All Entries Tagged With: "united states"
Obama Bows to Emperor, First to Break Protocol in U.S. History
[webmaster: Would someone please help Obama to keep his head up. It's disgusting.]
Sunday, November 15, 2009 11:14 PM By: Daniel Ruddy
President Obama created a new presidential precedent when he bowed to the Japanese Emperor Akihito and Empress Michiko Saturday.
No president of the United States in the more than 230 years since the country was founded in 1776 had ever bowed to a member of royalty. That was until Barack Obama’s presidency.
In April, President Obama bowed to the Saudi king during the G-20 meeting. At the time, Obama’s deferential bow was somewhat obscured, and the White House insisted that the president simply had leaned forward to shake the king’s hand.
But the president’s recent demonstration of royal deference to the Japanese emperor and empress suggests his earlier action was no aberration.
What should we make of this? Is it trivial to worry about what on its face could easily be interpreted as nothing more than a polite gesture by our president to respect the culture of a country?
Obama speaks streams of vomit
This is a special report to the people and governments of the world. Obama DOES NOT represent the people of the United States. He is part of a small elite group of politicians and money mongers that are trying to control the world. He is a liar and a fraud. He has hidden his past and refuses to reveal who he really is. Do not believe anything he says. He will lie to make it convenient for himself and his groupees.
If you are Muslim and like his recent speech then please make him a citizen of your country and keep him there. He is one of you. He is not one of us. He has only one goal and that is to take over the world as a one world government. He will do it by lying and saying whatever is necessary.
He is like a 3 year old child that has no ability except to lie. His wife is the same way. No not believe either one of them. His ability to run the government of the United States is non-existent. He has no idea what he is going and neither does his buddies from Harvard. They are just playing games with the American people. His entire cabinet and officials are made up of criminals and crooks.
The American people are fed up with his life, attitude, and record. If he is allowed to continue on the path he is on then he will intentionally destroy the United States. Osama bin Laden will be proud of him. The American people will remove him from office and he will be remembered as a bad taste from a bad hangover.
(c) copyright 2009 Ray Holt
WCJ: Obama Not an American
Barack Hussein Obama obviously has something to hide. He obviously knows how to keep a secret when it comes to releasing his Birth Certificate; the one document that could bolster the argument that he is, in fact, eligible under Article 2, Section 1, of the United States Constitution to hold the office of President of the United States.
And yet, Barack Hussein Obama has no problem sharing information that SHOULD remain secret to the entire world and to our enemies .
Case in point! The Obama Administration just released secret memos and photographs that detail the interrogations of terrorists that were being held in American custody.
Obama authorized the release of these photographs and memos in spite of the undeniable fact that releasing these memos and photographs places the lives of our intelligence operatives and their families in imminent danger .
Obama authorized the release of these photographs and memos in spite of the undeniable fact that r eleasing these memos severely compromises our national security, and endangers each and every one of us .
It’s becoming more and more clear, with each passing day, that the issue surrounding Obama’s refusal to release his Birth Certificate and prove his eligibility to hold the office of President of the United States goes much deeper than initially thought.
The fact that Obama has something to hide when it comes to his Birth Certificate (and some of his college records for that matter) is now more than apparent.
And Obama, through his own obstruction in this matter, has established that contention as valid. It can no longer be reasonably questioned.
But what is now becoming apparent is that Obama’s refusal to release his Birth Certificate hints at an arrogance and disdain of the American people that is unprecedented… an arrogance and disdain that places all of us, our children, our grandchildren and our way of life in extreme jeopardy .
Obama: What I Do Is None Of Your Business.
Consider the following incident. It clearly speaks to Obama’s character and the character of those in his Administration.
Team Obama recently dispatched a Boeing-747 and an F-16 fighter jet to buzz New York City. The residents of New York City were not informed, and, with the tragedy of 9-11 still fresh in their minds, understandably went into a panic.
Not to worry, said the Obama Administration, it wasn’t an attack or even a drill. It was just a photo-op. We needed updated photographs of Air Force One flying by the Statue of Liberty.
But when asked to release the photographs, the Obama Administration stonewalled.
Why? Were those really cool photographs, that sent the people of New York into a panic and cost the American taxpayer hundreds of million of dollars to shoot, a secret?
Do you see a connection here?
When it comes to sharing legitimate secrets with America’s enemies and endangering the lives of Americans, Obama is an open book .
But, when it comes to releasing information about himself or those close to him… even information that is not of a highly personal nature, that the American people SHOULD know (Hey folks, don’t panic, the planes flying perilously close to the New York Skyline are ours, or, here’s my Birth Certificate which proves I am eligible to hold the office of President of the United States) Obama takes an it’s-none-of-your-business attitude .
Who knows, perhaps this combination of courtesy for those that hate the United States and disdain for average Americans explains why Obama has gone to extraordinary lengths to keep his Birth Certificate under lock-and-key.
Perhaps this combination of courtesy for those that hate the United States and disdain for average Americans explains why teams of lawyers have been tasked to thwart the efforts of Americans who simply seek to compel Obama to produce his Birth Certificate.
Perhaps this combination of courtesy for those that hate the United States and disdain for average Americans explains why Team Obama has gone to extraordinary lengths to confound, confuse, distort and spin the issue surrounding his citizenship and eligibility, under the Constitution, to hold the office of President of the United States.
But one thing is becoming painfully obvious, Barack Hussein Obama is not an American, at least not in the truest sense of the word; he does not respect or admire or love the United States as you or I love and respect and admire the United States.
The Birth Certificate Controversy And The Obstruction… Just The Facts.
It’s been stated before but, as there is so much erroneous information published on this issue (from both sides of the ideological aisle) , it’s beneficial to state the facts whenever possible.
Barack Obama Senior (Obama’s Father) was a subject of the British Commonwealth (Kenya was not an independent nation when Obama was born. It was under the control of the British Crown) .
As an aside, since many have asked… yes, even under the best case scenario, Obama was born with dual citizenship and there are legal arguments as to whether his status as a dual citizen would also disqualify him under Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution.
However, we don’t address those arguments at this point so as not to confound matters. Essentially, one cannot even progress to that question until Obama proves that he was born in Hawaii.
His mother, while an American citizen, was not of sufficient age, under the laws of the United States, to bestow citizenship onto any of her offspring that were not born on American soil.
Amazingly, the liberal media initially treated the matter of Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution with a degree of seriousness. In fact, the liberal media probably started the ball rolling by aggressively questioning Senator McCain’s eligibility .
McCain’s father was stationed in Panama at the time of McCain’s birth. McCain was NOT born on American soil.
Is McCain eligible to be President of the United States? … The media aggressively pursued that question .
And McCain’s campaign promptly answered the question and put it to rest. Although McCain was NOT born on U.S. soil, McCain’s parents were both natural born citizens of the United States and of sufficient age to pass that status onto McCain… case closed.
The McCain incident was all but forgotten. Then Obama’s paternal grandmother reportedly made a statement that Obama was born in what is now Kenya and that she witnessed the birth .
Admittedly, at the time, the statement was unverified and even if Obama’s grandmother had, in fact, made the statement, it could be dismissed as a little white-lie told by a proud grandmother.
The story might have died were it not for the actions of Team Obama . In a rush to respond to the situation, Team Obama published a Hawaii CERTIFICATION of Live Birth on Obama’s Fight the Smears (or as we call it, Obama’s Fight the Truth) website… an action that raised more questions than it answered .
The Certification of Live Birth, while an official document is NOT an ACTUAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE (a CERTIFICATE of Live Birth) .
Why not produce an actual birth certificate? That was - and still is - the legitimate question that keeps this all too important controversy alive .
Except when it came to the media; what was initially a valid question, when it came to McCain, was apparently no longer of any importance.
When it came to McCain, they pursued the issue with diligence. When it came to Obama, to even ask the question was a conspiracy theory.
But, as shall become apparent, the ONLY conspiracy going on here is the conspiracy on the part of Team Obama, to keep his Birth Certificate vaulted .
The Real Obstruction Begins.
Again, the Certification of Live Birth is a legal document, but it is TOTALLY INADEQUATE when it comes to proving an individual was born in Hawaii .
The State of Hawaii DOES NOT EVEN ACCEPT the Certification of Live Birth as valid proof that an individual was born in Hawaii .
The Hawaii Department of Homelands, which administers programs to encourage property ownership for native Hawaiians states the following on its website.
"In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found ONLY on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL." [Emphasis Mine].
The bottom line is that the Certification of Live Birth can be erroneous. It has been reported that it was not uncommon for foreigners residing in Hawaii to bring their infant children to the Clerk of the Court, swear they were born in Hawaii and have actual Certificates of Live Birth issued to their children.
It has even been reported that foreigners residing in Hawaii, in some cases, produced birth certificates from foreign countries and the State of Hawaii still issued Hawaiian Certificates of Live Birth to the infants in question.
Could either of those two things have happened in Obama’s case?
The question remains unanswered because Team Obama started moving heaven and earth to keep Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth (the ACTUAL Birth Certificate which lists information such as the hospital, attending physician etc. that would verify Obama’s physical place of birth) under wraps .
The only person who may have seen it is the head of Hawaii’s Department of Health, Dr. Chiyome Fukino. Fukino issued the following statement to the media.
"Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."
When pressed for details… who was the physician… what hospital is listed… does the certificate say "unknown" … does it indicate Obama was delivered by a Mid-Wife … does it actually acknowledge he was born outside the United States… Fukino went silent.
And the hospital where Obama was born appears to be a hard question to answer because Obama won’t even answer it.
Obama’s own sister was once willing to answer the question but seems confused. She named two different hospitals on two different occasions and then, she too, went silent.
And the question remains unanswered.
What Is Obama Hiding?
Obama could easily answer the question by releasing his actual Birth Certificate. But not only has Obama refused to do so, teams of attorneys are thwarting efforts to compel Obama to produce it .
Obama is actively obstructing efforts to un-vault his actual Birth Certificate and this active obstruction, in and of itself, should arouse a tremendous amount of suspicion. Without a doubt, there is something on his actual Birth Certificate that he does not want known .
And for those maintaining some hope that the courts will resolve this issue… don’t hold your breath.
Court actions have been unsuccessful. Team Obama actually has the audacity to claim that the courts have settled the issue but THAT’S NOT A FACTUAL ASSERTION . In all cases, the courts have dismissed these suits WITHOUT ever considering the claims or even the MERITS of the actual claims.
In most cases, the courts have simply ruled that the petitioners "lacked standing" to bring the suits. In layman’s terms, the courts have basically stated, we’re not even going to look at this because you have NO RIGHT to even ask Mr. Obama to produce a Birth Certificate .
Generally, rulings on "standing" are valid. Simply put, you don’t have the right to un-vault your next-door neighbor’s Birth Certificate simply out of curiosity.
But in this particular case, there is a nagging issue of the Constitution that simply won’t go away. In our humble opinion, approximate 300 million people have standing to compel Barack Hussein Obama to un-vault his ACTUAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE .
So what’s happening with the courts? Simply put, they’re punting the ball. No judge wants to be the person who opens this Pandora’s Box.
But the American public thinks otherwise. While some in the political and media establishment are trying to convince everyone that this matter is some kind of conspiracy theory, a recent AOL poll (while non-scientific) indicates that 52 percent of the respondents believe this matter has validity .
It’s YOUR country. It’s YOUR Constitution. No one is going to honor or preserve it but YOU ! You have to stand up for your rights and you can do that by keeping up the pressure.
The liberal media wants this story to go away. The liberal media wants YOU to go away.
Don’t let that happen. Don’t give them the satisfaction. Demand they cover this story.
The Constitution Is NOT Just A Piece Of Paper.
Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution 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…"
Now… Obama supporters have written us hate-filled letters and told us that Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution, as it pertains to Obama, is nothing more than a "legal technicality."
Can you believe that?
Others have gone so far as to take the "living-breathing argument" to its unfortunate and dangerous conclusion and told us that Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution is outmoded, outdated and no longer relevant.
Sadly, even some conservatives have advanced that erroneous argument.
Erroneous because Obama’s own actions PROVE exactly WHY our Founding Fathers ratified Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution and why Article 2, Section 1 is STILL relevant today.
In under 100 days, Barack Hussein Obama:
Supplicated himself by bowing before the King of Saudi Arabia. But Obama did not simply supplicate himself. As the elected leader of the United States, he obsequiously and subserviently supplicated you… supplicated me… supplicated the entire United States before a man who is arguable, as the protector of Mecca and Medina, the most important man in the Muslim world .
Contrast Obama’s subservient bow to the actions of then-New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani in October of 2001. Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, came to the United States after the 9-11 attacks and, during a high-profile ceremony, gave Giuliani a $10 million disaster relief check.
After the ceremony, the Prince released a statement to the media saying the policies of the United States partially led to, and by implication, were a justification for, the 9-11 attack. Giuliani, gave the check back !
Obama, on the other hand, traveled to Europe and profusely apologized for America’s arrogance. He’s snuggled up to Hugo Chavez and the Castro regime in Cuba and is even reaching out to Iran’s Mahmoud "the-Holocaust-never-happened" Ahmadinejad.
Radio talk-show host, Tom Roeser comments on yet another incident:
"When Nicaragua’s president Daniel C. Ortega spent 55 minutes ripping the U. S. as a fascist, anti-humane power he smilingly said, ‘I’m grateful President Ortega didn’t blame me for things that happened when I was three months old’-referring to the climactic test with USSR-sponsored Cuba, supposedly a shining hour of the Kennedy years. Shove off JFK: your travail has nothing to do with me. You see, I was only a baby! To our enemies he says hate the U. S. but love me!"
Mark Rhodes, writing for the Internet news blog, Illinois Review , offered additional insights on Roeser’s point:
"Does Barack Obama… view himself as a citizen of the world who only happens to be the custodian of the American executive branch? This is a question that Tom Roeser hints at and it is an entirely legitimate one that in an unguarded and honest moment, President Obama himself might have a tough time answering. … Roeser’s point is that Obama can happily shake hands with enemies of America because he does not see their rants against our country as anything he needs take personally since he is detached from the history of the nation and is not emotionally bound up in its identity as most Americans are."
Taking into account Obama’s past associations with the Reverend Jeremiah "God D___ America" Wright and Nation of Islam leader, Louis Farrakhan; it’s almost as if hating America is a major prerequisite for those who wish to make it into Obama’s cozy little circle .
Our Founding Fathers ratified Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution for just such a reason. It should be obvious that the President of the United States should have sole allegiance to the United States .
When it comes to Barack Hussein Obama, many rational people will always have doubts when it comes to issues of his loyalty and allegiance.
Hiding his Birth Certificate from the American public will only compound those doubts . That issue must be resolved.
And While We’re On The Subject Of Allegiance And Loyalty, A Few More Points… .
It should come as no shock that Obama is reaching out to Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Obama, after all, expressed a willingness to meet Ahmadinejad without preconditions during the campaign.
Unfortunately, Ahmadinejad appears to have some preconditions of his own.
According to MSNBC; "Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said Iran would welcome talks with the U.S. - but only if there was mutual respect. Iranian officials have said that means the U.S. needs to stop accusing Iran of seeking to build nuclear weapons and supporting terrorism… ."
Of course, there’s just two small problem with Ahmadinejad’s demands. Iran IS seeking to secretly build nuclear weapons and IT DOES support terrorism.
And on another front, Obama’s still moving forward with plans to close Guantanamo Bay.
Last week, Attorney General Eric Holder told the media that at least 30 of these terrorists had already been cleared for release. Allusions were initially made that these 30 terrorists could actually be released on U.S. soil and that most of the remaining terrorists could be tried on U.S. soil (Essentially meaning that after retaining slick ACLU lawyers, who would make a mockery of our legal system, many of these remaining terrorists would also be released onto U.S. soil) .
Holder quickly contained the situation and issued a "clarification" on Thursday, saying that no terrorists will be released in the United States. However, as things stand now, we have no place to put these terrorists… no other country will take them. So WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO GO!
Frankly, coming from an Administration that distributed a secret report to law enforcement officials contending that patriotic Americans are the real terrorists, such statements are far from reassuring.
Senator Kit Bond of Missouri said: "While President Obama has no plan for what to do with these killers, he has pledged to close the terrorist detention facility in January, to fulfill a campaign promise. This is a dangerous case of putting symbolism over security."
And things are even worse on the domestic front.
Under the guise of "bailing-out" the auto industry, Obama essentially took control of General Motors and Chrysler. Not being a selfish man, he then turned around and effectively gave away pieces of the former to Big Labor and Fiat (a foreign automobile manufacturer).
But Obama’s not done yet. In a time of severe economic hardship, Obama has proposed to triple the national debt and he is laying the groundwork for an effective nationalization of the health-care industry .
As for the banks, they’re ripe for takeover as well. Economist Stuart Varney, in an editorial published by The Wall Street Journal , alerted us to the Obama Administration’s reluctance to accept money from banks that are attempting to repay TARP bailout money:
"My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future. Keeping them TARP-stuffed is the key to control. And for this intensely political president, mere influence is not enough. The White House wants to tell ‘em what to do. Control. Direct. Command."
Varney goes on a talks about what is happening to a large well-known bank that was FORCED to accept TARP money and is NOT being allowed to pay the money back to the American taxpayer:
"The chairman offers to write a check, now, with interest. He’s been sitting on the cash for months and has felt the dead hand of government threatening to run his business and dictate pay scales. He sees the writing on the wall and he wants out. But the Obama team says no, since unlike the smaller banks that gave their TARP money back, this bank is far more prominent. The bank has also been threatened with ‘adverse’ consequences if its chairman persists. That’s politics talking, not economics."
Are Obama’s actions, the actions of a man that loves the United States?
Many patriotic Americans will say no; but, at the very least, we should compel the man occupying the office of President of the United States to prove that he is eligible, under the highest law in the land, to occupy that office .
Use the button below to send your personalized faxes to Barack Hussein Obama and the editors of USA Today, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Daily News, the Chicago Tribune, the New York Post, and Long Island Newsday - the top ten newspapers in the United States with a combined circulation of approximately 10 million. Also send my personalized faxes to the producers at ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX News, MSNBC and CNN.
Tell them that Barack Hussein Obama has NOT produced an actual birth certificate and therefore has not verified that he is Constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President of the United States. Tell them to purse this very real story. Tell them to stop distorting and start reporting.
Floyd Brown
Western Center for Journalism
States to Feds: Stay in D.C.!
Posted: May 12, 2009 8:59 pm Eastern By Bob Unruh © 2009 WorldNetDaily
$11 trillion ‘micromanaging’ price sparks explosion in sovereignty movement
A movement to reclaim for states all rights not specifically designated to the federal government in the U.S. Constitution is exploding across the nation, with 35 states already acting or at least considering such proposals – and one state lawmaker estimating the nation as a whole could save $11 trillion in coming years if it would succeed.
WND reported not long ago when the number of states with lawmakers considering such sovereignty efforts reached 20.
Now, according to the Tenth Amendment Center, such provisions have been launched in at least 35 states. They all address the Tenth Amendment that says: "powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
South Carolina’s S. 424 is an example. It is titled: "To affirm South Carolina’s sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution over all powers not enumerated and granted to the federal government by the United States Constitution."
Essentially it’s a reminder that the United States is made up of individual states; it’s not a federal authority broken up into political subdivisions.
Get "Taking America Back," Joseph Farah’s manifesto for sovereignty, self-reliance and moral renewal
In South Carolina, the proposals remains pending in the state Senate, where Sen. Lee Bright said he still hopes that it will be adopted this year.
The proposal there notes specifically that the "federal government was created by the states … to be an agent of the states," and the states currently "are treated as agents of the federal government," many times in violation of the Constitution.
The resolution states:
Be it resolved by the Senate, the House of Representatives concurring: That the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina, by this resolution, claims for the State of South Carolina sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the United States Constitution.
Be it further resolved that all federal governmental agencies, quasi-governmental agencies, and their agents and employees operating within the geographic boundaries of the State of South Carolina, and all federal governmental agencies and their agents and employees, whose actions have effect on the inhabitants or lands or waters of the State of South Carolina, shall operate within the confines of the original intent of the Constitution of the United States and abide by the provisions of the Constitution of South Carolina, the South Carolina statutes, or the common law as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States.
Bright told WND the movement is spreading from state to state as fast as lawmakers discover it.
Michael Boldin, a spokesman for the Tenth Amendment Center, said his organization has created a posting for all such proposals to be tracked.
Among the states where such proposals at least have been considered are Louisiana, Colorado, Wisconsin, Illinois, West Virginia, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Nevada, Oregon, Alabama, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, Idaho, New Mexico, South Dakota, Virginia, Kentucky, Alaska, Indiana, Tennessee, Arkansas, Minnesota, South Carolina, Georgia, Kansas, Texas, New Hampshire, Missouri, Iowa, Montana, Michigan, Arizona, Washington and Oklahoma.
In North Dakota, it passed the House and Senate both in April, with the House a short time later adopting changes made by the Senate.
In South Dakota, it was approved by both houses of the Legislature, and under that state’s rules does not need the governor’s signature.
Just last week, Rep. M.J. "Manny" Steele, a Republican, in South Dakota wrote that he believes up to $11 trillion is being wasted in the coming years by Washington’s efforts "to duplicate and micromanage our states’ affairs."
He said states should manage their own affairs, and not be dependant on a federal cash cow to make ends meet. Likewise with industries, he said, citing federal cash dumps on the banking, insurance and automobile industries.
After all, he agreed, with enough federal money allocated to the industry, Americans all still could be listening to 8-track tapes in their cars, but would that really be the best outcome?
Steele told WND his dollar estimate was based on what President Obama himself has allocated in the coming years to spend on stimulus packages, industry bailouts and the like.
"If we would just let the market take care of these things," he said.
His letter noted that Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma and South Carolina legislatures joined South Dakota’s in passing some statement on the Tenth Amendment this year. The results vary based on state procedures, however. In Oklahoma, the governor vetoed the plan and it was launched on its second trip through the legislature.
"Over the course of decades, there have been increasing federal mandates and acts designed to effectively step in and legislate the affairs of our various states from Washington D.C.," Steele said. "Federal usurpation into state affairs severely limits the ability of state governments to operate according to their citizens’ wishes."
Keyes to appeal case on Obama’s eligibility
Keyes to appeal case on Obama’s eligibility. By Bob Unruh © 2009 WorldNetDaily
A lawsuit filed on behalf of Ambassador Alan Keyes, a candidate for president on California’s general election ballot last year, challenging President Obama’s eligibility to hold office under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution will be appealed, according to a lawyer working on the case.
WND reported earlier on the case being filed and then again when a judge dismissed it after concluding anyone can run for president on the California ballot – whether or not they are eligible under the Constitution of the United States.
Judge Michael P. Kenny said the secretary of state, who is responsible for election laws in the state, has no "duty" to demand proof of eligibility from candidates.
But now Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation has confirmed to WND the case will be appealed.
"The judge’s ruling in the case that only Congress and only on Jan. 6 of each year following a presidential election can object as to whether the nominee is eligible to serve as president of the United States is, in our opinion, completely wrong and eviscerates the [Constitutional] requirements for serving as president in the United States Constitution," Kreep said.
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 some 350,000 others and sign up now!
"It has been publicly reported that Mr. Obama as far back as 2006 had a relationship to a law firm that was coincidentally researching ways to get around the Article 2 requirements of the U.S. Constitution for service as president," he said.
"This appears to be an ongoing attempt by Mr. Obama to obtain the presidency while avoiding and evading all questions on his eligibility," he said.
Kreep said the judge’s ruling leaves open the option for any candidate, resident or not, alive or not, to run for the office of president.
"California has a history of removing people from the ballot who are not qualified to run for president," Kreep said. "The most famous case being Eldridge Cleaver."
"It is incumbent upon us here at the USJF to continue this fight to learn the truth," he said.
In the court’s decision to dismiss the case, the judge rejected concerns over the problems that could result if a president was found to be ineligible.
"If Mr. Obama is not constitutionally eligible to serve as president of the United States, then no act that he takes is, arguably, valid, the laws that he signs would not be valid, the protective orders that he signs would be null and void, and every act that he takes would be subject to legal challenge, both in courts of the United States of America, and in international courts, and that, therefore, it is important for the voters to know whether he, or any candidate for president in the future, is eligible to serve in that office," the case explained.
The case documents previously explained that in 1968 the Peace and Freedom Party submitted the name of Eldridge Cleaver as a qualified candidate for president. But then-Secretary of State Frank Jordan "found that, according to Mr. Cleaver’s birth certificate, he was only 34 years old, one year shy of the 35 years of age needed to be on the ballot as a candidate for president."
USJF explained that "using his administrative powers, Mr. Jordan removed Mr. Cleaver from the ballot. Mr. Cleaver unsuccessfully challenged this decision to the Supreme Court of the State of California, and, later, to the Supreme Court of the United States."
The USJF said similarly, in 1984, Peace and Freedom Party candidate Larry Holmes was removed from the ballot.
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, 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.
Further, others question his citizenship by virtue of his attendance in Indonesian schools during his childhood and question on what passport did he travel to Pakistan three decades ago.
Adding fuel to the fire is Obama’s persistent refusal to release documents that could provide answers. While his supporters cite an online version of a "Certification of Live Birth" from Hawaii, critics point out such documents actually were issued for children not born in the state.
Keyes has been critical of judges’ refusal to listen to evidence in the disputes and suggestions that those who bring such allegations for review should be penalized..
"In the final analysis if the courts refuse to respect the Constitution, they are not the judges of their own action. The people must ultimately decide. Which is why I and others will use every outlet to inform them of the injustice being done not just to individuals but to the sovereign people as a whole," Keyes said.
In a commentary on the dispute, Keyes wrote that the suggestion of sanctions against those who bring up the questions, already raised as an issue by Obama’s lawyers in his case, "confirms Obama’s ruthless determination to destroy anyone who continues to seek the information the Constitution requires.
"Why should they demand penalties against citizens who are simply seeking the enforcement of the Supreme Law of the Land? It is simply because their persistence runs contrary to the will of a supposedly popular demagogue? This smacks of tyrannical arrogance. That Obama thus signals his intent to bring financial ruin on those who won’t accept his cover-up of the circumstances of his birth is a tactical escalation," Keyes said.
"As one of the targets of this escalation, I need no more convincing proof of the ruthless disposition so far successfully masked by his empty rhetoric of hope and change. Obviously he means to offer hope only to those willing to surrender their most basic rights. To any who insist on questioning his actions, he offers the drastic change of ruin and destruction. So be it. We shall be among those who learn firsthand the meaning of the sacrifices made by the Founders of our free republic, as they pledged and gave up their lives, their fortunes and the world’s esteem," Keyes said.
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.
* 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. She also has been working on several other cases.
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, which the state’s procedures allowed at the time?
Loading ...