Category Archives: Obama

December 2015 real employment data, US labor Dept. tables, White american employment decimation continues, 139k more whites unemployed, Jan to Dec mere gain of 276k, Hispanics gain 71k employments in Dec

December 2015 real employment data, US labor Dept. tables, White american employment decimation continues, 139k more whites unemployed, Jan to Dec mere gain of 276k, Hispanics gain 71k employments in Dec

“In December 2014 there were 18 million immigrants (legal and illegal) living in the country who had arrived since January 2000. But job growth over this period was just 9.3 million — half of new immigration.”…Center for Immigration Studies February 2015

“There’s no other way to say this. The official unemployment rate, which cruelly overlooks the suffering of the long-term and often permanently unemployed as well as the depressingly underemployed, amounts to a Big Lie.”…Gallup CEO Jim Clifton 

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

The financial markets are jubilant as they typically are with the Orwellian job reports from the US Labor Department.

All of the mythical jobs being created.

Such as the alleged 292,000 jobs created in December 2015.

If that many jobs were created in December or any other month in 2015 or any month under Obama, how come the following is true?

There were 139,000 more whites unemployed in December.

From January to December 2015, there were only 276,000 more whites employed.

Of course, Hispanics gained 71,000 employments in December.

Can the folks on Wall Street not read?

Or are they just brainwashed by the Orwellian media and White House?

From Citizen Wells September 4, 2015.

“***  Update 8:55 AM  ***

“Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 173,000 in August, and the
unemployment rate edged down to 5.1 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.”

There was an increase in 23,000 white American employment in August.
However, white employment is down 132,000 since January!!!

***

***  Update 9:10 AM  ***

Almost 1.5 million more white Americans dropped out of labor force since Jan.

White employment to population ratio down .3 percent since Jan.

White labor force participation rate down .6 percent since Jan.

***

Regardless of the unemployment rate and jobs data provided by the US Labor Department this morning, September 4, 2015, the real employment situation can also be found in their data.

White employment.

WhiteEmployment

Hispanic employment.

HispanicEmployment

I found this article by Business Insider from February 10, 2011.

“No One Looking At This Chart Could Possibly Call It A Recovery”

“Currently the problem in the US jobs market mainly lies with, what I call, the maintenance rate. This is the minimum monthly job creation rate that our enormous system–our economy and government with its revenues and liabilities–must have in order to maintain itself as population grows. Getting lost in the weeds, therefore, of monthly unemployment rates is a waste of time. After having lost 8+ million jobs from the top of the last expansion, nitpicking one’s way through the additions, revisions, and changes to the presumed size of the work force misses the point. And that’s this: any month in which the US does not create at least 125,000 jobs, from a systemic point of view, is negative. It’s less than zero.”

“Now you know why annual government budgets have blown out into the the trillions: the economic flows normally provided by a functioning economy are now provided through unemployment checks, food stamps, FDR style spending and other distributions. In short, the “economy” cannot be experiencing a recovery when, after 10 years of population growth and growth in future liabilities, the number of people employed is hovering around levels last seen in 2002-2004. Whether you chose to look at just Non-Farm Employment, or Total Employment, the US Labor Market is essentially flat-lining since a deep trough was reached in late 2009, early 2010.

Those who would make sweeping claims about a recovery in the entire economy should place these two charts shown here in their printed columns, along with the fact that the US population has grown by over 25 million people since the year 2000.”

Read more:

http://www.businessinsider.com/when-recoverys-just-a-word-2011-2

The referenced study from above was retrieved from the WayBack Machine.

Why was it scrubbed?

From the Brookings Institute February 4, 2011.

“The traditional unemployment rate does not fully capture the extent of labor underutilization in our economy. In addition to the 14 million Americans who are officially counted as unemployed (the jobless who are still actively looking for work), there are over 11 million Americans who either want to work but have given up looking, or who are underemployed in the sense that they are working part time because full-time work is unavailable. These additional workers are less visible but are undoubtedly victims of the recent recession.”

“The Hamilton Project explores the monthly “job gap” based on the employment numbers—or the number of jobs the economy needs in order to return to return to pre-recession employment levels while absorbing the 125,000 people who enter the labor force each month.

The annual revision to the historical payroll numbers released with the January report paint an even starker picture for the job gap this month, increasing it to 12.4 million jobs.

The chart below shows the evolution of the job gap since the start of the Great Recession in December 2007. The thick line in the chart below shows the net number of jobs lost since the Great Recession began.

The broken lines display the date by which the jobs gap would be closed under alternative assumptions about the rate of job creation going forward. If the economy adds about 208,000 jobs per month, the average monthly rate for the best year of job creation in the 2000s, then it will take until July 2023 to close the job gap. At a more optimistic rate of 321,000 jobs per month, the average monthly rate for the best year of the 1990s, the economy will reach pre-recession employment levels by May 2016. ”

https://web.archive.org/web/20110209104602/http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2011/0204_jobs_greenstone_looney.aspx

From Zero Hedge September 2, 2015.

“Exposing The Lie Behind The “Strong Jobs Recovery” In One Chart”

“With all eyes glued to Friday’s payrolls report, we thought it worth reiterating some ‘facts’ about US employment data. As ECRI notes, the sustained decline in the official jobless rate – now approaching the Fed’s estimate of “full employment” – is a misleading indicator of labor market slack. The data shows that the so-called jobs recovery has been spearheaded by cheap labor, with job gains going disproportionately to the least educated — and lowest-paid — workers.

Indeed, the stagnation in nominal wage growth is consistent with the weakness in the employment/population (E/P) ratio. That said, even the E/P ratio may be overstating the health of the jobs market.

After dropping to three-decade lows in the wake of the Great Recession, the E/P ratio, has barely improved since the fall of 2013, reversing only about one-fifth of its decline from its pre-recession highs.””

https://citizenwells.com/2015/09/04/us-labor-dept-employment-charts-reveal-no-jobs-recovery-for-native-born-americans-september-4-2015-low-wage-part-time-jobs-going-to-immigrants-business-insider-warning-from-2011-economic-flows-p/

 

Rush Limbaugh uses citizen and natural born citizen interchangeably on Ted Cruz eligibility, Citizen Wells rectification, Obama and Cruz scenarios similar both not eligible, Ted Cruz eligibility nonsense???, Imagine John McCain right Limbaugh wrong

Rush Limbaugh uses citizen and natural born citizen interchangeably on Ted Cruz eligibility, Citizen Wells rectification, Obama and Cruz scenarios similar both not eligible, Ted Cruz eligibility nonsense???, Imagine John McCain right Limbaugh wrong

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“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 . . . .”…US Constitution

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

 

I am a big fan of Rush Limbaugh and have been for well over 20 years.

I do not always get to listen to him but I caught a few minutes yesterday when he was discussing the controversy over Ted Cruz’s eligibility.

He used citizen and natural born citizen interchangeably.

Even John McCain has this right. Cruz’s eligibility is subject to scrutiny.

To Limbaugh’s credit, he did go on to read the eligibility provision from the US Constitution and state the difficiencies of the candidates and opposing thoughts on what NBC means.

I found the following offensive. It reminds me too much of John Boehner and the mainstream media:

“I’m not saying that won’t happen, but they’re not gonna succeed in going into court and have Ted Cruz told by a court, “Hey, Mr. Cruz, we’ve just discovered you’re not a citizen. Leave the country! Turn in your passport and go back to Canada.”  It isn’t gonna happen. ”

Citizenship is not the term or the question. Hell, we’ll let anybody be a citizen.

It’s natural born citizen!

From Rush Limbaugh January 7, 2016.

“Cruz Citizenship Kerfuffle Is a Distraction”

“Well, we’re getting closer to the day that actual votes are going to happen, which is why all of this kerfuffle is effervescing up and boiling over. I mean, the nonsense on whether or not Ted Cruz is a natural born citizen. It’s stunning.”

“The latest to join this bandwagon suggesting that Ted Cruz may want to actually go to court and get some confirmation on the fact he’s a citizen, it could be a problem out there, John McCain. John McCain is now officially questioning Ted Cruz’s eligibility to run for the presidency. It’s getting into bizarro territory here. Remember, now, McCain was born in Panama, and his presidential eligibility is the same and based on the same constitutionality as is Ted Cruz’s. It’s amazing.

Folks, I left the program yesterday, and this was the subject we were laughing about, the way Trump was talking about it and raising the issue but not opining on it. And because the Republican establishment is scared to death of either one of them winning, the gears got into full motion and people started investigating this constitutionally, intellectually. You would not believe, one website probably has 75,000 words written on this. And the 75,000 words include the learned opinions of countless other scholars on whether or not Ted Cruz is actually an American citizen.”

“Anyway, the eligibility question is an interesting political development because it is gonna be explored, it is gonna be a distraction. The Democrats are gonna milk it for all it’s worth because of what happened to Obama and the birthers. And despite the fact that there’s no similarity or commonality in the two claims, they’re still gonna rely on the low-information voters’ ignorance of this and act like, “Hey, this is fun. You know, you guys did it to Obama, we got a chance to do it to you,” so that’s why they’re gonna get in on it.”

“But it’s an opportunity for a lot of people to show their chops, demo their chops on the Constitution. I mean, here’s what this really is all about. It’s right out of the Constitution. It is very, very simple. It’s Article 2, Section 1. “No person except a natural born citizen…” I’m telling you, I went to a blog site, and there’s a 75,000-word article on “natural born citizen,” what it means. I thought, “You know what? I could print that out, I could read that whole piece, and it’d be my program today. I could take the day off; just read that piece. At the end of that you’d think I’m nuts or brilliant.”

But 75,000 words! That’s a wild guess. But it printed out to 20 pages. “No person except a natural born citizen or a citizen of it United States, at the time of the adoption of the 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 35 years, and been 14 years a resident within the United States.” There’s nothing else. You can have an IQ of 20. You can be dumb, stupid. You can be poor, you can be uneducated. None of that matters. You just have to be a natural born citizen, gotta be 35 years old, and you have to have lived within the United States for 14 years.

That’s it. So when people raise the question, “‘Natural born citizen’? What’s that mean?” ‘Cause it doesn’t appear anywhere else in the Constitution. It’s not defined. The founders do not define what natural born citizen is, which means that back in the day they wrote it… It’s why original intent’s so important, folks, when you analyze the Constitution. “What did they mean? What did ‘natural born citizen’ mean at the time they wrote it?” It’s a derivative from British common law which meant natural born subject. And, I’m telling you, this… Andy McCarthy writes about this today, and he’s right.”

“It is not explained in the writings or the history of those who framed the Constitution, nor is it in a demonstrable common and clear understanding in the former British colonies at the time, and the Supreme Court has never ruled on it and probably never will. “Natural born” is not used anywhere in the Constitution. Its origins are unclear. It is assumed to be derived, as I say, from the British common stature law governing natural born subjects. And therein provides the wide opening for everybody to mad dash into and define it themselves as to their particular benefit.

There are essentially two ends of the spectrum here about which everybody agrees, in terms of the meaning of “natural born citizen.” 1. A person born in the United States to parents, both whom are United States citizens. Obviously, you’re natural born. You’re born here. Your parents are citizens. Bammo, you’re a citizen. Nobody questions it, and you’re natural born. By the way, if you Planned Parenthood aficionados are listening, it has nothing to do with artificial wombs and all that. That’s not what “natural born” means. We can rule that out right now. We’re not talking about test tubes here.

Although we might somewhere down the road. You never know. And the other end of the spectrum is a person born outside the United States to parents, neither of who is a United States citizen, is not a natural born citizen. Nobody disagrees with that. Even if citizenship is obtained through naturalization later, that is not natural born citizen. So if you’re a naturalized citizen — born somewhere else, your parents are not Americans — and if you come here and become a citizen? “Sorry, you’re not qualified. Too bad.”

Now, Rubio, Jindal, and Cruz, as did Obama, fall between these two points on the spectrum here. Rubio and Jindal born in the US to parents neither of whom was a citizen at the time that he was born here. So, bammo. Ted Cruz was born in Canada to parents, one of whom (his mother) was a US citizen, and as far as the best minds have worked on this, that alone qualifies Cruz. Now, Trump months ago… We had the audio sound bite yesterday. Months ago, Trump said of Cruz, “Ah, it’s not about that.”

Trump says, “Cruz is perfectly fine. It’s not a problem here. I looked into it; we have no problem with Cruz.” Now, yesterday Cruz becomes the focus point of Trump. “Weeeeell, I don’t know. I might be a little nervous. He might want to get clarification.” That’s all it took to get the media revved up and create this distraction now that is designed to distract Cruz, raise doubts, weaken support, all of these things. It’s ’cause Cruz is the front-runner now in the Hawkeye Cauci.”

Read more:

Cruz Citizenship Kerfuffle Is a Distraction

DISTRACTION???

Come on Rush, I know that you have always claimed to be an entertainer, but it’s the Constitution.

 

Trump Cruz should ask judge for a declaratory judgment, Rule if eligible to run for president as natural born citizen, John McCain Ted Cruz eligibility legitimate question, Cruz resembles Obama too much

Trump Cruz should ask judge for a declaratory judgment, Rule if eligible to run for president as natural born citizen, John McCain Ted Cruz eligibility legitimate question, Cruz resembles Obama too much

“Why did Obama employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to request an advisory opinion on FEC matching funds that he was not eligible for?”…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

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

 

 

I have always liked Ted Cruz but that “warm fuzzy feeling” is quickly fading.

Cruz is increasingly reminding me of Barack Obama with their common Harvard Law Review, attorney arrogance disregard for the US Constitution.

Ted Cruz has stated that attorneys have looked into his eligibility as a natural born citizen and given him their blessing.

Well Mr. Cruz, how about the courts, the FEC and what about the American People?

From CNN January 6, 2016.

“In separate interviews with CNN, Trump and Cruz squared off over the businessman’s comments — reported Tuesday in The Washington Post — that the senator’s birth in Canada could pose a “big problem.” Trump told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer that Cruz, whose mother was a U.S. citizen, should go to court and ask a judge to rule that he’s eligible to run for president.

“How do you run against the Democrat, whoever it may be, and you have this hanging over your head if they bring a lawsuit?” Trump said in an interview that aired on “The Situation Room.”

Trump said Cruz should to ask a judge for a “declaratory judgment” that Trump said would protect Cruz against any future questions about his eligibility that could come in a general election.

He also claimed that it was The Washington Post — not him — that raised the issue.”

Read more:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/06/politics/ted-cruz-birthplace-donald-trump/

McCain: Cruz’s presidential eligibility a ‘legitimate question’

“McCain says it’s “worth looking into” whether Ted Cruz is eligible to run for president, since the Texas senator was born in Canada.

In an interview on Phoenix CBS affiliate KFYI, McCain said the questions raised by Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump over Cruz’s eligibility are legitimate.

“I think there is a question. I’m not a constitutional scholar on that, but I think it’s worth looking into. I don’t think it’s illegitimate to look into it,” McCain said.”

Read more:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/06/politics/ted-cruz-birthplace-john-mccain/

From Lawrence Sellin, PHD January 6, 2016 at Family Security Matters.

“Ted Cruz should provide evidence of his Constitutional eligibility for the Presidency”

“Despite the misinformation being disseminated by our corrupt political-media establishment and the Saul Alinsky-like lobbing of the pejorative “birther” as a means to deflect or suppress discussion of the issue; there is, in my view, no ambiguity.

According to Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of the Constitution, the narrative of the 14th Amendment, the Supreme Court case of Minor v. Happersett (1875), other legal opinions, precedence and historical background, Presidential eligibility requires that a candidate be born a US citizen of two US citizen parents at the time of birth.
If you are unwilling to accept the exhaustive legal documentation regarding the true meaning of “natural born” citizenship, you may try the common sense question:
Why has every President since Martin van Buren been a US citizen at birth of two citizen parents except Barack Obama and Chester A. Arthur, who lied about his personal history?

In order to understand the current political machinations surrounding the “natural born” Presidential eligibility debate, it is important to know that there have been numerous attempts both by Democrats and Republicans to amend the Article II “natural born citizen” clause, starting in 1975 when New York Democrat House Rep. Jonathon B. Bingham introduced House Joint Resolution 33, which clearly, even then, recognized the distinction between “citizen” and “natural born citizen:”
“Provides that a citizen of the United States otherwise eligible to hold the Office of President shall not be ineligible because such citizen is not a natural born citizen.”

It appears that our corrupt political-media establishment, having failed to change the Constitution by legal amendment, achieved it in 2008 through an electoral fait accompli, when Obama reached the Oval Office even though, by his own admission, he does not meet the two parent citizen standard.

A detailed account of how, in 2008, a Constitutional requirement was erased by political legerdemain is described here.
I like most of the policies espoused by Ted Cruz, but he does his candidacy and the nation no service by not addressing the eligibility question head-on.

You can be sure the Democrats will.”

Read more:

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/ted-cruz-should-provide-evidence-of-his-constitutional-eligibility-for-the-presidency

 

 

 

Ted Cruz FEC advisory opinion on natural born citizen status patriotic duty, Cruz born in Canada to 1 US citizen parent, Senate resolution 511 sanctioned John McCain who was born to 2 US citizen parents

Ted Cruz FEC advisory opinion on natural born citizen status patriotic duty, Cruz born in Canada to 1 US citizen parent, Senate resolution 511 sanctioned John McCain who was born to 2 US citizen parents

“Why did Obama employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to request an advisory opinion on FEC matching funds that he was not eligible for?”…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

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

 

 

Donald Trump was quoted in the Washington Post on January 5, 2016.

“Donald Trump said in an interview that rival Ted Cruz’s Canadian birthplace was a “very precarious” issue that could make the senator from Texas vulnerable if he became the Republican presidential nominee.

“Republicans are going to have to ask themselves the question: ‘Do we want a candidate who could be tied up in court for two years?’ That’d be a big problem,” Trump said when asked about the topic. “It’d be a very precarious one for Republicans because he’d be running and the courts may take a long time to make a decision. You don’t want to be running and have that kind of thing over your head.””

Trump is correct.

This is a no brainer.

For the good of the country, the Republican Party and for Cruz himself, he should immediately request an advisory opinion from the FEC as to whether or not he is eligible for federal matching funds as a natural born citizen.

There is a precedent for doing so.

From Citizen Wells January 27, 2015.

“To be president of the US one must be a natural born citizen, not just a citizen and not a naturalized citizen.

Is Ted Cruz a natural born citizen?

Based on my understanding the answer is no.

Ted Cruz was born in Canada and had only one US citizen parent.

Is Ted Cruz a patriot?

I believe so.

For the good of the country I am requesting that Ted Cruz, at the earliest possible moment, request an advisory opinion from the FEC about his eligibility for Federal Matching funds and therefore the presidency.

The FEC will be compelled to provide an advisory opinion about whether or not he is a natural born citizen.

This will be important for two reasons.

Ted Cruz needs to know early if his efforts are worthwhile and not counterproductive.

We need a ruling on this. Every government entity that should provide guidance on the definition of natural born citizen has passed the buck, including the US Supreme Court. The courts and congress have shirked their constitutional duty.

There are 2 important instances of an advisory opinion from the FEC on matching funds.

1. Attorney Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie on behalf of Barack Obama in 2007.

From Citizen Wells January 23, 2012.

“WHY DID OBAMA REFUSE MATCHING FUNDS IN 2008?

PART 4

Obama, attorneys and Democrats control FEC

The devil himself could not have come up with a more devious plan.

Robert Bauer, of Perkins Coie, on February 1, 2007 requested an advisory opinion to keep Obama’s option for matching funds open. Bauer knew full well that Obama, not being a natural born citizen, was not eligible for matching funds. The FEC advisory opinion from March 1, 2007 responded in the affirmative.Ellen L. Weintraub, former staff member at Perkins Coie, was a Democrat appointee of the FEC at that time. She remained well beyond her scheduled tenure with the help of Barack Obama.
Obama, Robert Bauer, Democrats interaction with FEC timeline.
February 1,2007

Advisory Opinion Request: General Election Public Funding

From Obama attorney Robert Bauer to FEC

“This request for an Advisory Opinion is filed on behalf of Senator Barack Obama and the committee, the Obama Exploratory Committee, that he established to fund his exploration of a Presidential candidacy. The question on which he seeks the Commission’s guidance is whether, if Senator Obama becomes a candidate, he may provisionally raise funds for the general election but retain the option, upon nomination, of returning these contributions and accepting the public funds for which he would be eligible as the Democratic Party’s nominee.”

“cc: Chairman Robert Lenhard
Vice Chair David Mason
Commissioner Michael Toner
Commissioner Hans von Spakovsky
Commissioner Steven Walther
Commissioner Ellen Weintraub

Note, in the above advisory opinion request, Robert Bauer was a Perkins Coie attorney and Ellen Weintraub was a former Perkins Coie staff member.
March 1, 2007

FEC advisory opinion

From Robert D. Lenhard to Robert Bauer

“The Commission concludes that Senator Obama may solicit and receive private contributions for the 2008 presidential general election without losing his
eligibility to receive public funding if he receives his party’s nomination for President, if he (1) deposits and maintains all private contributions
designated for the general election in a separate account, (2) refrains from using these contributions for any purpose, and (3) refunds the private
contributions in full if he ultimately decides to receive public funds.””

June 19, 2008.

“Obama to Break Promise, Opt Out of Public Financing for General Election”

“In a web video to supporters — “the people who built this movement from the bottom up” — Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, announced this morning that he will not enter into the public financing system, despite a previous pledge to do so.”

“In November 2007, Obama answered “Yes” to Common Cause when asked “If you are nominated for President in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?”
Obama wrote:

“In February 2007, I proposed a novel way to preserve the strength of the public financing system in the 2008 election. My plan requires both major party
candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/01/23/obama-ga-ballot-challenge-natural-born-citizen-status-judge-michael-malihi-why-did-obama-refuse-matching-funds-in-2008-part-4-obama-attorneys-democrats-control-fec/

2. Abdul Hassan, a naturalized citizen, requested an advisory opinion in 2012.

From Citizen Wells March 11, 2013.

“From the FEC March 11, 2013.

APPEALS COURT ISSUES PER CURIAM ORDER IN HASSAN v. FEC

WASHINGTON – The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit today issued its Per Curiam Order inHassan v. FEC (Case 1:11-cv-02189-EGS). The text of the Order may be found here: (http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/hassan_ac_order2.pdf).

Background.

From Citizen Wells October 1, 2012.

“From the FEC October 1, 2012.

DISTRICT COURT ISSUES OPINION IN HASSAN v. FEC

WASHINGTON – The United States District Court for the District of Columbia on Friday issued its Memorandum Opinion and Order in Hassan v. FEC (Case 1:11-cv-02189-EGS). The text of the Memorandum Opinion may be found here (http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/hassan_dc_memo_opinion.pdf) and the text of the Order may be found here (http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/hassan_dc_order2.pdf).

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is an independent regulatory agency that administers and enforces federal campaign finance laws. The FEC has jurisdiction over the financing of campaigns for the U.S. House of Representatives, the U.S. Senate, the Presidency and the Vice Presidency. Established in 1975, the FEC is composed of six Commissioners who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

http://www.fec.gov/press/press2012/20121001_Hassan_v._FEC.shtml

Exerpts:
“Hassan’s challenge to the Fund Act rests on his contention
that the natural born citizen requirement has been implicitly
repealed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Court need
not repeat the thorough and persuasive opinions issued by its
colleagues in at least five other jurisdictions, all of whom
determined that the natural born citizen requirement has not
been implicitly repealed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.”

“Moreover, the Supreme Court has consistently held that the distinction between natural born citizens and naturalized citizens in the context of
Presidential eligibility remains valid.”

“Because the natural born citizen requirement has not been explicitly or implicitly repealed, Hassan’s challenge to that provision, and the Fund Act’s incorporation thereof, must fail.””

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/abdul-karim-hassan-vs-federal-election-commission-march-11-2013-u-s-court-of-appeals-per-curiam-order-hassan-not-natural-born-citizen/

This is important.

I urge you to contact Ted Cruz with this important information.

https://citizenwells.com/2015/01/27/ted-cruz-eligible-for-presidency-ted-cruz-natural-born-citizen-cruz-a-patriot-ted-cruz-advisory-opinion-from-fec-natural-born-citizen-not-citizen-naturalized-citizen-abdul-hassan-not-eligibl/

Vermont eligibility challenge update January 5, 2016, H. Brooke Paige v State of Vermont, Attorney General’s office failed to inform Secretary of State’s Election Office of their failure to respond in Superior Court

Vermont eligibility challenge update January 5, 2016, H. Brooke Paige v State of Vermont, Attorney General’s office failed to inform Secretary of State’s Election Office of their failure to respond in Superior Court

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“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 . . . .”…US Constitution

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

 

Just in from Mr. H. Brooke Paige, plaintiff in the complaint against the State of Vermont, Secretary of State James Condos and Attorney General William Sorrell.

“Well this was an unexpected turn of events.  As a result of their
negligence in Answering or otherwise entering an appearance in Superior
Court, a series of events are unfolding that could result in profound
changes in the Vermont Primary this March.  What those changes will be is
difficult to predict. There are structural and legal problems with Vermont
Election Laws (Title 17) which has been thrown together “piecemeal” over
the years and this case should focus attention on the shortcomings of the
current law.

Mr. Paige visited the Secretary of State’s Office today to hand deliver a
copy of the latest filings that requested a Temporary Restraining Order to
prevent the “publication and distribution” of the Presidential Primary
Ballots until the “troubles” complained in the Plaintiff’s pleadings are
resolved or an accommodation can be found that would avoid injuring or
disenfranchising the various candidates.

Sadly, the Attorney General’s office has failed to inform the Secretary of
State’s Election Office of their failure to respond in Superior Court. The
Director of Elections appeared “shell shocked” as Mr. Paige filled him in
on the case, the default and the resolution he intends to propose to the
Court relating to the Primary.  The General Election and the “natural-born
Citizen” question will require additional consideration in order to find
an equable resolution which hopefully will include defining “nbC”
precisely as part of the ruling (rather than mere dicta unrelated to the
resolution).

Mr. Paige informs that the gross negligence of the Defendants exhibited by
their failure to respond reduces the A/G opportunities to stall and
“sidetrack” the case.  The expedited resolution of the questions relating
to the Primary could produce an interesting civics lesson for Vermont
voters.

CitizenWells  will continue to follow this case and provide all the
details here as they become available !”

The complaint:

https://citizenwells.com/2015/12/30/ted-cruz-rubio-and-jindal-eligibility-challenged-in-vermont-h-brooke-paige-complaint-filed-december-9-2015-natural-born-citizen-status-requires-us-birth-and-2-citizen-parents-attorney-mario-apuzz/

Harvard Law Review article lied about Ted Cruz eligibility, Natural born citizen status, 2 US citizen parents required, Cruz born in canada to 1 US Citizen parent his mother, Is this why Obama and Cruz are arrogant in regard to US Constitution?

Harvard Law Review article lied about Ted Cruz eligibility, Natural born citizen status, 2 US citizen parents required, Cruz born in canada to 1 US Citizen parent his mother, Is this why Obama and Cruz are arrogant in regard to US Constitution?

“According to the  US Citizenship and Immigration Services Ted Cruz was not a US citizen at birth and consequently not a natural born citizen.”…Citizen Wells

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

 

At the time of the adoption of the US Constitution in 1787, there were only 2 types of citizens defined by US Law.

Natural born citizens and everyone else, citizens. There were no legally naturalized citizens and no provision in US Law to be naturalized until 1790.

That is why the founding fathers has to be grandfathered in with the following language:

“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 . . . .”

That language and the meaning of natural born citizen have not been altered.

Only the definition of citizen and how to attain citizenship has been altered.

It is believed by myself and many legal scholars that the founding fathers knew that one had to be born on US Soil to US citizen parents (plural).

Three years later in the Naturalization act of 1790 we find a clarification:

“And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens”

Obviously from that language one had to have US citizen parents (plural) to be a natural born citizen.

Senate Resolution 511, that Barack Obama signed, stated:

“Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a `natural born Citizen’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.”

Once again citizens (plural).

So from start to finish we have the requirement of 2 US Citizen parents to be a natural born citizen.

Ted Cruz had only one US Citizen parent, his mother and he was born in Canada.

Clearly not eligible.

That is why the following article from the Harvard Review is so absurd.

“We have both had the privilege of heading the Office of the Solicitor General during different administrations. We may have different ideas about the ideal candidate in the next presidential election, but we agree on one important principle: voters should be able to choose from all constitutionally eligible candidates, free from spurious arguments that a U.S. citizen at birth is somehow not constitutionally eligible to serve as President simply because he was delivered at a hospital abroad.

The Constitution directly addresses the minimum qualifications necessary to serve as President. In addition to requiring thirty-five years of age and fourteen years of residency, the Constitution limits the presidency to “a natural born Citizen.”

All the sources routinely used to interpret the Constitution confirm that the phrase “natural born Citizen” has a specific meaning: namely, someone who was a U.S. citizen at birth with no need to go through a naturalization proceeding at some later time. And Congress has made equally clear from the time of the framing of the Constitution to the current day that, subject to certain residency requirements on the parents, someone born to a U.S. citizen parent generally becomes a U.S. citizen without regard to whether the birth takes place in Canada, the Canal Zone, or the continental United States.”

This is a big lie!

http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/

From Citizen Wells March 16, 2015.

Truths, half truths and lies.

I will make this simple because it is.

Although our laws were derived from British laws and in fact some common laws are in force today, we have heavily modified them beginning with pre revolution colonial laws and the US Constitution.

The article above conveniently, selectively quotes the US Constitution which states:

“no Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President . . . .”

Ted Cruz is a citizen, but since he was not alive at the adoption of the Constitution, he is not by default a natural born citizen.

The Constitution was crafted by individuals with an excellent understanding of the law and a concern for foreign influences.

They made a clear distinction between citizen and natural born citizen.

Ted Cruz citizen not natural born citizen, Cruz not alive at adoption of constitution, Harvard Law Review article, Still teach to constitution?, Citizen at birth not equivalent to natural born citizen

Attorney Mario Apuzzo provides a scholarly explanation.

“I read the March 11, 2015 article entitled, “On the Meaning of a ‘Natural Born Citizen,” written by Neal Katyal and Paul Clement, found at 128 Harv.L.Rev.F 161, and accessed at http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/ .  The first sentence of the article says:  “We have both had the privilege of heading the Office of the Solicitor General.”  The article repeats the existing talking points offered in support of the constitutional eligibility of Senator Ted Cruz (all born citizens are natural born citizens) and offers nothing new.  Mr. Cruz was born in Canada to a U.S. citizen mother and a non-U.S. citizen (Cuban) father.  I have written a recent article in which I conclude that Mr. Cruz is not a natural born citizen and therefore not eligible to be President because he does not satisfy the one and only common law definition of a natural born citizen confirmed by the unanimous U.S. Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875), which is a child born in a country to parents who were its citizens at the time of the child’s birth.  The article is entitled, “What Do President Obama and Senator Cruz Have In Common? They Are Both Not Natural Born Citizens,” accessed at http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2015/02/what-do-president-obama-and-senator.html .  Katyal and Clement maintain that any child who becomes a citizen at birth, regardless of where born or by what means, is a natural born citizen.  They add that since Mr. Cruz became a citizen from the moment of birth and did not need any naturalization after birth he is a natural born citizen.  But there is no historical and legal evidence which demonstrates that this is how the Framers defined a natural born citizen and the authors surely have not presented that evidence even if it did exist.

The authors’ argument suffers from the fallacy of bald assertion.  They provide no convincing evidence for their position on who is included as an Article II natural born citizen.  They do not examine what was the source of the Framers’ definition of an Article II natural born citizen, let alone what was the definition of a natural born citizen when the Framers drafted and adopted the Constitution and when it was eventually ratified.  They ignore so much of the historical and legal record in coming to their bald conclusions. For a discussion of this historical and legal evidence, see the numerous articles that I have written and posted at my blog, http://puzo1.blogspot.com .
Read more at http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/03/attorney-responds-to-harvard-law-review.html#8Lt4afwlA9IQXYvW.99

Read more:

http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/03/attorney-responds-to-harvard-law-review.html

 

 

 

Vermont Ted Cruz eligibility challenge update January 1, 2016, H. Brooke Paige v State of Vermont, Attorney General Bill Sorrell neglects to file timely answer, Notice of Default, Court request for Secretary of State Jim Condos to take appropriate actions

Vermont Ted Cruz eligibility challenge update January 1, 2016, H. Brooke Paige v State of Vermont, Attorney General Bill Sorrell neglects to file timely answer, Notice of Default, Court request for Secretary of State Jim Condos to take appropriate actions

“According to the  US Citizenship and Immigration Services Ted Cruz was not a US citizen at birth and consequently not a natural born citizen.”…Citizen Wells

“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 . . . .”…US Constitution

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

 

Just in from Mr. H. Brooke Paige, plaintiff in complaint against the State of Vermont, Secretary of State James Condos and Attorney General William Sorrell.

“Vermont’s Attorney General Neglects to File Timely Answer in Paige v.
State of Vermont, et al (2015) – An Unexpected and Encouraging Event that
Could Expedite the Case !

It Appears the Vermont’s Attorney General Bill Sorrell has gotten cold
feet when it comes to the issue of the “natural-born Citizen” question and
numerous deficiencies in Vermont’s Primary and General Election process
(Title 17),

In the case currently before the Vermont Superior Court, Washington Unit,
Paige v. State of Vermont, et al, Civil Docket #780-12-15, was filed with
the court on December 8, 2015 and service of process was executed by the
Washington CO. Sheriff’s on December 11, 2015 with an Answer or Motion
required by the court 20 days after service today, December 31.

Mr. Paige visited the court clerk’s office at midday today (12/31/15) and
was informed that no communications had been received by the court from
the VT A/G’s office. The clerk confirmed that the answer was  required by
the close of business (4:30 PM) and suggested that he stop back then and
she would provide him with a copy of the filing – which both the clerk and
Mr. Paige were certain would be filed on time.

Mr. Paige arrived just before closing and was informed that the Attorney
General had not yet filed his answer and the clerk suggested he wait until
the office closed.  Mr. Paige waited until the bailiff came by to lock up
the courthouse – no timely response was by A/G Sorrell’s office on behalf
of the State, Secretary of State Jim Condos or Attorney General William
Sorrell (who is himself named as a co-defendant as a result of his
intentional misconduct in Mr. Paige’s prior ballot challenge before the
court)

Mr. Paige informs Citizen Wells that he will be filing his “Notice of
Default” with the court on Monday morning and will subsequently ask the
court for an expedited hearing on the merits, a directed verdict based
upon the Plaintiff’s Complaint and the issuance of an Order by the Court
directing Secretary of State Jim Condos to take appropriate actions to
mitigate and resolve the errors and deficiencies presented in his
Complaint.”

H. Brooke Paige

The complaint:

Ted Cruz Rubio and Jindal eligibility challenged in Vermont, H. Brooke Paige complaint filed December 9, 2015, Natural born citizen status requires US birth and 2 citizen parents, Attorney Mario Apuzzo explains founding fathers intent

 

Ted Cruz Rubio and Jindal eligibility challenged in Vermont, H. Brooke Paige complaint filed December 9, 2015, Natural born citizen status requires US birth and 2 citizen parents, Attorney Mario Apuzzo explains founding fathers intent

Ted Cruz Rubio and Jindal eligibility challenged in Vermont, H. Brooke Paige complaint filed December 9, 2015, Natural born citizen status requires US birth and 2 citizen parents, Attorney Mario Apuzzo explains founding fathers intent

“According to the  US Citizenship and Immigration Services Ted Cruz was not a US citizen at birth and consequently not a natural born citizen.”…Citizen Wells

“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 . . . .”…US Constitution

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

 

I agree with H. Brooke Paige, CDR Charles Kerchner, Attorney Mario Apuzzo and many others that the the founding fathers understood the definition of natural born citizen meant birth on US soil to 2 US citizen parents.

Yesterday Mr. Paige presented Citizen Wells with a complaint filed against the State of Vermont, Secretary of State James Condos and Attorney General William Sorrell.

Here are some exerpts:

“10. While it may seem counterintuitive that such a weighty question as
that of the definition of the constitutional meaning of a presidential
qualification and the other questions raised in this action, should
originate in a state superior court – it is not only entirely
appropriate, it is an absolute necessity as no other authority or
jurisdiction is available to the Plaintiff and is the most logical,
constitutionally permissible jurisdiction in light of the federal
Constitution’s protections of the coequal branches of the federal
government and the principle of Separation of Powers embodied in said
Constitution of the United States (1790).

11. In 2008, Dr. Daniel Tokaji, Professor of Law at Ohio State
University, explained this essential legal pathway in his “The
Justiciability of Eligibility: May Courts Decide Who Can Be President?”
(Exhibit D) which, after extensive analysis of question relating to the
constitutional qualification cases relating to Senator John McCain of
Arizona and then Senator Barack Hussein Obama of Illinois, concluded:

“(F)ederal lawsuits challenging the presidential candidates’ eligibility
to serve as president are not justiciable, and it is questionable whether
any justiciable case could be brought in federal court as an initial
matter. Fortunately, there are alternative means to adjudicate this matter
that are consistent with the U.S. Constitution. The most promising is a
pre-election state-court lawsuit seeking to keep an allegedly unqualified
candidate off the ballot. In the event that a renegade state court rejects
a candidate who is, in fact, eligible or that two or more state courts
reach conflicting conclusions on a candidate’s eligibility, U.S. Supreme
Court review should be available as a backstop. This avenue seems less
fraught with peril than congressional resolution of the matter, given
Congress’ dubious legal authority to not count electoral votes of a
candidate it believes ineligible. Those who seek to challenge a
presidential candidate’s eligibility would thus be well-advised to dust
off their state election codes and head to state court.”

“14. In the prior action the Defendants’ council, Attorney General Sorrell
through his assistant Todd Daloz,  attempted to obfuscate and confound
both the Plaintiff and the Court  with the issues of “ripeness” and
“mootness” of the issues raised. First arguing that the answers sought
could not be raised until AFTER the election had been conducted – a
tortured interpretation of 17 V.S.A. § 2732 and shortly thereafter, with
equal absurdity, arguing that the issues had become moot with the passage
of time.”

“22. In the 2016 Presidential Election, in addition to Socialist Party
candidates Lindsay and Osorio, who have vowed to run in every election
regardless of their constitutional qualification debility; three of the
Republican Party candidates are known to have birth circumstances that
preclude their qualifying for the office they are seeking.
(a) – Texas U.S. Senator, Rafael Edward (Ted) Cruz, was born in Calgary,
Alberta, Canada, to a Cuban citizen father, Rafael, who became a
naturalized U.S. citizen in 2005, long after his son’s birth.
(b) – Louisiana Governor, Piyush (Bobby) Jindal, was born in Baton Rouge,
LA to Indian nationals who had recently arrived in the U.S. on visas at
the time of their son’s birth. His father, Amar, was in the U.S. on a P3-1
professional work visa while his mother, Raj, was in the U.S. on a student
visa: neither was a U.S. citizen at the time of their son’s birth. (c) –
Florida U.S. Senator, Marco Antonio Rubio, was born in Miami, FL to two
Cuban nationals who came to the U.S. before Castro came to power. Mario
Rubio Reina and Oriales (Garcia) Rubio left Cuba in 1956 and continuously
resided in Miami, however they did not become naturalized citizens until
1975, when Marco was already four years old.

None of the above mentioned candidates meet the “natural born Citizen”
qualification set forth in the U. S. Constitution for serving as President
of the United States and Commander in Chief of the Military. Mario Apuzzo,
Esq. has written a dissertation delineating the debilities of each of
these candidates which bars their serving:  “Senator Cruz, Senator Rubio,
and Governor Jindal Should Not Be Allowed to Participate…(2015)”  (Exhibit
H).”

Exhibits:

Some legal scholars maintain that being a citizen at birth qualifies as being a natural born citizen.

Even by that standard, according to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services, Cruz is not a natural born citizen.

Ted Cruz is not a natural born citizen and not eligible for presidency, Not a citizen at birth, Not born after November 14, 1986, Media and Democrats are waiting to challenge Cruz, Ted Cruz must request advisory opinion from FEC

Obviously, the US Supreme Court needs to do their duty and settle this matter once and for all, irrespective of the impact on Barack Obama.

 

Greensboro NC YWCA new family shelter reveals the real economy and faces of hunger, News Record reports hunger correctly but misstates employment, I’m tired of lies from Washington and state capitals about jobs and the economy

Greensboro NC YWCA new family shelter reveals the real economy and faces of hunger, News Record reports hunger correctly but misstates employment, I’m tired of lies from Washington and state capitals about jobs and the economy

“In December 2014 there were 18 million immigrants (legal and illegal) living in the country who had arrived since January 2000. But job growth over this period was just 9.3 million — half of new immigration.”…Center for Immigration Studies February 2015

“There’s no other way to say this. The official unemployment rate, which cruelly overlooks the suffering of the long-term and often permanently unemployed as well as the depressingly underemployed, amounts to a Big Lie.”…Gallup CEO Jim Clifton 

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

I’m tired of lies from Washington and state capitals about jobs and the economy.

I am also tired of the mainstream media misrepresenting the economy and jobs situation.

Occasionally the Greensboro News Record produces a meaningful, quality article. This is one.

“24 hours in the YWCA’s new family shelter in Greensboro”

“Outside, the rain is cold and pounding.

A clock inches toward 8:45 a.m., the time each day that guests must leave the family shelter at the YWCA, which won’t reopen until late afternoon.

A young dad — who just finished packing a day of snacks from a table where brown paper bags are laid out for families to use — has to get the last of his brood into a coat.

And that child — one of four siblings under the age of 4 — isn’t cooperating.

“No,” she says firmly, perhaps sensing the misery to come, as the family’s normal routine includes a half-mile walk to the nearest bus stop.

Cries echo down the hallway as the siblings eventually trudge like baby ducklings out the door behind the mom, who just finished her last college exam and is on winter break, and the dad, who finds activities for the children during the day.

Jan Hill, the overnight staff person, locks up behind them.

These are not her favorite moments in the 24-hour cycle of one of the state’s few homeless shelters for families.

That the families had a warm bed, place for the children to run around and free meals last night gives her some solace.

A place to stay

The YWCA shelter is a place where families are able to put their lives back on track.

It is a modest space, with its own entrance at the back of the nonprofit’s building on East Wendover Avenue, that can house about 30 people. At the moment, that’s room for seven families.

The shelter’s goal is to help homeless families develop skills to achieve financial stability, pay off debts and save enough to move into permanent housing. A case worker works with them. Closing the doors at 8:45 a.m. is a nudge to the parents, that they need to be using their time wisely, such as going out looking for jobs.

The ones who seek help here are in the growing number of families who have fallen out of the middle class because of layoffs or companies closing or underemployment; of working-class people grappling with loss of benefits or reduced hours or rising prices that give them less to live on; and of others who may work several part-time jobs while going back to school to get GEDs or training or degrees that can make the family self-sufficient again — or for the first time.

Many end up on the other end of the line at the YWCA shelter, asking if there’s any room. Families are also referred by other agencies.

Problem is, the shelter can only take in a few and the need is great. Estimates show that in Guilford County at least 70 families are on a waiting list for a shelter at any given time. In the meantime, they and those that are deemed the invisible homeless, may live in cars or hotels or sleep on the couches and floors of friends as long as they can.

“When you are living in day-to-day crisis mode, it can be hard,” shelter director and case manager Michelle Cheek said. “It’s not alleviating all of their problems, but it’s reducing their stress.”

Most shelters are built like dorms with beds for adult men and women, grouped by gender.

Here, there are three separate bedrooms on one side for families with dads and older male children. These families share a large private bathroom. The other side holds a large space divided by partitions.

There are communal showers like those in middle school gyms.

A larger space is covered with tables for meals and a play area that’s stocked with books and has mats on the floor for children.

There’s a laundry room with multiple washers and dryers.

A large pantry nearby is stocked with breakfast cereals, fruits and other items — on this day, muffins — donated by volunteers and local businesses.

During the day, children go to school while their parents work or look for jobs.”

“The YWCA program opened in July with no funding dedicated to the shelter at all. It has depended on individual donations, a handful of local churches and a few grants.

And Garnette’s sheer will.

“I’m a strong believer that when you do the right things for the right reasons, they work out,” Garnette said. “We researched it. We believe it’s necessary. And in this community, it’s not OK for 2-year-olds to be sleeping in cars.””

“Shortly after 3:30 p.m. on a recent day, a school bus stops and drops off two of the children living at the shelter.

The doors to the shelter won’t open for another hour and a half, so the kids climb into an aging vehicle with their mother and they drive away.

A slightly older child who got picked up from school by his mom sits with her in the car — a beat-up vehicle with a missing passenger side window now covered by a towel — until it is time to come inside.

When the doors open at 5 p.m., some of the older children come in carrying heavy backpacks and almost immediately disappear into their family’s room.

“I think it is harder on the older children,” Hill said. “They remember what it was like to live in their own home.

“They also worry that their friends will find out.”

But after living on the streets or having nowhere else to turn and empty pockets, the parents know it is their best — and only — option.

Among the families who have stayed here recently is a single mother working two part-time jobs. She came here when her youngest son was just 2 weeks old. He’s now 3 months old.

Once she can settle an old Duke Energy bill that she says someone else ran up in her name, she will be able to move into her own apartment.

Another family learned of the shelter after neighbors in an out-of-the-way cul-de-sac noticed a car idling there for hours. When the car’s dome light flipped on, children could be seen moving around inside. They called police, who called the shelter.

There’s the single dad who had been sleeping on a park bench with his 4-year-old daughter because an old eviction kept him from being able to rent again.

He recently sat at a table in front of a woman who was laid off from a full-time manufacturing job. She sees the program as a place for her to start over.

“It was comfortable and safe, and I slept so good that first night,” she said. “But I just want to find a job, find decent housing, and I can go from there.””

Read more:

http://www.greensboro.com/news/local_news/hours-in-the-ywca-s-new-family-shelter-in-greensboro/article_479dff86-8fe9-5676-a062-3010255c8f67.html

Also from the Greensboro News Record December 27, 2015.

“North Carolina’s job growth doesn’t necessarily mean prosperity, stability or recovery”

“A dramatically changing economy in the state, corporate practices that erode wages and a common type of fraud that cheats workers out of wages and the state out of tax dollars are all part of the problem.

Here are some of the key figures to show you the shifts in the region’s economy since the turn of the century:

  • From January 1999 through November 2015, the Greensboro-High Point metropolitan statistical area lost 32,500 goods-producing jobs, which typically pay high wages, according to the N.C. Department of Commerce.
  • During the same period, the metro area gained 40,200 service jobs, which pay lower wages and offer employment with less stability and fewer benefits.
  • Although the national unemployment rate, at 5 percent, has returned to its pre-recession level, unemployment in the Greensboro-High Point metro, at 5.5 percent in November, remains above the 5.3 percent rate of January 2008.
  • North Carolina’s median annual household income in 2014 was $47,000, down from an inflation-adjusted $53,000 in 1999, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
  • In the United States, 13.3 million more people are working than at the depth of the recession in 2010, and 4.5 million more Americans are working than before the recession in 2008, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Many economists say the nation has fully recovered from the recession, and North Carolina’s major cities are the state’s success stories. But many rural counties and smaller metropolitan statistic areas — or MSAs — have not seen that level of success, which has created an uneven economic recovery, said a year-end report by the N.C. Justice Center, a nonprofit group that studies labor and economic issues. According to that report, 26 of the state’s 100 counties lost jobs from October 2014 through October 2015.”

“Permanently temporary

Lower-quality jobs is not the only reason for the wage decline, Shaw said.
Corporations have added more temporary, or “contingent,” employees to their workforces, either to account for seasonal variations or create a permanent level of employees without benefits or other perks that permanent workers receive.
Shaw said temporary workers are becoming a permanent strategy for many companies in this state.”

Read more:

http://www.greensboro.com/business/north-carolina-s-job-growth-doesn-t-necessarily-mean-prosperity/article_47cadc65-823b-525b-9381-77ad6f996d99.html

Now let’s set the record straight.

The New Record and other mainstream media won’t touch this because it indicts Obama and illegal aliens for taking native born American jobs.

The News Record stated:

“In the United States, 13.3 million more people are working than at the depth of the recession in 2010, and 4.5 million more Americans are working than before the recession in 2008, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.”

There are ZERO more white Americans working since 2008 and only approx. 4 million more since 2010.

That is a huge difference!

 

Blagojevich update US Supreme Court appeal, December 19, 2015, Order extending time to file response to petition to and including January 20, 2016, Not denied yet significant?

Blagojevich update US Supreme Court appeal, December 19, 2015, Order extending time to file response to petition to and including January 20, 2016, Not denied yet significant?

Why did Patrick Fitzgerald and the US Justice Department wait until December 2008 to arrest Rod Blagojevich?”…Citizen Wells

“I believe I’m more pristine on Rezko than him.”…Rod Blagojevich

“Regardless of how this plays out, it benefits Obama. If there is no appeal or the appeal is denied, Blagojevich will be sequestered. If the appeal proceeds, it could drag out beyond impacting the 2012 election cycle. The intent is obvious.”…Citizen Wells, July 19, 2011

 

Rod Blagojevich attorney Len Goodman filed an appeal, petition for a writ of certiorari, with the US Supreme Court on November 17, 2015.

The SCOTUS then had a response indicated by December 21, 2015.

No. 15-664
Title:
Rod Blagojevich, Petitioner
v.
United States
Docketed: November 19, 2015
Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
  Case Nos.: (11-3853)
  Decision Date: July 21, 2015
  Rehearing Denied: August 19, 2015

 

~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings  and  Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nov 17 2015 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 21, 2015)

This response has been extended to January 20, 2016.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docketfiles/15-664.htm

The Blagojevich appeal has not been denied yet.

Is this significant?

Here are some cases that have been denied.

Click to access 121415zor_8n59.pdf