THE WHITE HOUSE BEER FEST - THIS PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS IN WHAT IT TELLS US ABOUT BARACK OBAMA'S CHARACTER

Yesterday, Barack Obama staged a little farce
on the lawn of the White House.

Having invited his friend, mentor and former professor
at Harvard
to come to the White House to join with him and
Boston Police Sergeant Crowley in a little beer fest
as sort of a reconciliation party
the three of them exited the White House
to the Rose Garden as this picture shows.

What is so significant about the picture is that

it shows Sergeat Crowley,
the sole class act in this trio
helping the handicapped Professor Gates
down the steps,
while Barack Obama,
heedless of the infirmities of
his friend and fellow victim of
self-defined racial profiling
strides ahead on his own.

So who is compassionate?

Who is so self-involved and arrogant as
a narcissistic person would be
that he is oblivious
to his friends need.

********************************

BARRY SOETORO aka BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
IS A
USURPER

He is not eligible to be
President of the United States
because he is not a Natural Born Citizen
as required by Article Two, Section One, Clause Five of the United States Constitution.

This is a fact REGARDLESS of
where he was born (Mombassa, Hawaii, Chicago, Mecca or Mars).

He is not eligible
because he was not born of
TWO PARENTS
BOTH OF WHOM WERE UNITED STATES CITIZENS
AT THE TIME OF HIS BIRTH
as required by the Constitution.

His father, who did not live in the United States for more than a couple of years, was a subject/ciitizen
of Kenya/Great Britain at the time of Barack’s birth and afterwards, AND further, as Barack himself admitted on his website during the 2008 campaign, Barack was therefore born SUBJECT TO THE GOVERNANCE OF GREAT BRITAIN.

Here is a direct quote from Obama's "Fight the Smears/Fact Check" 2008 website:

‘When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…’ “

The FACT that he was not born of TWO US CITIZEN PARENTS is all that matters. The question of his birth certificate is a distraction (a distraction fostered by Obama’s supporters?) that ought not to occupy our time and resources.

Also, it is possible that he is not a United States
citizen at all through his mother if he was born in Kenya, as three witnesses have testified. The reason is because his mother could not pass her US citizenship on to her son because she did not live continuously in the United States for five full years after her fourteenth birthday as required by the US immigration law in effect during that period of time.

Check it out:
http://www.TheObamaFile.com/ObamaNaturalBorn.htm
Also, an excellent introductory primer on Obama Presiidential Eligibility is to be found at:
http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm

His usurpation can only be corrected (1) by Congress through his Impeachment and Removal [something which will never happen in a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid], or (2) it can be
corrected by his resignation, which could happen if the public presssure on him to resign becomes great enough, or (3) by his removal by the United States Supreme Court affirming a Quo Warranto decision of the United States Federal District Court for the District of Columbia [which process Attorney General Eric Holder would never allow to even begin] or (4) by an amendment to the Constitution,
which will never happen because that again would require the agreement of a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid.
_

HERE IS THE QUESTION WHICH EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN SHOULD BE ASKING HIS OR HER CONGRESSMAN AND SENATORS

“During the 2008 election, then Senator Obama published a statement at his website which said that his birth status was ‘governed’ by the British Nationality Act of 1948. Can you please tell me, and the American people, how a person governed - at birth - by British law, can be a natural born citizen of the United States and thus constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States?”

---
- Leo Rugiens

WERE YOU ONE OF THE IDIOTS WHO VOTED FOR BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA?

French President Sarkozy smiles as he watches Barack Obama look over the scenery.

-

Bookworm Room describes our Fearless Leader as

whiny, bad-tempered, lazy, ill-informed, stubborn, a loose cannon,

and, when it comes to strong women, submissive.

She has no problem speaking her mind, I believe.

Here is another fellow who has no problem doing likewise.

Obama has tried to play Lincoln, Reagan, JFK and FDR–

but in the end he can only play himself,

a shallow, manipulative and egotistical amateur who is in over his head,

and trying to drag the country down with him.

Obama’s White House is falling down and while the flashbulbs are still glittering and the parties are going on in D.C. and around the world, Obama and the Democratic Congress may be headed for a recession of their own.

For as long as I live it will be a mark of honor that I did not vote for that prissy little man-child, that arrogant pretension, that pompous snob, that silk-clad ape, that little minded bigot, that Godless pagan and Chicago gangster.

And for all of you who did vote for the creature? What have you to say now? True, perhaps one-third of you are mentally disturbed and so can be forgiven after being placed back on your meds. But the rest of you? What can you possibly say or do to merit redemption? With all your education and all your sophistication and all your pretend worldliness you were so easily and completley fooled.

What excuses do you have? All the facts about Obama were readily available. You were either too lazy to investigate or refused to believe what was so patently clear to those with eyes. You have brought shame and dishonor not just upon yourselves but upon this nation. If you have a shred of dignity and integrity left you will never vote again.

You have shown yourselves to be a disgrace to republican democracy and unfit to be called free citizens. I feel toward you as Sam Adams felt towards your type back in his day.

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.

I have already forgotten you."

I have no doubt that when all of this Obama madness has run its course, that finding someone who will admit to voting for Obama in 2008 will be as difficult as finding a German who will admit to voting Nazi in 1933.

Hat tips: The Gunslinger and Let’s Think About That

Update: Thomas Sowell weighs in. It is not pretty. It is not meant to be.

Like so many before him who have ruined countries around the world, Obama has a greatly inflated idea of his own capabilities and the prospects of what can be accomplished by rhetoric or even by political power. Often this has been accompanied by an ignorance of history, including the history of how many people before him have tried similar things with disastrous results.

When the dust settles, what should be done with the fools who voted in this monstrosity? Sooner or later they will vote in another monstrosity—one perhaps more dangerous than Obama himself.

Update: Slowly but surely, drop by drop and dribble by dribble, the truth about the hollow man in the White House is oozing out like pus from an infected wound.

Obama is, in other words, a manufactured candidate. His way was paved by the media, he has lied about who he is, and he continues to lie in ways big and small. This realization is slowly dawning on people beyond the readership of the conservative internet-based media..Growing numbers of Americans are coming to realize that they have bought into a false picture of Barack Obama.

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IS A BOIL ON THE BODY POLITIC

OF AMERICA

---

Our Parade Of Idiots

by Scipio

July 29th, 2009

TheReturnofScipio.blogspot.com

*************

BARRY SOETORO aka BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
IS A
USURPER

He is not eligible to be
President of the United States
because he is not a Natural Born Citizen
as required by Article Two, Section One, Clause Five of the United States Constitution.

This is a fact REGARDLESS of
where he was born (Mombassa, Hawaii, Chicago, Mecca or Mars).

He is not eligible
because he was not born of
TWO PARENTS
BOTH OF WHOM WERE UNITED STATES CITIZENS
AT THE TIME OF HIS BIRTH
as required by the Constitution.

His father, who did not live in the United States for more than a couple of years, was a subject/ciitizen
of Kenya/Great Britain at the time of Barack’s birth and afterwards, AND further, as Barack himself admitted on his website during the 2008 campaign, Barack was therefore born SUBJECT TO THE GOVERNANCE OF GREAT BRITAIN.

Here is a direct quote from Obama's "Fight the Smears/Fact Check" 2008 website:

‘When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…’ “

The FACT that he was not born of TWO US CITIZEN PARENTS is all that matters. The question of his birth certificate is a distraction (a distraction fostered by Obama’s supporters?) that ought not to occupy our time and resources.

Also, it is possible that he is not a United States
citizen at all through his mother if he was born in Kenya, as three witnesses have testified. The reason is because his mother could not pass her US citizenship on to her son because she did not live continuously in the United States for five full years after her fourteenth birthday as required by the US immigration law in effect during that period of time.

Check it out:
http://www.TheObamaFile.com/ObamaNaturalBorn.htm
Also, an excellent introductory primer on Obama Presiidential Eligibility is to be found at:
http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm

His usurpation can only be corrected (1) by Congress through his Impeachment and Removal [something which will never happen in a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid], or (2) it can be
corrected by his resignation, which could happen if the public presssure on him to resign becomes great enough, or (3) by his removal by the United States Supreme Court affirming a Quo Warranto decision of the United States Federal District Court for the District of Columbia [which process Attorney General Eric Holder would never allow to even begin] or (4) by an amendment to the Constitution,
which will never happen because that again would require the agreement of a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid.
_

HERE IS THE QUESTION WHICH EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN SHOULD BE ASKING HIS OR HER CONGRESSMAN AND SENATORS

“During the 2008 election, then Senator Obama published a statement at his website which said that his birth status was ‘governed’ by the British Nationality Act of 1948. Can you please tell me, and the American people, how a person governed - at birth - by British law, can be a natural born citizen of the United States and thus constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States?”

---
- Leo Rugiens

OBAMA STANDS CONVICTED OF BEING INTELLECTUALLY GUILTY OF FALSELY SWEARING THAT HE IS A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN

On Nov. 30, 2007 Obama swore to and signed the document below:

The US Constitution requires that the President must be a “natural born citizen” of the US. The Constitution makes a clear distinction between a basic citizen – who may be a Senator or Representative – and a “natural born citizen” – the higher standard which is required for the President/Commander In Chief.

Obama was a Constitutional law professor and Harvard Law graduate running for President. He was fully aware of the most on point US Supreme Court holding which discussed the meaning of “natural born citizen” – Minor v. Happersett – wherein the Supreme Court stated:

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. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [88 U.S. 162, 168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts.

In the Minor case, the person wasn’t running for President of the US so the court didn’t have to reach the nbc issue. But the court did note that the foreign nationality of a native born person’s parents could effect that native born person’s natural-born citizen status.

Furthermore, the court also stated that the definition of “natural-born citizen” was not found in the Constitution so “Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that.” Why is this important?

BECAUSE SCOTUS ISSUED THE MINOR HOLDING IN 1874 WHILE THE 14TH AMENDMENT WAS ADOPTED IN 1868.

The most predominant argument that Obama is Constitutionally eligible to be President relies on the wording of the 14th Amendment which states that a person born on US soil and subject to the jurisdiction thereof is a US citizen. But the 14th Amendment does not say that every person born on US soil is a “natural-born citizen”, it just says “citizen”. Obama supporters have argued that 14th Amendment citizenship makes one eligible to be President and satisfies the natural born- citizen requirements of Article 2 Section 1. This is the “native born” = “natural born” argument.

The 14th Amendment was adopted in 1868. But the Minor decision was issued in 1874 wherein SCOTUS said:

The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that.

The 14th Amendment had already been part of the Constitution for six years when SCOTUS made that statement. SCOTUS clearly and unequivocally states in Minor that the 14th Amendment does NOT define who is a “natural-born citizen”. Anybody who says the 14th Amendment does define “natural-born citizen” is lying and/or ignorant as to the Supreme Court’s holding in Minor – the most on point discussion of the definition of the Article 2 Section 1 “natural-born citizen” requirement for POTUS.

Obama - the famed brilliant Constitutional scholar – had to be aware that the most directly on point US Supreme Court case in our nation’s history directly stated that there were doubts as to his nbc status. Yet, regardless of these doubts expressed by the highest court in the land, Obama went ahead and swore – under oath – that he was eligible to be President.

Therefore, he is now intellectually convicted of false swearing.

When you swear that what you say is true, then – to the best of your knowledge – what you say must be true. If you are a gifted Constitutional scholar/professor who knows of a SCOTUS holding which calls your “natural-born citizen” status into question and directly states that there have been doubts thereto, but you go ahead and swear under oath that you are - in fact – a natural-born citizen, then you are also – in fact – guilty of false swearing.

You can’t legally swear to the best of your knowledge that you are eligible to be President when the SCOTUS last word on the issue directly calls such eligibility into doubt. You can’t even do that with a straight face let alone a sworn oath.

Even if the current SCOTUS were to one day hold that Obama is a natural-born citizen despite his British/Kenyan birth through his father (who was never a US citizen) that would not have been a holding available to Obama at the time he swore he was eligible.

The state of Arizona accepted as true the false sworn statements by Obama and thereafter placed his name on the ballots. He was then elected President. The voters in Arizona were directly defrauded by Obama’s false affirmations.

When Obama swore he was eligible, he lied. He didn’t swear that he might be eligible or that there was a good chance he would be found eligible. He swore that he was – in fact – eligible. Obama’s certain affirmations under oath and penalty of perjury are false. He could not have been certain and he should not have sworn that he was. He’s guilty of false swearing despite whatever definition of natural-born citizen comes down the pike.

On December 13, 2007, Obama could not have been certain he was eligible to be POTUS. He may have believed he could be held eligible according to his own hopes and his own analysis of what the current SCOTUS might say. But such an analysis could be nothing more than an intellectual guess. The affirmation demanded that he swear he was - in fact – eligible to be POTUS.

A statesman puts the safety and legal sanity of the nation ahead of himself. Obama reversed that call to honor and placed himself ahead of the law. The law questioned his eligibility but he swore under oath no such question existed.

The proper thing for Obama to have done was raise the issue before the American people prior to the election. Perhaps he could have accomplished this by bringing a law suit to determine whether he could satisfy these affirmations without perjuring himself. He did no such thing. He swore something was true when he knew the truth was in doubt. Regardless of what SCOTUS might say about this issue in the future, no future holding can change the facts as they existed on December 13, 2007.

Obama has now been intellectually convicted of false swearing.

---

by Leo Donofrio

on his Blog NaturalBornCitizen.wordpress.com on 28 July 2009

*******************************

BARRY SOETORO aka BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
IS A
USURPER

He is not eligible to be
President of the United States
because he is not a Natural Born Citizen
as required by Article Two, Section One, Clause Five of the United States Constitution.

This is a fact REGARDLESS of
where he was born (Mombassa, Hawaii, Chicago, Mecca or Mars).

He is not eligible
because he was not born of
TWO PARENTS
BOTH OF WHOM WERE UNITED STATES CITIZENS
at the time of his birth as required by the Constitution.
His father was a subject/ciitizen
of Kenya/Great Britain at the time of his birth and afterwards, AND further, as Obama himself admitted on his website during the 2008 campaign, Obama was therefore born SUBJECT TO THE GOVERNANCE OF GREAT BRITAIN.

Here is a direct quote from Obama's "Fight the Smears/Fact Check" 2008 website:

‘When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…’ “

The FACT that he was not born of TWO US CITIZEN PARENTS is all that matters. The question of his birth certificate is a distraction (a distraction fostered by Obama’s supporters?) that ought not to occupy our time and resources.

Also, it is possible that he is not a United States
citizen at all through his mother if he was born in Kenya, as three witnesses have testified. The reason is because his mother could not pass her US citizenship on to her son because she did not live continuously in the United States for five full years after her fourteenth birthday as required by the US immigration law in effect during that period of time.

Check it out:
http://www.TheObamaFile.com/ObamaNaturalBorn.htm
Also, an excellent introductory primer on Obama Presiidential Eligibility is to be found at:
http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm

His usurpation can only be corrected (1) by Congress through his Impeachment and Removal [something which will never happen in a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid], or (2) it can be
corrected by his resignation, which could happen if the public presssure on him to resign becomes great enough, or (3) by his removal by the United States Supreme Court affirming a Quo Warranto decision of the United States Federal District Court for the District of Columbia [which process Attorney General Eric Holder would never allow to even begin] or (4) by an amendment to the Constitution,
which will never happen because that again would require the agreement of a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid.
_

HERE IS THE QUESTION WHICH EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN SHOULD BE ASKING HIS OR HER CONGRESSMAN AND SENATORS

“During the 2008 election, then Senator Obama published a statement at his website which said that his birth status was ‘governed’ by the British Nationality Act of 1948. Can you please tell me, and the American people, how a person governed - at birth - by British law, can be a natural born citizen of the United States and thus constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States?”

---
- Leo Rugiens

IN SPITE OF OUR BEST EFFORTS TO PREVENT IT, IT APPEARS THAT OBMACARE IS INEVITABLY COMING TO AMERICA!

IT’S COMING! GET READY FOR OBAMACARE!

I am not usually given over to cynicism!

However!

With regard to the apparent inevitability of the

Imposition of Obamacare on our Nation,

I am cynical.

In spite of our best efforts to prevent the passage

Of the bill presently under consideration by the House

From becoming law, it probably will happen.

Here is the likely scenario:

The Blue Dog Democrats who are presently unwilling to vote for the bill will not vote for the bill until enough of the objectionable parts have been removed to permit RINO members of Congress to join in voting for the bill so that the Blue Dogs will have some cover in next year’s Congressional elections.

Then the Senate will pass a bill that will have some of the worst provisions in it watered down, but the will still remain in it.

The problem will still remain however that the House and Senate versions of the bill are not the same and must be reconciled in a Conference Committee before the bill can be finally voted on by the House and the Senate.

Since the Democrats control both the House and the Senate and since the Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the Senate are the ones who chose who will become the members of the Conference Committee, it is almost certain that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will chose radical members of their party plus a few RINO Republicans to be members of the Conference Committee. The Committee will have an overwhelming majority of Democrats on it.

During the Conference Committee’s deliberations the worst provisions of the present proposed bill will quietly be restored to the reconcile bill. Since the work of the Committee is not open to public scrutiny, we will not know what the reconciled bill looks like.

Then, the Conference Committee will send the bill back to the House and the Senate as a Conference Committee Report. Pelosi and Reid will call for a voice vote to accept the Conference Committee Report and

PRESTO

America will finally have Obamacare and we will not know what is in the final bill as passed by Congress until it is printed, sent to the President for his signature and then published in the Congressional Record.

By then all we can do is say,

GOD SAVE AMERICA!

- Leo Rugiens

**************************************

Charles Krauthammer is right about Obamacare and especially about the need for tort reform, except that I

believe that he is wrong in thinking that it is sinking. It is sinking

with the American people, but I believe that it will be imposed on America

in spite of the opposition. The reason: the Democrats have all the power

to impose it.

- Leo Rugiens

THE WASHINGTON POST

Why Obamacare Is Sinking

President Obama talks about health-care reform at Children's National Medical Center on Monday. (By J. Scott Applewhite -- Associated Press)

By Charles Krauthammer

Friday, July 24, 2009

What happened to Obamacare? Rhetoric met reality. As both candidate and president, the master rhetorician could conjure a world in which he bestows upon you health-care nirvana: more coverage, less cost.

But you can't fake it in legislation. Once you commit your fantasies to words and numbers, the Congressional Budget Office comes along and declares that the emperor has no clothes.

President Obama premised the need for reform on the claim that medical costs are destroying the economy. True. But now we learn -- surprise! -- that universal coverage increases costs. The congressional Democrats' health-care plans, says the CBO, increase costs on the order of $1 trillion plus.

In response, the president retreated to a demand that any bill he sign be revenue-neutral. But that's classic misdirection: If the fierce urgency of health-care reform is to radically reduce costs that are producing budget-destroying deficits, revenue neutrality (by definition) leaves us on precisely the same path to insolvency that Obama himself declares unsustainable.

The Democratic proposals are worse still. Because they do increase costs, revenue neutrality means countervailing tax increases. It's not just that it is crazily anti-stimulatory to saddle a deeply depressed economy with an income tax surcharge that falls squarely on small business and the investor class. It's that health-care reform ends up diverting for its own purposes a source of revenue that might otherwise be used to close the yawning structural budget deficit that is such a threat to the economy and to the dollar.

These blindingly obvious contradictions are why the Democratic health plans are collapsing under their own weight -- at the hands of Democrats. It's Max Baucus, Democratic chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, who called Obama unhelpful for ruling out taxing employer-provided health insurance as a way to pay for expanded coverage. It's the Blue Dog Democrats in the House who wince at skyrocketing health-reform costs just weeks after having swallowed hemlock for Obama on a ruinous cap-and-trade carbon tax.

The president is therefore understandably eager to make this a contest between progressive Democrats and reactionary Republicans. He seized on Republican Sen. Jim DeMint's comment that stopping Obama on health care would break his presidency to protest, with perfect disingenuousness, that "this isn't about me. This isn't about politics."

It's all about him. Health care is his signature reform. And he knows that if he produces nothing, he forfeits the mystique that both propelled him to the presidency and has sustained him through a difficult first six months. Which is why Obama's red lines are constantly shifting. Universal coverage? Maybe not. No middle-class tax hit? Well, perhaps, but only if they don't "primarily" bear the burden. Because it's about him, Obama is quite prepared to sign anything as long as it is titled "health-care reform."

This is not about politics? Then why is it, to take but the most egregious example, that in this grand health-care debate we hear not a word about one of the worst sources of waste in American medicine: the insane cost and arbitrary rewards of our malpractice system?

When a neurosurgeon pays $200,000 a year for malpractice insurance before he even turns on the light in his office or hires his first nurse, who do you think pays? Patients, in higher doctor fees to cover the insurance.

And with jackpot justice that awards one claimant zillions while others get nothing -- and one-third of everything goes to the lawyers -- where do you think that money comes from? The insurance companies, which then pass it on to you in higher premiums.

But the greatest waste is the hidden cost of defensive medicine: tests and procedures that doctors order for no good reason other than to protect themselves from lawsuits. Every doctor knows, as I did when I practiced years ago, how much unnecessary medical cost is incurred with an eye not on medicine but on the law.

Tort reform would yield tens of billions in savings. Yet you cannot find it in the Democratic bills. And Obama breathed not a word about it in the full hour of his health-care news conference. Why? No mystery. The Democrats are parasitically dependent on huge donations from trial lawyers.

Didn't Obama promise a new politics that puts people over special interests? Sure. And now he promises expanded, portable, secure, higher-quality medical care -- at lower cost! The only thing he hasn't promised is to extirpate evil from the human heart. That legislation will be introduced next week.

**************************************

BARRY SOETORO aka BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
IS A
USURPER

He is not eligible to be
President of the United States
because he is not a Natural Born Citizen
as required by Article Two, Section One, Clause Five of the United States Constitution.

This is a fact REGARDLESS of
where he was born (Mombassa, Hawaii, Chicago, Mecca or Mars).

He is not eligible
because he was not born of
TWO PARENTS
BOTH OF WHOM WERE UNITED STATES CITIZENS
at the time of his birth as required by the Constitution.
His father was a subject/ciitizen
of Kenya/Great Britain at the time of his birth and afterwards.
The FACT that he was not born of TWO US CITIZEN PARENTS is all that matters. The question of his birth certificate is a distraction (a distraction fostered by Obama’s supporters?) that ought not to occupy our time and resources.

However, it is possible that he is not a United States
citizen at all even if he was born in Kenya, as three witnesses have testified. The reason is because his mother could not pass her US citizenship on to her son because she did not live continuously in the United States for five full years after her fourteenth birthday as required by the US immigration law in effect during that period of time.

Check it out:
http://www.TheObamaFile.com/ObamaNaturalBorn.htm
Also, an excellent introductory primer on Obama Presiidential Eligibility is to be found at:
http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm

His usurpation can only be corrected (1) by Congress through his Impeachment and Removal [something which will never happen in a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid], or (2) it can be
corrected by his resignation, which could happen if the public presssure on him to resign becomes great enough, or (3) by his removal by the United States Supreme Court affirming a Quo Warranto decision of the United States Federal District Court for the District of Columbia [which process Attorney General Eric Holder would never allow to even begin] or (4) by an amendment to the Constitution,
which will never happen because that again would require the agreement of a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid.
_

HERE IS THE QUESTION WHICH EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN SHOULD BE ASKING HIS OR HER CONGRESSMAN AND SENATORS

“During the 2008 election, then Senator Obama published a statement at his website which said that his birth status was ‘governed’ by the British Nationality Act of 1948. Can you please tell me, and the American people, how a person governed - at birth - by British law, can be a natural born citizen of the United States and thus constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States?”

---
- Leo Rugiens

HELP!

Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country!

WHO WILL TELL MICHAEL J. FOX HE NEEDS TO DIE? IN THE OBAMANATION A HEALTHCARE BEAUROCRAT WILL

The Right Prescription

Who Will Tell Michael J. Fox He Needs to Die?

By Jeffrey Lord on 7.28.09

THE AMERICAN SPECTATOR

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/07/28/who-will-tell-michael-j-fox-he?/

**************************

BARRY SOETORO aka BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
IS A
USURPER

He is not eligible to be
President of the United States
because he is not a Natural Born Citizen
as required by Article Two, Section One, Clause Five of the United States Constitution.

This is a fact REGARDLESS of
where he was born (Mombassa, Hawaii, Chicago, Mecca or Mars).

He is not eligible
because he was not born of
TWO PARENTS
BOTH OF WHOM WERE UNITED STATES CITIZENS
at the time of his birth as required by the Constitution.
His father was a subject/ciitizen
of Kenya/Great Britain at the time of his birth and afterwards.
The FACT that he was not born of TWO US CITIZEN PARENTS is all that matters. The question of his birth certificate is a distraction (a distraction fostered by Obama’s supporters?) that ought not to occupy our time and resources.

However, it is possible that he is not a United States
citizen at all even if he was born in Kenya, as three witnesses have testified. The reason is because his mother could not pass her US citizenship on to her son because she did not live continuously in the United States for five full years after her fourteenth birthday as required by the US immigration law in effect during that period of time.

Check it out:
http://www.TheObamaFile.com/ObamaNaturalBorn.htm
Also, an excellent introductory primer on Obama Presiidential Eligibility is to be found at:
http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm

His usurpation can only be corrected (1) by Congress through his Impeachment and Removal [something which will never happen in a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid], or (2) it can be
corrected by his resignation, which could happen if the public presssure on him to resign becomes great enough, or (3) by his removal by the United States Supreme Court affirming a Quo Warranto decision of the United States Federal District Court for the District of Columbia [which process Attorney General Eric Holder would never allow to even begin] or (4) by an amendment to the Constitution,
which will never happen because that again would require the agreement of a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid.
_

HERE IS THE QUESTION WHICH EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN SHOULD BE ASKING HIS OR HER CONGRESSMAN AND SENATORS

“During the 2008 election, then Senator Obama published a statement at his website which said that his birth status was ‘governed’ by the British Nationality Act of 1948. Can you please tell me, and the American people, how a person governed - at birth - by British law, can be a natural born citizen of the United States and thus constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States?”

---
- Leo Rugiens

OBAMA WITHOUT A TELEPROMPTER UNCONSCIOUSLY REVEALS THE TRUE STATE OF HIS SOUL

"There is no vice so mean,

so pitiful,

so contemptible;

and he who permits himself to tell a lie once,

finds it much easier to do it a second and a third time,

till at length it becomes habitual;

he tells lies without attending to it,

and truths without the world's believing him.

This falsehood of the tongue leads to that of the heart,

and in time depraves all its good disposition."

--Thomas Jefferson

Humility is below his pay grade

When a slick "community organizer"

cons his way into the White House,

you may be able to take him out of the hood,

but you can't get the hood out of him.

When Barack Hussein Obama interrupted a recent live media propaganda confab on his administration's most critical national initiative (socializing health care) in order to accuse a local police officer of "acting stupidly," he got more than my attention; he earned my disrespect -- and that of most law enforcement offices and veteran officers across the nation.

I graduated from a state police academy at age 19 and worked as a uniformed patrolman for the next four years while completing my undergraduate degree. That was many years ago, but I can assure you that there is no such thing as a "former police officer." You can take a trooper off patrol, but can't get the patrol out of a former trooper.

On occasion when my kids and I watch the television program "Cops," with its familiar theme song "Bad Boys" and cameras recording real patrol officers on pursuits and takedowns, they know that I am not so much watching the show as I am vicariously riding shotgun.

So when Obama used a national soapbox to unfairly chastise a local Cambridge, Massachusetts, police officer, Sgt. James Crowley, for arresting one of BHO's comrades, Harvard professor Henry Gates, Obama also took a cheap shot at every sworn officer and veteran officer in America. It's a big fraternity, and even a novice like Obama should have known better.

There is an old but good adage, which Obama might want to learn before even the most devoted of his disciples declares the emperor has no clothes: "When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging!"

Of course when a pathological narcissist like Obama finds himself at odds with reality, he inevitably endeavors to alter reality.

Unless you just returned from Mars, you undoubtedly know the sequence of events regarding the arrest of H.L. Gates for disorderly conduct. Turns out, the arrest was fully justified and, having "been there and done that," there was no question in my mind from the start of this controversy that Gates blew a gasket, and the officer's actions were justified. (Gates might also benefit from the "stop digging" maxim.)

In any event, Obama, who has himself been so steeped in a culture of ethnocentric elitism by mentors of racial hatred like his old "pastor," Jeremiah Wright, could not help but assume that the arrest of Gates was the result of racism.

Gates under arrest

Under pressure from a black president, a black Massachusetts governor (Deval Patrick) and a black Cambridge City mayor (Denise Simmons), the district attorney dropped charges against Gates before any of the facts of his arrest were reviewed.

Obama said the police "acted stupidly," Patrick protested that this was "every black man's nightmare," and Simmons concluded, "the incident of July 16, 2009 was regrettable and unfortunate."

However, as I said, Gates' conduct was, at best, disorderly, and the arresting officer not only used restraint and good judgment in his actions, but Sgt. Crowley and a fellow black officer have, for the last five years, been instructors for a racial profiling class at the Lowell Police Academy in Boston, and Crowley was handpicked for that post by a senior officer who happens to be black.

At noon last Friday, with all the facts in, there was a press conference called by numerous representatives of Massachusetts law enforcement associations and unions, in support of Crowley and condemning Obama and Patrick for there rush to racial accusations.

One of Crowley's defenders, Dennis O'Connor, noted that Obama "used the right adjective but directed it to the wrong party" -- that it was Gates who acted stupidly. Noting that Obama did qualify his remarks by indicating he did not have all the facts, O'Connor added, "When you don't have all the facts, your next words should be 'I have no comment.'"

Though Obama can extend the benefit of doubt to folks like Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Palestinian Mahmoud Abbas, Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Russia's Vladimir Putin, when it comes to a couple of local cops, he convicted them sight unseen.

Steve Killian, president of the Cambridge Police Patrol Officers Association called for Obama to "make an apology to all law-enforcement personnel."

Not to be upstaged by the police unions, Obama made an unplanned appearance at a White House conference an hour after the Cambridge conference, to remake his case.

Receiving a reception similar to that George W. Bush received with his surprise appearance to have Thanksgiving dinner with our troops in Baghdad a few years ago, Obama's unannounced appearance at the press conference elated his adoring MSM audience.

"Hey, it's a cameo appearance. Sit down, sit down," Obama said, like some Hollywood teen idol.

In one of the most contorted makeovers of his asinine remarks to date, Obama feigned "making nice" with Crowley and offered to have him and Gates as guests at the White House "for a beer."

I am including a few Obama quotes below (with editorial reply), not only because he has dug himself deeper, but also because his comments were not read from a teleprompter. Consequently, the incidence of his verbal tick, "uh," occurs at a ratio of 1.2 times for every 10 words. This is significant because for Obama, "uh" constitutes a "poker tell," an unconscious cue that he is attempting to be deceptive.

When studying Obama's unscripted comments, the occurrence of this tell at a ratio of 1/20 indicates his remarks are disingenuous. At 1.2/10, he is lying. (While the White House video mutes his verbal ticks and struck all of them from the text of his comments, you can read the full -- and accurate -- text of Obama's comments here.)

"Uh, over the last day and a half, uh, obviously there's been all sorts of controversy around, uh, the incident that happened in Cambridge with, uh, Professor Gates and the police department there. ... Uh, and because, uh, this has been ratcheting up -- uh, and I obviously helped to contribute ratcheting it up -- uh, I want to make clear that in my choice of words, uh, I think I unfortunately, uh, gave an impression, uh, that I was maligning the Cambridge Police Department or Sergeant Crowley specifically -- uh, and I could have calibrated those words differently."

(I am certain that saying they "acted stupidly" constitutes "maligning.")

"Uh, I continue to believe, based on what I have heard, that, uh, there was an overreaction in, uh, pulling Professor Gates, uh, out of his home to the station. Uh, my sense is you've got two good people, uh, in a circumstance, uh, in which, uh, neither of them, uh, were able to resolve the incident in the way that it should have been resolved."

(Ah, they did not act stupidly, they just "overreacted.")

"Uh, the fact that it has garnered so much attention I think is a testimony to the fact that these are issues that are still very sensitive here in America."

(No, Obama's comment garnered so much attention because it was, uh, stupid.)

"Uh, what I'd like to do then I [sic] make sure that everybody ... uh, not extrapolate too much from the facts -- uh, but as I said at the press conference, uh, be mindful of the fact that because of our history, because of the difficulties of the past, uh, you know, African Americans are sensitive to these issues. And, uh ... interactions between police officers and, uh, the African American community can sometimes be fraught with misunderstanding."

(What is clear, however, is that Leftist socialized programs ostensibly designed to give blacks a chance to attain the American dream, have spawned a subculture of nightmares, and there is no misunderstanding about the resulting disparity in criminal activity by race, or the burden that places on society, including police officers of all racial backgrounds, who have to deal with that burden.)

"Uh, my hope is, is that as a consequence of this event, uh, this ends up being what's called a 'teachable moment,' where all of us, uh, instead of pumping up the volume spend a little more time listening to each other, uh ... instead of flinging accusations, uh, we can, uh, all be a little more reflective in terms of what we can do, uh, to contribute to, uh, more unity."

(The most teachable moment in this event was when Obama didn't have the facts. As previously suggested, Obama should learn to say, "no comment." The only folks flinging accusations were Gates, Obama, Patrick and Simmons.)

"Uh, but, uh, I just wanted to emphasize that, uh, one, one last point I guess I would make. ... Uh, the fact that this has become such a big issue I think is indicative of the fact that, uh, uh, race is still a troubling aspect of our society. Uh, whether I were black or white, uh, I think that, uh, me commenting on this, uh, and hopefully contributing to constructive -- uh, as opposed to negative -- uh, understandings about the issue, uh, is part of my portfolio."

(Actually, it became a big issue because Obama made a brainless accusation, and for sure, digging himself into a deeper hole is definitely part of his portfolio.)

"So, uh, at the end of the conversation there was a discussion about -- uh, uh, uh, my conversation with Sergeant Crowley, there was discussion about, uh, he and I, uh, and, uh, Professor Gates having a beer here in the White House. Uh, we don't know if that's scheduled yet -- uh, -- but, uh, uh, but we may put that together."

Perhaps Sgt. Crowley will take this bait and say nothing further, but it is clear that Obama has no intention of offering an apology. But in regards to his actions in the arrest of Gates, Sgt. Crowley says, "There will be no apology."

Back to Obama's remarks at his health care confab, I credit him with stating accurately, "There is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately, and that's just a fact."

Sometimes both white and black officers overstep their authority, and on occasion, that is motivated by racial tension. But it is difficult to avoid race-based profiling when the felonious crimes committed in our country are perpetrated by a grossly disproportionate number of black and Latino males. "And, that's just a fact." (Yes, yes, I know, victims of "the man," one and all...)

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander
Publisher, PatriotPost.US

Monday, 27 July 2009

Bad Boys, Bad Boys, Watcha Gonna Do...?

Editor's Note: Mr. Alexander leaves for Alaska today, but provided this analysis in response to Obama's accusations about police "acting stupidly" when they arrested his old friend, Henry Louis Gates Jr.

And a footnote: Regarding Obama and the Cambridge Police Department, you may recall that between 1989-1991, while a student at Harvard, Obama received 17 citations for offenses like parking in a bus-loading zone (how insensitive to those who must rely on public transportation). According to the Associated Press, Obama's citations and late fees were paid by somebody "two weeks before he officially launched his presidential campaign." I suppose he thought those citations were the result of racial profiling and thus, did not need paying.

*******************

BARRY SOETORO aka BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
IS A
USURPER

He is not eligible to be
President of the United States
because he is not a Natural Born Citizen
as required by Article Two, Section One, Clause Five of the United States Constitution.

This is a fact REGARDLESS of
where he was born (Mombassa, Hawaii, Chicago, Mecca or Mars).

He is not eligible
because he was not born of
TWO PARENTS
BOTH OF WHOM WERE UNITED STATES CITIZENS
at the time of his birth as required by the Constitution.
His father was a subject/ciitizen
of Kenya/Great Britain at the time of his birth and afterwards.
The FACT that he was not born of TWO US CITIZEN PARENTS is all that matters. The question of his birth certificate is a distraction (a distraction fostered by Obama’s supporters?) that ought not to occupy our time and resources.

However, it is possible that he is not a United States
citizen at all even if he was born in Kenya, as three witnesses have testified. The reason is because his mother could not pass her US citizenship on to her son because she did not live continuously in the United States for five full years after her fourteenth birthday as required by the US immigration law in effect during that period of time.

Check it out:
http://www.TheObamaFile.com/ObamaNaturalBorn.htm
Also, an excellent introductory primer on Obama Presiidential Eligibility is to be found at:
http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm

His usurpation can only be corrected (1) by Congress through his Impeachment and Removal [something which will never happen in a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid], or (2) it can be
corrected by his resignation, which could happen if the public presssure on him to resign becomes great enough, or (3) by his removal by the United States Supreme Court affirming a Quo Warranto decision of the United States Federal District Court for the District of Columbia [which process Attorney General Eric Holder would never allow to even begin] or (4) by an amendment to the Constitution,
which will never happen because that again would require the agreement of a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid.
_

HERE IS THE QUESTION WHICH EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN SHOULD BE ASKING HIS OR HER CONGRESSMAN AND SENATORS

“During the 2008 election, then Senator Obama published a statement at his website which said that his birth status was ‘governed’ by the British Nationality Act of 1948. Can you please tell me, and the American people, how a person governed - at birth - by British law, can be a natural born citizen of the United States and thus constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States?”

---
- Leo Rugiens

A BLACK PRESIDENT, A BLACK GOVERNOR AND A BLACK MAYOR ALL AGREE WITH A BLACK HARVARD PROFESSOR THAT HE WAS RACIALLY PROFILED

This booking photo released by the Cambridge, Mass., Police Dept., shows Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates, Jr., who was arrested while trying to force open the locked front door of his home near Harvard University Thursday, July 16, 2009. Gates, a pre-eminent African-American scholar, is accusing Cambridge police of racism after he was arrested on a disorderly conduct charge after police said he "exhibited loud and tumultuous behavior." He was released later that day on his own recognizance. --- By common consent, the most memorable moment of Barack Obama's otherwise listless press conference on "health care" were his robust remarks on the "racist" incident involving professor Henry Louis Gates and the Cambridge police. The latter "acted stupidly," pronounced the chief of state. The president of the United States may be reluctant to condemn Ayatollah Khamenei or Hugo Chávez or that guy in Honduras without examining all the nuances and footnotes, but sometimes there are outrages so heinous that even the famously nuanced must step up to the plate and speak truth to power. And thank God the leader of the free world had the guts to stand up and speak truth to municipal police Sgt. James Crowley. For everyone other than the president, what happened at professor Gates' house is not entirely clear. The Harvard prof returned home without his keys and, as Obama put it, "jimmied his way into the house." A neighbor, witnessing the "break-in," called the cops, and things, ah, escalated from there. Professor Gates is now saying that, if Sgt. Crowley publicly apologizes for his racism, the prof will graciously agree to "educate him about the history of racism in America." Which is a helluva deal. I mean, Ivy League parents remortgage their homes to pay Gates for the privilege of lecturing their kids, and here he is offering to hector it away to some no-name lunkhead for free. As to the differences between the professor's and the cops' version of events, I confess I've been wary of taking Henry Louis Gates at his word ever since, almost two decades back, the literary scholar compared the lyrics of the rap group 2 Live Crew to those of the Bard of Avon. "It's like Shakespeare's 'My love is like a red, red rose,'" he declared, authoritatively, to a court in Fort Lauderdale. As it happens, "My luv's like a red, red rose" was written by Robbie Burns, a couple of centuries after Shakespeare. Oh, well. 16th century English playwright, 18th century Scottish poet: What's the diff? Evidently being within the same quarter-millennium and right general patch of the North-East Atlantic is close enough for a professor of English and Afro-American Studies appearing as an expert witness in a court case. Certainly no journalist reporting Gates' testimony was boorish enough to point out the misattribution. I hasten to add I have nothing against the great man. He's always struck me as one of those faintly absurd figures in which the American academy appears to specialize, but relatively harmless by overall standards. And I certainly sympathize with the general proposition that not all encounters with the constabulary go as agreeably as one might wish. Last year I had a minor interaction with a Vermont state trooper, and, 60 seconds into the conversation, he called me a "liar." I considered my options: Option a): I could get hot under the collar, yell at him, get tasered into submission and possibly shot while "resisting arrest"; Option b): I could politely tell the trooper I object to his characterization, and then write a letter to the commander of his barracks the following morning suggesting that such language is not appropriate to routine encounters with members of the public and betrays a profoundly defective understanding of the relationship between law enforcement officials and the citizenry in civilized societies. I chose the latter course, and received a letter back offering partial satisfaction and explaining that the trooper would be receiving "supervisory performance-related issue-counseling," which, with any luck, is even more ghastly than it sounds and hopefully is still ongoing. Professor Gates chose option a), which is just plain stupid. For one thing, these days they have dash-cams and two-way radios and a GPS gizmo in the sharp end of the billy club, so an awful lot of this stuff winds up being preserved on tape, and, if you're the one a-hootin' an' a-hollerin', it's not going to help. In the Sixties, the great English satirist Peter Simple invented the Prejudometer, which simply by being pointed at any individual could calculate degrees of racism to the nearest prejudon, "the internationally recognized scientific unit of racial prejudice." Professor Gates seems to go around with his Prejudometer permanently cranked up to 11: When Sgt. Crowley announced through the glass-paneled front door that he was here to investigate a break-in, Gates opened it up and roared back: "Why? Because I'm a black man in America?" Gates then told him, "I'll speak with your mama outside." Outside, Sgt. Crowley's mama failed to show. But among his colleagues were a black officer and a Hispanic officer. Which is an odd kind of posse for what the Rev. Al Sharpton calls, inevitably, "the highest example of racial profiling I have seen." But what of our post-racial president? After noting that "'Skip' Gates is a friend" of his, President Obama said that "there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately." But, if they're being "disproportionately" stopped by African American and Latino cops, does that really fall under the category of systemic racism? Short of dispatching one of those Uighur Muslims from China recently liberated from Gitmo by Obama to frolic and gambol on the beaches of Bermuda, the assembled officers were a veritable rainbow coalition. The photograph of the arrest shows a bullet-headed black cop – Sgt. Leon Lashley, I believe – standing in front of the porch while behind him a handcuffed Gates yells accusations of racism. This is the pitiful state the Bull Connors of the 21st century are reduced to, forced to take along a squad recruited from the nearest Benetton ad when they go out to whup some uppity Negro boy. As professor Gates jeered at the officers, "You don't know who you're messin' with." Did Sgt. Crowley have to arrest him? Probably not. Did he allow himself to be provoked by an obnoxious buffoon? Maybe. I dunno. I wasn't there. Neither was the president of the United States, or the governor of Massachusetts or the mayor of Cambridge. All of whom have declared themselves firmly on the side of the Ivy League bigshot. And all of whom, as it happens, are African American. A black president, a black governor and a black mayor all agree with a black Harvard professor that he was racially profiled by a white-Latino-black police team, headed by a cop who teaches courses in how to avoid racial profiling. The boundless elasticity of such endemic racism suggests that the "post-racial America" will be living with blowhard grievance-mongers like professor Gates unto the end of time. In a fairly typical "he said/VIP said" incident, the VIP was the author of his own misfortune but, with characteristic arrogance, chose to ascribe it to systemic racism, Jim Crow, lynchings, the Klan, slavery, Jefferson impregnating Sally Hemmings, etc. And so it goes, now and forever. My advice to professor Gates for future incidents would be to establish his authority early. Quote Shakespeare, from his early days with Hallmark: "Roses are red Violets are blue Victims are black Like 2 Live Crew." --- Mark Steyn: Obama knows 'stupidly' when he doesn't see it Encounter between cops and black professor suggests grievance-mongering will always be with us. Friday, 24 July 09 ******** BARRY SOETORO aka BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IS A USURPER He is not eligible to be President of the United States because he is not a Natural Born Citizen as required by Article Two, Section One, Clause Five of the United States Constitution. This is a fact REGARDLESS of where he was born (Mombassa, Hawaii, Chicago, Mecca or Mars). He is not eligible because he was not born of TWO PARENTS BOTH OF WHOM WERE UNITED STATES CITIZENS at the time of his birth as required by the Constitution. His father was a subject/ciitizen of Kenya/Great Britain at the time of his birth and afterwards. The FACT that he was not born of TWO US CITIZEN PARENTS is all that matters. The question of his birth certificate is a distraction (a distraction fostered by Obama’s supporters?) that ought not to occupy our time and resources. However, it is possible that he is not a United States citizen at all even if he was born in Kenya, as three witnesses have testified. The reason is because his mother could not pass her US citizenship on to her son because she did not live continuously in the United States for five full years after her fourteenth birthday as required by the US immigration law in effect during that period of time. Check it out: http://www.TheObamaFile.com/ObamaNaturalBorn.htm Also, an excellent introductory primer on Obama Presiidential Eligibility is to be found at: http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm His usurpation can only be corrected (1) by Congress through his Impeachment and Removal [something which will never happen in a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid], or (2) it can be corrected by his resignation, which could happen if the public presssure on him to resign becomes great enough, or (3) by his removal by the United States Supreme Court affirming a Quo Warranto decision of the United States Federal District Court for the District of Columbia [which process Attorney General Eric Holder would never allow to even begin] or (4) by an amendment to the Constitution, which will never happen because that again would require the agreement of a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid. _ HERE IS THE QUESTION WHICH EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN SHOULD BE ASKING HIS OR HER CONGRESSMAN AND SENATORS “During the 2008 election, then Senator Obama published a statement at his website which said that his birth status was ‘governed’ by the British Nationality Act of 1948. Can you please tell me, and the American people, how a person governed - at birth - by British law, can be a natural born citizen of the United States and thus constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States?” --- - Leo Rugiens

GET READY FOR SHORTAGES! SHORTAGES OF MEDICAL CARE! SHORTAGES OF EVERYTHING! THE SYNONYM FOR SOCIALISM IS SHORTAGES!

WHEN PUSH COMES TO SHOVE!


ONE THING THE OBAMANATION
WILL NEVER LACK IS
RHETORIC!
WORDS, WORDS, WORDS,
JUST WORDS!
THERE MAY SOON BE SHORTAGES OF
DOCTORS AND MEDICAL SERVICES
ALONG WITH SHORTAGES OF EVERYTHING ELSE,
BUT THERE WILL NEVER BE A SHORTAGE OF
WORDS!

---

You have got to be kidding me.

Venezuela running out of coffee?

Is that not like Saudi Arabia running out of sand?

Venezuela to Import Coffee 1st Time Ever

It seems Venezuela’s dictator Hugo Chavez

has been meddling with the economy again.

One marvels at the mentality that can cause a nation’s most common product

to become as scarce as chastity in a whorehouse.

Really, one cannot swing a dead cat in Venezuela

without hitting some coffee planter.

It would be as if Cuba were running out of sugar—

oh wait, it is.

Castro and Chavez have the same understanding of economics.

It resembles Obama’s in all particulars.

The entire discipline of economics since Adam Smith has escaped Chavez.

Why could this idiot not open any Econ 101 text and turn to ‘price controls?’

Here are the results of Chavez meddling in areas far above his pay grade.

On-and-off food shortages for years have dogged the government of President Hugo Chavez, a former paratrooper who has nationalized several industries and expropriated land as part of his socialist revolution.

For Venezuela to experience a shortage of coffee is like Obama experiencing a shortage of lies. Very difficult to imagine let alone arrange.

Nationalization and shortages go together in the same way that Chicago and corruption go together. Find one, find the other. Naturally Chavez refuses to take the blame for his absurd policies. Neither does Obama. In typical socialist fashion, each blames others.

Critics point the finger at price and foreign exchange controls that have slowed investments in expansion and maintenance and eroded productivity. The government blames shortages on speculation by the private sector.

In a nutshell this is Obama’s health care plan. Conjure up a problem in the private sector, blame it on speculating capitalists, and use both as a reason to nationalize the entire system.

This is not the first time Chavez ran afoul of Economics 101. Some years back he was already sticking his semi-illiterate snout into the business of Venezuelan coffee.

President Chávez, who maintains price controls on basic foodstuffs, raised the price of coffee beans by 100% last month after weeks of protests by coffee farmers.

But most of the country’s coffee producers, who buy, roast and grind the beans, refused to sell on the coffee yesterday, claiming their margins had been cut, and began hoarding thousands of sacks of unprocessed beans.

And then Chavez took a page from Stalin.

I’ve instructed the National Guard to look for the missing coffee and to find every single kilogram of it. The army has the permission to seize the coffee with the power of attorneys and judges. We will sell the coffee at prices set by us.

This is how socialists arrange things—create a crisis from a government caused shortage, then claim that government needs to step in to restore economic stability. The results are bigger government and less liberty. Again we see echoes of the Obama Way. In Rahm Emmanuel’s words, “Never let a crisis go to waste.”

Socialism always brings shortages, sometimes in odd ways. Five years ago I was backpacking around the Nicaraguan island of Ometepe. Oddly, I found that

Water is very scarce everywhere on the island, in all hotels and restaurants and homes. It simply quits, sometimes for the entire day. And the island sits in a huge freshwater lake! Granada, the third city of the republic, also suffers from water problems, and it is on the shores of Lake Nicaragua.

While the Americans look for water on Mars, the Nicaraguans cannot seem to find it in their own backyard. It baffles.

The place was awash with water yet Nicaraguans could not figure out how to get it to their homes. I remain baffled.

Socialist Nicaragua runs out of water. Socialist Cuba runs out of sugar. Socialist Venezuela runs out of coffee. Believe it or not, once socialist Argentina ran out of beef. This happened in a nation that has the finest steakhouses in the world, just as the US has the finest medical care in the world. Even America hating dictators come here when they need surgery. If Obama Care ever becomes law, we can expect both rationing and shortages. The laws of economics are hard and unforgiving. Not for nothing has that discipline been called “the dismal science.”

If Obama has his way, Americans will be forced to deal with a black market in medical care in the same way that Venezuelans are forced to deal with a black market in coffee. This will be just another sign of American becoming a run-of-the-mill 3rd world nation, like Venezuela.

Come to think of it, Obama admires Chavez. Perhaps he seeks to emulate him.

---

No Coffee In Caracas?

Posted on July 24th, 2009 by Scipio

TheReturnofScipio.blogspot.com

*************

BARRY SOETORO aka BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
IS A
USURPER

He is not eligible to be
President of the United States
because he is not a Natural Born Citizen
as required by Article Two, Section One, Clause Five of the United States Constitution.

This is a fact REGARDLESS of
where he was born (Mombassa, Hawaii, Chicago, Mecca or Mars).

He is not eligible
because he was not born of
TWO PARENTS
BOTH OF WHOM WERE UNITED STATES CITIZENS
at the time of his birth as required by the Constitution.
His father was a subject/ciitizen
of Kenya/Great Britain at the time of his birth and afterwards.
The FACT that he was not born of TWO US CITIZEN PARENTS is all that matters. The question of his birth certificate is a distraction (a distraction fostered by Obama’s supporters?) that ought not to occupy our time and resources.

However, it is possible that he is not a United States
citizen at all even if he was born in Kenya, as three witnesses have testified. The reason is because his mother could not pass her US citizenship on to her son because she did not live continuously in the United States for five full years after her fourteenth birthday as required by the US immigration law in effect during that period of time.

Check it out:
http://www.TheObamaFile.com/ObamaNaturalBorn.htm
Also, an excellent introductory primer on Obama Presiidential Eligibility is to be found at:
http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm

His usurpation can only be corrected (1) by Congress through his Impeachment and Removal [something which will never happen in a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid], or (2) it can be
corrected by his resignation, which could happen if the public presssure on him to resign becomes great enough, or (3) by his removal by the United States Supreme Court affirming a Quo Warranto decision of the United States Federal District Court for the District of Columbia [which process Attorney General Eric Holder would never allow to even begin] or (4) by an amendment to the Constitution,
which will never happen because that again would require the agreement of a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid.
_

HERE IS THE QUESTION WHICH EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN SHOULD BE ASKING HIS OR HER CONGRESSMAN AND SENATORS

“During the 2008 election, then Senator Obama published a statement at his website which said that his birth status was ‘governed’ by the British Nationality Act of 1948. Can you please tell me, and the American people, how a person governed - at birth - by British law, can be a natural born citizen of the United States and thus constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States?”

---
- Leo Rugiens

THE DECLINE AND FALL OF AMERICA - IF WE DON'T LEARN THE LESSONS OF HISTORY WE WILL REPEAT THEM TO OUR OWN DESTRUCTION

The Chinese Army

---

World peace

—or even peace over a substantial part of the globe—

is a very rare thing.

Is has always come when one power

has been predominant over all others

or even over a combination of others,

and is able to enforce its own laws over lands far and wide.

It is also a fleeting thing.

When the dominant state declines, other states try to move into

the now lawless political vacuum.

We call this movement war.

As far as we know the first age of peace was brought by Sargon the Great (c. 2270 BC), of Akkad. He brought the petty and squabbling Sumerian city-states under his own rule and created history’s first empire. It included Mesopotamia, the Levant and parts of modern day Turkey, Syria and Iran. Since then others have forced their rule over much of the globe. We read of Assyria, Babylon, Persia and Macedon and of course Rome. When each of these powers declined wars and rumors of wars ensued.

We moderns are no different. When great powers decline war comes. We might have an up close and personal look at what it is like to live in a world where the predominant power is in decline. As the United States falls into debt and economic collapse, its foreign obligations will be seen more and more as onerous and will simply be abandoned. You see this wherever you look in our geopolitical landscape. Cuts in air and missile defense, abandonment of allies, stopping new weapons systems —these are all signs of decline. Such weakness is obvious to our enemies. Even ridiculously shabby nations like North Korea feel safe enough to threaten the heartland of this nation.

We can expect that as a result of America losing her ability to police the seas and enforce law, that much of the globe will sink into anarchy and dictatorship. Laws will be replaced by the whims of tyrants, and all questions of war and peace will be decide by the simple calculation of power. Nations will cease trying to resemble America and will begin to resemble Venezuela.

Nowhere has this crude fact been better spelled out than by Thucydides. He wrote of the Great War between Athens and Sparta, and how it ushered in formerly unknown spasms of cruelty and violence. Today we admire Athens, though we forget that she become an expert in genocide, mass murder and slavery. What she did to the people of Melos is a harbinger of what our own world is becoming.

Athens was especially murderous to those weaker states who would not dance to her imperial tune. Such was the case of the little island of Melos. Her people refused to join in Athens’ crusade against Sparta and preferred to remain neutral. Athens saw this has an unpardonable affront to her power. In the famous Melian Dialogue between the Athenian delegates and those of Melos, we read of the philosophy of power by those who possess it.

The standard of justice depends upon the equality of power to compel and that in fact the strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept.

Our opinion of the gods and our knowledge of men leads us to conclude that it is a general and necessary law of nature to rule whatever one can. This is not a law we made ourselves nor were we the first to act upon it when it was made. We found it already in existence and we shall leave it to exist forever among those who come after us.

Such a lawless philosophy is still practiced today. In an eerie echo of the Melian Dialogue we read Lt. Gen. Liu Yazhou of the Peoples Liberation Army Air Force:

When a nation grows strong enough, it practices hegemony. The sole purpose of power is to pursue even greater power…Geography is destiny…when a country begins to rise, it should first set itself in an invincible position.

This is the philosophy of the slave-state, a concept of power practiced throughout history by those who could wield it. When law perishes—when there is no nation powerful enough to uphold it—then the strong will do what they will and the weak will suffer what they must.

And what happened to those brave—or foolish—inhabitants of Melos? The Athenians executed every male of military age and enslaved the women and children. The horrors of our 20th century were already common in the 5th century BC.

Those horrors were ended by the rise of American power. When this is no more, we can expect to see their return.

---

The Coming Dialogues Of Melos

Posted on July 23rd, 2009 by Scipio
TheReturnofScipio.Blogspot.com

******************************************

BARRY SOETORO aka BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
IS A
USURPER

He is not eligible to be
President of the United States
because he is not a Natural Born Citizen
as required by Article Two, Section One, Clause Five of the United States Constitution.

This is a fact REGARDLESS of
where he was born (Mombassa, Hawaii, Chicago, Mecca or Mars).

He is not eligible
because he was not born of
TWO PARENTS
BOTH OF WHOM WERE UNITED STATES CITIZENS
at the time of his birth as required by the Constitution.
His father was a subject/ciitizen
of Kenya/Great Britain at the time of his birth and afterwards.
The FACT that he was not born of TWO US CITIZEN PARENTS is all that matters. The question of his birth certificate is a distraction (a distraction fostered by Obama’s supporters?) that ought not to occupy our time and resources.

However, it is possible that he is not a United States
citizen at all even if he was born in Kenya, as three witnesses have testified. The reason is because his mother could not pass her US citizenship on to her son because she did not live continuously in the United States for five full years after her fourteenth birthday as required by the US immigration law in effect during that period of time.

Check it out:
http://www.TheObamaFile.com/ObamaNaturalBorn.htm
Also, an excellent introductory primer on Obama Presiidential Eligibility is to be found at:
http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm

His usurpation can only be corrected (1) by Congress through his Impeachment and Removal [something which will never happen in a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid], or (2) it can be
corrected by his resignation, which could happen if the public presssure on him to resign becomes great enough, or (3) by his removal by the United States Supreme Court affirming a Quo Warranto decision of the United States Federal District Court for the District of Columbia [which process Attorney General Eric Holder would never allow to even begin] or (4) by an amendment to the Constitution,
which will never happen because that again would require the agreement of a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid.
_

HERE IS THE QUESTION WHICH EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN SHOULD BE ASKING HIS OR HER CONGRESSMAN AND SENATORS

“During the 2008 election, then Senator Obama published a statement at his website which said that his birth status was ‘governed’ by the British Nationality Act of 1948. Can you please tell me, and the American people, how a person governed - at birth - by British law, can be a natural born citizen of the United States and thus constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States?”

---
- Leo Rugiens