There’s always someone lurking in the bushes, as it were, waiting to be “Ohffended” … waiting to pounce!
We have sunk to a new low in sniveling Political Correctness. Yes boys ‘n girls our ubiquitous Chia pets cannot mingle one with the other because the new Obama Chia pet is racist! SAY WHAT? What lunatic hospital let these people out? Can you people get a life?
Walgreens has removed a Barack Obama version of the Chia Pet from its stores.
The Deerfield-headquartered drugstore chain made the move Friday after getting a few complaints about the item since the product”s April 1 launch, a spokeswoman said.
Chia founder Joseph Pedott — a Chicago native whose San Francisco-based Joseph Enterprises provides local jobs for the disabled — said he was inspired to create the Obama head as a show of patriotism
Maybe its just me, but I didn’t find the Obama Chia offensive. After all haven’t most of us received one of these little critters at least once in out lives? Usually you could tell it was from someone who decided to go to a drugstore for a last minute gift (under $10 bucks) and saw the Chia displays at the checkout counter.
Personally in my humble opinion, if the manufacturers had come out with one of those wall mounted singing fishes, put an afro on it, and called it an Obama Singing Bass . . . that might have been what? Funny, perhaps?
At least the White House didn’t put out a press release condemning the the newest addition to American kitsch. AND blessedly, Joe Biden did not regale us with his story about how Chia Pet people came to him with an idea for a Biden Buffoon Chia and he said, “look behind you Mr. President no one is following.” Opps, looks like Joe got his stories mixed up, again.
Thanks to Racquel who inserted this picture of a racist mailbox in her comment at Sodahead.
Truth and transparency . . . the words continually roll off of Obama’s lips day in and day out. T & T . . . is the new mantra of his administration. Here’s another one, Obama’s “no earmarks” dictum. It turned out to be just another campaign slogan ringing hollow and never meant to be honored. The “no earmarks” pledge was spoken of adoringly and honored . . . drum roll please . . . not!
The Omnibus bill, Obama termed it an imperfect bill (do ya think?) passed with 9,000 earmarks. So much for T & T in the Obama administration. Seems to me the operative question should be, “how many pledges did Obama make during the campaign for POTUS has he actually kept?”
Poor boy, he had no way of controlling those earmarks, don’t ya know, despite his pledge to “go line by line” in every bill and pull out the pork. Of course, constitutionally he has no power or authority to do that . . . never had that authority. One would never know that, of course, because the MSM was too busy genuflecting in adoration to point that out. But hey, what’s the Constitution, right? Right? RIGHT?
The truth is, why shouldn’t Obama think he can bend the Constitution anyway he wants to? He has gone out of his way to ignore the “natural born citizen” clause of the Constitution. In fact, Obama and his teams of enablers and lawyers have gone to extraordinary lengths to hide the truth about his place of birth, his biological father, and citizenship, etc. Here’s another truth. Obama may have taught Constitutional law, but he continues to demonstrate undisguised contempt for the document he has sworn to “uphold and protect”. Author, Joan Swirsky has termed Obama a Trojan Horse and has written about his contempt for the Constitution, here:
Barack Obama was an anti-constitutionalist professor. He studied the Constitution and he flatly rejected it. He doesn’t like the Constitution. He thinks it is flawed. Now I understand why he was so reluctant to wear the American flag lapel pin….he says that the Constitution ‘is a charter of negative liberties. This is nothing short of a condemnation of the Constitution, and he calls himself a professor. The greatest government, the freest society in the history of the world, and Professor Obama calls it a charter of negative liberties!
Ironically, there is no hiding the truth when it comes to providing basic information validating one’s eligibility to hold the office of POTUS. In many ways, it’s a lot like being pregnant. Either you are or you aren’t pregnant. There’s nothing in-between. Either the documents required by all seeking the office of president, those which validate (unequivocally) the status of “natural born citizen” have been provided or they haven’t. No equivocations, no half truths, no half being pregnant.
Mr. Obama, either you can produce the myriad of records demonstrating your eligibility to be President of the United States or you can’t. It is clear after all these stall laden months, you cannot. There is ( never has been) no other explanation.
Why do I continue to write about this? Why are thousands and thousands of people across the country pursuing this, spending time and money seeking the truth? Because this remains a legitimate issue that must be resolved.
Mike Lukovich, whose cartoons regularly appear in the Atlanta Journal Constitution, is one of my favorite political cartoonists. Most of the time, I’ve felt his positions about what effects this country have been spot on. Unfortunately, like most of the MSM, Lukovich drank the Kool-Aid and fell in love with the Usurper.
This cartoon was published just before the November election. The irony of Obama being handed a Constitution in tatters, brought on by the Bush Administration’s action cannot be over stated, given the fact that Obama’s disregard of our Republic’s most sacred document, the U.S. Constitution, is regularly ignored. Where Lukovich sees Obama in a heroic light, those of us who have opposed Obama’s politics and policies see little more than a fraud.
Obama has been described as an egomaniac and a pathetic narcissistic megalomaniac who should never have been allowed to enter the White House.
Fact . . . Obama has been elected selected (by the Dean and the other despicable dirty Democrats) to hold office as the first knowingly ineligible candidate to run for the office of POTUS. His own websiteproudly proclaimed his dual citizenship at the time of birth. One must be a natural born citizen to hold office, born of two parents both of whom are U.S. citizens. Obama was not.
Fact . . . he is the only “President” who has refused to produce the most basic information concerning his background that includes his college records, his original vault copy of his birth certificate (under seal), health records, thesis, billing and client records, etc, etc, etc. while proclaiming to aspire to an open and transparent presidency.
Fact . . . Obama’s teams of lawyers continue to fight toothe and nail to keep this information suppressed. They are now looking to sanction those persons looking to uncover the truth. Most recently, a California suit has been filed against Occidential College to have the college produce Obama’s records while he was in attendence.
Why is this information so important? Because the information ” could reveal on what name Obama attended classes at Occidental and whether he attended on scholarship money intended for foreign students ” as reported by Bob Unruh WorldNetDaily:
A high-powered team of Los Angeles attorneys representing President Obama in his effort to keep his birth certificate, college records and passport documents concealed from the public has suggested there should be “monetary sanctions” against a lawyer whose clients have brought a complaint alleging Obama doesn’t qualify for the Oval Office under the Constitution’s demand for a “natural born” citizen in that post.
Fact . . . Obama has turned his back on so many of his campaign promises for change, that it’s hard to keep track. Two of the most recent examples of his back-tracking include allowing lobbyists to serve in his administration and his decision to keep the Bush policy on rendition. Of late his plea for bi-partisanship has changed into, “We won, so get over it!” Ah, yes, Change we Can Believe In.
Fact . . . this isn’t the first time the Usurper has used intimidation. One need only go back to the 2008 campaign and Obama’s Truth Squads in Missouri to see what the Obama team thinks of the Constitution and free speech (and thought)! Governor Matt Blunt of Missouri said:
“What Senator Obama and his helpers are doing is scandalous beyond words, the party that claims to be the party of Thomas Jefferson is abusing the justice system and offices of public trust to silence political criticism with threats of prosecution and criminal punishment.
Fact . . . in less than a month in office, Obama has taken steps to tear this country apart using the financial crisis as a reason to stir further chaos. The Obama stimulus plan is a recipe for disaster and will bring this country to its knees, if it is passed.
It is beyond insane for Obama to demand that a $1.5 trillion dollar bill be on his desk by February 16th. It is insanity that anyone in Congress to consider voting for a 787 page bill that isn’t available for review and consideration.
Fact . . . this country and all of its citizens remain in jeopardy until the Usurper is driven from office.
Does the economy need a stimulus plan? Yes. Is this the right one? No,not by any measure! Does the plan HAVE to be on Obama’s (the Usurper) desk by February 16th? No! Does anyone on Main Street, anyone with a modicum of commonsensebelieve this plan will work? No!
We are supposed to watch billions of dollars flow out of the treasury so Obama’s stimulus plan can “create” 4 millions jobs. Let’s see, if Richard Shelby is correct, that’s at a cost of $286,000 per job . . . a job that may or not be created. We still don’t know. Even the fools in Washington admit, “No one knows if this will work . . . but if we don’t act now America faces a catastrophe bigger than the Great Depression . . . one from which we may never recover.” Hey hearing that, I’m feeling secure about my future, how ‘bout you?
Well, so much for leaving thepolitics of fear behind! Final cost of draining the treasury for this fool hardly experiment . . . over a trillion dollars. Have they all lost their (place your favorite expletive here) minds?
Since, no one knows if the “stimulus” plan will work. Why don’t we call this insane financial disaster package what is really is . . . the Obama Albatross Plan?
You know the definition of insanity; the act of consistently doing the same thing and expecting different results. Well, let me tell you this sucker will be with us for generations, because as everyone in the country knows (with the exception of the financial wizards in Washington) there is no free lunch. We have a trade deficit as far as the eye can see; China is already holding a very large percentage of our debt, and the Obama wiz kids want to double the deficit.
Bush leaves office leaving this country with the biggest deficient on record . . . eight years of uncontrolled spending . . . a Treasury Secretary who insists the country has to pump $780 billion dollars into the economy to save it. The first half of the money is sent to banks (some of which say they don’t want it) so the banks can begin lending again. Of course, no safeguards are in place, no method for tracking where each and every taxpayer dollar is going. Oh and BTW $78 billion has already been erroneously been overpaid. Poof! Poof! Poof! Into thin air the money goes, and as always the MSM is virtually silent . . . still fixated on Obama’s pecks . . . still swooning in rapture. God, where is that barf bag?
Can anyone list the safeguards that have been put in place totrack the billions of dollars Obama and the Democrats want to hurl at the economy for the Albatross Plan? No! There aren’t any, no one wants to take the time to place them into the Albatross bill. That would take work, commitment, and besides we’ve got to meet that February 16th deadline because . . . just what exactly is the reason? Will the Sears Tower explode? Will half of California finally fall into the ocean? What will happen on the 17th if the Albatross bill isn’t on Obama’s desk? How ‘bout this; we will have averted financial disaster, brought on by the clowns in Washington, at least for another day.
What we are supposed to do is to allow billions of dollars to flow out of the treasury. We are to cross our fingers the money will be spent intelligently because, you see, the banks did such a bang up job doing that with the first $350 billion. The banks were supposed to start lending, again, with the first half of the hand outs. Instead they bought other banks, hoarded the money, and increased credit card interest rates!!!!!!! They (add another expletive here) increased the credit card rates to as much as 29% or more!!!! The banks are getting our taxpayer dollars are raping us with usury rates . . . and the Obama team remains silent. And they wonder why no one is spending money! Is there a penalty for such obscene, unconscionable behavior . . . a slap on the hands . . . a fine perhaps? No. Nothing!
How many legislators do you guess have actually read all 778 pages (at last count) of the bill? My guess is none. How many legislators understand business and how the economy works? Close to the same number is my guess.
Here’s another question, how many in Washington could run a lemon aid stand and make a profit? How many of these fine folks, the one that are hurling the future of this country over a never ending cliff, could put together a basic business plan, buy the materials, hire, plan for overhead associated costs, and figure out a way to make a profit?
So, now here we are. The Dow is down another 300 points because as the tax evader Treasury Secretary Geithner Treasury just acknowledged, the first half of the bailout billions is not working. Instead of helping the economy recover, the money is doing the opposite! So, in an effort to help the economy Geithner wants to release the other $350 billion AND THE SENATE HAS JUST PASSED OBAMA’S $838 BILLION ECONOMIC PLAN. Remember that definition of insanity?
When I first brought the What’s Your Evidence site to your attention, I did so because unlike most of the MSM, I felt it was important to show an opposing view and let you the reader decide for yourself. I received a message from Ron Polarik, the man who has shown through extensive research, that the Obama COLB is a phony . . . a very bad one, at that. His message was that he has debunked the WHATS YOUR EVIDENCE site.
You can read his information here. Below is a snippet from his blog, The Greater Evil, at Townhall.com.
WHATSYOUREVIDENCE.COM: Nothing like the truth
Posted by Polarik on Thursday, October 30, 2008 8:53:55 PM
WHATSYOUREVIDENCE.COM: The TRUTH, the WHOLE TRUTH, and NOTHING LIKE the TRUTH!
Overview
This is the follow-up to my last post, WHATSYOUREVIDENCE: Retractions and Restatements, and contains all of the information that appeared in my original post, WHATSYOURSHYSTER, except for deleting two statements that were in error, and replacing a few words that were not appropriate. It is no longer a secret to FReepers that Ms. Teresa La Loggia is the owner and operator of the website, WHATSYOUREVIDENCE.COM. However, even after I outted her in my first post (and second post), and even after she wrote her “cease and desist” letter, Teresa La Loggia is still keeping her identity hidden from the public. This fact begs the question, “How much of her indignation was due to my statements incorrectly linking herself and her law firm to the Obama/DNC defense team, and how much of it was due to identity being discovered?”
After reading this post, and especially her letter, I’ll let you be the judge.
I voted for Gore in 2000 and watched with disbelief when the Supreme Court decided to take on Bush v Gore . . . disbelief because the method Florida decided to use to count the 2000 election votes should have remained with Florida. Federal intervention was not necessary, period.
It was an unprincipled decision that the Supremes in their “infinite wisdom” decided should apply solely to this case … that it could not be used as precedent for future cases. Cute, right? The majority of the court acted improperly (States rights, anyone?) and politically (5 Republican Justices) and some would say corruptly.
I still remember the number of people who questioned whether Scalia’s vote was because he wanted to position himself to be the next choice as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
What was shattered, along with the Constitution, was our belief in the incorruptibility of the Supreme Court justices. We witnessed, first hand, that the Supremes are as political as the rest of the hacks in this country that pretend to be fair and impartial and whose actions show the opposite reality. Legions of Americans have hoped that the Supremes would, once again behave with honor and dignity . . . alas as Donofrio,Berg, etal have witnessed, that will not take place.
The following is from an excellent article in Salon (written in 2000) . . . back when Salon was a source one could trust. It is a superior article that reviews several books written by legal authorities, including Alan Dershowitz, Vincent Bugliosi, Richard H. Pildes, and Cass R. Sunstein and Richard A. Epstein.
I urge anyone that has been fighting the good fight, trying to get our legislators, elected officials, and the courts to take an intellectually honest look at Obama and the Constitutional crisis brought on because Obama will not (cannot) present any documentation (exception the forged COLB on the Internet) proving he meets the eligibility requirements for POTUS as a natural born citizen to read the article. It may give you additional insight as to how to proceed. The article begins:
Supreme Court to democracy: Drop dead
With a single rash, partisan act, the high court has tainted the Bush presidency, besmirched its own reputation and soiled our nation’s proudest legacy.
Dec. 14, 2001 | Tuesday, Dec. 12, is a day that will live in American infamy long after the tainted election of George W. Bush has faded from memory. With their rash, divisive decision to dispense with the risky and inconvenient workings of democracy and simply award the presidency to their fellow Republican, five right-wing justices dragged the Supreme Court down to perhaps its most ignominious point since the Dred Scott decision.
With this as a back drop, should anyone really be surprised that the Supremes are, again, turning backs on the Constitution? Are we really so surprised that there isn’t a single backbone among them? Is it really so surprising ?
Why, when we have legitimate Constitutional questions will the Supremes not act? Self interest, perhaps? Lack of integrity, courage, intellectual honesty, impartiality? Some of these . . . all of these?
The far reaching impact of the Supreme Court’s decision to dismiss the cases brought thus far on technical issues (standing, wrong format, didn’t cross a “t” or an “i” was missing) is monumental. We have witnessed numerous people run for the office of POTUS we know are ineligible because they are not “natural born citizens” Obama (until he proves he is), Bill Richardson, Roger Calero and still the Supremes remain silent on an issue that effects every citizen of this country!
There is an element of power and, perhaps inevitably, self-interest in all judicial decisions. As Sunstein remarked, “We’ve tended to have too idealized a view of the court.” But the idea that justice must be blind, that the most powerful court in the world — and arguably the most powerful institution in the country — must not sink into brazen partisanship, is a bedrock principle . . . ( change & emphasis mine )that they have failed to live up to!
We must stand by it, and those justices who violate it must be held accountable. By failing to live up to their judicial oath, by allowing political motivations to sway them, by besmirching democracy itself, the five members of the (change and emphasis mine) 2009Supreme Court majority will have disgraced themselves forever.
I continue to be surprised by what fires people’s imaginations and passions. I have blogged about a wide variety of issues and topics, some serious, some not so much. The post that continues to draw the most interest is the one on Michelle Obama’s decision to wear that red & black dress with the X in the front … the decision to dress her entire family in those colors the night Barack won the 2008 election for president. You can read about it here.
My visceral reaction to the pictures each and every time I view them has not abated when seen through the prism of rebellion or defiance. But what if there was another way of viewing these pictures of the Obama’s all dressed up in red and black? What if the garb worn by the Obama’s was a silent tribute to Barack’s real father, Malcolm X?
I know anyone that has followed this blog and my positions on BHO’s ineligibility to hold the office of POTUS will find the following to be surprising. If the truth be known, I would be relieved to find out Obama’s real father is Malcolm X. Why? Because the alternative is many times worse.
Having a fraud become president is unthinkable. Having a man who is knowingly ineligible to hold the office because he never met the eligibility requirements as detailed in the Constitution will harm this country in ways that cannot tolerated. The consequences are far reaching and potentially devastating.
The evidence against his being eligible to hold the office of POTUS continues to accumulate on a daily basis. Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, aka Barry Dunham is not a “natural born citizen” regardless if he was born in Hawaii (as he alleges) or he was born in Kenya which multiple lawsuits contend and which his paternal grandmother say is the truth.
The story Team Obama continues to foist on the world is that his father, Barack Hussein Obama Sr., was a Kenyan. His father was also British citizen thus making Barry a British citizen as well, because his citizenship would have been determined by the father’s nationality. Since Barack’s mother was 17 and underage at the time of his birth, her nationality was moot. Like it or not, that was the law of the land in 1961. Even if his mother’s age could be discounted, because Barack would have held a dual citizenship at the time of birth, he would still be ineligible. Complicating all of this, is his mother’s second marriage to Lolo Soetoro and Barack’s adoption by his step-father. Lolo was Indonesian; now we’ve got yet a third country that impacts on Barry’s citizenship.
What if this entire story isn’t true and what does this have to do with Michelle Obama’s red & black dress, the one she worn in Grant Park the night Barack became the President Elect? Well, plenty if I’m right.
The supreme irony is that if Malcolm X isObama’s father then Obama meets the eligibility requirements of the Constitution! Malcolm X was a natural born citizen thus making Barack (Barry?) a natural born citizen. The worst case scenario is that if Barack were born in Kenya he would face (essentially) the same issues that John McCain faced! But back to Michelle’s red & black dress.
I know I am not the first to suggest that Obama’s father may be Malcolm X. This connection has been brought up before at Atlas Shrugs, Oil for Immigration, and on Polarik’s site using (as best I can determine) information that originated with Israel Insider. Other than idle curiosity, there hasn’t been much else to tie Obama to Malcolm. But then we’ve got that image of Obama’s in Grant Park, thered and black dress and that X that hits you between the eyes . . . an insult to the senses because the dress is so entirely out of place. It hard not to shout, “America’s next First Family shouldn’t be dressed these colors of defiance! Where are the various shades of red, white, and blue?”
Then suddenly it smacks you in the face . . . that X is for Malcolm. That X on the front of Michelle’s dress and those colors are for Malcolm. What other reason can there be? Sudden bad taste or a horrendous lack of sensitivity to the historical significance of the colors chosen for the very first photos of the Obama’s? In a campaign this carefully orchestrated and staged with the deliberate associations to the Kennedy’s how does it suddenly become feasible that a faux pas of this magnitude would be allowed?
Let’s cobble a few more interesting notes about Malcolm’s name.
In 1952, after he was released from prison, Malcolm changed his last name from Little toX, a designation that denotes “a certain mystery, a certain possibility of power in the eyes of one’s peers and one’s enemies …The ‘X’; announced what you had been and what you had become: Ex-smoker, Ex-drinker, Ex-Christian, Ex-slave.” and is also intended as a rejection of slave names.
X is also a brand that many slaves received on their upper arms. Though likely the most famous Black Muslim to change his name to X, Malcolm was one of many who eventually adopted this practice.
“He was tall and handsome and when he walked into a room, he took it over. These things were important. And when he spoke, he could talk our talk in a way that made people understand right off.” Remind you of anyone? Barack, perhaps?
If you are under 30 you probably have very little idea who Malcolm X was. For more complete understanding of his life see additional video here.
Make no mistake the 60’s were a violent time. The black revolution was beginning . . . this was a time of conflict where most black leaders were looked at in a negative manner. Malcolm X, although very controversial, was not an extremist like Farrakhan was and remains to this day. Malcolm could rightly be called an extremist initially, but he came to believe that the races could live and work together.
Malcolm left the Nation of Islam as a matter of principle. It cost him his life.
Like many of us who change and grow into maturity, Malcolm at the end of his life was much different than the Malcolm of his youth. During this time, Malcolm became a guest of Muhammed Faisal (son of then Prince Faisal), and Malcolm made a pilgrimage to Mecca, an event that changed his life. He believed, through Muslim teachings, that all racial barriers could be overcome.
Malcolm returned from Mecca a Sunni Muslim, a changed man. He also bore a new name, El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz. This is from Lessons from Malcolm X
Below is an excerpt of a powerful speech Malcolm gave upon his return:
“Human rights are something you were born with?.In the past, yes I have made sweeping indictments of all white people. I will never be guilty of that again (emphasis mine) as I know now that some white people are truly sincere, that some truly are capable of being brotherly toward a black man…Since I learned the truth in Mecca, my dearest friends have come to include all kinds, Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Agnostics, even Atheists My friends today are black, brown, red, yellow and white While in Mecca, for the first time in my life, I could call a man with blond hair and blue eyes my brother.”
Ok, so what’s the truth? Is Malcolm X or Barack Hussein Obama Sr. BHO’s father? I don’t know. Is Barack really a Muslim . . . the Freudian slip with George Stephanopoulos indicates he is. I really don’t know. There is a mountain of compelling evidence that supports several positions on Barack’s birth father and his religion.
Here’s what I do know. Stanley Ann Dunham was a complicated woman, a woman with a past more interesting than what we’ve been led to believe, regardless who Barack’s father really is. This is a family whose lives are clothed in secrets.
Something else I know is that this is a tragedy of epic proportions if Malcolm X really was BHO’s father. Imagine having to deny your real identity on a daily basis because somewhere along a line a decision was made that it was better to be known as the “son” of Barack Obama Sr. than to acknowledge that you are the son of Malcolm X.
In the desire to become president, was this denial born out of expediency because Malcolm X was a Muslim. America might tolerate a multi-cultural man as president . . . but after 9/11 does anyone think a Muslim would have any chance at the office? Again, I don’t know. I do know that the truth has a way of always coming out . . . that secrets kept in the dark have a way of finding the light of day.
If you have been following the Obama “natural born citizen” drama since August, when I first posed the question of whether or not BHO could hold the office of POTUS, you are most certainly aware of the numerous sites, that detail the multitude of lawsuits filed to discover the truth about Obama’s identity… his birth father and place of birth.
For those on the chase, I’m recommending you look at a pro Obama site called What’s Your Evidence? This is the first site I’ve found that analyzes the Berg complaint, as well as, the collateral issues surrounding this epic journey into whether or not Barack Hussein Obama II is eligible to hold the office of POTUS under our Constitution from anopposing viewof those of us who believe that Obama is not a natural born citizen or eligible to hold the office of POTUS.
Clearly, someone has taken a great deal of time to “debunk” the Berg claim. Make no mistake, the site is pro-Obama. If you haven’t stumbled across the site already, I am recommending this site for a number of reasons. The writer keeps insisting on evidence to support claims against Obama’s status as a natural born citizen, at the same time he/she either glosses over or omits evidence that supports Berg and others.
Agree or disagree with the legal conclusion here, it is an interesting compendium of the issues that many may find useful on their quest for the truth.
A quick read will show that the writer believes Factcheck.org is a reliable source, that Obama didn’t lie on his Illinois lawyer registration form, and that the Obama COLB posted on the Factcheck.org is a reliable record for determining Obama’s birth. No mention is made as to whether the Tooth Fairy is considered a reliable source. (Ok, cheap shot! So what!)
The following is from the site’s front page:
Berg v. Obama Citizenship Lawsuit: Status & Summary as of December 29
This blog is in the process of evaluating the allegations set forth in the complaint brought by Mr. Philip Berg against Senator Obama, alleging that he is not qualified to serve as President, on multiple different grounds.
The case was filed in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, by Mr. Philip Berg. Mr. Berg has published a website, www.obamacrimes.com, with copies of the pleadings and some materials related to the case. Mr. Berg’s lawsuit was dismissed by the District Court, on October 24, 2008. See Memorandum and Order. However, Berg is appealing this decision to both the Third Circuit (registration required) and the Supreme Court.
Should anyone still question the import to this Constitutional issue please review the following article from the American Thinker website.
[…] Obama has refused to disclose the vault copy of his Hawaiian birth certificate. This raises the question whether he himself has established that he is eligible to be President. To date, no state or federal election official, nor any government authority, has verified that he ever established conclusively that he meets the eligibility standard under the Constitution. (emphasis mine)
For those tracking this story on a daily basis, visit Oil for Immigration, Citizen Wells, TD Blog, Obama Crimes, America’s Right . . . etc.
Ah, conspiracies. Funny how that word has become one of the latest derogatory tools used by the Obama acolytes to metaphorically club anyone who opposes Obama. Take a principled stance against all that Obama and his campaign represent and be prepared to be accused of being a “tin foil” wearing conspiracy loon.
The truth is, conspiracies come in all sizes and shapes. Some conspiracies are well thought out . . . others, I submit, evolve and grow out of circumstances, timing, luck, happenstance. Do I believe there is/was an Obama Conspiracy? Yes, I do, but not the traditional plot one usually thinks of or reads about in novels.
When Obama began his run for the presidency, I’m not sure he thought he would actually capture the nomination. Hillary was the strongest of the Democratic contenders with more experience and street creds than BHO. When things began to change, particularly after the South Carolina primary, I think a loose confederation of conspirators began to assemble. I’m betting they didn’t think of themselves as conspirators while they schemed and plotted. After the Obama camp played the race card on the Clinton’s and it looked like Obama was going to take the black vote from Hillary, I think this loose confederation of Clinton haters (too strong a word?) got together and decided Obama was a better bet than Hillary.
Once the race card was hurled at the unsuspecting Clinton’s and their game was compromised, it became easier and easier for former Clinton supporters to jump ship. Some, like Bill Richardson, were always weasels. Others, like Dee Dee Myers were a surprise. The Clinton’s former press secretary was nothing more than weasel waste. Who knew? There were others like the Kennedy’s who also did a 180 degree turn on Bill and Hillary and never looked back.
Once the rats began jumping ship, I believe at some point the majority knew Obama had Constitutional eligibility problems and didn’t care. You cannot tell me that this group, of (supposedly) savvy political pros, many who hold law degrees themselves, were completely unaware of the fraud Obama was perpetrating on the voters of this country. They looked the other way because not being defeated by the Republicans was all they cared about . . . that and not risking having another Clinton White House with the possible dredging up of past Clinton sins the MSM would have another swing at. Why risk hearing and wincing about impeachment, or the Rose Law Firm, or Whitewater yet again?
So, Barack was born a British citizen, or Kenyon, or whatever . . . right? So what! Who, pray tell, will know the difference? Besides, who but a handful of scholars and lawyers actually knows what Article II Section 1 specifies? Why risk more Clinton controversy and scandal? Why, indeed.
Ironic, don’t you think . . . not wanting to risk more controversy. Obama hasn’t been officially declared President Elect by the Electoral College, the inauguration is weeks away and there are multiple lawsuits in 17 states & front of the Supreme Court questioning Obama’s eligibility to hold the office. Last week, another bomb shell. We have the selling of Obama’s Senate seat by Governor Blagojevich. Now we are asked to believe that Obama had no knowledge that the Chicago politician he supported for numerous years was engaged in this practice. Remember when Reagan was called the Teflon President? Obama has him beaten by a mile. As usual, the MSM is nowhere to be found. Still looking to find more incriminating Palin dirt, I suppose.
When one steps back and tries to put the election of 2008 into some kind of perspective, it is hard not be saddened and sobered by the spectacle of hosts politicians, voters, and the media stepping outside of reality, trashing our Republic . . . all for the sake of one man. They have put him ahead of everything we are supposed to hold dear. They have put him ahead of truth, of honesty,of common sense.
A few weeks ago I heard Zbigniew Brzezinski on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, say that Obama was our universal hope! As those words spilled out of Brzezinski’s mouth, I thought, “have you lost you friggin mind?” Brzezinski talked about Obama with the kind of glowing terms usually reserved for one’s savior , not a slick politician. Such is the madness surrounding the candidacy and nomination of Obama to the office of POTUS .
There is no doubt that Barack Hussein Obama is gifted . . . some would say charmed, but he is but a mere mortal of a man . . . in some ways a blank slate upon which millions have projected their hopes and dreams.
As the myth of the man has been separated by the reality of his actions and the betrayals of our political system by Team Obama, Howard Dean & the DNC, and Senators like Claire McCaskill and a legion of others, agroup a patriot bloggershave stood fast trying to preserve our Constitution.
We are from varied political backgrounds, having supported different candidates and philosophies in the past, we are united in our passion to hold Obama accountable! This passion is not born out of hatred for the man as many in the media and elsewhere would have you believe. My guess is that many supported Obama for a time, but simply couldn’t swill down enough Kool-Aid to look past the deception and dishonesty of his campaign.
We live in a world of “sound byte politics” with an entire generation under 30 that thinks in that superficial manner. There are no deliberative politics shown to this group of voters. All they know is the sound of another condescending quip, like “birthers” . . . the newly minted descriptor used for the patriot bloggers who have repeatedly pressed for Obama to present the credentials necessary to prove his eligibility to hold the office of POTUS as detailed in Article II Section 1 of the Constitution.
To those who accuse us of hating Obama, of wearing tin foil on our heads, of creating controversy and conspiracies where none exist, here is the point you are missing. We are fighting the good fight because of principles, because our “most perfect union”, our Republic is and must remain greater than any one man.
When Obama’s reign is over (assuming he is inaugurated & places his hand on the Bible as he swears to uphold the Constitution) what will we be left with? We must fight to make the those people we have entrusted to make the laws also follow the laws! No one is entitled to ignore any law because of convenience or because they disagree with it. That’s the point!
The Framers of our Constitution fought and thought long and hard about the nature and structure of our country. Those who have chosen to side-step this great document upon which our country and our liberties are built . . . you should be ashamed of yourselves.
As I write this, I find it incomprehensible that MSM is virtually silent on the Constitutional crisis that is before us . . . one that could have been easily averted if Mr. Obama had simply produced the records that prove that he is a natural born citizenas described in Article II Section 1of the Constitution.
But he hasn’t and the only logical conclusion one can reach is Obama can’t prove he meets the eligibility requirements for president as determined by the Framers of the Constitution. We all know that and so too the Obamabots. I remain incredulous that citizens should be forced to the take the extreme action of filing suit in order to obtain such basic information.
Why would Obama fail to comply with basic requests that include his school records etc? Possibly as, Dr. Kate wrote a few days on TD Blog, it’s because his sealed records, including college financial aid applications, papers, and coursework, and his financial aid applications (would) reveal his foreign status.
[…] I believe his Columbia and Harvard papers could reveal his examination of the “weaknesses” of the U.S. Constitution and ways to “remedy” them using “administrative procedures” as discussed in this 2001 radio interview.
Think it’s possible that the shuck ‘ jive routine about Obama’s thesis is because it concentrated on topics like naturalized, natural born, or dual citizenship as regards the eligibility for POTUS? And before anyone writes to tell me his thesis at Columbia was on nuclear negotiations with the Soviets . . . don’t. Copies of Michelle’s thesis from Princeton are available on line, but not Barack’s. Curious don’t you think? No one can find a single page, a draft, anything that resembles hard copy.
As anyone who has been following this knows, Obama, the DNC, and his teams of lawyers have ignored all requests to present these documents . . . documents that would be requested of anyoneseeking the highest office in the land. And so, with the January inauguration around the corner we now have a case resting in front of the Supremes. If the Justices of the Supreme Court agree to hear this case, I cannot help but wonder what kind of shock wave is going to go through this country.
I have this picture in my mind of all those people on the Titantic, sailing in that sea of icebergs, about to hit one head on . . . clueless about the tragedy ahead of them. The Captain of the ship who was aware … ignored the warnings. Along side of these visions I keep thinking about the MSM, aware of the consequences if Obama is found to be ineligible, ignoring the warnings. Possibly hoping like the Captain of the Titanic, that icebergs could be averted?
The Donofrio v Wells lawsuit is the only one that is not anchored to Obama’s birth certificate, instead focusing on the fact that Obama held dual citizenship at birth. This case does not face the same challenges regarding “standing” that the long list of other lawsuits face. For this reason alone, it has (IMHO) the best chance of succeeding. What has happened since Monday and as detailed on a new site I recommend to anyone looking for more in-depth coverage is that:
the United States Supreme Court scheduled the case – Leo C. Donofrio v. Nina Mitchell Wells, Secretary of State of the State of New Jersey – US Supreme Court Docket No. 08A407 – for a conference of the nine Justices. The conference is a completely private affair and the public may not attend. If four of the nine Justices vote to hear the case in full, oral argument may be scheduled. The conference is scheduled for December 5, 2008, ten days before the meeting of the Electoral College.
US SUPREME COURT TAKES EXTRAORDINARY EXPEDITED ACTION IN FAST TRACKING NJ CITIZEN SUIT CHALLENGING ’08 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
I am awaiting clarification from the Clerk’s office at the United States Supreme Court as to whether my stay application has now been accepted in lieu of a more formal full petition for certiorari (and/or mandamus or prohibition). Such a transformation is a rare and significant emergency procedure. It was used in Bush v. Gore, a case I have relied on in my brief.
We do know the case has certainly been “DISTRIBUTED for Conference“, a process usually reserved for full petitions of certiorari. Stays are usually dealt with in a different manner. As to a stay application, a single Justice may; a) deny the stay; b) grant the stay; c) refer the stay to the full Court.
If you haven’t looked at the CONSTITUTION, Bill of Rights, and the other key documents that form our democracy in a very long time, please visit The Charters of Freedom. It is a great site to visit and I highly recommend that people that want to comment on the merits of the Donofrio suit may want to visit before posting their comments.
John Marshall, oil painting (reproduction) by Rembrandt Peale, 1826
During the thirty-five years that John Marshall served as Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, he asserted both the power of the judiciary as a coequal branch of government and the supremacy of Federal authority.
Courtesy of the Supreme Court of the United States Washington, DC
Thanks to Racquel who inserted this picture of a racist mailbox in her comment at Sodahead. 
Stumble It!
/>
Hillary and Me 