Obama in Default, Court Case to Proceed!

Come on Marcus...

On a scale of 1 to 10, how well is Obama doing in your humble opinion. I'm curious.

Any comments on the CZAR thing? You comfortable with that? All these people being handed lots of power that nobody oversees? We're being taken over by the Marxists... Obama is putting them in every position... and you just sit there blissfully in blindness.


How do you like this guy?

I know you love Wiki so obviously you'll agree with everything posted in his bio.

Speaking to the East Bay Express, Jones said he first became radicalized in the wake of the 1992 Rodney King riots.

"I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th," he said. "By August, I was a communist."

Jones was still a law student at Yale Law School at the time. While volunteering as a legal monitor during a peaceful protest following the Rodney King riots, Jones was unlawfully arrested along with other legal monitors and some protesters. He and the other detainees were released no more than 4 hours after being illegally arrested and Jones was never convicted of a crime.

"I met all these young radical people of color – I mean really radical: communists and anarchists. And it was, like, 'This is what I need to be a part of.' I spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary," he said.

In the late 90s, Van Jones was involved in Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM), a multi-racial activist collective with Marxist influences. While never large, STORM was an influential group in the Bay Area, working with numerous organizations including Bay Area Police Watch, School of Unity and Liberation (SOUL), and People Organized to Win Employment Rights (POWER). Jones and STORM were also active in the anti Iraq War demonstrations of the early 2000’s.


Now coming from your lala land, this is what you would have read about the guy... from HuffPo of course...

Van Jones Appointed Green Jobs, Innovation Adviser

WASHINGTON — Author and activist Van Jones will be a special adviser for green jobs, enterprise and innovation in the Obama administration.

Nancy Sutley, chairwoman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, said in a release Monday that Jones will start work next week to help direct the administration's efforts to create jobs and help the environment. Sutley said Jones will work on "vulnerable communities."

Jones founded Green for All, a national organization that promises environmentally friendly jobs to help lift people out of poverty. He wrote the New York Times best-seller "The Green Collar Economy."
 
From all this back-and-forth, one thing seems to me to stand out---

Those who are trying to get a hearing on Obama's background are probably better off NOT using licensed attorneys. 'Procedure' becomes moot if you invoke Haines v Kerner. This might get heard after all.
KS
 
This picture pretty much sums up what is happening to the Obama administration at this point.

Wheels off the Wagon.jpg
 
A House Divided and Plea for Resolution: Formal Demand for Congressional Inquiry upon the Honorable Congressman Robert Goodlatte of the State of Virginia

21 July, 2009

Re: The Constitutional Authority of Barak Hussein Obama to Hold and Occupy the Office of the President of the United States of America and by which He Commands the Armed Forces.

We are long past the general election of November and it seems as though it were ages ago. Now well into July we still have no resolution to one of the most important Constitutional issues we have faced in the entire history of our great Nation; the answer to a question which has the potential to shake this country to its foundation but if we are to survive must be answered. To continue to ignore this issue is inhumane to the members of the Armed Forces, divisive and compromises us all because as at a minimum it conflicts their resolve and our own solidarity .

I am a USAF Military Officer in the service of my Country. With all humility and cognizant of the greater valor of many who have come before, I have upheld to the very best of my ability my oath of office.

I have fought for what I see as right and just before God and for my country. I acknowledge that I humbly and willingly bow before my Creator, and while I have served my Country proudly, I have never bowed in subservience before any Government or earthly King. While I am not proud of everything I have done in my life to say the least, I am proud of America and have never been ashamed of her. I am proud of her not because I am oblivious to her faults, but because of her innate ability to rise above them. She has gracefully blessed me with opportunity beyond what I deserve and what I could expect from most every other Nation on this earth and for this I am deeply thankful. I am not alone as countless others have also been blessed but the cost has not been free.

I have not ever and do not now in anyway consider it inappropriate to question the orders of those above me if, in good faith, I believe those orders are illegal. This is irrespective of the person or rank of the individual. The President is not immune. In fact, as it relates to the defense of our Constitution, I believe I am duty bound to question; to do otherwise in my opinion is dereliction of duty. Such is the moral basis and justification for my demand.

“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.” --Theodore Roosevelt.

Let me be clear. This for me is not a political issue. This is not based on race, religion or any value I hold other than my respect for the Constitution as my oath demands. I am bringing this before you as a Military Officer of my own volition and not as a concerned citizen. I have not been coerced or forced to do this. I affirm: although I have my personal opinions regarding the political ambitions of Barak Hussein Obama it is and would be inappropriate in my capacity as a military Officer to question ANY order he might give me due to political differences we may have. I have had significant political differences with past Presidents during my tenure to include our last one and never questioned their absolute authority over me in the conduct of my duty.
So I repeat this is not political but rather squarely about the Constitutional question at hand. Is Barak Hussein Obama a Natural Born Citizen qualified to hold the office of President and to be Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces or is he not? I speak only for myself and not for the Air Force when I say, based solely on the information he has given I am of the opinion he is not.

Either way, I have a right as an American soldier to have this question investigated and answered by Congress as it has direct bearing on my oath of office and relates to the legality of the orders he gives.

In an open letter of 3 March 2009 I pleaded with and challenged Secretary Gates to honor his oath of office and use whatever remedy he had in his power to resolve the issue. I expressed my concern that it was dividing and hurting my military family. I have also written my Senator Mark Warner of Virginia on 1 Feb. 2009 and pleaded that the Senator present take this issue up before Congress which he refused to do. When asked to meet with me to explain his failure to act he refused to do this as well. In his defense he is a young Senator and perhaps failed to recognize my plea for what it was and the right as a military member by which I asked him to bring this before Congress and his duty to act on it.

I have been advised through military channels that my letters to Secretary Gates and Senator Warner were inflammatory … so be it. I am not ashamed that I demand my leaders give the same weight to their oath of office as those appointed below them are required to do. If it turns out I am wrong I will freely offer my public apology, until then I can not hide my frustration and dismay and I continue my demand that they follow their oath and rise to the defense of our Constitution. I am convinced, as I wrote to Secretary Gates, that we are tearing our military apart by pitting their loyalty to the office of the President and commitment to defend America not against her enemies but against the greater moral and ethical question of serving at the command of a person who is not qualified to hold the office in violation of the Constitutional requirements.

We have focused much attention of late on the interrogation of prisoners and have been told we must consider the moral and ethical conduct of our methods if we are to regain our stature as a Great Nation. I rather believe if we are tarnished, we are so to a greater extent not for what we have done to our enemies, but rather for what we have done and are we are willing to do to our own; to include taking from those who were here before what was not ours to take and enslaving others. This is the Great Stain on a Nation otherwise known as a beacon of freedom and hope in a troubled world. So how does this relate to the question at hand? I submit we are committing another disgraceful hypocritical act when we show concern for our enemy’s human rights and then send our own soldiers off to battle to die for our Constitution which in turn is then violated by the very person that is sending them off to die for it. For those on active duty the situation is intolerable! How can it be that Congress would allow them to spill their blood on foreign soil for America and then leave them to wonder in the final waning moments of their life if the person who sent them to their death is an impostor; this is inhumane and absolutely cruel.

This is a National disgrace beyond comprehension and yet this is exactly the situation we are in. The fact that the courts have denied us standing and have not in a single case heard our pleading on the merits is an abomination and is absurd on its face. This must not be allowed to continue. Have we been deceived and are we dying at the command of a person who lacks the legal and therefore the moral right to command us?

Greatness never arises from a bed of deceit. The end no matter how noble it is or appears to be is always perverted to the detriment of the people if the means is based in a lie. In this regard we have no choice. As I am witnessing the cords of division rise in the military, if the office of the President is divided in loyalty (as would be evidenced by an USURPER) we as a Nation are a House divided. This is true regardless if recognized by the majority or not for it is the nature of such divisions that the dchallenged to the very core of our commitment to our Country and to each other. Very much like a Patient’s presenting symptom, often ignored or discounted that belies a deadly underlying disease that only under stress declares itself in its full lethal manifestation. This division is certain whether we wish to face it or not and one only need look around to see that such a challenge or stress is on the horizon. Would it not be wise that we address this now? In addition to the moral issue and because of it we should not allow this uncertainty to undermine our resolve and ability to respond to it with a united Military.
Early in our History President Lincoln said that a House divided against itself cannot stand! Does anyone doubt the wisdom of these words?

While I believe this would eventually be answered by the courts and I am not opposed to a remedy by the Courts given the gravity of the situation; I hold the opinion that the duty for remedy is greater upon the Congress. We should never fear the light of truth or the consequences of its discovery for to do so only deepens the injury and decreases the chances for recovery. This is as true in Medicine as it is true for the heart of our Nation.

As such I respectfully and formally demand a constitutional inquiry into the qualifications of Barak Hussein Obama to hold the office of the President of the United States of America and to the authority by which he commands the Armed Forces in her service.

Respectfully Submitted,
Lt Col David A. Earl-Graef USAFR MC
 
Weren’t the war protesters and men who dodged the draft in Vietnam using the ‘unconstitutionality’ angle as well? What makes these men different who are refusing to deploy because of a yet unproven, (you are innocent until proven guilty in this country, unless you are dealing with the IRS) allegation regarding Obama’s ‘legal’ status. Do you look at them more favorably then those young men of the 60s and 70s who refused to be drafted (remember these men who are currently refusing to serve volunteered).

Those men signed up to serve this country – to protect this country. They protect us, the American people. They are refusing to do that. I feel that they are using their military status as a soapbox to be able to voice their political opinion. Once you sign up, willingly, you have committed to protecting the country, no matter who or what party holds the reins of power. I can understand refusing to be drafted to fight a war that you believe hasn’t passed the constitutionality ‘test’ far more easily than I can understand someone who has signed up to fight a war, was willing to fight for the people of this country, and now is refusing to because they don’t think that the President has the legal right to hold his office. We still need protection, and when they signed up they promised to protect us. There wasn’t an asterisk anywhere that said “but only if I agree with the citizenship status of our leaders”.

They serve our country – which contrary to their belief has very little to do with the legal status of the man who holds the office of the president, but has everything to do with us, the American people.
 
Get your head around the idea that we have a usurper in office and you will fully understand the crisis we are facing.

Oh please do tell me that if this wasn't the first black african-american that the media wouldn't be all over this.

They tried to stop McCain for Christ's sake and then tried to cover him up.

Wake UP!

SHOW US THE DAMN BIRTH CERTIFICATE!And Toss In All Your College Records For Good Measure Mr. Transparency.
 
foxpaws said:
What makes these men different who are refusing to deploy because of a yet unproven, (you are innocent until proven guilty in this country, unless you are dealing with the IRS) allegation regarding Obama’s ‘legal’ status.
Click to expand...
Errrrrrrrrrrr...that only applies to criminal charges. Obama's legal status hasn't been raised to the level of criminal. The issue is whether or not he is eligible to be President. You can be a legally naturalized citizen, i.e. Schwarzenegger, and not be eligible.
 
There have been countless threads and post about this birth certificate , none of which have proven one thing except, Obama, for one reason or another, does not feel the need to produce anything further to prove his legitimacy.
Right from the gitgo I have said it will never happen, and I still think it will remain that way.
Now, another thought comes too mind here.
As much as I did not, and do not want a black president, (obviously if you have read any of my post concerning Obama, you know I have a dislike for black people, and have never hidden that fact) I striongly feel that his race played an enormous part in this "witch hunt".
Can any of you name one other president, of person running for president that was asked to produce his, or her birth certificate publicly to prove citizenship?
I sure can't.
I think it is only a trumped up assumption by people who feel the same as I about black people, that is fueling this birth certificate debacle.
They get online and spout their indifference to him, and some have petitioned the courts to intervene, while all the while hiding their true reason for their fruitless efforts to oust him.
I don't like him, or his wife, never have, and never will, and I also think he will never be removed from office on the grounds he is not a legitimate candidate to be pressident.
As I said above, this stinks of racisim with a capital "R".
I can hear all the replies as I write this, "The biggot speaks".
"Who are you to say this is racist"?
"Isn't this calling the kettle black"?
You can say anything you please, but facts are facts, and you will never see the day Obama is removed because of failure to produce a long form birth certificate.
To further back up my belief, just show me one instance where any candidate, or president was asked to publicy produce a long form birth certificate.
If you can, then I will concede.
Bob.
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
NEWSFLASH: McCain LOST!

:bowrofl: :bowrofl: :bowrofl: :bowrofl:

It would be impossible for McShame to be accused of being the "ursurper" of the POTUS. So your point is moot.
Click to expand...


It is not a moot point as you put it.
My statement was, "name one president or candidate for president that had too publicly produce a long form berth certificate."
Mc cain was a candidate.
Still looking for that varifable proof.
Bob.
 
Bob Hubbard said:
Still looking for that varifable proof.
Click to expand...

Sorry to disappoint you Bob but McCain eligibility was brought up about the saem time as Obama's. McCain's went so far as to the Senate for a resolution. And then McCaskill, Hillary and Obama tried to slip in an amendment that would make people like McCain and Obama eligible.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/582683/despite_being_born_in_panama_is_john.html?cat=47


Do some research and get up to speed here.

It is not about race. It is about the CONSTITUTION, but rest assured had McCain won, all the Left and the media would be talking about is how McCain didn't meet 1 of the 3 requirements to be eligible.

I object not to his race, but to the fact that he is; 1) not natural born, 2) grew up under very questionable circumstances with his years growing up in Indonesia, 3) his complete blackout of ALL his records (please feel free to showcase records he has released), his parents and grandparents backgrounds, 4) his education and the people he associated with back then, 5) his choice of Church, and 6) his choice of friends. The fact that he cannot speak unless someone writes the words for him is equally troubling I guess.

Race isn't even on the list although they should refer to him as the first Arab-American President as that is closer to the truth of his claimed identity.
 
Quote, "(please feel free to showcase records he has released), his parents and grandparents backgrounds, 4) his education and the people he associated with back then, 5) his choice of Church, and 6) his choice of friends. The fact that he cannot speak unless someone writes the words for him is equally troubling I guess."


What candidate or president has done , or been asked too do what you state in the above quote?

As for that link you posted, I sure as hell don't take that as gospel.
Many lines were double and triple spaced and some sentences left hanging.
I would not call any of the sources quoted in that link as being the "the sole word"
They are nothiung but political blogs favoring their views.
Some quotes made that are in the constitution are valid in the article, but I am very suspecious of the words that look as though they were intentionally omitted.
I stand my ground.
Bob.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 139 (members: 0, guests: 139)
Back
Top