles African tribal loyalty, and take an action for the greater good of America as a whole.  Imagine that.

background — Part Two

For a moment, I need to flash back a few months.

Although much of my writing focuses upon politics, I also write about Christian topics.  Perhaps nowhere else do my writings contain so much energy as where politics and religion intersect.  (My first talk-radio program was called "PR-Squared", for that very reason.)  And, perhaps nowhere else do politics and religion intersect with more power than where the topic surrounds Senator and President-elect Barack Hussein Obama II, and his role in End Times prophecy.  (For the specific details, read my book, Tribulation:  2008.  Hint:  It's not what you first think, but that would be close.)

As a result of my study of the Bible and of its application in modern politics, earlier this year I researched the meaning of Obama's last name.  At that time, most other writers were fixated upon his middle name, and clamoring about that fact that it is Arabic.  Although that is important, I find more prophetic significance in his family name.  This is especially true because "last" names are a relatively new concept in Kenya.  (The professor of linguistics that explained this to me had thirteen names, but he used the English two-name convention in his public life.)  As one part of that research, I made several phone calls to the Embassy of Kenya.  And, during those phone calls, a staff member of the Embassy of Kenya plainly lied to me.

The person that lied to me was a woman, and she would only identify herself to me as "Trudy".  The woman that lied to me was not the receptionist; it was someone else to whom the receptionist connected me.  Thus, the liar was a woman in some position of authority at the Embassy of Kenya.  There is only one woman listed on this roster of Kenyan embassy staff members.  I do not know if Felicina W. Ndwiga goes by the nickname "Trudy", but perhaps someone in the Kenyan news media will pick up this story and run farther with it.  Keep that name "Trudy" in the back of your mind, as it will appear again shortly.

What was the lie?  I had asked "Trudy" if there was anyone on the embassy staff that speaks Dho-Luo.  That is the language of the Luo tribe of western Kenya.  That is the tribe from which Barack Obama's paternal ancestry comes.  I wanted to get an official translation of the word "Obama" from someone at the embassy.  (But, I never got far enough to tell anyone that.  All I told "Trudy" was that I wanted to get the translation of a specific word; but, not which word.)  The first time that I called, Trudy told me that there was a person on staff that speaks Dho-Luo, but that he was not available.  I asked when he might be available.  She said to call back after lunch.  I did.  She said that he was not there.  I called back an hour later.  This time, the same Trudy told me that no one on the embassy staff speaks that language.  But, as it turns out, Ambassador Ogego himself is a native Dho-Luo speaker.  Surely, an embassy staff official would know which languages the ambassador can speak, and which one is his native language.  This was no mere mistake, especially given that I had three different telephone conversations with "Trudy".

Side note:  Some scoffers have tried to claim that the Detroit shock-jocks made up the whole thing, and that they made a phone call to a team of character actors.  That claim falls apart on its face, because I got the same voice-mail recording that one can hear in the audio file on their Web site.  And, there is another independent confirming factor.

background — Part Three

Fast-forward from my phone calls last summer to the present.  The telephone interview with the Detroit shock-jocks is gaining attention.  People are beginning to realize that this was an official pronouncement of the government of Kenya.  People are beginning to realize the implication of that pronouncement with regard to the outcome of our American presidential election.  Ambassador Ogego's words could have torpedoed Obama's chances of becoming president.

Now comes the back-pedaling.  WorldNetDaily (one of several publications for whom I have written) has picked up the Detroit angle of the story.  A staff writer contacted the Embassy of Kenya to confirm the story.  An embassy staffer told WND that Ambassador Ogego's words were taken out of context and that Senator Obama was not born in Kenya.  That article appeared on the morning of Wed, 26 November.

That same morning, I was scheduled for a brief guest appearance on the G. Gordon Liddy talk-radio program.  The guest host was Joseph Farah, publisher of WorldNetDaily.  (Mister Liddy was on Thanksgiving vacation.)  The topic was the Ogego radio interview.  Farah has kept the WND spotlight focused upon Obama's questionable eligibility.  To prepare for my interview, I checked for the latest news on the topic, and found the above-linked WND article.  The embassy staffer that issued the denials to WND was none other than "Trudy".  Immediately, I thought back to my own conversation with "Trudy", and knew that she must be the resident spin-doctor for the Embassy of Kenya.

Seeking independent confirmation for what I already knew in my gut, I made a phone call to Kenya.  I chatted with a newsman with many years of experience in following Kenyan politics.  (For his safety, I shall not identify him further.)  The conversation started out as a yes-or-no question:  Does Ambassador Ogego speak Dho-Luo?  The answer, of course, was "yes".  Dho-Luo is his native language.  Ambassador Ogego is also fluent in English and Swahili.  (Many people wrongly believe that Swahili is a "native" African language.  It is not.  It is a synthetic language, which is blended to help people of many African tribes and countries communicate.  Swahili is to the African continent what Esperanto is to the merchant seamen of Europe.)

Given that the ambassador is fluent in three languages, and given that he spent several years as a consultant in Canada before his assignment to the United States, it seems nearly impossible that he got linguistically "ambushed" by the Detroit radio team.  It seems much more plausible that, in a moment of great ethnic (and Socialist) pride, the ambassador was totally candid.  If the ambassador was ambushed in any way, it was not into the weeds of being "out of context".  Instead, it was that he was ambushed into the daylight of telling the whole truth.  (To totally rule out the idea that Ambassador Ogego was "ambushed" by the English language, read his fluent comments in this interview with The Washington Diplomat.  Then listen to his fluent description of the elder Obama at 1:57 of the edited Detroit clip.)

Lest anyone think that I'm merely grabbing at straws with regard to Ogego, consider the ambassador's background.  He grew up in the same village (Siaiya) as the senator's father (Barack Hussein Obama I).  He is from the Luo tribe.  (The Luo Union tried for many years to implement Socialist policies in the Kenyan government.)  He served for several years as the personal assistant to Odinga Odinga, the father of Prime Minister Raila Odinga.  The elder Odinga was a key member, along with the elder Obama, of the Socialist-connected Luo Union — an ethnic-based political association that was banned in 1980, along with all other tribal-based political organizations.  Despite that ban, which was part of an attempt to modernize the country, corruption and tribal politics are still very much a part of the Kenyan political landscape.  Tribal politics are so endemic that, when the younger Obama was elected to the US Senate in 2004, Kenyan Luos fully expected that Obama would order roads and airports to be built in Nyanza Province!  Of course, they also expected it to be done with American taxpayer money.  (Note that this actual African Socialist article on the younger Obama's roots has been blanked-out.  Socialist strategy apparently overcame Socialist pride, so the article was spiked ... but not completely.)  Ambassador Ogego was intimately familiar with the Odinga and Obama families.  The ambassador knew that he was speaking about Senator Obama, and not the senator's late father, when he said that the senator's "paternal grandmother is still alive" at the senator's birthplace.  Again, this was no mere mistake.  Ogego knew exactly what he was saying and about whom he was saying it.

The day after "Trudy" told WorldNetDaily that the ambassador's words were "taken out of context", the ambassador told the same WND writer that he was 'misquoted'.  It cannot be both.  Either the quote was accurate, or it was not.  A misquote cannot simultaneously be out of context, because a misquote involves the wrong words.  "Out of context" means to impart the wrong meaning to the right words.  Given that it is an audio recording of a live radio broadcast, it would be difficult to have the wrong words.  Given the ambassador's fluent command of English, it would be difficult to take the right words out of context.  The only other option is that the ambassador is quite ashamed of having been caught telling the truth, and he is now trying to get out of it.  But, as the old saying goes, one cannot unring a bell.

Notably, the same person at the Embassy of Kenya lied to WND's Chelsea Schilling and to me.  Those lies all hinged upon the purported linguistic weakness of a man fluent in three languages and with many years of foreign service.  Also notably, those lies by an official of a foreign government were to protect US Senator Barack Hussein Obama II from his own past.  And, that protection appears aimed at influencing the American electoral process into choosing a president that is disqualified by our Constitution.  This scenario reads like a role-reversed script from the 1960s TV series Mission: Impossible, with some faraway country using trickery to change the course of American history, instead of the Americans being the agents of "change".  Ironic humor aside, the bottom line is that both an embassy staffer and the ambassador himself lied to researchers trying to get at the truth about Barack Obama's background.

analysis and potential effects

Unfortunately, lies by political officials seem to be par for the course in any modern country.  Still, some lies have more effect than others.  Even in the jaded and lie-saturated environment of modern foreign relations, attempting to influence the outcome of another country's presidential election is considered a "biggie" by most definitions.  Will our current president and his State Department take the actions of Kenya seriously?  Don't hold your breath.

Regardless of what the current administration does, there are three government entities that can take action.  One is the Electoral College, which is scheduled to convene on the 15^th of December.  The second is the Supreme Court of the United States, which has set a "discovery conference" for the 1^st of December and a "certiorari conference" for the 5^th of December.  The discovery conference (with Justice Souter) is set to review Senator Obama's actual birth certificate (versus the forgery that was posted on his presidential campaign Web site).  The certiorari conference (with Justice Thomas) is set to decide whether the Supreme Court will hear the appeal arising from a New Jersey case that was dismissed.  That case, like more than a dozen others, sought to block Obama from the presidency because of his refusal to prove that he is a natural-born citizen.

If the members of the Electoral College take their duty seriously — by moving beyond party loyalties, and putting the good of our nation first — then they are the final check in the "checks and balances" of the presidential election process.  Keep in mind that the electors pledged to Barack Obama come from the ranks of Democratic Party activists.  If that party has so far shirked its Constitutional duty by ignoring the 800-pound gorilla in the room, then what expectation do we have that those electors will have a sudden attack of conscience on the 15^th of December?  (Perhaps the Democrats agree with the rant of Republican President George W. Bush, who declared three years ago that our Constitution is, "... just a God-d---ed piece of paper!")

Enter the third option:  the lawsuit filed by presidential candidate Alan Keyes in the California Supreme Court.  The lawsuit by Keyes seeks to avert a crisis by getting the court to issue an order that the California meeting of the Electoral College may not cast any votes in favor of Barack Obama until his Constitutional eligibility has been confirmed.  Why California?  First, that state has the largest affiliate of the new America's Independent Party, which had nominated Keyes for president.  (When the state-level American Independent Party switched its affiliation from the Constitution Party to the national AIP, the latter instantly became the third-largest party in America.)  Second, that state also has the largest number of Electoral College votes (55).  If the Keyes lawsuit succeeds, and if similar lawsuits were to succeed in only four other states (New York, Michigan, Florida, and Illinois), then courtroom action could block Obama's path to the White House.  (For all those pseudo-conservative pundits that parroted the 'Keyes doesn't have a chance' mantra, what are you doing to stop Obama?)

Although I'm not a lawyer, I have spent more time in courtrooms and law libraries than the average citizen.  In my opinion, the fact that two officials of a foreign government have been caught in a pattern of lies that appears designed to protect Obama from questions about his eligibility is a serious case of political "blowback".  The fact that an ambassador publicly stated that Obama's birthplace in Kenya is "already well known" should be prima facie evidence in any courtroom.  When coupled with the lies told to spin Kenya away from that statement, it rises to a level that I believe would convince most jurors — and, hopefully, most members of the Electoral College — that Obama is not eligible to become president.

And that, dear readers, is why it matters who told what lies to whom.

Posted by Tom Kovach at 11:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Recently, I put out a blog entry that 666 was the winning number for the Illinois state lottery on the day after Election Day.  Illinois, of course, is the home state of US Senator Barack Hussein Obama II, who has (ostensibly) become our president-elect.

So, what are the chances that Obama really is "The One"?  (In an increasing number of columns, blogs, and letters to the editor, that is the term by which Obama is referred:  The One.)

Obama supporters have criticized me for daring to even imply that there is any connection between the election of Barack Obama and the prophecies in the Holy Bible regarding the seven-year period known as The Tribulation.

Imply?  I wrote an entire book about The Tribulation!  And, sadly, I wrote that Barack Obama plays a prominent role in fulfilling the prophecies about this period of time.  (Which, by the way, has already begun.)  The book spells out that role quite plainly, and everything that Obama does confirms that the book is correct.

coincidence?

Was I merely grasping at straws to smear Obama, as critics claim?  Or, was it more than mere coincidence that the number 666 made headlines in Obama's home state the day after the election?  Let's do the math.

Regular readers know that I don't like math.  However, I do like precision, and math is an expression of precision.  And, no one is more precise than God.  Recently, I used math to show that God has given a simple but precise mathematical formula to help us understand the truth of His Word regarding the future of our world.  Through that formula, I was able to demonstrate that events in outer space last month took place on the exact day when the Bible formula said they would.  Nobody could've made a prediciton like that, with that level of precision, except God.

do the math

So, let's see what the numbers have to say about the "coincidence" of the Illinois Lottery picking 666 on the day after Election Day in the home state of the (purported) president-elect.

The chances of picking that number on any given day are one in a thousand.  Multiply that by 365 days in a year, times 4 years in a presidential election cycle, times two candidates likely to win (in our media-steered election process that ignores better-qualified candidates), times 50 states from which the president-elect could have come, times 42 states that have a lottery.  The resulting odds are one in 6,132,000,000 (yes -- more than six billion to one) for that event to happen as it did.

but, wait, there's more

If the number "six billion" rings a bell, it's probably because -- only a few years ago -- it was in the news quite a lot.  In 1999, scientists and the news media proclaimed that the population of Earth had exceeded six billion people.  So, does it seem "more than coincidence" that this one person -- out of more than six billion -- is called "The One"?  What are the odds of that?  A little more than six billion to one?

Only God knows exactly how many people are on Earth at any given moment.  (For example, I think that the figure shown by the US Census Bureau world population 'clock' is somewhat inflated.)  My personal feeling is that the odds of Barack Obama being "The One" precisely matched the number of people on  Earth at the moment when a specific event occurred.  What event?  Just like the exact population of Earth, only God knows the answer to that question.

Given the fact that Obama's home state had a prophetic number on his first day as "president-elect", it certainly seems that God is dropping us some major hints that events are lining up precisely as He predicted centuries ago.  What are the chances that people will pay attention?

Posted by Tom Kovach at 03:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Here is an example of media bias against conservatives.  But, the bias comes from a source that many conservatives overlook.  That would be a person that advertises himself as a conservative talk-radio host.  Yet, that person also tries to convince his listeners to ignore truly conservative choices.  For example, he told listeners to vote for phony conservative John McCain.  That would be like a fitness trainer telling his students to eat a "healthy" brand of doughnuts.

I refer to such Republican shills as "relief valves".

In the wake of the presidential election last week, many callers to various talk shows expressed their worry that we are indeed entering a political disaster "of Biblical proportions".  Given that I recently released a book that details that very thought, and which predicted (months in advance) that Obama would be elected (and that a comet would pass near Earth shortly after this year's Feast of Trumpets), it seemed like a good idea to call in to one of the local talk shows and mention my book.  This is especially true considering that the host has been supportive of some of my activism in the past, and that we have been on friendly terms for the most part.  That is, until I began steering people away from the Republican Party.

Yet, even I didn't expect what happened, or how it happened.

A little background is needed.  Whenever I call in to the Michael DelGiorno show, it is routine for me to be put on hold for anywhere from 45 minutes to two hours.  Yet, once on the air, my call-ins have mostly been positive exchanges.  (There was one very notable exception, a few months ago, when I expressed my desire for "equal time" to discuss the new America's Independent Party.  The host routinely interviews the chairmen of the state's Republican and Democratic Parties.  As the state AIP chairman, I asked for equal time.  DelGiorno was very rude to me that day, interrupting me more often that usual, and even trying to shout me down ("Don't push a pusher, 'cause I can push back!").  People even asked me later about his level of rudeness.  I wrote it off to the fact that he was taking strong cold medicine, and had made several out-of-character remarks on-air that day.)  As the months went on since his arrival in Nashville, though, DelGiorno began playing little electronic tricks on me.  While I would chat with him on-air, there would be very loud music playing in my telephone earpiece.  The music was distracting to me, but the radio listeners could not hear it.  Thus, it made me seem stupid.  Another trick was to do the inverse.  He would ring a little bell at certain points in our conversations.  I could not hear the bell through the phone, and my radio was turned down, but listeners could hear it.  (A friend told me about it, so I began wearing a headphone radio while talking on the phone.  I then chided Michael on-air for "ringing that tacky little bell".  Until the day that I called him on it, I was the only caller that he treated that way.  After I pointed it out, he gave a few other callers "equal time" with it.)  The bell gave an implication that, "This caller is a putz."  Despite all of that, I have been able to get a lot of good information out to the Nashville-area listening audience.  Examples include my lawsuit against TN Gov. Phil Bredesen, my creation of a group to stop student-upon-staff school violence, my research into the meaning of Obama's last name, and the significance of Obama's phony draft registration.  (All of those examples were "exclusives".)

But, then...

Last week, on the morning of Thursday, 06 November 2008, I was listening to the show.  So many callers brought up the topic of Obama potentially being The Antichrist, etc., that DelGiorno dropped all other topics and discussed that one.  (Most listeners admire him for discussing Christian topics on-air; but, there must be enough negative e-mail that station management gets after him about it.  So, some days it's OK to discuss the Bible, and other days it is not.  I strongly support discussing Bible topics.  My first talk-radio program was called "PR-Squared", because the main topics were "politics and religion".)  By the time I got on the air (after being on hold for a relatively short half-hour that time), it was almost time for the noon newsbreak.  (DelGiorno routinely bumps my calls to the end of the line, so that I won't have time to fully explain important details before an "automatic break" cuts me off.  It's one way to make sure that no caller sounds smarter than the host.)  On this occasion, however, he told me to call back at 1220, after Paul Harvey News, and we would discuss the book in more detail.

I did call back, on time, as instructed.  But...

During the extended newsbreak, host Michael DelGiorno had accomplished one of his stated goals since moving to Nashville in April of 2007.  He met music star Faith Hill, who was in the Cumulus Radio building for some other event.  (The facility is otherwise nicknamed "The Valentine Building")  In his typical boyish style, DelGiorno routinely goes ga-ga over Faith Hill on-air, and that day was the epitome.  But, to assuage his guilt for lusting after Faith Hill, he had to come up with something negative to say about her, so that he would not need to spend the night in the family doghouse.  So, he spent most of the next half-hour talking about how Faith Hill was wearing some perfume that smelled like the scented toilet paper often found in public restrooms.  I am not kidding!

Of course, during that time, I was still waiting to discuss Bible prophecy.

When I finally did get back on the air, he only gave me a few seconds to mention the topic of the book.  There was no mention of my last name, nor the title of the book, nor my Web site address, nor any other way to find the book; nothing.  After less than thirty seconds, he went to another caller.  The caller after that one got the "final say" for that day.  He opined that at least DelGiorno had not said that Faith Hill smelled like used toilet paper.  (Again, I am not kidding.  DelGiorno might need to worry about a libel lawsuit from Faith Hill, but I think that maybe he should worry even more about a couple of fists from her husband, music star and movie actor Tim McGraw.  After all, that caller must've told the call screener what he wanted to say, unless DelGiorno doesn't have control of his program.)

After the program, I e-mailed Michael and said that he should not waste my time jerking me around as he did.  If he wants me to discuss the book on his program (and, he said so on-air), then he should schedule me for a real segment, during which I could field questions from callers, just as he would for any other author.  Instead of responding on-topic, DelGiorno went into a diatribe in which he mocked my current lack of a job, mocked my vocal quality, and claimed that my calls are "divisive and distracting" (after telling listeners just a few days prior that I'm "skilled enough" to get my point across quickly and effectively before a newsbreak).  The bottom line of our several e-mails back and forth is that DelGiorno banned me as a caller or guest on his program.

In this tacky situation, there's a lesson for conservatives.

Beware of anyone — journalist, politician, party leader, or talk-radio host — that talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk.  That person is likely a Republican "relief valve".  The mission of a Relief Valve is to give true conservatives a means for venting their righteous anger, but without doing anything that would cause actual change in the overall situation.  So, for example, if a talk-radio host tells you that his program is popular with little children, and then three minutes later says, "I would give my left testicle to debate Barack Obama," then that person is likely a mere double-minded Relief Valve.  If a talk-radio host frequently tells listeners about how stable his marriage is (including details that most people would think are quite private), and then almost as frequently tells listeners about his lusts for a married celebrity, then that person is likely a Relief Valve (or, just plain insane).  If a person tells you that he really supports the views of Alan Keyes, but then repeatedly says "Keyes doesn't stand a chance", and tells listeners to vote for a RINO such as John McCain, then that person is likely a Relief Valve.  If a talk-radio host frequently touts his Christian faith, and frequently encourages listeners to "be aware of the times in which we live", but then actively prevents listeners from knowing anything about a book that says we are currently living in The Tribulation (with many facts to support that view), then that host is likely a Relief Valve.    If a talk-show host says that he would do any job to support his family, but has never done any job but radio, then that person is likely a Relief Valve.  (Especially if that host also makes fun of someone that actually has done a variety of unpleasant jobs to pay the bills, and simultaneously has done conservative activism without pay for many years.)

I could go on, but you get the idea.

Conservatives can do better than to put all their trust into some mere Relief Valve.  It's one thing to make those calls to talk-radio programs (and, those calls are important), but it's more necessary to back up those calls with real action.  An example of "real action" would be for conservatives (especially in Tennessee) to switch to America's Independent Party, instead of remaining stuck with either of the Big Two political parties that collude to diminish America's sovereignty and give illegal aliens a free ride on the backs of American workers.  Real action would be supporting a candidate that knows how to deliver fundamental changes, and has a track record to prove it, instead of supporting the choice of wealthy party insiders.  Real action would be filing lawsuits against elected officials that trample citizens, promote tyranny, and violate the Constitution.  But, sadly, all that most people do is call and vent their emotions to a handy Relief Valve.  And, that is all that the Big Two parties want you to do!

By the way, if a talk-show host tells listeners that he is a "trained professional", but then says on-air that Faith Hill smells like toilet paper, that host is simply proving his lack of professionalism.  In that particular case, it is the listeners that need relief.  When the local station dropped the G. Gordon Liddy show in favor of this guy, I worried that this day might come.  (In his tacky series of e-mails, which showed some disconnect from reality, DelGiorno mocked my talk-radio skills.  But, my last talk-radio program started on 19 stations, and quickly went to 51 stations nationwide.  How many stations has a DelGiorno program ever been on at one time?)

If you agree that Tom Kovach would make a much better talk-show host than Michael DelGiorno, then contact the new Program Director of WWTN-FM in Nashville at (615) 321-1067 and tell him so.  (If you prefer e-mail, his address is:  Charley.Connolly@cumulus.com.)  You can also tell him that, for the first three months, I'll work for half of what they're currently paying DelGiorno.  (I'd even consider hosting a mere one-hour "Nashville Nooner", if WWTN would bring back Gordon Liddy.)  That would be plenty of time for me to prove that I deserve a raise and a contract renewal.  It would also be plenty of time to show listeners how Nashville talk radio should sound.

Regardless of whether I get another talk-radio program, the big lesson here is that true conservatives — nationwide — need to focus their energies on making real changes, and should not dissipate that energy via some shill called a Relief Valve.

Spread the word, while you are still free.

Posted by Tom Kovach at 12:54 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

As my wise old Rusyn grandmother often warned me, "Be careful what you pray for, because you might get it."

For most of this year, I have prayed for God's wisdom and guidance as I researched the material for the book that eventually became Tribulation:  2008.  (The original working title was Are We Already in the End Times?  The research for the book was sparked by a friend's question, "Could it be that Barack Obama is the Antichrist?)

According to my book, he is not.  (Are you surprised?)

But, that does not mean that Obama is entirely off the Biblical hook.  For the details of what I mean by that, I suggest that you read the book.  In the meantime, confirmation of everything that I wrote in the book is coming from many directions.

One direction that I did not anticipate was a State of Illinois official Web page.  Specifically, it is the Web page for the winning lottery numbers for Wed, 05 Nov 2008.  (I captured the page, and stored it on my Web site, because the original page will eventually change as new numbers are posted.)

 

This is a zoom of the captured area.  Please pardon the sloppy highlighting.  (I'm more into "substance" than into "form".  Those that have heard my talk-radio programs know that I was not blessed with a "real radio-announcer voice".  But, nobody has ever called me a bad host, because the substance of the content overrides the form of the voice.)

Even those that know very little about the Bible still understand the significance of the number "666" (which I hate to even type on my computer).  They know that it is associated with absolute evil, albeit perhaps wearing a benevolent mask.  (just as "Satan transforms himself into an angel of light" -- 2nd Corinthians 11:14)  Hopefully, the fact that the very first sunset on a president-elect Obama included -- in his home state -- the number 6-6-6 as Obama's "winning numbers" is a fact that will get the attention of even the most hardened scoffer.

I wonder what "Peggy the mooch" thinks of this major-league hint from God.  (I heard that nickname, and the audio clip, from statewide talk-radio host Steve Gill this morning.)

"Peggy the Mooch" is quite emblematic of many Obama supporters.  Recently, I passed along to friends a forwarded e-mail story called "It's all about the ice cream".  The story describes a third-grade class that takes an interest in the presidential election.  The teacher decides to offer a practical lesson by staging a mock election in the classroom.  But, the teacher didn't anticipate little Olivia's one-sentence campaign speech:  "I will give everybody ice cream."  The class immediately forgot about little Steven's well-researched campaign speech.  And, despite teacher prompting, the class ignored questions about who would pay for the ice cream, etc.  Olivia won by a landslide.

One of my friends is a NY liberal.  I debated about whether to even send her the story, knowing that I would get a backlash.  What surprised me, however, were the purported "facts" that my friend used to justify her support of Barack Obama.  She claimed that Obama was the epitome of the American Dream, because he came from a "poor family" and rose to get elected president.

However, she has totally ignored the following real facts.

• Barack Hussein Obama I was a Harvard-educated economist from a politically-connected family in Kenya.
• Barack Hussein Obama II got substantial financial backing from Dr. Khalid al-Mansour in order to go to Harvard Law School (after attending two other colleges, in different parts of the country, and admittedly blowing a lot of money on booze and drugs).  How many products of "a poor family" can afford to do that?
• Barack Hussein Obama II was, by reliable accounts, born in Kenya of a Kenyan father.  Under the British law that was in effect at the time of his birth, that makes the younger Obama a natural-born citizen of Kenya.  (Thus, not only is he Constitutionally disqualified from becoming president, but he is also illegally occupying an office in the United States Senate, unless he can prove that he legally entered this country and became a naturalized citizen within the qualifying dates.)
• Barack Hussein Obama II is not even 100 percent Black.  (He is 50 percent White, 34 percent Arab, and only 16 percent Black.  He is, however, 100 percent Socialist.  That, of course, would be just fine with Peggy the Mooch and Olivia the Ice-Cream President.)
• Kenya's current prime minister, Raila Odinga, is the cousin of Barack Hussein Obama II, who campaigned for him during a trip to Kenya.  (Is is legal for a sitting United States senator to attempt to sway a foreign election?)
• Prime Minister Odinga received higher education in East Germany when it was still a Communist country.  Prime Minister Odinga named his son "Fidel" -- not a typical Kenyan name.

I could go on, but that would take away from the prophetic "hint" that God has allowed the Illinois Lottery provide to anyone that will pay attention.  To people such as Peggy the Mooch, it might seem as if Obama is an "angel of light".  But, don't worry, that illusion won't last much longer.  "If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear."  (Matthew 11:15)

Posted by Tom Kovach at 07:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This is the initial entry of my blog:  The Crossbow.

My first several columns were done on separate HTML pages.

 The original archive for The Crossbow may be accessed at:  http://tomkovach.us/Columns/Crossbow/000--CB--Archive.html

Assuming that all of the techical setup stuff goes as planned, all future editions of The Crossbow will be found on this blog site.

Posted by Tom Kovach at 08:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)