As December Looms, More Take Notice of Obama Eligibility Issue

Christian Science Monitor latest to weigh in on citizenship debate

Every single day, it seems as though more and more information is coming across my Blackberry and e-mail inbox regarding the citizenship and eligibility questions surrounding Barack Obama. There are new reports analyzing Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth, reports refuting the first reports, information about forged selective service documents, and even rumors of death threats against one of those who has brought suit.

So much new information has come across that I am forced, due to constraints in time and resources which preclude me from examining and verifying and properly sourcing everything to the point where I feel comfortable running it in these pages, to act much like a spectator in all of this and limit the coverage here at America’s Right to things with I can personally see and feel and smell and examine, such as the various legal filings in the different suits across the country.

Thankfully, it seems as though word is steadily getting out. The great folks at WorldNetDaily have taken it upon themselves to spearhead an operation bridging the gap between the new media and the mainstream press — and it seems to be working. A few days ago, a question about the birth certificate issue was asked at a White House press briefing, and now we see that even the Christian Science Monitor has picked up the baton and chosen to weigh in.

When I first broke the story on August 21, I waited patiently for the mainstream press to pick up on it. I remember that first weekend, telling my wife on Sunday night that the late nights in front of the computer would likely come to an end, because “the media should finally pick up on this now.”

Now, after a few long months, I am cautiously optimistic but nonetheless delighted to see that, finally, the nation seems to be starting to wake up and pay attention.

Here’s the Christian Science Monitor piece. A pretty fair article, but I would have liked to have seen a focus on the fact that Obama has fought this in court and has, as of yet, refused to provide a long-form “vault” copy of his birth certificate. This is, after all, the presidency. Still, any widespread attention is good.

Read it, pass it along, and enjoy.

– Jeff


A Last Electoral Hurdle for Obama
By Patrik Jonsson, Christian Science Monitor

Barack Obama has one election still to win before he moves into the White House, and by all accounts he’s a shoo-in. The Electoral College – that curious body created by the Founders to put one extra check on the popular vote – meets Dec. 15 to elect the president.

But across the US, a small band of Americans convinced that Mr. Obama is not a natural-born citizen, as the Constitution requires of presidents, are lobbying Democratic electors to take one last look at the notion that Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii.

The idea that Democratic electors would deny Obama the presidency strains the bounds of credulity. But the lobbying campaign points to the endurance of conspiracy theories pertaining to US presidents – and revives longstanding questions about the Electoral College itself.

“This does point out the frailty of the Electoral College system,” says Michael Mezey, an expert on the election process at DePaul University in Chicago. “The fact that in most states electors could make the decision to vote for somebody else … is a real vulnerability in the process. [Many Americans], in fact, tend to be amazed that these electors are real people.”

Here in North Carolina, the secretary of state’s office has fielded about 50 requests for names and contact numbers of electors – all public information. The last time so many people sought to contact electors was in 2000, amid a bid to urge electors to vote for Democratic presidential nominee Al Gore, who had won the popular vote.

“Most of the world thinks this is settled except for a few conspiracy theorists,” says North Carolina Secretary of State Elaine Marshall. “In the 2000 election … Republican electors felt under siege, and I expect the Democrat electors may end up feeling the same way [this time].”

Wayne Abraham, a Democratic elector in Greensboro, N.C., says he’s received three letters – two signed, one not – and one phone call about Obama’s citizenship.

“I was surprised, but I’m not worried about it,” he says, dryly. “As I said to the lady on the phone, I figured that the Bush administration had ample opportunity to investigate Senator Obama, and if they had discovered he was not truly a citizen they … would have let us know.”

A birth certificate from Hawaii

Many news organizations have debunked claims that Obama was born in Kenya to his 19-year-old American mother and his father, a Kenyan. The Obama campaign released a certificate of live birth from Hawaii in June, which would seem to have put the issue to rest. Critics, though, contend the document is a fake.

“It’s true that, if it’s not a totally impossible twist on actual facts that he’d been born in Kenya, [the Electoral vote] actually would have been quite tricky because of the statutory regime,” says Peter Spiro, an immigration law expert at Temple University in Philadelphia. “But it’s really a nonstarter because Obama was born in Hawaii.”

A disparate, Web-connected campaign appears to be driving the effort to contact electors ahead of the Dec. 15 meetings of the college in each state’s capital. It also includes a letter-writing effort to urge the US Supreme Court to intervene. One website, obamacrimes.com, has reportedly received 105 million hits in the past three months, speaking to the pervasiveness of the belief, perhaps fueled by Obama’s multiethnic background and globe-trotting childhood, that the president-elect was born abroad.

Legal challenges over Obama’s citizenship

Two pending lawsuits could yet get an audience before the Supreme Court prior to Dec. 15, and a movement is also afoot to sue secretaries of state over the certification issue. Some say the Founders intended the Electoral College to serve as the final certification board for candidates. The US has no other independent certification process, relying instead on vetting by courts, voters, and the press during the campaign.

“People are going after electors now because they can only vote for a qualified candidate, and [Obama] hasn’t shown he’s qualified,” says Philip Berg of Lafayette Hill, Pa., a Democrat and lawyer who has filed two lawsuits calling Obama’s citizenship into question. “I think we have enough trouble – we don’t need a fake president.”

Melanie Siewert, a stay-at-home mom in Kernersville, N.C., says her lobbying efforts mark the first time she’s been actively involved in the political process. The questions raised by lawyers like Mr. Berg, she says, are substantial enough to throw doubt on Obama’s eligibility.

“I’m not asking electors to overturn their vote, but really to, before we vote, to make absolutely sure,” says Ms. Siewert, who has contacted most of North Carolina’s 15 electors. “This is not being a sore loser or racist. This is just about ensuring that our leader is being truthful about who he is.”

Fueled by a historic presidential race that promised a dramatic shift in the direction of American power, the Obama citizenship flap, some experts say, shows that conspiracy theories still resonate with a subset of Americans. Over the years, the legitimacy of presidents from Thomas Jefferson to Abraham Lincoln has been questioned, though none about their citizenship status.

“Human beings will always go for myth because it’s compelling, dramatic, and, if it were true, it would be able to change history,” says Perry Leavell, a presidential historian and folklore expert at Drew University in Madison, N.J. “You can go back into the history of the American presidency and find over and over again people … who are prepared to believe the exact opposite of what all the data would say.”

Though many electors are bound by state law to cast their vote for the winning candidate, their constitutional role as federal agents means that any vote they cast on Dec. 15 will count. What’s more, their importance could come into sharper relief if new information about Obama’s citizenship status were to surface before Dec. 15, says James Ceaser, a political scientist at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville.

“The only time the electors’ role might change … is if something occurred during the election which afterwards made things look really strange,” says Mr. Ceaser. “That’s why I believe personally that human discretion should be involved in every decision until the last second, that nothing should be automatic.”

Share

Comments

  1. Anonymous says:

    I think it wonderful that these lawsuits continue. Reading that lawsuits will be filed against any legislation, executive order, and appointment coming from the Obama administration is a cause I can believe in to resolve finally the issue of the BC.

    I would like to see the three major networks, the Fox News organization, and countless newspapers that have failed to report in the public interest on so many issues be irreparably damaged beyond what little credibility they seem to retain.

    When compared with other times in history the trouble in the hen house in 2008 is so great, so pervasive, blood in the streets would be a great first step in returning to a country founded on the Constitution.

  2. Anonymous says:

    “The Electoral College – that curious body created by the Founders to put one extra check on the popular vote – meets Dec. 15 to elect the president.”

    The only thing worse than a dumbed down journo is a dumbed down journo who is too proud to know he is dumb.

    Obama and His Dummies are going to have a rude awakening.

    I can just see it, but Judge, I’m special, Really special. My whole entire life, Everyone has bent the rules for me. That doesn’t happen for most people, just for us special chosen ones.

    Ya know, you really do reap what ya sow.

  3. Eileen says:

    The entire world reads the Christian Science Monitor. Christian Science is in most countries. The Christian Science Monitor is Really that BIG!

  4. Ted Park says:

    I posted a very nice Situation Summary for the comments following the MSNBC story on Obama. They won’t publish it. The only thing they have is the story itself and about a dozen extremely hateful responses. I guess my calm and well-reasoned piece didn’t fit in.

  5. Anonymous says:

    The words “Obama birt certificate” send you people running like a pack of wild dogs to a dead deer.

    It’s hilarious to watch.

    “Obama birth certificate” here boy! Go fetch!

    Man that makes me chuckle like a fat kid with cake.

    The funniest part was Jeff referring to World Net Daily as a reputable news source. We all know how credible Jerome Corsi is!! Bwahahahaahaha!! Obama emails anyone? Give me a break.

    Have fun kiddies. See you after your heartbreak party.

  6. Mark says:

    Jeff,

    You said that this was a “fair” article?

    Hardly accurate, and certainly NOT fair. It is loaded with inaccuracies, bias, and outright lies.

    As with other mainstream outlets that stand to look completely foolish for not reporting this disaster when they should, they are playing defense by labeling this as just another conspiracy theory.

    Jeff – please try calling it for what it is and try not to be so concerned about making politically correct statements.

  7. Jeff West says:

    “CONFIDENCE”
    Sadly, Patrik Jonsson’s article makes no examination of the merits of the position of those who say that Mr. Obama is not constitionally qualified to be President. Instead, Mr. Jonsson seems to assume that the real story here is that “a subset of Americans” is prone to believe “myth”.

    Many people, apparently including Mr. Jonsson, have been misled into thinking that a “Certification of Live Birth” posted on Mr. Obama’s website in June settles the matter. However, even a quick check of the two cases now pending at the United States Supreme Court reveals that Mr. Obama’s constitutional problem is far deeper than whether or not he was born in the United States. In fact, Mr. Obama’s place of birth is not even a factor in one of those two cases.

    Reading the basic arguments in Berg v. Obama and Donofrio v. Wells, the two cases currently pending before the United States Supreme Court, would give this article’s author an entirely different perspective. The facts and arguments presented to the Court point very strongly to Mr. Obama not being qualified to assume the office of President. Anyone who looks into this matter honestly will quickly begin to see that the chances of Mr. Obama actually being qualified are slim.

    Largely because of Mr. Obama’s Indonesian background, it would take considerably more documentation than he has yet produced to overcome his problems in the Berg v. Obama case. But that is the good news for Obama; if the Supreme Court agrees with the arguments in Donofrio v. Wells, then no amount of documentation will get him out of the hole he has dug for himself.

    Concerned citizens in various states began bringing suit in August prior to the Democratic National Convention. Mr. Obama, if in fact he were qualified, could have put this matter to rest in August (or any time since then) simply by presenting sufficient documentation to prove his constitutional qualification. He has not done so. If he could do so, what possible reason would he have for promoting confusion by withholding his documentation? Legal arguments aside, this question alone should be enough to produce grave doubt as to his qualification in the mind of any reasonable person. Mr. Obama needs to be completely forthcoming in this matter so as to remove all doubt.

    In making this a story about conspiracy theorists, Jonsson has found fun where he should have found fraud. Tragically for those who have put their confidence in him, Obama can never legally become President. But I should not single out Jonsson. It seems that when it comes to Mr. Obama, everyone in the main stream media has forgotten that the term “con artist” is short for “confidence artist”.

    Once the blinders are off, it becomes clear that what has masqueraded as the audacity of hope would be better described as the audacity of ambition. The biggest story of the year has been swept under a rug labeled “Nut cases, sore losers, and racists”. Since the public’s supposed guardian, the main stream media has so eagerly played the patsy to Obama, we are now in a constitutional crises. It’s Obama versus the United States Constitution, and it is not at all clear which will come out on top.

  8. Koyaan says:

    There is no way that the real birth certificate that shows Obama was born in Kenya will be produced before he becomes President. So keep on trying.
    K

  9. john mirse says:

    My goodness, what terrible thing could have happened to infant Obama 47 long years ago in that Hawaii hospital so that he is scared to release his long form birth certificate 47 years after the fact–the one with the names of the doctor and the birth hospital on it—-and he won’t release his Hawaii birth hospital records 47 years after the fact?

    I don’t know about other posters here, but to me, 47 years is a very long time period to try to hide events that occurred on your birth date 47 years ago on Aug. 4,1961.

    I say it is time, after 47 long years, for Obama to finally come clean and release his long form birth certificate—-the one with the doctor and hospital names on it—-and to release his Hawaii hospital record.

  10. Anonymous says:

    News & Entertainment | News
    POSTED: NOVEMBER 21, 2008
    Alan Keyes Tells Us Why He Questions Obama's Presidency
    Cynthia Gordy
    ESSENCE MAGAZINE INTERVIEW:

    http://www.essence.com/news_entertainment/news/articles/alankeyesobama

  11. Anonymous says:

    I TOO had written a response/retort to the MSNBC piece over on FirstRead political forum and they refused to post it. Anonymous says it is up to them to scrub what we say because we are “playing in their sandbox”. What a pathetic argument. Putin has a sandbox too, and so did Stalin and Hitler and the list goes on, so don’t tell us here that we do not know abrogation of our rights when we encounter them.

  12. Anonymous says:

    I guess that one blogger does not believe in presenting both sides of an argument by the MSM. He/she needs to read up on the definition of state-run media.

  13. Anonymous says:

    I guess that one blogger does not believe in the MSM presenting both sides of an argument. He/she needs to look up the definition of “state-run” media.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Another MSM coverage, though not very accurate, especially in the last line with the erroneous definition of “natural born.”

    http://www.gazette.net/stories/11242008/polinew164200_32484.shtml

  15. Anonymous says:

    It’s no wonder that the mainstream media won’t report on the Obama lawsuits.

    The piece by Pete Williams of NBC for MSNBC, “Duo take Obama Birth Challenge to Court,” didn’t fare well with some readers.

    For example, Lynn of station KCMO said, “I am disappointed you even give these ‘nut jobs’ an inch of print on MSNBC… Geez… You’re not the National Enquirer.”

    Nikola bolstered Lynn’s attitude with her comment: “I know stories like this are great filler on slow news days, but come on already – a few phone calls could put an end to this phoney story for good.”

    Most readers just mocked the folks who give credence to the Obama suits — just right wing nut cases.

    Berg and Donofrio were declared “idiots” for filing the suits. R Howard from South Carolina figured that “[i]f these claims had any merit, the courts would have disqualified PE Obama months ago.”

    But most unfathomable were all the comments like that from Bob of Lyons, Oregon, that “Barack would not be where he is today, if he was not a legal citizen, pretty simple.”

    And paradoxically, that same Nikola who chastised MSNBC for publicizing the “phoney story” opined that “[i]f federal investigators determined that Senator Obama was ineligible for the presidency, don’t you think we would have heard about it by now?” [How?]

    Looks like the MSM is damned if they do and damned if they don’t.

    Obviously the MSM is nervous about the story and just plain scared that they’ll end up with egg on their telegenic faces.

    But, come on, you can’t be sued for libel for true reporting of a court case. You don’t need to comment on the merits of the cases, just let the world know that the darn things have been filed. That doesn’t even take any reportorial skill — just state the fact that the cases have been filed.

  16. Anonymous says:

    Second case makes the SCOTUS docket. The brief looks exceptionally well done. Download here:

    http://www.filesend.net/download.php?f=fb6dc015edba6d8ec689b56a06b79d0b

  17. Anonymous says:

    I am curious – do you folks think the CSM article helps your cause? In my reading of it, it essentially dismisses people who question Obama’s citizenship as little more than crackpots.

  18. RepubReader says:

    The Berg that was sueing Bush over 9/11? ROFL This is the same BERG. Get a brain people ROFL

  19. Anonymous says:

    Dear Newsmax Reader:

    Please find below a special message from our sponsor, The United States Justice Foundation. They have some important information to share with you. Thank you.

    Newsmax.com

    ——————————————————————————–
    Team Obama:”All I can tell you is that it is just pure garbage.”
    ——————————————————————————–
    According to the WorldNetDaily headline above, that was the retort of an Obama campaign spokesperson when asked about complaints requesting that Senator Obama produce a valid Birth Certificate to prove that he is constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States.

    Article 2, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States, states, “No person except a natural born citizen of the United States, at the time of adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President.”

    The Constitution of the United States is NOT “garbage” and furthermore, securing the rights of the people under the Constitution is NOT “garbage”!

    The Obama campaign’s response is an elitist, condescending slap in the face to patriotic Americans. No one is above the law and Team Obama cannot make the question of Obama’s eligibility go away by disrespecting the American people – and, by inference, the Constitution of the United States.

    That’s why we just filed an action that Senator Obama will not be able to ignore… an action that WILL NOT GO AWAY!

    In fact, in my humble opinion… we will ONLY “LOSE” if we do NOT have the resources we need to carry on for as long as it takes, and we will “win” as long as we can carry on this fight (more on that later).

    SO PLEASE KEEP READING… I promise that when you’re done, you will agree that we have filed the mother of all actions.

    The United States Justice Foundation (USJF) is a nonprofit public interest, legal action organization and has been your conservative voice in the courts since 1979. And since USJF is a 501(c)3 nonprofit, your generous assistance is also TAX DEDUCTIBLE!

    You can use this link or the hyperlink below to help – it’s TAX DEDUCTIBLE. Is it worth a TAX DEDUCTIBLE effort of $5000 or $2500 or even $100 or $50 or $25 to defend the Constitution and the integrity of our electoral process?

    The Obama campaign has a crack team of high-priced law firms – that’s not three lawyers but THREE LAW FIRMS – that will use every means that money can buy to fight this action. We’re relying on you and patriotic Americans like you.

    https://secure.conservativedonations.com/usjf_house/?a=1926

    Please use the hyperlink above to make your best TAX-DEDUCTIBLE effort to be a part of this battle.

    Why The “Berg Case” Is Dead In The Water And Why USJF Will Succeed…

    You probably already know that Pennsylvania attorney Philip J. Berg filed a suit in U.S. District Court several months back contending that Senator Obama is not a “natural-born” citizen.

    And you probably already know that the court dismissed the suit claiming that Berg, as a private citizen, “lacked standing to bring the case.”

    Of course, Berg is not the only one who has filed an action and the “Berg Case” is not the only one in which the courts have relied upon the lack-of-standing technicality.

    Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter denied an action saying to the plaintiff Rev. Tom Terry, “I don’t think you have standing to bring this suit.”

    Washington State Superior Court Judge John Erlick dismissed yet another suit ruling that even the Secretary of State did not have authority to inquire about Senator Obama’s birth certificate.

    Can you believe it? What’s going on? Well, perhaps Berg said it best;

    “This is a question of who has standing to uphold our Constitution. If I don’t have standing, if you don’t have standing, if your neighbor doesn’t have standing to question the eligibility of an individual to be president of the United States – the commander in chief, the most powerful person in the world – then who does?”

    Of course, Berg’s statement also illustrates why the “Berg Case” and some of these other actions are doomed to fail and why we believe our action WILL succeed!

    Simply stated, the lack-of-standing argument is already out there. Yes, it’s egregious but the all too sad reality is that judges will continue to grab onto it like a life-preserver now that it has been put into play… the die has been cast!

    That’s why USJF is taking a different approach. Our petitioners are Dr. Alan Keyes, Dr. Wiley S. Drake, Sr. and Markham Robinson!

    We state in the Petition we just filed with the court:

    “The parties in this case have standing to bring this litigation, due to the fact that Dr. Keyes and Dr. Drake, Sr., are candidates on the California ballot for President and Vice President of the United States, and Mr. Robinson is an Elector for the Keyes-Drake ticket, and Vice Chairman of America’s Independent Party, of Fenton, Michigan, which nominated Dr. Keyes for President. He is also a Chairman of the American Independent Party (California), which nominated Dr. Keyes and Dr. Drake for President and Vice President, respectively. Based on the foregoing, it is imperative for SOS to be provided proof that Senator Obama is a ‘natural born’ citizen.”

    Alan Keyes and Wiley Drake were actually on the ballot in California and Markham Robinson is an Elector for Keyes-Drake. If they don’t have standing, one would be hard-pressed to find ANYONE who has standing and if the court attempts to use the lack-of-standing argument, it’s an implied admission that NO ONE has standing to enforce the Constitution!

    The United States Justice Foundation (USJF) is a nonprofit public interest, legal action organization and has been your conservative voice in the courts since 1979. And since USJF is a 501(c)3 nonprofit, your generous assistance is also TAX DEDUCTIBLE!

    You can use this link or the hyperlink below to help – it’s TAX DEDUCTIBLE. Is it worth a TAX DEDUCTIBLE effort of $5000 or $2500 or even $100 or $50 or $25 to defend the Constitution and the integrity of our electoral process?

    The Obama campaign has a crack team of high-priced law firms – that’s not three lawyers but THREE LAW FIRMS – that will use every means that money can buy to fight this action. We’re relying on you and patriotic Americans like you.

    https://secure.conservativedonations.com/usjf_house/?a=1926

    Please use the hyperlink above to make your best TAX-DEDUCTIBLE effort to be a part of this battle.

    The Usurper-in-Chief…

    Now… a dose of reality. Frankly, a case of this magnitude could be in the courts for years. There are no quick solutions… BUT THAT’S OKAY.

    The key is in the following statement which also appears in the Petition:

    “Should Senator Obama be discovered, after he takes office, to be ineligible for the Office of President of the United States of America and, thereby, his election declared void, Petitioners, as well as other Americans, will suffer irreparable harm in that an usurper will be sitting as the President of the United States, and none of the treaties, laws, or executive orders signed by him will be valid or legal.”

    Part of that statement bears repeating:

    “… none of the treaties, laws, or executive orders signed by him will be valid or legal.”

    In other words, as long as this case is in the courts, a cloud hangs over Senator Obama’s head and for the sake of our Constitution and our Republic, the issue MUST be resolved!

    If President Obama issues an Executive Order to rescind the Mexico City Policy and allows the tax dollars of Americans to fund organizations that promote abortions overseas, the door to question the legitimacy of that Executive Order remains open.

    If President Obama signs a treaty with an unfriendly power or an agreement with the United Nations, the door to question the legitimacy of that treaty remains open.

    If President Obama signs a bill granting amnesty to illegal aliens into law, the door to question the legitimacy of that law remains open.

    If President Obama appoints new Commissioners to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) who bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine, the door to question those appointments and the legitimacy of the actions taken by his appointees remains open.

    That’s not to say that he can’t or won’t be able to fulfill the duties of his office, but until this matter is resolved… until he can validate that he is constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States, the door will always remain open to question and challenge the legitimacy of his actions and the dire consequences of those actions.

    In short… as long as we have the resources to fight, we’re ahead of the game!

    That’s where you come in.

    The United States Justice Foundation (USJF) is a nonprofit public interest, legal action organization and has been your conservative voice in the courts since 1979. And since USJF is a 501(c)3 nonprofit, your generous assistance is also TAX DEDUCTIBLE!

    You can use this link or the hyperlink below to help – it’s TAX DEDUCTIBLE. Is it worth a TAX DEDUCTIBLE effort of $5000 or $2500 or even $100 or $50 or $25 to defend the Constitution and the integrity of our electoral process?

    The Obama campaign has a crack team of high-priced law firms – that’s not three lawyers but THREE LAW FIRMS – that will use every means that money can buy to fight this action. We’re relying on you and patriotic Americans like you.

    https://secure.conservativedonations.com/usjf_house/?a=1926

    Please use the hyperlink above to make your best TAX-DEDUCTIBLE effort to be a part of this battle.

    I’m Not Living In The Real World…

    To be brutally blunt, a case of this magnitude may not be won or lost on the merits.

    I’m very proud of USJF’s accomplishments over the past 29 years.

    We’ve defended Minuteman Civil Defense Corps members protecting our borders from illegal aliens.

    We handled litigation against Hillary Clinton for campaign finance fraud in her 2000 Senate race.

    We’ve submitted testimony before the United States Senate on Supreme Court appointees.

    But all that won’t really matter. It won’t matter which side has the most skilled attorneys. Talent, competence and experience do not assure victory.

    Here’s the bottom line.

    Team Obama presently has THREE LAW FIRMS at its disposal – and a seemingly unlimited ability to raise funds from the far-left for more legal help.

    This potentially translates to hundreds of attorneys and law clerks who can literally throw paperwork at us until we crack under the sheer pressure and cry uncle.

    Team Obama WILL try to wear us down (which by the way is yet another reason why the “Berg Case” and many of the others – as mentioned earlier – are doomed to fail and why we CAN get the job done).

    They’ll stall and delay and throw paperwork at us so fast, so furiously and for so long… then they’ll wait for us to break under the strain and give up. Or so they think…

    Team Obama doesn’t fear our skill or the merits of our case.

    The ONLY THING THEY FEAR IS YOU!

    They hope and pray that you will not support our efforts or that you will grow tired of the fight. What they fear most is that you will join us and support our efforts!

    They know that if you support us, we’ll have the ability to take on additional clerical and research staff, cover court fees, file briefs and take on outside counsel on an as-needed basis.

    That’s why they’re praying you don’t help us… but we’re praying that you do!

    USJF wasn’t approached by a group of hot-shot movers and shakers. We took on this burden because like you we love this great country and we REFUSE to stand idly by while the Left disrespects the Constitution, the American people and our electoral process.

    USJF is a nonprofit public interest, legal action organization. We go where others fear to tread. We’re adept at taking on vastly superior forces. And we’re committed to hitting the trenches on this one and willing to get bloody if we must.

    That’s our promise to you.

    But, in the end, our commitment and our “pit-bull” determination doesn’t amount to a hill of beans.

    Winning or losing is NOT in our control… and it’s not in Team Obama’s control… IT’S IN YOUR HANDS!

    A lot of folks are very angry over Barack Obama’s refusal to validate his eligibility to be President of the United States.

    Is it worth a TAX DEDUCTIBLE effort of $5000 or $2500 or even $100 or $50 or $25 to defend the Constitution, the rights of Patriotic Americans under the Constitution and the integrity of our electoral process?

    Is it worth forwarding this e-mail to your family and friends with a personal note asking them to join the fight?

    The choice is now up to you.

    Please help us and after helping us, please forward this e-mail to everyone in your address book.

    We’re in… how about you?

    The United States Justice Foundation (USJF) is a nonprofit public interest, legal action organization and has been your conservative voice in the courts since 1979. And since USJF is a 501(c)3 nonprofit, your generous assistance is also TAX DEDUCTIBLE!

    You can use this link or the hyperlink below to help – it’s TAX DEDUCTIBLE. Is it worth a TAX DEDUCTIBLE effort of $5000 or $2500 or even $100 or $50 or $25 to defend the Constitution and the integrity of our electoral process?

    The Obama campaign has a crack team of high-priced law firms – that’s not three lawyers but THREE LAW FIRMS – that will use every means that money can buy to fight this action. We’re relying on you and patriotic Americans like you.

    https://secure.conservativedonations.com/usjf_house/?a=1926

    Please use the hyperlink above to make your best TAX-DEDUCTIBLE effort to be a part of this battle.

    In His Service

    Gary Kreep, Executive Director
    United States Justice Foundation

  20. Anonymous says:

    Is NBC’S Pete Williams Jaded?

    Duo Take Obama Birth Challenge To Court. November 26, 2008, By Pete Williams. Finally, after months of waiting for MSM to come forward and expose the lawsuits have been pending regarding Obama’s failure to prove Obama is Constitutionally qualified to be US President, an article was published by Pete Williams of NBC. At last, I thought, the public will be informed the truth about Obama. I was quite pleased until the paragraph below where Pete writes:

    “The justices are unlikely to take up these cases for a host of reasons, not the least of which is the invitation to overturn the results of an election in which more than 66 million Americans voted for Obama. An equally high hurdle is the issue of whether Berg or Donofrio have the legal right to sue claiming a violation of the Constitution.”

    Did I just read what I just read? Does Obama lover not realize this issue is really not about Obama? That there is a crisis America is now facing greater than any election of a candidate. And this man is an NBC news journalist? Where is his logic? Where is his loyalty to the American Constitution which every elected official swears an oath to uphold? Is he actually saying because 66,000,000 people voted for a man to whom all evidence points has clearly and consciously deceived the American voter, the Supreme court judges should over look that America’s Commander and Chief is a usurper because 66,000,000 million people voted for him? Is he suggesting the nine sacred guardians of The Constitution would prefer to “turn the other cheek” rather than over turn the election? Since when can the Articles of the Constitution be ignored, violated, manipulated, convoluted and changed by popular vote of a fraudulent candidate? How do Obama’s votes rewrite the Constitution?

    Is brave Pete suggesting our Holy Nine are so spineless, that out of fear of unpopularity, they will slither behind a stack of technicalities, (like “standing” or any other meaningless crap that has nothing to do with Obama’s fraud) dismiss all suits, and by svelte contortions declare Barry Sotoero, Barack Hussein Muhammad Obama qualified to be President because 66,000,000 voted for him.

    Imagine if Abraham Lincoln were so corrupted and spineless when he issued the Emancipation Proclamation? He faced worse than an over turn of an election. He had to fight a civil war to save the union. That was the strength of a moral America.

    It doesn’t matter if 266,000,000 voted for Obama. The issue is Obama, the DNC, MSM, and his hundreds of camp workers conspired to deceive the American voter and fraudulently stole the election. Every vote for Obama is illegal and fraudulent. Just because they all did it doesn’t suddenly alter the articles of the constitution and make it right.

    There is also another reality here. Obama didn’t win by a landslide. Only 25% of the people voted for him. That means 75% did not vote for him. What about their rights to have a legitimate president in office?

    Neither America not the world can afford the luxury of a Usurper as US President.
    Does the jaded Pete Williams not recognize the price America will pay if the great guardians of our Constitution fail to uphold the laws of America, is far greater than the over turning of the election? If these nine judges are so corrupt as to succeed in construing the meaning of the Constitution, interpret Obama’s documents, accept arguments presented by Obama’s defense attorneys or in any other bit of legal trickery ultimately legitimize Barack Obama as President, then not only did they fail to their job, they became guilty of the same conspiracy of Obama and his blind followers. They will have rendered The Constitution of the United impotent now and forever? If that happens there will be no umbrella left to protect Americans from the tyranny of ruthless politicians, gangsters, terrorists, and criminals of all types of which we are obviously over run. This will invite major world criminals to run ramped against America and people will live in fear of their lives, middle of the night home invasions, and ultimately concentration camps.

    Even though I feel Pete Williams is morally and legally confused when it comes to the Constitution of the US, I fear he may be right. The great silence by MSM about the entire issue of Obama’s refusal to present an authentic birth certificate and the question of his dual citizen has been a well organized conspiracy to keep the truth from the public. I fear the invisible conspirators might be powerful enough to reach and persuade the Supreme Court to simply dismiss the law suits on technicalities. The last hope of America will be crushed. Perhaps Pete Williams is part of the great MSM conspiracy to ignore Obama’s felony crimes of fraud, denial, and conspiracy to steal the office of Presidency regardless of the law of the land. That is why he so confidently predicts the Supreme Court will simply dismiss the law suits.

    Museumofinnocence.blogspot.com
    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/vos
    http://www.Menifeevalleytalkradio.com

  21. HollyN says:

    It does not matter whether he can produce abc from Hawaii or not. The issue is the term “Natural Born Citizen” which Obama is NOT
    His father was from Kenya, a british subject and he never had any citizenship status in the US.
    Natural born citizen is basically at least one generation away froma noncitizen parent.
    Obama had dual citizenship!
    IF he was born in Hawaii, he is a us citizen and can hold the office of senator but he has to descend from 2 US citizen parents in order to be POTUS

  22. Koyaan says:

    Anonymous wrote:

    I TOO had written a response/retort to the MSNBC piece over on FirstRead political forum and they refused to post it. Anonymous says it is up to them to scrub what we say because we are “playing in their sandbox”. What a pathetic argument. Putin has a sandbox too, and so did Stalin and Hitler and the list goes on, so don’t tell us here that we do not know abrogation of our rights when we encounter them.

    Unless you’re a Communist and don’t believe in private property rights, then you have no right to the use of someone else’s property.

    Do you believe you have the right to post here on Jeff’s blog? And that if Jeff doesn’t allow you to post something, or if he deletes something that you had posted that he’s violating your rights?

    If so, then it seems you are indeed a Communist who doesn’t believe in private property rights.

    If not, then MSNBC’s blog is no different than this blog. MSNBC is a private corporation and their blog is private property. You have absolutely no right to post anything there that they don’t approve of any more than you have any right to post anything here that Jeff doesn’t approve of.

    You may not like it, but unless you wish to abolish private property rights, that’s the way it is.

    So which is it? Do you believe in private property rights or are you a Communist?

    k

  23. Koyaan says:

    Koyaan wrote:

    There is no way that the real birth certificate that shows Obama was born in Kenya will be produced before he becomes President. So keep on trying.

    The Kenyan birth certificate is a forgery.

    k

  24. Kahleeka says:

    I didn’t care for the Christian Science article and I was unable to find the Essence article someone posted, but the MSNBC article actually was fair. I do see a lot of comments just bashing the story and I’m awaiting approval for my comment; I’m always polite and try to be informative with links to other sites with more info.

    I encourage all of you to comment and/or blog on these sites in a polite and respectful manner, dispelling the lies and giving links for others to do critical research for themselves.

  25. mdwoman says:
  26. MIDDLE CLASS GUY says:

    Koyann,

    Yes, Koyann the liberal / progressive / communist / socialist media, academia herein referred to as the left wing radical movement (LWRM) is scared to death of the traditional American point of view. That is why they go to extremes to suppress any opinions that are not in line with the secular progressive agenda anti-American agenda. That is why the LWRM wants bring back the so called fairness doctrine. Not because it is fair but it would stifle the Traditional American point of view. Yes, I consider socialism and communism as anti-American. 100,000 Americans have given their lives fighting communism / socialism. The LWRM has good reason to fear the people being informed. That is why I and others have had their opinions scrubbed from the LWRM sites. Please note that the Traditional American sites such as this one do not censor you or others just because your opinions are adverse to ours. That is because we do not fear your commentary. We welcome your input. I gave two years of my life serving in the U.S.M.C. so that all Americans will have the right to speak out and be heard. The LWRM cannot survive under that scenario.

    The LWRM is totally dependent on suppressing any information or opinions that are not in line with their movement. The LWRM exists only because they have successfully taken over the academia and news media in this country in line with the communist manifesto of 1947. Consider why 25 states now have legislation in process to protect students in our universities who dare to voice opinions contrary to the LWRM in a classroom. ABC, NBC, CBS, NBC, CNN. PBS are blatant in their support of the LWRM.

    Review the communist manifesto of 1947 and you will find it is a lot like the Democratic platform. As an American that is scary to me.

    Consider the fact the LWRM is brainwashing our college students and deceiving gullible citizens watching their “news” and reading their “newspapers” into thinking that they are reading and watching the news. These people do not understand that they are being deceived.

    Yet still the Democratic voting fraud runs rampant. I contend that if all Americans were informed of the issues on an unbiased basis, and only Legally entitled Americans were allowed to vote only once the LWRM cannot win an election and this issue of having an individual snub his nose at the American people and the constitution by refusing to present documentation proving he is constitutionally qualified to be POTUS would never happen.

    Notice that Koyann and all of those who come here and criticize those of us who believe that Obama or any candidate seeking to be the POTUS should have to provide the necessary documents to prove that they are constitutionally qualified has an explanation for why Obama refuses to put an end to all of this by simply displaying the proper documents. There is no sane reason for not complying if he is able to. The longer he refuses to pay big bucks to teams of lawyers and wasting the courts time to fight this issue on technicalities trying to avoid showing a real BC the more any sensible observer is going to lean toward the conclusion that he is unable to prove his eligibility or that he is not right in the head. In either case defending Obama on this issue is beyond the pale.

  27. Anonymous says:

    Typical … the Abomination zomboid COMMIEs show up here a day late and $5 short!

    Waiting for the WhiteHouse to issue you your mortgage and car-gas checks … lotsa luck … get a REAL job!

    Listen … what’s that I hear?

    Tick, tock … Tick, tock … Tick, tock … time for the Abomination is running out! It’s Time for a New day … time for a REAL change … bye-bye Abomination … bye-bye! … Tick, tock … Tick, tock … Tick, tock goes OUR Constitution’s Patriotic clock!!

    .
    .
    .

    As always, your friend and fellow Patriot,

    Richard Lawrence

  28. john mirse says:

    Remember, if the public starts to believe that a president will be a one term president, then that president’s power will become weak.

    So, if the public starts to believe that Obama will be a one term president, Obama will be a very weak president.

    **********

    Let’s suppose—and a lot of people say it will happen—-that on Dec. 5, 2008, a few days from now, the Supreme Court dismisses ALL the cases that question Obama’s eligibility to be president, and Obama becomes president on Jan. 20, 2009.

    1. Does anyone here really believe that such a Supreme Court decision will put Obama’s eligibility issue to rest forever and ever, like the Supreme Court decision in the Gore vs. Bush presidential race case back in 2000 finally put the Gore vs. Bush case to rest?

    2. Of course not.

    3. In fact, I say that over the next four years of Obama’s first term, there will be growing and tremendous pressure on Obama to finally reveal his Hawaii long form birth certificate—the one with the doctor and hospital name on it—-and to allow his birth hospital to release his birth records from Aug. 4, 1961.

    4. What about the name of Obama’s Hawaii birth hospital?

    5. I have no doubt that in the next four years, someone, like the National Enquirer, will verify which hospital Obama was born in, even if Obama continues to stonewall when it comes to naming his Hawaii birth hospital and when it comes to releasing his birth hospital records.

    6. NOTE: Let’s pretend that it is now Jan. 2012, the beginning of primary season for presidential campaigns: Obama has been in office 3 years.

    7. Supreme Court 2012: Do you really think that the 2008 Supreme Court wants to go through this Obama eligibility fiasco again in 2012? I don’t think so.

    8. NOTE: As I understand it, there is a strong possibility that President Obama may have the chance to nominate one or more new Supreme Court justices in the next 4 years, so the Supreme
    Court we see today may look a lot different in 2012, and it may tend to side with Obama on certain issues, like presidential eligibility issues.

    9. However, I wonder if present Supreme Court justices who will still be there in 2012 will want to go through this 2008 Obama eligibility fiasco again in 2012.

    10. Maybe this 2008 Supreme Court will say that enough is enough, and it will pass on the Obama lawsuits to the next stage, where the court will listen to oral arguments from both sides..

    11. But, on second thought, the 2012 Supreme Court may not be forced to deal again with several lawsuits that question Obama’s 2012 eligibility to be President, for the following reasons:

    a. By 2012, I believe that there will be several legal steps or government layers installed where a candidate must prove that he is eligible to be president.

    b. For instance, there will be tremendous pressure on political parties to investigate candidates very thoroughly, that is, a candidate will be required to provide at least a long form birth certificate, the one with the doctor and hospital name on it.

    c. Also, and this is very important, political parties, such as the Democratic and Republican parties, will insist that the candidates allow the birth certificate to become part of the public record, where anyone can see and examine it.

    d. In addition, each of the 57 states (Obama said there were 57 states, so who am I to disagree with him?) will pass laws that require a presidential candidate to provide a long form birth certificate, the one with the doctor and birth hospital name on it, before his name can be placed on the primary ballot and the final presidential ballot.

    e. Each of the 50 states will also demand that the birth certificate
    become part of the public record, where anyone can examine it upon request.

    f. Congress might even step in and require presidential candidates to provide long form birth certificates—the one with the doctor and birth hospital name on it—before it allows a candidate to run for president.

    g. Also, the state and federal governments will require that candidates sign papers where they agree to provide any documents requested by the state or federal governments, such as college records and selective service registration cards.

    12, In my opinion, I don’t see Obama getting on the 2012 primaries ballots unless he can present his Hawaii long form birth certificate, the one with the doctor and hospital name on it.

    As I see it, the public will be outraged in 2012 if Obama tries to get on a primary ballot without releasing his Hawaii long form birth certificate—-the one with the doctor and birth hospital name on it.

    13. College Records: Also, I don’t see how Obama can continue to stonewall the public over the next 4 years when the public demands over and over again to see his college records, especially when the public vehemently demands to see Obama’s college records during the 2012 presidential campaign.

    14. So as I see it, Obama will be a one term president, because what the public let Obama get away with in 2008, they won’t let him get away in 2012, no matter how many high-priced lawyers he hires to help him.
    *******

    Remember, if the public starts to believe that a president will be a one term president, then that president’s power will become weak.

    So, if the public starts to believe that Obama will be a one term president, Obama will be a very weak president.

  29. Koyaan says:

    MIDDLE CLASS GUY wrote:

    Yes, Koyann the liberal / progressive / communist / socialist media, academia herein referred to as the left wing radical movement (LWRM) is scared to death of the traditional American point of view. That is why they go to extremes to suppress any opinions that are not in line with the secular progressive agenda anti-American agenda.

    All I can say is that they don’t seem to be the only ones who are scared to death.

    I’ve lost count of how many posts of mine have either been deleted nor not made it past moderation, or how many times I’ve been banned for addressing the forgery claims over the past five months.

    Please note that the Traditional American sites such as this one do not censor you or others just because your opinions are adverse to ours. That is because we do not fear your commentary. We welcome your input.

    Even here I have had a number of posts which did not make it past moderation.

    I can’t say why, as no reason was given (not that I think I’m owed one) but I didn’t see anything particularly wrong with them given some of things I’ve seen posted here.

    Notice that Koyann and all of those who come here and criticize those of us who believe that Obama or any candidate seeking to be the POTUS should have to provide the necessary documents to prove that they are constitutionally qualified has an explanation for why Obama refuses to put an end to all of this by simply displaying the proper documents.

    He’s already displayed a proper document.

    k

  30. Anonymous says:

    Many question why Rush and Hannity don’t speak to this issue. I did hear Rush once. He said there was little point going after it because there was no proof. I think he knows it should be incumbent upon Obama to produce the proof, but he means the political reality that the challengers are going to have to have the proof.

    Now, I, for one, doubt that is his real reason. When has Rush ever been afraid to make accusations because he lacked proof? So I think it is one of two things:

    1) Rush is intimidated by the fear of sticking his neck out and being wrong, the Dan Rather effect. The problem is, Rush seems to thrive on attempts to intimidate him.

    2) For some reason, there is a belief that after Obama is inaugurated this can be used against him in some effective way. Given enough time, I think the masses can be made to understand that Obama’s refusal to release a piece of paper has coverup written all over it.

  31. aplombdenver says:

    Thanks Jeff, for all you are able to do.

    Regarding not having a right to post comments on some sites–

    There is a comments section and an invitation to post comments along with rules that I followed at both the msnbc and the Christian Science Monitor sites. Yes, they certainly have the right to not publish what I’ve posted. There is no waiting for moderation and approval about it, I sent comments on the very day that the commentaries were posted. They did not want our comments because they were rational and factual which would negate the lie that we are fanatics, show us to be credible and informative, and open up the realm of possibility that what we are saying is not only reasonable, but it is in fact the truth.

    I have a message for you religious liberals: America is not your sandbox, freedom of speech is not just for you, and no matter how much you all work to silence us and continue misconduct in the courts, the more you swell our ranks because this gives us more evidence of injustice against you. Patriotic conservatives are reaching more people every single day with as much information as possible and we will NOT stand down.

    The Donofrio site now has a warning posted on it which says something like “If you are a regular visitor to this blog and you think that the content of the material here is appropriate than click proceed to access the blog.” Keep it up. After people pass the disbelief stage an outrage takes over as we expose your communistic behavior. This is 2008 in America! We are NOT going to stand for this censorship nor further removal of our liberties. Pastors are collecting guns at churches now? We have seen the writing on the wall. Good grief, he’s not even taken the throne yet and this is what is happening in my own country. Somebody had better man up and demand the original birth certificate, college records et al from this guy and remove that illegal alien before we have something akin to a civil war on our hands. And you thought riots were bad.

    http://lawreview.kentlaw.edu/articles/81-1/Herlihy.pdf

  32. Let's move forward says:

    From Fight the Smears (from FactCheck):

    “Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”

    This is apparently not an Obama direct quote, but was picked up by his campaign, probably with his approval.

    Think how much stronger the statement would have been if it were:

    Senator Obama swore an oath of allegiance to the United States and renounced Kenyan (and Indonesian) citizenship(s) on Aug. 4,1982.

    (His 21st birthday)

    I remember from elementary school that dual citizens were supposed to declare a citizenship when they became adults. I’m not sure exactly what what citizenship they would have if an actual choice was not made.

  33. Eileen says:

    Of course it has cover up written all over it. Have you ever heard an American, that is one who has grown up here pronounce “POKISTON” for the country next to India. Methinks he is not really anything but the spawn Nikita Kruschef said would bury us from the inside.

  34. MIDDLE CLASS GUY says:

    Koyann said:

    He’s already displayed a proper document.

    Every intelligent, informed person in this country knows that it is a lie. It seems that you do not fit into this category. If he had produced the proper documents this discussion would be taking place.

  35. Kevin Hall says:

    It looks like Obama’s legal team looked into the issue of “natural born” status as far back at early 2006. Take a look at this … http://www.patriotbrigaderadio.com/barracks/index.php?topic=250.0

    Here’s another article from American Thinker. http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/why_the_barack_obama_birth_cer.html

  36. Anonymous says:

    Partial article by Alan Nathan from the Washington Times:

    NATHAN: First media bias …
    … now government censorship?
    Alan Nathan
    Friday, November 28, 2008

    OP-ED:

    What chance do arguments have to rise and fall on their merits if they’re framed by a seemingly party-owned press? And once that party comes to power, won’t its lackey journalists constitute a type of state-owned press? In other words (after Inauguration Day), how can the blushing news media keep from sharing President-elect Barack Obama’s political bed – given they have already serviced his electoral needs?

    The news reporting world must recognize that responsible journalism requires universal standards of neutrality, and that this can only occur when facts are presented in their self-evident form. When they’re not, the public naturally becomes more propagandized than informed. Punditry from all political perspectives is wonderfully helpful and perfectly legitimate – until it masquerades as news……..

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/28/first-media-bias/

  37. Kevin Hall says:

    I wrote an email to Senator Mel Martinez (R) for my state (FL), concerning BHO’s citizenship status. Here’s the reponse that I received.

    “Below is a response to the recent comments I received from you:

    Dear Mr. Hall:

    Thank you for contacting me regarding President-Elect Obama’s citizenship. I appreciate hearing from you and would like to respond to your concerns.

    Like you, I believe that our federal government has the responsibility to make certain that the Constitution of the United States is not compromised. We must fight to uphold our Constitution through our courts and political processes.

    Article II of the Constitution provides that “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.” The Constitution, however, does not specify how that qualification for office is to be enforced. As you may know, a voter recently raised this issue before a federal court in Pennsylvania. On October 24, 2008, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania released an order in the case of Berg v.Obama.In that case, the plaintiff, Phillip Berg, raised the same issue that your letter raises regarding proof of the President-Elect’s birthplace. Through his lawsuit, Mr. Berg sought to compel President-Elect Obama to produce a certified copy of his birth certificate.

    The District Court dismissed Mr. Berg’s suit and held that the question of Obama’s citizenship is not a matter for a court to decide. The court further noted that voters, not courts, should decide whether a particular presidential candidate is qualified to hold office.

    Presidential candidates are vetted by voters at least twice – first in the primary elections and again in the general election. President-Elect Obama won the Democratic Party’s nomination after one of the most fiercely contested presidential primaries in American history. And, he has now been duly elected by the majority of voters in the United States. Throughout both the primary and general election, concerns about Mr. Obama’s birthplace were raised. The voters have made clear their view that Mr. Obama meets the qualifications to hold the office of President.

    After he is sworn into office, Mr. Obama will be our nation’s President and I intend to bestow upon him the honor and respect due any man who holds that Office. Yet, I am certain that there will be times when I will disagree and oppose President Obama’s policies. When that happens, you can be assured that I will pursue vigorously what I believe to be in the best interest of Florida and the nation.

    I thank you for sharing your views with me and will keep your concerns in mind. If you have additional questions or comments, please contact me. For more information about issues and activities important to Florida, please sign up for my weekly newsletter at http://martinez.senate.gov.

    Sincerely,

    Mel Martinez
    United States Senator”

    It’s definitely NOT the response that I would have received. :-(

  38. Anonymous says:

    Jeff: many of the latest comments from various comments that there has been a hidden agenda to amend the constitution(if true) show the length obama supporters would go to allow Obama to get into the POTUS and then maybe they are thinking: possesion is 9/10 of the law so the constitution must be amended??? Wow that is real crazy!!! I agree with many people here that we have your blog as a neutral site without the Obama hatemongers on it.
    Anyway here is the site I found which is similar to the last two on this blog but I think is has better facts on the actual relationships to Obama (eg. they either work as his lawyers or are on Annenberg types of foundations and even the writers say 67% of respondents say they do not want the constitution amended to change the req. of POTUS or VPOTUS and by saying 2 million plus people are prevented from being POTUS because they are not “natual born” including those famous people named misses one big point-those people are idenified BECAUSE THEY HAD TO SHOW THEIR vault copy birth certificate for various legitimate resons in their life!! But Obama still insists he is above the Constitutional law that he will swear to defend. I say every person who goes into the military or the fereral government has to show their birth certificate I had to for both. The author of the article below misses point the government got the numbers of foreign people (even illegal aliens)that were metal of honor winners by their ‘addmission they were foreign or they actually saw their ‘real’ birth certificate!!!!!!! Obama still fights to hide his ‘hand written’ Birth Certificate:
    http://countusout.wordpress.com/2008/11/28/obama-covertly-working-to-amend-the-natural-born-citizen-requirement/

Speak Your Mind

*