Category Archives: Delegate

Democrat 2012 platform endorses same sex marriage, 2007 DNC party rules put Democrat Party above nation and Constitution, Norman Mattoon Thomas DNC adopted socialist platform

Democrat 2012 platform endorses same sex marriage, 2007 DNC party rules put Democrat Party above nation and Constitution, Norman Mattoon Thomas DNC adopted socialist platform

“It is presumed that the delegates to the Democratic National Convention, when certified pursuant to the Call, are bona fide Democrats who are faithful to the interests, welfare and success of the Democratic Party of the United States”…Rules for 2008 DNC Convention and Electors

“The term “presidential candidate” herein shall mean any person who, as determined by the National Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee, has accrued delegates in the nominating process and plans to seek the nomination,….affirmatively demonstrates that he or she is faithful to the interests, welfare and success of the Democratic Party of the United States”…Rules for 2008 DNC Convention and Electors

“In selecting delegates and alternate delegates to the national convention, no state law shall be observed which hinders, abridges, or denies to any citizen of the United States, eligible under the Constitution of the United States to hold the office of President of the United States or Vice President of the United States,”…Rules for 2008 RNC Convention and Electors

From Business Week August 11, 2012.

“Democratic Party Backs Same-Sex Marriage for 2012 Platform”

“Democrats unanimously voted today to endorse same-sex marriage in their party’s platform, the first time a major political party has supported the issue in its statement of policies.

Today’s action at the platform committee meeting in Detroit sends the document for ratification by delegates to next month’s Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, North Carolina. President Barack Obama, a Democrat, said in May that he supports same-sex marriage. Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney doesn’t.

A drafting committee included the same-sex marriage provision in the platform last month. Platform committee members raised no objections.

“The 14th Amendment is very clear — equal protection under the law,” said the platform committee co-chairman, Cory Booker, the mayor of Newark, New Jersey. “We as a party have really embraced the president’s ideas.”

While calling the action “very significant,” Booker told reporters after the committee meeting that the top issue in the presidential campaign would be the economy, not same-sex marriage.

“It may repel some, it may attract others,” he said. “This campaign is not going to turn on gay marriage.”

Immigration Overhaul
The platform also calls for “comprehensive immigration reform,” citing the Dream Act, legislation that would allow children brought to the U.S. by undocumented-immigrant parents to get legal status if they go to college or join the military. Congressional Republicans have blocked the legislation. Obama said June 15 that his administration would no longer deport some young adults brought to the U.S. illegally as children.

Senate Democratic candidates in Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico had asked that Dream Act provisions be part of the party platform.

While the platform promises to “preserve Americans’ Second Amendment right to own and use firearms,” it also says that “the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation,” such as restoring the ban on assault-style weapons and strengthening background checks.

Twelve people were killed and at least 58 were injured on July 20 when a gunman opened fire during a midnight showing of “The Dark Knight Rises” in an Aurora, Colorado, movie theater. Seven people, including the alleged gunman, died in a shooting at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin, on Aug. 5.

Corporate Donations
The platform also addresses the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which removed restrictions on corporate and union independent expenditures and has led to an increase in campaign spending by outside groups, many of which don’t disclose their donors. The platform calls for “immediate action” to overhaul the campaign finance system, including requiring nonprofit groups running political ads to disclose their contributors.

“You have huge amounts of secret money coming in and changing every level of government,” said Matthew Lesser, a state representative in Connecticut and a member of the platform committee.”

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-08-11/democratic-platform-mirrors-obama-and-backs-same-sex-marriage

Obviously no one was surprised.

The 2007 DNC party rules made no mention of adhering to the US Constitution. It did, however, reveal the priority of the Democrat Party.

“II. QUALIFICATIONS OF STATE DELEGATIONS”

“C. It is presumed that the delegates to the Democratic National Convention, when certified pursuant to the Call, are bona fide Democrats who are faithful to the interests, welfare and success of the Democratic Party of the United States, who subscribe to the substance, intent and principles of the Charter and the Bylaws of the Democratic Party of the United States, and who will participate in the Convention in good faith. Therefore, no additional assurances shall be
required of delegates to the Democratic National Convention in the absence of a credentials contest or challenge.”

“VI. PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES

The term “presidential candidate” herein shall mean any person who, as determined by the National Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee, has accrued delegates in the nominating process and plans to seek the nomination, has established substantial support for his or her nomination as the
Democratic candidate for the Office of the President of the United States, is a bona fide Democrat whose record of public service, accomplishment, public writings and/or public statements affirmatively demonstrates that he or she is faithful to the interests, welfare and success of the Democratic Party of the
United States, and will participate in the Convention in good faith.”

http://s3.amazonaws.com/apache.3cdn.net/c313170ef991f2ce12_iqm6iyofq.pdf

Obviously no one was surprised.

FROM A 1944 speech by Norman Mattoon Thomas, a leading American Socialist and six time Socialist Party of America Presidential Candidate.

“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism.
But, under the name of “liberalism”,
they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program,
until one day America will be a socialist nation,
without knowing how it happened.”

“I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party.
The Democratic Party has adopted our platform.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2009/05/12/norman-thomas-socialist-party-of-america-leading-american-socialist-liberalism-presidential-candidate-democratic-party-has-adopted-our-platform/
Obviously no one was surprised.

The 2007 Republican Party rules at least state the following constitutional requirement for the presidency.

“In selecting delegates and alternate delegates to the national convention,
no state law shall be observed which hinders, abridges, or denies to any citizen of the United States, eligible under the Constitution of the United States to hold the office of President of the United States or Vice President of the United States, the right or privilege of being a candidate under such state law for the nomination for President of the United States or Vice President of the United States or which authorizes the election of a number of delegates or alternate delegates from any state to the national convention different from that fixed in these rules.”

http://devvy.net/pdf/mar08/2008_Call_FINAL.pdf

I would like to see a reaffirmation of upholding the US Constitution.

Advertisements

David Farrar V Barack Obama, Georgia ballot, Obama not natural born citizen, Obama attorney Michael Jablonski motion, GA election laws

David Farrar V Barack Obama, Georgia ballot, Obama not natural born citizen, Obama attorney Michael Jablonski motion, GA election laws

“Why did Obama, prior to occupying the White House, employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to assist him in avoiding the presentation of a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells


“Why is Obama now employing private attorneys to keep his name on state ballots, despite compelling evidence that he is not a natural born citizen?…Citizen Wells

Obama has engaged private attorney Michael Jablonski to respond to the Pre Trial order filed by David Farrar. The order requests that Barack Obama’s name be removed from the Georgia State ballot because Obama is not a natural born citizen and therefore not qualified for the office of the president.

Some information on Attorney Michael Jablonski.

“Michael Jablonski represents select clients in matters related to politics: campaigns with contract problems; candidates facing ethics charges; political consultants charged with trademark and copyright violations; media buyers and candidates confused by the FCC’s lowest unit charge rules; businesses with campaign contribution problems; citizens using the Georgia Open Records Act or the Federal Freedom of Information Act; and others that have been caught in the mire of campaign finance and ethics law.”

Read more:

http://taarradhin.net/

Looks like Obama has picked the right attorney.

From David Farrar V Barack Obama.
“(4) The issues for determination by the Court are as follows:
A. Is the candidate’s proffered birth certificates, authentic state-issued documents that verify his actual, physical birth in Hawaii?
B. Is the candidate an Article II natural born citizen of the United States as established in US. Supreme Court case: Minor vs Happersett 1875 Page 88 U. S. 163
C. O.C.G.A. § 21-2-560 Making of False Statements Generally. Is the candidate’s Social Security number, authentic?”

Two segments from Mr. Jablonski’s motion.

“The Democratic Party of Georgia determines names to include on its Presidential Preference Primary ballot at its sole discretion. O.C.G.A. 21 -2-193. A state political party “enjoys a constitutionally protected freedom which includes the right to identify the people who constitute this association to those people only.”
“Furthermore, the citizenship issue the plaintiff seeks to raise was soundly rejected by 69,456,897 Americans in the 2008 elections, as it has been by every judicial body ever to have considered it.”

My response.

The GA Democratic Party may put anyone they want on the ballot. However, that right does not trump the US Constitution dictate that the president must be a natural born citizen. GA election law clearly provides the Secretary of State and electors the power to challenge the qualifications of candidates. Also, to my knowledge, no court in this country has ruled that Obama is a natural born citizen.

I was born and raised in NC, have some experience reading legal documents and we also have some good dictionaries in NC. I have read the motion from Mr. Jablonski as well as the 2008 and 2011 versions of Georgia election laws. I will leave it for the reader to evaluate the accuracy of the following statements by Michael Jablonski in the hope that good dictionaries and logical thought capabilities exist in other parts of the country.

From the motion filed December 16, 2011 by attorney  Michael Jablonski.

“President Obama asks for dismissal of this attempt to deprive the Democratic Party of Georgia of its statutory right to name candidates to the Presidential Preference Party held to apportion Gerogia’s delegates to the Democratic National Convention. No provision of Georgia law authorizes a challenge to a political party’s identification of names it wishes its members to consider in a preference primary for purposes of apportioning delegates to its National Convention.The Democratic Party of Georgia properly identified Barack Obama as a candidate to whom National Convention delegates will be pledged based upon votes in the preference poll. Georgia law does not authorize the Secretary of State to exercise any discretion or oversight over the actions of a political party participating in a preference primary. Indeed, any review by the Secretary of State would interfere with associational rights of the Democratic Party guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
“The Time Limit for filing any challenge under O.C.G.A. 21-2-5 (if it appplies) specifies a two week period after qualifying in which a challenge can be filed.”
“The Secretary of State’s involvement in the Presidential Preference Primary process, other than conducting balloting, is limited to receiving names submitted by political parties for inclusion in the preference primary, publishing the submitted names on a website, and including the names on the ballot.”
“O.C.G.A. 21-2-193. The Presidential Preference Primary statute does not empower the Secretary of State to review submissions of names by political parties.”
“O.C.G.A. 21-2-5 does not apply to the Presidential Preference Primary because the preference primary is not an election”
“Nothing in the context of O.C.G.A. 21-2-5 “clearly requires” applicability to the preference primary.”

From the Georgia Election Statutes.

“O.C.G.A. § 21-2-193  (2011)

§ 21-2-193.  List of names of candidates to appear on ballot; publication of list
   On a date set by the Secretary of State, but not later than 60 days preceding the date on which a presidential preference primary is to be held, the state executive committee of each party which is to conduct a presidential preference primary shall submit to the Secretary of State a list of the names of the candidates of such party to appear on the presidential preference primary ballot. Such lists shall be published on the website of the Secretary of State during the fourth week immediately preceding the date on which the presidential preference primary is to be held.”

“O.C.G.A. § 21-2-200  (2011)

§ 21-2-200.  Applicability of general primary provisions; form of ballot
   A presidential preference primary shall be conducted, insofar as practicable, pursuant to this chapter respecting general primaries, except as otherwise provided in this article. In setting up the form of the ballot, the Secretary of State shall provide for designating the name of the candidate to whom a candidate for delegate or delegate alternate is pledged, if any.”

“TITLE 21.  ELECTIONS 
CHAPTER 2.  ELECTIONS AND PRIMARIES GENERALLY 
ARTICLE 1.  GENERAL PROVISIONS

O.C.G.A. § 21-2-5  (2011)

§ 21-2-5.  Qualifications of candidates for federal and state office; determination of qualifications
   (a) Every candidate for federal and state office who is certified by the state executive committee of a political party or who files a notice of candidacy shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.

(b) The Secretary of State upon his or her own motion may challenge the qualifications of any candidate at any time prior to the election of such candidate. Within two weeks after the deadline for qualifying, any elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate may challenge the qualifications of the candidate by filing a written complaint with the Secretary of State giving the reasons why the elector believes the candidate is not qualified to seek and hold the public office for which he or she is offering. Upon his or her own motion or upon a challenge being filed, the Secretary of State shall notify the candidate in writing that his or her qualifications are being challenged and the reasons therefor and shall advise the candidate that he or she is requesting a hearing on the matter before an administrative law judge of the Office of State Administrative Hearings pursuant to Article 2 of Chapter 13 of Title 50 and shall inform the candidate of the date, time, and place of the hearing when such information becomes available. The administrative law judge shall report his or her findings to the Secretary of State.

(c) The Secretary of State shall determine if the candidate is qualified to seek and hold the public office for which such candidate is offering. If the Secretary of State determines that the candidate is not qualified, the Secretary of State shall withhold the name of the candidate from the ballot or strike such candidate’s name from the ballot if the ballots have been printed. If there is insufficient time to strike the candidate’s name or reprint the ballots, a prominent notice shall be placed at each affected polling place advising voters of the disqualification of the candidate and all votes cast for such candidate shall be void and shall not be counted.”

“TITLE 21.  ELECTIONS 
CHAPTER 2.  ELECTIONS AND PRIMARIES GENERALLY 
ARTICLE 5.  PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE PRIMARY

O.C.G.A. § 21-2-191  (2011)

§ 21-2-191.  Parties entitled to hold primaries; dates; decision to elect delegates to presidential nominating convention in primary; qualifying periods for candidates for delegate
   As provided in this article, a presidential preference primary shall be held in 2012 and every four years thereafter for each political party or body which has cast for its candidates for President and Vice President in the last presidential election more than 20 percent of the total vote cast for President and Vice President in this state, so that the electors may express their preference for one person to be the candidate for nomination by such person’s party or body for the office of President of the United States; provided, however, that no elector shall vote in the primary of more than one political party or body in the same presidential preference primary. Such primary shall be held in each year in which a presidential election is to be conducted on a date selected by the Secretary of State which shall not be later than the second Tuesday in June in such year. The Secretary of State shall select such date no later than December 1 of the year immediately preceding such primary. A state political party or body may by rule choose to elect any portion of its delegates to that party’s or body’s presidential nominating convention in the primary; and, if a state political party or body chooses to elect any portion of its delegates, such state political party or body shall establish the qualifying period for those candidates for delegate and delegate alternate positions which are to be elected in the primary and for any party officials to be elected in the primary and shall also establish the date on which state and county party executive committees shall certify to the Secretary of State or the superintendent, as the case may be, the names of any such candidates who are to be elected in the primary; provided, however, that such dates shall not be later than 60 days preceding the date on which the presidential preference primary is to be held.”

“O.C.G.A. § 21-2-521  (2011)

§ 21-2-521.  Primaries and elections which are subject to contest; persons who may bring contest
   The nomination of any person who is declared nominated at a primary as a candidate for any federal, state, county, or municipal office; the election of any person who is declared elected to any such office (except when otherwise prescribed by the federal Constitution or the Constitution of Georgia); the eligibility of any person declared eligible to seek any such nomination or office in a run-off primary or election; or the approval or disapproval of any question submitted to electors at an election may be contested by any person who was a candidate at such primary or election for such nomination or office, or by any aggrieved elector who was entitled to vote for such person or for or against such question.”

“O.C.G.A. § 21-2-522  (2011)

§ 21-2-522.  Grounds for contest
   A result of a primary or election may be contested on one or more of the following grounds:

   (1) Misconduct, fraud, or irregularity by any primary or election official or officials sufficient to change or place in doubt the result;

   (2) When the defendant is ineligible for the nomination or office in dispute;

   (3) When illegal votes have been received or legal votes rejected at the polls sufficient to change or place in doubt the result;

   (4) For any error in counting the votes or declaring the result of the primary or election, if such error would change the result; or

   (5) For any other cause which shows that another was the person legally nominated, elected, or eligible to compete in a run-off primary or election.”

David Farrar filing:

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/12/david-farrar-v-barack-obama-first.html
Attorney Michael Jablonski filing

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/12/obamas-private-attorney-files-motion-to.html

Senate Health Care Bill, Democrat Party politics, Party first, 2008 DNC Convention Rules, Why Democrats push unwanted bill

I constantly hear people on TV and around me ask why Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the Democrat controlled Congress keep pushing a bad Health Care Bill that most Americans are against. Many Americans believe that for modern day Democrat politicians it is party and party politics first and the hell with the country. Below are some exerpts from the 2008 Democratic National Convention party rules.

“As Adopted by the Democratic National Committee, February 2, 2007”

Citizen Wells:  This helps explain the convoluted, excessive size of the proposed Health Care Bill. A small portion of the calculation is presented.

“I. DISTRIBUTION OF DELEGATE VOTES

The distribution of votes, delegates and alternates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention shall be in
accordance with the following:”

“A. The number of Convention votes for delegates to the Convention shall be as set forth in the
compilation included in this resolution and determined as provided in paragraphs B, C, D, E, F,
G, H1, and I.

B. A base of 3,000 delegate votes is distributed among the 50 states and the District of Columbia
according to a formula giving equal weight to the sum of the vote for the Democratic candidates
in the three (3) most recent presidential elections and to population by electoral vote. The formula
is expressed mathematically as follows:”

Citizen Wells: “faithful to the interests, welfare and success of the Democratic Party of the United States”

“II. QUALIFICATIONS OF STATE DELEGATIONS”
“C. It is presumed that the delegates to the Democratic National Convention, when certified
pursuant to the Call, are bona fide Democrats who are faithful to the interests, welfare and
success of the Democratic Party of the United States, who subscribe to the substance, intent and
principles of the Charter and the Bylaws of the Democratic Party of the United States, and who
will participate in the Convention in good faith. Therefore, no additional assurances shall be
required of delegates to the Democratic National Convention in the absence of a credentials
contest or challenge.”
Citizen Wells: Priorities. The DNC is beholden to unions.
“V. THE 2008 DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION COMMITTEE, INC.”
“1. Contractors: The DNCC shall as a policy seek to engage the services of unionized
firms, including those owned by minorities, women and people with disabilities.”

Citizen Wells: Presidential qualifications. The only thing that matters is allegiance to the party.

“VI. PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES

The term “presidential candidate” herein shall mean any person who, as determined by the National
Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee, has accrued delegates in the nominating process and
plans to seek the nomination, has established substantial support for his or her nomination as the
Democratic candidate for the Office of the President of the United States, is a bona fide Democrat whose
record of public service, accomplishment, public writings and/or public statements affirmatively
demonstrates that he or she is faithful to the interests, welfare and success of the Democratic Party of the
United States, and will participate in the Convention in good faith.”

Citizen Wells

This is presented not to praise the Republicans or other political parties. It is also recognized that rules are necessary for any organized group. However, it is clear that the 2008 DNC rules are convoluted, overly complicated and designed as self serving for the preservation of the Democrat Party. The only qualification for the presidency that they address is allegiance to the party. And saddest of all, there is no mention of looking out for the best interest of the United States and citizens.

This should help you understand what is going on in the senate and White House. It is all about the Democrat Party.

John Adams speech, Declaration of Independence, Continental Congress, We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor

I leave you with this to ponder as we end one day and begin another, still free, but not guaranteed….Wells

“John Adams speech before the Continental Congress on Freedom and the reading of The Declaration Of Independence”

John Adams – God Save The American States

 

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Harry Reid, ACORN, Nevada Senator Reid protects ACORN, NV corruption, Voter fraud, Harry Reid losing support, Tea Party Express, Un-Elect Harry Reid Rally, Las Vegas ACORN office

Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi were all smiles back in 2008 and why not. They were ramroding through an illegal presidential candidate with the help of ACORN and other radicals from this country and abroad. However, anyone observing the two unbalanced, far left liberal members of Congress lately, from the pallor of their countenance,  would think the two had contracted cancer. Me thinks they have seen the spectre of accountability.

Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi ignored the US Constitution, confident that their deeds would be covered up or spun by the main stream media or squashed by a cadre of Obama internet thugs. They forgot that everyone cannot be bought and that most Americans still care about this country.

Let’s focus on Harry Reid. His popularity has been plummeting from his involvement in the tax and spend binge of the Democrats. The Tea Party Express made two stops in Nevada. Yesterday we reported:
“Despite all this evidence and a request in writing by 28 GOP senators — and despite the fact the U.S. Senate voted 83-7 on Sept. 14 to block ACORN from bidding for any more federal grant money — “Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is refusing to hold a Senate hearing on ACORN’s activities,” the National Republican Senatorial Committee complained Wednesday.

Mr. Reid replied additional investigations might distract lawmakers from addressing more important matters, including health care and economic recovery.”

Harry Reid protects ACORN

From the Tea Party Express in Las Vegas (covered by commenter JoyceAZ)
“All day long people gave each other the thumbs up.  We The People are UNITED IN OUR MARCH TO WAKE UP THE GOVERNMENT.
We just want to be heard.  Our Freedoms are being tread on.  OUR FLAGS SAY: Don’t Tread On Me.  We will not be UNHEARD.”
“The Las Vegas Review-Journal quoted that the count was 800-900.  I truly feel is was much larger than that.  The parking lot was filled at all times….. people would be waiting for a parking spot.  People arriving faster than leaving.
I don’t think I would be exaggerating to say it was closer to 1500+.  I am sending a few articles from the Las Vegas Review-Journal.  They have some interesting articles about dirty harry. He is not very popular at this time.”

Las Vegas, NV Tea Party Express

Harry Reid, things are looking bad for you. A “Un-Elect Harry Reid Rally” was held in Searchlight, NV on Saturday, September 26, 2009. Here is the announcement from the Mojave Daily News.
“An “Un-Elect Harry Reid Rally” will be held from 10:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. Saturday on the grounds of the Searchlight, Nev. Community Center.

Reid, 69, serves as majority leader of the Democratic Party-controlled U.S. Senate. He was first elected senator in 1986 and is up for re-election next year.
The rally is being held in Searchlight because Reid was born and raised there. He maintains a legal residence in the historic mining town on U.S. Route 95, located roughly halfway between Laughlin and Las Vegas.

The event is organized by the Lake Havasu City-based Committee on Taxation Without Representation, chaired by attorney and former mayor Harvey Jackson.

“We’ve got a couple of senators in the state of Arizona that represent us pretty well,” said organization secretary Dennis Schilling. He explained why his Arizona-based group is opposing Reid and House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who were elected outside of Arizona.

“What they do is they control those agendas and those committees … and they directly affect and cross state lines each and every day relative to their decision making,” Schilling said.”

“For more information, visit www.congressontrial.com.”

Read more:

http://www.mohavedailynews.com/articles/2009/09/26/news/local/local2.txt

Coverage of the event by Mojave Daily News:
“Revved up against Reid
Group voices displeasure with Nevada Senator”
““There are candidates among us who will rise like a phoenix from the ashes you’ve made of our Constitution.”

“The government is our servant, not our master,” said another guest speaker, identified as Don the Electrician. “Our constitution starts with the words ‘We the People.’ Well, we are the people. The Constitution was designed to protect us from our government and especially our politicians.”

A sampling of attendees found people angry and determined to make changes in Washington.

“They’re corrupting this nation,” said Jim Durham of Lake Havasu City. “I mean, they’re taking away our rights. I don’t want to have to learn to say, ‘How are you, comrade?’ ”

“Anybody who would pass a trillion-dollar bill without even reading it, must be pretty stupid,” said Steve Buckalew of Lake Havasu City. “Our rights are being taken away.”

“He (Reid) and Pelosi have totally destroyed this country,” said Elouise Joyner of Bullhead City. “I have no idea what their agenda is, but it’s not an American agenda,” she said. “There’s nobody that wants this stupid health care bill, yet he’s going to push it.”

“I don’t think he should be returned (to office) because I don’t believe in his philosophy,” said Jeannie Norris of Mesquite, Nev. “I don’t want more taxes.”

“He hasn’t done anything for Nevada,” said Norris’ husband, Jim, “and he just doesn’t represent me and he doesn’t believe in what I believe in.””

Read more:

http://www.mohavedailynews.com/articles/2009/09/27/news/local/local1.txt

So why would Harry Reid want to protect ACORN aside from the fact that they helped elect Obama?

Here are just a few examples from Reid’s state of Nevada that might be more than a little embarassing.

 

From the Nevada Department of Corrections, October 10, 2008:

“A total of 59 inmates were hired by ACORN. One was terminated for failing to meet quotas. None for registration fraud.”

NVacorn

 

From an article I saved on Wednesday, August  19,  2009, 7:40:07  PM that now gives the message:

“The article requested is no longer available.”

Since the article is no longer available at the link, it is provided in it’s entirety.

“Ex-ACORN Vegas director to testify against group”

“LAS VEGAS — A former Las Vegas director for a political advocacy group accused of illegally paying canvassers to register voters during last year’s presidential campaign has pleaded guilty to a reduced charge and agreed to testify against the group and another employee.

Christopher Edwards pleaded guilty this week to two gross misdemeanor counts of conspiracy to commit the crime of compensation for registration of voters. He agreed to testify against the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, known as ACORN, and Amy Busefink, a former regional voter registration director.

The case threatens the group’s ability to operate in Nevada, with the possibility that the group could have its status as a nonprofit corporation revoked, said Conrad Hafen, chief deputy attorney general for Nevada.

Hafen’s said Edwards’ testimony strengthens the state’s case against ACORN and Busefink.

“It adds to the evidence that we already have,” Hafen said Wednesday. “It makes a strong case that much stronger.”

Busefink’s lawyer, Kevin Stolworthy, said she plans to fight the charges. A lawyer for ACORN did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment from The Associated Press.

Prosecutors said in court documents that Edwards, Busefink and ACORN created a bonus incentive program that paid canvassers an extra $5 per shift if they turned in at least 21 voter registration cards at the end of the day.

Prosecutors said violates state laws that prevent a system that pays workers based on the number of registrations they turn in.

Stolworthy said Busefink, now living in Seminole, Fla., told Edwards not to use the so-called “blackjack” plan but he did anyway.

“When she found out about it she told him to stop,” Stolworthy said. “This guy was the instigator of this and the person who dreamed it up and they’re giving him a break to go after others who told him not to do it.”

Edwards is scheduled to be sentenced Nov. 17. Under the plea deal, prosecutors are recommending that he receive informal probation, pay a $500 fine and perform 16 hours of community service.

The case is the result of an investigation that began last year into the group that works to get low-income people to vote.

In October, the secretary of state’s office raided an ACORN office in Las Vegas after complaints surfaced that the group was turning in bogus voter registration forms. Secretary of State Ross Miller said at the time that some of the registrations included forms for football stars Tony Romo, Terrell Owens and the Dallas Cowboys starting lineup.

ACORN officials at the time said they separated and identified registrations that they thought were fraudulent when they turned them into the Clark County registrar. The group said the law prevented them from withholding registrations they thought were fake.”

Original link:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5isR8VrIHeni2GcKFAiy0OA1WG5kAD9A66C380

October 14, 2008 Senator John Cornyn letter to US Dept. of Justice

“I am increasingly concerned by reports of widespread election fraud by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (“ACORN”), which seem to emerge on a daily basis.

Specifically, I call your attention to state and local investigations into potentially hundreds of thousands of fraudulent voter registration applications filed by ACORN in North Carolina, Ohio, Nevada…”

Senator Cornyn letter

http://cornyn.senate.gov/doc_archive/Mukasey-ACORN-letter.pdf

October 07, 2008

“ACORN Vegas Office Raided in Voter Fraud Investigation
ACORN’s Las Vegas headquarters has been raided by Nevada authorities looking for evidence of voter fraud.”

Nevada state authorities seized records and computers Tuesday from the Las Vegas office of an organization that tries to get low-income people registered to vote, after fielding complaints of voter fraud.

Bob Walsh, spokesman for the Nevada secretary of state’s office, told FOXNews.com the raid was prompted by ongoing complaints about “erroneous” registration information being submitted by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, also called ACORN.

The group was submitting the information through a voter sign-up drive known as Project Vote.

“Some of them used nonexistent names, some of them used false addresses and some of them were duplicates of previously filed applications,” Walsh said, describing the complaints, which largely came from the registrar in Clark County, Nev.

Secretary of State Ross Miller said the fraudulent registrations included  forms for the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys football team.

“Tony Romo is not registered to vote in the state of Nevada, and anybody trying to pose as Terrell Owens won’t be able to cast a ballot on Nov. 4,” Miller said.

Walsh said agents from both the secretary of state’s office and Nevada attorney general’s office conducted the raid at 9:30 a.m. local time, and “took a bunch of stuff.”

Read more:

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/07/acorn-vegas-office-raided-voter-fraud-investigation/comments/

 

From Michelle Malkin October 8, 2008:

“The ACORN/Obama Voter Registration “Thug Thizzle””

“Systemic corruption of our election process continues. Barack Obama and his old friends at ACORN and Project Vote are leading the way. This radical revolution is taking place in your backyard. And as I’ve reported before, this voter-fraud racket is on your dime.”

“On Tuesday, Nevada state officials raided ACORN’s Las Vegas office after election authorities accused the group of submitting multiple voter registrations with fake and duplicate names.

ACORN, which receives 40 percent of its revenues from American taxpayers to pursue an aggressive welfare-state agenda, has already helped register over 1.27 million people nationwide. The rest of their funding comes from left-wing heavyweights like billionaire George Soros and the Democracy Alliance.”

Read more:

http://townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2008/10/08/the_acornobama_voter_registration_thug_thizzle?page=full

From a Citizen Wells Constitution Hall of Shame article regarding a Harry Reid response:
“As you mentioned, some reports have surfaced that my former colleague,
President-Elect Barack Obama, is not a natural-born American citizen.
These reports are false. Barack Obama was born on August 4, 1961, in
Honolulu, Hawai’i. His birth certificate is a matter of public record
of the State of Hawai’i and is available online through various news
sources, as well as on the Web site for the nonpartisan, nonprofit
Annenberg Political Fact Check: http://www.factcheck.org. I hope you
find this information useful.”

Harry Reid’s disregard for the US Constitution

 

There is so much more that can be written here about Nevada and Reid, but time constraints will not allow. Time to move on to the next scoundrel.

And speaking of scoundrels, did you know that Obama won NC by a mere 14,177 votes out of 4,310,789 votes cast. In the light of confirmed ACORN voter fraud in NC and the fact that Citizen Wells and other concerned citizens contacted NC election officials before and after the election to warn of Obama eligibility issues and ACORN voter fraud, somebodies’ got some “splaining to do.”

 

Thanks to commenter JoyceAZ  and many others.

NY Times, Acorn, Obama, March 30, 2009, Times pulled story, Obama ties to Acorn, House Judiciary subcommittee, Game changer story, Anita Moncrief, confidential informant, Times reporter Stephanie Strom, close link between ACORN, Project Vote and the Obama campaign

The NY Times, long known to be biased, pulled a story about Barack
Obama’s campaign ties to ACORN. The story was pulled on October 21,
2008 because it would have been a “a game changer.”

“‘New York Times’ Spiked Obama Donor Story”

“Congressional Testimony: ‘Game-Changer’ Article Would Have Connected
Campaign With ACORN

By Michael P. Tremoglie, The Bulletin
Monday, March 30, 2009

A lawyer involved with legal action against Association of Community
Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) told a House Judiciary subcommittee
on March 19 The New York Times had killed a story in October that would
have shown a close link between ACORN, Project Vote and the Obama campaign
because it would have been a “a game changer.”

Heather Heidelbaugh, who represented the Pennsylvania Republican State
Committee in the lawsuit against the group, recounted for the ommittee what
she had been told by a former ACORN worker who had worked in the group’s
Washington, D.C. office. The former worker, Anita Moncrief, told Ms.
Heidelbaugh last October, during the state committee’s litigation against
ACORN, she had been a “confidential informant for several months to The New
York Times reporter, Stephanie Strom.”

Ms. Moncrief had been providing Ms. Strom with information about ACORN’s
election activities. Ms. Strom had written several stories based on
information Ms. Moncrief had given her.

During her testimony, Ms. Heidelbaugh said Ms. Moncrief had told her The
New York Times articles stopped when she revealed that the Obama presidential
campaign had sent its maxed-out donor list to ACORN’s Washington, D.C. office.”

““If true, The New York Times is showing once again that it is a not an
impartial observer of the political scene,” he said. “If they want to be a
mouthpiece for the Democratic Party, they should put Barack Obama approves
of this in their newspaper.””

Read more:

http://thebulletin.us/articles/2009/03/30/top_stories/doc49d0a73c7f98e547489394.txt
Dick Morris on O’Reilly April 1, 2009

There is plenty about Acorn, what their style of community organizing
really is and Obama’s ties to Acorn, voter fraud  and socialism that
the MSM could have covered, but mostly chose to gloss over or ignore.
From the Citizen Wells blog:

Voter fraud, November 4, 2008

Acorn Tax Lien

Obama lies, Truth about Acorn

Acorn and risky sub prime loans

Obama, Acorn and Socialists

Acorn, Obama, Patrick Fitzgerald FBI investigation

Acorn voter fraud, Obama, Missouri voter fraud

Obama,Acorn, New Party, Democratic Socialists of America

Obama, Acorn, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Voter fraud

Obama Campaign, Texas voter fraud, Dr. Lynette Long investigates

Obama, suspicious payment to Acorn, voter fraud

Obama, Acorn, FEC, money laundering scandal

Larry Sinclair, St Paul, Thursday, Sept 4, 2008, Larry Sinclair updates, Obama drug sex encounter, Real time, twitter.com/citizenwells

Larry Sinclair is in St Paul, MN, to share his story of a drug and sex encounter with Barack Obama in November 1999. Sinclair had a very productive day on Wednesday. He passed out hundreds of info cards and had his picture taken many times. Most importantly, Larry Sinclair spoke to many RNC delegates and was interviewed by press from Spain, Germany, Japan, China and the US as well as local media. Larry Sinclair has a full day planned for today, Thursday, Sept 4, 2008. Larry will be providing real time reports to Citizen Wells. To follow Larry Sinclair as he shares his story with the American public, click here:

http://twitter.com/citizenwells