Eligibility case finds 'standing'?
New suit claims unique state law enables citizens to demand proof
By Drew Zahn
A new case challenging Barack Obama's natural-born citizenship and, therefore, constitutional eligibility to serve as president has the potential to clear a hurdle that caused several other similar cases' dismissal: the issue of "standing."
In the case brought by Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg, for example, a federal judge ruled against the lawsuit in deciding Berg lacked the "standing" to sue, arguing that the election of Obama wouldn't cause the plaintiff specific, personal injury.
In Washington state's Broe v. Reed case, however, plaintiff's attorney Stephen Pidgeon says a unique state statute grants everyday citizens the required standing.
"These lawsuits have pointed their fingers at the various secretaries of state and said, 'You handle the elections, it's your job [to verify Obama's eligibility],'" Stephen Pidgeon told WND, "and the secretaries of state have said, 'No, it's not our job. You the voter have to prove he was ineligible.' But when the voters try to do it, the courts tell them they have no standing. So it presents a catch-22.
"Here, we have standing by means of statute," Pidgeon continued. "This particular statute provides for any registered voter to challenge the election of a candidate if the candidate at the time of the election was ineligible to hold office."
Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 200,000 others and sign up now!
Rest of story here:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=84966
From Dr. Orly:
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
OBAMA HAS NOT MET HIS BURDEN OF PROVING HE WAS BORN IN HAWAII
By now, many of us know about the Certification of Live Birth (COLB) that Obama posted on the internet in June 2008 as proof that he was born in Hawaii. This document was touted by fightthesmears.com and factcheck.org as sufficient proof that he was born in Hawaii. Later on we learned about Hawaiian law in effect at the time of Obama's birth that allowed parents or guardians of babies born in a foreign country to register the foreign births in Hawaii and to receive a COLB as evidence of that registration. We also learned that only the original Certificate of Live Birth (BC), issued by the birth hospital, provides, among other things, the name of the hospital where a baby was born and the name of the attending physician that delivered the baby.
We learned that the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (a state agency that happens to detail the difference) states:In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL.
ALSO SEE: Keyes v. Lingle: Case Dismissed; Forensic Examiner Disproves Online COLB
After learning this information many concerned Americans had doubts about whether the COLB was sufficient proof that Obama was in fact born in Hawaii. But apart from the lax Hawaii law, there is another important point to understand about the COLB. If one reads the document, one will see that at the bottom it states: "This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding."The important words here are "prima facie evidence." "Prima facie" is a Latin phrase meaning "on its first appearance" or "by first instance." It is evidence which is adequate, if not invalidated, to confirm a particular intention or fact. It is evidence that is sufficient to raise a presumption of fact or to establish the fact in question unless rebutted. A prima facie case may be insufficient to enable a party to prevail if the opposing party introduces contradictory evidence. In other words, it basically means that on the face of it or on the surface there is enough evidence to prove the alleged fact, unless and until the alleged fact is contradicted...Continue Reading
Obama's Kenyan birth evidence to be revealed today, online
By Arlen Williams
See update on this article here: Divorce from Obama Sr. update info - Obama's Kenyan Birth
Update on Obama's
Permission to copy and post this article's text is granted.
A private investigator in Hawaii has uncovered the divorce decree for Barack Obama's father and mother, which indicates they had "one child under the age of eighteen, born in Kenya." That is the report of Ed Hale of PlainsRadio.com, an Internet radio site which has focused upon the natural born Citizen challenges to Obama's presidential eligibility.Hale announced this during his evening Internet broadcast on PlainsRadio.com, Tuesday, 12/30 and confirmed it with I.O. in an online interview, later that night. He reported that certified copies of this documentation have been sent from Hawaii by the investigator to himself and four others. Hale is to receive his copy today, Wednesday, 12/31 and plans to post it graphically on the site, during the day. He will also discuss this on a special Internet broadcast, between 6 pm and 10 pm Central Time, tonight. The site streams audio as soon as it is accessed via Web browser.
Link to PlainsRadio and their message forum
Message to Congress: Protect Constitution
Effort seeks volunteers to challenge eligibility
A California foundation whose chief is involved in two separate legal actions challenging the eligibility of Barack Obama to be president has launched a campaign seeking volunteers in Congress to object to the Electoral College vote.
The effort by Orly Taitz, who is a part of the Keyes v. Bowen case in California alleging Obama is not constitutionally qualified to occupy the Oval Office, was launched today with an open letter to members of Congress and a plea for the preservation of the Constitution.
"Our nation can survive four years of any president. It cannot survive without a Constitution," the letter, posted online at the DrOrly.blogspot.com website, said.
Obama's eligibility to be president based on questions about his citizenship has been challenged in more than a dozen lawsuits around the nation, including several that have reached the level of the U.S. Supreme Court.
Read rest of story here: http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=84882
Berg's Urgent Appeal For Letters To Supreme Court Of The United States
Philip Berg's Urgent Appeal
Philip Berg has an urgent appeal up regarding the upcoming Conferences on January 9 & 16th. I would like to join his plea for citizen support.Contact both the Supreme Court Justices and Members of Congress to urge action.Visit Citizenwell's "U.S. Constitution Hall of Shame" to see how uninformed the recent responses are from our representatives. Call them. Time is Short! End 2008 with an act of citizen involvement to protect our Constitution.
From ObamaCrimes:
Urgent – Write Letters to Supreme Court JusticesCase of Berg vs. Obama, U.S.S.C. Case No. 08-570, in the U.S. Supreme Court has been scheduled for two [2] Conferences [January 9th and 16th, 2009].The Justices of the Supreme Court will read letters sent to them. Let them know how important it is for them to hear our case; how “standing” is important on the issue of Obama’s qualifications; how we are headed for a “Constitutional crisis” if Obama’s qualifications are not resolved; how important it is to follow “our Constitution;” and how Obama’s records: his original ‘vault’ birth certificate, immigration records when he as Barry Soetoro [adopted in Indonesia] returned to Hawaii in 1971, if any, and any change of name Court records are necessary as Obama might be an illegal alien, not only not qualified to be President, but a fraud as U.S. Senator from Illinois.
Write one [1] letter to the nine Justices of the United States Supreme Court (names are listed below), make nine [9] copies and put them in nine [9] separate envelopes, addressed to each Justice, and then place them into one [1] manila envelope and mail to:U.S. Supreme Court1 First Street, N.EWashington, D.C. 20543Supreme Court Justices
Chief Justice John Roberts
Associate Justices:
Samuel A. Alito
Clarence Thomas
Antonin Scalia
Anthony M. Kennedy
David H. Souter
John Paul Stevens
Stephen G. Breyer
Ruth Bader Ginsberg
Note: Any communications received by the U.S. Supreme Court via e-mail or fax are thrown away. The U.S. Supreme Court will not take telephone messages for the Justices. All communications to the U.S. Supreme Court must be done in writing and sent to them by way of U.S. mail, UPS, Federal Express, etc.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
WHO WILL STAND UP FOR THE U.S. CONSTITUTION?
WHO WILL STAND UP FOR THE U.S. CONSTITUTION?
By Lynn Stuter
December 30, 2008
NewsWithViews.com
As we near the end of 2008, the day is rapidly approaching when Congress shall convene to address the votes of the Electoral College as set forth in 3 USC, Title 3, Chapter 1, Section 15,
Congress shall be in session on the sixth day of January succeeding every meeting of the electors. The Senate and House of Representatives shall meet in the Hall of the House of Representatives at the hour of 1 o'clock in the afternoon on that day, and the President of the Senate shall be their presiding officer. Two tellers shall be previously appointed on the part of the Senate and two on the part of the House of Representatives, to whom shall be handed, as they are opened by the President of the Senate, all the certificates and papers purporting to be certificates of the electoral votes, which certificates and papers shall be opened, presented, and acted upon in the alphabetical order of the States, beginning with the letter A; and said tellers, having then read the same in the presence and hearing of the two Houses, shall make a list of the votes as they shall appear from the said certificates; and the votes having been ascertained and counted according to the rules in this subchapter provided, the result of the same shall be delivered to the President of the Senate, who shall thereupon announce the state of the vote, which announcement shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, if any, elected President and Vice President of the United states, and, together with a list of the votes, be entered on the Journals of the two Houses. Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any.
Every objection shall be made in writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof, and shall be signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received. When all objections so made to any vote or paper from a State shall have been received and read, the Senate shall thereupon withdraw, and such objections shall be submitted to the Senate for its decision; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, in like manner, submit such objections to the House of Representatives for its decision; and no electoral vote or votes from any State which shall have been regularly given by electors whose appointment has been lawfully certified to according to section 6 of this title from which but one return has been received shall be rejected, but the two Houses concurrently may reject the vote or votes when they agree that such vote or votes have not been so regularly given by electors whose appointment has been so certified.
If more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State shall have been received by the President of the Senate, those votes, and those only, shall be counted which shall have been regularly given by the electors who are shown by the determination mentioned in section 5 of this title to have been appointed, if the determination in said section provided for shall have been made, or by such successors or substitutes, in case of a vacancy in the board of electors so ascertained, as have been appointed to fill such vacancy in the mode provided by the laws of the State; but in case there shall arise the question which of two or more of such State authorities determining what electors have been appointed, as mentioned in section 5 of this title, is the lawful tribunal of such State, the votes regularly given of those electors, and those only, of such State shall be counted whose title as electors the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide is supported by the decision of such State so authorized by its law; and in such case of more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State, if there shall have been no such determination of the question in the State aforesaid, then those votes, and those only, shall be counted which the two Houses shall concurrently decide were cast by lawful electors appointed in accordance with the laws of the State, unless the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide such votes not to be the lawful votes of the legally appointed electors of such State.
But if the two Houses shall disagree in respect of the counting of such votes, then, and in that case, the votes of the electors whose appointment shall have been certified by the executive of the State, under the seal thereof, shall be counted. When the two Houses have voted, they shall immediately again meet, and the presiding officer shall then announce the decision of the questions submitted. No votes or papers from any other State shall be acted upon until the objections previously made to the votes or papers from any State shall have been finally disposed of.
More and more concerned Americans are contacting their U.S. Senators and Representatives regarding the likelihood that Barack Hussein Obama is not eligible to the office of president as required by Article II, Section 1, United States Constitution. One response concerned Americans are receiving follows along the lines that Barack Hussein Obama has presented his birth certificate and is eligible. Nothing could be further from the truth.
What follows are the undisputed facts concerning the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to the office of president. Any U.S. Senator or U.S. Representative is welcome to dispute these yet undisputed facts. In so doing, however, the American people demand that the evidence be produced:
1 - Barack Hussein Obama has not been vetted or certified eligible to the office of president of the United States by any agency tasked to do so or authorized to do so.
2 - Not one American citizen, not one Senator, not one Representative has seen, touched or examined Barack Hussein Obama’s vault copy Hawaii birth certificate. While October 31, 2008, Dr Chiyome Fukino, Department of Health, Hawaii, issued a press release in which she stated that she had “seen and verified” that a Hawaii birth certificate for Obama did exist; she did not state what was on it nor did she state that it showed that Obama was born in Hawaii.
3 - The Certification of Live Birth (COLB) that Obama has been waving about is not a “birth certificate” as he claims, as the mainstream media claims, as FactCheck.org and FighttheSmears.com claims. The COLB is a short form, computer printed document deriving the information printed thereon from a database of information supposedly (See #13 and #14 below) taken from the original long form vault copy Hawaiian birth certificate.
4 - Factcheck.org claims to be a non-partisan organization. Factcheck.org is funded by the Annenberg Foundation on whose board Obama sat. Factcheck.org is about as non-partisan as is Obama. The Annenberg Foundation has never passed up a chance to fund a “progressive” (a.k.a., Marxist) cause.
5 - Hawaii has a law, HRS 338-17.8, which allows for the birth registration of a child born in a foreign country so long as one parent is a U.S. citizen and so long as that parent claimed Hawaii as his or her permanent residence for one year prior to the birth. Stanley Ann (Dunham) Obama met both of these requirements.
6 - If Obama was born in Hawaii, he is, at best, a dual citizen. At his birth, his father was a British subject as Kenya was a British colony. Dual citizenship precludes Obama from eligibility under Article II, Section 1, United States Constitution. Prior cases decided by the United States Supreme Court, involving the determination of “natural born” have used Vattel’s “The Law of Nations” definition which states, “The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.” (Part I, Chapter 19, Section 212). Factcheck.org states that Obama was a dual citizen at birth.
7 - If Obama was born in Kenya, he was, at birth, a British subject as Kenya was a British colony. 7 - American law, at that time, required that Stanley Ann (Dunham) Obama be a minimum of 19 years of age at his birth to confer to him her American citizenship if he was born outside the United States; she was only 18 years old when Obama was born.
8 - Barack Hussein Obama’s paternal step-grandmother has stated before witnesses, said witnesses signing affidavits, that she was witness to the birth of Obama in Kenya. See here, here, and here.
9 - Michelle Obama has stated that Barack Hussein Obama was adopted by his step-father, Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian citizen.
10 - When Barack Hussein Obama was registered at the Fransiskus Assissi Primary School in Jakarta, Indonesia, his father was listed as Lolo Seotoro; his citizenship as Indonesian; his name as Barry Soetoro.
11 - When Stanley Ann (Dunham) Soetoro divorced Lolo Soetoro in 1980, the divorce papers show they had two children: one minor child (Maya), one over 18 (Barack).
12 - When Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, became an Indonesian citizen, his British citizenship would have been terminated; if he was born in Hawaii, also his American dual citizenship. Indonesia does not allow for dual citizenship.
13 - Returning to the COLB. This document, as waved about by Obama, may be authentic on its face (See #14), but it is not accurate. Were it accurate, it would show Lolo Soetoro as his father; his name as Barry Soetoro.
14 - The COLB Obama waves about lists the race of his biological father as “African.” African is not a race any more than American is. This brings into question the authenticity of the COLB Obama is waving about as his “birth certificate.”
15 - If Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, did become an American citizen, he became a naturalized American citizen which precludes him from eligibility under Article 2, Section 1, United States Constitution. There has been no proof presented that he is even a naturalized American citizen.
16 - Barack Hussein Obama has multiple aliases: Barry Soetoro, Barry Dunham, Barry Obama, Barack Soetoro, Barack Dunham. When he registered with the American Bar Association, he listed none of these as is required by law. Unless he had his name legally changed to Barack Hussein Obama after his adoption, of which there has been no proof presented, Barry Soetoro is his real name and Barack Hussein Obama is an alias.
17 - All his passport records, education records, medical records, birth records have become “not available” to the public. Those records show where he was born, if he applied for or received aid as a foreign student, the country or countries from which he has received passports.
18 - His selective service registration appears to be fraudulent. If he was a naturalized American citizen when he turned 18, and he failed to register with the selective service, he is barred from holding any position in government, elected or otherwise.
19 - If he is not even a naturalized citizen, he is barred from holding any elected office.
20 - If he is not even a naturalized citizen, he is an illegal alien.
Every U.S. Senator and Representative has taken an oath of office to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution. In consideration of the above undisputed facts and the failure of any body, agency, or office so tasked or so authorized, to vet Obama’s eligibility to the office of president; every U.S. Senator and Representative has a sworn duty to write, sign and file an objection in accordance with 3 USC, Title 3, Chapter 1, Section 15.
Another response concerned Americans are receiving from their U.S. Senators and Representatives claims that the eligibility issue has been addressed by several lawsuits which have all been dismissed. It is true the lawsuits have been dismissed, but every U.S. Senator and Representative making this claim also knows that these lawsuits have not been dismissed on merit but rather on standing, which does not mean the lawsuits do not have merit, that the evidence presented in these causes is not true. And what SCOTUS has denied, to date, has been the applications for injunction to stop the certifying of the election until said time as Obama produces the evidence proving his eligibility. If Congress refuses to uphold the U.S. Constitution on January 6, 2009, SCOTUS will then have the jurisdiction to move on the evidence. Whether they will or not is to be seen.
If SCOTUS refuses to deal with the issue before January 20, 2009, refuses to look at the evidence, then the U.S. Constitution will have been effectively subverted, and only avenue left to the American people to protect their U.S. Constitution is set forth in the Declaration of Independence, in Congress, July 4, 1776,
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
John Adams, 1787,
The people in America have now the best opportunity and the greatest trust in their hands that Providence ever committed to so small a number...if they betray their trust, their guilt will merit even greater punishment than other nations have suffered, and the indignation of Heaven....
Who will stand for the U.S. Constitution?
http://www.newswithviews.com/Stuter/stuter136.htm
By Lynn Stuter
December 30, 2008
NewsWithViews.com
As we near the end of 2008, the day is rapidly approaching when Congress shall convene to address the votes of the Electoral College as set forth in 3 USC, Title 3, Chapter 1, Section 15,
Congress shall be in session on the sixth day of January succeeding every meeting of the electors. The Senate and House of Representatives shall meet in the Hall of the House of Representatives at the hour of 1 o'clock in the afternoon on that day, and the President of the Senate shall be their presiding officer. Two tellers shall be previously appointed on the part of the Senate and two on the part of the House of Representatives, to whom shall be handed, as they are opened by the President of the Senate, all the certificates and papers purporting to be certificates of the electoral votes, which certificates and papers shall be opened, presented, and acted upon in the alphabetical order of the States, beginning with the letter A; and said tellers, having then read the same in the presence and hearing of the two Houses, shall make a list of the votes as they shall appear from the said certificates; and the votes having been ascertained and counted according to the rules in this subchapter provided, the result of the same shall be delivered to the President of the Senate, who shall thereupon announce the state of the vote, which announcement shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, if any, elected President and Vice President of the United states, and, together with a list of the votes, be entered on the Journals of the two Houses. Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any.
Every objection shall be made in writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof, and shall be signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received. When all objections so made to any vote or paper from a State shall have been received and read, the Senate shall thereupon withdraw, and such objections shall be submitted to the Senate for its decision; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, in like manner, submit such objections to the House of Representatives for its decision; and no electoral vote or votes from any State which shall have been regularly given by electors whose appointment has been lawfully certified to according to section 6 of this title from which but one return has been received shall be rejected, but the two Houses concurrently may reject the vote or votes when they agree that such vote or votes have not been so regularly given by electors whose appointment has been so certified.
If more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State shall have been received by the President of the Senate, those votes, and those only, shall be counted which shall have been regularly given by the electors who are shown by the determination mentioned in section 5 of this title to have been appointed, if the determination in said section provided for shall have been made, or by such successors or substitutes, in case of a vacancy in the board of electors so ascertained, as have been appointed to fill such vacancy in the mode provided by the laws of the State; but in case there shall arise the question which of two or more of such State authorities determining what electors have been appointed, as mentioned in section 5 of this title, is the lawful tribunal of such State, the votes regularly given of those electors, and those only, of such State shall be counted whose title as electors the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide is supported by the decision of such State so authorized by its law; and in such case of more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State, if there shall have been no such determination of the question in the State aforesaid, then those votes, and those only, shall be counted which the two Houses shall concurrently decide were cast by lawful electors appointed in accordance with the laws of the State, unless the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide such votes not to be the lawful votes of the legally appointed electors of such State.
But if the two Houses shall disagree in respect of the counting of such votes, then, and in that case, the votes of the electors whose appointment shall have been certified by the executive of the State, under the seal thereof, shall be counted. When the two Houses have voted, they shall immediately again meet, and the presiding officer shall then announce the decision of the questions submitted. No votes or papers from any other State shall be acted upon until the objections previously made to the votes or papers from any State shall have been finally disposed of.
More and more concerned Americans are contacting their U.S. Senators and Representatives regarding the likelihood that Barack Hussein Obama is not eligible to the office of president as required by Article II, Section 1, United States Constitution. One response concerned Americans are receiving follows along the lines that Barack Hussein Obama has presented his birth certificate and is eligible. Nothing could be further from the truth.
What follows are the undisputed facts concerning the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to the office of president. Any U.S. Senator or U.S. Representative is welcome to dispute these yet undisputed facts. In so doing, however, the American people demand that the evidence be produced:
1 - Barack Hussein Obama has not been vetted or certified eligible to the office of president of the United States by any agency tasked to do so or authorized to do so.
2 - Not one American citizen, not one Senator, not one Representative has seen, touched or examined Barack Hussein Obama’s vault copy Hawaii birth certificate. While October 31, 2008, Dr Chiyome Fukino, Department of Health, Hawaii, issued a press release in which she stated that she had “seen and verified” that a Hawaii birth certificate for Obama did exist; she did not state what was on it nor did she state that it showed that Obama was born in Hawaii.
3 - The Certification of Live Birth (COLB) that Obama has been waving about is not a “birth certificate” as he claims, as the mainstream media claims, as FactCheck.org and FighttheSmears.com claims. The COLB is a short form, computer printed document deriving the information printed thereon from a database of information supposedly (See #13 and #14 below) taken from the original long form vault copy Hawaiian birth certificate.
4 - Factcheck.org claims to be a non-partisan organization. Factcheck.org is funded by the Annenberg Foundation on whose board Obama sat. Factcheck.org is about as non-partisan as is Obama. The Annenberg Foundation has never passed up a chance to fund a “progressive” (a.k.a., Marxist) cause.
5 - Hawaii has a law, HRS 338-17.8, which allows for the birth registration of a child born in a foreign country so long as one parent is a U.S. citizen and so long as that parent claimed Hawaii as his or her permanent residence for one year prior to the birth. Stanley Ann (Dunham) Obama met both of these requirements.
6 - If Obama was born in Hawaii, he is, at best, a dual citizen. At his birth, his father was a British subject as Kenya was a British colony. Dual citizenship precludes Obama from eligibility under Article II, Section 1, United States Constitution. Prior cases decided by the United States Supreme Court, involving the determination of “natural born” have used Vattel’s “The Law of Nations” definition which states, “The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.” (Part I, Chapter 19, Section 212). Factcheck.org states that Obama was a dual citizen at birth.
7 - If Obama was born in Kenya, he was, at birth, a British subject as Kenya was a British colony. 7 - American law, at that time, required that Stanley Ann (Dunham) Obama be a minimum of 19 years of age at his birth to confer to him her American citizenship if he was born outside the United States; she was only 18 years old when Obama was born.
8 - Barack Hussein Obama’s paternal step-grandmother has stated before witnesses, said witnesses signing affidavits, that she was witness to the birth of Obama in Kenya. See here, here, and here.
9 - Michelle Obama has stated that Barack Hussein Obama was adopted by his step-father, Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian citizen.
10 - When Barack Hussein Obama was registered at the Fransiskus Assissi Primary School in Jakarta, Indonesia, his father was listed as Lolo Seotoro; his citizenship as Indonesian; his name as Barry Soetoro.
11 - When Stanley Ann (Dunham) Soetoro divorced Lolo Soetoro in 1980, the divorce papers show they had two children: one minor child (Maya), one over 18 (Barack).
12 - When Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, became an Indonesian citizen, his British citizenship would have been terminated; if he was born in Hawaii, also his American dual citizenship. Indonesia does not allow for dual citizenship.
13 - Returning to the COLB. This document, as waved about by Obama, may be authentic on its face (See #14), but it is not accurate. Were it accurate, it would show Lolo Soetoro as his father; his name as Barry Soetoro.
14 - The COLB Obama waves about lists the race of his biological father as “African.” African is not a race any more than American is. This brings into question the authenticity of the COLB Obama is waving about as his “birth certificate.”
15 - If Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, did become an American citizen, he became a naturalized American citizen which precludes him from eligibility under Article 2, Section 1, United States Constitution. There has been no proof presented that he is even a naturalized American citizen.
16 - Barack Hussein Obama has multiple aliases: Barry Soetoro, Barry Dunham, Barry Obama, Barack Soetoro, Barack Dunham. When he registered with the American Bar Association, he listed none of these as is required by law. Unless he had his name legally changed to Barack Hussein Obama after his adoption, of which there has been no proof presented, Barry Soetoro is his real name and Barack Hussein Obama is an alias.
17 - All his passport records, education records, medical records, birth records have become “not available” to the public. Those records show where he was born, if he applied for or received aid as a foreign student, the country or countries from which he has received passports.
18 - His selective service registration appears to be fraudulent. If he was a naturalized American citizen when he turned 18, and he failed to register with the selective service, he is barred from holding any position in government, elected or otherwise.
19 - If he is not even a naturalized citizen, he is barred from holding any elected office.
20 - If he is not even a naturalized citizen, he is an illegal alien.
Every U.S. Senator and Representative has taken an oath of office to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution. In consideration of the above undisputed facts and the failure of any body, agency, or office so tasked or so authorized, to vet Obama’s eligibility to the office of president; every U.S. Senator and Representative has a sworn duty to write, sign and file an objection in accordance with 3 USC, Title 3, Chapter 1, Section 15.
Another response concerned Americans are receiving from their U.S. Senators and Representatives claims that the eligibility issue has been addressed by several lawsuits which have all been dismissed. It is true the lawsuits have been dismissed, but every U.S. Senator and Representative making this claim also knows that these lawsuits have not been dismissed on merit but rather on standing, which does not mean the lawsuits do not have merit, that the evidence presented in these causes is not true. And what SCOTUS has denied, to date, has been the applications for injunction to stop the certifying of the election until said time as Obama produces the evidence proving his eligibility. If Congress refuses to uphold the U.S. Constitution on January 6, 2009, SCOTUS will then have the jurisdiction to move on the evidence. Whether they will or not is to be seen.
If SCOTUS refuses to deal with the issue before January 20, 2009, refuses to look at the evidence, then the U.S. Constitution will have been effectively subverted, and only avenue left to the American people to protect their U.S. Constitution is set forth in the Declaration of Independence, in Congress, July 4, 1776,
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
John Adams, 1787,
The people in America have now the best opportunity and the greatest trust in their hands that Providence ever committed to so small a number...if they betray their trust, their guilt will merit even greater punishment than other nations have suffered, and the indignation of Heaven....
Who will stand for the U.S. Constitution?
http://www.newswithviews.com/Stuter/stuter136.htm
Monday, December 29, 2008
Keyes v. Lingle: Case Dismissed; Forensic Examiner Disproves Online COLB
From http://www.therightsideoflife.com/"If you don't follow Phil's blog you will miss the latest and most important news and opinion on the net." - Aristotle the Hun
I think this is really important. One phrase in her report mentions “best available evidence”.
1. The COLB form posted by Obama supporters is not authentic.
Very poor evidence.
2. The only other evidence was a newspaper announcement.
Very poor evidence.
3. His younger sister who could not have witnessed anything about his birth say he was born in Hawaii but doesn’t seem sure of what hospital.
Not really evidence at all.
Right now Obama’s Kenyan Grandmother sworn affidavit of his being born in Kenya trumps all of the above.
The “best available evidence” is the Birth Certificate reported to be on file in Hawaii.
There will be a push by those who follow legal protocol to obtain the “best available evidence” and make a decision based on that evidence.
Let me go out on a limb here. I don’t see how the SCOTUS can avoid ordering Obama to provide the “best available evidence” for their decision making process.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Keyes v. Lingle: Case Dismissed; Forensic Examiner Disproves Online COLB"
Another case that had been flying under the radar was Keyes v. Lingle, where the Constitution Party and Dr. Amb. Alan Keyes were petitioning against Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle, Chief Elections Officer Kevin B. Cronin, and various other Defendants as a means of holding an official accountable for determining Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility.
Documentation:
Dismissed on December 5 (HTML/PDF)
Motion to Reconsider dismissed on December 12 (HTML/PDF)
You will notice that the case was dismissed on a technicality (according to the judge, the Plaintiffs referred to the wrong Hawaiian statute(s)), not on content.
However, the bigger story to this lawsuit is the fact that forensic document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines (pictured) has documented in an associated affidavit (PDF) the following:
2. I have reviewed the attached affidavit posted on the internet from “Ron Polarik,” [PDF] who has declined to provide his name because of a number of death threats he has received. After my review and based on my years of experience, I can state with certainty that the COLB presented on the internet by the various groups, which include the “Daily Kos,” the Obama Campaign, “Factcheck.org” and others cannot be relied upon as genuine. Mr. Polarik raises issues concerning the COLB that I can affirm. Software such as Adobe Photoshop can produce complete images or alter images that appear to be genuine; therefore, any image offered on the internet cannot be relied upon as being a copy of the authentic document.
3. Upon a cursory inspection of the internet COLB, one aspect of the image that is clearly questionable is the obliteration of the Certificate No. That number is a tracking number that would allow anyone to ask the question, “Does this number refer to the Certification of Live Birth for the child Barack Hussein Obama II?” It would not reveal any further personal information; therefore, there would be no justifiable reason for oliterating it.
4. In my experience as a forensic document examiner, if an original of any document exists, that is the document that must be examined to obtain a definitive finding of genuineness or non-genuineness. In this case, examination of the vault birth certificate for President-Elect Obama would lay this issue to rest once and for all. [emphasis mine]
The above clearly illustrates that it is impossible to determine eligibility based on the widely-circulated certification of live birth and that the only way to determine Barack Hussein Obama’s natural born citizenship status is to retrieve the currently-sealed certificate of live birth.
It appears that we’re dealing with an individual who has so much to hide on so little a document.
-Phil
Has our mightiest governing document been rendered worthless?
Has our mightiest governing document been rendered worthless?
By Jerry McConnell Sunday, December 28, 2008
It looks like the mighty and powerful United States of America is going to be stymied by a slick-talking smoothie again. No, it’s not Jimmy Carter or Bubba Clinton but it is another one who can rattle off a cunning phrase about as well as anyone I’ve ever heard. And if Clinton was known as “Slick Willie” this new fellow will have to be known as “Brazen Barry”. The rest of his name is Hussein Obama.
How else can you describe someone who can stand up to the entire citizenry of this great country of three hundred million residents and when asked to do something, simply say that he won’t do it? And even more brazenly, go completely against a U.S. Constitutional directive while even our omnipotent Supreme Court hasn’t got the power or directives to order compliance. The only man in the history of our country that is mightier than the highest court in our land; simply by refusing to comply.
Our Constitution has been weakened probably for the first time ever in its glorious 221 years of existence. I say weakened because when one person can just refuse to provide proof that he or she is qualified to meet a requirement of that august document and flat out get away with it, not only the moral fibers but the heart and soul of its contents are damaged and weakened. How now can anyone ever be sure that any other part of our lifeblood of administrative embodiment can not be also so denigrated and ignored?
Court challenges to Mr. Obama’s decision not to provide his original birth certificate as proof the Constitutional requirement for a candidate for the Office of the Presidency of the United States to be a natural born citizen have failed, with no further explanation or any recommended course of action. In other words, there is no way to enforce the requirements of the Constitution. God help this country when its strongest governing document is rendered helpless. What other mischief might another clever legal deviant thrust on our people now that the precedent for refusal to divulge has been established and accepted by our highest court?
This is a very secretive person that a majority of our country’s citizens have elected to the highest office in the land. We know very little about the man and, it would seem, only what he wants us to know. There is no question that he is of Islamic heritage and training, as both his father and step-father were Muslims, his mother was an atheist. During the presidential primary in 2008 Obama claimed to have been converted to Christianity “20 years ago.” He has never stated what faith he “converted” from, but it is known that he did attend an Islamic school for at least two years while living in Indonesia.
Little is known about how he obtained the necessary finances to attend two of the most expensive and prestigious universities in America, Columbia and Harvard. He has consistently refused to make any of his collegiate documents a matter of public record as he has similarly done concerning his official birth record.
What is this man afraid of by having his records sealed off to the public? Is there incriminating information in these records? Is there verifying information that he is not a natural born citizen of the United States? Is there verifying information that he is a full-fledged Islamic Muslim and his “conversion” to Christianity was a possible cover for other devious ventures such as winning our presidency?
What other documents will he forbid being seen once he becomes President? Will he negotiate secret plans with our enemies that will harm the sovereignty of our nation? Will he secretly dismantle our strong defenses against attack that have protected us since the infamous “9/11” incident?
Isn’t there anyone with the strength, intelligence, and ability to get the information we should have about this man who will sit in our highest office?
Is there another Ronald Reagan or Teddy Roosevelt out there? If so, please step forward and soon.
Jerry McConnell is a longtime resident of planet earth with one half century on the seacoast of NH. He is a community activist but promises not to run for President and he feeds ACORN’s to the squirrels. He can be emailed at lethrneck@comcast.net with complaints or the editor at letters@canadafreepress.com with favorables.
By Jerry McConnell Sunday, December 28, 2008
It looks like the mighty and powerful United States of America is going to be stymied by a slick-talking smoothie again. No, it’s not Jimmy Carter or Bubba Clinton but it is another one who can rattle off a cunning phrase about as well as anyone I’ve ever heard. And if Clinton was known as “Slick Willie” this new fellow will have to be known as “Brazen Barry”. The rest of his name is Hussein Obama.
How else can you describe someone who can stand up to the entire citizenry of this great country of three hundred million residents and when asked to do something, simply say that he won’t do it? And even more brazenly, go completely against a U.S. Constitutional directive while even our omnipotent Supreme Court hasn’t got the power or directives to order compliance. The only man in the history of our country that is mightier than the highest court in our land; simply by refusing to comply.
Our Constitution has been weakened probably for the first time ever in its glorious 221 years of existence. I say weakened because when one person can just refuse to provide proof that he or she is qualified to meet a requirement of that august document and flat out get away with it, not only the moral fibers but the heart and soul of its contents are damaged and weakened. How now can anyone ever be sure that any other part of our lifeblood of administrative embodiment can not be also so denigrated and ignored?
Court challenges to Mr. Obama’s decision not to provide his original birth certificate as proof the Constitutional requirement for a candidate for the Office of the Presidency of the United States to be a natural born citizen have failed, with no further explanation or any recommended course of action. In other words, there is no way to enforce the requirements of the Constitution. God help this country when its strongest governing document is rendered helpless. What other mischief might another clever legal deviant thrust on our people now that the precedent for refusal to divulge has been established and accepted by our highest court?
This is a very secretive person that a majority of our country’s citizens have elected to the highest office in the land. We know very little about the man and, it would seem, only what he wants us to know. There is no question that he is of Islamic heritage and training, as both his father and step-father were Muslims, his mother was an atheist. During the presidential primary in 2008 Obama claimed to have been converted to Christianity “20 years ago.” He has never stated what faith he “converted” from, but it is known that he did attend an Islamic school for at least two years while living in Indonesia.
Little is known about how he obtained the necessary finances to attend two of the most expensive and prestigious universities in America, Columbia and Harvard. He has consistently refused to make any of his collegiate documents a matter of public record as he has similarly done concerning his official birth record.
What is this man afraid of by having his records sealed off to the public? Is there incriminating information in these records? Is there verifying information that he is not a natural born citizen of the United States? Is there verifying information that he is a full-fledged Islamic Muslim and his “conversion” to Christianity was a possible cover for other devious ventures such as winning our presidency?
What other documents will he forbid being seen once he becomes President? Will he negotiate secret plans with our enemies that will harm the sovereignty of our nation? Will he secretly dismantle our strong defenses against attack that have protected us since the infamous “9/11” incident?
Isn’t there anyone with the strength, intelligence, and ability to get the information we should have about this man who will sit in our highest office?
Is there another Ronald Reagan or Teddy Roosevelt out there? If so, please step forward and soon.
Jerry McConnell is a longtime resident of planet earth with one half century on the seacoast of NH. He is a community activist but promises not to run for President and he feeds ACORN’s to the squirrels. He can be emailed at lethrneck@comcast.net with complaints or the editor at letters@canadafreepress.com with favorables.
Obama - Usurper in Chief?
Obama - Usurper in Chief?
We are quickly approaching the time when it is likely that the first Constitutionally ineligible person will attempt to be sworn in as President of the United States of America. There are two more obstacles standing in the way of the possibility that a Usurper in Chief will occupy the Oval Office:On January 6, 2009, the House and Senate will count the Electoral College votes. However, if one Senator and one member of the House objects, the process will stall. With a Democrat controlled House and Senate, it is unlikely that such an exercise in courage would block the Congress from proceeding to say that Obama won the election.
On January 9, 2009, the Supreme Court of the United States will bring up in conference the case of Berg v. Obama to decide if the wish to hear Mr. Berg's allegations that Obama is not a "natural born" citizen within the meaning of the Constitution. It will take an extraordinary amount of courage for the Court to perform its duty and take a serious look at the possibility that Obama does not meet the Constitutional requirements to hold the Office of the Presidency. I pray they do, but I'm not holding my breath.
However, all will not be lost. In the event, Obama is sworn in as President, a steady stream of lawsuits will be forthcoming challenging every law he attempts to sign.
A few weeks ago Dr. Vieira wrote a very informative article that everyone should read in its entirety. I agree with most of Dr. Vieira's article, especially the part dealing with any of Obama's laws that impact on the rights of the criminally accused. In the case of a Criminal Defendant,standing would NOT be an issue.
...The next steps in the process of selecting a President are: (i) for the Electoral College to vote, and then (ii) for Congress to count those votes. The Twelfth Amendment provides (in pertinent part) as follows:The electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President... ..The Amendment specifies no grounds, procedure, or standards on or by which any elector’s vote may be challenged for any cause, by either the Electors or Members of Congress. But Congress has enacted a statute that partially addresses this matter:
Congress shall be in session on the sixth day of January succeeding every meeting of the electors.... Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any. Every objection shall be made in writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof, and shall be signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received. When all objections so made to any vote or paper from a State shall have been received and read, the Senate shall thereupon withdraw, and such objections shall be submitted to the Senate for its decision; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, in like manner, submit such objections to the House of Representatives for its decision...Even if this legislation is itself a constitutional implementation of the Twelfth Amendment under the Necessary and Proper Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 18), it does not purport to provide for, let alone guarantee, a correct result:First, without an objection “signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives” no inquiry at all can go forward. Yet the mere absence of an objection—particularly without any explanation—cannot preclude the possibility that an Elector’s vote ought to be the subject of an objection and may prove on examination to be objectionable. Indeed, in these times, the very absence of an objection may indicate only that “the good old boys” in Congress—Democrats certainly, and Republicans most likely, too—have “cut a deal” among themselves behind the scenes in order to suppress an investigation the inevitable and unavoidable results of which would demonstrate the utter bankruptcy, if not criminality, of the present electoral process—in that an individual possibly not “eligible to the Office of President” and his handlers may have managed to bamboozle, bribe, blackmail, or otherwise subvert, suborn, or silence both of the “two” major political parties, the big media, the pundits, and every public official with civil or criminal jurisdiction over elections throughout both the General Government and the States.Second, although a correct result requires a complete inquiry into an objection, with appropriate findings of fact and law supported by competent evidence, the statute merely requires “a decision” each from the Senate and the House of Representatives. On what basis and with what formality and content these “decision[s]” are to be made the statute does not specify. For instance, are the Senate and the House to hold hearings, to and at which witnesses will be subpoenaed and documents will be required to be produced for inspection and analysis? What rules of evidence will apply at these hearings? Who will have the ultimate burden of proof? What will be the standard of proof—a preponderance of the evidence, clear and convincing evidence, or evidence beyond a reasonable doubt? The queries are legion, the answers unknown.Yet the Constitution demands that, if such an inquiry is held, it should arrive at the correct conclusion with sufficient evidence in support. After all, the question of Obama’s eligibility vel non is not within the discretion of Congress to skirt or to decide as its Members may deem politically or personally expedient. Even by unanimous vote, Congress cannot constitutionally dispense with the requirement that Obama must be “a natural born Citizen,” by simply assuming that he is such, or by accepting something other than what lawyers call “the best evidence” (in this case, his supposed original Hawaiian birth certificate, as opposed to some purported “certification of live birth” computer-generated only decades later).Therefore, if no objection at all is made to any Elector’s vote for Obama—or if no objection to an Elector’s vote on the specific basis that Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” (and therefore the Elector cannot constitutionally vote for him) is allowed—or if such an objection is allowed, but no searching and complete inquiry, or no inquiry at all, is had—or if partisan Senators and Representatives jury rig “decision[s]” that whitewash Obama on the facts or the law—or some other gross irregularities appear in the process—then thereafter the matter cannot be said to have been settled to a constitutional sufficiency. Congress simply cannot “waive,” or simply flub, the Constitution’s eligibility requirement “to the Office of President” by inaction, or incompetent action, or collusive actionIn sum, if the statute does not guarantee (within human competence) that a correct answer to the question be had, then it cannot be deemed to be the exclusive remedy in the premises if (as will be discussed below) a better remedy is available. Moreover, even if the statute is employed to hear and decide challenges to Obama’s eligibility, the resulting “decision[s]” must provide assurances to a moral certainty that the correct answer has indeed been obtained in both fact and law—otherwise, further inquiry needs to be had in other fora. For the consequences of an incorrect answer on the ultimate issue, later exposed as such, are far too serious to allow for any lesser degree of surety. Never were the stakes from a game of “truth or consequences” higher than they are now.Assume, however, that no inquiry, or only a perfunctory inquiry, or only an obviously tainted inquiry takes place at the stage of counting the Electors’ votes. Is the issue then forever foreclosed? Not at all. For a extensive class of litigants who absolutely do have “standing” to challenge Obama’s eligibility will come into existence, and demand relief as a matter of undeniable constitutional right and practical necessity, as soon as Obama’s Department of Justice attempts to enforce through criminal prosecutions some of the controversial legislation that the new Congress will enact and Obama will sign—such as statutes aimed at stripping common Americans of the firearms to which (in Obama’s derisive terminology) they “cling.”For example, in a criminal prosecution under a new statute that reinstates the Clinton “assault-weapons ban” (or some equally obnoxious affront to Article I, Section 8, Clauses 15 and 16 and the Second Amendment), the defendant will undeniably have “standing” to challenge the indictment on the grounds that no statute imposing such a ban even exists, because the original “Bill which * * * passed the House of Representatives and the Senate” was never “presented to the President of the United States”, and therefore could never “become a Law,” inasmuch as the supposed “President,” Barack Obama, being constitutionally ineligible for that office, was then and remains thereafter nothing but an usurper. [See Article I, Section 7, Clause 2 and Article II, Section 1, 4]...Continue Reading Dr. Vieira's article.
CitizenWells is starting a new series of articles called “Constitution Hall of Shame.” This new series looks like it will be highly informative and useful should people decide to contact their Representatives in the House and Senate.Dr. Orly also has an open letter to the members of Congress up that is of interest.So where is the media? AWOL as usual. Just as they have been throughout the election, they remain Obama's cheerleaders. Just as they ignored Larry Sinclair's allegations that he and Obama used cocaine and engaged in consensual sex in 1999, the media continues to ignore anything that cast Obama in a negative light.For me personally, Obama will not be my President unless he proves that he is eligible to hold the Office. I will owe no allegiance to him or his policies until he shows that he respects the Constitution of the United States enough to comply with its provisions.
http://zachjonesishome.blogspot.com/2008/12/obama-usurper-in-chief.html
We are quickly approaching the time when it is likely that the first Constitutionally ineligible person will attempt to be sworn in as President of the United States of America. There are two more obstacles standing in the way of the possibility that a Usurper in Chief will occupy the Oval Office:On January 6, 2009, the House and Senate will count the Electoral College votes. However, if one Senator and one member of the House objects, the process will stall. With a Democrat controlled House and Senate, it is unlikely that such an exercise in courage would block the Congress from proceeding to say that Obama won the election.
On January 9, 2009, the Supreme Court of the United States will bring up in conference the case of Berg v. Obama to decide if the wish to hear Mr. Berg's allegations that Obama is not a "natural born" citizen within the meaning of the Constitution. It will take an extraordinary amount of courage for the Court to perform its duty and take a serious look at the possibility that Obama does not meet the Constitutional requirements to hold the Office of the Presidency. I pray they do, but I'm not holding my breath.
However, all will not be lost. In the event, Obama is sworn in as President, a steady stream of lawsuits will be forthcoming challenging every law he attempts to sign.
A few weeks ago Dr. Vieira wrote a very informative article that everyone should read in its entirety. I agree with most of Dr. Vieira's article, especially the part dealing with any of Obama's laws that impact on the rights of the criminally accused. In the case of a Criminal Defendant,standing would NOT be an issue.
...The next steps in the process of selecting a President are: (i) for the Electoral College to vote, and then (ii) for Congress to count those votes. The Twelfth Amendment provides (in pertinent part) as follows:The electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President... ..The Amendment specifies no grounds, procedure, or standards on or by which any elector’s vote may be challenged for any cause, by either the Electors or Members of Congress. But Congress has enacted a statute that partially addresses this matter:
Congress shall be in session on the sixth day of January succeeding every meeting of the electors.... Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any. Every objection shall be made in writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof, and shall be signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received. When all objections so made to any vote or paper from a State shall have been received and read, the Senate shall thereupon withdraw, and such objections shall be submitted to the Senate for its decision; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, in like manner, submit such objections to the House of Representatives for its decision...Even if this legislation is itself a constitutional implementation of the Twelfth Amendment under the Necessary and Proper Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 18), it does not purport to provide for, let alone guarantee, a correct result:First, without an objection “signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives” no inquiry at all can go forward. Yet the mere absence of an objection—particularly without any explanation—cannot preclude the possibility that an Elector’s vote ought to be the subject of an objection and may prove on examination to be objectionable. Indeed, in these times, the very absence of an objection may indicate only that “the good old boys” in Congress—Democrats certainly, and Republicans most likely, too—have “cut a deal” among themselves behind the scenes in order to suppress an investigation the inevitable and unavoidable results of which would demonstrate the utter bankruptcy, if not criminality, of the present electoral process—in that an individual possibly not “eligible to the Office of President” and his handlers may have managed to bamboozle, bribe, blackmail, or otherwise subvert, suborn, or silence both of the “two” major political parties, the big media, the pundits, and every public official with civil or criminal jurisdiction over elections throughout both the General Government and the States.Second, although a correct result requires a complete inquiry into an objection, with appropriate findings of fact and law supported by competent evidence, the statute merely requires “a decision” each from the Senate and the House of Representatives. On what basis and with what formality and content these “decision[s]” are to be made the statute does not specify. For instance, are the Senate and the House to hold hearings, to and at which witnesses will be subpoenaed and documents will be required to be produced for inspection and analysis? What rules of evidence will apply at these hearings? Who will have the ultimate burden of proof? What will be the standard of proof—a preponderance of the evidence, clear and convincing evidence, or evidence beyond a reasonable doubt? The queries are legion, the answers unknown.Yet the Constitution demands that, if such an inquiry is held, it should arrive at the correct conclusion with sufficient evidence in support. After all, the question of Obama’s eligibility vel non is not within the discretion of Congress to skirt or to decide as its Members may deem politically or personally expedient. Even by unanimous vote, Congress cannot constitutionally dispense with the requirement that Obama must be “a natural born Citizen,” by simply assuming that he is such, or by accepting something other than what lawyers call “the best evidence” (in this case, his supposed original Hawaiian birth certificate, as opposed to some purported “certification of live birth” computer-generated only decades later).Therefore, if no objection at all is made to any Elector’s vote for Obama—or if no objection to an Elector’s vote on the specific basis that Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” (and therefore the Elector cannot constitutionally vote for him) is allowed—or if such an objection is allowed, but no searching and complete inquiry, or no inquiry at all, is had—or if partisan Senators and Representatives jury rig “decision[s]” that whitewash Obama on the facts or the law—or some other gross irregularities appear in the process—then thereafter the matter cannot be said to have been settled to a constitutional sufficiency. Congress simply cannot “waive,” or simply flub, the Constitution’s eligibility requirement “to the Office of President” by inaction, or incompetent action, or collusive actionIn sum, if the statute does not guarantee (within human competence) that a correct answer to the question be had, then it cannot be deemed to be the exclusive remedy in the premises if (as will be discussed below) a better remedy is available. Moreover, even if the statute is employed to hear and decide challenges to Obama’s eligibility, the resulting “decision[s]” must provide assurances to a moral certainty that the correct answer has indeed been obtained in both fact and law—otherwise, further inquiry needs to be had in other fora. For the consequences of an incorrect answer on the ultimate issue, later exposed as such, are far too serious to allow for any lesser degree of surety. Never were the stakes from a game of “truth or consequences” higher than they are now.Assume, however, that no inquiry, or only a perfunctory inquiry, or only an obviously tainted inquiry takes place at the stage of counting the Electors’ votes. Is the issue then forever foreclosed? Not at all. For a extensive class of litigants who absolutely do have “standing” to challenge Obama’s eligibility will come into existence, and demand relief as a matter of undeniable constitutional right and practical necessity, as soon as Obama’s Department of Justice attempts to enforce through criminal prosecutions some of the controversial legislation that the new Congress will enact and Obama will sign—such as statutes aimed at stripping common Americans of the firearms to which (in Obama’s derisive terminology) they “cling.”For example, in a criminal prosecution under a new statute that reinstates the Clinton “assault-weapons ban” (or some equally obnoxious affront to Article I, Section 8, Clauses 15 and 16 and the Second Amendment), the defendant will undeniably have “standing” to challenge the indictment on the grounds that no statute imposing such a ban even exists, because the original “Bill which * * * passed the House of Representatives and the Senate” was never “presented to the President of the United States”, and therefore could never “become a Law,” inasmuch as the supposed “President,” Barack Obama, being constitutionally ineligible for that office, was then and remains thereafter nothing but an usurper. [See Article I, Section 7, Clause 2 and Article II, Section 1, 4]...Continue Reading Dr. Vieira's article.
CitizenWells is starting a new series of articles called “Constitution Hall of Shame.” This new series looks like it will be highly informative and useful should people decide to contact their Representatives in the House and Senate.Dr. Orly also has an open letter to the members of Congress up that is of interest.So where is the media? AWOL as usual. Just as they have been throughout the election, they remain Obama's cheerleaders. Just as they ignored Larry Sinclair's allegations that he and Obama used cocaine and engaged in consensual sex in 1999, the media continues to ignore anything that cast Obama in a negative light.For me personally, Obama will not be my President unless he proves that he is eligible to hold the Office. I will owe no allegiance to him or his policies until he shows that he respects the Constitution of the United States enough to comply with its provisions.
http://zachjonesishome.blogspot.com/2008/12/obama-usurper-in-chief.html
Cilium Likened to GPS 12/27/2008
Cilium Likened to GPS 12/27/2008 Dec 27, 2008 — A story on Science Daily says that the primary cilium, a protrusion on most human cells that looks like an antenna, acts like a GPS system. They “orient cells to move in the right direction and at the speed needed to heal wounds, much like a Global Positioning System helps ships navigate to their destinations.” Not only that, says Soren T. Christensen (U of Copenhagen): “What we are dealing with is a physiological analogy to the GPS system with a coupled autopilot that coordinates air traffic or tankers on open sea.” What happens is that the ciliar antennae act like beacons for an essential clotting factor. They orient themselves to steer fibroblast cells to the wound site, promoting repair. “The really important discovery is that the primary cilium detects signals, which tell the cells to engage their compass reading and move in the right direction to close the wound.” This exciting discovery falsifies an old evolutionary canard. “Protruding through the cell membrane, primary cilia occur on almost every non-dividing cell in the body,” the article ended. “Once written off as a vestigial organelle discarded in the evolutionary dust, primary cilia in the last decade have risen to prominence as a vital cellular sensor at the root of a wide range of health disorders, from polycystic kidney disease to cancer to left-right anatomical abnormalities.”
Great! Another wonderful design-based discovery to beat down the Darwinists for their science-stopping assumptions. Let’s pile these up for Darwin Day. What a show it will be: Charlie will get boos, hisses and rotten tomatoes, while crowds gather at the ID show to see who gets gets Nobel Prizes and Breakthroughs of the Year (12/19/2008).
Project: Browse through our 2008 stories for all the examples of Darwinism being an impediment to scientific progress, then list them after a quote by Eugenie Scott claiming that creationism is a science-stopper. Then list all the major discoveries stemming from the search for design. Your only challenge will be having too much material. Next headline on: Cell Biology • Human Body • Amazing Facts
Great! Another wonderful design-based discovery to beat down the Darwinists for their science-stopping assumptions. Let’s pile these up for Darwin Day. What a show it will be: Charlie will get boos, hisses and rotten tomatoes, while crowds gather at the ID show to see who gets gets Nobel Prizes and Breakthroughs of the Year (12/19/2008).
Project: Browse through our 2008 stories for all the examples of Darwinism being an impediment to scientific progress, then list them after a quote by Eugenie Scott claiming that creationism is a science-stopper. Then list all the major discoveries stemming from the search for design. Your only challenge will be having too much material. Next headline on: Cell Biology • Human Body • Amazing Facts
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Obama’s Medical Records
Is this some kind of a joke McCain submitted 1500 pages and this is what the Obama campaign released. Please wake up this is nothing any doctor could do this for one of his friends or if paid enough.
DAVID L. SCHEINER, M.D.
Hyde Park Associates in Medicine, Ltd.
1515 East 52nd Place, Chicago, IL 60615
To Whom It May Concern:
I am David L. Scheiner, a board certified general internist licensed to practice in the State of Illinois. I am on staff at the University of Chicago Hospitals and Rush University Medical Center. I have been Senator Barack Obama’s primary care physician since March 23, 1987. The following is a summary of his medical records for the past 21 years.
During that period of time, Senator Obama has been in excellent health. He has been seen regularly for medical checkups and various minor problems such as upper respiratory infections, skin rashes and minor injuries.
His family history is pertinent for his mother’s death from ovarian cancer and grandfather who died of prostate cancer. His own history included intermittent cigarette smoking. He has quit this practice on several occasions and is currently using Nicorette gum with success.
Senator Obama’s last medical checkup was on January 15, 2007; he had no complaints. He exercised regularly often jogging three miles. His diet was balanced with good intake of roughage and fluids. A complete review of systems was unremarkable. On physical examination, his blood pressure was 90/60 and pulse 60/minute. His build was lean and muscular with no excess body fat. His physical examination was completely normal.
Laboratory studies included triglycerides of 44(normal under 150), cholesterol 173 (normal under 200), HDL 68 (normal over 40), and LDL 96 (normal under 130). Chem 24, urinalysis and CBC were normal, PSA was 0.6, very good. An EKG was normal.
In short, his examination showed him to be in excellent health. Senator Barack Obama is in overall good physical and mental health needed to maintain the resiliency required in the Office of President.
Sincerely,
David L. Scheiner, M.D.
Is this transparent enough for you all. Damn I feel like I live in a third world country.
DAVID L. SCHEINER, M.D.
Hyde Park Associates in Medicine, Ltd.
1515 East 52nd Place, Chicago, IL 60615
To Whom It May Concern:
I am David L. Scheiner, a board certified general internist licensed to practice in the State of Illinois. I am on staff at the University of Chicago Hospitals and Rush University Medical Center. I have been Senator Barack Obama’s primary care physician since March 23, 1987. The following is a summary of his medical records for the past 21 years.
During that period of time, Senator Obama has been in excellent health. He has been seen regularly for medical checkups and various minor problems such as upper respiratory infections, skin rashes and minor injuries.
His family history is pertinent for his mother’s death from ovarian cancer and grandfather who died of prostate cancer. His own history included intermittent cigarette smoking. He has quit this practice on several occasions and is currently using Nicorette gum with success.
Senator Obama’s last medical checkup was on January 15, 2007; he had no complaints. He exercised regularly often jogging three miles. His diet was balanced with good intake of roughage and fluids. A complete review of systems was unremarkable. On physical examination, his blood pressure was 90/60 and pulse 60/minute. His build was lean and muscular with no excess body fat. His physical examination was completely normal.
Laboratory studies included triglycerides of 44(normal under 150), cholesterol 173 (normal under 200), HDL 68 (normal over 40), and LDL 96 (normal under 130). Chem 24, urinalysis and CBC were normal, PSA was 0.6, very good. An EKG was normal.
In short, his examination showed him to be in excellent health. Senator Barack Obama is in overall good physical and mental health needed to maintain the resiliency required in the Office of President.
Sincerely,
David L. Scheiner, M.D.
Is this transparent enough for you all. Damn I feel like I live in a third world country.
Send This Letter To All The Congress And Senate
Send This Letter To All The Congress And Senate
Dear Elected Official
Here are the undisputed facts concerning the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to the office of president under Article II, Section 1, United States Constitution.
You are welcome to try and refute these facts. But please provide hard evidence.
1. Barack Hussein Obama has not been vetted or certified eligible to the office of president of the United States by any agency tasked to do so or authorized to do so.
2. Not one American citizen, not one Senator, not one Representative has seen, touched or examined Barack Hussein Obama’s vault copy Hawaii birth certificate.
3. The Certification of Live Birth (COLB) that Obama has been waving about is not a “birth certificate” as he claims, as the mainstream media claims, as FactCheck.org and FighttheSmears.com claims. The COLB is a short form, computer printed document deriving the information printed thereon from a database of information supposedly (See #13 and #14 below) taken from the original long form vault copy Hawaiian birth certificate.
4. Factcheck.org claims to be a non-partisan organization. Factcheck.org is funded by the Annenberg Foundation on whose board Obama sat. Factcheck.org is about as non-partisan as is Obama. The Annenberg Foundation has never passed up a chance to fund a “progressive” cause.
5. Hawaii has a law, HRS 338-17.8, which allows for the birth registration of a child born in a foreign country so long as one parent is a U.S. citizen and so long as that parent claimed Hawaii as their permanent residence for one year prior to the birth. Stanley Ann (Dunham) Obama met both of these requirements.
6. If Obama was born in Hawaii, he is, at best, a dual citizen. At his birth, his father was a British subject as Kenya was a British colony. Dual citizenship precludes Obama from eligibility under Article II, Section 1, United States Constitution. Prior cases decided by the United States Supreme Court, involving the determination of “natural born” have used Vattel’s “The Law of Nations” definition which states, “The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.” (Part I, Chapter 19, Section 212). Factcheck.org states that Obama was a dual citizen at birth.
7. If Obama was born in Kenya, he was, at birth, a British subject. American law, at that time, required that Stanley Ann Dunham Obama be 19 years of age at his birth; she was 18 years old. If Obama was born in Kenya, she could not confer her American citizenship to him.
8. Barack Hussein Obama’s paternal step-grandmother has stated; has been recorded, said recording transcribed to an affidavit; that she witnessed the birth of Obama in Kenya.
9. Michelle Obama has stated that Barack Hussein Obama was adopted by his step-father, Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian citizen.
10. When Barack Hussein Obama was registered at the Fransiskus Assissi Primary School in Jakarta, Indonesia, his father was listed as Lolo Seotoro; his citizenship as Indonesian; his name as Barry Soetoro.
11. When Stanley Ann (Dunham) Soetoro divorced Lolo Soetoro in 1980, the divorce papers show they had two children: one minor child (Maya), one over 18 (Barack).
12. When Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, became an Indonesian citizen, his British citizenship would have been terminated. If he was born in Hawaii, also his American citizenship. Indonesia does not allow for dual citizenship.
13. Returning to the COLB. This document, as waved about by Obama, may be authentic on its face, but it is not accurate. Were it accurate, it would show Lolo Soetoro as his father; his name as Barry Soetoro.
14. The COLB Obama waves above lists the race of his biological father as “African.” Does your American birth certificate list your father as “American”? African is not a race any more than American is. This brings into question the authenticity of the COLB Obama is waving about as his “birth certificate.”
15. If Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, did become an American citizen, he became a naturalized American citizen which precludes him from eligibility under Article 2, Section 1, United States Constitution. There has been no proof presented that he is even a naturalized American citizen.
16. Barack Hussein Obama has multiple aliases: Barry Soetoro, Barry Dunham, Barry Obama, Barack Soetoro, Barack Dunham. When he registered with the American Bar Association, he listed none of these as is required by law.
17. All his passport records, education records, medical records, birth records have become “not available” to the public. Those records show where he was born, if he applied for or received aid as a foreign student, the country or countries from which he has received passports.
18. His selective service registration appears to be fraudulent. If he was a naturalized American citizen when he turned 18, and he failed to register with the selective service, he is barred from holding any position in government, elected or not.
19. If he is not even a naturalized citizen, he is barred from holding any elected office.
The elected Senators and Representatives of this county will convene on January 6 or 8, 2009 (seems to be some question of the date) to certify the votes of the Electoral College completed on December 15, 2008. If, considering the above undisputed facts concerning Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility to the office of president, the vote of the Electoral College is certified by Congress, every Senator and Representative voting the affirmative will be guilty of an act of treason against the United States of America.
Sincerely,
Dear Elected Official
Here are the undisputed facts concerning the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to the office of president under Article II, Section 1, United States Constitution.
You are welcome to try and refute these facts. But please provide hard evidence.
1. Barack Hussein Obama has not been vetted or certified eligible to the office of president of the United States by any agency tasked to do so or authorized to do so.
2. Not one American citizen, not one Senator, not one Representative has seen, touched or examined Barack Hussein Obama’s vault copy Hawaii birth certificate.
3. The Certification of Live Birth (COLB) that Obama has been waving about is not a “birth certificate” as he claims, as the mainstream media claims, as FactCheck.org and FighttheSmears.com claims. The COLB is a short form, computer printed document deriving the information printed thereon from a database of information supposedly (See #13 and #14 below) taken from the original long form vault copy Hawaiian birth certificate.
4. Factcheck.org claims to be a non-partisan organization. Factcheck.org is funded by the Annenberg Foundation on whose board Obama sat. Factcheck.org is about as non-partisan as is Obama. The Annenberg Foundation has never passed up a chance to fund a “progressive” cause.
5. Hawaii has a law, HRS 338-17.8, which allows for the birth registration of a child born in a foreign country so long as one parent is a U.S. citizen and so long as that parent claimed Hawaii as their permanent residence for one year prior to the birth. Stanley Ann (Dunham) Obama met both of these requirements.
6. If Obama was born in Hawaii, he is, at best, a dual citizen. At his birth, his father was a British subject as Kenya was a British colony. Dual citizenship precludes Obama from eligibility under Article II, Section 1, United States Constitution. Prior cases decided by the United States Supreme Court, involving the determination of “natural born” have used Vattel’s “The Law of Nations” definition which states, “The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.” (Part I, Chapter 19, Section 212). Factcheck.org states that Obama was a dual citizen at birth.
7. If Obama was born in Kenya, he was, at birth, a British subject. American law, at that time, required that Stanley Ann Dunham Obama be 19 years of age at his birth; she was 18 years old. If Obama was born in Kenya, she could not confer her American citizenship to him.
8. Barack Hussein Obama’s paternal step-grandmother has stated; has been recorded, said recording transcribed to an affidavit; that she witnessed the birth of Obama in Kenya.
9. Michelle Obama has stated that Barack Hussein Obama was adopted by his step-father, Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian citizen.
10. When Barack Hussein Obama was registered at the Fransiskus Assissi Primary School in Jakarta, Indonesia, his father was listed as Lolo Seotoro; his citizenship as Indonesian; his name as Barry Soetoro.
11. When Stanley Ann (Dunham) Soetoro divorced Lolo Soetoro in 1980, the divorce papers show they had two children: one minor child (Maya), one over 18 (Barack).
12. When Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, became an Indonesian citizen, his British citizenship would have been terminated. If he was born in Hawaii, also his American citizenship. Indonesia does not allow for dual citizenship.
13. Returning to the COLB. This document, as waved about by Obama, may be authentic on its face, but it is not accurate. Were it accurate, it would show Lolo Soetoro as his father; his name as Barry Soetoro.
14. The COLB Obama waves above lists the race of his biological father as “African.” Does your American birth certificate list your father as “American”? African is not a race any more than American is. This brings into question the authenticity of the COLB Obama is waving about as his “birth certificate.”
15. If Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, did become an American citizen, he became a naturalized American citizen which precludes him from eligibility under Article 2, Section 1, United States Constitution. There has been no proof presented that he is even a naturalized American citizen.
16. Barack Hussein Obama has multiple aliases: Barry Soetoro, Barry Dunham, Barry Obama, Barack Soetoro, Barack Dunham. When he registered with the American Bar Association, he listed none of these as is required by law.
17. All his passport records, education records, medical records, birth records have become “not available” to the public. Those records show where he was born, if he applied for or received aid as a foreign student, the country or countries from which he has received passports.
18. His selective service registration appears to be fraudulent. If he was a naturalized American citizen when he turned 18, and he failed to register with the selective service, he is barred from holding any position in government, elected or not.
19. If he is not even a naturalized citizen, he is barred from holding any elected office.
The elected Senators and Representatives of this county will convene on January 6 or 8, 2009 (seems to be some question of the date) to certify the votes of the Electoral College completed on December 15, 2008. If, considering the above undisputed facts concerning Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility to the office of president, the vote of the Electoral College is certified by Congress, every Senator and Representative voting the affirmative will be guilty of an act of treason against the United States of America.
Sincerely,
A message to Ron Paul
A message to Ron Paul
Here is an email I sent to Congressman Ron Paul and his congressional aides:
I was very disappointed to hear that Ron Paul had recently said to a constitutent that no one cared if Barack Obama was eligible to take office or not, and that both houses of Congress intended to approve his candidacy even if he was ineligible. Ron Paul said he was concerned about looking bad in front of the other politicians apparently, according to this broadcast account:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kE1ywGkajMQ
I am stunned that Ron Paul would make this kind of comment. Taking this position is going to cost him much more than he could ever imagine.
I am very concerned that Barack Obama is ineligible for office. Here is a message to
members of Congress on this issue:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APOA5WSUDmE
A chart summarizing the problem can be found at
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjko9dcVcCEy81TvrvFn6kgVyze0P6lc1YC0uxcfXYMTJzH6j_NWgptIwkzleqdCklqizo1nxW8o8Un7bYmWnJ6SudQKM1GhR4KQu7qje4W66qr7aYbDb0rX3UUpE6qmbRe7_F43UIuq1zy/s1600-h/naturalborncitizenchart.jpg
Thank you
Robert Stevens
Please consider joining me in expressing your concerns to Congressman Ron Paul
http://drorly.blogspot.com/
Here is an email I sent to Congressman Ron Paul and his congressional aides:
I was very disappointed to hear that Ron Paul had recently said to a constitutent that no one cared if Barack Obama was eligible to take office or not, and that both houses of Congress intended to approve his candidacy even if he was ineligible. Ron Paul said he was concerned about looking bad in front of the other politicians apparently, according to this broadcast account:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kE1ywGkajMQ
I am stunned that Ron Paul would make this kind of comment. Taking this position is going to cost him much more than he could ever imagine.
I am very concerned that Barack Obama is ineligible for office. Here is a message to
members of Congress on this issue:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APOA5WSUDmE
A chart summarizing the problem can be found at
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjko9dcVcCEy81TvrvFn6kgVyze0P6lc1YC0uxcfXYMTJzH6j_NWgptIwkzleqdCklqizo1nxW8o8Un7bYmWnJ6SudQKM1GhR4KQu7qje4W66qr7aYbDb0rX3UUpE6qmbRe7_F43UIuq1zy/s1600-h/naturalborncitizenchart.jpg
Thank you
Robert Stevens
Please consider joining me in expressing your concerns to Congressman Ron Paul
http://drorly.blogspot.com/
OPEN LETTER TO ALL U.S. SENATORS
OPEN LETTER TO ALL U.S. SENATORS:
OBAMA MUST STEP DOWN ON JANUARY 8, 2008
When the Senate meets on January 8, 2008 to talk about the results of the Electoral College vote, Mr. Obama will have to step down as he does NOT meet the criteria for being POTUS via the Constitution and Court cases throughout the years which say that only a "natural born citizen" can be POTUS. Even Mr. Obama agrees with this because he co-sponsored and signed Senate Resolution 511 which is the following:
SENATE RESOLUTION 511
Whereas the Constitution of the USA states the qualifications of the President, a person must be a ‘‘natural born Citizen’’ of the United States;
Whereas the term ‘‘natural born Citizen’’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1,is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;
Whereas there is no evidence of the intention of the Framers or any Congress to limit the constitutional rights of children born to Americans serving in the military nor to prevent those children from serving as their country’s President;
Whereas such limitations would be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the ‘‘natural born Citizen’’ clause of the Constitution of the United States, as evidenced by the First Congress’s own statute defining the term ‘‘natural born Citizen’’;
Whereas the well-being of all citizens of the United States is preserved and enhanced by the men and women who are assigned to serve our country outside of our national borders;
Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to be President; and Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936:
Now, therefore, be it Resolved,
That John Sidney McCain, III, is a ‘‘natural born Citizen’’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.
_____________________________________________
"Born to American citizens (mother and father)".
This Senate Resolution, unanimously (including Mr. Obama) adopted, declares that "natural born" means having two American citizen parents.
This, therefore, disqualifies Mr. Obama since his father was NOT an American but was a British citizen.
The Senate must apply the same standards to all Presidential Candidates.
Dr. Douglas W. Schell
Chair, www.restoretheconstitutionalrepublic.org
OBAMA MUST STEP DOWN ON JANUARY 8, 2008
When the Senate meets on January 8, 2008 to talk about the results of the Electoral College vote, Mr. Obama will have to step down as he does NOT meet the criteria for being POTUS via the Constitution and Court cases throughout the years which say that only a "natural born citizen" can be POTUS. Even Mr. Obama agrees with this because he co-sponsored and signed Senate Resolution 511 which is the following:
SENATE RESOLUTION 511
Whereas the Constitution of the USA states the qualifications of the President, a person must be a ‘‘natural born Citizen’’ of the United States;
Whereas the term ‘‘natural born Citizen’’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1,is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;
Whereas there is no evidence of the intention of the Framers or any Congress to limit the constitutional rights of children born to Americans serving in the military nor to prevent those children from serving as their country’s President;
Whereas such limitations would be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the ‘‘natural born Citizen’’ clause of the Constitution of the United States, as evidenced by the First Congress’s own statute defining the term ‘‘natural born Citizen’’;
Whereas the well-being of all citizens of the United States is preserved and enhanced by the men and women who are assigned to serve our country outside of our national borders;
Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to be President; and Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936:
Now, therefore, be it Resolved,
That John Sidney McCain, III, is a ‘‘natural born Citizen’’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.
_____________________________________________
"Born to American citizens (mother and father)".
This Senate Resolution, unanimously (including Mr. Obama) adopted, declares that "natural born" means having two American citizen parents.
This, therefore, disqualifies Mr. Obama since his father was NOT an American but was a British citizen.
The Senate must apply the same standards to all Presidential Candidates.
Dr. Douglas W. Schell
Chair, www.restoretheconstitutionalrepublic.org
2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved
2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved
Looking back over my columns of the past 12 months, one of their major themes was neatly encapsulated by two recent items from The Daily Telegraph.
By Christopher Booker
Last Updated: 10:59AM GMT 28 Dec 2008
Polar bears will be fine after all Photo: AP
The first, on May 21, headed "Climate change threat to Alpine ski resorts" , reported that the entire Alpine "winter sports industry" could soon "grind to a halt for lack of snow". The second, on December 19, headed "The Alps have best snow conditions in a generation" , reported that this winter's Alpine snowfalls "look set to beat all records by New Year's Day".
Easily one of the most important stories of 2008 has been all the evidence suggesting that this may be looked back on as the year when there was a turning point in the great worldwide panic over man-made global warming. Just when politicians in Europe and America have been adopting the most costly and damaging measures politicians have ever proposed, to combat this supposed menace, the tide has turned in three significant respects.
First, all over the world, temperatures have been dropping in a way wholly unpredicted by all those computer models which have been used as the main drivers of the scare. Last winter, as temperatures plummeted, many parts of the world had snowfalls on a scale not seen for decades. This winter, with the whole of Canada and half the US under snow, looks likely to be even worse. After several years flatlining, global temperatures have dropped sharply enough to cancel out much of their net rise in the 20th century.
Ever shriller and more frantic has become the insistence of the warmists, cheered on by their army of media groupies such as the BBC, that the last 10 years have been the "hottest in history" and that the North Pole would soon be ice-free – as the poles remain defiantly icebound and those polar bears fail to drown. All those hysterical predictions that we are seeing more droughts and hurricanes than ever before have infuriatingly failed to materialise.
Even the more cautious scientific acolytes of the official orthodoxy now admit that, thanks to "natural factors" such as ocean currents, temperatures have failed to rise as predicted (although they plaintively assure us that this cooling effect is merely "masking the underlying warming trend", and that the temperature rise will resume worse than ever by the middle of the next decade).
Secondly, 2008 was the year when any pretence that there was a "scientific consensus" in favour of man-made global warming collapsed. At long last, as in the Manhattan Declaration last March, hundreds of proper scientists, including many of the world's most eminent climate experts, have been rallying to pour scorn on that "consensus" which was only a politically engineered artefact, based on ever more blatantly manipulated data and computer models programmed to produce no more than convenient fictions.
Thirdly, as banks collapsed and the global economy plunged into its worst recession for decades, harsh reality at last began to break in on those self-deluding dreams which have for so long possessed almost every politician in the western world. As we saw in this month's Poznan conference, when 10,000 politicians, officials and "environmentalists" gathered to plan next year's "son of Kyoto" treaty in Copenhagen, panicking politicians are waking up to the fact that the world can no longer afford all those quixotic schemes for "combating climate change" with which they were so happy to indulge themselves in more comfortable times.
Suddenly it has become rather less appealing that we should divert trillions of dollars, pounds and euros into the fantasy that we could reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by 80 per cent. All those grandiose projects for "emissions trading", "carbon capture", building tens of thousands more useless wind turbines, switching vast areas of farmland from producing food to "biofuels", are being exposed as no more than enormously damaging and futile gestures, costing astronomic sums we no longer possess.
As 2009 dawns, it is time we in Britain faced up to the genuine crisis now fast approaching from the fact that – unless we get on very soon with building enough proper power stations to fill our looming "energy gap" - within a few years our lights will go out and what remains of our economy will judder to a halt. After years of infantile displacement activity, it is high time our politicians – along with those of the EU and President Obama's US – were brought back with a mighty jolt into contact with the real world.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/3982101/2008-was-the-year-man-made-global-warming-was-disproved.html
Looking back over my columns of the past 12 months, one of their major themes was neatly encapsulated by two recent items from The Daily Telegraph.
By Christopher Booker
Last Updated: 10:59AM GMT 28 Dec 2008
Polar bears will be fine after all Photo: AP
The first, on May 21, headed "Climate change threat to Alpine ski resorts" , reported that the entire Alpine "winter sports industry" could soon "grind to a halt for lack of snow". The second, on December 19, headed "The Alps have best snow conditions in a generation" , reported that this winter's Alpine snowfalls "look set to beat all records by New Year's Day".
Easily one of the most important stories of 2008 has been all the evidence suggesting that this may be looked back on as the year when there was a turning point in the great worldwide panic over man-made global warming. Just when politicians in Europe and America have been adopting the most costly and damaging measures politicians have ever proposed, to combat this supposed menace, the tide has turned in three significant respects.
First, all over the world, temperatures have been dropping in a way wholly unpredicted by all those computer models which have been used as the main drivers of the scare. Last winter, as temperatures plummeted, many parts of the world had snowfalls on a scale not seen for decades. This winter, with the whole of Canada and half the US under snow, looks likely to be even worse. After several years flatlining, global temperatures have dropped sharply enough to cancel out much of their net rise in the 20th century.
Ever shriller and more frantic has become the insistence of the warmists, cheered on by their army of media groupies such as the BBC, that the last 10 years have been the "hottest in history" and that the North Pole would soon be ice-free – as the poles remain defiantly icebound and those polar bears fail to drown. All those hysterical predictions that we are seeing more droughts and hurricanes than ever before have infuriatingly failed to materialise.
Even the more cautious scientific acolytes of the official orthodoxy now admit that, thanks to "natural factors" such as ocean currents, temperatures have failed to rise as predicted (although they plaintively assure us that this cooling effect is merely "masking the underlying warming trend", and that the temperature rise will resume worse than ever by the middle of the next decade).
Secondly, 2008 was the year when any pretence that there was a "scientific consensus" in favour of man-made global warming collapsed. At long last, as in the Manhattan Declaration last March, hundreds of proper scientists, including many of the world's most eminent climate experts, have been rallying to pour scorn on that "consensus" which was only a politically engineered artefact, based on ever more blatantly manipulated data and computer models programmed to produce no more than convenient fictions.
Thirdly, as banks collapsed and the global economy plunged into its worst recession for decades, harsh reality at last began to break in on those self-deluding dreams which have for so long possessed almost every politician in the western world. As we saw in this month's Poznan conference, when 10,000 politicians, officials and "environmentalists" gathered to plan next year's "son of Kyoto" treaty in Copenhagen, panicking politicians are waking up to the fact that the world can no longer afford all those quixotic schemes for "combating climate change" with which they were so happy to indulge themselves in more comfortable times.
Suddenly it has become rather less appealing that we should divert trillions of dollars, pounds and euros into the fantasy that we could reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by 80 per cent. All those grandiose projects for "emissions trading", "carbon capture", building tens of thousands more useless wind turbines, switching vast areas of farmland from producing food to "biofuels", are being exposed as no more than enormously damaging and futile gestures, costing astronomic sums we no longer possess.
As 2009 dawns, it is time we in Britain faced up to the genuine crisis now fast approaching from the fact that – unless we get on very soon with building enough proper power stations to fill our looming "energy gap" - within a few years our lights will go out and what remains of our economy will judder to a halt. After years of infantile displacement activity, it is high time our politicians – along with those of the EU and President Obama's US – were brought back with a mighty jolt into contact with the real world.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/3982101/2008-was-the-year-man-made-global-warming-was-disproved.html
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Obama's statements about his mother's residence in HI
http://drorly.blogspot.com/2008/12/obamas-atatements-about-his-mothers.html
Friday, December 26, 2008
Obama's statements about his mother's residence in HI are not true
From: This sender is DomainKeys verified "No FreeLunch" Add sender to Contacts To: dr_taitz@yahoo.com
Below are two official emails that dispute the public version of Obamaʼs Birth and his motherʼs marriage to BHO Sr.
From: pubrec@u.washington.edu [mailto:pubrec@u.washington.edu]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008
Subject: Re: Stanley "Ann" Dunham 1960 to 1970 class registration
Ms. Stanley Ann Dunham (BHO IIʼs mom) was enrolled at the University of Washington for:
Autumn 1961
Winter 1962
Spring 1962
The records responsive to your request from the University of Washington are above as provided by the Public Disclosure Laws of Washington State. This concludes the Universityʼs response to your Public Records request. Please feel free to contact our office if you have any questions or concerns.
Madolyne Lawson
Office of Public Records
206-543-9180
From: Stuart Lau [mailto:stuartl@hawaii.edu]
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008
Subject: Re: Inquiry
The University of Hawaii at Manoa is only able to provide the following information for Stanley Ann Dunham:
Dates of attendance:
Fall 1960 (First day of instruction 9/26/1960)
Spring 1963 - Summer 1966
Fall 1972 - Fall 1974
Summer 1976
Spring 1978
Fall 1984 - Summer 1992
Degrees awarded:
BA - Mathematics, Summer 1967 (August 6, 1967)
MA - Anthropology, Fall 1983 (December 18, 1983)
PhD - Anthropology, Summer 1992 (August 9, 1992)
Sincerely, Stuart Lau
****************************************
Stuart Lau
University Registrar
Office of Admissions and Records
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Ph: (808) 956-8010
****************************************
Commentary on University Emails:
For the BHO II Hawaiian Aug 4 1961 COLB to be accurate the following improbable events needed to occur:
1 month after starting classes, Stanley Ann Dunham, Barackʼs mom, at age 17, got pregnant by the only black African man on the entire chain of Hawaiian islands.
2 months after getting pregnant, she drops out of college.
3 months after getting pregnant, she marries BHO Sr.
10 months after her first day at the U of HI, she delivers BHO II and immediately leaves her parents, her new husband, and her home, to fly alone with a newborn 2800 miles to Seattle to start college at the U of W.
Stanley Ann Dunham does not return to Hawaii until after BHO Sr left the islands for Harvard.
This is an implausible series of events made even more nefarious because Obama II in his 2 bio books never mentions his mom left Hawaii when she was married to BHO Sr, nor does he mention she was in Washington State during this time.
Friday, December 26, 2008
Obama's statements about his mother's residence in HI are not true
From: This sender is DomainKeys verified "No FreeLunch" Add sender to Contacts To: dr_taitz@yahoo.com
Below are two official emails that dispute the public version of Obamaʼs Birth and his motherʼs marriage to BHO Sr.
From: pubrec@u.washington.edu [mailto:pubrec@u.washington.edu]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008
Subject: Re: Stanley "Ann" Dunham 1960 to 1970 class registration
Ms. Stanley Ann Dunham (BHO IIʼs mom) was enrolled at the University of Washington for:
Autumn 1961
Winter 1962
Spring 1962
The records responsive to your request from the University of Washington are above as provided by the Public Disclosure Laws of Washington State. This concludes the Universityʼs response to your Public Records request. Please feel free to contact our office if you have any questions or concerns.
Madolyne Lawson
Office of Public Records
206-543-9180
From: Stuart Lau [mailto:stuartl@hawaii.edu]
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008
Subject: Re: Inquiry
The University of Hawaii at Manoa is only able to provide the following information for Stanley Ann Dunham:
Dates of attendance:
Fall 1960 (First day of instruction 9/26/1960)
Spring 1963 - Summer 1966
Fall 1972 - Fall 1974
Summer 1976
Spring 1978
Fall 1984 - Summer 1992
Degrees awarded:
BA - Mathematics, Summer 1967 (August 6, 1967)
MA - Anthropology, Fall 1983 (December 18, 1983)
PhD - Anthropology, Summer 1992 (August 9, 1992)
Sincerely, Stuart Lau
****************************************
Stuart Lau
University Registrar
Office of Admissions and Records
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Ph: (808) 956-8010
****************************************
Commentary on University Emails:
For the BHO II Hawaiian Aug 4 1961 COLB to be accurate the following improbable events needed to occur:
1 month after starting classes, Stanley Ann Dunham, Barackʼs mom, at age 17, got pregnant by the only black African man on the entire chain of Hawaiian islands.
2 months after getting pregnant, she drops out of college.
3 months after getting pregnant, she marries BHO Sr.
10 months after her first day at the U of HI, she delivers BHO II and immediately leaves her parents, her new husband, and her home, to fly alone with a newborn 2800 miles to Seattle to start college at the U of W.
Stanley Ann Dunham does not return to Hawaii until after BHO Sr left the islands for Harvard.
This is an implausible series of events made even more nefarious because Obama II in his 2 bio books never mentions his mom left Hawaii when she was married to BHO Sr, nor does he mention she was in Washington State during this time.
Dispute posted on Court docket twice - Birth Obama
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=84609
Saturday, December 27, 2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
WorldNetDaily
2nd eligibility conference
scheduled by Supremes
Dispute posted on Court docket twice
after Electoral College votes submitted
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 26, 2008
10:40 pm Eastern
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WorldNetDaily
A second conference has been posted on the docket for the U.S. Supreme Court over the issue of Barack Obama's eligibility to occupy the White House, this one scheduled a week after Congress is to review the Electoral College vote tabulation.
The latest issue posted is a request for an injunction on the election results pending the resolution of a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by attorney Philip J. Berg, a case that is docketed for a similar conference among the justices on Jan. 9.
Berg's original case raises questions about Obama's eligibility and his injunction request first was filed early in December. It was submitted to and rejected by two different justices before it came before Justice Antonin Scalia on Dec. 18. Then just before Christmas the docket was updated to reflect that the motion had been "distributed for conference of January 16, 2009."
(Story continues below)
On Berg's Obama Crimes.org website, he said Congress is scheduled to hear the Electoral College results on Jan. 8. Then on Jan. 9 there's the conference scheduled on Berg's case itself, with the injunction issue to be addressed a week later.
WND has reported Berg's case, one of the first legal challenges to Obama's eligibility to reach the Supreme Court, alleges he cannot constitutionally be inaugurated.
"I know that Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally qualified natural born citizen and is ineligible to assume the office of president of the United States," Berg said in a statement on his ObamaCrimes.com website.
"Obama knows he is not 'natural born' as he knows where he was born and he knows he was adopted in Indonesia; Obama is an attorney, Harvard Law grad who taught Constitutional law; Obama knows his candidacy is the largest 'hoax' attempted on the citizens of the United States in over 200 years; Obama places our Constitution in a 'crisis' situation; and Obama is in a situation where he can be blackmailed by leaders around the world who know Obama is not qualified," Berg's statement continued.
"The Supreme Court has listed the case of Berg vs. Obama for 'conference' on January 9," the website said.
"I am appalled that the main stream media continues to ignore this issue as we are headed to a 'Constitution Crisis,'" Berg wrote. "There is nothing more important than our U.S. Constitution and it must be enforced. I am concerned that our courts have not yet decided to look into the merits of our allegations."
WND previously reported on a case brought by Cort Wrotnowski. It fell by the wayside when the justices heard about it in conference but refused to give it a further hearing. That was the same fate handed to a case brought by Leo Donofrio. Both challenged Obama on essentially the same issue: allegations that dual citizenship based on a father who was a British subject and a mother who was an American minor disqualified him for office.
Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 190,000 others and sign up now!
The high court previously turned down a request from Berg to stop the Electoral College from selecting the 44th president until Obama documents his eligibility for the office.
As WND has reported, more than a dozen lawsuits have been filed over Obama's eligibility to assume the office of the president, many have been dismissed, while others remain pending.
The cases, in various ways, have alleged Obama does not meet the "natural born citizen" clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, which reads, "No Person except 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 President."
Some of the legal challenges have alleged Obama was not born in Hawaii, as he insists, but in Kenya. Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. Such cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.
Several details of Obama's past have added twists to the question of his eligibility and citizenship, including his family's move to Indonesia when he was a child, his travel to Pakistan in the '80s when such travel was forbidden to American citizens and conflicting reports from Obama's family about his place of birth.
A partial listing and status update for several of the cases surrounding Obama's eligibility to serve as president is below:
Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania Democrat, demanded that the courts verify Obama's original birth certificate and other documents proving his American citizenship. Supreme Court conferences on the case and its motions are scheduled Jan. 9 and 16.
Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.
Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.
Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support.
Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.
Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.
In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.
In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.
In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injuction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.
California attorney Orly Taitz also has brought a complaint alleging Obama is not a "natural born" citizen and has written an open letter to the Supreme Court asking for the issue to be resolved.
Last month, WND reported the worries over a "constitutional crisis" that could be looming over the issue of Obama's citizenship.
"Should Senator Obama be discovered, after he takes office, to be ineligible for the Office of President of the United States of America and, thereby, his election declared void," argues the Alan Keyes case pending in California, "Americans will suffer irreparable harm in that (a) usurper will be sitting as the President of the United States, and none of the treaties, laws, or executive orders signed by him will be valid or legal."
With such high stakes potentially at risk, WND earlier launched a letter campaign to contact Electoral College members and urge them to review the controversy.
That followed a campaign that sent more than 60,000 letters by overnight delivery to the U.S. Supreme Court when one case contesting Obama's eligibility for the Oval Office was pending.
A separate petition, already signed by more than 190,000 also is ongoing asking authorities in the election to seek proof Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution.
WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi had gone to both Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama's birth. But his research and discoveries only raised more questions.
The biggest question was why, if a Hawaii birth certificate exists as his campaign has stated, Obama hasn't simply ordered it made available to settle the rumors. The image his campaign posted online has been rejected by critics since it is a "certification of live birth," not a birth certificate, and under Hawaii law at the time such certifications were given to parents of children born outside the state.
The governor's office in Hawaii said there is a valid certificate but rejected requests for access and left ambiguous its origin: Does the certificate on file with the Department of Health indicate a Hawaii birth or was it generated after the Obama family registered a Kenyan birth in Hawaii?
Obama's half-sister, Maya Soetoro, has named two different Hawaii hospitals where Obama could have been born. There have been other allegations that Obama actually was born in Kenya during a time when his father was a British subject. At one point a Kenyan ambassador said Obama's birthplace in Kenya already was being recognized.
Saturday, December 27, 2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
WorldNetDaily
2nd eligibility conference
scheduled by Supremes
Dispute posted on Court docket twice
after Electoral College votes submitted
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 26, 2008
10:40 pm Eastern
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WorldNetDaily
A second conference has been posted on the docket for the U.S. Supreme Court over the issue of Barack Obama's eligibility to occupy the White House, this one scheduled a week after Congress is to review the Electoral College vote tabulation.
The latest issue posted is a request for an injunction on the election results pending the resolution of a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by attorney Philip J. Berg, a case that is docketed for a similar conference among the justices on Jan. 9.
Berg's original case raises questions about Obama's eligibility and his injunction request first was filed early in December. It was submitted to and rejected by two different justices before it came before Justice Antonin Scalia on Dec. 18. Then just before Christmas the docket was updated to reflect that the motion had been "distributed for conference of January 16, 2009."
(Story continues below)
On Berg's Obama Crimes.org website, he said Congress is scheduled to hear the Electoral College results on Jan. 8. Then on Jan. 9 there's the conference scheduled on Berg's case itself, with the injunction issue to be addressed a week later.
WND has reported Berg's case, one of the first legal challenges to Obama's eligibility to reach the Supreme Court, alleges he cannot constitutionally be inaugurated.
"I know that Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally qualified natural born citizen and is ineligible to assume the office of president of the United States," Berg said in a statement on his ObamaCrimes.com website.
"Obama knows he is not 'natural born' as he knows where he was born and he knows he was adopted in Indonesia; Obama is an attorney, Harvard Law grad who taught Constitutional law; Obama knows his candidacy is the largest 'hoax' attempted on the citizens of the United States in over 200 years; Obama places our Constitution in a 'crisis' situation; and Obama is in a situation where he can be blackmailed by leaders around the world who know Obama is not qualified," Berg's statement continued.
"The Supreme Court has listed the case of Berg vs. Obama for 'conference' on January 9," the website said.
"I am appalled that the main stream media continues to ignore this issue as we are headed to a 'Constitution Crisis,'" Berg wrote. "There is nothing more important than our U.S. Constitution and it must be enforced. I am concerned that our courts have not yet decided to look into the merits of our allegations."
WND previously reported on a case brought by Cort Wrotnowski. It fell by the wayside when the justices heard about it in conference but refused to give it a further hearing. That was the same fate handed to a case brought by Leo Donofrio. Both challenged Obama on essentially the same issue: allegations that dual citizenship based on a father who was a British subject and a mother who was an American minor disqualified him for office.
Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 190,000 others and sign up now!
The high court previously turned down a request from Berg to stop the Electoral College from selecting the 44th president until Obama documents his eligibility for the office.
As WND has reported, more than a dozen lawsuits have been filed over Obama's eligibility to assume the office of the president, many have been dismissed, while others remain pending.
The cases, in various ways, have alleged Obama does not meet the "natural born citizen" clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, which reads, "No Person except 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 President."
Some of the legal challenges have alleged Obama was not born in Hawaii, as he insists, but in Kenya. Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. Such cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.
Several details of Obama's past have added twists to the question of his eligibility and citizenship, including his family's move to Indonesia when he was a child, his travel to Pakistan in the '80s when such travel was forbidden to American citizens and conflicting reports from Obama's family about his place of birth.
A partial listing and status update for several of the cases surrounding Obama's eligibility to serve as president is below:
Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania Democrat, demanded that the courts verify Obama's original birth certificate and other documents proving his American citizenship. Supreme Court conferences on the case and its motions are scheduled Jan. 9 and 16.
Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.
Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.
Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support.
Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.
Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.
In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.
In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.
In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injuction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.
California attorney Orly Taitz also has brought a complaint alleging Obama is not a "natural born" citizen and has written an open letter to the Supreme Court asking for the issue to be resolved.
Last month, WND reported the worries over a "constitutional crisis" that could be looming over the issue of Obama's citizenship.
"Should Senator Obama be discovered, after he takes office, to be ineligible for the Office of President of the United States of America and, thereby, his election declared void," argues the Alan Keyes case pending in California, "Americans will suffer irreparable harm in that (a) usurper will be sitting as the President of the United States, and none of the treaties, laws, or executive orders signed by him will be valid or legal."
With such high stakes potentially at risk, WND earlier launched a letter campaign to contact Electoral College members and urge them to review the controversy.
That followed a campaign that sent more than 60,000 letters by overnight delivery to the U.S. Supreme Court when one case contesting Obama's eligibility for the Oval Office was pending.
A separate petition, already signed by more than 190,000 also is ongoing asking authorities in the election to seek proof Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution.
WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi had gone to both Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama's birth. But his research and discoveries only raised more questions.
The biggest question was why, if a Hawaii birth certificate exists as his campaign has stated, Obama hasn't simply ordered it made available to settle the rumors. The image his campaign posted online has been rejected by critics since it is a "certification of live birth," not a birth certificate, and under Hawaii law at the time such certifications were given to parents of children born outside the state.
The governor's office in Hawaii said there is a valid certificate but rejected requests for access and left ambiguous its origin: Does the certificate on file with the Department of Health indicate a Hawaii birth or was it generated after the Obama family registered a Kenyan birth in Hawaii?
Obama's half-sister, Maya Soetoro, has named two different Hawaii hospitals where Obama could have been born. There have been other allegations that Obama actually was born in Kenya during a time when his father was a British subject. At one point a Kenyan ambassador said Obama's birthplace in Kenya already was being recognized.
Barack Obama, AKA Barry Obama, Barry Soetoro, Barry Sutoro, Barack Soetoro is a liar, a con man and a fraud.
Obama’s Hope For The World
24.12.2008
Source: Pravda.Ru
URL: http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/106866-Obama_Hope_World-0
By Mark S. McGrew
Barack Obama, AKA Barry Obama, Barry Soetoro, Barry Sutoro, Barack Soetoro is a liar, a con man and a fraud.
Please don’t take my word for it. Take his. Click here for 158 documented lies.
But, at least you won’t hear any lies from Obama’s Kenyan family, because the Kenyan government put out a Gag Order to keep them from talking to media people.
Barack Obama is a con man because he is making promises that he can’t keep. He has already proven he conned the voters by his chosen cabinet and staff. The World is beginning to realize that he has not changed anything. But the World is going to find out that his chosen associates to help him, as he says in his own words “Rule” over America, are by far the very worst that America has to offer. They will make the Bush and Clinton administrations look like Boy Scouts.
When people start asking questions, con men make themselves scarce. Questions are being asked about Obama and Rahm Emanuel’s relationship with Governor Blagojevich. Maybe it is just a coincidence that Obama is spending two weeks in a $9 million dollar house in Hawaii and Rahm Emanuel took off on a two week vacation to Africa.
America ’s major media has protected him, lied for him, slandered and libeled his Presidential opponents and viciously attacked and labeled anyone who questions his value as “Conspiracy Nuts” or “Racists”.
That is about to change. America’s major media has as a sole function, not to report the news, but to shape public opinion. During his campaign, they shaped Obama into a patient and compassionate gift from Heaven. Now, slowly, they are asking questions about him. Soon, they will shape his image into a hideous beast beyond comprehension. The evidence is available to prove that his ideals, his policies and his stated goals are to transform America into something the Nazis could only dream about: Youth Corps, Forced labor, socialism for the rich, paid for by the poor, military in America’s streets, all leading to complete absolute domination over the American people.
America ’s people will not and are not accepting Obama. The American media is just now realizing that American’s are nowhere near as ignorant and complacent as they thought. And they are learning that World leaders are beginning to question Obama’s desires for the World.
The major media in America will now begin to show why it would be best not to have Obama and his crew in power and Americans will be begging for it to be anything other than what Obama is offering.
It is impossible for Barry Obama to assume the position of President of the United States. It is against the Rights of man, throughout the World, throughout history.
Yes, there have been usurpers, pretenders, imposters, liars, cheats and bunko artists taking over Nations. But they don’t last very long and generally many of their policies are reversed by the next generation of leaders.
If Obama were to take the Oath of Office and become President of the United States of America, and later found to be ineligible under the US Constitution to be President, Americans will suffer in many ways. But equally so, or more so, the entire civilization of the World will suffer.
If Obama is not qualified, nothing he signs will be legitimate. Agencies of Federal, State and Local governments can ignore him. Any Nation on Earth can rescind any agreements he makes with them. And vice versa, future administrations of America can renege on any agreement made that suits their whims.
The United States House of Representatives and the Senate have a duty and took an Oath to defend and protect the US Constitution. If they have not done that, then they also are an illegitimate government and have absolutely no authority to act on behalf of the American People. Any agreements or laws they pass will be illegal. Ambassadors, Secretary of State, Embassy officials all over the World will be rendered sterile.
No Nation, no leader, no military, no corporation and no other entity on Earth will be able to rely on the continuity of America’s trustworthiness. And again, vice versa, any entity will have no obligation to abide by their commitments to America.
The American Constitution is the root of a tree, grown in the soil of Biblical principles, expressed as God’s words in the Ten Commandments. These Ten Commandments are similar to the instructions given to mankind thousands of years ago by all of the World’s religions.
All laws are a branch of the Constitution. The US Constitution does not “give” Rights to Americans. It delegates to the elected officials, to protect and preserve those Rights, which were given to all mankind, of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. No governing body in America can legally take away those Rights. If a government does take away those Rights and replace them with “Privileges” then life is worth only what the government says it is. At their Will, they can determine if you shall be granted the privilege to continue living if they don’t like what you speak or print or what God you choose to worship. In a society like that, in these modern times, not one Nation on Earth is safe from attack and not one human being can be comfortable knowing he will be alive to see the next day.
That is one small reason why the Constitution of The United States of America can not be altered to accommodate a man who is not eligible to be President under the terms of the Constitution. If we relinquish one Right, the traitors in government will take the rest of them.
The Constitution has no mention of a protected Right for the “Will of the People” to override any part of the Constitution. Anyone who preaches that the Will of the People comes first is a lying traitor and should be shot.
American politicians and major media people are fond of saying, “We are a Nation of laws”. They are idiots. And they are traitors, not only to the American people but to any peoples of the World who desire trust and peace in their dealings with others.
Any politician’s efforts to allow a person to take the Office of the President, who can not prove he is eligible is the highest violation of their Oath to defend and protect the Constitution. Anyone who violates the US Constitution has no authority to represent it.
Nothing they say, nothing they do, no words, no actions, no thoughts, dreams or desires will have any more legitimate importance to the World than a mosquito dying in a swamp.
The only thing that backs up the American dollar is Trust. There is no gold, silver, petroleum, or anything tangible that gives the American dollar a value.
Only “The Full Faith and Trust” of the United States government provides a value to the American dollar. If that trust is destroyed, the American financial system and the American economy will collapse and inevitably morph into something else.
The current multi-trillion dollar bailouts do exhibit that the governing powers in America do not want the Full Faith and Trust of America to be lost. The American government is doing everything in their power to ensure that the World knows that they are worthy of that Faith and Trust.
To allow a usurper to take control over America would destroy what the government is doing to maintain their integrity. I do not believe that they will allow that to happen.
But adhering to the major media’s modus operandi, they will tell us slowly, plant seeds of doubt about Obama, question thoughtfully on the air, pretend to be just realizing the mistake they made, gently debating with each other and gradually lead us to the point of acceptance. They will expertly “Shape” our opinion so that we will all accept that Obama is not qualified and will not be granted the Presidency.
If I am wrong, it won’t be the first time. If I am wrong, I am right that the World’s populations will suffer.
Dr. Orly Taitz’s Esq., representing military and former military plaintiffs, filed a lawsuit against the California Secretary of State asking her to NOT certify the Electoral College votes for Obama. One of the reasons for the request is that one of the 55 Democratic Electors of the Electoral College representing Congressman Berman and submitted to the Secretary of State, Mrs. Ilene Huber was……deceased and has been for eight years. This is on page 16 and 17 of her lawsuit.
Any military or former military personnel are welcome to join her lawsuit by signing this Military Consent Form.
ACORN is notorious for phony voter registration, but for the Democratic Party to list an 8 year old corpse as someone who is eligible to vote for the President of The United States would indicate deceitfulness beyond comprehension. By using a long dead, worm eaten body to get a vote, they prove that they have absolutely no respect for anything.
Barack Obama, by not responding to a lawsuit by Former Deputy State Attorney General for Pennsylvania, Phillip Berg, legally and effectively admitted fraud by not responding to that lawsuit.
If Obama can not prove he is eligible to become President of the United States of America, he will further have committed fraud against an unknown number of campaign contributors in the amount of more or less than 1 Billion dollars. Obama raised close to $1,000,000,000 for a job that pays maybe $400,000. Obama would have to work for 2,500 years to pay that money back if he used his entire salary to make the payments. Or, for 5,000 years if he wanted to eat now and then. If he is not eligible, he may and should be put in jail for the rest of his life and every penny to his name should be confiscated. Every person who aided and promoted his fraud also belongs in jail.
The group of unelected people, known as The Electoral College, has sole right to choose the President and Vice President. If Obama is determined to be ineligible, the Electoral College has the Constitutional Right to elect any Natural Born Citizen they please. They can elect Paris Hilton and Tina Turner if they want to.
Every American should learn their lesson and never listen to another major media outlet again. Over 30 large newspapers in America are for sale and no takers. Some have cut back on deliveries and some will close. Some of these newspapers have been in business for over 100 years. In less than 10 years of Political Correct “newspeak”, the editors have managed to destroy their companies. The New York Times recently announced that they are seeking a loan against their HQ building which they own 50% of. They need to borrow $250 million. And all they need to do to pay it back is to sell 500 million newspapers. The Major Media writers and smiling faces on TV get paid a lot of money to lie to us, but that should not exclude them from ridicule and contempt from their family and neighbors. It should also not exclude them from fraud charges. What kids would want to play with their kids?
The current President of the United States of America has the opportunity to leave his legacy as the President who preserved the United States of America and its Constitution. All he has to do is to walk out onto the steps of the White House and announce, “If the United States House and Senate, if the US Supreme Court, Federal and State Courts from coast to coast will not respect their sworn duty to uphold and protect our Constitution, I will. By a Presidential Executive Order, signed by me today, Barack Hussein Obama, or whatever his name is, is formally and legally prohibited from becoming the President of The United States. Effective immediately”. That would end all controversy and destroy all threats to the US Constitution.
Author’s note: People ask me why I publish articles in Russia’s Pravda Online. Many Americans do not realize just how controlled the American media is. Many more do not realize that Russia does have a Free Press that is far freer than the American Press. The answer to the question is a question: How often have you ever seen the truth published in America? What I write does not in any way reflect the opinion of the Russian government or the Russian people. Nor does it reflect the opinion of the editors and employees of Pravda Online. The Russian Constitution allows them the freedom to offer writers a place to express their own views. Anyone who does understand the dangers of an Obama Presidency should be thankful that there is a place where information can be shared, regardless of what Country that may be.
Barack Obama has said to “Get in your neighbor’s face and argue”. That can not be done in America’s major media. They only allow one view, which is whatever theirs is for the day. I would love to be sitting in a back alley some dark night and watch Barry Obama get in Vladimir Putin’s face and argue.
Alan Peters, a Subject Matter Expert (SME) has helped in acquiring and distributing this information.
Mark S. McGrew can be reached at McGrewMX@aol.com
24.12.2008
Source: Pravda.Ru
URL: http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/106866-Obama_Hope_World-0
By Mark S. McGrew
Barack Obama, AKA Barry Obama, Barry Soetoro, Barry Sutoro, Barack Soetoro is a liar, a con man and a fraud.
Please don’t take my word for it. Take his. Click here for 158 documented lies.
But, at least you won’t hear any lies from Obama’s Kenyan family, because the Kenyan government put out a Gag Order to keep them from talking to media people.
Barack Obama is a con man because he is making promises that he can’t keep. He has already proven he conned the voters by his chosen cabinet and staff. The World is beginning to realize that he has not changed anything. But the World is going to find out that his chosen associates to help him, as he says in his own words “Rule” over America, are by far the very worst that America has to offer. They will make the Bush and Clinton administrations look like Boy Scouts.
When people start asking questions, con men make themselves scarce. Questions are being asked about Obama and Rahm Emanuel’s relationship with Governor Blagojevich. Maybe it is just a coincidence that Obama is spending two weeks in a $9 million dollar house in Hawaii and Rahm Emanuel took off on a two week vacation to Africa.
America ’s major media has protected him, lied for him, slandered and libeled his Presidential opponents and viciously attacked and labeled anyone who questions his value as “Conspiracy Nuts” or “Racists”.
That is about to change. America’s major media has as a sole function, not to report the news, but to shape public opinion. During his campaign, they shaped Obama into a patient and compassionate gift from Heaven. Now, slowly, they are asking questions about him. Soon, they will shape his image into a hideous beast beyond comprehension. The evidence is available to prove that his ideals, his policies and his stated goals are to transform America into something the Nazis could only dream about: Youth Corps, Forced labor, socialism for the rich, paid for by the poor, military in America’s streets, all leading to complete absolute domination over the American people.
America ’s people will not and are not accepting Obama. The American media is just now realizing that American’s are nowhere near as ignorant and complacent as they thought. And they are learning that World leaders are beginning to question Obama’s desires for the World.
The major media in America will now begin to show why it would be best not to have Obama and his crew in power and Americans will be begging for it to be anything other than what Obama is offering.
It is impossible for Barry Obama to assume the position of President of the United States. It is against the Rights of man, throughout the World, throughout history.
Yes, there have been usurpers, pretenders, imposters, liars, cheats and bunko artists taking over Nations. But they don’t last very long and generally many of their policies are reversed by the next generation of leaders.
If Obama were to take the Oath of Office and become President of the United States of America, and later found to be ineligible under the US Constitution to be President, Americans will suffer in many ways. But equally so, or more so, the entire civilization of the World will suffer.
If Obama is not qualified, nothing he signs will be legitimate. Agencies of Federal, State and Local governments can ignore him. Any Nation on Earth can rescind any agreements he makes with them. And vice versa, future administrations of America can renege on any agreement made that suits their whims.
The United States House of Representatives and the Senate have a duty and took an Oath to defend and protect the US Constitution. If they have not done that, then they also are an illegitimate government and have absolutely no authority to act on behalf of the American People. Any agreements or laws they pass will be illegal. Ambassadors, Secretary of State, Embassy officials all over the World will be rendered sterile.
No Nation, no leader, no military, no corporation and no other entity on Earth will be able to rely on the continuity of America’s trustworthiness. And again, vice versa, any entity will have no obligation to abide by their commitments to America.
The American Constitution is the root of a tree, grown in the soil of Biblical principles, expressed as God’s words in the Ten Commandments. These Ten Commandments are similar to the instructions given to mankind thousands of years ago by all of the World’s religions.
All laws are a branch of the Constitution. The US Constitution does not “give” Rights to Americans. It delegates to the elected officials, to protect and preserve those Rights, which were given to all mankind, of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. No governing body in America can legally take away those Rights. If a government does take away those Rights and replace them with “Privileges” then life is worth only what the government says it is. At their Will, they can determine if you shall be granted the privilege to continue living if they don’t like what you speak or print or what God you choose to worship. In a society like that, in these modern times, not one Nation on Earth is safe from attack and not one human being can be comfortable knowing he will be alive to see the next day.
That is one small reason why the Constitution of The United States of America can not be altered to accommodate a man who is not eligible to be President under the terms of the Constitution. If we relinquish one Right, the traitors in government will take the rest of them.
The Constitution has no mention of a protected Right for the “Will of the People” to override any part of the Constitution. Anyone who preaches that the Will of the People comes first is a lying traitor and should be shot.
American politicians and major media people are fond of saying, “We are a Nation of laws”. They are idiots. And they are traitors, not only to the American people but to any peoples of the World who desire trust and peace in their dealings with others.
Any politician’s efforts to allow a person to take the Office of the President, who can not prove he is eligible is the highest violation of their Oath to defend and protect the Constitution. Anyone who violates the US Constitution has no authority to represent it.
Nothing they say, nothing they do, no words, no actions, no thoughts, dreams or desires will have any more legitimate importance to the World than a mosquito dying in a swamp.
The only thing that backs up the American dollar is Trust. There is no gold, silver, petroleum, or anything tangible that gives the American dollar a value.
Only “The Full Faith and Trust” of the United States government provides a value to the American dollar. If that trust is destroyed, the American financial system and the American economy will collapse and inevitably morph into something else.
The current multi-trillion dollar bailouts do exhibit that the governing powers in America do not want the Full Faith and Trust of America to be lost. The American government is doing everything in their power to ensure that the World knows that they are worthy of that Faith and Trust.
To allow a usurper to take control over America would destroy what the government is doing to maintain their integrity. I do not believe that they will allow that to happen.
But adhering to the major media’s modus operandi, they will tell us slowly, plant seeds of doubt about Obama, question thoughtfully on the air, pretend to be just realizing the mistake they made, gently debating with each other and gradually lead us to the point of acceptance. They will expertly “Shape” our opinion so that we will all accept that Obama is not qualified and will not be granted the Presidency.
If I am wrong, it won’t be the first time. If I am wrong, I am right that the World’s populations will suffer.
Dr. Orly Taitz’s Esq., representing military and former military plaintiffs, filed a lawsuit against the California Secretary of State asking her to NOT certify the Electoral College votes for Obama. One of the reasons for the request is that one of the 55 Democratic Electors of the Electoral College representing Congressman Berman and submitted to the Secretary of State, Mrs. Ilene Huber was……deceased and has been for eight years. This is on page 16 and 17 of her lawsuit.
Any military or former military personnel are welcome to join her lawsuit by signing this Military Consent Form.
ACORN is notorious for phony voter registration, but for the Democratic Party to list an 8 year old corpse as someone who is eligible to vote for the President of The United States would indicate deceitfulness beyond comprehension. By using a long dead, worm eaten body to get a vote, they prove that they have absolutely no respect for anything.
Barack Obama, by not responding to a lawsuit by Former Deputy State Attorney General for Pennsylvania, Phillip Berg, legally and effectively admitted fraud by not responding to that lawsuit.
If Obama can not prove he is eligible to become President of the United States of America, he will further have committed fraud against an unknown number of campaign contributors in the amount of more or less than 1 Billion dollars. Obama raised close to $1,000,000,000 for a job that pays maybe $400,000. Obama would have to work for 2,500 years to pay that money back if he used his entire salary to make the payments. Or, for 5,000 years if he wanted to eat now and then. If he is not eligible, he may and should be put in jail for the rest of his life and every penny to his name should be confiscated. Every person who aided and promoted his fraud also belongs in jail.
The group of unelected people, known as The Electoral College, has sole right to choose the President and Vice President. If Obama is determined to be ineligible, the Electoral College has the Constitutional Right to elect any Natural Born Citizen they please. They can elect Paris Hilton and Tina Turner if they want to.
Every American should learn their lesson and never listen to another major media outlet again. Over 30 large newspapers in America are for sale and no takers. Some have cut back on deliveries and some will close. Some of these newspapers have been in business for over 100 years. In less than 10 years of Political Correct “newspeak”, the editors have managed to destroy their companies. The New York Times recently announced that they are seeking a loan against their HQ building which they own 50% of. They need to borrow $250 million. And all they need to do to pay it back is to sell 500 million newspapers. The Major Media writers and smiling faces on TV get paid a lot of money to lie to us, but that should not exclude them from ridicule and contempt from their family and neighbors. It should also not exclude them from fraud charges. What kids would want to play with their kids?
The current President of the United States of America has the opportunity to leave his legacy as the President who preserved the United States of America and its Constitution. All he has to do is to walk out onto the steps of the White House and announce, “If the United States House and Senate, if the US Supreme Court, Federal and State Courts from coast to coast will not respect their sworn duty to uphold and protect our Constitution, I will. By a Presidential Executive Order, signed by me today, Barack Hussein Obama, or whatever his name is, is formally and legally prohibited from becoming the President of The United States. Effective immediately”. That would end all controversy and destroy all threats to the US Constitution.
Author’s note: People ask me why I publish articles in Russia’s Pravda Online. Many Americans do not realize just how controlled the American media is. Many more do not realize that Russia does have a Free Press that is far freer than the American Press. The answer to the question is a question: How often have you ever seen the truth published in America? What I write does not in any way reflect the opinion of the Russian government or the Russian people. Nor does it reflect the opinion of the editors and employees of Pravda Online. The Russian Constitution allows them the freedom to offer writers a place to express their own views. Anyone who does understand the dangers of an Obama Presidency should be thankful that there is a place where information can be shared, regardless of what Country that may be.
Barack Obama has said to “Get in your neighbor’s face and argue”. That can not be done in America’s major media. They only allow one view, which is whatever theirs is for the day. I would love to be sitting in a back alley some dark night and watch Barry Obama get in Vladimir Putin’s face and argue.
Alan Peters, a Subject Matter Expert (SME) has helped in acquiring and distributing this information.
Mark S. McGrew can be reached at McGrewMX@aol.com
Friday, December 26, 2008
Rep. John Linder's response to birth certificate issue
Thank you for contacting me with your concerns regarding allegations that U.S. Senator Barack Obama is not a U.S. citizen. I appreciate hearing from you.
This story has been percolating in the media for a number of months. Unfortunately, unless Senator Obama produces the documentation on his own, at this time, there is no way to verify if he is in fact a natural born citizen of the United States. [emphasis mine]
On January 8, 2009, both the U.S. Senate and House shall meet for the purpose of counting and certifying the electoral votes. After the vote has been counted, the President of the Senate shall call for objections. It is at this time that Federal officials in both the House and Senate may object to the certification of President-elect Obama by alleging that he fails to meet the Constitutional requirements to serve as President of the United States. Please be assured that I will continue to monitor this issue very carefully, and I will act when appropriate and necessary.
Again, thank you for contacting me. If I can be of further assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to call on me.
Sincerely,
John Linder
Member of Congress
Also, 12/24, 3:31am CT: As relayed and reported to I.O. yesterday evening by FReeper, BonRad, below is an email sent by Plains Radio, early Tuesday morning (emphasis by I.O.) [Ed. update: In the Monday interview described below, Dr. Mike Ritze, Oklahoma State Representative states that he is contacting OK Senators James Inhofe (R) and Tom Coburn (R), asking that they challenge the congressional certification of Barack Obama's election, based upon his not being a natural born Citizen according to the actual definition of that criterion. Rep. Ritze also describes his proposed state legislation to reform election law in that state, including the constitutional definition of natural born Citizen. Alabama's U.S. Senator, Jeff Sessions was also mentioned.]
This story has been percolating in the media for a number of months. Unfortunately, unless Senator Obama produces the documentation on his own, at this time, there is no way to verify if he is in fact a natural born citizen of the United States. [emphasis mine]
On January 8, 2009, both the U.S. Senate and House shall meet for the purpose of counting and certifying the electoral votes. After the vote has been counted, the President of the Senate shall call for objections. It is at this time that Federal officials in both the House and Senate may object to the certification of President-elect Obama by alleging that he fails to meet the Constitutional requirements to serve as President of the United States. Please be assured that I will continue to monitor this issue very carefully, and I will act when appropriate and necessary.
Again, thank you for contacting me. If I can be of further assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to call on me.
Sincerely,
John Linder
Member of Congress
Also, 12/24, 3:31am CT: As relayed and reported to I.O. yesterday evening by FReeper, BonRad, below is an email sent by Plains Radio, early Tuesday morning (emphasis by I.O.) [Ed. update: In the Monday interview described below, Dr. Mike Ritze, Oklahoma State Representative states that he is contacting OK Senators James Inhofe (R) and Tom Coburn (R), asking that they challenge the congressional certification of Barack Obama's election, based upon his not being a natural born Citizen according to the actual definition of that criterion. Rep. Ritze also describes his proposed state legislation to reform election law in that state, including the constitutional definition of natural born Citizen. Alabama's U.S. Senator, Jeff Sessions was also mentioned.]
Why wasn't Obama indicted yet, another pay to play
Why wasn't Obama indicted yet, another pay to play
The article below is from Citizen Wells, they have an Obama indictment petition going on.
In a nutshell State Senator Obama gets $100,000 from Robert Blackwell in exchange Blackwell's co, EKI, Electronic Knowledge interchange gets more then 3 times this amount in grants from the state.
Orly
The Case Against Barack Obama, Dan Shomon, Robert Blackwell, David Freddoso, Killerspin, Illinois State Grants, Legal retainer, Money Laundering, LA Times article
August 14, 2008 · 21 Comments
One of the least reported aspects of Obama’s past and his ties to
corruption and dubious business associations is the Robert Blackwell
“legal retainer” in conjunction with Dan Shomon. The LA Times broke
this story back in April 2008. They referred to Dan Shomon as an
Obama campaign aide. This blog, Citizen Wells, dug deeper into the
role of Dan Shomon. Dan Shomon was actually Obama’s Campaign Manager
at one time and he was also a lobbyist. Dan Shomon’s name is at
the top of an announcement of Robert Blackwell being on Governor
Rod Blagojevich’s team. Blagojevich was named often during the Tony
Rezko trial and has been the subject of a recall attempt in Illinois.
Robert Blackwell contacted this blog shortly after we presented
our article in April 2008.
David Freddoso has written a new book, “The Case Against Barack Obama.
Freddoso, to his credit, writes about the Dan Shomon connection. He
does not cover Shomon as well as this blog so we recommend that you
search on Shomon here and learn more. Here are some exerpts from
“The Case Against Barack Obama”:
“Perhaps the most surprising story about Barack obama and money is one that no one talks about at all. It involves ping-pong. it is the story of how state Senator Obama was paid more than $100,000 for legal work, then helped his client’s company get $320,000 in taxpayer grants.
For some reason, only the Los Angeles Times has examined the story of Robert Blackwell Jr. and the government grants he received after he invested in Barack Obama.
Obama writes in The Audacity of Hope that after his failed congressional run in 2000, he was “more or less broke.” His family would make $240,000 that year, but they had large debts, and he had just loaned his losing campaign $9,500 and maxed out his credit card. To keep his family afloat, he writes, he went back after the election to his law firm, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, which he had neglected throughout 2000 (he received no income from the firm that year). He planned to do some legal work to supplement his modest $58,000 salary as a state senator.
In 2001, while serving as a state senator, Obama would earn $98,158 from his law practice. Of that money, $80,000 came from a single client - Electronic Knowledge Interchange (EKI)-which had put him on a $8,000 monthly retainer. This lasted fourteen months and netted Obama $112,000. The company was owned by one Robert Blackwell Jr., a friend of Obama’s since about 1995.
Months after Obama received his final payment from EKI, he wrote a request on Illinois Senate letterhead and sent it to state officials for a $50,000 tourism grant to a company named Killerspin. This company was also owned by Blackwell.
Killerspin runs ping-pong tournaments and sells ping-pong gear. After Obama’s original request, Killerspin received a $20,000 grant for a ping-pong tournament. Over the next three years, Obama’s aide Dan Shoman-who was working for the senator part-time and part-time for Blackwell-would help Killerspin get a $200,000 state grant for its 2003 tournament and a $100,000 state grant for its 2004 tournament, for a total of $320,000.
So Blackwell’s company paid Senator Obama a large sum of money. Blackwell’s other company received almost three times as much in state grants, with help from Obama and his aide.
The Times reports that Obama, in his required legal financial disclosures, buried his six-figure financial conflict of interest amid a list of hundreds of other clients represented by his law firm. He did not mention that the majority of his 2001 income came from EKI-nor was he required to do so under Illinois law. Moreover, the Times piece notes:
The business arrived at an especially fortuitious time because, as the law firm’s senior partner, Judson Miner, put it, “it was a very dry period here,” meaning that the ebb and flow of cases left little work for Obama and cash was tight.”
This corruption connection is listed on the Petition to Impeach, expel Senator Obama:
http://obamaimpeachment.org
The article below is from Citizen Wells, they have an Obama indictment petition going on.
In a nutshell State Senator Obama gets $100,000 from Robert Blackwell in exchange Blackwell's co, EKI, Electronic Knowledge interchange gets more then 3 times this amount in grants from the state.
Orly
The Case Against Barack Obama, Dan Shomon, Robert Blackwell, David Freddoso, Killerspin, Illinois State Grants, Legal retainer, Money Laundering, LA Times article
August 14, 2008 · 21 Comments
One of the least reported aspects of Obama’s past and his ties to
corruption and dubious business associations is the Robert Blackwell
“legal retainer” in conjunction with Dan Shomon. The LA Times broke
this story back in April 2008. They referred to Dan Shomon as an
Obama campaign aide. This blog, Citizen Wells, dug deeper into the
role of Dan Shomon. Dan Shomon was actually Obama’s Campaign Manager
at one time and he was also a lobbyist. Dan Shomon’s name is at
the top of an announcement of Robert Blackwell being on Governor
Rod Blagojevich’s team. Blagojevich was named often during the Tony
Rezko trial and has been the subject of a recall attempt in Illinois.
Robert Blackwell contacted this blog shortly after we presented
our article in April 2008.
David Freddoso has written a new book, “The Case Against Barack Obama.
Freddoso, to his credit, writes about the Dan Shomon connection. He
does not cover Shomon as well as this blog so we recommend that you
search on Shomon here and learn more. Here are some exerpts from
“The Case Against Barack Obama”:
“Perhaps the most surprising story about Barack obama and money is one that no one talks about at all. It involves ping-pong. it is the story of how state Senator Obama was paid more than $100,000 for legal work, then helped his client’s company get $320,000 in taxpayer grants.
For some reason, only the Los Angeles Times has examined the story of Robert Blackwell Jr. and the government grants he received after he invested in Barack Obama.
Obama writes in The Audacity of Hope that after his failed congressional run in 2000, he was “more or less broke.” His family would make $240,000 that year, but they had large debts, and he had just loaned his losing campaign $9,500 and maxed out his credit card. To keep his family afloat, he writes, he went back after the election to his law firm, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, which he had neglected throughout 2000 (he received no income from the firm that year). He planned to do some legal work to supplement his modest $58,000 salary as a state senator.
In 2001, while serving as a state senator, Obama would earn $98,158 from his law practice. Of that money, $80,000 came from a single client - Electronic Knowledge Interchange (EKI)-which had put him on a $8,000 monthly retainer. This lasted fourteen months and netted Obama $112,000. The company was owned by one Robert Blackwell Jr., a friend of Obama’s since about 1995.
Months after Obama received his final payment from EKI, he wrote a request on Illinois Senate letterhead and sent it to state officials for a $50,000 tourism grant to a company named Killerspin. This company was also owned by Blackwell.
Killerspin runs ping-pong tournaments and sells ping-pong gear. After Obama’s original request, Killerspin received a $20,000 grant for a ping-pong tournament. Over the next three years, Obama’s aide Dan Shoman-who was working for the senator part-time and part-time for Blackwell-would help Killerspin get a $200,000 state grant for its 2003 tournament and a $100,000 state grant for its 2004 tournament, for a total of $320,000.
So Blackwell’s company paid Senator Obama a large sum of money. Blackwell’s other company received almost three times as much in state grants, with help from Obama and his aide.
The Times reports that Obama, in his required legal financial disclosures, buried his six-figure financial conflict of interest amid a list of hundreds of other clients represented by his law firm. He did not mention that the majority of his 2001 income came from EKI-nor was he required to do so under Illinois law. Moreover, the Times piece notes:
The business arrived at an especially fortuitious time because, as the law firm’s senior partner, Judson Miner, put it, “it was a very dry period here,” meaning that the ebb and flow of cases left little work for Obama and cash was tight.”
This corruption connection is listed on the Petition to Impeach, expel Senator Obama:
http://obamaimpeachment.org