Ed Koch Palin defense, Palin highly intelligent, We should denounce unfair false and wicked charges
I heard Rush Limbaugh mention recently that Ed Koch, former mayor of New York City, had not only defended Sarah Palin, but praised her. God bless Ed Koch.
From Real Clear Politics january 18, 2011.
“As I see it, in the current battle for public opinion Sarah Palin has defeated her harsh and unfair critics.
After the January 8 shooting of U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords and the murder of six others in Tucson, Arizona, some television talking heads and members of the blogosphere denounced her and held her in part responsible for creating a climate of hatred that resulted in the mass attacks.
An example is Joe Scarborough and his crew on the “Morning Joe” show, which I watch and generally enjoy every morning at 6:30 a.m. when I rise to start the day. Because Palin designated Congresswoman Giffords and others for defeat in the November elections by the use of crosshairs on website maps of the Congressional districts, they blamed Palin for creating an atmosphere that caused Jared Loughner (whom everyone now recognizes as being mentally disturbed) to embark on the shooting and killing spree.”
“How dare Sarah Palin, cried the commentators, use that phrase to describe the criticism of her by those who blamed her for creating the atmosphere that set Loughner off in his murderous madness. Some took the position that it proved their ongoing charges that she is not an intelligent person and probably did not know what the phrase meant historically. In my opinion, she was right to denounce her critics and use blood libel to describe the unfair criticism that she had been subject to.”
“Why do I defend Palin in this case? I don’t agree with her political philosophy: She is an arch conservative. I am a liberal with sanity. I know that I am setting myself up for attack when I ask, why did Emile Zola defend Dreyfus? Palin is no Dreyfus and I am certainly no Zola. But all of us have an obligation, particularly those in politics and public office, to denounce, when we can, the perpetrators of horrendous libels and stand up for those falsely charged. We should denounce unfair, false and wicked charges not only when they are made against ourselves, our friends or our political party but against those with whom we disagree. If we are to truly change the poisonous political atmosphere that we all complain of, including those who create it, we should speak up for fairness when we can.
In the 2008 presidential race when Sarah Palin’s name was first offered to the public by John McCain as his running mate, I said at the time that she “scared the hell out of me.” My reference was to the content of her remarks, not to her power to persuade voters.
It was McCain who lost the presidential election, not Palin. Since that time she has established that she has enormous power to persuade people. A self-made woman who rose from PTA mother to Governor of Alaska, she is one of the few speakers in public life who can fill a stadium. Her books are enormous successes. Her television program about Alaska has been a critical and economic success. When Sarah Palin addresses audiences, they rise to their feet in support and applause. She is without question a major leader of the far right faction in the Republican Party and its ally the Tea Party.
I repeat my earlier comment that she “scares the hell out of me.” Nevertheless, she is entitled to fair and respectful treatment. The fools in politics today in both parties are those who think she is dumb. I’ve never met her, but I’ve always thought that she is highly intelligent but not knowledgeable in many areas and politically uninformed. I don’t believe she will run for president in 2012 or that she would be elected if she did. But I do believe she is equal in ability to many of those in the Republican Party seeking that office.
Many women understand what she has done for their cause. She will not be silenced nor will she leave the heavy lifts to the men in her Party. She will not be falsely charged, remain silent, and look for others – men – to defend her. She is plucky and unafraid.
While I disagree with her and I am prepared to oppose her politically, in the spirit of longed-for civility I say, Ms. Palin you are in a certain sense an example of the American dream: You have the courage to stand up and present your vision of America to its people. Your strength and lack of fear make America stronger and are examples to be emulated by girls and boys, men and women who are themselves afraid to speak up. You provide the example that they need for self-assurance.”
Abercrombie finds no birth certificate, Obama eligibility, Vital records search, Birth notation found
“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans
From World Net Daily January 18, 2011.
“Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie suggested in an interview published today that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Barack Obama may not exist within the vital records maintained by the Hawaii Department of Health.
Abercrombie told the Honolulu Star Advertiser he was searching within the Hawaii Department of Health to find definitive vital records that would prove Obama was born in Hawaii, because the continuing eligibility controversy could hurt the president’s chances of re-election in 2012.
Donalyn Dela Cruz, Abercrombie’s spokeswoman in Honolulu, ignored again today another in a series of repeated requests made by WND for an interview with the governor.
Toward the end of the interview, the newspaper asked Abercrombie: “You stirred up quite a controversy with your comments regarding birthers and your plan to release more information regarding President Barack Obama’s birth certificate. How is that coming?”
In his response, Abercrombie acknowledged the birth certificate issue will have “political implications” for the next presidential election “that we simply cannot have.”
Suggesting he was still intent on producing more birth records on Obama from the Hawaii Department of Health vital records vault, Abercrombie told the newspaper there was a recording of the Obama birth in the state archives that he wants to make public.
Abercrombie did not report to the newspaper that he or the Hawaii Department of Health had found Obama’s long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate. The governor only suggested his investigations to date had identified an unspecified listing or notation of Obama’s birth that someone had made in the state archives.
“It was actually written, I am told, this is what our investigation is showing, it actually exists in the archives, written down,” Abercrombie said.
For seemingly the first time, Abercrombie frankly acknowledged that presidential politics motivated his search for Obama birth records, implying that failure to resolve the questions that remain unanswered about the president’s birth and early life may damage his chance for re-election.”
Purpura et al. v. Sebelius et al, Standing v US Constitution, First amendment rights, Legalese cited to perpetuate legalese
“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”…First Amendment US Constitution
From Birther Report January 17, 2011.
“Government files their motion to dismiss in Purpura et al. v. Sebelius et al.. The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey by Nicholas Purpura and Donald Laster of the Jersey Shore Tea Party Patriots and the New Jersey Tea Party Coalition. Other plaintiffs in the lawsuit include the Colts Neck Tea Party, Jersey Shore Tea Party Patriots, Jackson Tea Party Patriots, Bayshore Tea Party Group and Ocean County Citizens for Freedom. The lawsuit alleges the healthcare bill is unconstitutional on 15 separate counts including Obama’s ineligibility. Full brief embedded below. More background on the case can be found here. The lead plaintiffs discuss their lawsuit here, the video is also embedded at bottom of this post.
The government argues the plaintiffs lack standing and the court does not have jurisdiction…”
“Kerchner v. Obama,
612 F.3d 204 (3d Cir. 2010)”
“Lightfoot v. United States,
564 F.3d 625 (3d Cir. 2009)”
They are attempting to use legalese, “standing”, applied in earlier cases to substantiate further legalese and thus attempt to trump the First Amendment and effectively block attempts to redress government for grievances by petition.
Robert H. Cipperly, LCDR letter to Georgia elected officials, Obama eligibility, GA ballot
“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans
From the Post & Email January 17, 2011.
“An Open Letter to:
Governor Nathan Deal
Office of the Governor
State of Georgia
203 State Capitol
Atlanta, GA 30334
Tel 404-656-1776; Fax 404-657-7332
Sam Olens
Georgia Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
40 Capitol Square, SWAtlanta, GA 30334
Tel 404-656-3300; Fax 404-657-8733
Senator Bill Jackson
319-A Cordell Legislative Office Building
Atlanta, GA 30334
Tel 404-656-5114; Fax 404-657-0797
Bill.Jackson@senate.ga.gov
Representative Ben Harbin
245 State Capitol
Atlanta, GA 30334
Tel 404-463-2247
Ben.harbin@house.ga.gov
Dear Georgia elected Officials;
I know it is early days in the present Georgia Administration. However, I am writing to you now because of the importance of the current Constitutional crisis that the United States of America and, by default the State of Georgia now finds itself in. The Georgia Constitution is very specific as to the protections afforded the citizens of Georgia as to their freedoms and liberty. These freedoms are being severely eroded by the overreach of the Federal Government that are in violation of the Tenth amendment to the United States Constitution concerning States sovereignty.
First, a man who calls himself Barak Hussein Obama was put on the ballot in Georgia as a candidate for the office of president of the United States. To date, there has been no validated documentation that has been provided that such a person exists and that such a person has the qualifications under Article II of the United States Constitution that requires the Office of the President of the United States be a “Natural Born Citizen”. The person in question has admitted publicly that he was born as the son of a British subject and, that alone, disqualifies him to reside in the White House. Also, investigations have shown that he has used several different Social Security numbers. The main one that has been used appears to be one that belonged to someone else from the state of Connecticut. The individual in question has never been known to reside in that state. He also claims education that has for all intensive purposes has been proven to be fictitious and he has never disputed the findings, nor have any of the persons involved with the facility ever come forward with proof of such activity. Further, he has traveled to a foreign country when travel to that country was banned by the US Government for US citizens. No such passport has ever been found that supports such travel. For all intensive purposes, we really have no idea of who this person really is. It is requested that an investigation be done to determine if the laws of Georgia were broken when this person was placed on the ballot for the position of President of the United States.”
“Third, the certification that was provided to the State of Georgia was done so by Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic National Committee. That Certification was not done in accordance with the requirements of the Constitution of the United States of America. A properly worded Certification was submitted to the State of Hawaii. However, the other 49 states received a different letter of Certification. It is requested that this certification be examined to determine if there was voter fraud perpetrated in its submission. Also, if the Certification was attested to under penalty of perjury and it is determined that the person placed on the ballot does not qualify under Article II of the Constitution as a Natural Born Citizen, then charges of perjury be made for those who made the attestation.”
Natural Born Citizen, US Code Title 8 Section 1401, Philip J Berg lawsuit, Obama eligibility
“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans
“dedicated his life as a newsman and as a public official to the unrelenting search for truth.”…Lyndon B. Johnson on Edward R. Murrow’s passing
I have encouraged all entering this blog to question everything and seek the truth, the facts.
This was posted last night on Citizen Wells by GORDO.
“Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are “citizens of the United States at birth:”
[list at link]
Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example.”
==========
The above sentence is frequently used to justify calling Obama a natural born citizen.”
Clicking on the link yielded the following:
“Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are “citizens of the United States at birth:”
•Anyone born inside the United States *
•Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person’s status as a citizen of the tribe
•Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
•Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
•Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
•Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
•Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
•A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
* There is an exception in the law — the person must be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.
Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example.”
Here is the actual code.
US Code Title 8 Section 1401
Nationals and Citizens of the United States at birth.
“The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;
(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;
(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person
(A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or
(B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and
(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.”
Philip J Berg, First Amended Complaint October 6, 2008.
“76. Obama, if born in Kenya would have made him a citizen of Kenya. Furthermore, because of the 1940 Naturalization Act, June 1952, Obama’s mother would have had to be nineteen (19) in order for Obama to be a “natural born” United States citizen.
Obama’s mother was only eighteen (18) when she had Obama and therefore was not old enough to meet the residency requirements under our laws at the time of Obama’s birth and be able to register her son’s birth as a “natural born” citizen.” http://obamacrimes.com
Now you know the truth, the facts regarding Obama’s Natural Born Citizen deficiency per the laws in place at the time of his birth somewhere.
Obama passport, American citizen requirement, Proof of citizenship, John Brennan, Analysis Corporation, Passport files breached
“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans
Lest we forget.
Obama has hidden his past. His birth certificate, college records, passport data, IL Senate records his puppet masters. And you, the American taxpayer, have assisted him. Most of the attorneys aiding in this criminal endeavor are government attorneys. One of them, Robert Bauer, has assisted him as a private attorney and government employee.
And then there is John Brennan.
From Fox News, March 21, 2008.
“The State Department confirmed late Friday that the contractors who gained improper access to Barack Obama’s passport files worked for two Virginia-based companies, after Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice promised a full investigation into breaches that affected all three presidential candidates.”
“The other company was identified as The Analysis Corporation.”
“Obama’s top terrorism and intelligence adviser, John O. Brennan, heads a firm that was cited in March for breaching sensitive files in the State Department’s passport office, according to a State Department Inspector General’s report released this past July.”
“During a State Department briefing on March 21, 2008, McCormack confirmed that the contractor had accessed the passport files of presidential candidates Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and John McCain, and that the inspector general had launched an investigation.
Sources who tracked the investigation tell Newsmax that the main target of the breach was the Obama passport file, and that the contractor accessed the file in order to “cauterize” the records of potentially embarrassing information.” http://www.newsmax.com/404?aspxerrorpath=/timmerman/brennan_passport_breach/2009/01/12/170430.html
The link now yields this result:
“We are sorry. The content you are looking for has either expired or is unavailable”
From Executive Biz January 12, 2009
“President-elect Barack Obama has announced that John Brennan will serve as White House homeland security adviser and deputy national security adviser for counterterrorism. A 25-year veteran of the CIA, Brennan transitioned in recent years to the private sector, where he has worked as president of The Analysis Corporation (TAC). His pick as head homeland security adviser and national security adviser for counterterrorism comes as welcome news to many in the national security and counterterrorism community. Here’s a roundup of what several industry leaders are telling ExecutiveBiz”
“SUBMIT A U.S. PASSPORT APPLICATION FOR AN ADULT IN PERSON:
Read and understand Steps 1 – 7 before leaving this page.
1. Fill Out Form DS-11: Application For A U.S. Passport
2. Submit Completed Form DS-11 In Person
3. Submit Evidence of U.S. Citizenship
4. Present Identification
5. Submit a Photocopy of the Identification Document(s) Presented (Step 4)
6. Pay the Applicable Fee
7. Provide Two Passport Photos”
“Primary Evidence of U.S. Citizenship (One of the following):
Previously issued, undamaged U.S. Passport
Certified birth certificate issued by the city, county or state*
Consular Report of Birth Abroad or Certification of Birth
Naturalization Certificate
Certificate of Citizenship
*A certified birth certificate has a registrar’s raised, embossed, impressed or multicolored seal, registrar’s signature, and the date the certificate was filed with the registrar’s office, which must be within 1 year of your birth. Please note, some short (abstract) versions of birth certificates may not be acceptable for passport purposes.”
“Secondary Evidence of U.S. Citizenship
“If you cannot present primary evidence of U.S. citizenship, you must submit secondary evidence of U.S. citizenship. Determine what form of secondary evidence is most appropriate for your situation based on the descriptions below.
Early Public Records
If you were born in the United States and cannot present primary evidence of U.S. citizenship, submit a combination of early public records as evidence of your U.S. citizenship. Early public records must be submitted with a birth record or Letter of No Record. Early public records should show your name, date of birth, place of birth, and preferably be created within the first five years of your life. Examples of early public records are:
Baptismal certificate
Hospital birth certificate
Census record
Early school record
Family bible record
Doctor’s record of post-natal care
Early Public Records are not acceptable when presented alone.
Delayed Birth Certificate
If you were born in the United States and cannot present primary evidence of U.S. citizenship because your U.S. Birth Certificate was not filed within the first year of your birth, you may submit a Delayed U.S. Birth Certificate. A Delayed U.S. Birth Certificate filed more than one year after your birth may be acceptable if:
It lists the documentation used to create it (preferably early public records) and
It is signed by the birth attendant or lists an affidavit signed by the parents
If your Delayed U.S. Birth Certificate does not include these items, it should be submitted together with Early Public Records.
Letter of No Record
If you were born in the United States and cannot present primary evidence of U.S. citizenship because you do not have a previous U.S. passport or a certified U.S. birth certificate of any kind, you must present a state-issued Letter of No Record showing:
Your name
Your date of birth
The years for which a birth record was searched
Acknowledgement that no birth certificate was found on file
A Letter of No Record must be submitted together with Early Public Records.
Form DS-10: Birth Affidavit
If you were born in the United States and cannot present primary evidence of U.S. citizenship, you may submit Form DS-10: Birth Affidavit as evidence of your U.S. citizenship. The birth affidavit:
Must be notarized
Must be submitted in person with Form DS-11
Must be submitted together with early public records
Must be completed by an affiant who has personal knowledge of birth in the U.S.
Must state briefly how the affiant’s knowledge was acquired
Should be completed by an older blood relative
NOTE: If no older blood relative is available, it may be completed by the attending physician or any other person who has personal knowledge of your birth
If you claim citizenship through birth abroad to U.S. citizen parent(s), but cannot submit a Consular Report of Birth Abroad or Certification of Birth, you must submit all of the following:
Your foreign birth certificat
Evidence of citizenship of your U.S. citizen parent
Your parents’ marriage certificate
An statement of your U.S. citizen parent detailing all periods and places of residence or physical presence in the United States and abroad before your birth
NOTES:
See Documentation of U.S. Citizens Born Abroad for additional information.
For information on foreign born children adopted by U.S. citizens, see the Child Citizenship Act of 2000.”
Obama speech writer excels, Rhetoric doesn’t match actions, Obama camp continues Orwellian hate speech, Orwellian word smithing
“We control life, Winston, at all its levels. You are imagining that there is something called human nature which will be outraged by what we do and will turn against us. But we create human nature. Men are infinitely malleable.”…George Orwell, “1984″
The speech that Obama gave in Tucson recently was appropriate. The pep rally setting and actions of some in the audience were not. Obama’s speech writer did a good job and Obama read it well. However, these are just words, and as we know, actions speak louder than words.
The Citizen Wells blog began comparing our world, increasingly controlled by the Obama camp by mid 2008, to that of “1984” by George Orwell. The equivalent themes of lies being broadcast on the screens inside each home, the altering of history and hate speech, were all too reminiscent of a Orwellian society.
Sarah Palin, like Goldstein in “1984” and the Jews in Nazi germany, has been the focus of much of the hate emanating from the Obama camp.
Reprinted from Citizen Wells November 20, 2009.
“What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.”…Ecclesiastes 1:9 (NIV)
“I took with me certain simple criteria with which to measure.
That which made for more life, for physical and spiritual health, was good;
that which made for less life, which hurt, dwarfed and distorted life, was bad.”…Jack London
“Before the Hate had proceeded for thirty seconds, uncontrollable exclamations of rage were breaking out from half the people in the room.”
“the sight or even the thought of Goldstein produced fear and anger automatically.”
“He was an object of hatred more constant than either Eurasia or Eastasia.”
“There were also whispered stories of a terrible book, a compendium of all the heresies”
“In it’s second minute the Hate rose to a frenzy. People were leaping up and down in their places and shouting at the tops of their voices”… George Orwell “1984″
Lies
Leftists
Liberalism
If you are offended by references to the Bible, good versus evil or anything that is not politically correct, you are in the wrong place.
Everyone is tap dancing around the attacks on Sarah Palin. People with the best of intentions speak of her as a conservative female threatening the philosophies and positions of those on the left. Let’s call this what it is. This is a classic struggle between good and evil, right versus wrong.
The modern day Democrat Party is controlled by far left socialists who are driven by a message of hate. Hate George Bush, Hate America and recently Hate Sarah Palin. The Beatles, in their song “Revolution”, had this to say:
“But when you want money
for people with minds that hate
All I can tell is brother you have to wait”
“You say you’ll change the constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it’s the institution
Well, you know
You better free you mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao
You ain’t going to make it with anyone anyhow”
It seems the leftist Democrats have covered all the bases. Hate, change the Constitution and carrying pictures of Chairman Mao (Anita Dunn).
Sarah Palin is not a perfect person, her humanity prevents that. She is, however a good person who loves her family, her country and follows her moral compass, her concept of God, the creator of all. She is against many of the ideological positions that have slowly taken hold of this country.
Sarah Palin represents what is right about this country. She tries to live her life by doing the right thing. She apparently intimidates those who believe:
Women should follow the dictates of the Democrat Party.
Abortion is always ok and should not be reserved for the lesser of evils.
There is no God.
There is no right or wrong.
The founding fathers and US Constitution are out of vogue and not relevant to modern issues.
European countries should be emulated.
A Government option will improve health care.
Global warming is real and is mainly the fault of Americans.
An endangered fish is more important than endangered humans.
Drilling for oil is always wrong.
Terrorists are regular criminals with constitutional rights.
Patriotism, Religion and Guns are not fashionable.
I am next going to refer to Jesus of Nazareth. The life and tenets of Jesus are known by Christians, Jews and Muslims, so most of you should understand what I am about to write. While Sarah Palin cannot be compared to Jesus on one level, reactions to the good in Sarah Palin and other children of the light are paralleled in the reactions to Jesus, his teachings and actions. The hypocrites and evil doers of Jesus’ time attacked him and demanded his crucifixion.
The modern day hypocrites have put Sarah Palin under a microscope. They employ legions to fact check her statements and her new book and gave Barack Obama a free ride on his books and election campaign. As Jesus would state, they look for a speck in Palin’s eye and ignore the beam in theirs.
I wish to make an important point. It is ok to disgree with Sarah Palin. Since Palin embraces American values, she would be the first to agree. It is not ok to trash, lie about and attack Sarah Palin. This is wrong (remember, most of us believe in right and wrong.) When you attack Sarah Palin, you attack America and decent Americans and we are not going to take it anymore.
This is fair warning to those, and I do not care who you are, who viciously attack Sarah Palin. If you are a company like NewsWeek, that belittled Palin with the sexist magazine cover, we are going to boycott you. If you are a politician, we are going to run you out of office. If I personally hear someone attack Palin, I am going to quietly get in their face and ask why they hate America. I suggest you do the same.
Generally, I do believe we should pray for those who have lost their way. However, there is a concept called righteous indignation. A response, sadly lacking in many of those who profess to be Christians. And how ironic. Jesus, who was all about love for thy neighbor, entered the temple, saw the moneychanger’s wrongful acts, and overturned the tables in righteous indignation.
The lesson is simple. We must rise up in righteous indignation and say no more to attacks on Sarah Palin and others.
And be certain you are clear about this.
This is a struggle between good and evil.
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”… Ephesians 6:12.
HR 1503 revisited?, Presidential Eligibility Act, Brian Williams interview of Speaker Boehner, Williams says citizen, Natural Born Citizen
“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans
Speaker of the House John Boehner was interviewed by Brian Williams last friday after the reading of the US Constitution in the House Chambers and the shout of “Except Obama, except Obama” when the Natural Born Citizen clause was read. Williams continues the Orwellian tradition of the mainstream media of obfuscating the Obama eligibility issues by using citizen instead of Natural Born Citizen. Boehner, as Speaker of the House, should know better and should have corrected Williams. Otherwise, we have just another Pelosi look alike.
At approx one minute Williams brings up the fact that twelve congressmen have challenged Obama’s eligibility. Apparently he was referring to HR 1503 that was initiated by Representative Posey with twelve cosponsors.
HR 1503, which expired with the end of the 111th Congress contained the following language:
“To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of President to include with the committee’s statement of organization a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution.”
Williams speaks in the present tense about the twelve congressmen. Is he referring to the 2009 bill or new initiatives?
John Boehner needs a quick tutoring on the US Constitution and the status of Obama eligibility questions. He did state that he would not tell the other congressmen what to think. That is good, but he can and must do better.
“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans
Quite a few attorneys have been involved in lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility. Some of them are Democrats. Other attorneys and legal experts have commented on Obama, eligibility issues and court proceedings. Some of those expert opinions are presented below.
John Boehner, members of Congress, judges and other officials holding offices designed to serve and protect the American public, pay attention.
Long time Democrat and civil rights attorney, Bartle Bull.
From Citizen Wells November 12, 2008.
Responses to Judge Surrick’s ruling in Berg v Obama.
“Judge Surrick ruling exerpts:
“If, through the political process, Congress determines that citizens, voters, or party members should police the Constitution’s eligibility requirements for the Presidency, then it is free to pass laws conferring standing on individuals like Plaintiff. Until that time, voters do not have standing to bring the sort of challenge that Plaintiff attempts to bring in the Amended Complaint.”
“…regardless of questions of causation, the grievance remains too generalized to establish the existence of an injury in fact. To reiterate: a candidate’s ineligibility under the Natural Born Citizen Clause does not result in an injury in fact to voters. By extension, the theoretical constitutional harm experienced by voters does not change as the candidacy of an allegedly ineligible candidate progresses from the primaries to the general election.””
Mark J. Fitzgibbons is President of Corporate and Legal Affairs at American Target Advertising:
“Chief Justice John Marshall, writing in Marbury v. Madison, said that judges have a duty to decide cases under our paramount law, the Constitution. I have lamented previously about how some judges tend to evade their duty to decide constitutional matters by resorting to court-made doctrines. Judge Surrick’s reliance on case law to dismiss Berg’s suit for lack of standing is reasoned from a lawyer’s perspective, but not heroic and perhaps evasive of his larger duty.
His decision to “punt” the matter to Congress creates, I suggest, a dangerous, longer and perhaps more painful constitutional quagmire than had he heard the evidence in the case. Even had the case lacked merit, the Constitution would not have been harmed.”
“Ellis Washington, currently a professor of law and political science at Savannah State University, former editor at the Michigan Law Review and law clerk at The Rutherford Institute, is a graduate of John Marshall Law School and a lecturer and freelance writer on constitutional law, legal history, political philosophy and critical race theory. He has written over a dozen law review articles and several books, including “The Inseparability of Law and Morality: The Constitution, Natural Law and the Rule of Law” (2002). See his law review article “Reply to Judge Richard Posner.” Washington’s latest book is “The Nuremberg Trials: Last Tragedy of the Holocaust.”
Mr. Washington wrote the following response to the Philip J Berg lawsuit and Judge Surrick ruling in a World Net Daily article dated November 8, 2008 :”
“Constitutionally speaking, Judge Surrick’s reasoning is completely illogical and a total dereliction of his duty as a judge to substantively address this most vital constitutional controversy. Instead, in a gutless manner, Surrick dismissed Berg’s complaint 10 days before the elections on a technicality of standing, which to any rational person begs the question: If Philip J. Berg as an American citizen, a respected Democratic operative and former attorney general of Pennsylvania doesn’t have the “standing” to bring this type of lawsuit against Obama, then who in America does have standing? The good judge in all 34 pages of legal mumbo jumbo didn’t bother to answer this pivotal question.
That Berg’s complaint is not “concrete or particularized enough to constitute an injury” is an amazing admission by any person that went to law school and even more so given the fact that Surrick is a respected appellate judge!”
John McCain, with two US Citizen parents, has questionable status.
“A. Citizenship and Natural Born Citizenship by Statute
According to the Supreme Court in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the Constitution “contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two only: birth and naturalization.” Unless born in the United States, a person “can only become a citizen by being naturalized . . . by authority of congress, exercised either by declaring certain classes of persons to be citizens, as in the enactments conferring citizenship upon foreign-born children of citizens, or by enabling foreigners individually to become citizens . . . .” A person granted citizenship by birth outside the United States to citizen parents is naturalized at birth; he or she is both a citizen by birth and a naturalized citizen. This last point is discussed thoroughly in Jill A. Pryor’s 1988 note in the Yale Law Journal, The Natural-Born Citizen Clause and Presidential Eligibility: An Approach for Resolving Two Hundred Years of Uncertainty.
The Supreme Court holds that the citizenship statutes are exclusive; there is no residual common-law or natural-law citizenship. Citizens have no constitutional right to transmit their citizenship to children. In Rogers, the Supreme Court upheld a statute requiring children born overseas to citizen parents to reside in the United States to retain their citizenship. Since “Congress may withhold citizenship from persons” born overseas to citizen parents or “deny [them] citizenship outright,” it could impose the lesser burden of requiring U.S. residence to retain citizenship.
Congressional power to withhold citizenship from children of U.S. citizens is not hypothetical; for decades, it was law, and to some extent still is. The Tribe-Olson Opinion proposes that “[i]t goes without saying that the Framers did not intend to exclude a person from the office of the President simply because he or she was born to U.S. citizens serving in the U.S. military outside of the continental United States . . . .” However, the Seventh Congress, which included Framers Gouverneur Morris and Abraham Baldwin among others, did precisely that. In 1961 in Montana v. Kennedy, the Supreme Court construed an 1802 statute to mean that “[f]oreign-born children of persons who became American citizens between April 14, 1802 and 1854, were aliens . . . .” Thus, children of members of the armed forces serving overseas, and diplomats and civil servants in foreign posts, were not only not natural born citizens eligible to be president, they were not citizens at all.
Denial of automatic citizenship had very different implications than it would now because until the late nineteenth century, there was little federal immigration law. There were no general federal restrictions on who could enter the country, no provisions for deportation of residents who became undesirable, and immigration officials to deport them. Of course, these children could become citizens by individual naturalization. But even if the child suffered based on lack of citizenship, according to the 1907 Supreme Court decision in Zartarian v. Billings, “[a]s this subject is entirely within congressional control, the matter must rest there; it is only for the courts to apply the law as they find it.””
William A. Jacobson, Associate Clinical Professor at Cornell Law School, believes Obama was born in Hawaii but states the obvious.
“There is a bizarre intellectual dance taking place around the topic of Barack Obama’s birthplace.
The world has been artificially divided into “Birthers” and “anti-Birthers” when in fact I suspect a large percentage or even majority of the population is neither and simply wants all the evidence released so that we can move beyond the issue. For most people, who have had to show their own birth certificates at various points in their lives, the notion that a presidential candidate should release his or her birth certificate to prove qualification for office reflects neither pro- nor anti-Obama sentiment, but a “what’s the big deal?” attitude.”
“We can deal with accusations of John McCain’s alleged misconduct during imprisonment even though such suggestions were beyond the pale, and also questions as to whether McCain’s birth in the Panama Canal Zone disqualified him from the highest office in the land:”
“We have reached the point that merely expressing normal political and legal inquisitiveness will result in a charge of Birtherism or racism because it now involves Barack Obama, even though similar questions as to John McCain’s eligibility for office were raised in the 2008 election cycle.
I repeat, whiter-than-white John McCain had his eligibility questioned because of his birthplace, so how is it necessarily racist that the same thing takes place as to Barack Obama? The racist charge is just a way of shutting down the conversation, a convenient excuse for epistemic closure.
As I’ve posted before, I think the circumstantial evidence supports the view that Obama was born in Hawaii, and there is no credible evidence otherwise. But to reach this conclusion, the one thing neither I nor anyone else can honestly say is that all the evidence has been reviewed.”
John Boehner and Congress, Natural Born Citizen 101, Constitution 101, You must stay after class
“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation
or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge
the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.” Congressional Oath of Office
“No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United
States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be
eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be
eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of
thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the
United States.”…US Constitution
The US Constitution was read in the House of Representatives last week. As I understand it, Constitution 101 classes will be held for congressmen. Some members of Congress, including John Boehner, may have to do some remedial work including stay after class. The same day that the Constitution was read, John Boehner used the word citizen and natural born citizen interchangeably. He also exhibited ignorance regarding proof of Obama’s birthplace.
Last Friday, after responding to Speaker Boehner’s remarks on this blog, I contacted his office regarding his gaffe. I am not aware of a correction or apology from John Boehner.
Speaker Boehner, you owe the American people an apology and you need to issue a corrected statement in response to Brian Williams’ questions. You also need to learn the truth about Obama’s eligibility issues. I am certain I and others can find the time to assist you.
Citizen WElls 