dnc-certification_of_nomination-082908-2

FOIA Request Response From VA: Document From VA SOS signed by Nancy Pelosi stating that Pelosi certified Obama’s qualifications » dnc-certification_of_nomination-082908-2

33 Comments

33 Comments »

[...] Here’s the link! [...]

Pingback by The Right Side of Life » Blog Archive » Did House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Certify Obama’s Qualifications? | November 27, 2008
This was a rubber stamp move, look at the date, it is August 28,2008…The issue of “natural born” citizenship was not yet an ISSUE! Can you say “CAUGHT WITH YOUR PANTS DOWN?”

Comment by Lori Stinger | November 27, 2008
“official certification” are the key words. That implies both legal implication, due diligence, and legally tenable assertation. It carries a lot of weight. Certification also implies a qualifying process. What can she possibly say, opps, I didn’t certify anything? Well, her light bulb is not as bright as most. This is very good evidence should OBama not be eligible.

The RI email says the same thing, I have no way of posting this PDF.

Comment by virgil | November 27, 2008
Thank you SO MUCH, Virgil! We wrote to you twice on Wednesday. Would you please email the pdf to us?

Comment by count us out | November 27, 2008
Let me tell you first of all, that everyone of you (incl. Donofrio of course) is doing a great job. I say this, although I was an Obama supporter, but I do not want a President with illegitimate power. So in any case, this matter has to be resolved.

However, concerning the certification above, I don’t think that this is such a big deal. The document certifies (i.e. attests and documents) the candidate’s nomination. Nowhere can it be deduced that the (possibly implied) process of qualifiying/vetting Obama would legally include Pelosi, otherwise it would have said: “Certification of qualification” or something like that, or it would have included a wording like e.g. that “Obama has been qualified to fulfill the nomination” etc.

But Virgil is right that Pelosi and Germond are implied by due diligence. However, a court might rule that this due diligence is transferred from these two people to the people, who vetted Obama. Neither Pelosi and Germond are to my mind constitutional lawyers, and so they surely trusted the professionals assessments on Obama’s eligibility in good faith, if there ever was a professional assessment, especially on constitutional issues (see below).

We have to remember that former Solicitor General Ted Olson and Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe came to the conclusion that McCain was a natural born citizen. There must have been some law professionals looking into Obama’s eligibility as well. If not, then Pelosi really IS in trouble.

But of course there are and have always been different views on McCain’s eligibility, e.g. the essay by Prof. Chin, which supports Donofrio’s case, although Chin presents a quite different approach when concluding that McCain is not eligible. Download the PDF here:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract-id=1157621

In any case, I would like to know, who the people were, who vetted Obama, who vetted him professionally, including eligibility for office.

Comment by Joss Brown | November 27, 2008
I don’t care what Solicitor Genl Ted Olson and Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe’s opinions are. They are wrong. If they were so right, why then did the Senate put forth and pass a resolution making McCain eligible? If it was implied, then no resolution would have been needed. Furthermore, my FL SOS told me there were no laws on the books that force them to look into a presidential candidate’s qualifications and we know that is a fact. Furthermore, the resolution passed in the Senate did nothing to satisfy the constitutional requirements. That it was up to the Congress to pass a law stating that the presidential candidate must produce a valid birth certificate. What did the Congress do to rectify this problem, Nothing. At the time the resolution of McCain was brought up, both Sen. McCaskill and Sen Obama were trying to add an amendment which would have included any other candidate, which amendment failed. Which leads me to believe that McCaskill knows the truth and Obama was trying to cover his a**. No way is this man a citizen, I don’t care how many phony documents they put forth, he’s a fraud.

Comment by ladyhawkke | November 27, 2008
Could you please provide a source that proves that Obama and McCaskill were trying to add this amendment? I couldn’t find any record.

However, when looking through the Congressional proceedings, I found two VERY interesting quotes. After the reading of Resolution 511, a short dialog followed. See here:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r110:3:./temp/~r110qg0xfe::

Relevant quotes:

(1) “Because he was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind that Senator McCain is a natural born citizen.” (Leahy)

(2) “My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen.” (Former Federal Judge Secretary Chertoff)

Conclusion:

Resolution 511 has of course no legal validity, because it is not a law. Furthermore Olson’s and Tribe’s assessment is what you, ladyhawke, rightfully called an “opinion”, albeit a professional opinion. But it isn’t a law either.

What is most important here, is that during the debate on 511 a former Federal Judge stated that if a person is born to American parents [please note the plural form!] he qualifies as a “natural-born citizen”. So independent of the possibility that “natural-born citizenship” need also include birth on US soil (which the Panama Canal Zone IS NOT!!!), these two remarks by Leahy and especially Chertoff could pose some real problems for Obama.

Comment by Joss Brown | November 27, 2008
Sorry guys, the link to the LOC is non-permanent. Please use the following link:

http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.uscongress/legislation.110SRes511

Then select “All Information (except text)”
Then select “CR S2950″
Then select point 3 (“Senate Resolution 511″)

The last link will lead you to the Congressional Record with the above dialog.

Comment by Joss Brown | November 27, 2008
To make it a bit clearer—this is why I think 511 might pose a problem for Obama:

If the SCOTUS concludes against Donofrio that McCain is a “natural-born citizen” and that therefore there’s nothing wrong (constitutionally) with Resolution 511, then Obama can logically NOT be “natural-born”, because the reasoning behind 511 was clearly that you need to be born to US parents (plural).

Otherwise (to save Obama’s a$$) they would have to declare 511 null and void.

At least that’s my 2¢.

Comment by Joss Brown | November 27, 2008
Hello Joss. We appreciate your 2¢. Keep ‘em coming.

Here is something you can take for what it’s worth since anyone with any “sense” knows this is filled with (LIES)disinformation. One thing is true, however, and that is that a senate resolution is NOT legally binding.:

Legal Questions Still Surround John McCain’s Birth in the Panama Canal Zone
By EUNICE MOSCOSO
Cox News Service
Monday, July 28, 2008
(Released July 3) WASHINGTON — Is Sen. John McCain a natural-born citizen? Or is he ineligible to be president?

The presumptive Republican nominee was born on Aug. 29, 1936 — not within the 50 United States, but in the Panama Canal Zone, where his father, a Navy officer, was stationed.

His birth location has revived a longstanding debate over the constitutional requirement that limits the presidency to “natural born” citizens.

The problem is that the Framers never defined the term.

At least two lawsuits filed in federal court claim that McCain’s birthplace disqualifies him from becoming president. The issue has been simmering in the blogosphere for months, including discussions on prestigious legal forums. A Google search for “John McCain” and “natural-born citizen” yields more than 57,000 hits.

McCain’s campaign does not appear worried. It commissioned prominent scholars from the left and right to research the question and are confident that the Arizona senator qualifies for the highest office.

His Democratic rival, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, agrees. So does the U.S. Senate, which passed a non-binding resolution declaring that McCain is a natural-born citizen, constitutionally eligible to run for president of the United States.

Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, said the Senate resolution is legally irrelevant, and that the question of McCain’s eligibility is a serious one.

“It is not clear whether a Panamanian-born citizen is a natural-born citizen,” Turley said. “The meaning of the term ‘natural-born’ is unresolved.”

Turley said the current lawsuits against McCain will probably be dismissed as frivolous or premature, but that any court challenges during the state balloting process could move forward.

In addition, he said that if McCain wins the presidency he could face a legal challenge aimed at stopping his inauguration. That could have “a great dysfunctional impact” on the political system, Turley said.

One of the issues in question is whether the Panama Canal Zone was part of the United States at the time of McCain’s birth.

Turley said that military installations, such as the one in Panama, were sitting on leased land and were never part of U.S. soil.

However, Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe and former Solicitor General Theodore Olson, who examined the issue for the McCain campaign, pointed to “substantial legal support” that the United States “exercised sovereignty” over the Panama Canal Zone, including a 1986 Supreme Court opinion.

They also concluded that McCain was a natural-born citizen because his parents were U.S. citizens and that the Framers never intended to exclude children of military officers serving outside of the continental United States from the presidency.

In fact, current federal law defines a natural-born citizen in various ways, including one that clearly includes children of military officers overseas. However, it could be argued that the laws contradict the Constitution.

One of the persons bringing a lawsuit against McCain is Fred Hollander, a retired engineer in Nashua, N.H.

On his Web site — http://www.fredhollander.com — Hollander contends that he actually supports McCain but is afraid that his election could be stolen by Democrats if the eligibility question is not resolved.

The issue has come up several times in history. Charles Curtis, who served as Herbert Hoover’s vice president, was born in Kansas in 1860, a year before it became a state.

Some voters thought Chester Arthur might be ineligible for president because it was rumored that he was born in Canada, but he became the nation’s 21st commander in chief anyway, listing his birthplace as Vermont.

A few prominent presidential candidates who were never elected faced similar questions.

Barry Goldwater, the GOP nominee in 1964, was born in the territory of Arizona three years before it achieved statehood in 1912. George Romney, the father of Mitt Romney, ran for president in 1968 even although he was born in Mexico. Former Sen. Lowell P. Weicker of Connecticut, who ran for the Republican nomination in 1980, was born in Paris, France.

Turley said such questions will continue to arise if the matter is not resolved by a constitutional amendment that would allow all citizens to be eligible for the presidency regardless of their birthplace.

“The requirement that you be a natural-born citizen is distinctly un-American,” he said.

Granting eligibility to naturalized citizens, who started their life as citizens of a foreign country, would open the door to California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who was born in Austria; Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, who was born in Vancouver, and Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida, who was born in Cuba.

Meanwhile, Obama’s status is clear-cut. He was born in Hawaii on Aug. 4, 1961, two years after it became a state.

JOHN McCAIN: A ‘NATURAL BORN’ CITIZEN?

Not qualified — At least two lawsuits have been filed in federal court saying McCain is not a “natural born” citizen, a constitutional requirement for the presidency, because he was not born in one of the 50 United States.

Qualified — Many legal scholars cite evidence that that the United States had sovereignty over the Panama Canal Zone in 1936, when McCain was born. They also say other factors cement his qualifications, including that his parents were U.S. citizens and his father was serving in the military at the time of McCain’s birth.

WHO IS A “NATURAL-BORN” AMERICAN?

The Founding Fathers never defined what it means to be a natural-born American citizen. Federal law defines several instances in which a person qualifies. They include:

— Anyone born inside the United States.

— Any Indian, Eskimo Aleutian, or member of another aboriginal tribe born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the United States does not impair the person’s right to tribal or other property.

— Anyone born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year.

— Anyone born outside the United States, as long as one parent is a U.S. citizen of the United States who lived in the United States for at least five years, with military or diplomatic service included in that time.

— Anyone found in the United States, under the age of 5, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21.

http://www.coxwashington.com/reporters/content/reporters/stories/2008/07/3/2008/07/28/NATURAL_BORN04_COX.html

Comment by count us out | November 27, 2008
Check this out as well:
Obama Adopted Into Crow Nation

Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) arrives for a campaign rally in Crow Agency, Mont., May 19, 2008. (Reuters)

By Matthew Mosk
CROW AGENCY, Mont. — Sen. Barack Obama became the first American presidential candidate to visit the reservation of the Crow Nation and in doing so was adopted into the nation under the Crow name “One Who Helps People Throughout the Land.”

Drums pounded and the crowd cheered as Obama was escorted to the podium by his “new parents,” Hartford and Mary Black Eagle, in the manner of a groom being walked down the aisle. Obama beamed. His adoptive parents gave Obama hugs as he stepped onto a riser to speak.

“I want to thank my new parents,” he said. “The nicest parents you could ever want to know. I like my new name. Barack Black Eagle. That is a good name!”

For all the symbolism — members of the tribe wore colorful traditional clothing and feathered head-dresses — Obama addressed some issues of serious concern not only to the 12,100-member Crow Nation but to many Native American tribes around the country.

Obama told those gathered that he intended to acknowledge the “tragic history” of Native Americans over the past three centuries. They “never asked for much, only what was promised by the treaty obligations of their forebears,” he said, promising to honor those treaties.

Moreover, he pledged to bring sorely needed “quality affordable health care and a world-class education to reservations all across America. That will be a priority when I’m president.”

The visit was meaningful, said Darrin Old Coyote, a member of the tribe who wore an elaborate headdress. “To have us left out all these years, and then for him to come here, it shows respect, and it makes us optimistic,” Old Coyote said.

The visit also had political value for Obama. The members of the Crow Nation vote as “a close-knit bloc,” Old Coyote said. “Now that Senator Obama is part of the family, that is where we will go.”

Posted at 6:04 PM ET on May 19, 2008

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/05/19/obama_adopted_into_crow_nation.html

Comment by count us out | November 27, 2008
Well, that’s exactly the view that is probably wrong and that Donofrio is challenging. At the end of his article Moscoso alleges “anyone born inside the US” etc. pp. is “natural-born American”. First of all the wording is wrong, because “American nationals” are also Americans, although not American “citizens”. So it would have to read “natural-born citizens”. But when looking at the underlying law (US Code 8.1401a sqq.) it says nothing about “natural-born” or “natural-born citizen” or “natural-born American”. It only talks about “citizens at birth”. And a “citizen at birth” does not necessarily mean that he was “natural-born”.

I also suggest reading the essay by Prof. Chin (link see above: Post #5), who has compelling evidence that McCain wasn’t even DECLARED an American citizen at the time of his birth according to US Code 8.1403. McCain was in all probability born as a citizen of Panama. The US law which automatically declares all people born to US parents in Panama as “US citizens”, came into effect much later. So McCain was at least at the beginning of his life a citizen of Panama. And even if US Code 8.1403 had been in effect at his birth, he would DE IURE not be a “citizen at birth” (as laid-out in 8.1401), but only “delared” a citizen, which is something like an automatic and immediate naturalization process. In any case, he can’t have been “natural-born”, if he wasn’t even a “citizen at birth”.

This is a catastrophe. It could set a precedent e.g. for politicians like Schwarzenegger to run for President — although I do like the guy —, because (like McCain) he is a citizen by statute, not by birth.

Comment by Joss Brown | November 27, 2008
via wndawmn666

Here is a little more on it:

A natural-born citizen of the United States means those persons born whose father the United States already has an established jurisdiction over, i.e., born to father’s who are themselves citizens of the United States.

A person who had been born under a double allegiance cannot be said to be a natural-born citizen of the United States because such status is not recognized (only in fiction of law).

A child born to an American mother and alien father could be said to be a citizen of the United States by some affirmative act of law but never entitled to be a natural-born citizen because through laws of nature the child inherits the condition of their father.

Please visit http://federalistblog.us/2008/11/natural-born_citizen_defined.html# more for further information.

Comment by count us out | November 27, 2008
Yes, the federalistblog article is excellent. Prof. Yinger has very similar arguments and conclusions. See here:

http://faculty.maxwell.syr.edu/jyinger/Citizenship/history.htm

Comment by Joss Brown | November 27, 2008
I feel sorry for the CROW nation as they were lied to. Obama is the Pied Piper he can tell you anything and youwill belive it. But check out a few websites as I did you will find that Obama was born in Keyna his father was Kenyan and his mother was American but too far along to fly to HA. She gave birth in Kenya with her husbands mother helping. He gave up his citizenship to USA when he took the kenya citizenship. That is why he could fly to Kenya when the US forbade any citizen to go ther for the civil unrest. His cousin lost the presidentail election and Obama and his wife went to Kenya to stir up the crowds and get them to rise up against the Presidency. They killed anyone that got in their way. He has not applied for citizenship for the USA> Records have been checked and there is no record.
why did he hire attorneys to stop the lawsuits when just as easy he could show his BC. He has not. The ones on his website are forgeries and that has been proven time and again. He thinks we are lambs to follow blindly and we are not .
We are EAGLES souring high and wide to protect our Constitution and Bill of Rights and the Nation as whole of free enterprise.

Comment by Marcia | November 27, 2008
Sorry, I thought that paragraph was taken out of the resolution about other candidates being born out of the country. Is this the same resolution you are referring to?
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-sr511/text

Comment by ladyhawkke | November 28, 2008
I am opposed to opening the door for any naturalized citizen being able to run for President. This is the United States of America and I don’t want a person born in another country, who might have an allegiance to that country, coming to our country, become a citizen, and then run for president. No Way, no how. I also like Schwartzenneger, but don’t like Mel Martinez from Cuba. I lived in Miami and believe me, he is Cuba first and America second. Suppose Karzai from Afganistan came over here and then became a citizen and ran for President? Changing the constitution to allow “any” citizen to run for POTUS is dangerous. USA FIRST! Illegals need not apply.

Comment by ladyhawkke | November 28, 2008
The Berg lawsuit had already been to court and Obama lawyers had already been in court. They knew about it.

Comment by Researcher on Obama | November 28, 2008
Read this: Amending the Natural Born Citizen Requirement
It is obvious BO is not natural born or his friends wouldn’t be trying so hard to make him one.
http://www.patriotbrigaderadio.com/barracks/index.php?topic=250.0

Comment by ladyhawkke | November 28, 2008
THANK YOU, Ladyhawkke. We truly appreciate all that you do. We’re arm in arm with you. May all of our efforts be blessed.

Comment by count us out | November 28, 2008
I am one of two attorneys on Keyes v Bowen, can you please contact me at dr_taitz@yahoo.com, I would like to post on my blog this doc and see if any att-s would like to file against DNC and Pelosi

Comment by orly | November 29, 2008
Didn’t Obama explain in Germany that he was a citizen of the world?

Here’s something to read to your children, after putting the last piece of “government-issued” wood on the fire.

http://www.groundbreaking.com/Good_Sam/Rhyme003.htm

Comment by asthecrowflies | November 30, 2008
[...] While the U.S. Constitution spells out in Article II that the President must be a natural born citizen – “natural born” and “citizen” are distinct qualifications – neither federal nor state law requires that any government actor must determine whether the candidate for POTUS satisfies these conditions. True, Ms. Pelosi’s signed a Certification of Nomination after the Democratic National Convention; but in this document, she only promised he is the Party’s nominee and not that he is Constitutionally eligible for the job. http://countusout.wordpress.com/2008/11/26/foia-request-response-from-va-document-from-va-sos-signed... [...]

Pingback by FIND OUT WHETHER BARACK OBAMA IS A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN AS REQUIRED UNDER ARTICLE II OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND STOP THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE FROM VOTING FOR HIM, IF HE IS NOT! « jbjd | December 1, 2008
“In any case, I would like to know, who the people were, who vetted Obama, who vetted him professionally, including eligibility for office.”
MSM, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC ect took care of this…
1. Black… check
2. Democrat… Check
3. Past records and achievements.. All blocked.. check
4. Meets all qualifications for job.. He said he did.. Check.
5. Halo.. check
6. Walks on water.. check
7. Sends chills up men’s legs.. Check
What more checking do you expect? It is not like he was asked to ask a question, that brings in the background checks.

Comment by USSA | December 1, 2008
The international civil rights organization known as AXJ is looking into the birth of Mr. OBAMA via AXJ-KENYA. http://www.axjus.com

Comment by AXJ | December 1, 2008
Thank you all for caring enough to comment, research, file suit and continue to get the word out. Few people realize how crucial this issue is to our very survival as a nation of law based on our Constitution. The thought that this rogue and his handlers have come this close to seizing the White House is as incomprehensible as it is terrifying.

I applaud you all and urge you to work together for mainstream media exposure and reform with Media Blackout, Newsbuster and MediaPUMA.wordpress.com

Comment by pumaspirits | December 2, 2008
Ladyhawke and Joss Brown,

I came across the answer to your question on NBC’s website:

“Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill, a prominent Obama backer, has introduced legislation that would define a “natural born citizen” as anyone born to any U.S. citizen while serving in the active or reserve components of the U.S. armed forces. Obama is a co-sponsor of the bill.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23841816/

Comment by FembotsForObama | December 3, 2008
I know this post is a little behingd the 8 ball. I believe the “certification” signed by Pelosi is nothing more than a “certification” that Obama wone the Democratic nomination by virtue of the delegate count.

Comment by epicurious | December 14, 2008
Betrayal by Our Own Government
This is not about an individual’s race, but his disqualification from becoming the President of our country due to his misinterpretation of essential facts to gain favor in the President election

We have approached every agency within our government to investigation the numerous discrepancies surrounding Barack H. Obama before he is officially sworn in as the next President of the United States of America. We don’t understand why something of such dire importance and necessity would receive such little concern. The fear of receiving disfavor of some of the voters, but not all, appear to be top on the list of reasons why an investigation will not be requested. We keep being passed back and forth between agencies in the hope of discouraging us. I need to believe that while there is corruption involved with some of the people within the various governmental agencies there are a sufficient number that if made aware would chose to take corrective action. With this glimmer of hope I proceed onward in my endeavor to solicit help to rectify a tremendous injustice to the American people who really care about their government.

I do not doubt that it would be a source of extreme embarrassment to the Democratic Party and possibly the FEC if known that they failed to accomplish a complete investigation into Obama’s background before they selected him to run on their ticket. In particular his name alone and his Muslim heritage should have posed questions. We can only assume that the desire for political success by the Democratic Party held more significance and would more than likely be guaranteed by their selecting an African American as their candidate. His persuasive charismatic attributes and use of propaganda could sway (brainwash) the American people to enable their victory. The purchase of excessive advertising rendering bias reporting by the news media a final touch to their successful win!

Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution reads: “No Person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.”

The constitution is a general outline provided by our forefathers and the need to implement additional requirements to insure the security and stability of our country was deemed necessary over the years due to the increased criminal activity that took place within our country. The background check was instituted and is used universally throughout our country in securing employment, in securing entry into schools and colleges and most importantly before anyone can run for any governmental office. etc.

There are numerous questions as to Obama’s citizen status raising suspicion and doubt about Obama constitutional qualification to be president, as well as other discrepancies that should be addressed: To settle these questions Mr. Obama must produce proof of citizenship and other documentation that would clear his inability to receive a certified national security clearance! At this time, Obama is refusing to provide the additional documentation to support his full qualification and he has hired a team of lawyers to find loopholes to avoid his having to produce these type of documents.

By Obama constantly refusing to summit the required information and then if he conveniently provides it, when forced to do so after the elapse of an extraordinary amount of time, its value is lost in contemplation that payoffs could be involved to achieve the required result.

Documents that must be produced include:
(a) a certified copy of “vault” (original long version) birth certificate;
(b) certified copies of all reissued and sealed birth certificates in the names Barack Hussein Obama, Barry Soetoro, Barry Obama, Barack Dunham and Barry Dunham;
(c) a certified copy Certification of Citizenship;
(d) a certified copy Oath of Allegiance taken upon age of maturity;
(e) certified copies of admission forms for Occidental College, Columbia University and Harvard Law School; and
(f) certified copies of any court orders or legal documents changing his name from Barry Soetoro, or to whomever he now professes to be.
Now the following being added;
(g)both American and Indonesian Passport verification under the aforementioned names since he could not enter Indonesia under an American passport (he would have to become an Indonesian citizen revoking his American citizenship and would then be qualified as a naturalized citizen and not a “natural born’ citizen. One of the loopholes Obama is trying to get around. There is no record of Obama holding an American passport prior to his becoming a U.S. Senator.)

How could our government show such little regard to the above without assuming they have become corrupted by other influential forces detrimental to the proper functioning of our government?

After repeated requests before the actual election process, he has refused to produce even the first essential document, a valid birth certificate. The first copy which he submitted over the internet, upon verification by a qualified source, was found to be fraudulent. Since that time and even after his election, he has arrogantly refused to submit this document which should support he was unqualified at the time he ran for the position. When he was in Hawaii visiting his ailing grandmother, he could have collected a copy of this document, but he did not. Can we assume as a result of his visit, he also visited the Director of the Health Department and gained his support in refusing to release this document without written approval of Obama. Now, in place of this document, our government has accepted a statement from the Director confirming that Obama was in fact born in Hawaii. Back when Obama was born, Hawaii’s practice was merely to accept statements that they were born there, not really caring they were not. Since they did not have a good control on the actual recording of births back them, they believed the people would not openly lie to accomplish the desired result of gaining improper citizenship into the United States.

The Hawaiian Directors confirmation of birth by word of mouth, is an invisible document providing nothing to unequivocally support where Obama was actually born and who he really is, and still fails to address the issues at hand.

It is reasonable that these documents should be produced considering that his father is Kenyan, his adoptive father is Indonesian, and his grandmother claims to have been present at his birth in Kenya. If he is a natural born citizen then producing these documents should not be any problem.

Our government does not care that he has committed fraud by hiding (1) his full involvement in the financial disaster (documented by testimony taken during the financial committee meetings during 2005 and 2006) and blatantly accusing the Republican Party to discourage voting for the Republican candidate (2) failing to substantiate the purpose of his receiving over $100,000 personally from the financial institutions of Fannie Mae/Freddie Max, (3) of his true identity and birthright, (betraying our constitution) ,(4) has bribed the news media through the purchase of extensive advertising space to deliberately withhold negative information about him from the American people to keep them in the dark, and (5) has disrupted the accomplishment of the required background check to stall any investigation into his disqualification to enable his electoral certification as our next President and his swearing in on January 20, 2009.

As of this date, December 12, 2008, Obama has failed to provide the requested information and he is not qualified to be out next President. If the Elector Committee vote in his favor and allow him to proceed onto the final swearing in ceremony and his inauguration, we will know how far the corruption in our government has gone.
Basing one’s decision on the fear factor that a racial conflict (African Americans) could result is not only one sided but shows a total disregard of the importance of the security and stability of our country.
We ask for your help in making know our dilemma to our government, since it is apparent we have been blocked in doing so by the individuals involved in the corruption. We do not have access to those we need to approach that have more creditability in accomplishing the needed investigation to address the issue once and for all.
If nothing is done before January 20th, it is certain that Obama will become our next President. However we will exercise our right in not honoring any rules or regulations on which his name appears. We as Patriots, do not have to accept anyone who has failed to meet our constitutional and background requirements even though members of our government have inappropriately done.
This could lead to civil disturbances and could erupt into civil wars throughout this country and to hopefully avoid this we may need to invoke our rights as true American citizens in accordance with the constitution as follows:
“All men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principals and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”

All of this action which is about to take place is because there are those in our government who would not take corrective action by accomplishing the basic investigation requested by its concerned citizens. We are not talking about a certain few. Over 80,000 individuals on the internet expressed their concerns over Obama’s lack of qualification (it grows larger each day), yet those in charge of our legislative and judicial branches choose to look the other way.
I execute my right to demand Obama’s electoral confirmation be denied and he be disqualified for the position for which he knowingly did not qualify. Our government was founded on the principles that is shall be a government of the people and by the people. If every agency within our government refused to become involved why should they exist!

In accordance with my right of freedom of speech without retaliation from the U.S. Government, I render this communication

Comment by Joan of Arc | December 16, 2008
Disloyalty by the Majority of the African American Population and Naïve Young Voters

With an interest to understand why people voted for Obama, I was totally shocked by the comments that three out of four provided to me. The three people I asked said any change was better than what we had. How pathetic. It appears they just don’t care about the security and stability of our country or are even interested in finding out the truth. They believe the issues of his qualification are merely jealously on the part of the Republicans . There seems to be a lot to be said about blind loyalty. I am glad our country in the beginning was not based on such perverse logic. Apparently we have enjoyed too much freedom, so we take it for granted.

Since the corruption is so deep, there is little possibility the truth will ever be told for fear of a racial uprising so they would rather take a chance on having a terrorist within our government. They talk about racial attitudes which developed heavily during this campaign due to the exploitation by the African Americans, to gain favor for their candidate. Since Obama was selected as our next President, they care less whether he could be a criminal as long as they assume him to be their racial equal. There definitely was racial activity but not against the blacks but against the whites, only on the basis that his background should be questioned which they have no concern about. They have become so complacent that they don’t believe American can ever be taken down. Yet, they have now allowed our country to become potentially weak to infiltration by the enemy.

Even if Obama is not the enemy in our mist, that I feel he has the potential of being, by this election we have proven to the world how weak and stupid we have become when we don’t even investigate the background of someone that will hold one of the most critical positions in our government and have thrown our constitution out the window. They talk about immigration, soon we will be the ones on the outside looking in than the other way around when we lose interest in the fundamentals of how our country was formed.

I had hoped if we were wrong about Obama, his devoted fans would be more than interested in proving that to us. I am willing to have an open mind if they likewise would do the same. To have such undivided and bias loyalty in lieu of the extreme consequences doesn’t bother them one iota. What has happened to our people. I hope it doesn’t take a war, this time another civil one within our own country resulting from the lackadaisical attitude towards patriotism and value of our precious freedoms that a majority of people take for granted today.

Our ancestors fought the Civil War, brother against brother, etc. to free the black slaves and we are now thanked for their efforts by their dishonoring our government in allowing infiltration of a possible foreign enemy into the highest position of our government, just because they think he is a black African American than a potential black African Muslim and not caring which.

When the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, we certainly would not have elected a Japanese President and probably still would have a problem doing so. Yet only 7 years after the bombing of the World Trade Center and our White House by Islamic Muslim Militants, we readily elect an assumed black African American/Muslim without any validation of his background.

I have never felt so much disgust for the people, black African Americans as well as the naïve young adults, primarily college graduates, who had access to information through the internet to make a wiser choice, but chose not to use it since they care more about their own self interest than that of their country.

A nation can survive its fools and even the ambitious, but it cannot survive treason from within.

Comment by Joan of Arc | December 16, 2008
RACIAL BIAS WILL DESTORY OUR COUNTRY

We fought the Civil War, brother against brother, to release the slaves from bondage believing that they should enjoy the rights and freedom that the rest of us enjoyed. Our success in accomplishing this will now become our downfall.

It appears when people are suppressed for so long, they do not understand that freedom is not free and make decisions that could seriously affect that freedom:

With freedom comes responsibility to make the right choices to retain that right and to question anything or anyone that could cause the relinquishment of that freedom:

To base one’s decision merely on discriminating factors such as race, sex, religion, age, or education (ivy league versus less prestigious schools or colleges) rather than on documented morality becomes destructive to the country and to its people.

Destruction of freedom becomes possible when the following issues become involved:

1. Failure to understand the difference between promises (praying upon the needs of an individual) and deceit to gain favor (willful abandonment of those needs to gain access to a business, political or financial position in favor of the candidate over that of the people).

2. Failure to keep racial bias out of the equation in determining quality of a policy that which could affect an individual’s life or lifestyle.

3. Failure to review and independently question any discrepancy or controversy before rendering a decision without favoring an individual’s word over that of substantiated facts. The day that a person’s word meant something is long gone.

4. Failure to avoid the scenario of devoted fan (resulting from one’s personal attributes regardless of performance over that of supportive fan (based on a true evaluation of one’s principles over that of endless devotion regardless of principles).

The resulting consequences involved due to the aforementioned four (4) issues have taken a toll in the 2008 Presidential election. The 2008 Presidential election will go down in history as the most corrupt of any in our history. A majority of the disillusioned public select a candidate regardless of his involvement with controversial individuals (both inside the country and with foreign countries) and his lack of qualification (due to unsupported birth and back ground certification) make their choice on the basis that change is necessary without any regard for the safety and security of our people and our country.
Even after repeated request were made for Obama to produce documentation to address these negative issues to clearly support his election, his loyal fans, for the sake of their country, fail to see the importance of accomplishing this by collecting these documents, which once and for all could clear Obama’s name. Instead they prefer to promote the racial excuse, dividing our country forever. They demand racial freedom and hold it hostage at their convenience. Instead of gaining equality they are pulling more and more people away from it.

If Colin Powell would have run, I would have voted for him as I consider him a black American of better caliber than Obama. I blame the Democratic Party for not making a better choice.

If they continue to look the other way, they are responsible for the results that follow. The longer the black American’s promote racism the longer they will be slaves to it. Refusing to demand answers from Obama supports their impetuous decision in wanting a black American as President at all costs. It is easier to accuse their lack or success on racial bias rather than lack of achievement.

Of course, the black Americans are not the only ones that have supported this corruption that could serious affect the safety and stability of our country. It is unfortunate that our young voters (primarily college students) have failed to fulfill their obligations as well in questioning the controversy surrounding Obama and have decided to take the easy way out as well, by looking the other way, in favor of promises that would better support their lifestyle regardless of the consequences. The potential of a Muslin radical within the confines of our government does not concern them one iota. There is no acceptable excuse when they have accessibility to the internet why they did not use that source to gain true insight into the controversy surrounding Obamat.

While it is somewhat understandable, but still perverse, that the black Americans would make the decision that they did, what excuse do the others have?

If only the Obama voters would support the request to collect the needed documents (which could relinquish all doubt in Obama’s qualification as our next President), this issue could be put to bed once and for all and could bring about unity within our country. If Obama has nothing to hide, then this request should be supported. If this request is denied, then continued support by the black Americans and the young voters should be looked upon as a means of undermining our country and should be dealt with accordingly.

If equality is the desire of the black American people, than prove it by granting this simple request.

Comment by Joan of Arc | December 16, 2008
[...] Courtesy of Count Us Out [...]

Pingback by Official Certification of Nomination for POTUS « Citizens Against Pro-Obama Media Bias | December 29, 2008
What is/are the federal law(s) against election fraud?

Anyone know?

If so, please post a comment here and over at http://investigatingobama.blogspot.com

Comment by Arlen Williams | December 30, 2008