And You Were Born Where, Mr. President?

What is it they call us? Birthers?  People who want to know where Obama was born, and why is he hiding his birth certificate. If you wait long enough, it comes out.  This was only a problem when you seek the office of President, when the Constitution forbids a foreign born person from holding the nations highest office.  But, when Barrack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Sorieto, was running for Illinois senate, it wasn’t a problem.  I give you the article from 2004, from the Associated Press:

Sunday, June 27, 2004

Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations. The allegations that horrified fellow Republicans and caused his once-promising candidacy to implode in four short days have given Obama a clear lead as Republicans struggled to fetch an alternative. Ryan’s campaign began to crumble on Monday following the release of embarrassing records from his divorce. In the records, his ex-wife, Boston Public actress Jeri Ryan, said her former husband took her to kinky sex clubs in Paris, New York and New Orleans. Barrack Obama “It’s clear to me that a vigorous debate on the issues most likely could not take place if I remain in the race,” Ryan, 44, said in a statement. “What would take place, rather, is a brutal, scorched-earth campaign – the kind of campaign that has turned off so many voters, the kind of politics I refuse to play.” Although Ryan disputed the allegations, saying he and his wife went to one ‘avant-garde’ club in Paris and left because they felt uncomfortable, lashed out at the media and said it was “truly outrageous” that the Chicago Tribune got a judge to unseal the records. The Republican choice will become an instant underdog in the campaign for the seat of retiring Republican Senator Peter Fitzgerald, since Obama held a wide lead even before the scandal broke. “I feel for him actually,” Obama told a Chicago TV station. “What he’s gone through over the last three days I think is something you wouldn’t wish on anybody.” The Republican state committee must now choose a replacement for Ryan, who had won in the primaries against seven contenders. Its task is complicated by the fact that Obama holds a comfortable lead in the polls and is widely regarded as a rising Democratic star. The chairwoman of the Illinois Republican Party, Judy Topinka, said at a news conference, after Ryan withdrew, that Republicans would probably take several weeks to settle on a new candidate. “Obviously, this is a bad week for our party and our state,” she said. As recently as Thursday, spokesmen for the Ryan campaign still insisted that Ryan would remain in the race. Ryan had defended himself saying, “There’s no breaking of any laws. There’s no breaking of any marriage laws. There’s no breaking of the Ten Commandments anywhere.” —AP

The Fat Lady, Is She Warmin’ Up?

From Carl, who does wonderful searches finding this material.  It seems fitting, since a new Justice for SCOTUS is getting ready to be named, to bring up once again, the job that the current court is still not doing.  You may or may not agree with some of this, but it’s worth reading. Then, PLEASE, read the letter at the end.  Tell me this lady knows which side the bread is buttered on. Thanks again, Carl!

 

 

 

AKA Obama Fans: All together now – say OMG!!

 

by Aristotle the Hun

Somehow, you know it’s coming. That OMG moment is just around the corner. You can feel the inescapable reality creeping up on you. Something will leak. Someone will spill the beans.

“For nothing is hid that shall not be made manifest, nor anything secret that shall not be known and come to light.” Luke 8:17

 

 

 

 

It isn’t hard to imagine the gnawing anxiety that AKA OBAMA (Also Known As: an acronym used to describe suspicious persons who use more than one name) lives with, day in and day out. Much has been written about AKA OBAMA’s behavior that reminds mental health experts and others of NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder.) A frequent manifestation of such a disorder is The Narcissist, as Liar and Con-man.

This disorder is frequently misunderstood as “self-love.” A more accurate understanding is love of a reflection of one’s self. Abused, abandoned and neglected children will compensate for damaged egos by creating an ideal reflection of themselves that they then embellish and vigorously defend. A person with NPD is quite capable of a mind twisting position like, “I have nothing to hide but I am hiding things anyway.” AKA OBAMA certainly fits the model of having such a childhood. While I am not in the position to deliver an official In Absentia diagnosis of a full strength NPD case, many of the indicators are present.

If AKA OBAMA were not in a position of public trust, most of us would probably overlook such deception and secrecy. For those of us who care about our Constitution and the rule of law, the issue becomes clear in this article that appeared in on-line Pravda by international columnist, Mark S. McGrew The Mysterious Shadow: Code Name Obama.

Most Americans do not want their president to be secretive about his past. However, if one is living a lie to preserve the ego compensating, idealized reflection of self, one will go to great lengths to hide things that most would routinely reveal.

For the person who has NPD tendencies, the lies used to create the reflection become so numerous that eventually the man in the mirror cracks, and so does the real human being hiding behind the reflection.A useful tool in evaluating things that are not known with certainty is Occam’s razor. When multiple competing hypotheses are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the hypothesis that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities. It is in this sense that Occam’s razor is usually understood. I condense this to the simple question; what is most likely? In our discussion of the documents which AKA has hidden, most of this article is an examination of which explanation is most likely.

For example; which is most likely;
(a) AKA OBAMA is hiding documents that are innocuous?
(b) AKA OBAMA is hiding documents that are damaging?

What we know with certainty is that AKA OBAMA is not practicing the virtue of full disclosure. “ The biggest question, and the biggest reason for asking more questions, is the fact Obama has enlisted law firms across the nation to battle every attempt to access, among other documents, his birth, schooling, immigration or passport records.” New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo

There are so many potential sources that can end AKA OBAMA’s Presidency that it is impossible to keep them all quiet. It’s just a matter of time. As columnist Davvy Kidd says, IMPOSTOR PRESIDENT OBAMA: VICTORY WILL BE SHORT LIVED. First, let’s think of all the lawyers and support staff involved in keeping the birth certificate issue quiet. Isn’t it likely that some of them know what they are hiding? Isn’t it likely that several people at the Hawaiian Department of Public Health know what is, or is not, on the original birth certificate that AKA OBAMA refuses to release? Did you know that there is a one million dollar reward offered for AKA OBAMA’s Hawaiian birth certificate?

Please get this straight: Hawaiian officials have not validated AKA OBAMA’s place of birth. What they have said is that they “have the original document” on file. They haven’t offered a clue as to what information is in that document. They can not legally validate what is on that document without a court order or permission from “our” Chicago con-man. Laws of the Territory of Hawaii ACT 96 To Provide For The Issuance Of Certificates Of Hawaiian Birth was in effect from 1911 until 1972 and allowed someone who was born outside the Hawaiian Islands to be registered as though he were born in Hawaii. Under that law, someone simply would have presented herself to the Hawaiian authorities and declared that the child was born in Hawaii. The person could have sworn under oath and presented witnesses and other evidence. If the authorities accepted it, that was the end of it. The only way to know where AKA OBAMA was actually born is to view AKA OBAMA’s original birth certificate from 1961 to see what kind of birth certificate it is, and to examine what corroborating evidence supports what its says about AKA OBAMA’s alleged place of birth. If the birth was in a hospital, as AKA OBAMA has maintained, such evidence would be the name of the hospital and the name and signature of the doctor that delivered him.

The Certification of Live Birth that was published on AKA OBAMA’s campaign web site is not a Birth Certificate. It is easy to tell the difference between the two types of documents. It is very likely that the COLB used by AKA OBAMA’s campaign is a fraudulent document. Several forensic document examiners have carefully scrutinized the COLB and declared it suspicious or an obvious forgery. The best evidence presented so far is from the Ron Polarik, PhD.

Dr. Polarik writes: “There are laws on the books in Hawaii and the Federal Statutes that clearly spell out exactly what constitutes forgery, and in both Hawaii State Law and the Federal Statutes, the act of altering an official government document — even if it is just a facsimile of that document — constitutes forgery. The bogus COLB that Obama created is also considered to be a “false identification document, a felony forgery.” Dr. Polarik’s evidence is preserved online. There is also a YouTube video summary of the evidence.

Forensic document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines, a Former Federal Examiner with a long history of expert testimony in state and federal courts, has testified in an affidavit that states, in part:

After reviewing Dr. Polarik’s analysis, Sandra Lines says, “I can state with certainty that the COLB presented on the internet by the various groups, which include the “Daily Kos,” the Obama Campaign, “Factcheck.org” and others cannot be relied upon as genuine. Mr. Polarik raises issues concerning the COLB that I can affirm. Software such as Adobe Photoshop can produce complete images or alter images that appear to be genuine; therefore, any image offered on the internet cannot be relied upon as being a copy of the authentic document.” Sandra Ramsey Lines summary is posted at U. S. Law Blog.

As long as we are on the subject of falsified documents, it seems that AKA OBAMA never registered for the draft, as required by Selective Service laws. When his career began to be noticed by the public, suddenly draft registration records appeared. Unfortunately for AKA OBAMA these documents have also been exposed as forgeries.

Another piece of information that many fail to realize is that in the birth certificate cases, all that is needed is for the case to be heard. This case will be over in the “Discovery” phase. Before a trial starts both sides are required by the court to put all their cards on the table to avoid “trial by ambush.” The judge orders all evidence to be presented by both sides. Since this case is about discovering documents that are hidden, the case will be decided by court-ordered presentation of all relevant records. Lawyers in birth certificate cases don’t need to win a trial; they only need to get a trial.

Enough on the hidden birth certificate and forged documents.

For those of you who think ridicule and name calling are effective debate tactics, I refer your kool-aid drenched, tin foil protected brains (a dose of your own medicine) to this article from American Thinker; Why the Barack Obama Birth Certificate Issue Is Legitimate

What about the legal team that is keeping AKA OBAMA’s college records hidden? Several people probably know what they are hiding. The best guess as to what is so secret isn’t likely to be bad grades. More likely his admission papers will say he was a foreign student, or that he was receiving financial aid as a foreign student. How many people do you estimate already know what is on AKA OBAMA’s college documents? Those records were handled routinely for more than 20 years. How many personnel in the registrar’s offices of Occidental College, Columbia University, and Harvard University have seen AKA OBAMA’s records and know what is in them? How many of those people would be willing to talk about it, or maybe even “leak” just one sheet of paper that would put even more cracks in AKA OBAMA’s mirror? Is that number likely to be zero?

Do you think that AKA OBAMA worries about how many people know something that could destroy his career? Fear of being “found out” is an obsession for NPD types.So far we have only talked about the original birth certificate, supposedly locked up in Hawaii, and AKA OBAMA’s draft and college records. Already the potential sources for leaks are numerous. And you can bet that AKA OBAMA and his lawyers are concerned about many more possible leaks than these.

There is a long list of vulnerability points for leaks, and there is a story behind every one of them:

Soetoro adoption records –

Punahou (Indonesia) School records –

Passports records –

Any INS (Immigration & Naturalization Services) or port of entry documentation which may have been generated in his infancy or childhood –

Selective Service Registration (Released, but is possibly an altered document) –

Harvard Law Review articles (None, maybe 1, not signed) –

University of Chicago scholarly articles (None) –

Law practice client list –

Illinois State Senate records (locked up to prohibit public view) –

llinois State Senate schedule (Lost. All other Illinois State Senators’ records are intact) –

Baptism certificate –

Medical records -

International columnist Mark S. McGrew* sums it up succinctly: “With all of Obama’s different names, with his documented long term relations to convicted criminals, with his active efforts to prohibit us from knowing where he was born, with his active efforts to keep us from seeing his credentials, with his documented registration to practice law, professing to have only one name, with his being an ex-attorney not authorized to practice law, but representing himself as such, with his non-existent “Office of The President Elect,” with the dozen or so lawsuits against him to determine his citizenship status, with the various promises he made to voters and on which he has since reneged, with his documented lack of respect to America, with his refusal to salute the American flag with others on stage or even to stand at attention, and his other disrespectful actions, with his many millions of dollars in campaign funds suspected to be from foreign sources, with campaign donations accepted from possible terrorists groups, . . . Obama has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that he can not in any way, shape or form be trusted.”

* Mark S. McGrew frequently writes for Pravda and other foreign media outlets, because of the lack of free press in the United States.

I would ask the reader to accept the premise that there are many potential leaks from those things that are being kept hidden by a man who promised transparency in government.

But there are other problems from sources that are not hidden.

AKA OBAMA himself has made it known that his father was from Kenya.We know that records indicate that AKA OBAMA’s biological father was Barack Obama Sr, a Kenyan native, and a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s offspring. We know that the geographical location of AKA OBAMA’s birth is not considered by British law. Who the father was determines citizenship, not where you are born. Had AKA OBAMA been born in Tokyo or Texas he would still be a citizen of the United Kingdom under The British Nationality Act. A similar practice governs who is considered a citizen in several countries. Judaism is matrilineal, meaning that your mother’ lineage determines whether you are a Jew. That is why Jews from all over the world can claim Israeli citizenship.

British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.

In other words, at the time of his birth, AKA OBAMA might have been a U.S. citizen (by virtue of his allegedly being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC.Obama’s British citizenship was short-lived. On Dec. 12, 1963, Kenya formally gained its independence from the United Kingdom. Chapter VI, Section 87 of the Kenyan Constitution specifies that:

1. Every person who, having been born in Kenya is, on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963…

2. Every person who, having been born outside Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall, if his father becomes, or would but for his death have become, a citizen of Kenya by virtue of subsection (1), becomes a citizen of Kenya on the 12th of December, 1963.

As a citizen of the UKC who was born in Kenya, Obama’s father automatically received Kenyan citizenship via subsection (1). So given that Obama qualified for citizen of the UKC status at birth and given that Obama’s father became a Kenyan citizen via subsection (1), it follows that Obama did in fact have Kenyan citizenship after 1963.

So we know for sure that, if OBAMA Sr is in fact his legal father, then AKA OBAMA was a citizen of the United Kingdom and then Kenya. Given all the efforts to keep his birth certificate hidden, it is reasonable to assume that he is not a citizen of the United States, but even if he were born in downtown Denver he would still have triple citizenship, and is thus ineligible to hold the office of President.

There is a similar problem with AKA OBAMA’s possible Indonesian citizenship. School records have surfaced that clearly indicate AKA OBAMA being listed as a “Muslim” with “Indonesian” citizenship.

So AKA OBAMA has been a citizen of the UK, Kenya, and there are inconclusive documents indicating that he was also a citizen of Indonesia. The missing birth certificate may be a false clue that leads away from the big crime. Even if Obama were born in Hawaii* he would still be ineligible to serve as President because of his dual (perhaps triple) citizenship.

*not likely, given the effort expended to keep the information about his birth a secret. By AKA OBAMA’s and Bob Bauer, AKA OBAMA’s Lead Lawyer’s, own reports, AKA OBAMA has spent Six Hundred and Eighty Eight Thousand Dollars ($688,000.00) on legal fees defending against lawsuits claiming that he is not eligible. Why would AKA OBAMA spend that much money to hide a $10 Birth Certificate?

Pay attention to this next quoted paragraph:

“Don’t be distracted by the birth certificate and Indonesian issues. They are irrelevant to Senator Obama’s ineligibility to be President. Since Barack Obama’s father was a Citizen of Kenya, and therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of Senator Obama’s birth, then Senator Obama was a British Citizen “at birth,” just like the Framers of the Constitution, and therefore, even if he were to produce an original birth certificate proving he were born on US soil, he still wouldn’t be eligible to be President.” Leo C. Donofrio

The facts are clear, and the law is clear. All it will take is for a judge to issue a ruling. Do you think AKA OBAMA and his lawyers fret about this? They certainly are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to fight this issue. So far, no court or judge has issued a ruling on the merits of any legal case against AKA OBAMA. Cases have been dismissed on legal technicalities, but no actual case has yet been heard.There are other potential leaks that come from AKA OBAMA’s international history. If Obama was born in Kenya, there should be a record of that birth in UK records. There are probably people in England and Kenya who already have information that would put cracks in AKA OBAMA’s distorted reflection of himself, and there is other information that can be mined from archives. The same is true for Indonesia.

In the unlikely outcome that none of the people talk, and none of the documents surface, would AKA OBAMA than be free of obsessive fear of being found out? No, even if none of his secrets are revealed and none of his lies are exposed, he will continue to remain vulnerable.

Because of the way AKA OBAMA ran his campaign; donations from Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse, donations from illegal foreign sources, and ACORN’s crimes; More than half the voter registrations turned in by ACORN canvassers during the last election were not valid, according to testimony to be presented before a House Judiciary subcommittee, etc, AKA Obama is subject to criminal violations of the Internal Revenue Code, federal campaign finance laws, and laws against voter registration fraud, according to a memo by Cleta Mitchell, co-chairman of the Republican National Lawyers Association. In spite of all this Congressional Democrats still want the group to be eligible for federal money.

You may have noticed that the usual role of the media in ferreting out high jinks in high places has not been mentioned. There is no “All the President’s Men” movie in the making. No one is being considered for a Pulitzer Prize for investigating AKA OBAMA. Is journalism dead in America? Well no, not quite.Somebody, a major news outlet executive, has done the Pulitzer research.

On his To The Point News website, Dr. Jack Wheeler said he will “Let the source of the information reveal it, in his own time. “…the details of what he told me are for him to reveal when he chooses, not me. I can tell you it is OMG wild.”

So get ready folks. One of these days I will be asking all of you AKA Obama fans to, “All together now, say OMG!”

My conclusion: Obama will be indicted and charged very soon. Keeping in mind that the role of a grand jury is to determine if enough evidence exists to refer a case to the courts for trial, can any objective person review information like that presented above and reject the premise that this case needs to be referred to the courts for prosecution?

It is very likely that the American Grand Jury effort will result in an indictment by a conventionally impaneled Grand Jury.

The American Grand Jury was designed in a unique and very creative manner. Bob Campbell, the Founder of American Grand Jury, wanted to find a way to impanel a grand jury that was convenient, available free of charge to all citizens, and had maximum impact. He came up with a brilliant plan!

From across the nation citizens can collectively examine and discuss the evidence, make a decision whether to indict, and then act with the full power of the U.S. Constitution to present the indictment to local, state and federal authorities. American Grand Jury will also empower individual representatives to act on behalf of American Grand Jury Members and make presentments of evidence to jurisdictions anywhere in the United States. These representatives will be sworn in and subject to an oath similar to the American Grand Jury Members, and will then be authorized to make presentments to such authorities as Sheriffs, County, State and Federal Prosecutors.Even if the American Grand Jury were ignored, and deemed legally impotent, we can still expect a powerfully awakening increase in awareness and outrage on the part of the citizens. There are many potencies beyond the legal system.

However, it is highly unlikely that not even one jurisdiction will take action on the indictment. All we need is one jurisdiction to order “Discovery.” The case against AKA OBAMA is unique because it will be over in the Discovery phase, as the first step in a criminal complaint. The goal of the project is to discover what AKA OBAMA doesn’t want us to know, and why he doesn’t want us to know it. Our goal will be achieved without a trial.

Our goal is to present indictments in every jurisdiction of the union;
50 States
3,007 entities named “County”

16 Boroughs in Alaska11 Census Areas in Alaska (for areas not organized into Boroughs by the State)

64 Parishes in Louisiana

42 Independent Cities (1 in Maryland, 1 in Missouri, 1 in Nevada, and the remainder in Virginia)1 District – the Federal District or District of Columbia.

For a total of 3,191 opportunities to bring criminal charges against offending politicians.

Even if an independently convened grand jury is mistakenly seen as merely people assembling to exercise their Constitutional right to “redress their grievances,” that is no small thing. Hundreds of people in such “assemblies” will be examining evidence and presenting the results of their investigation to appropriate county, state, and federal authorities, some of whom will almost certainly form more conventional Grand Juries to indict AKA OBAMA. Can one honestly surmise that there is not one prosecutor or judge in the entire nation who questions AKA OBAMA’s eligibility to be President?

Once the American Grand Jury presentments are made, it is likely that many prosecutors and judges will want a copy of the evidence.The American Grand Jury organization with which I am affiliated is using recognized expert witnesses with a long professional history of forensic testimony. The guiding principles for the project are the usual protocols of epistemology, scientific methodology, and rules of evidence. Any prosecutor or judge who ignores such evidence and testimony is at risk of being seen as acquiescent.

 

 

Letter to the President of the United States

 

 

WOW!!!  This lady is right on the money, and she’s not afraid to take credit for it either!!  She left her name and phone number at the end!

 
This letter you are about to read was written by a 4th grade teacher this past week. She even gave the world her telephone and fax numbers. We are in dire need of more true American citizens who are proud of OUR United States of America. WAKE UP AMERICA . . . please . . . before it is too late!

 

 April 27, 2009

 

 The White House

 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

 Washington , DC 20500

 

 Mr. Obama:

 

 I have had it with you and your administration, sir. Your conduct on your

 recent trip overseas has convinced me that you are not an adequate

 representative of the United States of America collectively or of me personally.

 You are so obsessed with appeasing the Europeans and the Muslim world that

 you have abdicated the responsibilities of the President of the United

 States of America.  You are responsible to the citizens of the United States.

 

 You are not responsible to the peoples of any other country on earth. I

 personally resent that you go around the world apologizing for the United

 States telling Europeans that we are arrogant and do not care about their

 status in the world. Sir, what do you think the First World War and the

 Second World War were all about if not the consideration of the peoples of

 Europe? Are you brain dead? What do you think the Marshall Plan was all about?

 

 Do you not understand or know the history of the 20th century? Where do you

 get off telling a Muslim country that the United States does not consider

 itself a Christian country? Have you not read the Declaration of

 Independence or the Constitution of the United States? This country was

 founded on Judeo-Christian ethics and the principles governing this country,

 at least until you came along, come directly from this heritage. Do you not

 understand this?

 

 Your bowing to the king of Saudi Arabia is an affront to all Americans.Our

 President does not bow down to anyone, let alone the king of Saudi Arabia.

 You don’t show Great Britain, our best and one of our oldest allies, the

 respect they deserve yet you bow down to the king of Saudi Arabia. How dare

 you, sir! How dare you!

 

 You can’t find the time to visit the graves of our greatest generation

 because you don’t want to offend the Germans but make time to visit a mosque

 in Turkey. You offended our dead and every veteran when you give the Germans

 more respect than the people who saved the German people from themselves.

 What’s the matter with you?

 

 I am convinced that you and the members of your administration have the

 historical and intellectual depth of a mud puddle and should be ashamed of

 yourselves, all of you. You are so self-righteously offended by the big

 bankers and the American automobile manufacturers yet do nothing about the

 real thieves in this situation, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Frank, Franklin Raines, Jamie

 Gorelic, the Fannie Mae bonuses, and the Freddie Mac bonuses. What do you

 intend to do about them? Anything? I seriously doubt it.

 

 What about the U.S. House members passing out $9.1 million in bonuses to

 their staff members — on top of the $2.5 million in automatic pay raises

 that lawmakers gave themselves? I understand the average House aide got a

 17% bonus. I took a 5% cut in my pay to save jobs with my employer.

 

 You haven’t said anything about that. Who authorized that? I surely didn’t!

 Executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will be receiving $210 million in

 bonuses over an eighteen-month period, that’s $45 million more than the AIG

 bonuses. In fact, Fannie and Freddie executives have already been awarded

 $51 million — not a bad take. Who authorized that and why haven’t you

 expressed your outrage at this group who are largely responsible for the

 economic mess we have right now.

 

 I resent that you take me and my fellow citizens as brain-dead and not

 caring about what you idiots do. We are watching what you are doing and we

 are getting increasingly fed up with all of you. I also want you to know

 that I personally find just about everything you do and say to be offensive

 to every one of my sensibilities.  I promise you that I will work tirelessly

 to see that you do not get a chance to spend two terms destroying my beautiful country.

 

 Sincerely,

 

 Every Real American

 

 

 

 Ms Kathleen Lyday

 Fourth Grade Teacher

 Grandview Elementary School

 11470 Hwy. C

 Hillsboro, MO 63050

 

- – - – - – - – - -

OK, I’ve heard enough, gimme my microphone!

Folks,

Just the other day I saw a blog and got an email about how the legislators in Oklahoma had stood up for once and passed several distasteful conservative values. They voted for a monument to the 10 commandments, verified gun carry rights, and banned the marriage of homosexuals. Now, they are under attack by the left, the ACLU, and others saying that Muslims need equality, anti-Christians, perverts and so forth. Let me very simply fix this. If you don’t like it, go somewhere else that your hokey vision of rights is acceptable. See, the founders wrote our laws based on Christianity, and said we should be tolerable of other religions, not acceptable. Rights were unalienable, of God, not of law. We had the right of free speech, the ability to call a spade a spade, and the ability to do it under the protection of American law that no one seems to understand – most of all, our own government.

The Oklahoma legislature must have studied the Constitution and figured out they had the right to make law that trumped federal law. By the way, for all morons that disagree with that, you might read the 10th amendment. The feds have no right to peek at me, gps me, take my guns, keep me from talking about them, invade my privacy, or take my property. None, nada, nil, any. Read the Constitution. The 5th says they may offer just compensation, not take, and even then the right of due process is owed. They forget that part, because they know you can’t afford the fight. So, when will we wake up? When will something knock us out of “our own little world” bubble enough that we finally challenge the authority of the government against the Constitution? Our founders guaranteed it, they fought for it, and they died for it.

Are we willing to do the same, or are we going to watch each other roll over and show the whites of our soft bellies? I keep watching all the Dems defend Obama. Give him a chance they say. Let me set another scenario for you. If Al Franken is appointed the winner in Wisconsin, the state that elected Jessie Ventura governor, so be ready, Obama has the White House, Congress, and with a swift appointment or two, the Supreme Court. That is NOT balance of power, that is an instant ticket to socialism. It is dangerous for either side to wield that kind of power.

Attend the tea parties; speak out about all this unfair spending, high taxes and crooked government. Our children are counting on us for their future, God expects that of you, and remember, WE, AMERICANS, were guaranteed our rights by the Constitution, not by barter, not by attrition, and not by threat. Other religions are welcome, but are not to be forced upon us, nor used against us. Liberalism is good in balance, but not as the rule, it will in its current form, make America a third world country.

I am not ready for that, I don’t wish it on your children or mine, and I will fight for balance and the Constitution as long as I have breath. I hope you will also do the same in every way that you can. You owe it to the founders who gave you the freedom to read and understand that you can. You have the obligation to answer the call.

Steve

It’s Starting, Can You Feel it?

The Party may just be starting!!!! Coming to a city near you soon.

And now, our Chief Justice…

Thank the Lord this woman has moxey.  After hearing that another liberal judge struck down Alan Keyes lawsuit on this in California, we can now see if our Chief Justice puts his money where his mouth is.

 

BORN IN THE USA?
Chief justice accepts ‘eligibility’ petition
Roberts agrees to read Obama docs, consider WND’s 330,000 signers

---

Posted: March 14, 2009
4:45 pm Eastern

By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts

A California attorney lobbying the U.S. Supreme Court for a review of Barack Obama’s qualifications to be president confronted the chief justice yesterday with legal briefs and a WND petition bearing names of over 325,000 people asking the court to rule on whether or not the sitting president fulfills the Constitution’s “natural-born citizen” clause.

According to Orly Taitz, the attorney who confronted Chief Justice John Roberts at a lecture at the University of Idaho, the judge promised before the gathered crowd that he would, indeed, read and review the briefs and petition.

“I addressed him in front of 800 people in the audience,” Taitz told WND, “including university officials, the president of the Idaho State Bar and the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Idaho, and in front of all them, [Roberts] promised to read my papers.”

Roberts was lecturing on Abraham Lincoln to approximately 1,200 attendees of the annual Bellwood Memorial Lecture Series at the Moscow

, Idaho, university. Roberts has been chief justice of the Supreme Court since his nomination by President George W. Bush and subsequent confirmation in 2005.

Earlier in the week, Taitz confronted Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who told her the issue of Obama’s eligibility, which has been raised before the Supreme Court at least four times but has yet to be given a single hearing, still lacked the votes of the required four justices in conference before it would be officially heard.

Taitz said, “I told Scalia that I was an attorney that filed Lightfoot v. Bowen that Chief Justice Roberts distributed for conference on Jan. 23 and now I represent nine state reps and 120 military officers, many of them high ranked, and I want to know if they will hear Quo Warranto and if they would hear it on original jurisdiction, if I bring Hawaii as an additional defendant to unseal the records and ascertain Obama’s legitimacy for presidency.”

The legal phrase Quo Warranto essentially means an explanation is being demanded for what authority Obama is using to act as president. An online constitutional resource says Quo Warranto “affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents.”

Where’s the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the “natural-born American” clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 325,000 others and sign up now!

“Tell me what to do, what can I do?” Taitz reports asking Scalia. “Those soldiers [her plaintiffs] can be court-martialed for asking a legitimate question, who is the president, is he legitimate?”

She says Scalia responded, “Bring the case, I’ll hear it, I don’t know about others.”

In Idaho, Taitz obtained the promise of one of the others, the chief justice, that he would read through the eligibility challenge, including the petition brought by WND readers.

As WND reported, Taitz is submitting a motion to the Supreme Court for re-hearing of Lightfoot v. Bowen, a case she is working on through her foundation Defend Our Freedoms, alleging some of her documentation may have been withheld from the justices by a court clerk.

Orly Taitz

She asserts docketing information about her case “was erased from the docket of the Supreme Court on January 21st, one day after the inauguration and two days before [the case was to be heard].”

At the lecture in Idaho, Taitz grabbed the attention of Justice Roberts by boldly addressing her allegation that a clerk had buried the case.

Taitz told WND that the forum rules required that those questioning Roberts announce their relationship to the University of Idaho and refrain from talking about cases currently before or likely to appear before the court.

“I said, ‘Justice Roberts, my name is Orly Taitz. I’m an attorney from California, and I got up at 3 o’clock in the middle of the night, flew and drove thousands of miles just to ask you a question. So please give me some leeway,’” Taitz told WND. “My question is, do you know there is illegal activity going on in the Supreme Court of the United States?”

According to Taitz, the room was stunned silent as she continued, “I have presented my case to you, and you personally agreed to hear this case in conference. But your clerk refused to forward a supplemental brief to you. He has hidden this brief from you. He refused to put it on the docket. Additionally, my case was erased from the docket one day after the Inauguration, two days before my case was to be heard.

“Outraged citizens and members of the media and state representatives are calling the Supreme Court, demanding to have the case reentered on the docket,” Taitz told Roberts.

Then she held up the WND petition and continued, “Moreover, here are the names of U.S. citizens who signed this petition and who sent individual letters to individual justices, including you, Justice Roberts, all of them demanding the same thing – that you hear my case in regards to Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility for presidency.”

According to Taitz, Roberts approached the microphone and said, “I see you have papers. I promise you I will read all your papers, I will review them. Please give them to my Secret Service and I will review all of them.”

Shortly thereafter, Taitz told WND, a Secret Service agent identified by his badge as Gilbert Shaw accepted two suitcases of documents and pledged to deliver them to Roberts.

Taitz reports the documents included four major sections:

• A motion for reconsideration of Lightfoot v. Bowen with all its supplemental briefs.

 

• The Quo Warranto Easterling et al v. Obama et al case.

 

• The WND petition, consisting of 3,300 pages of names – over 325,000 in all – of people demanding the Supreme Court hear the Obama eligibility case.

 

• A copy of a 164-page dossier sent to Attorney General Eric Holder detailing suspected criminal activity surrounding Obama and his supporters, also available on the Defend Our Freedoms website.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama’s status as a “natural born citizen.” The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama’s American mother, some suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Although Obama officials have told WND all such allegations are “garbage,” here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over Obama’s eligibility:

• New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn’t properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president.

 

• Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama which is under seal at the U.S. District Court level and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, (now dismissed) brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama.
• Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama’s dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.

 

• Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut’s secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.

 

• Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state’s 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case was dismissed by Judge Michael P. Kenny.
•  
• Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama’s vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.
• Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama’s eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama’s citizenship. His case was denied.
• In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.
• Also in Ohio, there was the Greenberg v. Brunner case which ended when the judge threatened to assess all case costs against the plaintiff.
• In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama’s citizenship. The case was denied.
• In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama’s birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia’s secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.

 

• California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.

In addition, other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions about Obama’s eligibility include:

• In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed.
• In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed.
• In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.
• In Washington, L. Charles Cohen vs. Obama.
• In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.

 

I am hooked on Stupid, cause Stupid’s hung on me….

Well, one of the 12 dwarfs is in the US Senate….Dopey.  Enter Mel Martinez with this stroke of brilliance:

A U.S. senator has suggested that voters have made Barack Obama eligible to occupy the Oval Office, whether or not he meets the constitutional mandate of being a “natural born” citizen.

The comments from Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., came in an e-mail sent to a constituent shortly after the election, which just now was forwarded to WND.

The constituent had asked about Martinez’s perspective on the issue on which WND and others have reported: claims made by dozens of lawsuits around the country that Obama might not meet the constitutional qualification for various reasons.

“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,” Martinez responded.

“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,” he wrote.  

Read the rest on wnd here:

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=90767

Please, help me understand why people who learn the English language can’t understand English words.  The Constitution is written in English.  We have a senator that thinks a vote trumps the document.  Please show these clowns to the door!  Woe to us….it’s time for a Tea Party.

 

Steve

More Heat from the States…can we say Tennessee!!!!

Thanks to State Representative Eric Swafford who stepped up to the plate for the Great State of Tennessee while Phil and company are preparing to slash everything by 25% unless they get their stimulus cut.  Look for another attempt at the state income tax and a raise in gas taxes that the Governor promised was coming.  I met Rep. Swafford on my last trip to legislative plaza, and I’d love to go back and shake his hand.  This story hit World Net Daily:

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

 

A new lawsuit is being prepared by a California attorney who already has four cases pending over the issue of President Obama’s eligibility to occupy to Oval Office, and this one will include a demand from state lawmakers who forward state funds to Washington for documentation of his qualifications.

Orly Taitz told WND today she’s preparing the complaint but is holding onto it and will file it shortly to give state legislators a chance to join the action as plaintiffs.

Four already have signed up, including state Rep. Eric Swafford of Tennessee, who agreed to be a plaintiff “for a Writ of Mandamus to obtain original birth certificate, immigration records, passports and other vital records for Barry Soetero aka Barack Hussein Obama.”

Taitz told WND the case also probably will include members of the military as plaintiffs, since both state lawmakers and military officers are obliged to follow orders from the president, and both have a need to know the orders are legitimate.

“In the military, those would be unlawful orders, and [following them] would subject the officers to courts-martial,” she said. “In the legislatures, they cannot follow any of his bills or orders … they don’t know who he is.

“As far as we know he is a foreign national … Why should state legislators send any funds from the state to a foreign national?” she said.

“While we are working on the complaint, I’m gathering support from different states,” said Taitz.

Her other cases now include one pending at the U.S. Supreme Court, another in Superior Court in California, a third in U.S. District Court in California and a fourth in Texas for which she’s awaiting a court response.

WND has reported on multiple legal challenges that have alleged Obama does not meet the “natural born citizen” clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, which reads, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

Some claim he was not born in Hawaii, as he insists, but in Kenya. Obama’s American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Where’s the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the “natural-born American” clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 235,000 others and sign up now!

Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Several details of Obama’s past have added twists to the question of his eligibility and citizenship, including his family’s move to Indonesia when he was a child and on what nation’s passport he traveled to Pakistan in the ’80s, as well as conflicting reports from Obama’s family about his place of birth.

WND reported just yesterday on a case that accuses Congress of failing to investigate President Obama’s birthplace before approving the Electoral College vote giving him the presidency.

It alleges unequal treatment because Congress investigated GOP candidate Sen. John McCain’s eligibility.

The lawsuit explains not only are there legitimate questions about Obama’s birth, and therefore eligibility, he might not even be a U.S. citizen at all.

“There exists a possibility that Obama could be an illegal alien,” the lawsuit said. “Obama has yet to adequately prove that he was born in the United States. [Further], Obama has publicly conceded that his father was born in Kenya and a British subject/citizen at the time of Obama’s birth which precluded Obama from gaining any U.S. citizenship from his father.”

Several of the legal cases – including those brought by Taitz, Cort Wrotnowski, Leo Donofrio and Philip Berg, already have been discussed in conference at the U.S. Supreme Court, which has failed to have a hearing on any of the merits involved.

Other cases remain active at lower court levels.

While Obama’s campaign team called the cases garbage, here is a partial listing and status update for several of the cases:

• Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania Democrat, demanded that the courts verify Obama’s original birth certificate and other documents proving his American citizenship. Berg’s latest appeal, requesting an injunction to stop the Electoral College from selecting the 44th president, was denied.
• Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama’s dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.
• Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut’s secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.
• Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state’s 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public’s support.
• Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama’s vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.
• Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama’s eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama’s citizenship. His case was denied.
• In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.
• In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama’s citizenship. The case was denied.
• In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama’s birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia’s secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.
• California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.

In addition, other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions about Obama’s eligibility include:

• In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed.
• In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed.
• In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.
• In Washington, L. Charles vs. Obama.
• In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.

WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi had gone to both Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama’s birth. But his research and discoveries only raised more questions.

The governor’s office in Hawaii said there is a valid certificate but rejected requests for access and left ambiguous its origin: Does the certificate on file with the Department of Health indicate a Hawaii birth or was it generated after the Obama family registered a Kenyan birth in Hawaii?

 

 

 

 

While you were sleeping….

Change, all I hear is change…what the heck is the change?  Three articles to post for you, and I’ll save you some TUMS:

The only Change Obama has brought to DC is now the corruption is bigger and bolder.

 

The List

First president not to attend The Inaugural Medal of Honor Ball
5 exectutive orders the first week in office. Including
* -allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States.
* – Scrapping the Mexico City Policy that protected taxpayers from involvement in overseas abortions for eight years. Obama will send hundreds of millions of dollars to groups that aggressively promote abortions on a worldwide scale.
Insults China
First interview, with foreign news outlet- for Muslims
Talks about his muslim family
Picks fight with Limbaugh
Won’t take question from press
Allows to FDA approve first human embryonic stem cell safety trial (3 days after Pres. Bush left)
Excludes any compromise with GOP on Stimulus bill Massive pork in stimulus bill
5% of stimulus bill to actually go to infrastructure
Offers to negotiate directly with Iran
Puts 5 millionairs on his cabinet
Makes a tax cheat the Sec. of the Treasury
Bombs Pakistan
Argues with the Pope on abortion
Signed the SCHIP bill, that gives health care to illegals
Won’t allow a video of his retaking of the oath of office
Ordered the closure of Gitmo
Halts all pending Bush regulations

Second week:

Appoints extremist Samantha Powers to head foreign policy team
Secret nuke talks with Iran/Syria
Appoints tax cheat for commerce secretary
Illegal alien aunt, granted a “stay” of deportation Daschle the tax cheat/lobbiest proposed as secretary for health care
Nancy Killefer for candidacy to be the first chief performance officer for federal government fails to pay household help taxes …withdrawn
Obama brings the U.S. Census Bureau under White House jurisdiction under protest from Republican lawmakers
12 lobbyists (or more) appointed to high gov’t positions within the first 14 days of his administration (up to 17 by another source)
Administration demands defense cuts of 10% during wartime
Obama envoy George Mitchell tells Palistinians ” they believe can extract from Israel concessions reaching “much further” than during talks held under the previous administration
The European Union warns the US yesterday against plunging the world into depression by adopting Obama’s “Buy American” policy, intensifying fears of a trade war Obama immediately backs down from policy
After stating her priority would be “mum-in-chief”, Michelle Obama goes on listening tour and then makes political speeches with her husband not yet one month in office…
George Mitchell resigns from a Saudi Lobbying firm, two weeks into his appointment as “Special Middle East Envoy”
Obama administration says it will cancel 77 drilling leases near Utah parks
Ogden, President Obama’s pick for deputy attorney general, used to represent Playboy
Steven Chu, Obama’s secretary of energy (not a climatologist) states: California’s farms and vineyards could vanish by the end of the century, and its major cities could be in jeopardy, if Americans do not act to slow the advance of global warming
Obama names “most fined” Washington State bureaucrat Ron Simms to the #2 position in HUD
Hilda Solis, Obama’s pick for labor secretary’s husband is found to be a tax cheat just before the confirmation vote
Directed military prosecutors to revoked charges pending against mastermind of USS Cole bombing: Al Nashiri
Adding insult to injury: speaks to families of USS Cole dead, after decision to free Al Nashiri- not before

Third week in office

Obama changes the setup of the National Security Councel by executive order
Shauna Daly, professional “dirt digger” hired as “White House councel research director”
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel got free housing from House rep (D) Rosa DeLauro for 5 years . DeLauro is married to Stan Greenberg; a pollster (Quinlin Rosner Research) with lucrative contracts from both that representatives.

Stay tuned for more “change”

Senate support builds for ‘Fairness Doctrine’
Harkin accused of trying to ’squelch’ 1st Amendment

---

Posted: February 11, 2009
11:30 pm Eastern 

Sen. Tom Harkin with Senate President Harry Reid

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, has become the second U.S. senator in a week to endorse a return to the ideas behind the so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” a policy abandoned under President Reagan in 1987 as unnecessary and unconstitutional.

The policy, originally introduced in 1949, required that radio and television stations give equal time to conservative and liberal opinions on political issues under the threat of penalties or license revocation.

According to Politico.com, Harkin told radio host and WND columnist Bill Press, “We gotta get the Fairness Doctrine back in law again.”

WND reported just days earlier when Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., told Press, “I think it’s absolutely time to pass a standard. Now, whether it’s called the Fairness Standard, whether it’s called something else – I absolutely think it’s time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves.”

Stabenow’s husband, Tom Athans, was executive vice president of the left-leaning talk radio network Air America. He left the network in 2006, when it filed for bankruptcy, and co-founded the TalkUSA Radio Network.

According to the show transcript, Harkin told Press:

“Well, anytime – just let me know Bill. I love being with you, and thanks again for all you do to get the truth and the facts out there. By the way, I read your Op-Ed in the Washington Post the other day. I ripped it out, I took it into my office and said ‘there you go, we gotta get the Fairness Doctrine back in law again.’”

Press responded: “Alright, well good for you. You know, we gotta work on that, because they are just shutting down progressive talk from one city after another. All we want is, you know, some balance on the airwaves, that’s all. You know, we’re not going to take any of the conservative voices off the airwaves, but just make sure that there are a few progressives and liberals out there, right?”

“Exactly, and that’s why we need the fair – that’s why we need the Fairness Doctrine back,” Harkin said.

His statements prompted an immediate response from Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, a co-sponsor of the Broadcasters Freedom Act, which would keep the Federal Communications Commission from reinstating the “Fairness Doctrine.”

“It is incredible that in today’s modern media age, where information is easily accessible in so many different forms, Tom Harkin wants to squelch your First Amendment rights in favor of Chinese-style censorship,” King said.

“Does Rush Limbaugh intimidate Senator Harkin so much that he wants to ration free speech? Allowing the government, run by liberals, to control broadcast journalism and determine what on-air content is and is not ‘fair’ will stifle our free speech and hurt our free flow of information,” he said.

Michael Calderone at Politico reported Press told him he’s hoping for congressional hearings on the “accountability” for radio stations, and “whether stations are honoring the language in their public licenses.”

Contributors to the Politico forum were incensed:

• “Liberal talk radio can’t pay their way. Companies will not sponsor programs that have no listeners.”
• “Memo to liberal: Get your own radio audience. Is anything more pathetic then (sic) passing a law forcing people to listen to your crap?”
• “Seems like it’s time for a new Cabinet post – Minister of Truth! War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is Strength Obama is the Messiah.”
• “No one is ’shutting down’ liberal talk radio. They are going out of business because advertisers do not want to spend money on shows that no one listens to.”
• “There are plenty of opportunities for liberal talk. Is it conservative talk’s fault that no one listens to their drivel?”

L. Brent Bozell, president of the Media Research Center, said Harkin can be added “to an ever growing laundry list of liberal censors that seek to silence free speech by shutting down conservative talk radio.”

“There are some liberals in the media that insist the fear of a return of the Censorship Doctrine is an imaginary one that exists only in the heads of paranoid conservatives. Meanwhile, one liberal leader after another publicly states his or her intent to bring it back,” he said.

Stabenow had said: “I think it’s absolutely time to pass a standard. Now, whether it’s called the Fairness Standard, whether it’s called something else – I absolutely think it’s time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves. I mean, our new president has talked rightly about accountability and transparency. You know, that we all have to step up and be responsible. And, I think in this case, there needs to be some accountability and standards put in place.”

Asked by Press if she could be counted on to push for hearings in the Senate this year “to bring these (radio station) owners in and hold them accountable,” Stabenow replied: “I have already had some discussions with colleagues and, you know, I feel like that’s gonna happen. Yep.”

Meanwhile, other Democratic legislators have tried to claim talk about a reintroduction of the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” is merely conspiracy-mongering by right-wing talk radio and its partisan cheerleaders.

But other Democrats in the Senate and House – and even a few Republicans – have made no secret of their support for such legislation.

“For many, many years, we operated under a Fairness Doctrine in this country,” Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., told Albuquerque radio station KKOB last year. “I think the country was well-served. I think the public discussion was at a higher level and more intelligent in those days than it has become since.”

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., told WYNC’s Bryan Lehrer Show in 2007, “I think the Fairness Doctrine ought to be there and I also think equal time doctrine ought to come back.”

Last June, John Gizzi reported in Human Events a conversation with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., in which he asked her if she personally supported revival of the “Fairness Doctrine.”

“Yes,” Pelosi answered.

And as recently as December, Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif. – who serves on the Telecommunications and Internet Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee – told the Palo Alto Daily Post she still believes in the “Fairness Doctrine” and will work on bringing it back.

“It should and will affect everyone,” Eshoo pledged.

Obama’s press secretary, Robert Gibbs, has said, “Sen. Obama does not support reimposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters. He considers this debate to be a distraction from the conversation we should be having about opening up the airwaves and modern communications to as many diverse viewpoints as possible.”

But the debate heated up again recently when Obama singled out Rush Limbaugh, the king of talk radio, for criticism: “You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.”

FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell, a Bush appointee whose term runs through June, however, warned that Democrats may be adopting a stealthier approach to shutting down conservatives on talk radio.

In a speech to the Media Institute in Washington last week, Multichannel News reports, McDowell suggested there are efforts to implement the controversial policy without using the red-flagged “Fairness Doctrine” label.

“That’s just Marketing 101,” McDowell explained. “If your brand is controversial, make it a new brand.”

Sign the petition here.

Eligibility issue: McCain checked but not Obama
Lawsuit contends Congress failed to qualify Democrat for Oval Office

---

Posted: February 10, 2009
9:09 pm Eastern 

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

 

A lawsuit that accuses Congress of failing to investigate President Obama’s birthplace before approving the Electoral College vote giving him the presidency has been amended to include additional claims of rights violations, including unequal treatment, because Congress did such an investigation into GOP candidate Sen. John McCain.

That word comes from Mario Apuzzo, the lawyer handling the case on which WND previously has reported.

The case raises many of the same arguments as dozens of other cases that have flooded into courtrooms around the nation since the November election.

The case was brought by Apuzzo on behalf of Charles F. Kerchner Jr., Lowell T. Patterson, Darrell James Lenormand and Donald H. Nelson Jr. It names as defendants Barack Hussein Obama II, the U.S., Congress, the Senate, House of Representatives and former Vice President Dick Cheney along with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Apuzzo told WND that Congress last year raised the issue of whether McCain was a “natural born” citizen, a requirement set out in the U.S. Constitution for the president, because of his birth to U.S. citizens in the Panama Canal Zone.

According to a report in the Washington Post, the Senate unanimously declared McCain to be a “natural born” citizen, meeting the demand of Article 2 of the Constitution, which states, “no person except a natural born citizen … shall be eligible to the office of president.”

The report, however, pointed out that such a statement was opinion only, and the constitutional question actually isn’t so simple. It quoted Catholic University associate law professor Sarah Duggin saying the document is ambiguous.

“Ultimately there has never been any real resolution of this issue. Congress cannot legislatively change the meaning of the Constitution,” she told the newspaper, saying a constitutional amendment or a U.S. Supreme Court ruling would be the way to reach a determination.

However, even though his clients wrote to Congress requesting a similar review of Obama’s birthplace, they were refused.

“The question is: Why do you do it for McCain, but not Obama,” Apuzzo told WND.

More specifically, those who doubted McCain’s eligibility had an opportunity for a review but not those who doubt Obama.

That violates a liberty right for his clients, he said, because as members of a republic, they have a right to know that their president is legitimate.

“What I’m arguing is that Congress and President Obama have violated my clients’ due process under the 5th Amendment [of the U.S. Constitution],” Apuzzo said.

Already; Congress held a responsibility to make certain Obama is qualified for the post, he alleges. And the public outcry, evidenced by the dozens of lawsuits over the issue, should have prompted due diligence on the part of members of Congress, he said.

Obama, meanwhile, has refused to hand over “sufficient documents” to verify his “natural born” status, Apuzzo said.

“We’re not a monarchy,” Apuzzo said, “People have a right to know.”

He said his case in U.S. District Court in New Jersey is at the point where the court notices about the case are being distributed.

He said the fact Obama already has been inaugurated changes nothing in his case.

“Before that, everything really was premature,” he said. “He has a right to run for office. But when you down to the nitty gritty, he still has to qualify for the position.”

He said the Constitution specifically raises the scenario of a president who has been chosen for office but has failed to qualify.

“Even though you ran, everybody loves you, you still have got to qualify under the Constitution,” Apuzzo said.

Further, the lawsuit explains, not only are there legitimate questions about Obama’s birth, and therefore eligibility, he might not even be a U.S. citizen at all.

“There exists a possibility that Obama could be an illegal alien,” the lawsuit said. “Obama has yet to adequately prove that he was born in the United States. [Further], Obama has publicly conceded that his father was born in Kenya and a British subject/citizen at the time of Obama’s birth which precluded Obama from gaining any U.S. citizenship from his father.”

The lawsuits over Obama’s eligibility, in various ways, have alleged Obama does not meet the “natural born citizen” clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, which reads, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

Some of the legal challenges have alleged Obama was not born in Hawaii, as he insists, but in Kenya. Obama’s American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Several details of Obama’s past have added twists to the question of his eligibility and citizenship, including his family’s move to Indonesia when he was a child and on what nation’s passport he traveled to Pakistan in the ’80s, as well as conflicting reports from Obama’s family about his place of birth.

Apuzzo told WND the biggest reason to investigate further is the fact that Obama has refused to allow public release of a signed “vault” copy of his original birth certificate.

Several of the legal cases – including those brought by Orly Taitz, Cort Wrotnowski, Leo Donofrio and Philip Berg, already have been discussed in conference at the U.S. Supreme Court, which has failed to have a hearing on any of the merits involved.

Taitz, in fact, is requesting information from the Supreme Court about a meeting eight of its justices held with Obama, a defendant in her case, before the justices reviewed the issues of the case in a private conference.

Several of the cases still remain active at lower court levels, from which emergency requests to the high court were launched.

“I know that Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally qualified natural born citizen and is ineligible to assume the office of president of the United States,” Berg said in a statement on his ObamaCrimes.com website.

“Obama knows he is not ‘natural born’ as he knows where he was born and he knows he was adopted in Indonesia; Obama is an attorney, Harvard Law grad who taught Constitutional law; Obama knows his candidacy is the largest ‘hoax’ attempted on the citizens of the United States in over 200 years; Obama places our Constitution in a ‘crisis’ situation; and Obama is in a situation where he can be blackmailed by leaders around the world who know Obama is not qualified,” Berg’s statement continued.

While Obama’s campaign team called the cases garbage, here is a partial listing and status update for several of the cases:

• Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania Democrat, demanded that the courts verify Obama’s original birth certificate and other documents proving his American citizenship. Berg’s latest appeal, requesting an injunction to stop the Electoral College from selecting the 44th president, was denied.
• Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama’s dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.
• Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut’s secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.
• Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state’s 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public’s support.
• Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama’s vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.
• Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama’s eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama’s citizenship. His case was denied.
• In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.
• In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama’s citizenship. The case was denied.
• In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama’s birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia’s secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.
• California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.

In addition, other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions about Obama’s eligibility include:

• In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed.
• In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed.
• In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.
• In Washington, L. Charles vs. Obama.
• In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.

WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi had gone to both Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama’s birth. But his research and discoveries only raised more questions.

The governor’s office in Hawaii said there is a valid certificate but rejected requests for access and left ambiguous its origin: Does the certificate on file with the Department of Health indicate a Hawaii birth or was it generated after the Obama family registered a Kenyan birth in Hawaii?

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Congress now sued over Obama’s Citizenship

We haven’t had a chance to do much blogging because of the weather, as we lost power and internet service for a while.  I hope you and your family are safe and warm.  It’s amazing how much has happened in the week or so since we’ve been on line.  Seem’s O is worried about his financial legacy.  He should be worried more if a few ‘pub’s get their hands on  this little sweetie:

Posted: January 31, 2009
12:00 am Eastern

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A new lawsuit is challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president, and this one targets Congress as a defendant for its “failure” to uphold the constitutional demand to make sure Obama qualified before approving the Electoral College vote that actually designated him as the occupant of the Oval Office.

The new case raises many of the same arguments as dozens of other cases that have flooded into courtrooms around the nation since the November election.

It is being brought on behalf of Charles F. Kerchner Jr., Lowell T. Patterson, Darrell James Lenormand and Donald H. Nelson Jr. and names as defendants Barack Hussein Obama II, the U.S., Congress, the Senate, House of Representatives and former Vice President Dick Cheney along with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Where’s the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the “natural-born American” clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 193,000 others and sign up now!

As WND has reported, dozens of lawsuits have been filed over Obama’s eligibility to assume the office of the president. Many have been dismissed while others remain pending.

The cases, in various ways, have alleged Obama does not meet the “natural born citizen” clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, which reads, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

Some of the legal challenges have alleged Obama was not born in Hawaii, as he insists, but in Kenya. Obama’s American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Several details of Obama’s past have added twists to the question of his eligibility and citizenship, including his family’s move to Indonesia when he was a child, his travel to Pakistan in the ’80s when such travel was forbidden to American citizens and conflicting reports from Obama’s family about his place of birth.
Perhaps the most perplexing detail, however, has been Obama’s refusal to allow the public release of a signed “vault” copy of his original birth certificate.

The new case was launched in New Jersey, and focuses on the alleged failure in Congress to follow the Constitution.

That document, the lawsuit states, “provides that Congress must fully qualify the candidate ‘elected’ by the Electoral College Electors.”

In provides, the lawsuit said, “If the president-elect shall have failed to qualify, then the vice president elect shall act as president until a president shall have qualified.”

“There existed significant public doubt and grievances from plaintiffs and other concerned Americans regarding Obama’s eligibility to be president and defendants had the sworn duty to protect and preserve the Constitution and specifically under the 20th Amendment, Section 3, a Constitutional obligation to confirm whether Obama, once the electors elected him, was qualified.”

“Congress is the elected representative of the American people and the people speak and act through them,” the lawsuit said.

The defendants “violated” the 20th Amendment by failing to assure that Obama meets the eligibility requirements,” the lawsuit said.

In the Russian publication Pravda, commentator Mark S. McGrew addressed the subject:

“The United States Congress is required, under the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, to count the Electoral College votes for president and vice president, ask if any member of Congress objects to the count and hear that Congressman’s objection. This is under Title 3, Chapter 1, Section 15, ‘Upon such reading of any such certificate of paper, the president of the Senate shall call for objections, if any,’” he wrote.

Several of the cases – including those brought by Orly Taitz, Cort Wrotnowski, Leo Donofrio and Philip Berg, already have been heard in conference at the U.S. Supreme Court, which has failed to have a hearing on any of the merits involved.

Taitz, in fact, is requesting information from the Supreme Court about a meeting eight of its justices held with Obama, a defendant in her case, before the justices reviewed the issues of the case in a private conference.

Several of the cases not scheduled for hearings at the Supreme Court still remain active at lower court levels, from which emergency requests to the high court were launched.

“I know that Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally qualified natural born citizen and is ineligible to assume the office of president of the United States,” Berg said in a statement on his ObamaCrimes.com website.

“Obama knows he is not ‘natural born’ as he knows where he was born and he knows he was adopted in Indonesia; Obama is an attorney, Harvard Law grad who taught Constitutional law; Obama knows his candidacy is the largest ‘hoax’ attempted on the citizens of the United States in over 200 years; Obama places our Constitution in a ‘crisis’ situation; and Obama is in a situation where he can be blackmailed by leaders around the world who know Obama is not qualified,” Berg’s statement continued.

A partial listing and status update for several of the cases surrounding Obama’s eligibility to serve as president is below:

    * Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania Democrat, demanded that the courts verify Obama’s original birth certificate and other documents proving his American citizenship. Berg’s latest appeal, requesting an injunction to stop the Electoral College from selecting the 44th president, was denied.

    * Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama’s dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.

    * Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut’s secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.

    * Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state’s 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public’s support.

    * Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama’s vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.

    * Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama’s eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama’s citizenship. His case was denied.

    * In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.

    * In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama’s citizenship. The case was denied.

    * In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama’s birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia’s secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.

    * California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.

Private investigator Douglas Hagmann of HomelandSecurityUS.com reported earlier he found 13 cases challenging Obama’s eligibility still active or semi-active.

In addition, other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions about Obama’s eligibility include:

    * In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed.

    * In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed.

    * In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.

    * In Washington, L. Charles vs. Obama.

    * In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.

WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi had gone to both Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama’s birth. But his research and discoveries only raised more questions.

The biggest question was why, if a Hawaii birth certificate exists as his campaign has stated, Obama hasn’t simply ordered it made available to settle the rumors.

The governor’s office in Hawaii said there is a valid certificate but rejected requests for access and left ambiguous its origin: Does the certificate on file with the Department of Health indicate a Hawaii birth or was it generated after the Obama family registered a Kenyan birth in Hawaii?

Obama’s half-sister, Maya Soetoro, has named two different Hawaii hospitals where Obama could have been born. There have been other allegations that Obama actually was born in Kenya during a time when his father was a British subject. A one point a Kenyan ambassador said Obama’s birth place in Kenya already was recognized and honored.

Strike 2, Obama 2, Constitution 0

OK, for all you doubting Thomases, the birth certificate that is supposedly real, look at the very last line.  We’re up against the wall with an incoming leader who wants to change our Constitution now.  I am highlighting some of the really important stuff.  Prepare yourself for the NEW WORLD ORDER!Read and weep:

Monday, December 08, 2008

---

WorldNetDaily
President-elect would seek changes in Supreme Court
‘Constitution a living, breathing document and more justices have to understand that’

---

Posted: December 05, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

 

---

WorldNetDaily

President-elect Barack Obama believes the U.S. Constitution needs to be interpreted through the lens of current events and the U.S. Supreme Court needs to include empathy for the plight of minorities in its opinions, a new report has found.

The issues are raised in Fox News report in which Obama staff members affirm the Democrat’s goals. WND also reported Obama believes the Constitution is flawed, because it does not mandate redistribution of wealth, and he says the Supreme Court should have intervened years ago to accomplish that.

Fox News noted four of the Supreme Court justices are in their 70s, and Justice John Paul Stevens now is 88, so Obama is expected to leave a major footprint on the makeup of the court through possible appointments in the coming years.

Obama has stated repeatedly his desire for empathetic judges who “understand” the plight of minorities.

(Story continues below)

 

In a 2007 speech to Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider, he said, “We need somebody who’s got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that’s the criteria by which I’m going to be selecting my judges.”

Obama has committed himself to respecting the Constitution, but he said the founding document must be interpreted in the context of current affairs and events.

Melody Barnes, a senior domestic policy adviser to the Obama campaign, said in the Fox News report, “His view is that our society isn’t static and the law isn’t static as well. That the Constitution is a living and breathing document and that the law and the justices who interpret it have to understand that.”

Obama has criticized Justice Clarence Thomas, who is on the more conservative side of the philosophical spectrum in the Supreme Court, as not a strong jurist or legal thinker.

And Obama voted against both Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, two appointees of President Bush who vote with Thomas on many issues.

Obama doesn’t support their vision of the Constitution, essentially as a document whose provisions still are controlling all aspects of U.S. law.

“There’s nothing wrong with voting against nominees who don’t appear to share a broader vision of what the Constitution is about,” he told the pro-abortion audience in 2007.

He even raised the topic during a campaign event at Pastor Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church, saying one of the most important jobs of the Supreme Court is to guard against “encroachment” on the separation of powers.

Obama has complained Roberts has given in to the White House too much while on the bench.

“I think he has been a little bit too … eager to give an administration … more power than I think the Constitution originally intended,” Obama said in the report.

Barnes told Fox News that Obama is looking for “empathy” on the part of justices.

As WND reported, Obama said in a 2001 radio interview said the Constitution is flawed in that it does not mandate or allow for redistribution of wealth.

Obama told Chicago’s public station WBEZ-FM that “redistributive change” is needed, pointing to what he regarded as a failure of the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren in its rulings on civil rights issues in the 1960s.

The Warren court, he said, failed to “break free from the essential constraints” in the U.S. Constitution and launch a major redistribution of wealth. But Obama, then an Illinois state lawmaker, said the legislative branch of government, rather than the courts, probably was the ideal avenue for accomplishing that goal.

In the 2001 interview, Obama said:

If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be OKBut, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.

And that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court-focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.

The video is available here:

In his top-rated national radio show, Rush Limbaugh reacted.

The Constitution, he said, “most certainly does spell out things it must do on your behalf. He understands it. He just doesn’t like it.”

“He’s talking about giving things to people,” Limbaugh said. “This is perverted. Some people call this radical. I call it perverted.

“To me, ladies and gentlemen, the Constitution is a gift from God. It’s not a disappointment; it’s a blessing,” he said.

WND also has reported an associate at a Chicago law firm whose partner served on a finance committee for Obama has advocated simply abandoning the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that a president be a “natural-born” citizen.

The paper was written in 2006 by Sarah Herlihy, just two years after Obama had won a landslide election in Illinois to the U.S. Senate. Herlihy is listed as an associate at the Chicago firm of Kirkland & Ellis. A partner in the same firm, Bruce I. Ettelson, cites his membership on the finance committees for both  Obama and Sen. Richard Durbin on the corporate website.

The article by Herlihy is available online under law review articles from Kent University.

The issue of Obama’s own eligibility is the subject of nearly two dozen court cases in recent weeks, including at least two that have gone to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Herlihy’s published paper reveals that the requirement likely was considered in a negative light by organizations linked to Obama in the months before he announced in 2007 his candidacy for the presidency.

NOW, THE BEST QUOTE OF ALL!

“The natural born citizen requirement in Article II of the United States Constitution has been called the ’stupidest provision’ in the Constitution, ‘undecidedly un-American,’ ‘blatantly discriminatory,’ and the ‘Constitution’s worst provision,’” Herlihy begins in her introduction to the paper titled, “Amending the Natural Born Citizen Requirement: Globalization as the Impetus and the Obstacle.”