Challenging Obama's Eligibility to be President

[samizdat]

That video was removed by the user...
I'm sorry. It was Polarik, who profesionally analyzed the web COLB, providing an "expert witness" testimony that it is forgery, complete with 2008 seals on a 2007 border document and typed in inserts which alter the pixels. It sats he's a PHD in "internet comm" with a specialty in graphics. He's a freeper.

new link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDIVEfVGLBQ

[samizdat]

Here's the short form facts.

1. The problem of the pixels: When you have a green patterned document such as this, there should be a lot of green pixels from the background showing up between the letters that appear on the certification. But in this case, instead of green pixels, there are white and grey pixels between the letters, which result when you replace existing text with other text.
2. There is no second fold line. The pictures show two folds – necessary to fit any COLB into an envelope for mailing, but the document itself shows only one fold. This is another indication of document alteration.
3. There's a blurred border. The border has a lower resolution than the rest of the document, which is another indication that it has been altered.
4. The border is one that is used in 2007 COLBs. As a security measure, Hawaii changes their borders every year. This is when the Obama campaign claims the certificate was obtained. That is fine except for the problem that …
5. The seal and signature stamp are from a 2008 COLB. As revealed by a process called edging, the Hawaiian seal and signature stamp on the back of the document are revealed to be from the wrong year!

[Aplomb]

Apparently it was removed to remake it masking his identity due to receiving threats. Here's the info posted along w/ an easy access route for viewing it right here:

November 25, 2008
(more info)
(less info)

Want to Subscribe?
Sign in to YouTube now! Sign in with your Google Account!

For more info, visit www.obamacrimes.com NOTE: TO B...

For more info, visit www.obamacrimes.com

NOTE: TO BETTER PROTECT DR. POLARIK'S IDENTITY, WE HAVE POSTED THIS NEW VERSION OF THE VIDEO.

Molotov Mitchell interviews Dr. Ron Polarik, PhD about his findings concerning Obama's alleged Certification of Live Birth (COLB). Dr. Polarik explains, step by step, why Obama's COLB is without a doubt, a forgery. This video is a more technical version of the upcoming "I Invented the Internet" episode, "Catch Me If You Can".

NOTE: We had to repost the video after further diguising Polarik's voice.

[Aplomb]

The Manning Report: "They All Know"
start at the 15.00 mark
http://www.atlah.org/broadcast/manningreport.html

[samizdat]

I saw him parodied on SNL. Wow. I ducked atlah last time I went to NY. Good move. I left with tires. Listen to Manning call bros maggots, not able to pull piss out of a boot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khuu-RhOBDU

[samizdat]

here's another on FOX NEWS- Manning also sees the Clinton Hilary-bama ticket.

Incidentally I haven't had the recurring nightmare yet, but could Bill be Back?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygWExq7g2F0&NR=1

[Aplomb]

The issue has FINALLY made it to the main stream media. Commentary anyway, and you have to wonder why there's no defending the substance only the standing. And I'm not sure where to find the writer's so-called "debunking" here:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122763857669957141.html

'Natural Born' Baloney

Debunking the urban legend about the Supreme Court and Obama's citizenship.


By JAMES TARANTO


No, the Supreme Court is not going to intervene and stop Barack Obama from becoming president.


Normally this would be "Bottom Story of the Day" material, but lots of crazy rumors have been going around, albeit mostly on blogs and other Web sites of the far-right fringe. Last week, however, David Serchuk of Forbes.com rehearsed one of them, giving us an opportunity to set the record straight. Here's Serchuk:

You've got to hand it to Philip J. Berg: he doesn't give up easily. You might recall that Philadelphia attorney Berg tried, and failed, to halt the presidential election of Barack Obama on the grounds that he is not a native-born citizen. Game over, right? Wrong.

Berg filed a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court in late October, asking that the highest court review the decision of the U.S. District Court in Pennsylvania. The latter court dismissed Berg's claims because he lacked standing to bring them. Standing requires plaintiffs to prove they are directly affected by the issue at hand, with evidence of injury that is concrete and particular. In its decision the district court said Berg "does not, and we believe cannot, establish injury in fact." It also dismissed his claims as frivolous.

Berg takes this in stride. His writ, he says, requires Obama and the Democratic National Council to respond by December 1. . . .

One of the pillars of Berg's argument is that Obama doesn't have a legally-valid U.S. birth certificate because he was born in Kenya . . .

In fairness to Serchuk, he doesn't seem to take this seriously--but he doesn't quite explain why it is nonsense. So, here goes.


In August Berg filed a lawsuit in Philadelphia's federal trial court, alleging that Obama was not a "natural born citizen" and thus constitutionally ineligible to be president. No trial was held; on Oct. 24, the court summarily dismissed Berg v. Obama on the ground that Berg did not have standing to sue. (In fact, the judge who dismissed the case opined that Berg's efforts to establish standing "are frivolous and not worthy of discussion.")


On Oct. 30, Berg filed a petition for a writ of certiorari--in laymen's terms, he asked the Supreme Court to hear his appeal. (Note that contrary to Berg's language, which Serchuk repeats, one does not "file a writ." One files a petition, and the court decides whether to issue a writ.) On Oct. 31, according to Berg's Web site, he filed a motion asking Justice David Souter for injunctive relief in the form of halting the following week's election.


On Nov. 3, Souter denied the injunction. The next day, the election was held as scheduled. You might have read about it, it was in all the papers.


It is true that Berg's petition for certiorari is still pending before the high court. It is also true that there is a deadline for responses from the defendants (including Obama) of next Monday, Dec. 1. The defendants, however, are under no obligation to respond, and there is no reason to think they will bother.


The probability that the court will actually grant certiorari is, in theory, greater than zero, but it is such a small number as to be incomprehensible to anyone within the ordinary range of intelligence. As Judge Peter Messitte notes in an article for the State Department's eJournalUSA, the justices typically grant such petitions only for cases "raising particularly significant questions of law, and/or those where there is a division of legal authority, as where lower courts have produced conflicting interpretations of constitutional or federal law."


An additional rumor, not repeated by Forbes.com's Serchuk, is that the "response" that Obama is "required" to file next week consists of proof that he is a natural-born citizen.



Those who make this claim seem to believe that cert. is two, two, two writs in one. In fact, the only question currently before the high court is whether to hear the appeal at all.


Even in the vanishingly unlikely event that the court does grant certiorari, it almost certainly would consider only the legal issue raised by the lower court's ruling--namely, whether Berg has standing to sue. In the even more vanishingly unlikely event that the justices rule in his favor, the case would be returned to a trial judge for consideration of the factual allegations.


One Leo Denofrio has a pending petition for certiorari in a similar case that was dismissed by the New Jersey Supreme Court. His prospects for success are approximately equal to Berg's, for the same reasons. We devoutly hope this is the last item we will ever have to write on this silly topic.

[Aplomb]

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81943

Commentary Excerpt by Janet Porter

Rathergate II: Certification of Live Birth a clear forgery
The media bought it. The voters bought it. And now some in Congress are resisting the idea of congressional hearings because they believe that Barack Obama's "birth certificate" has been posted online.


Not so.


What was posted was not a birth certificate, but something that resembles a "Certification of Live Birth" or COLB, which, even if authentic, does not prove "natural born" U.S. citizenship. You see, in [COLOR=blue ! important][COLOR=blue ! important]Hawaii[/color][/color], a Certification of Live Birth is issued within a year of a child's birth to those who register a birth abroad or one that takes place outside a hospital.
It's Rathergate all over again with more amiss than a 1970s Selectric typewriter. But before I tell you what the experts found, let me ask you a few questions:

1. If you were a natural born American citizen and had it within your means to quiet all the lawsuits and questions with proof, would you do it?
2. If you were a natural born American citizen, would you spend thousands of dollars to fight the legal cases against you, or would you simply answer the legitimate question of whether you meet the constitutional requirements for office?
3. If you were a natural born American citizen, would you forge a document called a "Certification of Live Birth" and tell the public it was a real "birth certificate"?

If someone were to violate the law by manufacturing a forgery in order trick the public, would that be enough evidence for members of Congress to conduct hearings and for a court to issue an order for the critical records, including the original long-form birth certificate (signed by the doctor) to ensure that the U.S. constitutional requirements for office were not violated? After all, Congress is sworn to uphold and defend that Constitution, and the justices on the U.S. Supreme Court are "guardians" of the Constitution. That's their job, isn't it?



...


There is a way to help prevent this. Our founders sacrificed their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor. I'm asking you to do three things.

1. Fast and pray for all the hidden things to come to light.
2. Call the Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee – in their district offices while they're home this week for Thanksgiving. Ask them to "Please hold congressional hearings to investigate whether Barack Obama meets the basic constitutional requirements for the highest office of the land."
3. Write a letter to the nine Justices of the United States Supreme Court (names are listed below) and put them in a FedEx (or other overnight) envelope to: U.S. Supreme Court
   1 First Street, N.E
   Washington, D.C. 20543

Our Constitution matters and defending it is going to take an outcry from the public.



The electors vote on Dec. 15. The numbers are below and your immediate action is critically needed right now. Do it before defending our liberties costs a lot more than making some phone calls and writing a few letters.


The Republican House Judiciary members: Call them at 202-225-3121, AND most importantly reach them in their district offices:


Lamar Smith (Texas), ranking member, critical in any hearings: 512-306-0439 Austin, 830-896-0154 Kerrville, and 210-821-5024 San Antonio.
James Sensenbrenner ([COLOR=blue ! important][COLOR=blue ! important]Wisconsin[/color][/color]) 800-242-1119 or 262-784-1111 Brookfield
Howard Coble ([COLOR=blue ! important][COLOR=blue ! important]North [COLOR=blue ! important]Carolina[/color][/color][/color]) 336-333-5005 Greensboro, 336-626-3060 Asheboro, 336-886-5106 High Point, 226-229-0159 Graham, 704-209-0426 Granite Quarry


Elton Gallegly (California) 800-423-0023 or 805-497-2224 Thousand Oaks, 805-686-2525 Solvang


Bob Goodlatte (Virginia) 540-432-2391 Harrisonburg, 434-845-8306 Lynchburg, 540-857-2672 Roanoke, and 540-885-3861 Staunton


Steve Chabot (Ohio) 513-684-2723 Cincinnati


Dan Lungren (California) 916-859-9906 Gold River


Chris Cannon (Utah) 800-571-2971 Provo, 801-569-5125 West Jordan


Ric Keller (Florida) 407-872-1962 [COLOR=blue ! important][COLOR=blue ! important]Orlando[/color][/color], 888-642-1211 Eustis, 888-642-1211 Ocala


Darrell Issa (California) 951-693-2447 Temecula, 760-599-5000 San Diego


Mike Pence (Indiana) 765-640-2919 Anderson, 765-962-2883 Richmond, 765-747-5566 Muncie


Randy Forbes (Virginia) 757-382-0080 Chesapeake, 804-526-4969 Colonial Heights, 434-634-5575 Emporia


Steve King (Iowa) 641-782-2495 Creston, 712-580-7754 Spencer, 712-325-1404 Council Bluffs, 712-224-4692 [COLOR=blue ! important][COLOR=blue ! important]Sioux [COLOR=blue ! important]City[/color][/color][/color], 712-732-4197 Storm Lake


Tom Feeney (Florida) 386-756-9798 Port Orange, 407-208-1106 Orlando, 321-264-6113 Titusville


Trent Franks ([COLOR=blue ! important][COLOR=blue ! important]Arizona[/color][/color]) 623-776-7911 Glendale


Louie Gohmert (Texas) 866-535-6302 Lufkin/Marshall/Nagadoches, 903-236-8597 Longview, 903-561-6349 Tyler


Jim Jordan (Ohio) 419-522-5757 Mansfield, 419-999-6455 Lima, 419-423-3210 Findlay

Supreme Court Justices
Chief Justice John Roberts


Associate Justices:
Samuel A. Alito
Clarence Thomas
Antonin Scalia
Anthony M. Kennedy
David H. Souter
John Paul Stevens
Stephen G. Breyer
Ruth Bader Ginsberg


How important is the Constitution to you? Forward this to all you know.


Be sure to sign the petition demanding evidence of Barack Obama's constitutional qualifications.

[Aplomb]

http://features.csmonitor.com/politi...dle-for-obama/

A last electoral hurdle for Obama

A Web-driven challenge to his legitimacy targets members of the Electoral College.


By Patrik Jonsson | Staff Writer / November 26, 2008 edition



Raleigh, N.C.


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.”

[samizdat]

WSJ was wrong about Nixon. This is good. I'm still hoping for a charitable judicial rectification- call it dismissal, eviction, conversion.

Bama should have his member whacked by the bailiff. If he "changed", by conversion, he could make a good hostage negotiator (UN). What if Bama got struck by de Holy Ghost. We could end up w/ Alan Keyes and Sarah Palin.

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

[Aplomb]

Yeah, sami, you notice they don't even touch Keyes in those commentaries. I like Donofrio's case, myself, but Keyes has standing if it really must come down to that.

I've got a question. It's been reported in several places that in 1981 Americans were barred from Pakistan. You can draw some conclusions from things like the following quote, but I've been hunting and I don't find any real proof of that ban. It was no doubt dangerous to be there, but was it IMPOSSIBLE to travel during that time as an American?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Pakistan

Civilian rule resumed from 1972 to 1977 under Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, until he was deposed by General Zia-ul-Haq, who became the country's third military president. Pakistan's secular policies were replaced by the Islamic Shariah legal code, which increased religious influences on the civil service and the military. With the death of General Zia in a plane crash in 1988, Benazir Bhutto, daughter of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, was elected as the first female Prime Minister of Pakistan. Over the next decade, she alternated power with Nawaz Sharif, as the country's political and economic situation worsened.

[Aplomb]

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.p...w&pageId=82060

Kenya: 'I don't know' if Obama born in U.S.
Ambassador suggests question be put to American government

Posted: November 26, 2008
9:44 pm Eastern

By Chelsea Schilling
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

[COLOR=blue ! important][COLOR=blue ! important]Ambassador[/color][/color] Peter Ogego

Kenyan Ambassador Peter N.R.O. Ogego is saying he's "infuriated" by a radio program's efforts to "misquote" him on the subject of President-elect [COLOR=blue ! important][COLOR=blue ! important]Barack [COLOR=blue ! important]Obama[/color][/color][/color]'s birthplace – but he refused to confirm whether Obama was born in the United States.


In an exclusive interview with WND today, Ogego was specifically asked whether Obama is a natural-born U.S. citizen.


"I don't know," he said with a tone of irritation. "You should ask your government. I know his father is Kenyan."


He continued with a rhetorical question: "Obama is an American, isn't he?"


Sign the petition to insist on release of birth certificate.


On Nov. 6, only two days after the election, Detroit radio talk-show hosts Mike Clark, Trudi Daniels and Marc Fellhauer on WRIF's "Mike In The Morning" called the Embassy of Kenya in Washington, D.C., to speak with Ambassador Ogego.

Hear the Kenyan ambassador's interview with WRIF radio

The interview with the Kenyan ambassador was widely publicized after he called President-elect Barack Obama's Kenyan birthplace a "well-known" attraction:

Clark: "We want to congratulate you on Barack Obama, our new president, and you must be very proud."

Ogego: "We are. We are. We are also proud of the U.S. for having made history as well."

Fellhauer: "One more quick question, President-elect Obama's birthplace over in Kenya, is that going to be a national spot to go visit, where he was born?"

Ogego: "It's already an attraction. His paternal grandmother is still alive."

Fellhauer: "His birthplace, they'll put up a marker there?"

Ogego: "It would depend on the government. It's already well known."


Now Ogego is saying the hosts misquoted and edited the audio recording of his comments.



"I'm already infuriated by the whole thing," he said. "The radio itself had a cynicism to it. I didn't mind that, but to misquote me is unacceptable. They are circulating misinformation regarding Mr. Obama's birthplace."


However, WRIF's Mike Clark told WND the show never manipulated the audio recording in anyway.


"I can assure you that nothing was edited or stated out of context," he said.
Nonetheless, Ogego insisted he was speaking about Barack Obama Sr., and not President-elect Obama.


"They asked me about Obama's father, not Obama," Ogego said with a raised voice.



"This is common-sense knowledge. Nobody is fooling anybody."



But Clark said Ogego's claim that he was speaking about Barack Obama Sr. doesn't add up.


"If you listen to the call in its entirety, you will find it was very obvious we were all talking about President-elect Barack Obama and not his father," Clark said. "So, the idea that he thought we were talking about his father seems a little farfetched to me."


Clark said Ogego's statement that Obama's Kenyan birthplace was already an attraction caught them off guard.


"The point is, we expected him to say, 'No. Obama was not born in Kenya, but there is an attraction to honor his father.' I would of thought that would of been the answer if anything," he said.


The issue of Obama's place of birth has been heating up since WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi traveled to Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama's birth.


When asked if birth records for President-elect Obama exist in Kenya, Ogego replied, "I don't know about all that."


WND asked Ogego why Obama's birth records have been sealed.


"Let's not get into that," he replied. "We will not be dragged into unnecessary information. Somebody has a right to those details – the American government or the Kenyan government – if it is that important."


Ogego refused to discuss the matter further and ended the call.

[samizdat]

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/11/26/1689515.aspx

nbc steps out

[Aplomb]

Here's what they wrote in their analysis:

Duo take Obama birth challenge to Court

Posted: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 11:57 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: Courts, 2008 Obama

From NBC’s Pete Williams



When the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court meet on Dec. 5th, in their regular private conference to decide which cases to hear, two lawsuits that have captivated a

segment of the blogosphere will be up for discussion.


Both urge the court to consider claims that President-elect Obama is not qualified to be president, because he is not a natural-born American citizen.


Persistent concerns about the qualifications of both major party candidates rank among the oddest aspects of 2008's historic campaign.


Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution provides that "No person except a natural born citizen" is eligible to be president. John McCain's status was questioned because he was born in the Panama Canal Zone and various theories have been advanced to cast doubt on Obama's.


Lawsuits over the inclusion of their names on state general-election ballots popped up around the country and were quickly dispensed with by local courts. But two challengers have pursued their cases to the Supreme Court.


Pennsylvania lawyer Philip Berg claims that the circumstances of Obama's birth are vague and that he may have been born in Kenya. Obama's mother, Berg asserts, later flew to Hawaii to register the birth.


Leo Donofrio, a New Jersey lawyer, contends that election officials in his state failed to ensure that only legally qualified candidates were placed on the ballot. Obama may have been born in the United States, Donofrio argues, but "natural born" status depends on both parents being American citizens. Obama's father was Kenyan.


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.


In dismissing Berg's complaint, a federal judge in Pennsylvania found that he failed to meet the basic test required for sustaining a lawsuit, because he couldn't show how the inclusion of Obama's name on the ballot would cause him -- apart from others -- some particular harm. Berg's stake, the judge said, "is no greater and his status no more differentiated than that of millions of other voters."


Other courts presented with similar challenges have reached the same conclusion, ruling that there is no general legal right to sue over the Constitution's eligibility requirements. Federal courts typically reject claims of legal standing based simply on a litigant's status as a voter or taxpayer.


The Obama campaign had hoped to end the controversy last spring by releasing his actual Hawaii birth certificate. But that prompted further questions about its authenticity, which were compounded when state authorities in Hawaii said they could not vouch for it, because they were constrained by the privacy laws.


Then, on Oct. 31st, the director of Hawaii's Department of Health issued a statement, proclaiming that he had personally seen and verified that the state has "Sen. Obama's original birth certificate on record," which shows that he was born there.


I followed their rules regarding comments Wednesday. I'll put them here since they didn't post them there:

Look at the last quote. Notice where the quote stops. Nobody said that he was born in Hawaii. Hawaii issues certificates of live birth even for foreign-born babies. Call and ask them yourself.

Here is the exact quote: "Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures," Fukino said.

Obama's own Annenberg FactCheck (posted it but it) has been proven a forgery. Youtube it. This is also from FactCheck: "He held both U.S. and Kenyan citizenship as a child, but lost his Kenyan citizenship automatically on his 21st birthday." Dual citizenship, eh?

Go on and check it out.

[samizdat]

google censoring anti bama sites
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=82113
Gellar said the top Google word searches used to be about Obama's birth certificate. But now she said the searches only return "a bunch of speculating and hearsay" to make the stories appear to be unfounded conspiracy theories.
She believes the censorship could have something to do with Google CEO Eric Schmidt's relationship with the president-elect. According to recent reports, Schmidt will soon be holding a position in the Obama administration.

[samizdat]

Why Tulsa Today went dark

By David Arnett, Publisher

Thursday, 27 November 2008

Monday morning Tulsa Today posted an analysis by veteran New York journalist and the recipient of seven Long Island Press Awards, Joan Swirsky, titled, “The Great Birth Certificate Scandal/Cover-Up of ‘08” questioning the missing Barack Obama birth certificate and his eligibility to serve as President of the United States. Two hours and 10,000 page views later, our local Internet Service Provider and domain hosting service, Tulsa Connect locked us off the Internet.

http://www.tulsatoday.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1799&Itemid=2

[samizdat]

JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT ALLEGED BY LEO DONOFRIO IN NJ SUPERIOR COURT APPELLATE DIVISION - OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE ALLEGED AGAINST JUDGE JACK M. SABATINO IN ACTION CHALLENGING ELIGIBILITY OF PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES FOR 2008 ELECTION.

DONOFRIO FORWARDS TO CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS OFFICIAL ALLEGATION OF MISCONDUCT AGAINST SCOTUS STAY CLERK DANNY BICKELL


This past week, Leo C. Donofrio forwarded to the Honorable Chief Justice John G. Roberts an official allegation of misconduct against SCOTUS stay clerk, Danny Bickell.

OJ is par 4 de course. We're looking at reverse, remand- wait- stay-appeal- etc. Pray and watch.

[Aplomb]

Donofrio's blog which is basically a record of the court documents and proceedings now has a warning posted on it. When you hit the link in the above post, the page you come to says that if you are a regular visitor to that site and are confident that the content is appropriate then click on proceed to access that blog. WTF!!!!!!!!

And, wow, there's quite a find here: http://www.patriotbrigaderadio.com/b...hp?topic=250.0

"If the facts do not support the theory, Destroy the facts!" « on: November 28, 2008, 12:43:43 AM »

---

While digging my way through the Internet last night, I came across the following paper, written by SARAH P. HERLIHY. It's title

AMENDING THE NATURAL BORN CITIZEN REQUIREMENT: GLOBALIZATION AS THE IMPETUS AND THE OBSTACLE

caught my eye, and had to read it...

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

I had to ask myself, what would drive any American to want to change a clause in a document that is the very foundation of our government?
So, I kept digging, and found that SARAH P. HERLIHY is employed by Kirkland & Ellis LLP http://www.kirkland.com

Noting that this law firm is based in Chicago, the light bulb was shining a little brighter . Upon looking at the firm, and the partners, I found that
Bruce I. Ettelson, P.C., is Member of finance committees of U.S. Senators Barack Obama and Richard Durbin.

http://www.kirkland.com/sitecontent.cfm ... temID=7845 (towards bottom of the page)

In addition, Jack S. Levin, P.C., another partner who, in December 2002 was presented the " Illinois Venture Capital Association's lifetime achievement award for service to the private equity/venture capital community" presented by Sen. Barack Obama

So it sure looks like Obama's people have looked into the matter of "Natural born" as far back as early 2006. What is even more disturbing is that it would appear that they are following the thought of :

"If the facts do not support the theory, Destroy the facts!"

Here is the introduction to the paper... It looks like a road map for Obama's defense lawyers...And a precursor to a Socialist world.
================================================== ================================================== =========

AMENDING THE NATURAL BORN CITIZEN REQUIREMENT: GLOBALIZATION AS THE IMPETUS AND THE OBSTACLE
SARAH P. HERLIHY∗
INTRODUCTION
The natural born citizen requirement in Article II of the United States Constitution has been called the “stupidest provision” in the Constitution,1 “undecidedly un American,”2 “blatantly discriminatory,”3 and the “Constitution’s worst provision.”4 Since Arnold Schwarzenegger’s victory in the California gubernatorial recall election of 2003, commentators and policy-makers have once again started to discuss whether Article II of the United States Constitution should be amended to render naturalized citizens eligible for the presidency.5 Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution defines the eligibility requirements for an individual to become president. Article II provides:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Of-fice who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.6
Although these sixty-two words are far from extraordinary, the natural born citizen provision is controversial because it prevents over 12.8 million Americans from being eligible for the presidency.7 In addition to Governor Schwarzenegger, the natural born citizen clause prohibits many other prominent Americans from becoming president, including Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm,8 former Secretaries of State Madeleine Albright and Henry Kissinger, Labor Secretary Elaine Chao,9 and over 700 Medal of Honor Winners.10 Even though many of these individuals have served in high political positions or fought in a war on behalf of America, they are not able to become president simply because they were not born in the United States.11
The natural born citizen clause of the United States Constitution should be repealed for numerous reasons. Limiting presidential eligibility to natural born citizens discriminates against naturalized citizens, is out-dated and undemocratic, and incorrectly assumes that birthplace is a proxy for loyalty. The increased globalization of the world continues to make each of these reasons more persuasive. As the world becomes smaller and cultures become more similar through globalization, the natural born citi-zen clause has increasingly become out of place in the American legal sys-tem. However, even though globalization strengthens the case for a Constitutional amendment, many Americans argue against abolishing the requirement. In a recent USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll taken November 19–21, 2004, only 31% of the respondents favored a constitutional amendment to abolish the natural born citizen requirement while 67% opposed such an amendment.12 Although some of the reasons for maintaining the natural born citizen requirement are rational, many of the reasons are based primarily on emotion. Therefore, although globalization is one impetus that should drive Americans to rely on reason and amend the Constitution, this paper argues that common perceptions about globalization ironically will convince Americans to rely on emotion and oppose a Constitutional amendment.
Part one of this paper provides a brief history and overview of the natural born citizen requirement. Part two discusses the rational reasons for abolishing this requirement and describes why the increase in globalization makes abolishing the natural born citizen requirement more necessary than ever. Part three presents the arguments against allowing naturalized citizens to be eligible for the presidency and identifies common beliefs about glob-alization that will cause Americans to rely on emotion and oppose a Constitutional amendment.

[Aplomb]

If you only have one shot at getting the truth about Obama's Constitutional ineligibility to somebody who thinks this is all nothing more than some sore-loser fit, this is it. In clear terms that any person with a 4th grade education can easily understand...





And here's the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqH7rSHcvgU

[Aplomb]

http://www.rightsidenews.com/2008113...n-citizen.html

We the People Run Full Page Ad to Obama: Natural Born Citizen?

November 28, 2008
Right Side News
From "We the People Foudation" comes the announcement of a full page AD:
Our full-page Open Letter to Mr. Obama will be published in the Chicago Tribune on both Monday, December 1, 2008 and Wednesday, December 3, 2008. It will appear in the main news section. Click Here to view a copy of the final ad. (source)

Chicago is Mr. Obama's hometown. His transition team is operating out of the Kluczynski Federal Building in downtown Chicago. He is known to be a regular reader of the Tribune, Chicago's principal newspaper, with a daily circulation of over a half-million readers.
The Open Letter to Mr. Obama is a formal Petition for a Redress (Remedy) for the alleged violation of the "natural born citizen" clause of the Constitution of the United States of America.

Mr. Obama is respectfully requested to direct the Hawaiian officials to provide access to his original birth certificate on December 5-7 by our team of forensic scientists, and to provide additional documentary evidence establishing his citizenship status prior to our Washington, D.C. press conference on December 8.
A First Amendment Petition to any official of the Government for Redress of a violation of the Constitution is substantially different from the garden-variety political petitions frequently received by government officials. This Petition demands it be given the highest priority for an expedited review and official Response by Mr. Obama.

As a formal "Notice of a Constitutional Violation," the Petition naturally includes the People's inherent Right to an official Response. As a time-sensitive, election related Petition involving the Office of the President, failure to Respond as requested would constitute an egregious breach of the public trust and confirm the certainty of a Constitutional crisis.
For the D.C. press conference the WTP Foundation has reserved the Edward R. Murrow Room at the National Press Club from 1-4 pm on Monday, December 8, 2008. We are hopeful that C-SPAN may cover what could be a pivotal, historic event.
The Petition for Redress/Open Letter to Mr. Obama is also expected to have a significant impact on the deliberations of the Electoral College as it proceeds toward selection of the U.S. President as provided for by the Constitution.
Many, many thanks to the many individuals who donated the money needed to cover the costs of publishing the Open Letter and conducting the Washington press conference.

We are now in the process of selecting the forensic scientists who would travel to Hawaii to examine Mr. Obama's original birth certificate (assuming he responds to the Petition for Redress by directing the Hawaiian officials to provide access to the birth certificate). The budget for this task is currently estimated at $20,000. We need to raise the money quickly. Unfortunately, we are starting from zero and we have but one week before the scientists would need to be in Hawaii
---------------