“John Boozman will enter the Arkansas Senate race this weekend as the frontrunner. He leads incumbent Blanche Lincoln by an amazing 56-33 margin in our first poll of the race.
Lincoln’s approval rating has sunk to just 27%, with 62% of voters in the state disapproving of her. She’s at a middling 51% even within her own party and just 17% of independents and 9% of Republicans are happy with how she’s doing.
A look inside the health care issue gives a good indication of how Lincoln has managed now to get it from all sides. 61% of voters in the state oppose the President’s plan, and among those folks Lincoln’s approval rating is just 8% with 79% of them expressing the belief that she’s too liberal. But she’s managed to antagonize a lot of the people who support the Democratic health care plan as well- 36% of them think she’s too conservative and her approval with them is just 57%. Barack Obama’s at 95% with that same group of voters.
What it all adds up to is Boozman winning 89% of the Republican vote while Lincoln’s at just 68% with Democrats. And Boozman has a 66-20 lead with independents as well.”
Why has Obama employed a legion of private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?…Citizen Wells and millions of Americans
To anyone who has an agenda, is simple minded, not paying attention or does not care, including, but not limited to, Bill O’Reilly and Glenn Beck. Obama’s eligibility issues, his intentional withholding of a legitimate birth certificate, college records and other records from his past and his decision to not receive federal matching election funds are all tied up in a web of deception. One cannot refer to one dubious aspect of Obama’s secrecy without bringing to light another. So it is with the hidden birth certificate. Much has been made about the significance of this fact. For people like Glenn Beck, who preach adherance to the US Constitution out of one side of their mouth while insulting concerned Americans who question Obama’s eligibility out of the other. For people like Beck who appear to be either hypocritical or doing the bidding of the Saudis via their ownership of Fox, I am going to make this real simple.
Why has Obama kept hidden his college records?
It is a certainty that the Saudis played a large role in Obama’s education. Just how much? We will be reopening that can of worms. But first let’s revisit contributions to Obama’s presidential campaign and why Obama chose to not receive federal matching funds.
From NewsMax, September 29, 2008.
“Secret, Foreign Money Floods Into Obama Campaign”
“More than half of the whopping $426.9 million Barack Obama has raised has come from small donors whose names the Obama campaign won’t disclose.
And questions have arisen about millions more in foreign donations the Obama campaign has received that apparently have not been vetted as legitimate.
Obama has raised nearly twice that of John McCain’s campaign, according to new campaign finance report.
But because of Obama’s high expenses during the hotly contested Democratic primary season and an early decision to forgo public campaign money and the spending limits it imposes, all that cash has not translated into a financial advantage — at least, not yet.
The Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee began September with $95 million in cash, according to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
The McCain camp and the Republican National Committee had $94 million, because of an influx of $84 million in public money.
But Obama easily could outpace McCain by $50 million to $100 million or more in new donations before Election Day, thanks to a legion of small contributors whose names and addresses have been kept secret.
Unlike the McCain campaign, which has made its complete donor database available online, the Obama campaign has not identified donors for nearly half the amount he has raised, according to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP).
Federal law does not require the campaigns to identify donors who give less than $200 during the election cycle. However, it does require that campaigns calculate running totals for each donor and report them once they go beyond the $200 mark.
Surprisingly, the great majority of Obama donors never break the $200 threshold.
“Contributions that come under $200 aggregated per person are not listed,” said Bob Biersack, a spokesman for the FEC. “They don’t appear anywhere, so there’s no way of knowing who they are.”
The FEC breakdown of the Obama campaign has identified a staggering $222.7 million as coming from contributions of $200 or less. Only $39.6 million of that amount comes from donors the Obama campaign has identified.
It is the largest pool of unidentified money that has ever flooded into the U.S. election system, before or after the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reforms of 2002.”
Glenn Beck, O’Reilly and others who pretend to cover important news, the eligibility issue is either above your comprehension level or US Constitution adherance level or you are purposely avoiding or denigrating it for some agenda. So here it is, simple enough for a third grader.
Why has Obama employed countless attorneys to avoid presenting his college records?
Whether the good citizens of Louisiana are successful or not at removing Senator Mary Landrieu from office, it is good to know that concerned citizens are attempting this and that statutes exist to permit it. And yes, I do believe that the 10th Amendment is pertinent.
From the MoveOnMary.org website.
“Is it Possible ?
No doubt, gathering enough signatures to remove a currently seated United States Seantor will be difficult.
Our legislators, no doubt, did not want recall petitions to be used willy-nilly everytime someone gets annoyed by current office holders. They’ve made it difficult enough by requiring at least 33% of the voters who were registered to vote at the time of the office holders election.
What this translates to, in this attempt to remove Mary Landrieu, is the collection of 981,873 signatures of voters who were registered to vote on November 4th 2008. Do we believe this to happen easily? Certainly not. Is it really possible to achieve our goal, given the whole hearted participation of supporters who really want to restore some semblance of sanity with our elected officials? Yes, we really can. Yes, it will take a lot of work, but, it can be done. We certainly would not have ventured into this effort, were it impossible. You can download the voter registration data from the Secretary of State web site at:
Well, you’re probably already hearing from the “conservative” nay-sayers already. You may be hearing all kinds of reasons that you should not participate in this effort. I’ve already had a coulple of conversations with “Conservative activists” trying to dissuade me from participationg in this effort. This morning, one gentleman who is a self declared “leader” in the Tea Party movement expressed to me his own reasons why I should give this up already. Some of these I’d like to share with you now.
1) “It can’t be done!”
Sorry, but that defeatest attitude isn’t one of my core attitudes.
2) “It’s never been done before.”
Well, he was correct. Of course, it will never ever be done until someone really tries to get it done.
3) “State law only provides for the recall of State and Local Officials”
When I asked him if he could give me the actual Louisiana Statute he was talking about, he told me that it would take a couple of week to get it to me. But, of course, he did know the statute. Until he gets that information to me, I’ll have to fall back on Louisiana RS 18:1300.1 §1300 (Link). This statute, specifically addressing the recall of elected officials, states, “Any public officer, excepting judges of the courts of record, may be recalled”. Nowhere, could I find in that statute an exception to Federal officials nor anything that would describe a U.S. Senator as something different that a “Public Officer”.
4) “The Supreme Court has already held that States cannot recall U.S. Representatives or Senators.”
Well, again, when I asked for this case to be cited, it couldn’t be. Neither the U.S. nor the Louisiana Supreme Court has ever heard or made a decision concerning the recall of U.S. Represntatives or Senators.
5) “The Constitution doesn’t provide a means to recall U.S. Representatives or Senators”.
True. There are lots of issues that the U.S. Constitution does not address. That’s why our founding fathers later included the 10th Amendment (link). It states simply, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” In simplest terns, since the U.S. Constitution has NOT provided a means for the citizens to remove Representatives or Senators and has NOT forbidden the States or the people from doing so, then it is reserved to the States or the people. Fortunately, Louisiana is one of the 18 states that have passed laws providing for the recalling of “Any public officer” other than judges. U.S. Representatives and Senators or NOT judges, so can be recalled.
6) “The 10th Amendment forbid it.”
The Tenth Amendment of which Constitution? See note 5.
7) “Constitution experts have …..”
Sorry, but Constitutional experts are simply people like you and I, who have opinions. Some have the opinion that it can be done, some have the opinion that it can’t be done.
Thoughout the internet, in the social networking groups, in the blogs, etc., there have been many who have made a lot of noise about recalling Mary Landrieu. Up until now, I’m sure it has been an amusement to her ilk. On December 29, 2009, Someone finally did something about it and filed the petition with the Secretary of Sate’s office. I for one am enthusiastically joining in the effort and will never look back.
Legally, we CAN recall Mary Landrieu. Ethically and morally, we CAN recall Mary Landrieu. Ethically and morally, we SHOULD recall Mary Landrieu. I can promise, if we accomplish this daunting task, it will have a snowball effect in Baton Rouge AND Washington, Nay-sayers notwithstanding. One thing is a fact, however, as long as we continue to roll over and play victim, we will continue to be made fools out of by the likes of Mary Landrieu. Attending meetings and rallies, waving banners and placards and making a lot of noise changes NOTHING … if we do nothing else to change things. Louisiana voters are blessed with the statutes allowing us to recall public officials who are derelict in their duty, and we should take advantage of those laws. Yes, laws do mean something … as long as we use those laws.
I want to do something about the problems in Washington. What about you?”
The Chicago Tribune supports David Hoffman, opponent of Alexi Giannoulias, who had close ties to Barack Obama and Chicago corruption figures. Hoffman and Giannoulias are competing in the Democrat primary for the former senate seat of Obama. From the Chicago tribune, January 28, 2010.
“Once again: Hoffman”
“An honest mistake, yes, and a careless one. But it was handled with the forthright integrity we’ve come to expect from Hoffman. And for all the whining from the Giannoulias camp about negative attacks, it’s the only statement whose factual basis has been challenged successfully. Unless you count this: In a press release this week, Giannoulias accuses Hoffman of citing a “non-existent Daily Herald story” in an ad that references loans made by Giannoulias’ family bank to convicted influence-peddler Tony Rezko.
“David Hoffman should stop insulting voters, take down this smear job and put up an ad talking about jobs,” it says.
We’ll leave it to voters to decide if linking Giannoulias to Rezko is a “smear job,” but the Daily Herald story does exist, and the Giannoulias camp knows it. Hoffman’s ad got the date wrong. Careless again. But it has allowed Giannoulias to present himself again as the victim.
None of this changes our opinion. As we wrote in our endorsement: Hoffman, the former inspector general for the city of Chicago, “is an incorruptible man who tells truth to power…”
Hoffman is the Democrats’ best choice to bring the highest ethical standards to the U.S. Senate.”
Read more:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-hoffman0129-20100128,0,1398080.story From the Chicago tribune, June 12, 2007.
“Obama endorses Alexi Giannoulias for state treasurer”
“But Obama’s record of local endorsements — one measure of how he has used his nascent political clout — has drawn criticism from those who say it reflects his deference to Chicago’s established political order and runs counter to his public calls for clean government.
In the 2006 Democratic primary, for example, Obama endorsed first-time candidate Alexi Giannoulias for state treasurer despite reports about loans Giannoulias’ family-owned Broadway Bank made to crime figures. Records show Giannoulias and his family had given more than $10,000 to Obama’s campaign, which banked at Broadway.”
“Barack Obama and campaign contributor Alexi Giannoulias”
“Alexi Giannoulias—a “man who has long been dogged by charges that the bank his family owns helped finance a Chicago crime figure” and “who became Illinois state treasurer” in 2006 after Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) “vouched for him”—”pledged to raise $100,000 for the senator’s Oval Office bid,” Charles Hurt reported September 5, 2007, in the New York Post.[1]
The September 5, 2007, Chicago fundraiser was omitted from Obama’s public schedule and the event was closed to the press,” Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times reported.[2]
“Before he promised to raise funds for Obama, Giannoulias bankrolled Michael ‘Jaws’ Giorango, a Chicagoan twice convicted of bookmaking and promoting prostitution.”
“Obama and Giannoulias reportedly met on the basketball court “in the late 1990s … at the East Bank Club, a luxurious spot in downtown Chicago,” Jodi Kantor wrote June 1, 2007, in the New York Times.[3] Now, “thanks in part to [Obama’s] backing, [Giannoulias] is now the Illinois state treasurer. Other regular gymmates include the president of the Cook County Board of Commissioners, the director of the Illinois Department of Public Health and several investment bankers who were early and energetic fund-raisers,” Kantor wrote.”
“Obama the king maker”
“”Did U.S. Senator Barack Obama clear the field in the Democratic state treasurer’s race?” lawyer and political analyst Russ Stewart wrote January 4, 2006.”
“But none announced, and all deferred to Alexi Giannoulias, a 29-year-old Chicago investment banker who was an early supporter of Obama in his 2004 Senate race, whose father owns Broadway Bank, and whose family helped bankroll the Obama campaign. Giannoulias has said that he will campaign as a ‘progressive,’ and he has promised to put more than $1 million in family funds into the race,” Stewart wrote.”
“In March 2006, Giannoulias said that “his ‘good friend and mentor, Barack Obama,’ inspired him to run.”
In fact, Giannoulias’ “endorsers” were “essentially the base of the Obama coalition: white north side progressives and south side blacks.””
The same day that Obama spun his web of deceit in a speech in Ohio, it was announced that unemployment in NC reached a record high of 11.2 percent. Today we have a breakdown of the 100 counties in NC.
Listen to these speech exerpts and decide if Obama’s rhetoric matches reality.
Record unemployment in NC report from the News Record.
“N.C. unemployment rate hits historic high”
“North Carolina’s unemployment rate hit a historic high of 11.2 percent in December as the tally of jobs lost by the state’s workers since the recession started two years ago neared 250,000.
December’s jobless rate of 11.2 percent rose from 10.8 percent in November, the Employment Security Commission said Friday.
“That’s a pretty significant jump in the unemployment rate when we’ve been into the recovery this long,” said Harry Davis, the chief economist for the North Carolina Bankers Association and an Appalachian State University banking professor.”
“Since the U.S. fell into recession in Dec. 2007, North Carolina has lost 248,000 nonfarm jobs. Manufacturers have slashed 95,500 workers since that time, while construction companies cut 65,800.
Those two sectors shed 2,100 positions in December, but the month’s biggest loser was the 2,600 jobs cut by leisure and hospitality services like hotels and entertainment companies.
That’s no surprise with consumers worried about their incomes cutting back on luxuries, Davis said. More losses at leisure companies can be expected this year, he said.”
“RALEIGH – State officials have released the latest county-by-county unemployment numbers, showing that unemployment rates increased in 86 of North Carolina’s 100 counties in December.”
“Other Stats
• Highest unemployment: Graham County at 17.6 percent
• Lowest unemployment: Orange County at 6.2 percent
• Biggest increase: Hyde County increases 3.4 percent to 12.2 percent
• Biggest decrease: Perquimans County decreases 0.5 percent to 9.9 percent
• Current state unemployment: 11.2 percent”
“The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”… William Shakespeare “Hamlet”
Everything that Barack Obama does can be explained by the following:
Narcissism
Lies
Radical and socialist associations
David Limbaugh wrote an excellent article about Obama’s narcissism on January 25, 2010.
“‘It’s Not About Me’ — Wink, Wink”
“The more painful exposure we have to Barack Obama — and we’re talking hyper-exposure at this point — the more we realize how narcissistic he is. Indeed, we are treated to this overexposure precisely because of his narcissistic impulses. He can’t keep himself out of the spotlight.
So it was that on the heels of his crushing personal defeat in the Massachusetts senatorial election last week, Obama’s principal reaction was, “This isn’t about me.”
When someone says that one time or a few times, you might believe him. But when he says it repeatedly (see below), you have to conclude he is protesting too much and means just the opposite.”
“His entire domestic and foreign policy agenda is so much about him that he insists on cramming it down our throats even though the polls overwhelmingly indicate that we Americans do not want it and, more importantly, that it is bankrupting this nation and making us less safe. That’s not selflessness. It’s self-indulgence and conceit to an obscene degree. He is so brainwashed in Marxist and appeasement ideologies that he continues to believe in their maxims in the face of their historical failure and of the miserable failure of his own agenda in the here and now. He is so convinced he knows better than we do what is in our best interests that he must thwart our ignorant will.”
“–On Feb. 15, 1990, after becoming “the first black president of the influential Harvard Law Review,” Obama said, “I realized my election was not about me, but it was about us, about what we could do and what we could accomplish.”
–On Nov. 2, 2004, when Obama visited the campus of the University of Illinois during his campaign for U.S. senator, he said: “Ultimately, this election is not about me. … It’s about the willingness of our citizens to get engaged and get involved.”
–On Dec. 11, 2006, in a speech in New Hampshire, Obama said, “It’s not about me.” But, according to an NPR reporter, “it really is all about him.”
–On Dec. 10, 2007, Obama said, “This campaign is not about me; it is about the hundreds of volunteers … in Rhode Island … and the millions of people across the country who want change we can believe in.”
–On Dec. 14, 2007, when asked about a New Year’s resolution, Obama said he needed to keep reminding himself, “This is not about me.”
–On Aug. 28, 2008, Obama said in his acceptance speech, “This election has never been about me; it’s about you.”
–On July 20, 2009, Obama said (exactly as he repeated following the Massachusetts election): “This isn’t about me. This isn’t about politics. This is about a health care system that is breaking America’s families, breaking America’s businesses and breaking America’s economy.”
Whom do you think it’s about?”
Just in from Charles Kerchner of another case, Kerchner v Obama & Congress.
U.S. District Court
District of Columbia (Washington, DC)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:10-cv-00151-RCL
TAITZ v. OBAMA
Assigned to: Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth
Case: 1:09-mc-00346-RCL
Cause: 28:1331 Fed. Question
Date Filed: 01/27/2010
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 890 Other Statutory Actions
Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Defendant
Plaintiff
ORLY TAITZ represented byORLY TAITZ
29839 Santa Margarita Parkway
Suite 100
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688
(949) 683 – 5411
Fax: (949) 766 – 7603
PRO SE
V.
Defendant
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
Date Filed#Docket Text
01/27/20101 COMPLAINT against BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4616027174) filed by ORLY TAITZ. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(rdj) (Entered: 01/28/2010)
01/27/2010 SUMMONS (3) Issued as to BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (rdj) (Entered: 01/28/2010)
1:10-cv-00151-RCL TAITZ v. OBAMA
Royce C. Lamberth, presiding
Date filed: 01/27/2010
Date of last filing: 01/27/2010
Case Summary
Office: Washington, DC Filed: 01/27/2010
Jury Demand: None Demand:
Nature of Suit: 890 Cause: 28:1331 Fed. Question
Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Defendant Disposition:
County: 88888Terminated:
Origin: 1 Reopened:
Lead Case: None
Related Case: 1:09-mc-00346-RCLOther Court Case: None
Def Custody Status:
Flags: PROSE-NP, TYPE-F
“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”…Albert Einstein
Fantasy
From the State of the Union speech, January 27, 2010, Fox News reports.
“Renewing Promise of ‘Change,’ Obama Tries to Reset Agenda”
“The road to restoring public confidence in Washington and in his ability to lead it starts Thursday in Tampa, where Obama will hold a town hall meeting and discuss federal investment in mass transit. The visit comes as the president vows to make the economy and jobs creation his top focus in 2010, while continuing to press ahead with his ambitious agenda on everything ranging from health care reform to education to immigration reform.”
“But the centerpiece of Obama’s address was jobs creation. The president called on Congress to pass a new jobs bill right away, telling the Senate to pass something similar to the bill passed by the House last year as its “first order of business.”
“People are out of work. They’re hurting. They need our help. And I want a jobs bill on my desk without delay,” Obama said.”
“Obama said the “devastation” of the economic crisis remains, but also defended his approach so far, saying his administration acted “immediately and aggressively” to stave off a “second depression.”
The president emphasized that conditions would be worse if his administration and Congress had not approved the stimulus package last February. He said the package has saved 2 million jobs.”
From Fox News, January 28, 2010.
“New Jobless Claims Drop Less Than Expected”
“WASHINGTON — The number of newly laid-off workers claiming unemployment benefits fell less than expected last week, fresh evidence the job market remains a weak spot in the economic recovery.
The Labor Department said Thursday that first-time jobless claims dropped by 8,000 to a seasonally adjusted 470,000. Analysts had expected a steeper drop to 450,000, according to Thomson Reuters.
The four week average, which smooths out volatility, rose for the second straight week to 456,250. The average had fallen for 19 straight weeks before starting to rise. That decline had given some analysts hope the economy would soon generate net job gains.
Two weeks ago, claims surged by 34,000 due to administrative backlogs left over from the holidays in the state agencies that process the claims, a Labor Department analyst said. Those delays may still be affecting the data, the analyst said.
That means the current figures could be artificially inflated. At the same time, it would also mean that the steep drop in claims in late December and early January was also exaggerated by the backlogs.”
“But the so-called continuing claims do not include millions of people who have used up the regular 26 weeks of benefits typically provided by states, and are receiving extended benefits for up to 73 additional weeks, paid for by the federal government.”
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/28/new-jobless-claims-drop-expected/
Why has Obama employed a legion of private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?…Citizen Wells and millions of Americans
Thank God Sean Hannity was not completely right. He was, of course, referring to the MSM, mainstream media. Citizen journalists have kept the torch burning on the internet.
We have come to believe that only Fox will bring us the news and the truth about Obama. However, Lou Dobbs, while still at CNN, asked the simple journalistic question, the question of the century.
Why doesn’t Obama provide a legitimate birth certificate?
“Lou Dobbs, while still on CNN asked the simple journalistic question, why doesn’t Obama provide a legitimate birth certificate. Dobbs refers to the COLB, Certification of live birth, as a document that refers to another document. After leaving CNN, Lou Dobbs, interviewed by Bill O’Reilly on Fox continues to state ther obvious about Obama not providing a legitimate birth certificate. A shot was fired at Lou Dobbs house.”
Of Bill O’Reilly, Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity, only Hannity has stated that questioning Obama’s birth certificate is a valid endeavor. O’Reilly, in his self righteous, pontificating manner, has insulted birthers on Fox and Glenn Beck recently, on his radio show, insulted average, concerned Americans who question Obama’s eligibility. This has caused many to speculate that Fox has restricted this topic.
I have a surprise for Glenn Beck. God willing, I will produce it in a few days.
Many thanks to Lou Dobbs for asking real questions.
God bless Lou Dobbs.
From Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., Commander USNR (Retired), Lead Plaintiff, Kerchner v Obama & Congress, January 24, 2010.
“I Believe The Fix Was In for the 2008 Election and The Cover Up is Still Going Strong!”
I believe that the RNC and DNC at the highest levels in 2008 were both complicit in shutting down all discussion of Obama’s eligibility issue in the Main Stream Media, print press, and in the leading Conservative Talk Show radio stations. I believe that the RNC and the DNC were complicit in subverting Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of our Constitution as to the eligibility requirements for the Office of the President, i.e., the person eligible for that office must be a “natural born Citizen”, i.e., one born in the country to parents who are both citizens of the country such that the child born has singular and sole allegiance at birth to the USA and no citizenship at birth with any other country via his parents or due to the place or location of birth. A natural born Citizen needs know law or resolution of Congress to give or clarify citizenship status. Natural born Citizenship status can only be obtained by the facts of nature at the child’s birth. This is natural law. This is what the founders and framers of our Constitution required for the singular and very powerful office of the President and Commander in Chief of the military. John Jay and George Washington put that requirement into the Constitution for exactly the reason that the person serving in that office would have no foreign influences on him/her at birth due to the facts and circumstances of his/her citizenship at birth. Only “natural born Citizenship” in the USA per natural law guarantees no other allegiance or citizenship claims by an another country at birth. If you are born on the U.S. soil of parents who are both citizens, no other country can claim you as a Citizen of their country and you are only governed by the laws of the USA at your birth. This is natural law as written by Vattel in 1758 in his legal book, “The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law”. This book was used as a reference to set up our new new nation in 1776 in the writing of the Declaration of Independence and also in drafting the new form of federal government in 1789 and the writing of our Constitution, the fundamental law of our nation.
Both parties put up questionable candidates in 2008 as to their birth citizenship and then the covered up for each other and helped shut down the media and talk radio totally via their respective high contacts in the media industry and elected officials within the sitting Bush administration and in Congress as well as within their own respective presidential campaign organizations. Though shalt not talk about the presidential constitutional Article II eligibility issues was the word put out by all the powers to be in Washington DC and the USA media. It was reported that threats were even made to certain conservative talk show radio hosts in the last quarter of 2008.
And it continues to this day, imo, and is most obvious with the stone silence and “cone of silence” and occasional mocking comments made by the talk show hosts about the eligibility issue questions if mentioned briefly by a guest now and then on Fox News. The approach on Fox News is to ban the topic. Other networks such as MSNBC simply mock the movement continually using Saul Alinsky’s tactics from Rules for Radicals rule number 5, ridicule, to stifle all open, serious, and public debate on the issue and to scare off any one in political power from broaching the subject. Anyone even just mentioning this issue is pounced on for the ridicule treatment by the press. This shut down of a free and full “on air” debate of the Obama eligibility issue with serious scholars and legal experts representing each side (such as my attorney, Mario Apuzzo) being allowed on the air together with someone from the Obot side to debate this issue openly is being orchestrated at the highest levels of the RNC and DNC and their elected official type contacts in various powerful positions both today and back in Dec 2008 and early Jan 2009. Whispers in the hallways allude to grave consequences if one breaches this subject seriously on the air ways. The RNC silenced opposition in the conservative talk show radio and elsewhere in late 2008 which has enabled Obama to take power virtually unopposed as to addressing his constitutional eligibility in any serious manner in public debate via the national media. The leadership of the RNC at the highest levels, imo, shut down members of their own political party in Congress and via using their contacts in the highest levels of government, they helped shut down conservative talk radio and TV hosts with innuendos and and whispers of the consequences if this subject surfaced for discussion in a major way on their shows. They were told to keep the eligibility issue and the so called “Birthers” banned on their callers list with special instructions to the call screeners to keep them off the air. The RNC powers to be and their political connections used their power to do this to cover up their own subverting of Article II of the Constitution via putting up a candidate of their own with questionable natural born Citizenship status as their candidate for President. The big liberal media anointed Obama (a hard core progressive and Socialist) and then anointed McCain (a progressive light) because they knew McCain had a citizenship issue of his own and thus would keep him silent about Obama’s. And it worked. A “cone of silence” was dropped on the eligibility issue in the DC media and Congress and elsewhere in American to cover up for what both parties were doing, subverting Article II of the U.S. Constitution in the 2008 election. Listen to this radio show interview for more details.”
Citizen WElls 