Should Auld Dingbats be forgot - Berg/COLB update
Wrapping up the last update for 2008.
First off, when you have a chance, go check out the site "Obama Conspiracy Theories". Like "What's Your Evidence", VERY useful information. Not to mention entertaining.
Two things I'm noticing with the Birthers. First is a lot of them seem to be involved with the "tax rebellion" movement. The "We The People Tax Cheats" for example, not to mention several other figures. Donald Sullivan of the defunct case Sullivan v Marshall is another. Several Ron Paul followers and electors, (but not Ron Paul himself, curiously enough) are involved, and there's a rumour Orly Taitz is up to her eyeteeth in it as well.
I suspect the "Tax Rebels" have grabbed onto the Birther movement as an excuse. If you can convince yourself that the President is an "usurper" and therefore the entire US government is illegal, it becomes easier to play games with your taxes or refuse to pay them. The end result I suspect is that the IRS - who is NOT known for playing nice - will end up having these people for lunch. Which, of course, they will blame on Obama, rather than their own stupidity.
The second is that the birthers seem to be having orgasms over the legal text "The Law of Nations" written by Emerich de Vattel in 1758. They claim this establishes the requirement that a "Natural Born citizen" requires that both parents need to have the same citizenship, that if one parent is of a different citizenship, then the child cannot be "natural born". However, let's look at part of Book 1, Chaper 19, §212. "Citizens and natives", shall we?
"The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country."
The problem is that de Vattel bases all these claims on the citizenship of the father. Indeed, Book 1, Chaper 19, §215, Children of citizens born in a foreign country", states:
"...By the law of nature alone, children follow the condition of their fathers, and enter into all their rights; the place of birth produces no change in the particular, and cannot, of itself, furnish any reason for taking from a child what nature has given him..."
Basically, to accept the conditions of "Law of Nations", you have to delegate to the mother the status of "walking womb", and that the mother gives the child absolutely nothing legally, not nationality or citizenship. This may have been all well and good for the Swiss in 1758, but that was before this nation was even founded, and over 250 years of US case law and court decisions, not to mention US legal code, argue against it. De Vattel doesn't address the subject of someone having more than one citizenship at birth, because to his mode of thought, the citizenship of the mother, (or even if she was to be considered a citizen) meant absolutely nothing.
De Vattel also said in book 1, chapter 12, §130 that "If there by as yet no relgion established by public authority, the nation ought to use the utmost care, in order to know and establish the best. That which shall the approbation of the majority shall be received, and publically established by law; by which means it will become the religion of the state.. And if you're not of that state religion? Then §131 says:
"Finally, if the number of citizens who would profess a different religion from that established by the nation be inconsiderable; and if, for good and just reasons, it be thought improper to allow the exercise of several religions in the state - those citizens have a right to sell their lands, to retire with their families, and take all their property with them..."
This may be why "Law of Nations" seems to be popular with groups like the "Lonang Institute" and other groups that support the "Biblical Principals of Law" and calls for people to "Reclaim the Church".
The "Law of Nations" can be considered a part of historical international law, and certainly Emerich de Vattel can be rated with Muhammad al-Shaybani (who wrote "Introduction to the Law of Nations" at the end of the 8th century) and Hugo Grotius (who wrote "On the Law of War and Peace" in 1625) as one of the early theorists on international law. However, international law is not US law and US code, and US law on citizenship trumps any claim in de Vattel's writing,
26 December - Hmmm.....who is telling the truth here? Dr. Orly claims the military won't support Obama, based on this article that gateway pundit posted.
"President-elect Obama stopped by the Marine Corps base in Hawaii Kaneche Bay where servicemen and -women were eating Christmas dinner in Kailua Thursday evening.
“Just wanted to say hi, hey guys,” Obama said as he walked into the Anderson dining hall which was decked out in Christmas decorations.
The diners represented seven military units -- Marine and Navy -- some of whom were joined by their families for Christmas dinner.
As Obama entered the room, it was absent of the regular fanfare of cheering and clapping. The diners were polite, staying seated at their respective tables and waited for the president-elect to come to them to stand up."
Which is interesting, because according to CNN:
"Obama, dressed casually in a blue polo shirt and dark khaki trousers, chatted casually, shook hands and posed for photos with men and women in the dining hall, which had been decorated with Christmas trees and Santa figurines.
Shortly before Obama entered the room, a Marine shouted to the crowd scattered across 25 tables, "You need to take you seats, the president-elect is going to be coming."
Obama, who spent about an hour at the Marine base, worked his way around the room, table by table.
"Just wanted to say, 'Hi, hey guys,'" Obama said at one point while reporters were allowed in the room.
"Hey guys, Merry Christmas," he said to another group."
Or the New York Times:
"Obama on Thursday visited Marine Corps Base Hawaii near his rented vacation home and briefly chatted with enlisted members who ate turkey, ham and roast beef. He didn't make formal remarks or speak to reporters during the stop, one of the few public sightings of the president-elect on what aides call a private family vacation.
''Hey,'' Obama said as he walked into the mess hall wearing a short-sleeved shirt and slacks. ''Just wanted to say 'hi.'''
Obama lingered a few minutes at each table as the Marines and sailors and their families stood to greet their next commander in chief. At other tables, the visitors ate candied sweet potatoes with marshmallow topping, mashed potatoes and simmered corn and broccoli.
''What part of Indiana?'' he asked one person. To another: ''This is the East Coast table, huh?''
Funny, sounds like people were being polite and respectful. Not surprising, considering how much the military gave to Obama's campaign over McCain.
"U.S. soldiers have donated more presidential campaign money to Democrat Barack Obama than to Republican John McCain, a reversal of previous campaigns in which military donations tended to favor GOP White House hopefuls, a nonpartisan group reported Thursday.
Troops serving abroad have given nearly six times as much money to Obama's presidential campaign as they have to McCain's, the Center for Responsive Politics said.
The results also are striking because they favored Obama, who never has served in the military. McCain meanwhile, is a decorated war veteran who spent nearly five years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam. The Arizona senator graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy and had a 22-year career as a naval aviator."
Not to mention the retired Generals and Admirals that supported Obama:
Distorting the facts and repeating right-wing lies. O RLY??? Or should that be "Orly"??
Orly's cavity creeps seem to think the Military will run in and save them.
"Anonymous replies:Yesterday, 1:33:08 PM PST
“The military, if Obama is sworn in,
will NOT have to obey him, and in fact will have to disregard and and all orders.
The Constitution, clearly states the qualifications and/or requirements for Office of the President.
Obama is not, can not, nor ever be considered a "Natural Born" citizen. Hence he would not legally be President.
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809.ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the "lawful command of his superior officer," 891.ART.91 (2), the "lawful order of a warrant officer", 892.ART.92 (1) the "lawful general order", 892.ART.92 (2) "lawful order". In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.
The military would have a duty and obligation to remove him from office [with force if neccessary] and restore order and the law.
Can you say "Martial Law""
Again, the same military in which their personnel and their families donated to Obama 6:1 over McCain......
27 December - And the Birthers turn on Ron Paul...
They're NOT happy with their hero saying "No, I won't do it"
27 December - "Lies, all lies!" screams Dr. Orly's chief Cavity Creep Robert Stevens. He pens a post that basically claims every single rebuttal, every single scrap showing they're talking out their butts, everything that shows them for the liars they are, are part of an elaborate disinformation campaign by Obama.
He even brings up the tired old "400 paid bloggers" chestnut!
"I would not be surprised if there have been dozens if not hundreds of similar "fake" stories that were planted, either by willful action, or appeared in the mainstream media because the journalists were biased or careless or did not have the time and resources to check on their stories. We have had armies of Obama supporters on blogs and in forums and other places on the internet spewing disinformation. I even recall a story in the mainstream media in which it was suggested that Obama had hired many hundreds of operatives to counter anti-Obama information on the internet "
Oh, and you know the full recording of the Sarah Obama interview? The one where the translators repeatedly state he was born in Hawaii?? Hacked and forged according to Stevens....
"Now I have even heard a rumor that hackers have altered some online versions of the Kenyan grandmother recording! "
What I see here is a major attempt by the Birthers to stick their fingers in their ears, close their eyes, and scream "LALALALALA I'M NOT LISTENING!!!!" when confronted with the truth about their lies.
27 December - Ironically, Mr. Stevens may have shown Yet ANOTHER Lawsuit, this one with the Supreme Court of Hawaii.
See, he posted in his "Disinformation" rant links to two PDF files.
(Executed Sandra Lines Declaration PDF)
Sandra Lines is the Forensic Document Expert that he claims confirmed his "research" that the COLB was a forgery. Curiously enough, the report from Ms. Lines doesn't say forgery at all, simply what everyone with three brain cells has been saying from day one - including Dr. Neil Krawetz. Which is it's impossible to prove or disprove forgery from a document scanned as a JPEG file. She does say in paragraph three that none of the images have an identifcation number for the certificate. This is interesting since the FactCheck photos DO have the identifcation number for the certificate clearly visible, along with an embossed seal and fold lines. Which seems like a strange oversight unless she didn't bother looking at the images on FactCheck and took Polarik's word for it. And it's a oversight that looks to damage her credibility.
She also repeats the "death threat" claim of Polarik Which is REALLY funny, because the second one looks like it's from Polarik himself, and THAT says:
(Anonymous Digitable Expert Declaration PDF)
"I am submitting this opinion anonymously because I work for a government contractor and need to remain anonymous in order to keep my employer free from any ramifications due to presenting this opinion. In addition, my family needs the opinion to be anonymous due to the nature of my work."
He doesn't mention the FactCheck photos save to dismiss them:
"19. Slightly more than two months after the publication of the COLB image on the Daily Kos and Obama's Campaign website, Factcheck published a story, Born in the U.S.A., in which they presented nine digital photographs that they allegedly made of Obama's "real, paper COLB" at his campaign headquarters - the same COLB used to make the document image they posted on June 16. Without a doubt, the COLB image that Factcheck posted is a forgery, and that Obama's real COLB, as proffered by Factcheck, is a nonexistent document. Factcheck had created a conundrum: if the image Factcheck posted is a forgery of a nonexistent document, then how can any genuine photos be made of it? The answer had to be that both the document image and the photographs were all forgeries."
Or the simpler answer - the photos were real and your theory and claims were all bullshit,. Basically he's saying that the FactCheck photos disprove his entire] claim, therefore they must be forgeries as well. Circular arguement - and one a suspect a skilled attorney would blow holes in.
But the REAL telling thing? BOTH documents said this:
NO. 29473
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAII
CONSTITUTION PARTY; ALAN L. KEYES;
Plaintiffs,
vs.
LINDA LINGLE in her official capacity as Governor of the State of Hawaii;
KEVIN B. CRONIN in his official capacity as the Chief
Election Officer for the State of Hawaii;
JOHN DOES 1-50;
JANE DOES 1-50;
DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-50;
DOE CORPORATIONS 1-50;
AND DOE ENTITIES 1-50
Defendants.
Does that mean we have another Hawaii case?? The document has the path name "F:\Active Clients\Smith, Thomas\Election Challenge\Anonymous Digitable Expert Declaration.wpd" listed, would Thomas Smith be the local attorney handing it?
By the way, I did a couple tests. Dr. Orly's blog is AGRESSIVELY censoring and deleting posts from suspected "obots" It looks like they can't handle anything like truth or even debate, just a Greek choir of fellow Birther cultists.
Sad, but not surprising. Still, you think that if we here at "Yes To Democracy" can have the comments open to all with no censorship, you think THEY wouldn't have a problem with it - unless they know they're peddling crap and claiming it's diamonds.
(28 December - update. Based on a post at Dr. Orly's Clinic for impacted wisdom, Robert Stevens says the Lines and possible "Polarik" document are from the "Hochberg" lawsuit. I assume he means L. James Hochberg, Esq., a Hawaiian attorney who was part of a post at Dr. Orly's blog on 23 December)
28 December - And anti-semite Andy Martin once against puts two and two together and comes up with purple, claiming that the new attacks against Gaza by Israel are a sign that "Israel has come out into the open and declared war on Obama"
He bases this flight of fancy based on sudden revelations that he "has extensive experience in the Middle East, having been in Israel, Jordan, Libya, Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan. He served as a Baghdad Bureau Chief and was a strong opponent of the 2003 invasion"
Oh really? Bureau Chief for what, "Dingbats and Delusion Quarterly"??
“The week between Christmas and New Year’s is traditionally a quiet one, which is why I made good on promises to launch our National Conversation on Obama on the West Coast this week,” Martin says. “Frankly, I am surprised that Israel has chosen now to declare war on Barack Obama. I am scrambling to get back to New York on December 31st.
“This is the week that the real world intruded on Barack Obama’s ‘fantasy island’ vacation in Hawai’i. Obama has been living in a dream world. Rather appropriately, as Israel was attacking Gaza, the lights also went out across Oahu. Coincidence?
“This is the week reality also intruded in the Middle East. Arab nations and Muslim nations have been expecting a ‘new deal’ from Obama (see Part Two, San Diego, below). The ‘new deal’ is dead. Attitudes are going to harden overnight. Israel’s Ehud Barack says he wants a ‘fight.’ He may get it. Just not where he wants it."
28 December - And Dr. Orly posts another "suggestion" to her cavity creeps, to report Obama to ICE as an "Illegal Alien".
If I remember correctly, there's some pretty stiff penalties for false reports.....
Oh, and it's pretty much confirmed. Any attempt to actually present the facts on Dr. Orly's blog - or pretty much anything other than blind agreement - gets deleted ASAP. Looks like Robert Stevens is pretty much Dr. Orly's zampolit. Ah, the wonderful smell of censorship. How patriotic - for Soviet Russia. For the United States, not so much. But they're not interested in the facts or the truth, are they? Facts have a nasty habit of undermining their claims and lies.......
28 December - And Dr. Orly's zampolit, Robert Stevens, continues his wailing at Ron Paul.
"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. "
He also includes this interesting chart. Interesting because it seems to have absolutely no basis in reality.
Let's look at this shall we??
This chart argues a three-tier system of citizenship where one is either:
1) A Natural Born Citizens born of two US citizen parents. The US Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 is referenced along with two cases in law. The Constitution says:
"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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
The first law case was Wong Kim Ark:
"It was held that a person born within the jurisdiction of the U.S. to non-citizens who "are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity" is automatically a citizen, per the Fourteenth Amendment. "
The second was Perkins v. ELG, where:
"The U.S. Supreme Court concluded that Marie Elizabeth Elg who was born in the United States of Swedish parents then naturalized in the United States, had not lost her birthright U.S. citizenship because of her removal during minority to Sweden and was entitled to all the rights and privileges of that U.S. citizenship. In this case, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the decree that declared Miss Elg "to be a natural born citizen of the United States."
The last is particularly telling, because neither of Marie Elizabeth Elg's parents were US citizens, but the court still declared her a "natural born citizen of the United States." From their decision, as a example:
"On her birth in New York, the plaintiff became a citizen of the United States. Civil Rights Act of 1866, [307 U.S. 325, 329] 14 Stat. 27; Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1, U.S.C.A.Const.; United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 , 18 S.Ct. 456. In a comprehensive review of the principles and authorities governing the decision in that case-that a child born here of alien parentage becomes a citizen of the United States-the Court adverted to the 'inherent right of every independent nation to determine for itself, and according to its own constitution and laws, what classes of persons shall be entitled to its citizenship.' United States v. Wong Kim Ark, supra, 169 U.S. page 668, 18 S.Ct. page 164. As municipal law determines how citizenship may be acquired, it follows that persons may have a dual nationality. 1 And the mere fact that the plaintiff may have acquired Swedish citizenship by virtue of the operation of Swedish law, on the resumption of that citizenship by her parents, does not compel the conclusion that she has lost her own citizenship acquired under our law. As at birth she became a citizen of the United States, at citizenship must be deemed to continue unless she has been deprived of it through the operation of a treaty or congressional enactment or by her voluntary action in conformity with applicable legal principles."
The decision also references a earlier case of a Prussian subject who came to the US, had a son, and returned back to Prussia. Quote:
"'Young Steinkauler is a native-born American citizen. There is no law of the United States under which his father or any other person can deprive him of his birthright. He can return to America at the age of twenty-one, and in due time, if the people elect, he can become President of the United States"
So, by that section of the chart, Barack Obama is a "Natural Born Citizen" of the United States.
2) A "Citizen of the US", born to at least one US citizen, born in the US mainland, or Naturalized. They site the two above law cases, plus the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, Section 1. But all that says is:
"Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Says nothing about the citizenship of the child.
3) "Native Born" citizen, born on the US mainland.
The problem here is US law only recognizes two statuses of citizenship. If one is born in the US, (or overseas by US parents), one is considered a US citizen. If neither apply and the person becomes a citizen later, they are naturalized citizens and are not allowed to be president.
To cite US code, Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter III, Part 1, § 1401:
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;
(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;
(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person
(A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or
(B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and
(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.
As you can see, there is NOTHING in US law that comes near this "three tier citizenship" the Birthers are so insistant on. In fact, the very cases they claim argue against their position. Much the same way that the Naturalization Act of 1940 argues against Berg's claims but he quotes it anyway.
Of course, the greek choir over on their site parrots the usual:
"bob strauss says:Yesterday, 3:22:57 PM PST
“What do you mean? "jobless after the next election". These bastards should be arrested and charged with Treason. To violate the Constitution's natural born citizen clause and install an usurper is strong evidence of Treason. They have all been warned in open letters, emails, and phone calls. Ignorance on this issue is no excuse!"
28 December - "Citizen Wells" barfs all over his blog, first a rehash of all the arguments that Berg, Donofrio, Taitz, Kreep, etc., have claimed.
"Under the best case scenario for Obama, he is a US citizen, not natural born, and the worst case scenario, Obama is an illegal alien. If Obama was born in Kenya, he is an illegal alien.
At the time of Obama’s birth, he was a Kenyan citizen and under British rule. For there to be a ruling on Obama’s potential eligibility for the presidency based on being a natural born citizen, Obama must provide proof that he was also a US citizen at birth and that would require proof that he was born in Hawaii. To date, no legal proof has been provided. In fact, every effort has been made by Obama to avoid proving his eligibility. He has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and employed numerous attorneys to evade his dubious past.
Obama must provide a vault (long form) birth certificate to prove he is not an illegal alien. Think about it. We know that Obama is not eligible under the US Constitution."
And there's that chestnut that Obama has spent "hundreds and thousands of dollars". Most of these cases have been at the state level against state officials, and the taxpayers in those states are having to pay or them. Very few cases have actually had attorneys directly from Obama's campaign - and filing requests for dismissals doesn't cost "hundreds and thousands of dollars".
And the comments have this Birther wet dream. Seriously, I suspect this is a major erotic fantasy of theirs.......
"The South // December 28, 2008 at 11:07 pm
I can’t wait to see where and when the movement will begin.I wonder what will happen?Will it be a small group of people in some small town that takes a stand? Or will it be an entire organization of thousands that take a stand in their state?
I can see it now! FOX news reporting live in [ insert red state here ] at the state capitol as thousands of protesters storm the building taking state officials out of their offices by force.Local police and National Guard have been called in to try and control the situation, but the protesters [ Red Blooded Americans ] are armed and there are literally thousands of them and state officials can’t control the situation and “many of them have joined the fight” as they are tired of the shit too!
CNBC reporting live from the White House…thousands of protesters [Red Blooded Americans] have stormed the White House and local police and National Guard have been called in, but the crowds are too powerful.Wait it looks as if the National Guard and local police have joined the fight as they are tired of the shit here too!!
Reporting “LIVE” from the White House !!!
This is Billy Bob Tucker, and we’ve taken over the White House and several state capitols ( no one was injured during these raids ) and once again America is in the hands of “We the people”
We will hold NEW elections come Monday morning. Anyone wanting to participate should be at your state capitol 8:00AM.
I’ll take questions from the press now.
1…Where is the President?…… You mean Bam-Bam? He’s been exported back to Kenya
2…What caused this outbreak?…… We the people just finally got tired of being taxed to death, and we are tired of our elected officials “not listening to us after we vote them in”
3…What is going to happen from here?….Well, we’re going to start by restoring the Constitution that our elected officials have stomped, burned, changed, worked around, and just flat ass ignored to it’s original meaning. Then we’re going to bring God and Country back into the school systems (effective immediately ). Then we are going to make it a pre-requisite for all voters to take a 4 hour course studying the track record of the person they are fixing to vote for before they are allowed to cast their votes.
4…What about Islam and the Muslims rights?….F**K-EM !!! There asses are out of here!! There will be no Sharia compliant financing allowed in the United States and anyone trying to push that shit on us will be put in jail
Well, there you have it America! Looks like the people have finally stood up and taken back their country "
Yeah. You keep those tissues handy, okay.....
29 December - It's been confirmed, (Thanks to Tesibria of "What's Your Evidence"), that Alan Keyes DID have a lawsuit with Hawaiian Supreme Court against Gov. Lingle, et all.
Docket number 29473
It was dismissed on 5 December. (PDF here)
The motion to reconsider was dismissed on 12 December. (PDF here)
The ironic thing is that to support both his claim of "disinformation", and the tired old chestnut that the Birth Certificate has been "confirmed" as a forgery, Dr. Orly's zampolit Richard Stevens posted the info from Polarik without bothering to mention they came from a case that was dismissed........Sounds like disinformation to me.
29 December - And speaking of Dr. Orly's zampolit, Stevens has an "Open Letter to Member of Congress", which is a rehash of the usual claptrap the Birthers spew forth. Examples:
"1. No proof that he was born on U.S. sovereign territory, as required by Article II of the U.S. Constitution (the posting of his forged & fraudulent Certificate of Live Birth (C.O.L.B.) only proves fraud – and that he’s INELIGIBLE;
2. No proof that he ever applied for U.S. citizenship, when reaching the age of majority, following his years as a citizen of Indonesia (this would make him ‘naturalized’, and therefore INELIGIBLE);
3. No proof that he was born of two parents of U.S. citizenship, with both owing allegiance to and being under the jurisdiction of the U.S., as required by law and/or the Constitution, in order to be a ‘natural-born citizen’. (actually he has freely admitted the opposite to be true, and therefore INELIGIBLE);
4. No proof that he was authorized, as a ‘natural-born U.S. citizen’ with a U.S. Passport, to travel to Pakistan in 1981 (he could not by law), or that he re-applied for ‘naturalized’ U.S. citizenship on his return, which would also make him INELIGIBLE;
5. No certified proof that he registered for the draft/Selective Service between the ages of 18 and 26, as required by law, thereby rendering him ineligible, by law, for employment in the Executive Branch of our government, and therefore INELIGIBLE for POTUS. (NOTE: over a year of multiple FOIA requests produced a forged and blatantly fraudulent Selective Service Registration form that should be cause for indictments and arrests);
6. No proof that he is, in fact, not an illegal alien, and therefore subject to the same penalties that would befall all illegal aliens in his situation. Therefore, INELIGIBLE;"
Amazingly craptacular. And goes with Zampolit Stevens' repeated "Strawman Attacks" against supposed "Obama Apologetics". Strawman attacks that Zampolit Stevens only seems to allow the party faithful to reply to.
29 December - And "Secret of the Rosary Films" are offering a $1 million reward for anyone providing the "certified long-form birth certificate of Barack Obama"
"The long-form birth certificate must be certified by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Long form birth certificates are exact photocopies of the original birth record that was prepared by the hospital or attending physician at the time of the child’s birth.
The long form usually includes parents’ information such as address of residence, race, birth place, date of birth — and additional information on the child’s birthplace, and information on the doctors that assisted in the birth of the child. The long form also usually includes the signature of the doctor involved and at least one of the parents.
When Hawaii became a state in 1959, there were many people who resided there who did not have a birth certificate. From 1911 to 1972, in Hawaii a person — over the age of one — whose birth was not registered — could apply for a short form birth certificate in Hawaii.
Obamas Kenyan grandmother stated he was born in Kenya. However, Obamas mother or grandmother probably filed an affidavit stating that Obama was born in Hawaii and the state of Hawaii issued the kind of short form certificate posted on the Obamas Web site.
This is the reason why Obama has not released a long form Hawaiian birth certificate to the courts it does not exist."
They even have a YouTube video for it. Complete with comments like:
RottenLiberals (1 month ago) +1
the muslim is born in kenya, and the liberals are too stupid to think for themselves....
ObamaSecrets (1 month ago) 0
Hmmm.... Let think about this, find it, get the million dollars, and have a WW3/Depression/Obama brown shirts/Freedom of speech gone/and more or don't provide it at all. Decisions decisions.
3swelldogs3 (1 month ago) 0
lol...ok..now that you put it that way. hell I hope SOMEONE finds it...be it one way or the other. I seriously doubt we could find his actual b/c in kenya...it would have probably just been written on a rock.
3swelldogs3 (1 month ago) +4
I'm telling ya...it's over there in kenya...etched into a rock...that's how it's probably done over there ; )
hairybeast101 (1 month ago) 0
i dont like obama cause he is unamerican and a complete foreigner
CynNichol (1 month ago) -4
There could have been documentation of his birth in Kenya, but the thugs of Raila Odinga, Obama's 'cousin', made it a point to burn the newspaper building with archives in the area last year... no telling what other records he 'cleaned out' as well. Obama is a deceiver, backed up by his radical Luo tribe members in Kenya and the US. All of this needs to be exposed. Obama is letting us know what he thinks of America's Constitution and its people. Produce or step aside Obama.
alogmail (1 month ago) 0
They will never have to pay the reward: The document critical to the BHO presidency doesn't exist.
BHO is a fraud. He is not a natural born citizen.
This crypto-Muslim socialist who bought the presidency with laundered Muslim petrodollars can't even produce a "long form" birth certificate.
Fraud. Manchurian Candidate.
QV5140oz (1 month ago) +2
Great to see that US culture, history and tradition means nothing to you. Im sure the 40 million who have looked into Philip Berg's lawsuit don't care at all to see the constitution, which has been around since 1776 (long before trendy "Obamiacs") withheld.
You're wasting your time if you're saying that Americans don't care about the US constitution, Im sorry
Mccainpres08 (3 weeks ago) 0
Blingbling youre the MORON here!There is a ONE MILLION dollar REWARD for the TRUE birth certificate, and she thinks Obamas MUSLIM WAGON wouldnt be all up on that Million? Hillary is biding her time, knowing it wont be long until this falls apart, she THEN can move forward with the blessings of the DEMOCRAT PARTY!If she got involved in this NOW, it would backfire on her!No One is delusional, being a SENATOR doesnt require citizenship, being pres does! WHY WONT HE PRODUCE IT so the matter drops?
Delusional much??
29 December - And the wingbat "Citizen Wells", starts his "Hall of Shame", comprised of politicians that actually told the Birthers the truth rather than their delusional myths.
So far he's got:
Connecticut Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz
"So, Susan Bysiewicz, Chase T. Rogers, Richard Blumenthal, what is your excuse?
Ignorance
Apathy
Party politics
Fear
Please respond with your reasons for your behaviour.
An apology to the American public is in order."
Sen. Roger Wicker (R - Mississippi)
“Thank you for contacting me regarding questions surrounding President-Elect Obama’s citizenship. I am glad to have the benefit of your views on this issue. The U.S.Constitution requires the President to be a natural-born citizen. In August, a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia alleged that President-Elect Obama was born in Kenya, not
Hawaii. The lawyer who filed this action has also filed suits alleging President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney knew about the September 11 terrorist attacks. He also has called for Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, and former Justice Sandra Day O’Conner to disbar themselves for their decision in the 2001 Bush v. Gore. In October, a federal judge dismissed the Obama suit, and on Dec 8, 2008 , the Supreme Court declined to hear the emergency appeal without opinion. Several similar cases have been filed in various courts across the country and are going through the judicial process. It appears unlikely that Senate Democratic leaders will bring up legislation related to this issue
in the 111th Congress. I hope this information is helpful. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of assistance. With best wishes I am
Sincerely yours,
Roger F. Wicker”
“Thank you for contacting me regarding President-Elect Obama’s citizenship. I appreciate hearing from you and would like to respond to your concerns.
Like you, I believe that our federal government has the responsibility to make certain that the Constitution of the United States is not compromised. We must fight to uphold our Constitution through our courts and political processes.
Article II of the Constitution provides that “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.” The Constitution, however, does not specify how that qualification for office is to be enforced. As you may know, a voter recently raised this issue before a federal court in Pennsylvania. On October 24, 2008, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania released an order in the case of Berg v.Obama. In that case, the plaintiff, Phillip Berg, raised the same issue that your letter raises regarding proof of the President-Elect’s birthplace. Through his lawsuit, Mr. Berg sought to compel President-Elect Obama to produce a certified copy of his birth certificate.
The District Court dismissed Mr. Berg’s suit and held that the question of Obama’s citizenship is not a matter for a court to decide. The court further noted that voters, not courts, should decide whether a particular presidential candidate is qualified to hold office.
Presidential candidates are vetted by voters at least twice - first in the primary elections and again in the general election. President-Elect Obama won the Democratic Party’s nomination after one of the most fiercely contested presidential primaries in American history. And, he has now been duly elected by the majority of voters in the United States. Throughout both the primary and general election, concerns about Mr. Obama’s birthplace were raised. The voters have made clear their view that Mr. Obama meets the qualifications to hold the office of President.”
Mel Martinez"
“Thank you for contacting me regarding citizenship and other eligibility requirements for public office. I appreciate hearing your thoughts and welcome the opportunity to respond.
As you know, some have raised questions about the eligibility of President-elect Barack Obama (D-Illinois) and Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) for the office of President of the United States. Having confidence in the electoral process and our public officials is critical to maintaining public confidence in our democracy. As such, the voters must be confident in the integrity of the electoral process and our electoral institutions.
The Constitution and federal law require that, among other things, only native-born U.S. citizens (or those born abroad, but only to parents who were both American citizens) may be President of the United States. In President-elect Obama’s case, some individuals have filed lawsuits in state and federal courts alleging that he has not proven that he is an American citizen, but each of those lawsuits have been dismissed. Furthermore, both the Director of Hawaii’s Department of Health and the state’s Registrar of Vital Statistics recently confirmed that Mr. Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961 and, as such, meets the constitutional citizenship requirements for the presidency. If contrary documentation is produced and verified, this matter will necessarily be resolved by the judicial branch of our government under the Constitution.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Please feel free to contact me in the future on this or other matters of interest to you. For more information about the issues before the U.S. Senate as well as news releases, photos, and other items of interest, please visit my Senate website, http://crapo.senate.gov.
Sincerely,
Senator Mike Crapo"
Sen. Carl Levin (D - Michigan)
"Thank you for contacting me regarding the false rumors surrounding President-elect Obama’s citizenship status. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts with me.
As you may know, Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution states that, “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.” President-elect Obama was born in Hawaii as documented by his official birth certificate. He is, therefore, a natural born citizen of the United States. Thank you again for writing.
Sincerely,
Carl Levin”
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D- Maryland)
“Thank you for getting in touch with me. It’s nice to hear from you.
I appreciate knowing of your concern over a rumor that President-elect Obama is ineligible to serve as President because he is not a U.S. citizen.
The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” Since President-elect Obama was born in Hawaii two years after it was admitted as the 50th state, he is a natural-born citizen. He has released a copy of his birth certificate and it has been authenticated by experts. Following Obama’s overwhelming and undisputed victory in the recent election, the Supreme Court has considered challenges to his citizenship and dismissed them as being without merit.
Thanks again for contacting me. Please do not hesitate to let me know if I can be of assistance to you again in the future.
Sincerely,
Barbara A. Mikulski
United States Senator”
It may be really sticking in their craw that some of those Senators are Republicans.......
29 December - And Dr. Edwin Vieira comes up with a three part paranoid right-wing fantasy, claiming in part one that "A militarized police state is coming to this country—into your own neighborhood, and with you and your family as its targets—unless you start, right now, to enforce the Constitution, as is your right and your duty."
Part two has this gem:
"Typically, though, the scheme emanating from Washington (and apparently being accepted without question in some States) relies, not on We the People who organize themselves and take personal control of “homeland security” “from the bottom up,” but on aloof and elitist “civilian authorities” who “tap military planners to develop disaster response plans” “from the top down.” The obvious—and ominous—anomaly in this situation is that We the People not only are the subjects of “homeland security,” whose defense and welfare are its objects, but also are the most important, constitutionally speaking, of all “civilian authorities”. So any plan that invests “civilian authorities” and “military planners” instead of We the People with ultimate control—that emphasizes bureaucracy rather than democracy, and “federalization” rather than federalism—is unlikely to provide “homeland security” in its only constitutionally acceptable form: “the security of a free State.”
And part three
"So, now what? What must America’s patriots demand of Obama if he persists in calling for such a force? Nothing less than that he support revitalization of “the Militia of the several States” by the States. Simply put, enforce the Constitution. That would be “change we can believe in.” And in the nick of time, too."
Basically this is a claim that the Birthers are starting to pimp - that Obama will bring in a draft for his "civilian volunteer force"
29 December and yet another on-line petition, this one to "Remove Usurper From The White House".
And the petition calls for either the military or citizens "with their second amendment rights" to "remove the Usurper using all means necessary" Yep, it's another birther calling for armed rebellion to overthrow the government.
"if Obama dares to take the Presidential Oath or Affirmation of office, knowing that he is not a natural born Citizen, he will commit the crime of perjury or false swearing (see Article II, Section 1, Clause 7). For, being ineligible for the Office of President, he cannot faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, or even execute it at all, to any degree.. taking the Oath or Affirmation? will be a violation thereof!
If at the end of the day our Judiciary, our law Enforcement and our government fails us. We will have the right to remove the Usurper using all means necessary. Our Army is sworn to uphold the Constitution, they have the right to remove the Usurper from the Whitehouse to uphold the Constitution., and we still have our second amendment right and we might need to use it to defend our rights and freedoms, guaranteed to us by our Constitution."
This is increasingly becoming their erotic fantasy. Never mind it's illegal and Un-American as hell..... Ironically, they include the legal definition of Treason and Sedition...
"TREASON: The offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance; or of betraying the state into the hands of a foreign power.
SEDITION: ...knowingly becoming a member of any organization which advocates the overthrow or reformation of the existing form of government of this state by violence or unlawful means."
Sounds like this petition is sounding kinda.....treasony or seditious.....
It ends with:
"WE DEMAND TO REMOVE Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro/Barry Obama/Barack Dunham/Barry Dunham FROM THE WHITEHOUSE
Attention All Military Personnel (active or reserve, former or retired, any age)
PLEASE SIGN
All Active Duty Personnel Only
PLEASE include your rank."
So we can include trying to get active and reserve duty personnel to violate their oaths and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Wow. How Un-American.
As for comments....
"Mon., Dec. 29, 2008 2:04 PM link glennie c. | Warsaw, IN
i don't want to live in a communist/socialist/facist america..we need to find out who obama really is and what he stands for..he doesn't love america..he wants to change it..(not a change we can believe in either)and do away with our constitution..we will become the united states of islam..i don't know about you but that scares me to death..and it should scare you too..it isn't about the color of his skin..it's about the company he keeps..BIRDS OF A FEATHER FLOCK TOGETHER.the man is pure evil..please look into this..our very lives may depend on it..
Mon., Dec. 29, 2008 9:29 AM link Lisa w. | San Antonio, TX
If you fail to do your constitutional duty, we the people of the US will have the last laugh at you by removing you from your privilaged position, whether by law or force if necessary in compliance with our Constitutional rights. If you fail to act appropriately, you will become known as the biggest cowards and corrupt people the US has ever born.I have always lived my life doing the moral and correct things especiaslly when it comes to my Country or family. You devils have shown you have absolutely no honor and your lives were not worth the innocent shedding of one life of an American Service person.
I look forward in taking up arms if necessary to oust you from power and destroying my country any longer. I cojoin millions of other Americans who have had enough of you treacherous and lying fools who are only out for themselves and their greed at the expense of The American citizens. i look forward to the day that is coming when you will be on your knees begging for protection from Americans who have rallied to re-take their country from you usurpers. I hope the coming court convicts you and sentences each of you to the maximun. Your day of answering to the American people is soon approaching. Now, Are you going to live up to your sworn constitutional duties in denying this userper obama from becoming president, or do you chance on your gamble to circumvent WE THE PEOPLE of the United States of America, The choice is yours. Please don't continue toi make the same foolish choices.
Mon., Dec. 29, 2008 9:11 AM link Lisa w. | San Antonio, TX
As a retired SFC Retired in the US Army, I demand that our government enforce all aspects of our US Constituyion. Many true Americans have died in defense of our Nation and I personally served in War for our Nation in a combat field Artillery unit. My 2 decades of Service to my Country demanded that I defend the Constitution of the USA from all enimies, foreign and domestic. it appears that we now have an entire congress, SCOTUS and president elect who have chosen to ignore their constitutional duties. For this reason I demand that Obama be removed from eligibility immediately as he will be an usurper.
Please do the right and moral thing and protect my service for my country as well as others sacrifice.
Mon., Dec. 29, 2008 6:24 AM link Mary G. | La Mesa, CA
CALLING ALL SOLDIERS TO ACT NOW
You swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Sun., Dec. 28, 2008 9:19 PM link Dean T. | Splendora, TX
I am a Navy Veteran and I want to know how to have the Usurper arrested and tried for perjury or false swearing of a governmental document that he had to sign to run for President of the United States. If we have to we need to hold him to tne UCMJ. He is also follows under the UCMJ as Commander in Cheif Elect. I feel that we need to act fast to stop this TREASON on our Constitution of the United States. Please contact me by my e-mail address at datrussell@yahoo.com. I am willing to file the charges if need so with the help of an Attorney. God Bless the People that is trying to correct an INJUSTICE. My rank is AOAN Reserve. I will still uphold my oath that I took.
Sun., Dec. 28, 2008 11:53 AM link L M. | Fellsmere, FL
PLEASE AMERICA, ATTORNEY/DR. ORLY TAIZ(her website listed below) IS CALLING ANY/ALL ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY, INCLUDING RESERVES, TO UNITE AND REMOVE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, THE USURPER FROM THE WHITEHOUSE. Att. Taiz is also trying to locate any brave General, Admiral or any military Commander, who can lead this group of military.
This is OUR REALITY NOW!
America is in grave danger, all Americans are in grave danger! January 20, 2008 Obama IS ABOUT TO COMMIT PERJURY & TREASON, he fraudulently purchased his way into the Whitehouse, with BLOOD MONEY. Obama must be taken by any military means necessary, including force, per the Constitution and placed under arrest to be tried for treason against the Constitution. Obama has "BIG" GOVERNMENT assisting him, that is exactly why NOBODY, including the Supreme Court is doing NOTHING. Many of these individuals, including Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the House, are also guilty of treason against the Constitution. Washinton D.C. corruption is widespread and needs to be cleaned out, from the top down! McCain/Palin were cheated out of the election by fraud! We needed a real Commander-In-Chief! John McCain could have done the Presidents job in his sleep America. We know this is a fact. He is a true American Hero. Not a cocaine smoking liar, like Barack. Obama is getting a free pass...........but it is NOT from 242 million real Americans. Slavery ended long ago...........100 years or so, if I am not mistaken. Obama wants pitty. Sorry, go back to where you were born...........Mombasa, Kenya. Obama will take care of Kenya 1st, NOT AMERICA.
We need 242,000,000 million Americans to help this effort. WE DESPERATELY NEED AMERICANS TO GET INVOLVED. Obama had 64,000,000 fraudulent votes for him. We are not in agreement with this High Crime of Treason.
AMERICA CANNOT BECOME EXTINCT; NOT ON OUR WATCH
dr_taiz@yahoo.com. Her email
http://www.drorly.blogspot.com/
Attorney Lawrence Eagleburger tried to warn ALL AMERICANS, if Obama was elected, "God help all of us."
Ask him to help us: 1-202-508-3400.
My husband is a 20 year Police Officer veteran, we are both ready to stand up and right this wrong!
Sun., Dec. 28, 2008 8:54 AM link John R. | Fairfield, CT
For the reasons set forth in Berg v. Obama, I demand that the Constitution be upheld thd the usurper Obama removed and tried for treason."
Wow. The frightning thing about these....well, idiots, is that they THINK they're patriots. And they're anything but.
29 December - Lightfoot v Bowen refiled to Chief Justice Roberts.
"No. 08A524
Title: Gail Lightfoot, et al., Applicants
v.
Debra Bowen, California Secretary of State
Docketed: Lower Ct: Supreme Court of California
Case Nos.: (S168690)
~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dec 12 2008 Application (08A524) for a stay pending the filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Kennedy.
Dec 17 2008 Application (08A524) denied by Justice Kennedy.
Dec 29 2008 Application (08A524) refiled and submitted to The Chief Justice."
As for comments....
"Katie says:Yesterday, 12:41:33 PM PST
“THANK YOU to all who are giving so much to save America! We're waiting for and COMMANDING Justice Roberts to do his duty and keep his oath to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC!"
30 December - Looks like Berg has Yet Another Lawsuit, this one on behalf of a retired Colonel, One Gregory S. Hollister of Colorado Springs, and filed with co-counsel Lawrence J. Joyce, Esq. It was filed in Federal Court in the United States District for the District of Columbia.
The case is the same old tired claptrap we've come to expect from Berg.
"Berg today, with co-counsel Lawrence J. Joyce, Esquire, filed another lawsuit in Federal Court in the United States District for the District of Columbia on behalf of Retired Colonel Hollister against Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama demanding to know Obama’s real name and if he is constitutionally qualified to be President. Plaintiff, Gregory S. Hollister, is a resident of Colorado Springs, Colorado and Hollister has “standing” and needs a decision so he knows whether or not to follow any Order of Soetoro a/k/a Obama.
The suit is in the nature of an Interpleader that shifts the burden of proof to the Defendants, Soetoro a/k/a Obama and Biden to show that they are “qualified” for office.
Berg stated, “I am determined, on behalf of the 320 million citizens in the United States, to see that “our U.S. Constitution” is followed. Specifically, in the case of Soetoro a/k/a Obama, does he meet the constitutional qualifications for President ? I do not believe so based upon: 1) Obama was born in Kenya and because his mother was not nineteen [19], he was only “naturalized” and therefore, not qualified to be President; 2) Obama was legally adopted/acknowledged in Indonesia at the approximate age of six [6] and attended school as “Barry Soetoro,” [his step-father is Lolo Soetoro] for four [4] years – Indonesia did not have dual citizenship and to attend school, he had to be adopted or acknowledged and he became a “natural” citizen of Indonesia; 3) when he returned to Hawaii at age ten [10], there is a question if he returned through U.S. Immigration – (a) if he did, Barry Soetoro would have been given a “Certification of Citizenship” that would have indicated he was a “naturalized” U.S. citizen since he was a “natural” citizen of Indonesia; or (b) if he did not go through immigration, which I believe, then Soetoro a/k/a Obama is an illegal alien and therefore, not constitutionally qualified to be President and his three [3] years as an U.S. Senator were a fraud.”
Berg continued, “I am appalled that the main stream media continues to ignore this issue as we are headed to a ‘Constitutional Crisis.’ There is nothing more important than our U.S. Constitution and it must be enforced. I am encouraged that the U.S. Supreme Court has scheduled two [2] Conferences to look into the merits of our allegations. I know that Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally qualified ‘natural-born’ citizen and therefore, is ineligible to assume the Office of the President of the United States.
Obama, knows he is not ‘natural born’ as he knows where he was born and he knows he was legally adopted/acknowledged in Indonesia; is an attorney, Harvard Law head of the Law Review and graduate who taught Constitutional law; knows the Obama candidacy is the biggest ‘hoax’ attempted on the citizens of the United States in over 200 years; places our Constitution in a ‘crisis’ situation; and Obama is in a situation where he can be blackmailed by leaders around the world.”
Berg concluded, “I will continue my efforts until Obama either proves he is qualified or does the right thing and states that he is proud that he, an African American, received more votes than anyone else in the Presidential election on November 4, 2008, but because of things in his past, he must withdraw his name.”
Phil at "The Right Side of Life" posts about it, as does "Citizen Wells".
30 December - Tesibria at "Whats Your Evidence" sends me a PDF of an overlooked case from 11 December, filed in Federal Court in the United States District for the District of Columbia, Civil Action 1:08-cv-02150-UNA, Cohen v Obama, and dismissed the same day. The planiff was one L. Charles Cohen, a Federal Prisoner currently incarcerated at the Federal Medical Center in Lexington, Kentucky. This is a Federal Prison used to house inmates with medical or psychological problems.
Defendants were Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. "aka Hussein Obama, Barry Obama, Barry Dunham, Barry Soetoro, Barack Obama, Barack Dunham, and Barack Soetoro", plus Condoleezza Rice, Michael Mukasey, Michael Chertoff, the DNC, and the FEC
The allegation is that Obama "Is an illegal alien impersonating a United States citizen". The complaint also alleges the Secretary of State wrongly issued Obama a passport, the Attorney General failed to arrest Obama for "impersonating a United States citizen", something he also charges against the Director of Homeland Security. Aklso the DNC and FEC get in on the complaints as well.
Why do I suspect Mr. Cohen falls into the "Psychological problem" aspect of his hospital stay?? (and would love to know why he's in Prison....)
30 December - And "Citizen Wells" adds more elected officials to his "Hall of Shame" for refusing to buy into the cult's paranoid fantasies....
Sen. Herb Kohl (D - Wisconsin)
“Thank you for contacting me. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome this opportunity to respond.
As you may know, Hawaii became a state on August 21st, 1959. President-elect Barack Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961, making him a United States citizen at birth under the first section of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. President-elect Obama’s birth certificate has been made public, and is widely available online. This document has been authenticated by a variety of sources, including the Hawaii Department of Health and the Annenberg Public Policy Center.
Additionally, on December 5, 2008, the United States Supreme Court considered Donofrio v. Wells, a case questioning President-elect Obama’s citizenship, in conference. The Justices voted not to hear this case, making it the second case related to President-elect Obama’s citizenship that the Supreme Court refused to hear. The first, Berg v. Obama, was rejected at conference on November 3, 2008.
I hope this information proves useful to you. If I can be of assistance to you in any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Herb Kohl
U.S. Senator”
“Thank you for contacting me regarding President-elect Barack Obama. I appreciate having the benefit of your comments on this matter.
As you know, on January 20, 2009, Barack Obama will be sworn in as the forty-fourth President of the United States of America. As we enter the 111th Congress, our nation faces many challenges. We are in the midst of tough economic times, and the federal government must stand on the side of taxpayers and small businesses. Now more than ever, we need fiscal discipline in Washington. I welcome President-elect Obama’s commitment to reform the federal budget process and rein in wasteful government spending, and I will hold the President-elect accountable as Congress works to quickly identify and eliminate inefficient, ineffective, and outdated federal programs.
Families across Texas and the nation are forced to make tough financial decisions each day—the federal government should be no different. But year after year too many government programs are funded because there are small—but vocal—special interest groups backing them with little Congressional oversight to determine when ideas have run their course. The American people have a right to know how their hard earned dollars are being spent, and I will continue to support making our government more transparent, accountable, and efficient.
While strengthening the economy must remain a priority, we must also find bipartisan solutions to address other critical issues facing our nation while continuing to advance conservative principles such as limited government, lower taxes, family values, and fighting against those who seek to destroy the American way of life. The consequences of continued inaction are too great. It is imperative that Congress act quickly to secure our borders, reform our country’s immigration laws, modernize healthcare, and promote energy independence. You may be certain that I will continue to pursue conservative initiatives that reinforce the principles upon which our country was founded while holding the new Administration accountable to the American people.
I appreciate having the opportunity to represent the interests of Texans in the United States Senate. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.
Sincerely,
JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator”
"Citizen Wells" is hoping that "the word accountable is used three times above. Does this mean that Senator Cornyn will step up to the plate and “support and defend the Constitution of the United States” as he swore on his senate oath?. I suspect he will - by not listening to dingbats like "Citizen Wells" and the other birthers.....
Rep. Jay Inslee (D, 1st Congressional Dist., Washington)
“Thank you for contacting me about claims about President-Elect Obama’s status as a natural-born citizen, as required for admittance to U.S. Presidential office by the Constitution. As always, I appreciate hearing from you.
As you know, President-Elect Obama has indeed provided his actual paper Certification of Live Birth to several media organizations, as well as the Annenberg Foundation’s non-partisan “Factcheck.org” website and the conservative news website World Net Daily, which reported that a “WND investigation into Obama’s birth certificate utilizing forgery experts also found the document to be authentic.” In fact, all of these groups have recognized that the President Elect’s actual birth certificate document is real and genuine. Furthermore, the director of Hawaii’s Department of Health confirmed on Oct. 31 that Obama was born in Honolulu and that he is therefore eligible to hold the office of
President. I hope you will join with me and honor the position of next President of the United States just as we have honored the current one.
I applaud your interest in federal issues and will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind as we move through the legislative process. It is great that we have people in this country who are so actively engaged in helping make public policy.
Please keep in touch.
Very truly yours,
JAY INSLEE
Member of Congress”
(As a Washington State resident myself, BRAVO Rep. Inslee!!)
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama)
“Thank you for your recent letter regarding President-elect Barack Obama. I appreciate your comments and welcome the opportunity to respond.
The Constitution of the United States requires that all candidates for the office of President must be at least 35 years of age, natural born citizens, and residents in the United States for the previous 14 years. As you know, stories have circulated that call into question President-elect Obama’s citizenship. To this end, lawsuits have been filed allegging that Obama is not a natural born citizen of the United States, and therefore is constitutionally ineligible for the office of President.
One of the most highly publicized suits was filed by Philip Berg on August 21, 2008, in the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. This suit was dismissed on October 24, 2008, and Berg subsequently filed an appeal. The decision to hear the case is still pending before the United States Supreme Court. A related suit, filed by Leo Donofrio, was recently submitted to the Supreme Court. On December 8, 2008, the court declined to hear Donofrio’s suit.
Senate ethics rules preclude me from becoming personally involved in pending litigation. I sincerely hope this matter can be fully and promptly resolved by the courts. In the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact me in the future should you have a question regarding an issue over which I have jurisdiction.
Thank you again for writing. Your comments and suggestions are always welcome.
Very truly yours,
Jeff Sessions
United States Senator”
And "Citizen Wells" replies with "We are contacting you now. Congress meets on January 8, 2008 to count and validate the Electoral College Votes. We are asking you carry out your oath of office and request proof of eligibility from Obama, a candidate who is not a natural born citizen and probably is an illegal alien. I am certain this is within the realm of your “jurisdiction.” "Citizen Wells" is, in fact, dumber than a Yugo full of anvils.
“Thank you for contacting me regarding President-Elect Barack Obama.
President-Elect Obama has provided several news organizations with a copy of his birth certificate, showing he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961. Hawaii became a state in 1959, and all individuals born in Hawaii after its admission are considered natural-born United States citizens. In addition, the Hawaii State Health Department recently issued a public statement verifying the authenticity of President-Elect Obama’s birth certificate.
Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Sherrod Brown”
“Thank you for your correspondence. As your voice in Washington, I appreciate knowing your concerns.
There is a considerable amount of information circulating over the Internet making various claims about Senator Obama, including that he was not born in Hawaii and has not provided a valid birth certificate as proof he is a natural born citizen. Likewise, there was information on the Internet claiming Senator John McCain was not eligible to run for President due to an alleged lack of U.S. jurisdiction over the military installation in Panama Canal in which Senator McCain was born. These issues have resulted in a number of unsuccessful legal filings challenging the natural born citizen qualification of both Senators Obama and McCain. The most recent of these cases was dismissed in the U.S. Supreme Court on December 8, 2008.
Specifically, with regard to Senator Obama’s birth certificate, in June 2008, Senator Obama produced a certificate of live birth from the State of Hawaii Department of Health, which has been available for inspection by various news media over the past number of months. In addition, Hawaii’s Health director, in October, has verified that the Health Department has Senator Obama’s original birth certificate on file.
I can certainly appreciate the need for the appropriate review to ensure all candidates for the Presidency meet the basic requirements in the Constitution. Again, thank you for bringing your concerns to my attention. Please do not hesitate to contact me again.
Senator Jim Inhofe"
Wasn't Sen. Inhofe being bandied around as a possible person to support an electoral challenge in the Senate?? Doesn't seem like it......
Rep. Steven LaTourette (R- 14th Congressional Dist., Ohio)
“Thank you for taking the time to contact me regarding President-elect Obama’s citizenship. It was good to hear from you and I appreciate the opportunity to respond.
As you may know, on December 8, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court turned down an emergency appeal filed by a New Jersey man who claimed that Barack Obama is ineligible to be president based on questions regarding his citizenship. At least one other appeal over the president-elect’s citizenship remains pending with the U.S. Supreme Court. As you may also be aware, Hawaii state officials say they have checked health department records and confirmed that there is no doubt that the president elect was born in Hawaii.
There have also been several lawsuit on the state level regarding this issue. The Secretary of State of each state holds the responsibility of verifying that each presidential candidate meets the requirements as outlined in the U.S. Constitution. A man from Ohio sued Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner in October of 2008, claiming she had to prove Barack Obama citizenship or remove him from the ballot. However, the magistrate ruled that the evidence in the case was based on hearsay and speculation, not admissible evidence, therefore, the case was thrown out. You may wish to contact Secretary Brunner’s office at 877-767-6446 to voice your concerns.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact me. If you should have any other questions, please do not hesitate to contact my office again. I remain
Very truly yours,
Steven C. LaTourette
Member of Congress”
“Thank you for contacting me. I appreciate hearing from you.
According to Article I, Sections 2 and 3 of the Constitution, any person serving in the United States House of Representatives must have reached the age of twenty-five and must have been a citizen of the United States for at least seven years, and any person serving in the United States Senate must have reached the age of thirty and must have been a citizen of the United States for at least nine years. In addition, Article II, Section 1 mandates that a person must have reached the age of thirty-five and be a natural born citizen in order to serve as President of the United States.
As you mentioned, some reports have surfaced that my former colleague, President-Elect Barack Obama, is not a natural-born American citizen. These reports are false. Barack Obama was born on August 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Hawai’i. His birth certificate is a matter of public record of the State of Hawai’i and is available online through various news sources, as well as on the Web site for the nonpartisan, nonprofit Annenberg Political Fact Check: http://www.factcheck.org. I hope you find this information useful.
Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. For more information about my work for Nevada, my role in the United States Senate Leadership, or to subscribe to regular e-mail updates on the issues that interest you, please visit my Web site at http://reid.senate.gov. I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.
My best wishes to you.
Sincerely,
HARRY REID
United States Senator, Nevada”
All the insane "Citizen Wells" has to say is "Harry Reid has zero credibility. Harry Reid is complicit in this fraud. Enough said."
Sen. David Vitter (R - Louisiana)
“Thank you for contacting me with concerns about President-elect Barack Obama’s citizenship status. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.
I am deeply concerned about many policies the incoming Obama Administration may promote, including nominations of liberal judges who do not follow a strict interpretation of the Constitution, higher taxes on Louisiana families and businesses, fewer opportunities for domestic energy production, and more. I will continue working in the U.S. Senate against things like these and to promote policies that will grow our economy and follow our Constitution.
As you know, Article II, Section I of the Constitution requires that candidates for president must be natural born citizens, at least thirty-five years old, and residents of the United States for fourteen years. Hawaii state officials have verified that President-elect Obama was born in Honolulu on August 4, 1961, making him a natural born citizen. To this point, the U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear cases contesting Obama’s citizenship status, leaving in place the lower court rulings. I will continue to monitor this situation and any cases on this matter in our courts.
Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts on this important issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about other issues important to you.
Sincerely,
Senator David Vitter
United States Senator”
And the comments:
"Jerome // December 29, 2008 at 10:15 pm
Hey Citizen,
I’ve mentioned this once before but has anyone tried writing to Palin? Sure she’ not in congress and can’t block the vote but she is a patriot and has the advantage of being able to call a serious press conference. If she brought it up then millions of Americans on our side would catch on and join the ranks. Sure it would be a risk to her but if she helped bring OB-wan down it would make her a hero to a lot of concerned voters.
It might be worth a few letters on our part."
Yeah, I'm sure St. Sarah Moosekiller, protector of the North, will come to your assistance. Remember she was a "rouge" loose cannon for McCain, and STILL didn't fall to this level of stupidity. And she's not the brightest crayon in the box either.....
30 December - Kookoo Bananas over at Dr. Orly's clinic for impacted wisdom. In this post, take a look at this comment:
"Anonymous says:Today, 5:06:42 PM PST
“Orly, Bloggers and others....
Follow the money....The reason why MSM, Obama and his agitators don't want you to understand the Constitution because they are scared that the U.S. ARMED FORCES are about to wipe out this coup de'tat for real.
When 6 out of 10 armed service men and women know that Obama is not a worthy commander in chief, then you have a problem and Obama's propaganda is not working.
The natural born citizen clause, as Chief Justice John Jay gave in his letter dated July 25, 1787 was meant for the President's role as commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces. If he is not legitimate, no propaganda can fool that and the U.S. armed forces have the right to IGNORE ANY ORDERS HE GIVES and use military force to take him out.
This is the dilemma for Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama II and he and his supporters know it."
How do they explain the fact that active duty service people donated to Obama 6:1 over McCain? Oh, that's right, they ignore it like they do every other fact......
30 December - Note to Stephen Pidgeon - claiming that the defendant is "confused", when the defendant is the Secretary of State for the state you're in, may not be a great course of action.
(PDF Here)
"Washington’s Secretary of State claims he has no duty to determine if a presidential candidate is even an American citizen running under his legal name. Yet, there is not a single document in the public record available for inspection that could establishes as a matter of law that Obama is 1) a natural born citizen of the United States; 2) an American citizen; or 3) that his legal name is Barack Obama.
The Secretary of State’s claim that “Barack Obama has publicly produced a certified copy of a birth certificate showing he was born on August 4, 1961” is patently false. Nothing in its original form has been produced publicly. The document provided by Obama says on the bottom border that “any alteration invalidates this certificate.” The copy is altered, its CERTIFICATE NUMBER having been blotted out with a dark, black line. The only document Sen. Obama has yet to produce to demonstrate his native birth in the United States is wholly deficient to do so."
Ummm, did you check FactCheck, and the photographs of the actual document WITH the certificate number??? And did you honestly think that the JPG posted on Daily Kos, Fight the Smears, etc., was what he showed the appropriate legitimate authorities?? Are you honestly that clueless or stupid??
"We stated a claim in mandamus. The Secretary claims that we have the burden of establishing that Obama is not qualified to assume the office! We have proved that Obama did not establish that he was a “natural born citizen” of the United States at the time of the election. He has not produced a single piece of credible evidence that he is an American citizen, let alone a natural born citizen, and he has not produced any document showing a change of his legal name from Barry Soetoro to Barack Hussein Obama."
The burden of proof is on you, and YOU have not produced a single piece of credible evidence that he is NOT a US Citzen, is NOT a "natural born citizen", or that he ever changed his name to "Barry Soetoro" in the first place.
"FactCheck.org’s certification is meaningless, because the document they “certify” as genuine is deficient on its face as a matter of law. The digital copy of the Certification of Live Birth does not establish that Senator Obama was born in the United States, because of Hawaiian law HRS 338-17.8 which allows for people born in foreign countries to register their birth in Hawaii."
So, no, you didn't take a look at the FactCheck photos of the real LEGAL document then. And oh, BTW, when those births in foreign countries are registered in Hawaii, they show place of birth AS the foreign city in question, NOT a city in Hawaii. Obama's COLB says "Honolulu, Hawaii".
Yes indeed, you ARE that stupid.
30 December - Mark McGrew produces more birther propaganda for Pravda on-line, with some major gems like:
"In response to a lawsuit filed by Phillip Berg, Obama has refused to produce a valid Birth Certificate to The United States District Court of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Speculation has been that Obama is not a citizen of the United States and now that speculation is that it may be so sinister, that he is an illegal alien.
In that lawsuit, Phillip Berg identifies that Barrack Obama has used the names:
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, BARRY SOETORO, BARRY OBAMA, BARACK
DUNHAM and BARRY DUNHAM.
Who exactly is Barrack Obama and where did he come from?
In Executive Intelligence Review , Anton Chaitkin and Jeffrey Steinberg have said about international curiosity George Soros, “Soros had been bragging for years about his longstanding scheme to stage a "hostile takeover" of the Democratic Party. Through billions of dollars in donations to a select group of Democratic Party-linked organizations, such as MoveOn and ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), and through his longstanding links to Service Employees International Union (SEIU) corporatist president, Andy Stern, Soros has established his financial and political control over the very grassroots apparatus that is supposed to give Obama the margin of victory on Nov. 4.”
Why?
"Now, the World should know that we know it too, and there are some of us trying to stop the maniacs from their course of implementing a New World Order, based on destruction and misery, to put themselves in absolute and total domination of the entire Earth."
And he's beating the "rise up and overthrow the government" drums again. Or, better, have an outside force, (his Russian friends??) "liberate" us.
"Whether WWIII is about to take place or not, whether the American psychos are going to nuke us, whether Barrack Obama is a good man or bad, whether Obama wins or McCain wins, the only thing that will truly restore the United States Constitution and enforce our laws, is for an overwhelming force to come to the United States, root out the traitors and give us our country back. It is too far gone for us as a People to reclaim it."
30 December - And Jeff Schreiber at "America's Right" weighs in on Berg's latest, Hollister v. Soetoro.
"...This new suit, Hollister v. Soetoro, is part of what Berg calls a "concerted effort to find a legal avenue to expose the truth about Barack Obama, joins his original action as well as a related suit filed under seal under the False Claims Act, and is markedly different from anything Berg has filed before.
"For starters," Berg said, "this is an interpleader action which, properly done, would shift the burden of proof onto Barack Obama to show that he is indeed eligible to serve as president of the United States. Also different, we've filed the suit on behalf of a retired Air Force colonel and done so against Barry Soetoro a.k.a. Barack Obama, and not the other way around. That, we believe, is his real name anyway."
He also provides information on Col. Gregory Hollister (USAF, Retired). He was part of the regional leadership team of Colorado Veterans for John McCain, ran for city council in Colorado Springs under a plan to reform Medicare, privitive social security, and establish voucher programmes. He also was tossing around plans to sue MoveOn.org for libel and defamation over their ad regarding Gen. David Petraeus. (Note, I personally thought the ad was stupid and ill-thought out) His lawsuit centers around his status in the Individual Ready Reserve and the possibility of recall to active duty. From the complaint:
"Plaintiff is literally caught between a rock and a hard place. If reactivated, he comes under a duty to obey lawful orders. He would come under a duty, under at least certain circumstances, to disobey unlawful orders. He would come under a duty to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. But to whom will these duties be owed from January 20, 2009 on? And against whom will these duties operate? Soetoro or Biden?
This dilemma is particularly distressful to the Plaintiff in light of the current state of the law on obeying or disobeying unlawful orders. The Armed Forces themselves construe their oath to obey orders to require only that they obey lawful orders."
Jeff Schreiber goes on to point out that:
"Because of the outward appearance of a contrived "strawman" action due to what could be perceived as Hollister's "token" presence as plaintiff, however, Berg could once again run afoul of much of the same Article III "case or controversy" jurisdictional requirements for the district court which plagued his own eponymous action."
Now the odd part of this suit is it's an "interpleader", which related to property. Hollister has obligations and oaths due to his status in the Individual Ready Reserve, but these are not property.
"For the record, there are two types of interpleader, one from Rule 22 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the other from the United States Code. There are distinct differences between the two, but for the sake of Berg's new case, I'm not sure the differences are essential, as Berg cites both and because, well, wiggling an eligibility-related claim against Barack Obama into an interpleader action seems, to me, a little like trying to shove a square peg through a round hole.
Since he told me a few days ago about his plans to file an interpleader action, I've been trying to wrap my head around how Berg could possibly use this procedure in such a manner. I've read more than a half million civil filings in the past half-dozen years, and never have I seen anything of the sort. Interpleader requires property, after all, and the question I kept on coming back to was simple enough -- where's the property?"
And, like a dense parrot, Berg is screaming "Constitutional Crisis" again.
"We're there," said Berg, when asked about whether or not he feels the nation is still threatened by much of the uncertainty cited in his various legal actions. "We've reached a constitutional crisis, and unless the courts see the significance of these issues, we could be headed for complete disaster."
Hollister v. Soetoro, Berg maintains, is just part of an ongoing effort to find the correct legal solution to the problems created by what he says is an undervetted candidate. Sure, he said, he hopes that the Supreme Court finds that he has standing in his first case, the case facing conference in just over a week, but he wants to ensure that all of his eggs are not in one basket.
"This is by far the greatest hoax ever seen in American history," he said. "We're in virgin territory here, and we don't quite know the best way to reach our goal, we don't quite know how the courts and how the people will react to a certain method or procedure. All I can do is stand firm, and stand behind the rights of 320 million people, and I will continue to do so until Barack Obama comes out and acknowledges the history made on November 4th but admits that, due to things in his background, he will not be able to serve as president of the United States."
Jeff ends by saying "In many ways, I started this, and feel obligated to see it to fruition, as fairly as I possibly can."
30 December - Batshit Crazy "pastor" James Manning continues his rants against that "long-legged mack daddy" Obama. In this video on YouTube, he calls for 20 million letters to be sent to Chief Justice Roberts demanding that "Barack Obama to present his birth certificate to the courts for verification."
31 December - And Dr. Orly's zampolit Robert Stevens does another cowardly strawman attack against unnamed "o-bots". The irony being this statement:
"You see, dear Anonymous O-bots, when it comes to trying to decide what information in this entire affair we can trust and what we cannot, one has to consider all the evidence as a whole, and look to see what evidence is corroborated and what is contradicted by other evidence and by common sense."
Choice wording from someone in a group that is cherry picking just about every bit of so-called "evidence" they spew towards Obama. They cherry pick laws, tapes, court rulings, graphics, and everything else they use as "evidence".
Mr. Stevens, has it ever crossed your alleged mind that I, among every other person I know disproving the crap you're spewing, HAVE considered all the evidence as a whole, have looked at what evidence is corroborated and what is contradicted by other evidence and by common sense, and determined that every single claim you, Dr. Orly, Berg, Polarik, TechDude, Kreep, Pidgeon, AND EVERY OTHER SINGLE BIRTHER have spewed out is a complete and total pack of lies, falsehoods, and bullshit. Of course it hasn't, you're so blinded by hatred and ignorance.
Hypocrisy much Mr. Stevens??
31 December - The latest Great White Hope for the birthers is a claim from the often-wrong Ed Hale that a private investigator "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."
"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.
The Texan Internet entrepreneur relates he got fed up with the lack of documentation on Obama and decided to discuss ideas with his radio audience. His offer to hire an investigator was met with piecemeal sums of money from listeners to his broadcasts. Hale said some of the information one would expect to find was not available. For example, documentation from Obama's mother Stanley Ann's divorce to her second husband, Lolo Soetoro, had vanished. Hale speculates, the reason this forthcoming 1964 divorce decree had not also been "scrubbed" could be that the divorce had been filed not by Obama's mother, but by Barack H. Obama, Sr. Thus, it may have been overlooked by any plumbers for Obama.
Hale does admit to incomplete certainty of his investigator's work until he receives it, partially due to the PI's accent, the telephone connection, and his slight hearing impediment. However, he is very confident of what he will receive during the day. Mark S. McGrew, who writes about Obama's natural born Citizen problems for Pravda.ru, accompanied Hale in his broadcast and also expressed confidence. McGrew had sought publication in numerous American news outlets, but they turned down his articles referring to Obama's apparent ineligibility. Russia's Pravda however, decided his effort to find and report the truth was not to be redlined."
Hmmm....Ed Hale was one of the people pimping the "Michelle Tape" that African Press International never managed to produce. Why do I suspect the same here?
Later, an update is posted. Curiously enough, there is (surprise surprise!) a delay and the ink hasn't dried the "evidence" won't be released until friday, 2 Jan.
"Ed Hale has sent an email stating that his delivery has been delayed until Friday, 1/2. We wait another day for what he has to show. We can be patient in light of how long we wait for Barack Obama to admit the truth of his ineligibility per Article II — and show us the whole truth of his actual Hawaiian birth certificate, besides"
This really does seem like "Michelle Tapes. take 2"........
31 December - "Citizen Wells" continues his tirade:
Rep John Sarbanes (D - 3rd Congressional Dist., Maryland)
"Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns about President-elect Barack Obama’s citizenship status.
The Supreme Court has turned down emergency appeals over the President-elect’s constitutional eligibility for the presidency on several occasions. State officials in Hawaii have also confirmed that their records indicate President-elect Obama was born in Hawaii. I hope you find this information helpful.
Again, I appreciate hearing from you. Please do not hesitate to contact me about other issues of concern to you in the future.
Sincerely,
John Sarbanes
Member of Congress”
Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R - 5th Congressional Dist., Wisconsin)
"Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding the eligibility of President-elect Barack Obama to serve as President of the United States. I appreciate the opportunity to learn of your views.
As you may know, the Senate unanimously passed S.Res.511, recognizing that Senator McCain is a natural born citizen. This measure came about in response to questions that were raised with respect to Sen. McCain’s eligibility due to the fact that he was born outside of the United States to U.S. citizens while his father was serving in the U.S. military. In President-elect Obama’s case, such legislation was not deemed necessary because claims that Mr. Obama is constitutionally ineligible for the nation’s highest office are unfounded. No credible evidence has surfaced to call into question his eligibility to run.
I hope this information is helpful. Thanks again for taking the time to contact me.
Sincerely,
F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR.
Member of Congress”
Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D - 2nd Congressional Dist., Wisconsin)
“Thank you for contacting me regarding President-elect Obama’s citizenship. It is always good to hear from you.
As you know, some have suggested that President-elect Barack Obama may have been born outside the U.S. and is not a “natural born citizen” eligible for the presidency. During the presidential campaign, President-elect Obama voluntarily posted his birth certificate on his campaign website indicating he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii in 1961. Media accounts report that Hawaiian officials verified health department records and determined there is no doubt that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii.
You may be interested to know that concerns surrounding President-elect Obama’s citizenship are the subject of at least one legal challenge before the U.S. Supreme Court. However, on December 8, 2008, the Supreme Court denied consideration of the claim that Mr. Obama lacks the citizenship requirement to become president.
Again, thank you for sharing your views. Your opinion matters to me. If I can be of service to you in any other way, please do not hesitate to let me know. As a security precaution, all mail sent to Congress is first irradiated. This process causes significant delays. To ensure the fastest response, I encourage all constituents who have access to the internet to contact me through my website at http://tammybaldwin.house.gov.
Sincerely,
Tammy Baldwin
Member of Congress”
Rep. John Tanner (D - 8th Congressional Dist., Tennessee)
“Thank you for contacting our office regarding the allegations that President-Elect Barack Obama was not born in the United States. I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me on this issue.
There are claims that President-Elect Obama was born in Africa and not in the United States which would make him ineligible to become president. The Obama campaign released a scanned copy of his birth certificate in June 2008, but many people believe it was a forgery. The non-partisan organization Political Fact Check (this group monitors the factual accuracy of political information) has examined Mr. Obama’s birth certificate and they report that it is valid and he is a U.S. citizen. I have included a link to a Newsweek article that was written on this subject and includes links to pictures of the birth certificate (http://www.newsweek.com/id/154599).
Again, thank you for sharing your views with me and I hope you will feel free to contact our office with any issues of concern to you in the future.
Sincerely,
John Tanner, M. C.”
Sen. Robert Menendez, (D - New Jersey)
“Thank you for contacting me regarding your support for the cases brought before the Supreme Court regarding President-Elect Obama’s dual nationality at birth. Your opinion is very important to me, and I appreciate the opportunity to respond to you on this vital issue.
These cases allege that President-Elect Obama’s Hawaiian birth certificate is counterfeit or that he may have dual citizenship. However, based on state health department records, Hawaii state officials have confirmed that Barack Obama was born August 4, 1961, in Hawaii. That means he is a natural born citizen, and thus, eligible to serve as President of the United States.
As you may have heard, on December 8, 2008, the US Supreme Court turned down the emergency appeal in one of these cases. Other appeals have been dismissed in the federal courts of Pennsylvania, Ohio and Washington State.
Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. I appreciate your support. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I may be of more assistance. I invite you to visit my website (http://menendez.senate.gov) to learn of other important issues to New Jersey.
Sincerely,
ROBERT MENENDEZ”
And so 2008 draws to a close, a historical year full of joys and tears. We saw a historic primary, a historic general election, and the election of a president-elect that may be able to undo the damage from the last eight years. We've got the Bush recession to deal with, economic freefall, and global challenges for the President-elect to confront in the coming year. Challenges for this nation, and this world. Let those of us who truly defend our nation and our constitution stand fast and firm against those misguided souls who have let hatred, ignorance, and yes, bigotry, blind them to truth and reality.
To my friends, my family, and the readers of this blog. May the 2009 be the start of a new positive era of peace, prosperity, and good fortune for ourselves, our families, our nation, and our world.
And for the cultists, the birthers, and their allies, may you reap exactly the rewards your actions deserve. Honi soit qui mal y pense
That comment from "The South" about how they're going to take over the government is just fucking scary. Seriously, does the Secret Service know about that? And, more importantly, what is WRONG with these people?
Posted by: Marilyn | December 31, 2008 at 11:16 PM
Marilyn - Yeah, it seems to be their particular wet dream, much like their tax protester friends think that the US is going to rise up and overthrow the tax and spend government.....
And I suspect the Secret Service is keeping a very close eye on these people. Not the least of which is because many of them are claiming the Secret Service is IN on the conspiracy.....
Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | December 31, 2008 at 11:31 PM
You should have heard the Ed Hale broadcast tonight (and read the chat comments). That hilljack nutbag is openly calling for armed rebellion, as are his guests and commenters.
And it's not comical -- it it is serious, ugly, racist, violent mob-type shit.
My expectation that Ed is shortly going to get the MIB treatment.
Posted by: StrangeAppar8us | December 31, 2008 at 11:57 PM
StrangeAppar8us - It doesn't surprise me. Since the primaries the Birthers and Cultists have been building up hate and more hate, and knew, just knew that there was no way in hell Obama would win.
He won. And it's becoming obvious to even the most optimistic birther that the court cases aren't working. The smears have not taken any traction in the media or with the general public. They know that baring a miracle to them, there is no way they can achieve their desires.
And many of them are melting down as a result. They can't question if they were wrong - they have too much faith and emotional energy and time invested in it. So they have the wet dream that "We The People" will rise up and overthrow the government. But they can't seem to grasp that they don't have the numbers, the support, the resources, or anything else to do such. And most of them only talk the talk anyway, (not counting their sock puppets).
I think some of the lawyers involved in this are going to start getting warnings about disiplinary actions and title 11 sanctions if they keep this up, and the various Secretary of States are going to nail others with court costs as well. They'll harbor fantasies about throwing out any elected official that dared disagree with them, but overtime all but the most delusional will be forced to accept just how impotent they really are.
Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | January 01, 2009 at 12:09 AM
Challenge, can anyone prove this wrong?:–
1. Constitution Article II requires USA President to be “natural born citizen”.
2. BHO’s website admits his dad was Kenyan/British, not American, citizen when BHO was born.
3. BHO is therefore not a “natural born citizen” (irrespective of Hawaiian birth or whether he may be a 14th Amendment “citizen” of USA) — as confirmed in the Senate’s own McCain qualification resolution agreed to by BHO.
4. Supreme Court has already docketed two upcoming conferences, 1/9/09 and 1/16/09 — between dates Congress counts electoral votes (1/8/09) and Presidential inauguration (1/20/09) — to address Berg Case and fashion relief on BHO’s eligibility to be President.
5. Since no facts are in dispute, Supreme Court rules on Summary Judgment to enjoin BHO’s inauguration as President.
6. Therefore, BHO is not inaugurated as President.
7. Vice President Elect Biden is inaugurated Acting President under the 20th Amendment to serve until new President is determined — the procedure for which determination to be set out by Congress and/or the Supreme Court so long as in conformance with the Constitution.
Posted by: Ted | January 01, 2009 at 03:54 AM
Ah, TedBot, I see you posted that here too. Since you didn't read what I posted above, let me recap.
1. US Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 says:
"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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
2. At least two cases where one or both parents were not US citizens determined that a child born in the US was a natural born citizen.
Wong Kim Ark:
"It was held that a person born within the jurisdiction of the U.S. to non-citizens who "are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity" is automatically a citizen, per the Fourteenth Amendment. "
Perkins v. ELG:
"The U.S. Supreme Court concluded that Marie Elizabeth Elg who was born in the United States of Swedish parents then naturalized in the United States, had not lost her birthright U.S. citizenship because of her removal during minority to Sweden and was entitled to all the rights and privileges of that U.S. citizenship. In this case, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the decree that declared Miss Elg "to be a natural born citizen of the United States."
Perkins v. ELG also references a earlier case of a Prussian subject who came to the US, had a son, and returned back to Prussia. Quote:
"'Young Steinkauler is a native-born American citizen. There is no law of the United States under which his father or any other person can deprive him of his birthright. He can return to America at the age of twenty-one, and in due time, if the people elect, he can become President of the United States"
So the citizenship of Obama's father doesn't mean anything. By US law and multiple decisions of the Supreme Court, a child born in the United States is a "Native Born" US citizen and therefore qualifies under the US Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5.
3. The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, Section 1. says:
"Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Technically speaking, if one is born in the United States - even to two US citizen parents, then one is also a citizen under the 14th Amendment.
4. Berg's cases have not been decided. The track record for such cases is remarkably poor, and there is no reason to believe writ or injunction would be granted.
5. The "facts" in Berg's case are very much in dispute. In the unlikely event SCOTUS would grant Berg's case, all that means is it would be sent back to the lower courts to review their ruling. And there is nothing in Berg's lawsuits - any of them - that would stand cross-examination. Standard legal proceedure for a defendant is to not address issues and move to dismiss. If dismissal is granted, you ignore the issues the plantiff brought up. If dismissal is not granted, then defendant addresses the issues - and Berg's cases would be torn apart if that happened to him
6. Unlikely.
7. If for some reason Barack Obama, (you CAN write his name you know. The constant "BHO" does nothing except make you look stupider), was found to be unable to be President, then Biden, having qualified, would be sworn in as Acting President while the Congress and Senate decided to leave him as President or select a new President The Supreme Court would not be involved as the 20th Amendment doesn't call for SCOTUS to have a say in the selection. The most likely result in the unlikely event Obama couldn't serve would be Biden as President, with Pelosi or Byrd becoming VP as per the presidential line of succession, as specified by the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 U.S.C. § 19) (Clinton, as Secretary of State-designate, might also be considered for the role) There is no senario where both Obama AND Biden would be disqualified, so the hope that somehow McCain / Palin would end up President / Vice President after all are slim, none, and forget it.
However, #5, 6, and 7 are meaningless because, due to birth in Hawaii, Barack Obama IS a Natural-Born US citizen according to the Constitution and US Law. And what IS US Law regarding citizens? To cite US code, Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter III, Part 1, § 1401:
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;
(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;
(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person
(A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or
(B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and
(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States."
There you go. Your nice little pet theory, shot more full of holes than a 99 cent store condom.
Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | January 01, 2009 at 05:00 AM
WHAT!!! They sell condoms at the 99 cent store?
HE HE
I hope everyone is having a safe New Years and getting really wasted.
I see Tedbot is already there.....or is that just normal (using that word loosely)Ted?
Posted by: cjlatina | January 01, 2009 at 05:20 AM
This article is yet another example of desperation to ignore the obvious by generalizing individuals who have studied the facts and calling them "Birthers". The analysis, while lengthy, is clearly designed to suppress supporters of the US Constitution who do not have the political agenda that is shared by the author.
Posted by: Michele Pecora | January 01, 2009 at 10:21 AM
Michele Pecora -- I don't believe that there's a political agenda at work here. Your problem seems to be that the *actual* facts and case law relevant to the "NBC/BC" issue render any challenge to Obama's eligibility for POTUS moot.
It's very simple, and no "conspiracy" or "agenda" is required: Obama has released his Certificate of Live Birth indicating he was born in Honolulu, HI...which is all the ticket you need to get into the "Natural Born Citizen Club."
There is NO authoritative documentation proving that Obama was born anywhere else, or that he subsequently surrendered his US citizenship. There is also no "expert" testimony that the COLB is a forgery or fabrication of any kind.
Everything else is fevered speculation and rumor (packaged as "assertions"), amateurish misstatements of precedents-at-law, and gymnastic attempts to create a parallel "fantasy" framework of American Jurisprudence which does not exist, and has never existed outside of the minds of publicity freaks like Berg, Martin, Taitz and Donofrio and self-styled "Defenders of the Constitution" who wear that document as a disguise for their petty bigotry and irrational Obama-hatred.
Posted by: StrangeAppar8us | January 01, 2009 at 11:23 AM
Challenge, can anyone prove this wrong?
Challenge, if proven wrong, will you admit its wrong or will we go 'round in circles again? I don't think I need a Vegas bookie to tell me what the odds are on that.
Posted by: Doug H. (Fausto no more) | January 01, 2009 at 01:24 PM
Aw, shucks. I guess that Obama/Dunham divorce decree isn't the magic bullet the birthers are anticipating. Ed Hale is going to be wiping egg off his face. Posted today at I.O. :
"Update 1/1/2009, 3:36am CT - In his 7:45pm Plains Radio broadcast, this last night, Ed Hale backed down from his prior assertion of having gained even uncertain information about the Barack Sr. / Stanley Ann divorce decree containing language referring to Barack Jr. as being born in Kenya. Instead, Hale referred to an apparently tricky recollection... of an indeterminate person... referring to such a document's generally referring to the place of birth of the children of the divorced parents. That is not what I heard from Mr. Hale on the 31st.
"Two people reported during the broadcast that they had contacted Hale's private investigator yesterday, who indicated he did not thoroughly read the documentation and does not know how it addresses Barack Obama Jr. -- nor did he make a copy for himself. ..."
Well, I guess that's what you get when you pay $1000 to a private investigator with a hearing problem and a reading disability.
Posted by: GeorgetownJD | January 01, 2009 at 01:29 PM
Michele Pecora -- I don't believe that there's a political agenda at work here.
Of course there's a political agenda at work here. There are those who don't want to pay their taxes, and there are those who refuse to admit that an uppity negro can be President. At their intersection you have the Birther movement.
Of course that's not the political agenda what Michele the Birther was thinking of, but Birthers project faster than the ol' two-reel at the local dollar cinema so whaddya expect.
Posted by: Doug H. (Fausto no more) | January 01, 2009 at 01:30 PM
Michele Pecora - The political agenda is on the part of the birthers, by building an ever more wild-eyed and rickety structure to support their pet theory, while showing not a single scrap of credible evidence to support their claims.
None of these claims are supported by verifiable evidence.
There's no credible evidence that he was born in Kenya, (indeed, the much lauded "Sarah Obama" tape actually STATES on the unedited version that he was born in America. Need the URL to listen to it?)
There's no credible evidence he was born in Canada (The birth certificate Berg cites for this was signed by Dudley DoRight and JFK)
There's no credible evidence the actual COLB was forged, (the claims are based on two nameless, faceless internet "experts", Polarik and TechDude, based on scanned JPG files. Even Sandra Lines states there's no way to prove or disprove based on scanned JPG files.)
There's no credible evidence that Stanley Ann Dunham gave up her US citizenship when she married Lolo Soetoro
There's no way according to US law that Barack Obama would have lost his US citizenship as a minor due to his mother marrying Lolo Soetoro.
There's no credible evidence he ever had Indonesian citizenship.
US Law trumps Indonesian law for purposes of determining US Citizenship.
There's no credible evidence he traveled to Pakistan on a Indonesian passport
There's no credible evidence he ever legally used the name "Barry Soetoro"
Pakistan was NOT under a travel ban, (a 1981 New York Times article had tourism information for Pakistan, and they were a US ally at the time)
"Laws of Nations" has never been a part of US law or legal codes.
At least two Supreme Court cases, Wong Kim Ark & Perkins v. ELG, have stated that a child born in the United States, even if their parens were not citizens, are "Natural Born" citizens.
The Constitution says nothing about a "Natural Born" citizen has to be of two US citizen parents.
US Law says nothing about a "Natural Born" citizen has to be of two US citizen parents.
There's no credible evidence that "Hundreds of Thousands" or "Millions" of dollars has been spent by Obama to hide information. Indeed, most of the lawsuits have been at the state level against state officials, and the money to defend the state in those suits are coming from the taxpayers of that state.
Of the 40 lawsuits supposely filed, 15 have been dismissed. 7 show no evidence of ever being filed. 8 are active at the state level. 2 show no signs of ever being filed with the Supreme Court, (no docket numbers), and 2 are active at that level. There's no sign any of the lawsuits, (most of which are cookie cutter clones of each other) will fare any better than the 15 that have so far been dismissed.
There is simply no credible evidence to support the Birther claims. The "Political Agenda" seems to come from a group of people that for whatever reasons, (Hillary didn't win the primaries, McCain didn't win the general, Ron Paul didn't win either, they don't want to pay taxes, they don't want an "uppity negro" in the White House, they believe he's a "stealth Muslim", etc.) have a deep-seated psychological need to believe this increasingly paranoid conspiracy theory.
Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | January 01, 2009 at 01:57 PM
OK. I've written a couple of times and have some personal perspective on how the military views its role. We have had military members serving since 1941. The military is always under civilian leadership. The civilian courts and legislature determine what is or is not constitutional. Members can resign,as General Tanscheki (sp) did if they disagree. They can refuse to obey an order they see as unconstitutional and then proceed through the military system which judges THEIR personal conduct. My husband who is a retired officer finds the ideas presented by Dr. Taitz "dishonorable and seditious". Again I ask, who is she? She seems to lack understanding of the basic relationship between the military and civilian control.
Also, I am in my 60's and remember the movement to impeach Earl Warren, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, after Brown vs Board of Education. We lacked the internet but not billboards and their pictures of Warren with known Communists. It all was a grand hoax of course. They were vicious and the attacks on Warren continued for years. You younger people might look back at that era and see some similarities. This situation that also attempts to usurp the Constitution reminds me of that era. Please remember as well that their are many of us who are not part of the progressive movement who see the validity of your case for President-Elect Obama. Thank you.
Posted by: Mary Brown | January 01, 2009 at 02:21 PM
Mary Brown - Not a problem. I don't see myself as a progressive myself. I'm a former member of the Libertarian Party and joke I'm a "rare endangered North American Moderate"
And I know very well that the "Birthers" don't represent the mainstream of Conservative thought in this country. Heck, many of the Birthers are furious with Fox News and Conservative pundits like Malkin and the like for NOT reporting on their fantasies!
Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | January 01, 2009 at 02:36 PM
Mary Brown - Oh, and as for Dr. Orly Taitz, she's an immigrant from the former Soviet Union. She did her undergrad work at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, and practices as a dentist in Mission Viejo, California. She has a JD law degree from an on-line school based in Santa Ana, California, and due to the fact that the State of California allows the graduates of on-line unaccredited law schools to sit for the bar exam, is licenced to practice law in the State of California.
Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | January 01, 2009 at 02:41 PM
Patrick - With all due respect and admiration, you spend an incredible amount of time and energy dissecting people who simply refuse, for one reason or another, to embrace and/or confront reality.
These people are indicative of the level of outright ignorance that exists in our society as a whole. It is the reason that we are in this massive economic and political mess. Too many people chose to embrace an alternate reality where everyone was wealthy and deserved a McMansion in the suburbs and a Hummer in the garage.
I think we're at a crossroads where a disproportionate segment of the populous simply wishes to dive into an alternate universe, but the technology is not yet available to make it possible. Perhaps in another decade it will be, but in the meantime we're stuck trying to solve the real and tangible challenges of our nation (and civilization) while a massive bulk of those involved simply choose to tune out and pretend it isn't happening.
I am thankful that we are nineteen days out from inaugurating a leader who bears a keen and brilliant intellect. I can only hope that his call to service reaches enough ears, but I fear that it's simply too late for many who believe they are entitled to live in whatever reality they choose. I wish I had a solution for how to deal with them in the meantime.
Posted by: Pumalicious! | January 01, 2009 at 02:58 PM
A very happy New Year Patrick and Christina, and my admiration for your patience, fortitude and tenacity following the twists and turns of first the PUMAs and then the Birthers: you're like two mongeese against a pit of cobras!
I've neglected my blog shamefully in favor of YTD and Rumproast, but I made my first post in two weeks today, and in under five minutes was spammed by Tedbot, first time ever. It's kind of exciting.
Mary Brown, it's really heartening to know that sensible people like you are to be found in differing parts of the political spectrum.
Posted by: Mrs. Polly | January 01, 2009 at 02:59 PM
Hello Patrick,
Thank you for her history. I am having an Alice in Wonderland moment or moments concerning this woman in particular. Civilian control of the military under all circumstances is a huge check that has prevented this Republic from worry or concern about a military role in elections. It is as if she favors a path that would lead to national disintegration. My husband tells me I need to let it go and before I become obcessed.
My family is from the northwest. All my children settled there after our military journey was over. We have a strong libertarian bent. I call one child liberal-libertarian. Again thank you for using your intellect in all of this. We plan on continuing to check your site.
Posted by: Mary Brown | January 01, 2009 at 03:03 PM
Mary Brown - Understand. I'm an "Air Force" brat, and was in my 3rd year of AFROTC in college when I wrecked my knee and couldn't continue. My brothers lived all over the US and overseas (one brother was born in Scotland), and I've lived in Hawaii towards the end of my father's active duty career. As an adult, I've lived in the Middle East for a year, which gave me a strong appreciation for this country and how it's seen in the world. And now I live in the Pacific Northwest, raising my daughter and poking birther badgers with spoons :-)
Dr. Orly doesn't seem to have an idea how civilian control of the military works in the US, or how the courts are bound by the laws of this nation, not the writings of a Swiss legalist in the 1750's or by the demands of a noisy minority. And that's something the birthers really don't seem to understand - the same laws they claim Obama is hiding behind ALSO protect them, their rights, and their privacy.
Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | January 01, 2009 at 03:26 PM
MESSAGE TO EVERY MEMBER OF CONGRESS:
When counting the electoral votes, either Congress finds by 1/8/09 that Obama, not being an Article II “natural born citizen”, fails to qualify as President whereupon Biden becomes the full fledged President under 3 USC 19 (free to pick his own VP such as Hillary) or thereafter defers to the Supreme Court to enjoin Obama’s inauguration with Biden becoming only Acting President under the 20th Amendment until a new President is duly determined.
The preferable choice, at least for the Democrats, should seem obvious.
Posted by: Ted | January 01, 2009 at 06:03 PM
MESSAGE TO TED:
The smart money says Congress validates the Electoral Vote, SCOTUS denies all pending NBC/BC filings, Obama is inaugurated and sworn in by Chief Justice Roberts on January 20 -- and "Ted" has to go back to selling "Work From Home" rip-offs and hard-on creams via email.
Posted by: StrangeAppar8us | January 01, 2009 at 06:14 PM
LOL, I thought you wrote "hand creams" the first time I read that.
Posted by: John Dean | January 01, 2009 at 06:24 PM
John Dean -- Well, they ARE occasionally interchangeable. ;->
Ted is <1>en fuego !
Posted by: StrangeAppar8us | January 01, 2009 at 06:30 PM
BTW, Ted-bot is Ted Sampley, right?
Posted by: John Dean | January 01, 2009 at 06:30 PM
Ted wrote:
5. Since no facts are in dispute, Supreme Court rules on Summary Judgment to enjoin BHO’s inauguration as President.
----------------------------
Ted, you are HYSTERICAL!
You really have no grasp whatsoever on how the legal system works, do you?
I would respond, but I can't stop laughing at you long enough to even begin to address your ignorance on this and every other subject you post about.
Way to go, Ted! Really, were you aware how damn funny you are!!
RMFAOL
Posted by: not a fan of puma | January 01, 2009 at 06:40 PM
John Dean -- Sorry about that HTML fumble.
Regarding Ted Sampley -- this is certainly right up his alley, and would explain his psychotic persistence in pushing bogus disinfo. For some reason, he seems to hate all Presidents and presidential candidates.
Patrick or one of the other regulars may have the more definitive scoop on "Ted."
Posted by: StrangeAppar8us | January 01, 2009 at 06:42 PM
Ted, please, I beg you to start your own blog.
I could use a laugh like you just gave me each and every day!
If you do start a blog (or, if you already have one, GOD that would be GREAT!) please, please post here to tell us!! Laughter is such an important thing in life, and, you sir, are quite the masterful comedian.
Posted by: not a fan of puma | January 01, 2009 at 06:45 PM
I'm no legal scholar, but I'm pretty certain that openly encouraging the military to ignore the orders of a president, and demanding they turn on him and remove him by force, HAS to be a violation of some laws, somehow. It's one thing to criticize a president, but, when you start undermining the cohesion and stability of the entire country by demanding the military commit large-scale acts of treason, I seriously doubt you could claim that that's constitutionally protected free speech. This stuff is getting so crazy and dangerous that I can't imagine it could continue on much longer without federal authorities stepping in and bringing charges against some of the more insane elements in this whole fiasco. Some of them are really stepping on some dangerously thin ice when they make the kind of threats and statements that they do. It's all getting out of hand.
Posted by: Keith | January 01, 2009 at 06:53 PM
This is Ted Sampley's website, in case that's "our boy" Ted-bot.
And this is just downright disgusting.
As a former MSgt, USAF, I can honestly and legitimately say that this freak brings shame to veterans...there he is, selling bracelets and shirts, and putting out this garbage.
John
Posted by: John Dean | January 01, 2009 at 07:19 PM