As if blaming Bush for the floundering economy and the continuing effort to pile on to an already enormous deficit weren’t evidence enough that Barack Obama isn’t exactly presidential — he poured more gasoline on to the fire with his remarks after the shooting at Fort Hood. He should have come out completely somber and measured in his remarks. Instead, he did this

When bush was talking to school children at 9/11 we were told he was wrong. But its ok for Obama to do this?

Getty Images President Obama didn’t wait long after Tuesday’s devastating elections to give critics another reason to question his leadership, but this time the subject matter was more grim than a pair of governorships.

After news broke out of the shooting at the Fort Hood Army post in Texas, the nation watched in horror as the toll of dead and injured climbed. The White House was notified immediately and by late afternoon, word went out that the president would speak about the incident prior to a previously scheduled appearance. At about 5 p.m., cable stations went to the president. The situation called for not only his trademark eloquence, but also grace and perspective.

But instead of a somber chief executive offering reassuring words and expressions of sympathy and compassion, viewers saw a wildly disconnected and inappropriately light president making introductory remarks. At the event, a Tribal Nations Conference hosted by the Department of Interior’s Bureau of Indian affairs, the president thanked various staffers and offered a “shout-out” to “Dr. Joe Medicine Crow — that Congressional Medal of Honor winner.” Three minutes in, the president spoke about the shooting, in measured and appropriate terms. Who is advising him?

Anyone at home aware of the major news story of the previous hours had to have been stunned. An incident like this requires a scrapping of the early light banter. The president should apologize for the tone of his remarks, explain what has happened, express sympathy for those slain and appeal for calm and patience until all the facts are in. That’s the least that should occur.

Indeed, an argument could be made that Obama should have canceled the Indian event, out of respect for people having been murdered at an Army post a few hours before. That would have prevented any sort of jarring emotional switch at the event.

Now we are told that the flag will be flown at half mast but no wait Obama had to say that the flag is not for the dead. Its also for all men and women serving in the war. WTF the flag is never flown at half mast to respect men and women at war whats this crap.

The truth is that Obama is nuts he is in no way is smart enough to be President.

Here is what we believe. Obama being a illegal alien did not have a real SS# so while in school he used stolen SS#s like other illegal aliens do. Only after he decided to run for office were records fixed to make it look like he has a SS# and had registered for selective service.

“The evidence contained in exhibit B shows that Barrak Hussein Obama might have used as many as 149 addresses and 39 Social Security Numbers prior to assuming office as president. The Social Security number most commonly used by Barrak Hussein Obama is one issued by the state of Connecticut, the state where Barrak Hussein Obama never resided and shows him to be 119 years old.

This coupled with the fact that Mr Obama’s grandmother, Madeline Dunham was a volunteer at the Oahu Circuit Court Probate department and had access to the Social Security Numbers of the deceased, constitutes circumstantial evidence casting serious doubt on the legitimacy of Mr Obama and his claims of being born on U.S. territory.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdBVN7azPs8

Something doesn’t add up here. Why would the U.S. government need to declare a national emergency to enable hospitals to handle a flood of sick people when there is no flood of sick people (and the pandemic seems to be fizzling out)?

The National Emergencies Act passed in 1976 invokes a set of laws that not only override important sections of the U.S. Constitution, but that also activate FEMA to take charge of “responding” to the emergency. Many say the act is unconstutional when enacted we were told it was to be used in an atack gainst the US but then we were told it was ok to use it in storms. Now we are told it is ok to use it because we have a cold?

Now we know why they need all those emergency medical tent camps near the hospitals. FEMA’s in charge! And if FEMA handles the swine flu pandemic in the same way the agency handled the Hurricane Katrina disaster, we may indeed need all those emergency triage tents after all.

Those of you who have been following the ongoing march to destroy the freedoms of the American People already know about FEMA camps. These aren’t Boy Scout field trip camps; they’re detention centers designed to hold large numbers of people for “emergency” purposes. Many theories abound on what these FEMA camps might be used for

http://www.campfema.com/

more here

Obama’s pick is Judge Sonia Sotomayor, who is currently on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second District. There she has racked up an anti-Second Amendment record and has displayed contempt for the rule of law under the Constitution.

The Heller decision put the Supreme Court in support of the
Constitutional protection of the individual right to keep and bear arms. Sotomayor, a politically correct lover of centralized government power (as long as she is part of the power elite), immediately went into counter-attack mode against the Heller decision.

Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which ruled in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states. As she and her cohorts claimed, the Supreme Court has not yet incorporated the states under the Second Amendment. Until then, she believes, the Second only applies to the District of Columbia.

This is pure judicial arrogance — something Sotomayor relishes (as long as she is one of the ruling judges). In fact, protection of the right to keep and bear arms was a major objective for enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment, as recently freed slaves were being disarmed and terrorized in their neighborhoods.

But Sotomayor disdains this important right of individuals, as indicated by an earlier opinion from 2004. In United States v. Sanchez-Villar, she stated that “the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.”

Sotomayor has held very anti-gun views, even as far back as the 1970s. Fox Cable News reported yesterday that in her senior thesis at Princeton University, she wrote that America has a “deadly obsession” with guns and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to
firearms ownership.

Sotomayor’s Second Amendment views go hand in hand with her politically correct views on the law and the role of judges.

In a speech given at Duke University in 2005, she made it abundantly clear that judges are involved in making policy. Realizing that this did not sound very judicial (even though most judges act on this basis), Sotomayor tried to laugh off her brazen admission: “I know this is on tape and I should never say that, [audience laughing], because we don’t
make law — I know. Um, okay. I know, I’m not promoting it, I’m not advocating it.” The audience continued to laugh. They got the joke.

But Sotomayor’s joke will be on us and our liberties if she gets confirmed to the Supreme Court. And that is why we need to start contacting our Senators early and often, urging them to vote against this dangerous nomination.

ACTION: Please contact your two Senators and urge them to oppose the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court. You can go to the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators a pre-written e-mail message.

Obama visits Mexico and promised to listen to other countries uit would e nice if he would listed to americans and the Tea parties but he doesnt care about Americans since he was not born here.

Obama is now pushing a gun control treaty INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION AGAINST THE ILLICIT MANUFACTURING OF AND TRAFFICKING IN FIREARMS, AMMUNITION, EXPLOSIVES, AND OTHER RELATED MATERIALS

If ratified and the U.S. is found not to be in compliance with any provisions of the treaty — such as a provision that would outlaw reloading ammunition without a government license — President Obama would be empowered to implement regulations without Congressional approval.

As Wyoming Senator John Barasso pointed out in a recent trip to El Paso, Texas: “Why would you disarm someone when they potentially could get caught in the crossfire?… The United States will not surrender our second-amendment rights for Mexico’s border problem.”

President Obama disagrees and he continues to spread the myth about how many guns recovered in Mexico come from the U.S. “More than 90% of the guns found in Mexico are not bought [in Mexico], but in the United States,” he said.

William La Jeunesse and Maxim Lott set the record straight and debunked “the 90% number” in a FOXNews.com report: “It’s just not true,” they said. According to their report, the real number is closer to 17%.

In other words, the Obama administration is pushing to disarm law-abiding Americans based on a massive misinformation campaign.

So how are the cartels armed if firearms are not pouring across the U.S. border? Keeping in mind that the cartels control BILLIONS of dollars, La Jeunesse and Lott shed some light on how they obtain the overwhelming majority of their guns:

– The Black Market. Mexico is a virtual arms bazaar, with fragmentation grenades from South Korea, AK-47s from China, and shoulder-fired rocket launchers from Spain, Israel and former Soviet bloc manufacturers.

– Russian crime organizations. Interpol says Russian Mafia groups such as Poldolskaya and Moscow-based Solntsevskaya are actively trafficking drugs and arms in Mexico.

– South America. During the late 1990s, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) established a clandestine arms smuggling and drug trafficking partnership with the Tijuana cartel, according to the Federal Research Division report from the Library of Congress.

– Asia. According to a 2006 Amnesty International Report, China has provided arms to countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Chinese assault weapons and Korean explosives have been recovered in Mexico.

– The Mexican Army. More than 150,000 soldiers deserted in the last six years, according to Mexican Congressman Robert Badillo. Many took their weapons with them, including the standard issue M-16 assault rifle made in Belgium.

– Guatemala. U.S. intelligence agencies say traffickers move immigrants, stolen cars, guns and drugs, including most of America’s cocaine, along the porous Mexican-Guatemalan border. On March 27, La Hora, a Guatemalan newspaper, reported that police seized 500 grenades and a load of AK-47s on the border. Police say the cache was transported by a Mexican drug cartel operating out of Ixcan, a border town.

In addition, despite efforts to clean up the system, corruption in the Mexican government is rampant. An article in the New York Times late last year noted that, “One of Mexico’s most notorious drug cartels made huge cash payments to officials in the Mexican attorney general’s office in exchange for confidential information on anti-drug operations… the cartel might have had an informant inside the American embassy.”

The bribes ranged from $150,000 to $450,000 each. Clearly, these gangs have the resources not only to buy firearms by the planeload, but they can buy the planes, too! Politicians on both sides of the border seem to ignore that they’re dealing with multi-billion dollar criminal organizations that will always be able to get firearms.

One would think that Mexico President Felipe Calderón and Attorney General Eduardo Medina Mora would have their hands full cleaning up a huge mess in their own country, but they’re not too busy to meddle in U.S. affairs.

As the Times noted in an article that coincided with Obama’s Mexico trip, “Mexican officials have repeatedly called on the United States to clamp down on the flow of weapons and are likely to bring it up again with President Obama on Thursday.”

Mr. Mora even lectured that “The Second Amendment was never meant to arm foreign criminal groups.”

American office holders should be more concerned about upholding their oath to support and defend the U.S. Constitution than kowtowing to “blame America first” foreign politicians.

See full story.

– Billions of dollars for anti-gun ACORN and computer database

It was a day that will live in infamy.

President Obama traveled to Denver, Colorado yesterday to sign the multi-billion dollar, pork-laden, so-called “stimulus” bill into law.

But forget the $787 billion price tag you heard on TV. Forget the $12 TRILLION debt limit which the bill created.

By the time debt services and other frills of the “socialism bill” are accounted for, the cost will be over $3,000,000,000,000 (yes, three TRILLION).

This makes the bill the biggest government spending grab in human history.

But what about the details? The hundreds and hundreds of pages in the bill were not made available until less than 18 hours before the final passage vote. But here’s what we know in relation to the gun-related provisions:

* The final bill continues to spend between $12 and $20 BILLION on requiring your doctor to retroactively put your most confidential medical records into a government database. Based on our experience with veterans, we would expect the government to try to use computerized psychiatric records to impose gun bans on people who have sought (or will seek) treatment.

* The final bill continues to fund liberal community action groups like ACORN, which has been convicted in previous elections for voter fraud and is now under investigation in several states for having engaged in massive criminal election fraud on behalf of Barack Obama’s presidential
candidacy. Not only that, they have also been involved in anti-Second Amendment activism in New Jersey.

White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel was at least honest when he said it would be a shame to let a crisis like the current recession “go to waste.” Like vultures picking on the nation’s carcass, the White House has used the nation’s pain to lavish largesse on its political supporters, at the expense of the nation’s economic survival.

And, in the end, this act of ethical depravity was made possible by every Democrat Senator who voted for the bill, plus the defections of three Republicans: Arlen Specter (R-PA), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and Susan Collins (R-ME).

Ex-Hitler youth compares Obama to Nazi rise

Socialism is the phantastic younger brother of despotism, which it wants to inherit. Socialism wants to have the fullness of state force which before only existed in despotism. … However, it goes further than anything in the past because it aims at the formal destruction of the individual … who … can be used to improve communities by an expedient organ of government.
– Friedrich Nitzsche

Marxists believe that a non-socialist society is to blame for what is wrong with people and therefore, change has to begin with those who are responsible for society, mainly “the rich.” Others, not they, have to change, and the others are in the end all those who oppose socialism. People are either forced to comply or they are killed, as happened in Nazi Germany. If you put right what is wrong in society, so goes Marxist theory, you will heal injustice and people, products of a hostile society, will become their good selves. Healing is created by installing more and more socialists in office, socialist immorality and socialist programs.

Barack Obama has not touched corruption and moral issues. His plans for dealing with issues are of economic nature and are pure Marxism – blaming the non-socialist enemies and distributing money to bribe poor voters, making them dependent on government and cementing its power. Marxism’s concepts lead to the welfare state – and on to a totalitarian system built on lies where government is central. There is no real concern for people; power is at the heart of all their projects.

The Democratic Party, with the leadership of Obama, the Clintons, Reid, Pelosi and comrades, is an illegitimate party that is destroying the Constitution – which leads to spiritual, political and economic disaster. It is illegitimate because of policy principles like abortion and also Darwinism being taught in schools. Instead of protecting life, this party promotes killing life. The Republican Party, on the other hand, is legitimate in principle with a majority that wants to do what is right but is lacking a national and personal purpose and therefore so often appeases what is wrong. Nobody wants to risk his position. It is the Appeaser’s Party. There are too many who are looking after themselves first and their country second.

One central theme is enough to clarify why I say that the socialist Democratic Party is illegitimate. Their policies are Marxist and not American, and they promote immorality. It was the Soviet Union, for instance, that was the first state to make abortion legal, already at the beginning of the ’20s. Having grown up in the godless totalitarian Nazi society, it is appalling for me to watch that in America, politicians can speak of their “Christian faith” and at the same time make abortion, same-sex marriage and homosexuality their party policy. Democrats are not fit for American constitutional government.

No government or parliament across the globe has the authority to overrule God. The godless national Socialists, called Nazis, did it, and my family, Jewish people, all Germans and Europeans paid dearly for it, because millions of us did not see our own evil inside. American soldiers shed their blood to liberate us from Nazi power. It pains me to see America today on the same track. Not only those who actively promote the godless programs allowed by our government establishment but also those who for personal reasons or lack of backbone appease them. They will pay for it, here and when they face their Creator. I know the consequence of a godless government. America must have a God-fearing government. The abortionists are closer to the Nazis than to our Founding Fathers. Both base their philosophy and action on lies.

More Here

Obama Clashes with Santa Claus on Gun Rights Christmas card.

Packing a holstered pistol on his belt, Santa Claus opposes President-elect Barack Obama over gun rights on an original Christmas card sent to members of Congress and others by right to self-defense advocate John M. Snyder of Telum Associates, LL.C.

“Although Obama said recently that, ‘lawful gun owners have nothing to fear’ from his administration, the fact is that firearm owners are not so sure,” said Snyder. “Obama’s public record as a staunch advocate of repressive gun control measures belies his attempt to tamp the concerns of lawful gun owners. So does his appointment to his administration of anti-gun politicians Eric Holder as Attorney General and Rahm Emanuel as White House Chief of Staff. America’s 90 million law-abiding firearm owners oppose extremist gun control proposals emanating from Washington, D.C. This includes any extremist anti-gun proposals which Obama tries to label ‘common sense gun safety laws,’ a phrase he used recently to characterize the kind of laws he would support.

“Obama’s record includes support for a handgun ban and a ban on concealed carry firearm permits, as well as hyper-restrictive measures regarding the acquisition and possession of rifles and shotguns. Holder has stated that the Second Amendment does not protect an individual right to keep and bear arms. Emanuel worked at the White House for passage of the Clinton Administration ban on certain semiautomatic firearms, which President Clinton himself later admitted led to Democrat loss of the House in the 1994 elections. It expired in 2004. Although Obama said recently that, ‘people can take me at my word,’ gun owners wonder, ‘which word?’ Lawful firearm owners do not trust him and are gearing up for a real battle.”

Snyder added that, “Americans hope an incoming administration will be able to deal effectively with the economic problems confronting our nation, but gun owners are wary of Obama’s record on firearms regulatory and prohibitive proposals, and concerned about Obama’s possible connection with officials involved in public scandals being reported from Illinois. Firearms owners are ready to fight for the preservation of the civil right to keep and bear arms, the right to self-defense, the right to life itself.”

The card depicts Santa and Obama in caricature tugging against each other on opposite ends of a rope. Gun owners support Santa and gun grabbers support Obama.

An image of the Supreme Court appears in the background, recalling the Court’s holding last summer in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. Initially, both Obama and Holder opposed the individual rights position which the Court later adopted.

“The tug of war continues,” notes the card. A high resolution image of the card is available on request by email to gundean@gmail.com.

Obama contradicts his own website on gun control.
afp/article/

Obama said Sunday that lawful gun owners have “nothing to fear” from his incoming administration so there is no reason for Americans to stock up on guns.
“I believe in common sense gun safety law, and I believe in the second amendment,” Obama said at a press conference Sunday. “And so, lawful gun owners have nothing to fear.
“I’ve said that throughout the campaign. I haven’t indicated anything different during the transition, and I think that people can take me at my word.”

Now come on thats a outright lie his his websites have clearly stated the following.

…would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information. ..support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. .. also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.

And he has hired pro guncontrol nuts to run the Justice department. Who is he trying to fool? Whats the deal is he smoking Crack or what?

Is this the change you voted for? A president who post something on his website and then tells you you did not see it.

Gun owners will not be fooled by this lame remark.

Full story here
Among the throng of Clinton regime retreads recruited for the Obama administration we find Gregory Craig. Craig served as Obama’s advisor on Latin American during the campaign, and was appointed last week as chief White House Counsel.

The MSM has mentioned Craig’s role as Bill Clinton’s impeachment lawyer, but mostly has omitted mention of Craig’s role as chief facilitator for Fidel Castro’s shanghaiing of Elian Gonzalez

Officially Craig served as attorney for Elian’s father, Juan Miguel Gonzalez. He went to Cuba and broght him back under gard so he could not escape. Using him in mock CBS interviue with actors used as fake translators. Full story here

Perhaps this explains why Obama offices in Texas flew the Castro flag.

another-flag-issue-obama
Is this the change we need?

per Article 1, Section 6:

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.

What this means is that a member of Congress cannot take an appointment for which the pay has gone up during the time he/she held office in Congress. Since the pay for the Secretary of State has gone up in the last year that would appear to preclude Hillary from getting appointed.

And even if the pay were reduced, by a strict reading of the text (which may or may not even matter to the powers that be these days given how little respect there is out here for what the Constitution actually says) that still wouldn’t be enough.

Hillary may want to be Secretary of State, but it doesn’t look like she can be.

Update I: More from Volokh, an email from Constitutional Law expert Prof. Michael Stokes Paulsen

Thanks for alerting me to this fascinating (and fun) issue! I’ve played in this particular sandbox before [as to Lloyd Bentsen], and am amused to see it return in slightly different form.

So, “Is Hillary Clinton Unconstitutional?” In a word, Yes — or, to be more precise, a Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would be unconstitutional.

The Emoluments Clause of Article I, section 6 provides “No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time.” As I understand it, President Bush’s executive order from earlier this year “encreased” the “Emoluments” (salary) of the office of Secretary of State. Last I checked, Hillary Clinton was an elected Senator from New York at the time. Were she to be appointed to the civil Office of Secretary of State, she would be being appointed to an office for which “the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased” during the time for which she was elected to serve as Senator. The plain language of the Emoluments Clause would thus appear to bar her appointment … if the Constitution is taken seriously (which it more than occasionally isn’t on these matters, of course).

http://belowthebeltway.com/2008/11/23/is-hillary-ineligible-to-be-secretary-of-state/

http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/11/24/hillary-ineligible-for-cabinet-post/42

As Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel puts it, the crisis is “an opportunity to do things you could not do before . . . You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

Obama’s has nominated Eric Holder for attorney general.
deputy attorney general in the Bill Clinton administration from 1997 to 2001

He advocated federal licensing of handgun owners, a three-day waiting period on handgun sales, rationing handgun sales to no more than one per month, banning possession of handguns and so-called “assault weapons” by anyone under age 21, a gun show restriction bill that would have given the federal government the power to shut down all gun shows, and national gun registration.

Now do you understand why gun sales are up?

“He also promoted the lie that ‘Every day that goes by, about 12, 13 more children in this country die from gun violence’ — a statistic that is only true if you count 18-year-old adult gangsters who shoot each other as ‘children,’”

After 9/11 Holder wrote that a new law should give “the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms a record of every firearm sale.” He also said prospective gun buyers should be checked against secret government “watch lists” .

Earlier this year, Holder was on the wrong side of the DC case — co-signed an amicus brief in support of the District of Columbia’s ban on all handguns and on the use of any firearm for self-defense in the home.

Holder played a key role in the gunpoint, night-time kidnapping of Elian Gonzalez. The pretext for the paramilitary invasion of the six-year-old’s home was that someone in his family might have been licensed to carry a handgun under Florida law. Although a Pulitzer Prize-winning photo showed a federal agent dressed like a soldier and pointing a machine gun at the man who was holding the terrified child, Holder claimed that Gonzalez “was not taken at the point of a gun” and that the federal agents whom Holder had sent to capture Gonzalez had acted “very sensitively.” If Mr. Holder believes that breaking down a door with a battering ram, pointing guns at children (not just Elian), and yelling “Get down, get down, we’ll shoot” is example of acting “very sensitively,” his judgment about the responsible use of firearms is not as acute as would be desirable for a cabinet officer who would be in charge of thousands and thousands of armed federal agents, many of them paramilitary agents with machine guns.

These policies match Obama’s anti gun history and show that Obama supportors who thought he was pro gun were wrong.

Eric Holder was also involved in the Waco raid that killed US children.

About two weeks before the raid, Tim Russert asked Holder, “You wouldn’t send a SWAT team in the dark of night to kidnap the child, in effect?”

Holder answered, “No, we don’t expect anything like that to happen.”
Then after the raid Holder was asked “Why such a dramatic change in position?” “I’m not sure I’d call it a dramatic change,” Holder answered. “We waited ‘til five in the morning, just before dawn.”

So ask yorself going back to Jack booted thugs. Is this the change people wanted? This man should be no wehere near government he is not qualified.

Obama questions to anyone who works for him.

So Obama and his top people are so ignorant that they do not know we don’t have gun registration in the US? That only some cities have it.
This question is an insult to gun owners. It shows how ignorant of guns laws the top Obama people are.

As a US gun owner we are not required to hold any ‘complete ownership registration information’ and we demand an apology from the Obama on this pro gun-control wording in his official documents.

Are you a Natural Born Citizen of the U.S.? Orginal posted here

Are you legally eligible to hold the Office of President?

Dear Mr. Obama:

On October 24, 2008, a federal judge granted your request to dismiss a lawsuit by Citizen Philip Berg, who challenged your eligibility under the “Natural Born Citizen” clause of the U.S. Constitution to legally hold the office of President of the United States of America.

Mr. Berg presented factual evidence to the Court in support of his claim that you are either a citizen of your father’s native Kenya by birth, or that you became a citizen of Indonesia, relinquishing your prior citizenship when you moved there with your mother in 1967.

In your response to the lawsuit, you neither denied Mr. Berg’s claims nor submitted any evidence which would refute his assertions. Instead, you argued that the Court lacked the jurisdiction to determine the question of your legal eligibility because Mr. Berg lacked “standing.”

Astonishingly, the judge agreed, simply saying, “[Mr. Berg] would have us derail the democratic process by invalidating a candidate for whom millions of people voted and underwent excessive vetting during what was one of the most hotly contested presidential primary [sic] in living memory.”

Unfortunately, your response to the legal claim was clearly evasive and strikingly out of character, suggesting you may, in fact, lack a critical Constitutional eligibility necessary to assume the Office of President: i.e., that you are not a “natural born” citizen of the United States or one who has relinquished his American citizenship.

Before you can exercise any of the powers of the United States, you must prove that you have fully satisfied each and every eligibility requirement that the Constitution mandates for any individual’s exercise of those powers.

Regardless of the tactics chosen in defending yourself against the Berg lawsuit, significant questions regarding your legal capacity to hold this nation’s highest office have been put forth publicly, and you have failed to directly refute them with documentary evidence that is routinely available to any bona fide, natural born U.S. Citizen.

As one who has ventured into the fray of public service of his own volition, seeking to possess the vast powers of the Office of President, you should expect to produce evidence of your citizenship to answer the questions and allay the concerns of the People. Indeed, as the one seeking the office, you are under a moral, legal, and fiduciary duty to proffer such evidence to establish your eligibility as explicitly mandated by Article II of the Constitution.

Should you proceed to assume the office of the President of the United States as anything but a bona fide natural born citizen of the United States that has not relinquished that citizenship, you would be inviting a national disaster, placing our Republic at great risk from untold consequences. For example:

· Neither the Electoral College on December 15, nor the House of Representatives on January 6 would be able to elect you, except as a poseur – a usurper;

· As a usurper, you would be unable to take the required “Oath or Affirmation” of office on January 20 without committing the crime of perjury or false swearing, for being ineligible for the Office of the President you cannot faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States;

· Your every act in the usurped Office of the President would be a criminal offense as an act under color of law that would subject the People to the deprivation of their constitutional rights, and entitling you to no obedience whatsoever from the People;

· as a usurper acting in the guise of the President you could not function as the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy and of the militia of the several states, as such forces would be under no legal obligation to remain obedient to you;

· No one in any civilian agency in the Executive Branch would be required to obey any of your proclamations, executive orders or directives, as such orders would be legally VOID;

· Your appointment of Ambassadors and Judges to the Supreme Court would be VOID ab initio (i.e., from the beginning), no matter what subsequent actions the Senate might take as well as rendering any such acts by such appointed officials void as well;

· Congress would not be able to pass any new laws because they would not be able to acquire the signature of a bona fide President, rendering all such legislation legally VOID;

· As a usurper, Congress would be unable to remove you from the Office of the President on Impeachment, inviting certain political chaos including a potential for armed conflicts within the General Government or among the States and the People to effect the removal of such a usurper.

As an attorney and sitting U.S. Senator, I’m sure you agree that our Constitution is the cornerstone of our system of governance. It is the very foundation of our system of Law and Order – indeed, it is the supreme law of the land. I’m sure you also agree that its precise language was no accident and cannot be ignored if Individual, unalienable, natural Rights, Freedoms and Liberties are to be protected and preserved.

As our next potential President, you have a high-order obligation to the Constitution (and to those who have fought and died for our Freedom) that extends far beyond that of securing a majority of the votes of the Electoral College. No matter your promises of change and prosperity, your heartfelt intent or the widespread support you have garnered in seeking the highest Office of the Land, the integrity of the Republic and Rule of Law cannot, — must not — be put at risk, by allowing a constitutionally ineligible person to sit, as a usurper, in the Office of the President.

No matter the level of practical difficulty, embarrassment or disruption of the nation’s business, we must — above all — honor and protect the Constitution and the divine, unalienable, Individual Rights it guarantees, including the Right to a President who is a natural born citizen of the United States of America that has not relinquished his American citizenship. Our nation has endured similar disruptions in the past, and will weather this crisis as well. Indeed, it is both yours and the People’s mutual respect for, and commitment to, the Constitution and Rule of Law that insures the perpetuation of Liberty.

As a long time defender of my state and federal Constitutions, and in consideration of the lack of sufficient evidence needed to establish your credentials as President, I am compelled to lodge this Petition for Redress of Grievances and public challenge to you.

Make no mistake: This issue IS a Constitutional crisis. Although it will not be easy for you, your family or our Republic, you have it within your ability to halt this escalating crisis by either producing the certified documents establishing beyond question your eligibility to hold the Office of President, or by immediately withdrawing yourself from the Electoral College process.

With due respect, I hereby request that you deliver the following documents to Mr. Berg and myself at the National Press Club in Washington, DC at noon on XXday, November XX, 2008:

(a) a certified copy of your “vault” (original long version) birth certificate;
(b) certified copies of all reissued and sealed birth certificates in the names
Barack Hussein Obama, Barry Soetoro, Barry Obama, Barack Dunham
and Barry Dunham;
(c) a certified copy of your Certification of Citizenship;
(d) a certified copy of your Oath of Allegiance taken upon age of maturity;
(e) certified copies of your admission forms for Occidental College, Columbia
University and Harvard Law School; and
(f) certified copies of any court orders or legal documents changing your name
from Barry Soetoro.

In the alternative, in defense of the Constitution, and in honor of the Republic and that for which it stands, please announce before such time your withdrawal from the 2008 Presidential election process.

“In a government of laws, the existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.”
Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 469-471.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely,

Robert L. Schulz,
Founder and Chairman, We The People Foundation for Constitutional Education, Inc.

U. S. SUPREME COURT AWAITS RESPONSE TO
BERG’S WRIT OF CERTIORARI
FROM OBAMA, DNC and Co-DEFENDANTS

(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 11/07/08) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States filed a Writ of Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court on October 30, 2008, requesting review of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge Surrick’s Dismissal of Philip J. Berg’s lawsuit against Barack H. Obama, Jr., the DNC and the other co-Defendants. Accordingly, the U. S. Supreme Court has set dates in which Barack Obama, the DNC and all co-Defendants are to respond to the Writ, which is on or before December 1, 2008.

Mr. Berg remarked today, “I look forward to receiving Defendant Obama’s response to the Writ and am hopeful the U. S. Supreme Court will review Berg v. Obama. I believe Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally-qualified natural-born citizen and is ineligible to assume the office of President of the United States.”

Mr. Berg’s case, Berg vs. Obama was dismissed from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Docket # 08-cv-4083 for lack of standing. Mr. Berg filed a Writ of Certiorari for review of the case and an injunction to stay the election pending review. Justice Souter denied the injunction. It is expected that the Court will decide whether or not to review Berg v. Obama after the Defendants file their response, and Mr. Berg has replied to the Defendant’s response.

The Defendants’ response is due by December 1^st and Mr. Berg’s reply will be submitted thereafter.

This story on whats going on with the unprotected in Chicago shows what kind of gun laws Obama wants since he approved all of these laws.

Strict gun control laws do nothing to prevent violent crimes

It’s scary to go dress shopping in Illinois these days. After all, it has been 11 weeks, and still no arrest has been made in the tragic Tinley Park Lane Bryant store massacre. All we know is that the perpetrator was attempting to rob the Brookside Marketplace clothing store on a cold Saturday morning. He forced six women into the store’s back room, tied them up and made them lay on the floor. Lying there, the heroic store manager secretly dialed 911 for help. Audio tapes of the 911 call indicate the robber heard the operator’s voice, panicked and began shooting each defenseless victim in the back of the head.

After shooting all six, the killer escaped through the store’s back door, just as the 911 operator alerted a Tinley Park police officer in an adjoining parking lot. Before the officer could respond, the devastation had taken place. Just yards away from him, five women were killed, and one, shot in the neck instead of the head, lay critically wounded.

To this day, a dangerous man with nothing to lose from killing again remains on the loose.

Illinois women are some of the few in America banned by law from protecting themselves. Forty-eight other states allow their citizens to carry concealed firearms.

And it’s even more scary in Chicago. There, law-abiding women are completely defenseless, even within their homes. Chicago women are not allowed to register handguns and keep them in their homes for protection against intruders.

On top of that, the state has an active moratorium on the death penalty.

If you were a cold-blooded murderer, where would you go to find your next victims?

Updated after election

FULL STORY HERE

Well we warned you Obama was anti gun but you were promised by his factcheck website that he was not. Now his new website has posted his true gun control plans.

Last week President-elect Obama’s Web site had posted his administration’s agenda for curtailing the Second Amendment rights of law abiding Americans, thereby validating the concerns of gun owners, sportsmen and firearms enthusiasts all across the country. Curiously, the Obama-Biden gun control agenda was taken down from the Web site after just two days.

We are not really surprised at the changing website Obamas webmasters have done this before on Obama websites. But this time they have been caught. Because the new website is a gov website it is PD unlike the old campain one that was copyrighted. A archived copy of the old website has been posted here so Obamas webmasters can no longer hide what they posted. Guncontrol is listed under Urban Policy
To allow the Obama camp to pretend their words never existed is unacceptable.

President-elect Obama’s Web site stated he would make permanent the expired “assault weapons” ban of 1994, a ban on firearms that was based on cosmetic appearance, such as the type of stock on the gun, and not functionality. The expired ban did nothing to reduce crime while it was in place. President-elect Obama’s Web site intentionally misled the American people by referring to these firearms as “weapons that belong on foreign battlefields.” These firearms are not machine guns. In reality, these commonplace firearms that President-elect Obama wants to permanently ban are used in shooting competitions and are found in homes and hunting lodges all across the country. They fire only once with each trigger pull, no spray firing, and they shoot the same ammunition as other firearms of the same caliber.

President-elect Obama has also promised to repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, a law which restricts public access to sensitive, law enforcement — only firearms tracing data. Public release of gun trace data outside law enforcement has and will continue to jeopardize ongoing criminal investigations, putting the lives of law enforcement, witnesses and others at risk. This is why Congress, ATF, and law enforcement, including the nation’s largest police organization, the Fraternal Order of Police, agree on the importance of securing this sensitive data. Access to gun trace data should only be available to law enforcement taking part in a bona-fide investigation, and law enforcement already has the access it needs for this purpose. No law enforcement agency has ever been denied access to trace data as part of a criminal investigation.

The Obama-Biden Web site also called for “childproofing” all firearms, despite firearm-related accidents being at their lowest levels in history, including a 60 percent decrease over the last 20 years, and a federal law that requires firearms dealers to provide a lock with each handgun sold and to have locks available for consumers to purchase. Firearms industry members have a long history of supporting the safe and responsible use and storage of firearms through programs such as Project ChildSafe, a campaign developed by the NSSF that has distributed over 35 million free gun lock safe storage kits throughout the United States. For years, manufacturers have voluntarily provided a free locking device with each new firearm. Thankfully, the National Safety Council reports that childhood firearms accidents now comprise less than 1 percent of all fatal childhood injuries.

Finally, the appointment of Rahm Emanuel, the strident chief architect of the Clinton-Gore gun control agenda, as President-elect Obama’s chief of staff sends an unambiguous message to gun-owners and members of the firearms industry.

Is this the change you voted for? Perhaps next time someone says they have change but wont tell you what it is you won’t vote for them.

Is this the Change you voted for.

“I believe we can reconfigure our civilian national-security force. We still have a national security apparatus on the civilian side, in the way the State Department is structured and USAID, that harkens back to the Cold War,” Obama said.

“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded,” he said.

Under the plan, all middle and high school students would be required to do 50 hours of community service.

Will your kids be drafted into the new brown shirt Obama police?

Is this the change we need?

indonesian-citizen

Old school records for Obama show that he was a indonesian citizen and a muslem. This jives with him using a indonesian pasport to travel in the 80s.
This page now updated to include a photo of the records.