Obama’s Eligibility, A Constitutional Crisis in the Making

How exactly does one go about constructing a Constitutional crisis?

It can’t be done easily and it takes a concerted effort to contradict the very framework of our nation.

Obama is in the midst of such a creation.

If Georgia Judge, the Hon. Michael Malihi, returns a verdict disallowing Obama’s name from the Georgia ballot, a Constitutional crisis could well be the outcome. The threat of such an event can be no reason to issue a ruling which would avoid it.

In last week’s Georgia hearing, neither Obama nor his attorney were present. Obama was campaigning in Nevada and his attorney, Michael Jablonski, issued to the Georgia Sec. of State the previous day, his intention of non participation.

Regardless of the outcome and the decision of the Judge, an appeal will certainly follow and should the Judge rule against Obama, expect an injunction to be filed preventing the Georgia Sec. of State from taking action to remove Obama from the ballot.

One of the things which is sure to be brought into play by Jablonski is Executive Privilege.

It will be claimed that Obama, as sitting President, has the Executive Privilege to ignore the subpoena of the court.

We believe this will be met with resistance by the legal team for the plaintiffs.

Continue reading

0

Its Time for ALL of Us to Take Action on Obama’s Eligibility

Carter Braxton, Thomas Malaren, John Hart, David Farrar, Thomas Lynch Jr., Leah Lax, George Read, Laurie Roth, Lewis Morris, David Weldon, Stephen Hopkins, Carl Swensson, William Ellery and Kevin Richard Powell.

Who are they?

In a word…Patriots.

Braxton, Hart, Lynch Jr., Read, Morris, Hopkins and Ellery were among the 56 who signed their names to the Declaration of Independence.

The others, Malaren, Farrar, Lax, Roth, Weldon, Swensson and Powell…Patriots too.

The latter group were the plaintiffs, last Thursday in a courtroom in Atlanta, Georgia, as Obama’s eligibility to appear on that state’s ballot was held.

Were the 56 a great deal different than the 7?

No.

The 56 gave birth to a nation of laws and stated their case in the Declaration. That nation was, via the Constitution, entrusted to the people.

The 7, guided by the Constitution, are carrying the torch having stated their case in a Georgia courtroom.

Continue reading

0

Obama Eligibility and the Gotcha Liberals

It’s time I suppose to deal with some of the neener neener liberals out there. I know a few and a suspect you do too.

Liberals won’t do their homework or, they’ll only do it up to a point. They will parse out only what backs their position without bothering to mention the whole story.

You and I both know this kind of liberal, don’t we?

These are the Obama Kool Aid drinkers who just can’t bring themselves to the understanding that THEIR guy may well be in trouble and in order to deflect any talk of ineligibility, they try the old and worn…”Well, what about THESE Presidents…HUH?”…tact.

These liberals will lay upon you the names of other Presidents who had one or both parents born off soil so to speak so, let’s have a look shall we?

Continue reading

0

Eligibility, Obama and the Coming Crisis

Tomorrow, a storm will strike in Georgia. It could well be a storm of epic proportions. It will be a political storm from which a Constitutional crisis could well arise.

It will take place in a Georgia courtroom.

Obama’s eligibility to serve as President is on the line.

It’s been a long and hard road for Dr. Orly Taitz and the Liberty Legal Foundation, which will represent the plaintiffs in court tomorrow, what they have been working toward may well create the perfect storm.

Make no mistake, while the outcome of this case is at the state level, and while it will not, if successful by the plaintiffs, remove Obama from office, it could set the stage for that ultimate showdown.

This case, brought forth in Georgia, will decide, before appeals, whether or not Obama is qualified, by virtue of the constitution, to appear on Georgia’s ballot in 2012.

This IS huge.

There are other such cases being formulated and one, in the state of California, which is pending.

The case against Obama’s eligibility hinges on the definition of “Natural Born Citizen” and the constitution clearly states one must BE a Natural Born Citizen in order to serve as president.

Continue reading

0

SOTU…A Look Back and a Look Forward

On Tuesday night, less than 48 hours before Obama has been subpoenaed to appear in a Georgia courtroom in a case regarding his eligibility to serve, he will deliver the 2012 State of the Union address.

We can hardly wait.

This year’s SOTU is expected to focus on “A Return to American Values.”

Obama? American Values?

Isn’t that an oxymoron of sorts?

“American Values, of course, being the “Oxy”…

Before we look too deep into the shallow end of the pool regarding the 2012 SOTU speech, shall we look back at the 2011 version?

Remember when…

Continue reading

0

The Federal Government and King George

This article is an exploration on many of the charges listed in the Declaration of Independence against King George and how they apply to the Federal Government.  I had been thinking of this for quite some time, as had many others before me apparently.  There are a few decent articles written on this subject on the internet, from which I have gained some inspiration.  I purposefully tried to eliminate the idea that our current “President” has committed the same offenses and rather decided that the behemoth of our Federal Government is at fault.

The reason it is at fault can be summed up in the Declaration of Independence.  The condition of American society with regard to the power the Federal Government has on all of us shows “that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.”  This is just as true today as it was over 200 years ago.  It is not just the fault of the President, but of the government as a whole.  The checks and balances system is broken, and few have the moral compass to keep the nation pointed in the right direction even if it means they will not see another term.  We have become accustomed to Federal involvement in our daily lives.  Whereas the Constitution used to provide the guidepost to which all politicians used to face, it is now carved up, interpreted and reinterpreted to justify any and all actions against liberty.

With that, I give you the following charges against King George, and the actions of the Federal Government that mirror the justification of those charges (not inclusive of all charges, just the ones I could justify):

Continue reading

0

Obama’s Willful Violation of the Constitution

Yesterday, we, at The National Patriot, asked YOU, our readers and the American people to take action. We asked this in the wake of Obama’s “recess” appointments.

These appointments took place while the Senate remained in Pro Forma session.

Obama’s actions are in contempt of Congress.

Obama’s actions are a willful violation of the United States Constitution.

Obama’s actions are a direct violation of his oath of office.

We thought it would be interesting to see what some Congressional members are saying about Obama’s actions in regard to the “recess” appointments.

“Once again we’re seeing presidential overreach. This is not what our founding fathers had in mind for this great nation.”   

Congressman Allen West

__________

“The president put his own political future and the radical views of his far-left base ahead of constitutional government. The president will have to answer to the American people for this power grab.”

Sen. Orin Hatch

__________

“I think the president wanted to pick a really big fight, and he has surely chosen one. This is a direct affront to the American people and the constitutional system of government that we have.”

Sen. Mike Lee

__________

Continue reading

0

Emperor Obama Has Decreed…Let It Be So!!!

A President making recess appointments is nothing new. It’s been happening pretty much since Congressional recesses were invented. In some cases, it has been no big deal; while in other cases, controversial, but it happens and it IS legal.

Well…it’s legal when it’s legal; and to be legal, Congress must be in recess.

If Congress is NOT in recess, a President MUST go through Congress and have Congress approve appointees.

That is in the Constitution.

You will find it in Article 2, Section 2.

He (the president) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

The President shall have the power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the  Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

That is exactly, word for word what the Constitution states regarding recess appointments.

Here is the problem.

Continue reading

0

Eric Holder’s Selective Application of the Law

Eric Holder, our nation’s Attorney General, is a racist. Plain and simple, no two ways around it, a racist.

Oh, we’ve suspected as much for some time.

When the New Black Panthers, caught on video, were intimidating voters in Pittsburgh and Holder did nothing…we suspected he was a racist, but, in all fairness, we had nothing from which to make a direct comparison. There were no WHITE people standing out front of a polling place intimidating voters for Holder to either ignore or throw the book at…so, we could only suspect his racism.

That has now CHANGED and we DO have direct comparisons.

Eric Holder is a racist.

Our direct comparison comes to us in the form of Voter ID Laws.

Holder, racist that he is, is shutting down state’s voter ID laws.

This week, he shut down South Carolina’s new Voter ID law and he’s looking at several other states new Voter ID laws as well. Holder is shutting them down because, he claims, these new laws unfairly discriminate against minorities and old people.

He had to toss in “old people” in an attempt to mask his racism.

It’s not working.

According to the racist Eric Holder, old people and minorities don’t have access to photo ID’s or at least, not the same access that white people have and therefore, any law requiring a photo ID to vote, is discrimination.

Here’s the problem with Holder, the racist’s claim.

According to his, and various other liberal’s own numbers, which will surely change as this story unfolds, 25% of minorities don’t have a photo ID.

25%!!!

Oh the humanity!!!

Liberals, and the racist Holder, seem to think that’s a lot…a WHOLE lot.

Now correct me if I’m wrong but…Using THEIR numbers…doesn’t that mean that…75% of minorities DO have a photo ID?

75%!!!

Why, that’s 3 times more than…a WHOLE lot…isn’t it???

That 75% of minorities CAN and HAVE obtained photo ID’s tells ME that the other 25% COULD if they wanted to. I contend that IF one has the ability to vote, one also has the ability to get a photo ID. To have the ABILITY to vote meaning they can fog a mirror and they are in this country LEGALLY.

Oh yes, the direct comparison…

People need to show a photo ID for lots of things, don’t they?

Photo ID’s are required when you go to the bank, when you try to board an airplane, when you pick up items from the pharmacy, when a credit or debit card is used, when you are contacted by police…the list is nearly endless.

Has Eric Holder gone after any of those entities which require a photo ID?

ANY of them???

Nope.

He’s ONLY going after STATES who are passing new VOTER ID LAWS…isn’t he?

White people, who apparently have no problem whatsoever getting a photo ID, must, because of Eric Holder’s ignoring of the situation, SHOW those photo ID’s EVERYWHERE but minorities…because 25% can’t seem to obtain a photo ID…should NOT be required to have them for a singular purpose…voting.

Let me tell you something…Were I black…I’d be OUTRAGED at Holder right about now.

HOLDER DOESN’T CARE THAT BLACK PEOPLE ARE BEING DISENFRANCHISED FROM BANKS, AIRPLANES, STORES AND AN ENDLESS LIST OF OTHER PLACES.

If minorities are indeed being disenfranchised from voting because they don’t have a photo ID, are they not also being disenfranchised from all the other businesses and entities which require the presentation of said photo ID???

Of course, we know this is all BS and Holder is FULL of it.

The only people who will be disenfranchised by voter ID laws are dead people, those who claim to be someone they’re not and illegal aliens.

Illegal aliens were never “Franchised” to begin with so, how can they possibly become DISenfranchised?

Dead people are “Previously franchised” but, sadly, no longer franchised due to having their voting privileges cancelled by a much higher power.

Those who claim to be someone they’re not ARE franchised – but ONLY as THEMSELVES and NOBODY is franchised to vote more than once in a given election.

Oddly enough, those who claim to be someone they’re not, illegal aliens and the “Previously Franchised” nearly always vote for liberals and THAT is exactly why Holder is SO adamant about protecting THEIR voting rights!!!

Here’s a little something Holder probably doesn’t want you to know.

If he gets HIS way, you won’t need a photo ID to VOTE for a president but, if you want to get into the White House where a president lives…YOU HAVE TO SHOW A PHOTO ID!!!

What we have in this administration, in Eric Holder and in liberals in general, is a political ideology bent on encouraging fraud and illegal activity in an effort to curry votes.  How else can his insistence that voter ID laws are racially motivated while ignoring all other requirements to show photo ID be explained?

If ACORN and their ilk weren’t bent on registering dead voters, the Dallas Cowboys and illegal aliens, individual states might not be passing voter ID laws now. If people didn’t break the law to get into our country and then go driving about without a care in the world, their vehicles would not be impounded.

The 14th Amendment states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

I suggest Holder, and this administration, by striking down voter ID laws are in violation of the 14th Amendment.

Holder is saying that requiring a photo ID be shown to vote but saying NOTHING regarding photo ID’s being required for score of other things and THAT is not EQUAL protection. The ONLY people being “protected” by Holder, regarding photo ID voter laws are those who would perpetrate fraud.

Let me state that again.

The ONLY people being “protected” by Holder, regarding photo ID voter laws are those who would perpetrate fraud.

Since when, precisely, has it become the mission of the United States Attorney General, to protect those who would commit fraud?

The voter ID laws are just PART of it.

I also submit that by blocking states from establishing their own laws to prevent illegal immigration, such as Arizona’s SB1070, Holder and this administration is ALSO in violation of the 14th Amendment as their actions are meant to protect those who are breaking the law at the expense of those who are law abiding citizens.

Whether we are talking about the voter ID laws or the federal blocking of laws like SB1070, we are in fact talking about UNEQUAL protection under the law.

If, as Holder contends, it is unconstitutional to require a photo ID to be allowed to vote then it should ALSO be considered for a bank to require a photo ID or an airline, or a store or the white house. It should also be considered unconstitutional for law enforcement to ask for a photo ID if it is unconstitutional for a photo ID to be required at the voting booth.

I contend it is Holder and his selective application of law which is unconstitutional and any Attorney General who applies the law in a selective manner is not fit to hold the office and should therefore, immediately, be removed.

The FACTS regarding the supposed 25% of minorities who do not currently have a valid photo ID are clear. They CAN, if they are legal to vote, obtain one AND they have 11 months in which to do so. If they CHOOSE not to, then they should not be allowed to vote AS PER THEIR CHOICE.

I also believe that a system of ID be implemented for those voting via absentee ballot. With the technology available today, a simple finger print on a prescribed place on the absentee ballot checked against a voter registration card would suffice.

All steps to PREVENT possible voter fraud rather than any step to enable it should be employed.

Holder and this administration continue to take steps to ENABLE voter fraud by challenging or blocking voter ID laws.

Voting for those who would lead our towns, cities, states and nation must…MUST be protected against fraud or the possibility of it if we are to remain free. ANY action by ANY level of government to protect those who would commit such fraud is, in fact, promoting such fraud and therefore, an infringement of our very freedoms.

The enactment of voter ID laws does NOT disenfranchise anyone but blocking those laws DOES.

Now, either Holder is actively encouraging fraud, or he’s a racist.

How else can his actions possibly be explained???

0

Politics on Christmas? Yes…and for a VERY Good Reason

Be sure to Click LIKE at the bottom of this article, and share it everywhere!!

By Craig Andresen – Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio

If there is such a thing as divine providence, clearly it played a most important part in the events surrounding the founding of this nation.

For those who wish to separate Christmas from the politics of the day, I am with you but, one must realize that without connecting the two, we may well not have a nation at all.

When one thinks of Christmas, the true and first Christmas, one thinks of tiny Bethlehem. That’s where it started. Bethlehem.

So too, perhaps via divine providence, is Bethlehem a key to our nation’s birth.

Yes, it is a different Bethlehem than the one from the first Christmas but I ask you, is it coincidence? I rather doubt it as I don’t believe in such things either in politics OR divine providence.

Continue reading

0