|
SubscriptionsSites I Read
|
|
|
|
| Supreme Court Review of Obama's eligibility on 12/5If you don't think this is a issue that is your opinion. Barack Obama should have disposed of this long ago. Dispose of it does not mean his factcheck.org buddies, it means producing documents to the court.That said, I always felt there was more question about the lack of a oath of allegiance after reentry from Indonesia because of the citizenship laws of Indonesia and the US at the time. Mc Cain answered the demand for proof with documents out of respect for our rule of law and the system. Here is the argument on the birth certificate: Why the Barack Obama Birth Certificate Issue Is LegitimateDoes this Barack Obama birth certificate issue bug you because, although improbable, it's possible that he's not a natural born citizen, isn't eligible to be President under the Constitution, and this issue could be bigger than Watergate -- or any other "gate" in history?
Are you afraid that if you were even to raise the subject with your friends that they will think you wear a tinfoil hat, because Factcheck.org, the final arbiter of truth in the universe, said so?
Are you with the news media, and after spending so much money to get Barack Obama elected, you'd hate to ruin your investment?
Are you a talk radio host who thinks that if you say the burden of proof needed to demonstrate one is eligible to be Commander in Chief should be at least as high as, oh, say, the level to be eligible for Hawaiian homestead status (see 1.F. below), that you'd be forced to give equal time to someone who disagrees?
Are you a conservative, libertarian, or any conscientious constitutionalist from any ideological side of life, who's convinced something's not right, but you're afraid your reputation might be tarnished because, after all, this could be one big Saul-Alinsky-style set-up, and the joke would be on you?
Fear not! Joe the Farmer has prepared an outline showing that no matter how this issue is ultimately resolved, you have legitimate concerns, and that Barack Obama should, simply out of respect for the nation he was elected to lead, disclose the sealed vault copy of his birth certificate.
Given the circumstances, if Barack Obama respected this nation, he would prove it by the simplest and easiest of gestures - unless, of course, all this talk about change and hope was just a bunch of bull, and he's just "another politician." Here's the outline:
1. Under Hawaiian law, it is possible (both legally and illegally) for a person to have been born out of state, yet have a birth certificate on file in the Department of Health.
A. From Hawaii's official Department of Health, Vital Records webpage: "Amended certificates of birth may be prepared and filed with the Department of Health, as provided by law, for 1) a person born in Hawaii who already has a birth certificate filed with the Department of Health or 2) a person born in a foreign country" (applies to adopted children).
B. A parent may register an in-state birth in lieu of certification by a hospital of birth under HRS 338-5.
C. Hawaiian law expressly provides for registration of out-of-state births under HRS 338-17.8. A foreign birth presumably would have been recorded by the American consular of the country of birth, and presumably that would be reflected on the Hawaiian birth certificate.
D. Hawaiian law, however, expressly acknowledges that its system is subject to error. See, for example, HRS 338-17.
E. Hawaiian law expressly provides for verification in lieu of certified copy of a birth certificate under HRS 338-14.3.
F. Even the Hawaii Department of Home Lands does not accept a certified copy of a birth certificate as conclusive evidence for its homestead program. From its web site: "In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL."
2. Contrary to what you may have read, no document made available to the public, nor any statement by Hawaiian officials, evidences conclusively that Obama was born in Hawaii.
A. Associated Press reported about a statement of Hawaii Health Department Director Dr. Fukino, "State declares Obama birth certificate genuine."
B. That October 31, 2008 statement says that Dr. Fukino "ha[s] personally seen and verified that the Hawai'i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama's original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures." That statement does not, however, verify that Obama was born in Hawaii, and as explained above, under Hawaiian policies and procedures it is quite possible that Hawaii may have a birth record of a person not born in Hawaii. Unlikely, but possible.
C. The document that the Obama campaign released to the public is a certified copy of Obama's birth record, which is not the best evidence since, even under Hawaiian law, the original vault copy is the better evidence. Presumably, the vault record would show whether his birth was registered by a hospital in Hawaii.
D. Without accusing anyone of any wrongdoing, we nevertheless know that some people have gone to great lengths, even in violation of laws, rules and procedures, to confer the many benefits of United States citizenship on themselves and their children. Given the structure of the Hawaiian law, the fact that a parent may register a birth, and the limited but inherent potential for human error within the system, it is possible that a parent of a child born out-of-state could have registered that birth to confer the benefits of U.S. citizenship, or simply to avoid bureaucratic hassles at that time or later in the child's life.
1. We don't know whether the standards of registration by the Department of Health were more or less stringent in 1961 (the year of Obama's birth) than they are today. However, especially with post-9/11 scrutiny, we do know that there have been instances of fraudulent registrations of foreign births as American births.
2. From a 2004 Department of Justice news release about multiple New Jersey vital statistics employees engaged in schemes to issue birth certificates to foreign-born individuals: "An individual who paid Anderson and her co-conspirators for the service of creating the false birth records could then go to Office of Vital Statistics to receive a birth certificate . . . As part of the investigation, federal agents executed a search warrant of the HCOVS on Feb. 18, 2004, which resulted in the seizure of hundreds of suspect Certificates of Live Birth which falsely indicated that the named individuals were born in Jersey City, when in fact, they were born outside the United States and were in the United States illegally . . . Bhutta purchased from Goswamy false birth certificates for himself and his three foreign-born children."
3. Even before 9/11, government officials acknowledged the "ease" of obtaining birth certificates fraudulently. From 1999 testimony by one Social Security Administration official: "Furthermore, the identity data contained in Social Security records are only as reliable as the evidence on which the data are based. The documents that a card applicant must present to establish age, identity, and citizenship, usually a birth certificate and immigration documents-are relatively easy to alter, counterfeit, or obtain fraudulently."
3. It has been reported that the Kenyan government has sealed Obama's records. If he were born in Kenya, as has been rumored even recently, the Kenyan government would certainly have many incentives to keep that undisclosed. Objectively, of course, those records may prove nothing. Obama's refusal to release records at many levels here in the United States, though, merely fuels speculation.
4. Obama has refused to disclose the vault copy of his Hawaiian birth certificate. This raises the question whether he himself has established that he is eligible to be President. To date, no state or federal election official, nor any government authority, has verified that he ever established conclusively that he meets the eligibility standard under the Constitution. If the burden of proof were on him, perhaps as it should be for the highest office of any individual in America, the more-than-dozen lawsuits challenging his eligibility would be unnecessary.
A. Had he disclosed his vault copy in the Berg v. Obama lawsuit (which was the first lawsuit filed on the question of his eligibility to be President), and it was established he was born in Hawaii, that would have constituted res judicata, and acted to stop other similar lawsuits being filed. Without res judicata (meaning, the matter is adjudged and settled conclusively) he or government officials will need to defend other lawsuits, and valuable court resources will be expended. Strategically from a legal standpoint, therefore, his refusal to disclose doesn't make sense. Weighing factors such as costs, resources and complexity of disclosing versus not disclosing, he must have reason of considerable downside in disclosing, or upside in not disclosing. There may be other reasons, but one could speculate that he hasn't disclosed because:
1. He was not born in Hawaii, and may not be eligible to be President;
2. He was born in Hawaii, but facts that may be derived from his vault copy birth certificate are inconsistent with the life story he has told (and sold);
3. He was born in Hawaii, and his refusal to provide the best evidence that he is a natural born citizen is a means by which to draw criticism of him in order to make him appear to be a "victim." This would energize his supporters. This would also make other charges about him seem suspect, including his concealment about ties to Bill Ayers and others of some infamy. Such a clever yet distasteful tactic would seem to be a Machiavelli- and Saul-Alinsky-style way to manipulate public opinion. But while this tactic may energize his supporters, it would convince those who believe him to be a manipulator that he's not only just that, but a real pro at it. This would indeed be the basest reason of all, and would have repercussions about his trustworthiness (both here and abroad), which Americans know, is a characteristic sorely lacking in its leaders.
B. His motion to dismiss the Berg case for lack of standing could be viewed as contemptuous of the Constitution. See, "Who Enforces the Constitution's Natural Born Citizen Clause?" Are we to expect yet another White House that hides behind lawyers, and expects Americans to swallow half-truths on a just-trust-me basis?
C. This issue poses the potential for a constitutional crisis unlike anything this country has seen. Disclosure at this stage, however, could even result in criminal sanctions. See, "Obama Must Stand Up Now Or Step Down." Thus, he has motive not to disclose if he were ineligible.
The question not being asked by the holders of power, who dismiss this as a rightwing conspiracy, is what's the downside of disclosing? This is a legitimate issue of inquiry because Barack Obama has turned it into one. The growing number of people who demand an answer in conformance with the Constitution are doing their work; the people's watchdogs aren't. __________________ Can we see another 1961 Hawaii birth certificate to see if the borders match his? | | |
| Reid says Democrats to tackle big issues Harry Reid can't wait to start spending money, but I find something really amazing, he doesn't even mention the financial crisis or tax breaks at all, but executive orders and the environment. So is bankrupting the coal industry the next item on Washington's agenda? WASHINGTON -- Buoyed by more Democrats in the House and Senate and a Democratic president-elect, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he expects lawmakers next year to take on hot-button issues from immigration to health care. The Nevada Democrat also said Congress will try early on to undo some of President George W. Bush's recent executive orders, including ones on environment policies. Last week, Reid discussed his priorities for the next Congress. QUESTION: What are your priorities for the first 100 days of the session? ANSWER: We're going to have to take care of a lot of nominations. ... We have to finish our appropriations process. We have a number of issues to repeal -- presidential orders (Bush) put in in the last few weeks. ... On the environment, for example, we're looking at clean-air regulations. Q: Will it be an easier pitch with more Democrats in Congress? A: Yes, next year it will be much easier to do. ... I'll have a larger majority here; so will ( House Speaker Nancy) Pelosi. We'll have a new president. And I think the Republicans come from the same states we come from. They have a lot of issues they need help with. Q: What failed efforts disappoint you? A: I wish we would have passed the speculation bill dealing with oil. I wish we could have gotten more money for infrastructure. We got quite a bit. But ... we should have a major infrastructure development program in our country. Q: With more Democrats in the Senate and the House and a Democrat in the White House, how do you see congressional efforts playing out on such issues as health care and immigration? A: On immigration, there's been an agreement between (President-elect Barack) Obama and (Arizona Republican Sen. John) McCain to move forward on that. ... We'll do that. We have to get this economy stuff figured out first, so I think we'll have a shot at doing something on health care in the next Congress for sure. Q: Will there be as much of a fight on immigration as last time? A: We've got McCain and we've got a few others. I don't expect much of a fight at all. Now health care is going to be difficult. That's a very complicated issue. We debated at great length immigration. People understand the issues very well. We have not debated health care, so that's going to take a lot more time to do | | |
| How Democrats Talked Down The Economy  The subprime mess notwithstanding, Democrats now have the economy they've always wanted. While things were going good, in an effort to differentiate themselves from Republicans, Democrats went on a search-and-destroy mission on the economy, obviously not caring that Wall Street was also listening.
2003: Bu$h: worst jobs growth record since great depression!
Democrats are using the ghost of Herbert Hoover to taunt President Bush, who so far has the worst jobs growth record of any president since the Great Depression. With the economic recovery in full swing, the hiring gains that typically follow have not. The economy lost 2.6 million jobs since Bush took office - 1 percent in the private sector alone. Every president since Hoover has seen the economy add jobs. That puts Bush on track to post the worst jobs record in nearly 70 years.
2003: George Walker Hoover?
The bad news for Bush is that even if the economy does add 2 million jobs by October 2004, he will still have presided over the only job-losing presidency since Hoover. And as Karl Rove surely knows, that name is never good company for a president seeking re-election. Since 1900, the only incumbent Republican presidents to lose second-term bids have been named Hoover and Bush. 2003: Economy not worst since Hoover.
The problem is, is that the economy is showing signs of a strong recovery. Jobless claims are down, inflation is down, and corporate profits are up up up. IBM reported last week that they will hire 50,000 new people in the first 2 quarters of next year. The stock market is also showing robust growth. My all measures the economy is doing well, and we have President Bush to thank for that. 2004: George Bush As Herbert Hoover? Oh Come On!
In what it called the first salvo in a $10-million advertising campaign aimed at defeating President Bush, the liberal group MoveOn.org released a TV ad it said would run in 16 cities in 10 states starting Thanksgiving week. The ad states that “George Bush is going to be the first president since Herbert Hoover to lead an economy that loses jobs. …Didn’t George Bush say his tax cuts would create jobs?” 2004: Kerry & Hoover, Perfect Together
In campaign speeches and on his website, John Kerry tells us that President Bush has “the worst economic record since the Hoover administration.” Herbert Hoover, of course, presided over the start of the Great Depression in 1929. There have been eight post-1945 recessions. How many do you suppose were worse than the 2001 recession? All of them. 2004: Worst Economy Since Hoover?
The first signs of poverty and the struggling middle class, were the number of newer model SUVs parked in driveways and alongside the streets. At first, I thought maybe because that's where these people were sleeping and living. But it turns out, that these are the homeowners and the reason that they can't park in their garages is because there homes are too small to hold all their possessions. In this "worst economy since Hoover," it seems like folks are cramped and stuffed into 2500-4000 sq ft. homes, and unable to fit their families of four and their possessions. So what doesn't fit, like the Bowflex, stairmasters, treadmills, pool tables, and etc., have to go into the 3-car garage. I wonder, if Al Gore had won in 2000, would people have bigger homes and maybe a storage shed out back to hold their stuff? Clearly, Bush has failed to lead. If John Kerry wins, will these struggling people get the same kind of storage facilities that the members of the Senate get? Lord, I sure hope so. 2004: It's the worst economy since Hoover, you know
More evidence of our rotten economy from the House Joint Economic Committee…. New data from the respected Institute for Supply Management (ISM) show the economic expansion continues to accelerate into 2004, Vice Chairman Jim Saxton said today. Saxton referred to both the ISM index of manufacturing as well as the ISM index of non-manufacturing activity. Both indexes have recently reached levels in excess of the boom years of the late 1990s. “The January ISM business survey index released today shows an increase to a level of 65.7 percent, the highest since this index was created in 1997,” Saxton said. “The ISM manufacturing index released a few days ago also reached its highest level since the height of the boom in the late 1990s." Follow the link to find some nice graphs, if you're the visual learning sort. It seems fairly clear. If low investment - thus, poor business spending - was the problem….the fairly supply-side tax cuts were the obvious solution, both monetarily (long term) and psychologically (short term). 2004: Bush Jobs Record Still Worst Since President Hoover
Despite the job gains in March 2004, the Bush administration's labor market record still remains the worst since the Hoover administration, even if employment growth persists at the rate of job creation in March. The record of the Bush administration on job creation is so bad that even if the economy produces 308,000 new jobs ever month between now and January 2005 employment will have grown by only 0.9 percent, less than two thirds the rate of growth of the second Eisenhower administration which was previously the worst administration since President Hoover in job creation. 2006: Worst economy since Hoover
As headlines blare out Dow Jones Industrial Average Surges to New All-Time High this afternoon, I can’t help but think about the mantra repeated daily during the 2004 election by Democrats that the Bush economy was the worst in 50 years. people actually started believing it, too. Despite the fact that we’d fought back from a burst internet “bubble” caused by overspeculation (much like the overspeculation in the housing market in recent months), the worst attack on our mainland since 1814 and the beginnings of a recession. 2007: Worst Economy Since Hoover? I Blame Bush Too!
According to the US Commerce Department the US “economy grew at a 4.9 percent pace in the third quarter, the fastest in four years.” Matt at WMD was quick to jump on it crediting Bush and his tax cuts for the one piece of positive economic news to come out in a long time. Problem is: if you read the whole article you’ll get a totally different picture. 2008: A Progressive Mandate v. Worst Job-Creation Since Herbert Hoover
Our nation today is only now realizing the extent of the resounding victory for progressive ideals registered on election day. Progressives triumphed in all regions of the country and won overwhelming support from individuals of all different backgrounds. President-elect Barack Obama defeated John McCain decisively, winning the most votes in history and the largest share of the popular vote of any presidential candidate in two decades. Candidates running on progressive platforms helped Democrats expand their majorities in both houses of Congress. Democrats now have the most elected members of Congress any party has held since 1995.
Be careful what you ask for. You might get it, and it will affect everyone else as well. Bob Parks | | |
| The Personhood Movement In his latest appointment, Obama appointed Ellen Moran as the new White House Communications Director. Moran is the executive director of EMILY's List, the powerful political action committee that works to get pro-abortion women elected to political office.
"Clearly, the American people have picked an extremist president dedicated to doing all in his power to advance the culture of death," said Jim Sedlak, vice president of American Life League.
"Faced with an executive branch stacked with pro-abortion pawns, pro-lifers must more than ever unite behind the cultural and legislative hope of the personhood movement," said Sedlak, as he suggested a new direction to combat Obama's extreme advocacy for abortion.
Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, so virulently pro-abortion he voted against the partial-birth abortion ban, will be the new Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Sen. Hillary Clinton, well beloved of the pro-abortion and infanticide movements, is widely believed to be the next Secretary of State.
Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of American, has joyfully announced her role as advisor to Obama's transition staff – a role Richards makes clear will carry expectations of his full-fledged support for pro-abortion policy. 
"We have been communicating with his transition staff almost daily," Cecile Richards told the Washington Post. "We expect to see a real change."
"The change Richards will demand, of course, is more money for Planned Parenthood and easier access to abortion and birth control," said Sedlak. "But sadly this is only what the American people should have expected of Obama when they voted him into office."
The only way to combat this lack of respect for the dignity and worth of human life, Sedlak explained, is to change the cultural mentality to one that places a new emphasis on the intrinsic value of every human being – a personhood mentality. Currently 16 states are pursuing personhood amendments, many with the support of American Life League.
"Personhood was the united objective of the pro-life movement immediately after Roe v. Wade," Sedlak said. "The movement is now strong enough and has enough active supporters that we can finally achieve that objective. Now is the time for personhood for every human being."
| | |
| Laying down in green pasturesThe Lord is my shepherd. You know sheep herding isn't a easy job, it requires watching out for a bunch of really dumb sheep who tend to get lost very easily. It also requires keeping a watchful eye out for predators who may be watching the flock from afar to find the easy prey who has strayed. I shall not be in want. My shepherd provides me what I need to survive, because he knows what it is I need . He makes me to lie down in green pastures Did you know that sheep refuse to lie down unless they are free from all fear? So the Shepherd has lead us to a lush green pasture and made it so we could trust in His oversight and lie down without fear. Notice the tense here "He makes me to lie down" Perfect love is what casts out fear. But when you have faith in the Shepherd, you will allow Him to lead you to that place where you can shake off your fears and simply trust Him. When you allow Him to lead you there you will find this is the place where He restores you. I am thankful for being lead to this place. | | |
|
True
Lifetime
