Abuse of Power

Video: Abuse of Power

Technorati Tags: Constitution,Lawless,Obamaland,Politics,Power,Dictator Powers,Big Brother Tactics,Watch the Other Hand,Wake-Up

The POTUS’s Illegal Actions: A 36 Page Compendium… Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Conscience of a Conservative:  Once again, from Israel (with love for America) a few more facts on the crimes committed by Barack Hussein Obama against America. Why do the House Republicans continue to attack the fleas instead of the monster they live on? Just my humble opinion, but it seems that Obama, himself, is his own worst enemy and weakest link. The birth certificate scandal, alone, should be enough to send him to prison.

The POTUS’s Illegal Actions: A 36 Page Compendium… Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Posted on July 27, 2013

Much time, energy and resources (calling in ‘favors’ isn’t a one way street) has been exerted detailing the unlawful actions of Obama Inc. Predictably, the abusive messages from their minions pour in fast and furious…who can keep up…but this is like water off a duck’s back…And yes, the buck does stop at the POTUS’s door, even though his handmaidens and surrogates are equally culpable.

Lest readers believe otherwise, there is no “malice aforethought” ( the term is generally applicable to the act of murder and its essence holds that of premeditation, but this is not the case herein, even though THEIR actions are fully pre-planned) in reporting their aggregate of malfeasance. In fact, it is downright depressing and degrading, as any patriot can attest. And just because one is an expatriate doesn’t make it any less compelling and onerous/burdensome.

But without having the goods none of the above would amount to squat. In fact, this blog’s compendium of research is so vast and pervasive it would take two lifetimes to completely do it justice. And yes, there are other topical-worthy matters – personal ones as well – which require this writer’s attention!

Hence, a short compilation will have to suffice. So commence with the latest, but start with this charge sheet: Indeed, in which universe is it legal to prop up community organizing grads at taxpayer expense? And with a regime gone wild, aren’t the abuses at the IRS more than meets the eye, knowing full well that the agency holds the keys to Obamacare, as well as the taxpayer trough?

But why anyone is still shocked by their treachery is beyond comprehension, unless one is missing a few screws. And one needn’t be the sharpest tool in the shed either. Not at all. After all, there are so many poopy droppings, one can’t help but step in them. Yet to aid the process along, go back to this blog’s beginnings, precisely in August 2012, and the following was front and center: An anti-American POTUS runs an un-American campaign was meant to warn the readers of the disasters afoot, if the Radical-in-Chief managed to grab a second term!

Yet it is within Congress’s mandate/purview to rein them in, even if they are becoming more and more irrelevant – rubber stamp-like. And reports, per se, won’t cut it. Quick, decisive actions are mandatory, if America – as a Constitutional Republic – is to survive.

‘CONGRESSIONAL REPORT LISTS 36 PAGES OF OBAMA’S CRIMES’

AUGUST 17, 2010 BY Ben Johnson
Ben Johnson, Floyd Reports

Congressman Darrell Issa has produced a shocking new report detailing the Obama administration’s extensive use of taxpayer-funded propaganda, which he says breaks federal law. The report created for the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform details how the former Alinskyite community organizer has channeled the resources of the federal government — that is, your money — to create “a sophisticated propaganda and lobbying campaign” made up of “inappropriate and sometimes unlawful public relations and propaganda initiatives.” The highlights include:

• Using federal arts grants to spread Obama’s legislative message. Last August 10, administration officials held a conference call with National Endowment of the Arts grant recipients. Buffy Wicks, a college radical who worked in Valerie Jarrett‘s Office of Public Engagement, told the invitees, “we’re going to come at you with some specific ‘asks’ here,” specifically supporting Obama’s initiatives on health care, the environment, or energy. She suggested, “We wanted folks to connect…with federal agencies, with labor unions, progressive groups, face groups [faith groups, perhaps?], women’s groups, you name it.” Within 48 hours, no fewer than 21 arts organizations released a statement endorsing ObamaCare.
• The Dept. of Health and Human Services paid MIT economist Jonathan Gruber nearly $400,000 for various jobs. He did not disclose his employment by HHS while writing a string of op-eds, nor while testifying before the Senate in favor of, ObamaCare.
• The Justice Dept. hired Tracy Russo, the former blogger for John Edwards, to comment on internet articles or bulletin board messages that criticized Barack Obama and his agenda. She did this anonymously or used a pen name.
• A Dept. of Education officer used the White House email to send his colleagues eight bullet points to “communicate the merits of the President’s proposal with your members and their audiences.”
• The federal government “highly recommended” constructing highway signs that tout big government and advertise politicians (including Obama). (Watch the committee’s video on the subject here.)
• Obama attempted to enlist “voluntary” Hollywood propaganda for his proposals through the iParticipate campaign.
• Andy Griffith starred in a Medicare “update” that doubled as a commercial for Obama’s health care legislation. Not only is the PSAl propaganda, it is erroneous. A writer with the nonpartisan FactCheck.org remarked Griffith’s scripted “promise that ‘benefits will remain the same’ is just as fictional as the town of Mayberry.”
• The White House routinely drove traffic to websites that lobby for Obama’s legislation.

You can read the full report here.

Issa cites three separate federal statutes violated by the Obama administration and has called for a Government Accountability Office (GAO) to launch an investigation. If violations of the law are found, impeachment could follow.

It’s not bad enough the president is a megalomaniac who skirts the law to foist his far-Left agenda on the American people — he also uses your money to do it.”

A very capable rendition of what’s what can be found at Anti-Obama “Witch Hunts”…or WHICH Hunts?“. Western Center for Journalism, as usual, let’s it all hang out. NOT only that, but there appears to be a ‘smoking gun’, one which can bring the whole regime to its knees. Its essence is found within the so called ‘Birther‘ kerfuffle, one which is dismissed as crackpot-worthy. Not so fast. Recall, ‘The Teflon-One’ hired a slew of high priced lawyers to shield his documents from outing. Well and good. However, one of THEIR own resident experts, a forensics document examiner !, is jumping on board – the ‘Birther’ wagon. Holy crap.

And while it is heartening to realize that Rep Issa has led the charge sheet, it won’t matter a whit if Obama & gang are not behind bars, not unlike other Federal criminals. For if abusing tax payer funds (the tip of their crimes) in the service of radical, community organizing “ideals” – to make good on his/their promise to “transform” America – is not a criminal act, then what exactly rises to the definition?

Isn’t it crystal clear from all of the above, plus so much more, that bringing down America is their raison d’etre?

Technorati Tags: politics,wake-up America,crimes,POTUS,Obama,Obamaland,dumbing-down of America,Congressional Hearings,GAO,fundamental transformation of America,Obama's agenda,destroying America,Constiution,laws

An Irishman’s American Dream

 Young Patriots: Posted on January 29, 2013 – h/t to MJ

I’m a citizen of Ireland and have been attempting to get a green card for over 9 years.

Once again, America faces the popular discussion of immigration – trying to find the best way forward for America and its 11 million illegals.

One of the greatest conservatives of modern time, Mark Levin, had two great guests on tonight’s show – Jeff Sessions arguing against the current ideas, and Marco Rubio, who is part of the group of eight who are trying to come up with legislation to deal with this problem.

Because this is an issue that affects me greatly, I had to call in and I was very lucky to be able to discuss a few points with the Great One – Mr. Levin, himself. I personally have a massive problem with granting an illegal worker a permanent visa because America has laws and those laws need to be respected. The biggest issue, to me, is the fact that 11 million people will skip the line in front of people like me who have waited 9 years to get a visa… and still waiting. To put that number in perspective, the American government awards 50,000 DV visas every year. I could wait a lifetime and still never get to achieve my dream, but someone who has broken the law gets to live the dream every day.

While Rubio insists that we will all be on the same level, the law of possession will come into play. Does anyone really believe that the US government is going to deport someone illegal just so I can come into the country? That will never work.

The other issue I addressed on Levin’s show was the message conservatives need to communicate going forward. Republicans like John McCain keep saying Republicans need this reform to win another election. THEY ARE WRONG. Three little words will lead to a win: THE AMERICAN DREAM!

When was the last time you heard this mentioned? The country where if you worked hard, you could become anything you wanted and could achieve anything. No one could stop you or get in the way.

The answer to tyranny is not less tyranny – its Liberty and Freedom.

Reagan summed up my feelings about America perfectly in his “Time for Choosing” speech in 1964, where he told the story of a Cuban talking to two Americans, telling them everything he ran away from. The two Americans looked at each other and realized how lucky they were. But the Cuban insisted he was the lucky one because he had somewhere to run to…..

For me, while I don’t face the same oppression or anything like it, I still long for the American Dream and I hope and pray every day that I will get the chance to achieve it.

*Hear Jonathon on The Mark Levin Show -  (Start at 56 minute mark)

Related:

Lee, Sessions: 'Group of Eight' Immigration Proposal No Good

Marco Rubio explains new bipartisan immigration plan to Ed Morrissey

Legal Immigrant’s Must-Watch Testimony Against Gun Control: ‘Few Saw the Third Reich Coming Until It Was Too Late’

Lou Barletta Discusses Illegal Immigration and Small Cities on ‘Wilkow!’

Rubio's amnesty: A path to oblivion for GOP

Comment:

I am a first generation immigrant. Came here before my second birthday with my parents and am an American in every way… but birth.

My parents and I came to America after WWII after waiting in line for the okay to come for more than 7-years. They came here on their own dime, with sponsors (close relatives who had been here for over 20-years)… which used to be required so immigrants would not end up on the government dole if they needed help and within a week of arriving first in New York and then at our end destination, Glendale CA, my father had a job (and soon thereafter 3) plus my parents had enrolled themselves in English classes at the local high school, night school. And from their night school connections came lifelong friends from all over the world whose common goal was to become respectable law-abiding American citizens.

Although I and later my sister and brother who were born here in the United States, were taught traditions from our homeland and told stories about our roots, the immediate goal and ultimate focus was that everyone learned and spoke English as well as American history and civics and that we as a family, an immigrant community, adopted American traditions and slowly learned to blend in.

Nobody, in our family or our extended immigrant circle of friends, expected a free ride or even help. Nobody expected America or Americans to change for us or adopt our ways, to print things in our language(s) let alone provide interpreters or bi-lingual teachers for our children, to TV shows in our native language(s) or to have laws changed or skewed for us or relatives still waiting to come to join us in America.

We, immigrants until very recently, were grateful for the opportunity to be in this country legally. Everyone expected to work hard, to learn English and to become Americans in every way. And they expected to follow the laws and rules or be deported.

The idea(s) that America would allow people who came here illegally to remain or even receive Amnesty; or that the law could be changed so someone like Arnold Schwarzenegger (once discussed) could run for president; or that someone like Barack Hussein Obama could become president without a thorough vetting process with all the questions and missing documents; or that people from around the world who followed the rules could fall to the back of the line behind cheaters to gain green cards; or that the Average American would be so low, un or mis-informed (or dumbed down) that they didn’t understand what was happening to the greatest country in the world, their country, as the rest of the world was laughing at them; or that Americans would question the wisdom of the U.S. Constitution and their Founders who wrote it was totally unfathomable to the immigrants of yesteryear.

And for the legal immigrants who are here now from every corner of the world, the prospects of what is coming from amnesty for millions, to gun confiscation, to healthcare rationing, to the breakdown of the basic pillars of society and even perhaps an attempt to re-write our already much damaged Constitution and Bill of Rights is frightening because they have already lived in counties under rules and rulers that most Americans are too oblivious to even think about, let alone understand. MGA

Technorati Tags: immigration,illegal aliens,legal immigration,illegal immigration,secure the borders,RINOS,enforce the law,Mark Levin,freedom,Constitution,choices,natural born citizen,US Constitution,law and order,laws

The Council Has Spoken! This Week’s Watcher’s Council Results

The Council Has Spoken! The votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week’s Watcher’s Council match up.

Even taking into consideration the normal high level of quality in both the Council and Non-Council entries, this was a tough call with some exceptional pieces to choose from, and the close vote tallies reflect it.

This week’s winner, The Noisy Room’s Infiltration, Treason, Jihad – Welcome to The Project is a great examination of something most Americans are unaware of..the Muslim Brotherhood’s detailed and covert plan to subvert the west and put it under sharia and Muslim rule. Here’s a slice:

The Blaze aired a special last week in two parts called The Project. Part 1 is here and Part 2 is here.

As I have contended from the very beginning, Obama and his minions are corrupt beyond belief. It is my belief that Obama is actively facilitating the Muslim Brotherhood and radical Islam in an effort to bring America to her knees and usher in not only Sharia law, but a worldwide caliphate. This week, I am going to summarize for you the content of The Project and what it means to Americans. Time is growing short, we are entering the third and final phase of a very, very evil plan.

In 2001, an Islamic manifesto called The Project was discovered in Switzerland. This document is a plan to carry out a quiet coup within the United States through indoctrination, subversion and infiltration at all levels of our government and through key positions in education and other influential positions such as the media. Fast forward to 2008 and the Holyland Foundation Trial. This showcased the largest terror financing trial in US history. There are 80 boxes of evidence, including The Project, that have been made available by our government to the accused enemies of America, but which, to this day, are being withheld from our leaders and the American people. Barack Obama, Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano cite national security, but have given the terrorists a free pass to review the documents. I contend, that if they haven’t already done so, that Obama and his colleagues will destroy those documents because they implicate Obama and his administration in outright treason by aiding and abetting the Muslim Brotherhood. If Obama loses this election, he will most likely do two things: 1) He will release the Blind Sheik and 2) he will have those 80 boxes of documents destroyed if he hasn’t done so already. Obama will remain faithful to his Muslim roots and his anti-colonialist leanings. Remember Obama’s words:

”The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

In our non-Council category, the winner was Ace of Spades with The Normative Power of Law and the Emotional Power of Drama submitted by Joshuapundit. It’s a fascinating look at exactly how laws and rules work, the message they send, and how it applies to our tacit acceptance of Islamist violence. Do read it.

OK, here are this week’s full results:

Council Winners

• *First place with 2 2/3 votes! The Noisy Room – Infiltration, Treason, Jihad – Welcome to The Project
• Second place with 2 1/3 votes – The Right Planet – Fundamental Transformation: Dhimmitude for America
• Third place with 2 votes – The Political Commentator-“Main Street” pain belies Bernanke rhetoric!
• Fourth place *t* with 1 2/3 votes – Joshuapundit - Obama Monopoly: Burn An American Embassy, Collect $450 Million!
• Fourth place *t* with 1 2/3 vote – Gay Patriot - Legacy media downplay (or downright ignore) Obama’s September of Incompetence
• Fifth place *t* with 1 vote – The Colossus of Rhodey - Just like they did with color-blindness, “progressives” re-examining First Amendment
• Fifth place *t* with 1 vote – The Independent Sentinel - U.N. Ambassador John Bolton Addressing Upcoming Assault on the Second Amendment
• Sixth place *t* with 2/3 vote – Bookworm Room – Radiolab, a Progressive public radio station, errs by showing its audience how the meat gets into the sausage.
• Sixth place *t* with 2/3 vote – The Razor – An Obama Victory May Be Good for the War on Terror
• Seventh place *t* with 1/3 vote – GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD – Suriya al Kubra’s WMD War
• Fifth place *t* with 1/3 vote – The Mellow Jihadi – William Donohue and His Jar of Brown Play-Doh
• Fifth place *t* with 1/3 vote – Simply Jews – How did Bibi’s UN speech bomb so badly?

Non-Council Winners

• First place with 3 votes! – Ace of Spades -The Normative Power of Law and the Emotional Power of Drama submitted by Joshuapundit
• Second place *t* with 2 1/3 votes – Michael Yon – America’s Dumbest War, Ever submitted by The Glittering Eye
• Second place *t* with 2 1/3 votes – Doug Ross – MEXICAN STREETS RUN RED WITH THE BLOOD OF CHILDREN: Holder Lies to Congress; Obama Covers Up; U.S. Media Ignores the Slaughter submitted by VA Right!
• Third place with 1 2/3 votes -American Thinker - Obama’s Biblical Rewrite submitted by The Right Planet
• Fourth place with 1 vote – Sultan Knish - Muslim Violence is Our New Law submitted by The Noisy Room
• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 votes - The Compass – Mitt Romney’s Mideast Vision submitted by GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD
• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 vote - The Sad Red Earth – Amnesty’s Arrogance submitted by Simply Jews
• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 vote - Doug Ross – The Most Brutal Jobs Graph of the Year submitted by The Independent Sentinel
• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 vote - PJ Media – Ambassador Chris Stevens Is Dead; Al-Qaeda Is Alive submitted by The Political Commentator
• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 vote - The Blaze – Open Letter:Beck Responds To Criticism From Muse Band Leader Matthew Bellamy submitted by The Mellow Jihadi
• Sixth place *t* with 1/3 vote - PJ Lifestyle – Why Gore Vidal, Norman Mailer, and Truman Capote All Failed to Write the Great American Novel submitted by Gay Patriot
• Sixth place *t* with 1/3 vote - Open Markets.Org – Fifty Years Later: Rachel Carson Is Still Wrong submitted by The Colossus of Rhodey
• Sixth place *t* with 1/3 vote - FOX News – Interview: Dr. Henry Kissinger On The State of Foreign Policy submitted by The Watcher

See you next week! Don’t forget to tune in on Monday AM for this week’s Watcher’s Forum, as the Council and their invited guests take apart one of the provocative issues of the day and weigh in…don’t you dare miss it. And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that!

Technorati Tags: Watcher's Council,news nuggets,news,alternative news,bloggers,blogosphere,collection of articles

NDAA: The Most Important Lawsuit in American History that No One is Talking About

I would also take the time to watch this short video from one of the co-counsels on the case as to exactly what the government is arguing in court. Not a word from the mainstream media on the most important court case in American history. One that will decide the fate of a law that will effectively dismantle at least a third of The Bill of Rights.

Video:  CO-Counsel speaks after #NDAA hearing

NDAA: The Most Important Lawsuit in American History that No One is Talking About

Despite a mainstream media blackout on the topic, the alternative media is abuzz with this week’s hearing on the constitutionality of the clearly unconstitutional NDAA. In case you don’t remember, section 1021 of the NDAA, which Obama signed into law on December 31 of last year, allows the government to lock up U.S. citizens indefinitely without a trial. At the time of signing, Obama penned a pathetic letter to many of his outraged supporters where he basically said he signed it but he won’t use it. Thanks pal!

In any event, the Administration is showing its true colors by appealing an injunction that judge Katherine Forrest issued against it in May. The injunction was in response to the lawsuit filed by Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Chris Hedges and others. While the NDAA clearly vaporizes the 5th and 6th Amendments of the Constitution, I believe the real target is the 1st Amendment. By having a law on the books that allows the government to arbitrarily lock anyone up and throw away the key, the government is actually trying to instill enough fear in people that they self-censor speech and become too afraid to criticize the criminal political and economic ruling and elite oligarchy… both here in the United States (Progressive politicians and media) and globally including members of groups like  the CFR, the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateralists, International Bankers, etc.

Tangerine Bolen is one the lead plaintiffs in the suit against the government and she penned a powerful piece for the UK’s Guardian. Here are some key quotes:

I am one of the lead plaintiffs in the civil lawsuit against the National Defense Authorization Act, which gives the president the power to hold any US citizen anywhere for as long as he wants, without charge or trial.

In a May hearing, Judge Katherine Forrest issued an injunction against it; this week, in a final hearing in New York City, US government lawyers asserted even more extreme powers – the right to disregard entirely the judge and the law. On Monday 6 August, Obama’s lawyers filed an appeal to the injunction – a profoundly important development that, as of this writing, has been scarcely reported.

Judge Forrest had ruled for a temporary injunction against an unconstitutional provision in this law, after government attorneys refused to provide assurances to the court that plaintiffs and others would not be indefinitely detained for engaging in first amendment activities. At that time, twice the government has refused to define what it means to be an “associated force”, and it claimed the right to refrain from offering any clear definition of this term, or clear boundaries of power under this law.

This past week’s hearing was even more terrifying. Government attorneys again, in this hearing, presented no evidence to support their position and brought forth no witnesses. Most incredibly, Obama’s attorneys refused to assure the court, when questioned, that the NDAA’s section 1021 – the provision that permits reporters and others who have not committed crimes to be detained without trial – has not been applied by the US government anywhere in the world after Judge Forrest’s injunction.

Full article here.

Please share this with everyone that cares about Liberty and The Republic.

Related:

Doug Hagmann: Obama Re-election Insurrection Imminent – Updated – A Must Read

Judge Strikes Down NDAA, Rules Obama Must Obey Constitution

HR 347 Just Passed Without Notice – US "Trespass Bill" will make protest illegal

OWS and the planned “endgame” for the U.S.

Video: NDAA Floor Speech Jan 18 2012

Obama’s Possible October Surprise: Will He Use the Military To Sway the Electorate?

Technorati Tags: NDAA,NDAA lawsuit,unconstitutional,detention,unlawful detention,National Defense Authorization Act,wake-up America,Bill of Rights,Dismantling the Constitution,First Amendment,martial law,ruling elites,watch the other hand

Judge Strikes Down NDAA, Rules Obama Must Obey Constitution

Western Journalism:

In a considerable setback for a president eager to ravage the due process rights of the American people, Federal Judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction on Wednesday, striking down those sections of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012 which sought to provide Barack Obama the power to indefinitely detain citizens without benefit of their 5^th Amendment rights.

Signed very quietly into law on New Year’s Eve, the controversial Act has been roundly criticized as unconstitutional by groups on both the political left and right. Of greatest concern was Section 1021, which grants the United States military authority to exercise police powers on American soil. Upon order of the president and at his sole discretion, agents of the military are empowered to detain “until the end of hostilities” anyone the president believes to have “substantially supported” al Qaeda, the Taliban, or “associated forces.”

Judge Forrest concluded that the Section “…failed to ‘pass Constitutional muster’ because its broad language could be used to quash political dissent.” In a statement clearly directed to lawmakers, she added, ”Section 1021 tries to do too much with too little – it lacks the minimal requirements of definition and scienter that could easily have been added, or could be added, to allow it to pass constitutional muster.” That is, Congress failed—perhaps deliberately– to define “substantial support” of terrorist groups or describe those activities which might be construed as crossing the legal line. And no law may be enforced if those to whom it applies are unable to clearly understand what a violation of that law entails.

Nothing could more plainly reveal the rank corruption and lust for power of the Manchurian Candidate (now The Manchurian President) than his involvement in crafting and then misrepresenting the final text and authority of the NDAA. According to Democrat Senator Carl Levin, it was Obama himself who demanded American citizens be included under the detention law and that the President have exclusive authority to invoke the statute. “The language which precluded the application of Section [1021] to American citizens was in the bill that we originally approved…and the administration asked us to remove the language which says that U.S. citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section,” said Levin after the NDAA was signed into law.

Yet in his signing statement, Obama wrote that he had in fact forced Congress to “…[revise] provisions that otherwise would have jeopardized the safety, security and liberty of the American people.” So rather than the grand inquisitor, committing to prison any American citizens he chose to view as enemies, Obama claimed to be their champion and savior, protecting them from the excesses of an over-zealous Congress!

“I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens,” wrote Obama. “My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law.” This of course was an outright lie, given the expressed meaning of the statute as Obama himself had demanded it be written. Leave it to Barack Obama to demand he be given absolute authority over the American public, yet claim in the next moment that he will not take advantage of it!

The Department of Justice, which defended the NDAA before Judge Forrest, will undoubtedly appeal her ruling. It is a judicial process Americans must watch closely as the free exercise of our Constitutional rights depends upon the outcome.

Keep praying and keep fighting… the ship of state is starting to turn as more and more Americans are starting to wake up.

Technorati Tags: NDAA,America awakening,wake-up America,stand-up America,U.S. Constitution,Constitution,keep fighting,Constitutional Law

Bill O'Reilly Absolutely DESTROYS Young Leftist Activist Monica Novoa

Soros's groups including Media Matters and MoveOn.org launched a campaign last week against anyone who calls illegal immigration ‘illegal’ and attempting to categorize using the word illegal as a hate crime… their minions were all over the TV last Thursday and Friday, and some were not only obviously planted but unprepared and uncommitted:

Video: Bill O'Reilly Absolutely DESTROYS Young Leftist Activist Monica Novoa

Monica Novoa told O’Reilly she was a legal immigrant. But in 2000 she admitted her family crossed into California through a torn border fence, making Monica not only an  ignorant pawn but a liar and an illegal herself as well. 

See Latino Studies Become a Central Focus at CSUN:

Monica Novoa, 20, has been with CAUSA for three years and helped push for the new program. Her family left El Salvador in 1982, when federal troops were targeting teachers and other intellectuals for intimidation and slaughter.  Novoa said her father was a teacher and a leftist. When she was 3, coyotes--guides for undocumented immigrants--took the family through Guatemala, Mexico and a torn border fence into California.

Once he arrived in the United States, her father went to school to become an electrician. Her mother got into the real estate business. But like Barrios' parents, Novoa's family rarely discussed their experiences in El Salvador.

"Most of what I knew about El Salvador was from the popular music that I listened to," she said. "One of my favorite lines is from a Victor Jara song where he's saying: 'If the hands that work the soil are the people's, then why doesn't the harvest belong to those who work the land?' "

2012 Election Game On: Class vs. Crass… Hope vs. Nope

Video: The Tail of Two Leaders

Mac Lewis: The logic of the ad in one line: “If voters think on election day that Obama is the cool one, but Romney is the competent one, Obama will lose.”

Matt Lewis wrote Wednesday morning that Obama vs. Romney is starting to look a bit like a “Mac vs. PC” commercial. Here’s the RNC kinda sorta embracing that framework to make the point that what America has with The One is the policy equivalent of a Sad Mac.

Lewis:

Republicans, of course, will claim the contrast favors them — that Tuesday night demonstrated a serious candidate talking about serious issues — versus someone “slow-jamming” with a comedian (while the economy crumbles).

But it also reminds me that the Obama vs. Romney clash creates a PR/optics problem for Republicans: Policy aside, Obama seems cool — while Romney seems more like The Man. (This might not matter, however. Voters might decide they personally like Obama, but that they want a technocrat to fix the economy. Sometimes we need The Man!)

Brand images, though, often outlast political campaigns. And from a purely superficial standpoint, the GOP — especially if Romney makes a milquetoast running mate pick — risks reinforcing its image as your father’s party.  So the GOP V.P. pick could be a factor this election and if not for this election, it might reinforce a brand for the next time?!?

With a couple of events and a couple of speeches the 2012 Election focus was set and the race is on, all in one day.

While President Obama appeared on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon for some slow ‘jammon’ that ended up looking and sounding anything but presidential except to the (MSM) media Obamabots, Mitt Romney took the stage in New Hampshire and claimed his position as the presumptive GOP nominee after winning 5-primaries on Tuesday. That one move showed leadership and has changed the conversation.  Within 24-hours Gingrich announced that he was leaving the race, former GOP primary candidate endorsed Romney and the RNC announced that Mitt Romney was now their presumptive nominee unveiling their support and the support of many behind the scenes already working together to defeat Barack Obama, including with the Ron Paul Campaign though Paul has no plans of dropping out of the race..

Romney looked and sounded presidential creating an echo over the blogosphere and even among some mainstream media outlets that a presidential Romney made slow jammom Obama look anything but presidential.

Mitt Romney Kicked-Off His Presidential Campaign with the words “A better America begins tonight”.  Romney hit all right notes, said all the right things and sounded believably concerned.

Transcript of Romney’s “A Better America” Speech:

"Thank you Pennsylvania, Delaware, Rhode Island, Connecticut and New York! And tonight I can say thank you, America. After 43 primaries and caucuses, many long days and more than a few long nights, I can say with confidence – and gratitude – that you have given me a great honor and solemn responsibility. And, together, we will win on November 6th!

We launched this campaign not far from here on a beautiful June day. It has been an extraordinarily journey.

Americans have always been eternal optimists. But over the last three and a half years, we have seen hopes and dreams diminished by false promises and weak leadership. Everywhere I go, Americans are tired of being tired, and many of those who are fortunate enough to have a job are working harder for less.

For every single mom who feels heartbroken when she has to explain to her kids that she needs to take a second job … for grandparents who can’t afford the gas to visit their grandchildren … for the mom and dad who never thought they’d be on food stamps … for the small business owner desperately cutting back just to keep the doors open one more month – to all of the thousands of good and decent Americans I’ve met who want nothing more than a better chance, a fighting chance, to all of you, I have a simple message: Hold on a little longer. A better America begins tonight.

Tonight is the start of a new campaign to unite every American who knows in their heart that we can do better! The last few years have been the best that Barack Obama can do, but it’s not the best America can do!

Tonight is the beginning of the end of the disappointments of the Obama years and the start of a new and better chapter that we will write together.

This has already been a long campaign, but many Americans are just now beginning to focus on the choice before the country. In the days ahead, I look forward to spending time with many of you personally. I want to hear what’s on your mind, hear about your concerns, and learn about your families. I want to know what you think we can do to make this country better…and what you expect from your next President.

And I’ll tell you a little bit about myself. I’ll probably start out talking about my wonderful wife Ann – I usually do – and I’ll probably bore you with stories about our kids and grandkids. I’ll tell you about how much I love this country, where someone like my dad, who grew up poor and never graduated from college, could pursue his dreams and work his way up to running a great car company. Only in America could a man like my dad become governor of the state in which he once sold paint from the trunk of his car.

I’d say that you might have heard that I was successful in business. And that rumor is true. But you might not have heard that I became successful by helping start a business that grew from 10 people to hundreds of people. You might not have heard that our business helped start other businesses, like Staples and Sports Authority and a new steel mill and a learning center called Bright Horizons. And I’d tell you that not every business made it and there were good days and bad days, but every day was a lesson. And after 25 years, I know how to lead us out of this stagnant Obama economy and into a job-creating recovery!

Four years ago Barack Obama dazzled us in front of Greek columns with sweeping promises of hope and change. But after we came down to earth, after the celebration and parades, what do we have to show for three and a half years of President Obama?

Is it easier to make ends meet? Is it easier to sell your home or buy a new one? Have you saved what you needed for retirement? Are you making more in your job? Do you have a better chance to get a better job? Do you pay less at the pump?

If the answer were “yes” to those questions, then President Obama would be running for re-election based on his achievements…and rightly so. But because he has failed, he will run a campaign of diversions, distractions, and distortions. That kind of campaign may have worked at another place and in a different time. But not here and not now. It’s still about the economy …and we’re not stupid.

People are hurting in America. And we know that something is wrong, terribly wrong with the direction of the country.

We know that this election is about the kind of America we will live in and the kind of America we will leave to future generations. When it comes to the character of America, President Obama and I have very different visions.

Government is at the center of his vision. It dispenses the benefits, borrows what it cannot take, and consumes a greater and greater share of the economy. With Obamacare fully installed, government will come to control half the economy, and we will have effectively ceased to be a free enterprise society.

This President is putting us on a path where our lives will be ruled by bureaucrats and boards, commissions and czars. He’s asking us to accept that Washington knows best – and can provide all.

We’ve already seen where this path leads. It erodes freedom. It deadens the entrepreneurial spirit. And it hurts the very people it’s supposed to help. Those who promise to spread the wealth around only ever succeed in spreading poverty. Other nations have chosen that path. It leads to chronic high unemployment, crushing debt, and stagnant wages.

I have a very different vision for America, and of our future. It is an America driven by freedom, where free people, pursuing happiness in their own unique ways, create free enterprises that employ more and more Americans. Because there are so many enterprises that are succeeding, the competition for hard-working, educated and skilled employees is intense, and so wages and salaries rise.

I see an America with a growing middle class, with rising standards of living. I see children even more successful than their parents - some successful even beyond their wildest dreams – and others congratulating them for their achievement, not attacking them for it.

This America is fundamentally fair. We will stop the unfairness of urban children being denied access to the good schools of their choice; we will stop the unfairness of politicians giving taxpayer money to their friends’ businesses; we will stop the unfairness of requiring union workers to contribute to politicians not of their choosing; we will stop the unfairness of government workers getting better pay and benefits than the taxpayers they serve; and we will stop the unfairness of one generation passing larger and larger debts on to the next.

In the America I see, character and choices matter. And education, hard work, and living within our means are valued and rewarded. And poverty will be defeated, not with a government check, but with respect and achievement that is taught by parents, learned in school, and practiced in the workplace.

This is the America that was won for us by the nation’s Founders, and earned for us by the Greatest Generation. It is the America that has produced the most innovative, most productive, and the most powerful economy in the world.

As I look around at the millions of Americans without work, the graduates who can't get a job, the soldiers who return home to an unemployment line, it breaks my heart. This does not have to be. It is the result of failed leadership and of a faulty vision. We will restore the promise of America only if we restore the principles of freedom and opportunity that made America the greatest nation on earth.

Today, the hill before us is a little steep but we have always been a nation of big steppers. Many Americans have given up on this President but they haven’t ever thought about giving up. Not on themselves. Not on each other. And not on America.

In the days ahead, join me in the next step toward that destination of November 6th, when across America we can give a sigh of relief and know that the Promise of America has been kept. The dreamers can dream a little bigger, the help wanted signs can be dusted off, and we can start again.

And this time we’ll get it right. We’ll stop the days of apologizing for success at home and never again apologize for America abroad.

There was a time – not so long ago – when each of us could walk a little taller and stand a little straighter because we had a gift that no one else in the world shared. We were Americans. That meant something different to each of us but it meant something special to all of us. We knew it without question. And so did the world.

Those days are coming back. That’s our destiny.

We believe in America. We believe in ourselves. Our greatest days are still ahead. We are, after all, Americans!

God bless you, and God bless the United States of America."

To quote Jedediah Bila, “With this one speech, Romney changed the discussion from class warfare to a discussion of hope and choice.”

SuperPac American Crossroads also produced a new video entitled: “Cool” - After four years of a celebrity president, is your life any better?  It is focused toward the young…

Meanwhile Obama looked foolish and inept appearing in one of the worst skits ever, demeaning his position and the office of presidency after having spent taxpayer money to campaign and to promote his new student loan program into an election issue.  But the problem with that is Obama’s record and that Romney agrees with Obama on helping students with their loan debt while the economy keeps them from getting jobs, making it a non-issue.

Under Obama:

• 1 in 2 recent college grads are jobless or underemployed
• 85% of recent college grads are moving back with their parents
• Student loan debt exceeds 1 Trillion Dollars

Breibart.com:

And now it seems that Obama’s Fallon appearance violated campaign law

Last night, President Obama appeared on Jimmy Fallon’s unwatchable show to “slow-jam the news.” By this, Fallon meant that Obama would read a campaign speech about student loans, Fallon would utter a few lines to back him up every so often, and his lead band singer would warble in support of Obama’s propaganda.

Only one problem, aside from the fact that this was possibly the worst “comedy” segment in the history of mankind: it violated campaign finance law.

The equal time rule states that if a licensee permits a person “who is a legally qualified candidate for any public office to use a broadcasting station, he shall afford equal opportunities to all other such candidates for that office in the use of such broadcasting station.”

There are exceptions to the rule: appearances on (1) a bona fide newscast, (2) a bona fide news interview, (3) a bona fide news documentary, or (4) on-the-spot coverage of bona fide news events.

Only the second provision could be construed as saving NBC from giving Mitt Romney equal time. But this was not a bona fide news interview. In fact, it wasn’t an interview at all – no questions were asked, no answers were given. It was literally Obama reading a campaign speech over a guitar, a horn, a keyboard, and some drums.

Not only was this appearance in violation of equal time law, it was clearly an in-kind contribution by NBC to the Obama campaign. As the Federal Elections Commission states, “A donation of services is … considered an in-kind contribution.” Under applicable law, contribution of broadcast time is considered such a service. This was a campaign commercial for Obama, and the Obama campaign was not charged for it. A minute of network time can cost up to a couple million dollars; this segment ran a full five minutes. There is no doubt that Obama was given millions of dollars of free advertising time, and the Romney campaign should invoke all available law to make that clear.

NBC should be punished to the fullest extent of the law (because they are a repeating offender). Mitt Romney should be given equal time, and an equally sycophantic propaganda piece by Fallon. Obama should be ashamed of himself (though, of course, he has no capacity for shame).   Video HERE

Speaker of the House John Boehner also weighed in this week on Obama campaigning on the public dime.  Boehner said Obama misuses Air Force One for political trips and that he is now trying to make a political issue out of student loans, hitting swing states to make speeches without having to cover the cost for campaigning.  Using taxpayer dollars to fly to battleground states to make political points is 'pathetic, said Boehner.  Read more Here.

Of course violating campaign laws, ethics or tradition doesn’t seem to matter to Team Obama.  He has been campaigning and appearing at fundraisers on the taxpayer dime for months.  Yet, they had the audacity to announce this week that President Obama would be beginning his official campaign in about a month.  At some point the American people are going to get tired of being played for fools on top of watching their country being spent into bankruptcy.  As Mitt Romney said the other night, “It is still about the economy and we’re not stupid”

By Ask Marion~

Justice Served To Obama

April 10, 2012 By Matt Barber   -  The Western Center for Journalism

Eric Holder is a busy man. When President Obama’s chief law enforcement officer isn’t tied up selling guns to Mexican drug cartels, refusing to prosecute self-serving cases of voter intimidation or ignoring “wanted dead or alive” bounties placed by black militants on the heads of private citizens, he’s busy conspiring with pro-abortion extremists to bring the full weight of the federal government down upon innocent pro-life advocates.

So much tyranny, so little time.

Eric Holder is much more than just incompetent. He’s an extremist pro-abortion activist who shares his boss’s goal of “fundamentally transforming America” to reflect both men’s secular-socialist self-image.

The most recent and obvious example of this administration’s serial abuse of power in furtherance of a radical pro-abortion agenda came when the Department of Health and Human Services mandated, in contravention of the First Amendment, that all religious organizations provide contraception, sterilization and various forms of abortion to employees. This may be the single greatest violation of our constitutionally safeguarded religious liberties in our lifetimes. The mandate remains in place to this day.

But individual citizens haven’t escaped a forced fiduciary tie to abortion homicide. A few weeks later HHS arbitrarily attached a “final rule” to Obamacare requiring that every American, pro-life or otherwise, pay one dollar per month earmarked expressly for an abortion services pool. This validates pro-life forewarnings that the president was simply lying when he issued a toothless executive order supposedly banning federal dollars for abortion. (What do we call someone who chronically lies?)

Still, every once in a while the good guys win one.

For several months now the Obama administration has been abusing our judicial system through a concerted political intimidation campaign via the federal courts. Obama has instructed the Justice Department to sue a number of pro-life counselors and volunteers for allegedly violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrance (FACE) Act.

You won’t hear it from the mainstream media, but the Justice Department has just faced an embarrassing smack down on the highest profile of these cases. It has dropped an appeal in Holder v. Pine against pro-life sidewalk counselor Mary “Susan” Pine, who is represented by the civil rights firm Liberty Counsel. The DOJ has agreed to pay $120,000 for this frivolous lawsuit which, as the evidence indicated, was intended to intimidate Ms. Pine and send a shot over the bow of pro-lifers around the country.

Mr. Holder unsuccessfully sought thousands of dollars in fines against Ms. Pine, as well as a permanent injunction banning her from counseling women on the public sidewalk outside the Presidential Women’s Center (PWC) abortion mill (or any other “reproductive services” clinic).

After 18 months of litigation, the DOJ’s case was thrown out of federal court, and the department was chastised in a scathing ruling by U.S. District Judge Kenneth Ryskamp for filing a case with no evidence.

Judge Ryskamp wrote that Holder’s complete failure to present any evidence of wrongdoing, coupled with the DOJ’s cozy relationship with PWC and their apparent joint decision to destroy video surveillance footage of the alleged “obstruction,” caused the court to suspect a conspiracy at the highest levels of the Obama administration. “The Court is at a loss as to why the Government chose to prosecute this particular case in the first place,” wrote Judge Ryskamp. “The Court can only wonder whether this action was the product of a concerted effort between the Government and PWC, which began well before the date of the incident at issue, to quell Ms. Pine’s activities rather than to vindicate the rights of those allegedly aggrieved by Ms. Pine’s conduct.”

After the ruling the DOJ appealed on the last day possible and gave indication that President Obama had personally ordered the appeal. A little over a week later, the president apparently decided to cut his losses and reversed course.

Harry Mihet, senior counsel for Liberty Counsel, said of the judge’s ruling: “It’s not every day that a federal judge accuses the Justice Department of a full-blown conspiracy.”

Ironically, this past December, in the midst of the case, Ms. Pine actually counseled a woman outside of PWC and convinced her not to have an abortion, thus saving the life of the child and possibly the mother as well. Her email to Liberty Counsel read simply: “We saved a life today.”

Mathew Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, pulled no punches:

It is irresponsible for the U.S. Department of Justice to place politics above principle when deciding to prosecute, and thus attempt to silence, a pro-life sidewalk counselor without any evidence of wrongdoing.

When the nation’s highest law enforcement officer files suit against any citizen, the suit must be based on the law coupled with compelling evidence. Anything less is an abuse of the high office. Susan Pine will not be silenced or detoured from her mission to save the lives of innocent children.

Indeed, “politics above principle,” intimidation of private citizens and jaw-dropping abuses of power are but a few hallmarks of this Obama administration.

History will be no more kind to this president than he has been to the citizens he was sworn, and failed, to honorably serve.

Matt Barber (@jmattbarber on Twitter) is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. He serves as Vice President of Liberty Counsel Action (LCA on Facebook).

Will Obama Show up at Eligibility Hearing?

Obama Ordered to Appear at Hearing: Attorney Taitz Says It Will Be 100 Times Bigger than Watergate’

Columbus Ledger-Enquirer ^ | 1-21-12 | Chuck Williams

A Georgia judge, Judge Michael Malihi, has ordered President Barack Obama to appear in court in Atlanta Thursday for a hearing on a complaint that says Obama isn't a natural-born citizen and can't be president. Orly Taitz, the California attorney who brought the legal challenge to Obama's name on the March Georgia presidential primary ballot, says this is what she has been working for over the last three years. "This will be 100 times bigger than Watergate," she said Saturday morning, referring to the scandal that brought down President Richard Nixon in 1974. "There are high ranking judges and federal officials who are involved in this cover up. The ramifications of this trial will be enormous."         

            Taitz said she expects the president's legal team to fight his appearance in the Georgia court.

"But he's in a catch-22," she said. "If he is appealing this decision, then he looks guilty. The whole nation understands this man is a fraud."

Taitz has led the "Birther" movement that insists Obama is not a natural-born U.S. citizen. She is also familiar to Georgia courts.

Taitz represented two soldiers in U.S. District Court in Columbus who  sought to avoid deployment by arguing Obama wasn’t the  commander-in-chief because he wasn’t eligible to be president. Federal  Judge Clay Land warned Taitz against filing a frivolous suit, then fined  her $20,000 after he denied the second claim.

The one of many such lawsuits that have been filed across  the country, so far without success. A Georgia resident made the  complaint, which is intended to keep Obama's name off the state's ballot  in the March presidential primary.

An Obama campaign aide says any attempt to involve the president  personally will fail and such complaints around the country have no  merit.

The hearing is set for Thursday before an administrative judge.  Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi on Friday denied a motion by the  president's lawyer to quash a subpoena that requires Obama to show up.

The Office of  State Administrative Hearings handles disputes between the public and  state agencies. For example, if the state Department of Revenue wants to  revoke a business owner’s alcohol license, the owner could appeal to  the Office of State Administrative Hearings. It also handles ballot  disputes.

Georgia Ballot Challenge - Quash Subpoena

Judge whacks Obama in eligibility case

Will Obama Show up at Eligibility Hearing?

There’s a subpoena from a Georgia administrative court with Barack Obama’s name on it for him to be in Atlanta on Thursday, along with the documentation about his birth, to answer to challenges from residents of the state objecting to the presence of his name on the 2012 ballot.

They believe he’s simply not eligible under the Constitution’s requirement that a president be a “natural born citizen.” They say the Founders thought of that status as the offspring of two citizen parents, and Obama’s father was Kenyan. Or they say he wasn’t born in the U.S. They are legitimately allowed to raise those challenges under a state law.

But several observers say no one really should expect Obama to arrive.

For one thing, his important presidential trip to Denver, Detroit and Las Vegas, three key regions where he wants to build his support before the November 2012 election, is on tap.

Discover what the Constitution’s reference to “natural born citizen” means and whether Barack Obama qualifies, in the ebook version of “Where’s the REAL Birth Certificate?”

Besides that, Eric Segall of Georgia State University told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that this is just like all the other lawsuits over Obama’s eligibility: worthless.

“There have been many, many lawsuits trying to litigate the issue of the president’s nationality,” the law professor opined. “They have all been dismissed and this one should be too. In light of the frivolousness of the case, the judge has no valid authority to require the president to appear in court.”

The administrative court itself probably would not pursue any sort of procedure against the president should he fail to appear, but Marietta, Ga., attorney Melvin Goldstein said the logical sequence of events would be, presuming Obama’s failure to appear, for the court to refer the matter to a superior court judge in the county, who could determine whether a contempt citation against Obama would be supported.

It was White House Press Secretary Jay Carney who told reporters Obama would be delivering the State of the Union Tuesday, then traveling for three days, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.

“He will be speaking specifically about … American manufacturing, American energy, and skill for American workers,” Carney said.

WND reported Friday on the stunning decision from Judge Michael M. Malihi, who refused a demand from Obama’s lawyer to quash the subpoena for Thursday.

WND had reported earlier when Obama outlined a defense strategy for a number of state-level challenges to his candidacy in 2012 which argue that states have nothing to do with the eligibility of presidential candidates. Such challenges have been raised in New Hampshire, Arizona, Illinois and several other states.

“Presidential electors and Congress, not the state of Georgia, hold the constitutional responsibility for determining the qualifications of presidential candidates,” Obama’s lawyer argued in a motion to quash a subpoena for him to appear at the hearings in Atlanta Jan. 26.

“The election of President Obama by the presidential electors, confirmed by Congress, makes the documents and testimony sought by plaintiff irrelevant,” the lawyer said.

Malihi, however, took a different view.

“Defendant argues that ‘if enforced, [the subpoena] requires him to interrupt duties as president of the United States’ to attend a hearing in Atlanta, Georgia. However, defendant fails to provide any legal authority to support his motion to quash the subpoena to attend,” he wrote in his order.

“Defendant’s motion suggests that no president should be compelled to attend a court hearing. This may be correct. But defendant has failed to enlighten the court with any legal authority,” the judge continued.

“Specifically, defendant has failed to cite to any legal authority evidencing why his attendance is ‘unreasonable or oppressive, or that the testimony … [is] irrelevant, immaterial, or cumulative and unnecessary to a party’s preparation or presentation at the hearing, or that basic fairness dictates that the subpoena should not be enforced.’”

Hearings have been scheduled for three separate complaints raised against Obama’s candidacy. They all are raised by Georgia residents who are challenging Obama’s name on the 2012 ballot for various reasons, which they are allowed to do under state law.

It is states, usually through the office of secretary of state, that run elections, not the federal government. The national election is simply a compilation of the results of the individual elections within states.

The schedule for the hearings was set by Malihi of the Georgia state Office of State Administrative Hearings. In Georgia, a state law requires “every candidate for federal” office who is certified by the state executive committees of a political party or who files a notice of candidacy “shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.”

State law also grants the secretary of state and any “elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate” in the state the authority to raise a challenge to a candidate’s qualifications, the judge determined.

Three different plaintiffs’ groups are lined up for separate hearings, including one represented by California attorney Orly Taitz. She had the judge sign a subpoena for Obama’s testimony, and Michael Jablonski, Obama’s attorney for the cases, argued that he should be exempted.

“Make no mistake about it. This is the beginning of Watergate Two or ObamaForgeryGate. I believe this is the second time in the U.S. history a sitting president is ordered to comply with a subpoena, and produce documents, which might eventually bring criminal charges to the president and a number of high-ranking individuals,” Taitz said.

Separately, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Arizona told WND he also had gotten a subpoena to be at the hearings in Georgia. He said the goal apparently is to ask him about his Cold Case Posse investigation of Obama’s eligibility, but he said since the investigation remains open, he wouldn’t be able to say much about it.

Citizens bringing the complaints include David Farrar, Leah Lax, Thomas Malaren and Laurie Roth, represented by Taitz; David Weldon represented by attorney Van R. Irion of Liberty Legal Foundation; and Carl Swensson and Kevin Richard Powell, represented by J. Mark Hatfield. Cody Judy is raising a challenge because he also wants to be on the ballot.

Hatfield also had filed with the court a “Notice to Produce” asking for Obama’s documents and records.

He wants one of the two original certified copies of Obama’s long-form birth certificate.

Obama’s attorney, Jablonski, also had argued that the state should mind its own business.

“The sovereignty of the state of Georgia does not extend beyond the limits of the State. … Since the sovereignty of the state does not extend beyond its territorial limits, an administrative subpoena has no effect,” the filing argued.

Taitz’s supporters joined a discussion on her website, where she also solicits support for the expenses of the battles she’s confronting, judging that Obama is on the defensive.

“What a joke. He claims to be too busy performing the duties of the president of the United States. How many days of vacation has he taken? How many rounds of golf? If he is too busy to provide the documents that provide the basis for meeting the requirements of the office, then perhaps he better sit out the next four years,” said one.

Wrote another, “The election of President Obama by the presidential electors, confirmed by Congress, makes the documents and testimony sought by plaintiff irrelevant. … This is complete utter nonsense!”

In fact, a presidential elector in California brought a lawsuit challenging Obama’s eligibility at the time of the 2008 election and was told the dispute was not yet ripe because the inauguration hadn’t taken place. The courts later ruled that the elector lost his “standing” to bring the lawsuit after the inauguration.

Barack Obama

Irion said his argument is that the Founders clearly considered a “natural born citizen,” as the Constitution requires of a president and no one else, to be the offspring of two citizen parents. Since Obama himself has written in his books that his father, Barack Obama Sr. was a Kenyan, and thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom, Irion argues that Obama is disqualified under any circumstances based on his own testimony.

Those who argue against his birth in the United States note that numerous experts have given testimony and sworn statements that they believe Obama’s Hawaiian birth documentation to be fraudulent.

It is that concern that also has prompted Arpaio to turn over an investigation of that issue to his Cold Case Posse. Its investigative report is expected to be released in the next few weeks.

The Georgia hearing apparently will be the first time among dozens of so-far unsuccessful lawsuits brought over Obama’s eligibility issue that evidence will be heard in a court. Other cases all have been dismissed over issues such as standing, without a presentation of the evidence.

There are similar challenges to Obama’s 2012 candidacy being raised before state election or other commissions in Tennessee, Arizona, Illinois, New Hampshire and other states.

The image released by the White House in April:

Obama long-form birth certificate released April 27 by the White House

Top constitutional expert Herb Titus contends that a “natural born citizen” is born of parents who are citizens. That argument also is supported by a 19th-century U.S. Supreme Court decision, Minor v. Happersett in 1875. The case includes one of very few references in the nation’s archives that addresses the definition of “natural-born citizen.”

That case states: “The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”

An extensive analysis of the issue was conducted by Titus, who has taught constitutional law, common law and other subjects for 30 years at five different American Bar Association-approved law schools. He also was the founding dean of the College of Law at Regent University, a trial attorney and special assistant U.S. attorney in the Department of Justice.

“‘Natural born citizen’ in relation to the office of president, and whether someone is eligible, was in the Constitution from the very beginning,” he said. “Another way of putting it; there is a law of the nature of citizenship. If you are a natural born citizen, you are a citizen according to the law of nature, not according to any positive statement in a Constitution or in a statute, but because of the very nature of your birth and the very nature of nations.”

If you “go back and look at what the law of nature would be or would require … that’s precisely what a natural born citizen is …. is one who is born to a father and mother each of whom is a citizen of the U.S. or whatever other country,” he said.

“Now what we’ve learned from the Hawaii birth certificate is that Mr. Obama’s father was not a citizen of the United States. His mother was, but he doesn’t qualify as a natural born citizen for the office of president.”

by Bob Unruh – who joined WND in 2006 after spending nearly three decades writing on a wide range of issues for several Upper Midwest newspapers and the Associated - WND

Updated: Obama argues against appearing at eligibility hearing - Judge Rejects Obama Motion...

IS OBAMA PAINTING HIMSELF INTO A CORNER? IS THE NOOSE GETTING TIGHTER AROUND HIS NECK? BET HIS LEGAL BILLS ARE NOW 5 MILLION BUCKS

'Electors, Congress, not Georgia, hold responsibility for qualifications of candidates' says White House

Barack Obama has outlined a defense strategy for a multitude of state-level challenges to his candidacy on the 2012 presidential ballot in a Georgia case that is scheduled to come before a judge later this month – simply explain that states have nothing to do with the eligibility of presidential candidates.

“Presidential electors and Congress, not the state of Georgia, hold the constitutional responsibility for determining the qualifications of presidential candidates,” Obama’s lawyer argues in a motion to quash a subpoena for him to appear at the hearings Jan. 26.

“The election of President Obama by the presidential electors, confirmed by Congress, makes the documents and testimony sought by plaintiff irrelevant,” the lawyer said.

Hearing have been scheduled for that date for three separate issues to be handled. They all are raised by Georgia residents who are challenging Obama’s name on the 2012 ballot for various reasons, which they are allowed to do under state law.

It is states, usually through the office of secretary of state, that run elections, not the federal government. The national election is simply a compilation of the results of the individual elections within states.

The schedule for the hearings was set by Judge Michael M. Malihi of the Georgia state Office of State Administrative Hearings. In Georgia, a state law requires “every candidate for federal” office who is certified by the state executive committees of a political party or who files a notice of candidacy “shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.”

State law also grants the secretary of state and any “elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate” in the state the authority to raise a challenge to a candidate’s qualifications, the judge determined.

Three different plaintiffs’ groups are lined up for separate hearings, including one represented by California attorney Orly Taitz. She had the judge sign a subpoena for Obama’s testimony, and Michael Jablonski, Obama’s attorney for these cases, argtued that he should be exempted.

Jablonski earlier had argued that state eligibility requirements didn’t apply to Obama, but the judge said that isn’t how he reads state law.

“Statutory provisions must be read as they are written, and this court finds that the cases cited by [Obama] are not controlling. When the court construes a constitutional or statutory provision, the ‘first step … is to examine the plain statutory language,” the judge wrote. “Section 21-2-1(a) states that ‘every candidate for federal and state office’ must meet the qualifications for holding that particular office, and this court has seen no case law limiting this provision, nor found any language that contains an exception for the office of president or stating that the provision does not apply to the presidential preference primary.”

In Obama’s attempt to be excused from providing testimony and evidence such as his original birth certificate, he argues that such testimony would “interrupt duties” as president.

He also argues that the documents and testimony “is, on its face, unreasonable.” And further, the documents and testimony already have been made public, he argued.

“The president made the documents available to the general public by placing it on his website. Although the document has been generally available for years, the president took the extraordinary step of acquiring a copy of the record of birth, informally known as the ‘long form,’ making it available to anyone who cares to check the website,” the filing argues.

And the state should mind its own business anyway, he argued.

“The sovereignty of the state of Georgia does not extend beyond the limits of the State. … Since the sovereignty of the state does not extend beyond its territorial limits, an administrative subpoena has no effect,” the filing explains.

Taitz’ supporters joined a discussion on her website, where she also solicits support for the expenses of the battles she’s confronting, judging that Obama is on the defensive.

“What a joke. He claims to be too busy performing the duties of the president of the United States. How many days of vacation has he taken? How many rounds of golf? If he is too busy to provide the documents that provide the basis for meeting the requirements of the office, then perhaps he better sit out the next four years,” said one.

Wrote another, “The election of President Obama by the presidential electors, confirmed by Congress, makes the documents and testimony sought by plaintiff irrelevant. … This is complete utter nonsense!”

In fact, a presidential elector in California brought a lawsuit challenging Obama’s eligibility at the time of the 2008 election, and was told the dispute was not yet ripe because the inauguration hadn’t taken place. The courts later ruled that the elector lost his “standing” to bring the lawsuit after the inauguration.

Barack Obama

Those bringing the complaints include David Farrar, Leah Lax, Cody Judy, Thomas Malaren and Laurie Roth, represented by Taitz; David Weldon represented by attorney Van R. Irion of Liberty Legal Foundation; and Carl Swensson and Kevin Richard Powell, represented by J. Mark Hatfield.

Irion said not many court observers believed Obama actually would comply with the subpoena for a number of reasons. He said for his clients’ arguments the testimony wouldn’t even be an issue.

His argument is that the Founders clearly considered a “natural born citizen,” as the Constitution requires of a president, to be the offspring of two citizen parents. Since Obama himself has written in his books that his father, Barack Obama Sr., was a Kenyan, and thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom, Irion argues that Obama is disqualified under any circumstances.

Those who argue against his birth in the United States note that a multitude of experts have given testimony and sworn statements that they believe Obama’s Hawaiian birth documentation to be fraudulent.

It is that concern that also has prompted Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Arizona to turn over an investigation of that issue to his Cold Case Posse. Their investigation report is expected to be released in the next few weeks.

The Georgia hearing will be the first time among dozens of so-far unsuccessful lawsuits brought over Obama’s eligibility issue that evidence will be heard in a court. Other cases all have been dismissed over issues such as standing, without a presentation of the evidence.

Top constitutional expert Herb Titus explains that the use of “natural born citizen,” does, in fact, require parents who are citizens. That argument also is supported by a 19th-century U.S. Supreme Court decision

The hearing is set at 9 a.m. on Jan. 26 for the complaint brought by Weldon. Following immediately will be hearings for the cases brought by Swensson and Powell, and the issue raised by Farrar, Lax, Judy, Malaren and Roth will be third.

Malihi’s ruling said: “The court finds that defendant is a candidate for federal office who has been certified by the state executive committee of a political party, and therefore must, under Code Section 21-2-5, meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.”

There are similar challenges to Obama’s 2012 candidacy being raised before state election or other commissions in Tennessee, Arizona, Illinois, New Hampshire and other states as well.

The U.S. Supreme Court opinion cited is Minor v. Happersett from 1875. It includes one of very few references in the nation’s archives that addresses the definition of “natural-born citizen,” a requirement imposed by the U.S. Constitution on only the U.S. president.

That case states:

“The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”

What the White House in April released was as an image of a “Certificate of Live Birth” from the state of Hawaii in support of Obama’s claim that he was born in the state. The White House has not addressed the questions raised by Obama’s father’s nationality.

The image that the new lawsuits contend is irrelevant:

Obama long-form birth certificate released April 27 by the White House

An extensive analysis of the issue was conducted by Titus, who has taught constitutional law, common law and other subjects for 30 years at five different American Bar Association-approved law schools. He also was the founding dean of the College of Law at Regent University, a trial attorney and special assistant U.S. attorney in the Department of Justice.

“‘Natural born citizen’ in relation to the office of president, and whether someone is eligible, was in the Constitution from the very beginning,” he said. “Another way of putting it; there is a law of the nature of citizenship. If you are a natural born citizen, you are a citizen according to the law of nature, not according to any positive statement in a Constitution or in a statute, but because of the very nature of your birth and the very nature of nations.”

If you “go back and look at what the law of nature would be or would require … that’s precisely what a natural born citizen is …. is one who is born to a father and mother each of whom is a citizen of the U.S. or whatever other country,” he said.

“Now what we’ve learned from the Hawaii birth certificate is that Mr. Obama’s father was not a citizen of the United States. His mother was, but he doesn’t qualify as a natural born citizen for the office of president.”

Source: WND

Where's the Birth Certificate?

A very interesting bit of detective work...

1. Back in 1961 people of color were called ' Negroes .' So how can the Obama ' birth certificate ' state he is ' African-American ' when the term wasn't even used at that time?

2. The birth certificate that the White House released lists Obama's birth as August 4, 1961 . It also lists Barack Hussein Obama as his father. No big deal, right? At the time of Obama's birth, it also shows that his father is aged 25 years old, and that Obama's father was born in " Kenya, East Africa ." This wouldn't seem like anything of concern, except the fact that Kenya did not even exist until 1963 , two whole years after Obama's birth , and 27 years after his father's birth . How could Obama's father have been born in a country that did not yet exist? Up and until Kenya was formed in 1963 , it was known as the "British East Africa Protectorate."

3. On the birth certificate released by the White House, the listed place of birth is "Kapi'olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital." This cannot be, because the hospital(s) in question in 1961 were called "KauiKeolani Children's Hospital" and "Kapi'olani Maternity Home," respectively. The name did not change to Kapi'olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital until 1978, when these two hospitals merged. How can this particular name of the hospital be on a birth certificate dated 1961 if this name had not yet been applied to it until 1978?

Resources :

http://www.kapiolani.org/women-and-children/about-us/default.aspx

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

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

Order to Squash:

OFFICE OF STATE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Judge Mahili Denies Obama's Motion To Squash Subpoenas And To Not Appear At Georgia Ballot Challenge Hearing!!!

The Order:

Defendant, President Barack Obama, a candidate seeking the Democratic nomination for the office of the President of the United States, has filed a motion to quash the subpoena compelling his attendance at the hearing on January 26, 2012.

In support of his motion, Defendant argues that "if enforced, [the subpoena] requires him to interrupt duties as President of the United States" to attend a hearing in Atlanta, Georgia. However, Defendant fails to provide any legal authority to support his motion to quash the subpoena to attend. Defendant's motion suggests that no President should be compelled to attend a Court hearing. This may be correct. But Defendant has failed to enlighten the Court with any legal authority. Specifically, Defendant has failed to cite to any legal authority evidencing why his attendance is "unreasonable or oppressive, or that the testimony... [is] irrelevant, immaterial, or cumulative and unnecessary to a party's preparation or presentation at the hearing, or that basic fairness dictates that the subpoena should not be enforced." Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.19(5).

Defendant further alludes to a defect in service of the subpoena. However, the Court's rules provide for service of a subpoena upon a party, by serving the party's counsel of record. Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.19(4). Thus, the argument regarding service is without merit.

Accordingly, Defendant's motion to squash is denied.

SO ORDERED, this the 20th day of January, 2012.

Judge Mahili

Why hasn't this been discussed in the major media?????

Related:

WND – Judge Whacks Obama Eligibility Case

U.S. Sued Over Michelle Obama’s Secretive ‘Family Outing’

Supreme Court Tells Obama “NO”

Obama’s Gay Past Being Hidden by Killing Ex-Lovers Resurfaces