by Katie Pavlich
Senator Jim DeMint, in partnership with Chairman of the Republican Study Committee (RSC) Rep. Jim Jordan and Chairman of the RSC Budget and Spending Task force Scott Garrett, have unveiled their solution to reducing federal spending in order to address the crippling amount of debt the United States currently holds.
Jordan pointed out the amount of debt is nearly the size of our entire economy and has grown from $8.6 trillion just four years ago to more than $14 trillion today and that spending cuts have to be addressed in order to prevent falling further into debt.
The Spending Reduction Act is the first step to halting mounting debt and if passed will save taxpayers $2.5 trillion through 2021. Spending cuts outlined in the bill would take place immediately and throughout the next decade.
DeMint referred to the legislation as a way to make tough decisions in order to preserve freedom rather than sending the country over the edge into bankruptcy.
NRO outlines some of the cuts:
– Reducing the federal workforce by 15 percent through attrition, and eliminating automatic pay increases for the next five years.
– Eliminating all remaining “stimulus” funding. $45 billion
– Privatizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. $30 billion
– Prohibiting any funding of the implementation — or legal defense — of Obamacare.
– Cutting the federal travel budget in half. $7.5 billion annually
– Cutting the federal vehicle budget by 20 percent. $600 million annually
– Eliminating the Corporation for Public Broadcasting subsidy. $445 million annually
– Eliminating Amtrak subsidies. $1.565 billion annually
– Repealing Title X Family Planning. $318 million annually
– Repealing the Davis-Bacon Act (which sets “prevailing wages” for workers on federal projects). $1 billion-plus annually
– Prohibiting taxpayer funded union activities by federal employees.
$1.2 billion savings over ten years
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Monday, January 10, 2011
Paul Ryan: A Republican to Watch
Interview with Rush Limbaugh
TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Grab audio sound bite number 13, Mike. We don't have Paul Ryan from Greta last night. We do have him yesterday afternoon, Wall Street Journal, Conversations With, he talked to Paul Gigot. And this is a small sound bite, but Ryan, pay attention to him, brilliant guy. Budget matters, brilliant guy. Gigot said, "Some Democrats criticize you for backtracking on the promise, campaign promise, hundred billion-dollar deficit reduction, can you respond to that charge you're already backtracking, is that true?"
RYAN: If people think we're afraid of cutting a hundred billion dollars they got another thing coming. This is just the beginning. Wait 'til we do our budget resolution; wait 'til we do our fiscal year 2012 spending bills, we're gonna keep going.
RUSH: That's the Paul Ryan that I know. I met Paul Ryan. Paul Ryan was an intern at Empower America when Jack Kemp and Bill Bennett ran that shop in Washington. I flew up there one weekend to meet Bennett for a weekend of revelry and they took me by the office, and Paul Ryan was in there as an intern. He remembered meeting me, he told me that was the first place that we met, and so there he was, interned for Kemp and Bennett, Empower America, Forbes and all that, bammo. And here he is now running the budget for the US Republicans in the Congress, saying, "A hundred billion? Hell. That's just the beginning."
TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Grab audio sound bite number 13, Mike. We don't have Paul Ryan from Greta last night. We do have him yesterday afternoon, Wall Street Journal, Conversations With, he talked to Paul Gigot. And this is a small sound bite, but Ryan, pay attention to him, brilliant guy. Budget matters, brilliant guy. Gigot said, "Some Democrats criticize you for backtracking on the promise, campaign promise, hundred billion-dollar deficit reduction, can you respond to that charge you're already backtracking, is that true?"
RYAN: If people think we're afraid of cutting a hundred billion dollars they got another thing coming. This is just the beginning. Wait 'til we do our budget resolution; wait 'til we do our fiscal year 2012 spending bills, we're gonna keep going.
RUSH: That's the Paul Ryan that I know. I met Paul Ryan. Paul Ryan was an intern at Empower America when Jack Kemp and Bill Bennett ran that shop in Washington. I flew up there one weekend to meet Bennett for a weekend of revelry and they took me by the office, and Paul Ryan was in there as an intern. He remembered meeting me, he told me that was the first place that we met, and so there he was, interned for Kemp and Bennett, Empower America, Forbes and all that, bammo. And here he is now running the budget for the US Republicans in the Congress, saying, "A hundred billion? Hell. That's just the beginning."
Saturday, January 8, 2011
A Letter to The Honorable Harry Reid
By Addison Wiggin
01/08/11
The Honorable Harry Reid
Majority Leader
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Mr. Leader,
I’m writing in response to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s appeal to you to raise the debt ceiling.
I understand that you didn’t ask for my opinion. And with no political positions on my curriculum vitae, you may not even recognize my name. But I have co-authored two books warning about the United States’ fiscal situation, starting with Financial Reckoning Day in 2003 and followed by Empire of Debt in 2005. I mailed copies of the latter to you and the other members of Congress free of charge. While it may not be sitting on your nightstand, I trust that you’re at least aware of the book.
After we published the book, I wrote and produced a documentary, I.O.U.S.A., which was screened in competition at the Sundance Film Festival, nominated for a Critics Choice award and shortlisted for an Academy Award. The film attempts to present the fiscal crisis facing the United States in a way that the average American could understand. The film took two years to produce and premiered on Aug. 22, 2008 – almost a month before Lehman Bros. declared bankruptcy, kicking off the Panic of ’08.
So after a decade of attempting to bring the root causes of our economic woes to light, I humbly suggest that the shortsighted tone of Mr. Geithner’s appeal is itself part of the problem. It is, in fact, no different than Secretary of Treasury Hank Paulson’s frantic three-page proposal that kicked off the bailouts in September 2008.
Sir, in short, by raising the debt ceiling, we’re delaying the day of reckoning yet again. Instead of paying for our excessive spending today, we’ll pass that burden on to our children and grandchildren. I have three young children. And I, like many Americans, already find it a challenge to educate them and provide for their health care. Now I must also worry about what their future is going to look like…what opportunities will they find when it’s their turn to join the work force or start businesses?
Mr. Geithner shares his fears of a default in his letter to you. But his request simply means my children – everyone’s children – will have to deal with that default on their own.
Do we really want our children burdened by higher taxes, excessive government regulation, higher mortgage rates, reduced incentives to start their own businesses and, as things are going, the end of the freedoms that you, Mr. Geithner, the rest of the American public and I cherish?
Freedom is the very promise that America bestows on history. But now, through our own malfeasance, we are in a position of telling the world, “We cannot afford to offer you the opportunity to enjoy that freedom anymore.”
How did it come to this? And why perpetuate the very malfeasance that threatens our future prosperity?
For most of America, understanding the fiscal condition of the nation is no easy task. For that, they place their trust in you. No doubt, it’s easier to do exactly what our Treasury secretary is asking you to do – ignore the problem and continue to kick the can down the road. But I’m asking you, on behalf of future generations, to think deeper about the problem and begin addressing it today.
To help you with your decision, here are some images you can use to illustrate the magnitude of the national burden.
As Mr. Geithner stated in his letter to you, “In February of 2010, Congress passed legislation to increase the debt limit to $14.29 trillion.” To grasp that staggering figure, imagine stacking $100 bills on top of one another. To reach $14.29 trillion, your stack would soar 9,721 miles into the sky!
Said a different way, that’s like 1,767 mountains of $100 bills the size of Mount Everest piled on top of each other.
Of course, the current debt wouldn’t be a problem if tax revenue were exceeding our spending and therefore reducing the debt. But we both know that is not happening. Even if we taxed all Americans 100% of their income for an entire year, we still wouldn’t be able to pay off our $14.29 trillion hole
What’s more, the interest we’re paying on the current debt is forcing us deeper and deeper into the hole. According to the TreasuryDirect.gov website, the interest payment on our debt was a massive $1.13 billion per day – for a total of $413 billion – in 2010.
The interest payment alone amounts to record-breaking deficits hit during the Bush administration just a few short years ago. If you agree to raise the ceiling, you effectively agree to drive up the interest payments until they exceed tax revenue – creating a situation in which we’ll be forced to default, eventually. And the longer it takes to happen, the worse it will be for our children.
The Treasury secretary outlines how catastrophic a default would be for the financial system and the integrity of the United States:
Default would effectively impose a significant and long-lasting tax on all Americans and all American businesses and could lead to the loss of millions of American jobs.
When, I ask you, do we begin addressing the root problem? When do we admit that we’re spending beyond our means and begin to address the problem in earnest? “We can live beyond our means for a very long time,” to paraphrase a leading financier from I.O.U.S.A., “and we can do it on a very large scale – but we cannot do it forever.”
The United States is like a private company suffering from a pension burden it did not plan for and that is losing market share because its products are no longer competitive. And it is as if the management has decided to take an extended vacation, rather than hold a meeting to find a way out of the hole.
In Congress, you don’t address the real problems. You talk around them, play politics with them and then make frantic appeals at the 11th hour to borrow more money to paper over the problems again for yet another year.
At this pace, how do you honestly believe the government will ever balance its books again? In the era of uncertainty created by mayhem in Washington and ever-increasing global competition, how do you expect the economy to get back on track?
Let’s put the numbers aside for a second. I’d like to ask you a simple question:
Imagine for a moment that you’ve chosen to smoke cigarettes all your life. You’ve ignored the warnings about them that appear all around you. Then, eventually, and unfortunately, you get diagnosed with lung cancer.
Luckily, you’ve caught the disease in its very early stages. The doctor presents you with two choices.
First, you can enter chemotherapy. The road to recovery, the doctor tells you, will be harsh. You’ll suffer extreme nausea. You’ll hardly be able to swallow from the ulcers you develop in your mouth. In short, you’ll go through hell in an attempt to beat the disease. But because you caught the disease after the first symptoms appeared, you have a high chance at a full recovery.
The doctor also offers a second alternative. He’s worked out a deal that allows you to rid yourself of the disease instantly. No pain. No suffering. No hell. All you have to do is agree to give the disease to your 2-year-old grandson.
Would you make that deal, Mr. Leader?
I trust you’ll make the right decision about our nation’s fiscal health. At the very least, there needs to be an honest debate over raising the debt ceiling. If you provide the rubber stamp Mr. Geithner is asking for, you will be as guilty as he of passing the buck. Each time the buck gets passed, the stakes get higher. The default Mr. Geithner fears only looms more ominous in our future.
The newly elected speaker of the House, John Boehner, has gone on record saying he’ll agree to increase the debt limit because we have to be “adults” about addressing the fiscal crisis the nation faces.
What, may I ask, is “adult” about failing to address this issue altogether?
Sincerely,
Addison Wiggin
Executive publisher, Agora Financial
Co-author, Financial Reckoning Day and Empire of Debt
Executive producer, writer, I.O.U.S.A.
cc:
The Honorable John A. Boehner, Speaker of the House
The Honorable Nancy Pelosi, House Minority Leader
The Honorable Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader
The Honorable Dave Camp, Chairman, House Committee on Ways and Means
The Honorable Sander M. Levin, Ranking Member, House Committee on Ways and Means
The Honorable Max Baucus, Chairman, Senate Committee on Finance
The Honorable Orrin Hatch, Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Finance
All Other Members of the 112th Congress
---------------------
Addison Wiggin
Addison Wiggin is the editorial director of The Daily Reckoning, and executive publisher of Agora Financial, an independent financial research firm based in Baltimore, Maryland. His second editions of international best-sellers Financial Reckoning Day Fallout and The New Empire of Debt, which he co-authored with Bill Bonner, were updated in 2009. His third book, The Demise of the Dollar… and Why it’s Even Better for Your Investments was updated in 2008, the same year he wrote I.O.U.S.A.
Wiggin is the executive producer and co-writer of I.O.U.S.A. an acclaimed documentary nominated for the Grand Jury prize at the 2008 Sundance Film Festival and the 2009 Critics Choice Award and shortlisted for a 2009 Academy Award. Wiggin is a three-time New York Times best-selling author whose work has been recognized by The New York Times Magazine, The Economist, Worth, The New York Times, The Washington Post as well as major network news programs.
01/08/11
The Honorable Harry Reid
Majority Leader
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Mr. Leader,
I’m writing in response to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s appeal to you to raise the debt ceiling.
I understand that you didn’t ask for my opinion. And with no political positions on my curriculum vitae, you may not even recognize my name. But I have co-authored two books warning about the United States’ fiscal situation, starting with Financial Reckoning Day in 2003 and followed by Empire of Debt in 2005. I mailed copies of the latter to you and the other members of Congress free of charge. While it may not be sitting on your nightstand, I trust that you’re at least aware of the book.
After we published the book, I wrote and produced a documentary, I.O.U.S.A., which was screened in competition at the Sundance Film Festival, nominated for a Critics Choice award and shortlisted for an Academy Award. The film attempts to present the fiscal crisis facing the United States in a way that the average American could understand. The film took two years to produce and premiered on Aug. 22, 2008 – almost a month before Lehman Bros. declared bankruptcy, kicking off the Panic of ’08.
So after a decade of attempting to bring the root causes of our economic woes to light, I humbly suggest that the shortsighted tone of Mr. Geithner’s appeal is itself part of the problem. It is, in fact, no different than Secretary of Treasury Hank Paulson’s frantic three-page proposal that kicked off the bailouts in September 2008.
Sir, in short, by raising the debt ceiling, we’re delaying the day of reckoning yet again. Instead of paying for our excessive spending today, we’ll pass that burden on to our children and grandchildren. I have three young children. And I, like many Americans, already find it a challenge to educate them and provide for their health care. Now I must also worry about what their future is going to look like…what opportunities will they find when it’s their turn to join the work force or start businesses?
Mr. Geithner shares his fears of a default in his letter to you. But his request simply means my children – everyone’s children – will have to deal with that default on their own.
Do we really want our children burdened by higher taxes, excessive government regulation, higher mortgage rates, reduced incentives to start their own businesses and, as things are going, the end of the freedoms that you, Mr. Geithner, the rest of the American public and I cherish?
Freedom is the very promise that America bestows on history. But now, through our own malfeasance, we are in a position of telling the world, “We cannot afford to offer you the opportunity to enjoy that freedom anymore.”
How did it come to this? And why perpetuate the very malfeasance that threatens our future prosperity?
For most of America, understanding the fiscal condition of the nation is no easy task. For that, they place their trust in you. No doubt, it’s easier to do exactly what our Treasury secretary is asking you to do – ignore the problem and continue to kick the can down the road. But I’m asking you, on behalf of future generations, to think deeper about the problem and begin addressing it today.
To help you with your decision, here are some images you can use to illustrate the magnitude of the national burden.
As Mr. Geithner stated in his letter to you, “In February of 2010, Congress passed legislation to increase the debt limit to $14.29 trillion.” To grasp that staggering figure, imagine stacking $100 bills on top of one another. To reach $14.29 trillion, your stack would soar 9,721 miles into the sky!
Said a different way, that’s like 1,767 mountains of $100 bills the size of Mount Everest piled on top of each other.
Of course, the current debt wouldn’t be a problem if tax revenue were exceeding our spending and therefore reducing the debt. But we both know that is not happening. Even if we taxed all Americans 100% of their income for an entire year, we still wouldn’t be able to pay off our $14.29 trillion hole
What’s more, the interest we’re paying on the current debt is forcing us deeper and deeper into the hole. According to the TreasuryDirect.gov website, the interest payment on our debt was a massive $1.13 billion per day – for a total of $413 billion – in 2010.
The interest payment alone amounts to record-breaking deficits hit during the Bush administration just a few short years ago. If you agree to raise the ceiling, you effectively agree to drive up the interest payments until they exceed tax revenue – creating a situation in which we’ll be forced to default, eventually. And the longer it takes to happen, the worse it will be for our children.
The Treasury secretary outlines how catastrophic a default would be for the financial system and the integrity of the United States:
Default would effectively impose a significant and long-lasting tax on all Americans and all American businesses and could lead to the loss of millions of American jobs.
When, I ask you, do we begin addressing the root problem? When do we admit that we’re spending beyond our means and begin to address the problem in earnest? “We can live beyond our means for a very long time,” to paraphrase a leading financier from I.O.U.S.A., “and we can do it on a very large scale – but we cannot do it forever.”
The United States is like a private company suffering from a pension burden it did not plan for and that is losing market share because its products are no longer competitive. And it is as if the management has decided to take an extended vacation, rather than hold a meeting to find a way out of the hole.
In Congress, you don’t address the real problems. You talk around them, play politics with them and then make frantic appeals at the 11th hour to borrow more money to paper over the problems again for yet another year.
At this pace, how do you honestly believe the government will ever balance its books again? In the era of uncertainty created by mayhem in Washington and ever-increasing global competition, how do you expect the economy to get back on track?
Let’s put the numbers aside for a second. I’d like to ask you a simple question:
Imagine for a moment that you’ve chosen to smoke cigarettes all your life. You’ve ignored the warnings about them that appear all around you. Then, eventually, and unfortunately, you get diagnosed with lung cancer.
Luckily, you’ve caught the disease in its very early stages. The doctor presents you with two choices.
First, you can enter chemotherapy. The road to recovery, the doctor tells you, will be harsh. You’ll suffer extreme nausea. You’ll hardly be able to swallow from the ulcers you develop in your mouth. In short, you’ll go through hell in an attempt to beat the disease. But because you caught the disease after the first symptoms appeared, you have a high chance at a full recovery.
The doctor also offers a second alternative. He’s worked out a deal that allows you to rid yourself of the disease instantly. No pain. No suffering. No hell. All you have to do is agree to give the disease to your 2-year-old grandson.
Would you make that deal, Mr. Leader?
I trust you’ll make the right decision about our nation’s fiscal health. At the very least, there needs to be an honest debate over raising the debt ceiling. If you provide the rubber stamp Mr. Geithner is asking for, you will be as guilty as he of passing the buck. Each time the buck gets passed, the stakes get higher. The default Mr. Geithner fears only looms more ominous in our future.
The newly elected speaker of the House, John Boehner, has gone on record saying he’ll agree to increase the debt limit because we have to be “adults” about addressing the fiscal crisis the nation faces.
What, may I ask, is “adult” about failing to address this issue altogether?
Sincerely,
Addison Wiggin
Executive publisher, Agora Financial
Co-author, Financial Reckoning Day and Empire of Debt
Executive producer, writer, I.O.U.S.A.
cc:
The Honorable John A. Boehner, Speaker of the House
The Honorable Nancy Pelosi, House Minority Leader
The Honorable Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader
The Honorable Dave Camp, Chairman, House Committee on Ways and Means
The Honorable Sander M. Levin, Ranking Member, House Committee on Ways and Means
The Honorable Max Baucus, Chairman, Senate Committee on Finance
The Honorable Orrin Hatch, Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Finance
All Other Members of the 112th Congress
---------------------
Addison Wiggin
Addison Wiggin is the editorial director of The Daily Reckoning, and executive publisher of Agora Financial, an independent financial research firm based in Baltimore, Maryland. His second editions of international best-sellers Financial Reckoning Day Fallout and The New Empire of Debt, which he co-authored with Bill Bonner, were updated in 2009. His third book, The Demise of the Dollar… and Why it’s Even Better for Your Investments was updated in 2008, the same year he wrote I.O.U.S.A.
Wiggin is the executive producer and co-writer of I.O.U.S.A. an acclaimed documentary nominated for the Grand Jury prize at the 2008 Sundance Film Festival and the 2009 Critics Choice Award and shortlisted for a 2009 Academy Award. Wiggin is a three-time New York Times best-selling author whose work has been recognized by The New York Times Magazine, The Economist, Worth, The New York Times, The Washington Post as well as major network news programs.
Friday, January 7, 2011
Meet the House party crasher, the U.S. House, that is
WND Exclusive
BORN IN THE USA?
Protester charges Obama a 'tyrannical dictator' bent on bringing down U.S.
By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WorldNetDaily
The woman who burst out with "except Obama" when New Jersey Democrat Rep. Frank Pallone today read in Congress the Constitution's requirement that the president be a "natural born Citizen" says she felt compelled to let representatives know of the absence of proof for Barack Obama's eligibility.
Theresa Cao, who was arrested by Capitol police, given a court date and then released, told WND in a telephone interview after her release, while she was standing in front of the Hart Office Building near the Capitol, that the only hope for the United States is a return to the faith of the Founding Fathers.
And that direction, she said, is opposite from the one Obama is leading the nation, citing his "socialism," such as a nationalized health-care system and the takeover of private companies including banks, insurance companies and car companies.
Get the free, in-depth special report on eligibility that could bring an end to Obama's presidency
She said she had come to the U.S. House chambers to see the launch of the new Congress under the leadership of the Republicans. She said she was overwhelmed when the Constitution was being read, which came about as part of an effort by the new GOP majority to return the nation to a sense of its founding principles.
Pallone was reading Article II, Section 1, regarding the required qualifications for the president, which demand that the president be a "natural born Citizen," when she burst out, "except Obama."
"Literally if this question of the natural born citizenship, if this question does not get answered, then I am allowing a tyrannical dictator – the spirit of the anti-Christ, the new world order system that has their plans right this second to collapse the U.S. economy, and we know their plan, the new world order system's plan is to literally destroy humanity," she said.
She said "God made sure" that such a message "got out to every single American leader and every leader [now] knows the truth.
"He [Obama] has fought it not only for two years, not only has he fought it pre-election but historically all of his connections, every single connection [has been] blacked out."
Her description of the day's events was permeated with explanations of her belief that the God of the Bible is being abandoned by America, especially under Obama's rule because of his leanings toward "one-world" endeavors, through the United Nations and other channels.
"It's prophesied this new world order system will devastate America and the world, and Satan's plan is to take as many people to hell with him as he can," she said.
"God is saying, 'no way,'" she said.
Cao told WND she obtained tickets for the House gallery a day early, and was impressed by the idea that a House speaker would be dedicated to doing "the will of the people," following California Rep. Nancy Pelosi's tenure at the speaker's desk, which included forcing the Obamacare mandate on Americans even though a majority oppose it.
"I knew that this was truly a historic moment in the history of America. … I heard John Boehner, the new House speaker. It was overwhelming to understand and know finally we have a House majority leader who will make it a priority to do the will of the people."
She said she saw in the incoming Congress what her own ministry, "Heaven's bailout," has been working on for several years.
"It's all about defending God, country and the Constitution."
"I understood that I as an American [needed] to do my part to defend God's country and the Constitution, that when and if America does become a nation that is going to be really not just socialist, fascist or communist, but really controlled by a dictator, if I, TC from DC, personally did not do something to 'change' what was going on for the good and to bring true 'hope,' I would have failed."
It was almost a year ago when she was profiled in WND as a lone woman evangelist delivering the message that "heaven is offering a 'bailout' far greater than dollars."
At the time, Cao told WND, "I have a standard location literally right in front of the White House" – encouraging people to follow the Bible to see God's miracles on earth and its companion warning of punishment for those who disobey.
The message applies not only to individuals but to nations, she believes.
"Most Americans really are asleep concerning what's taking place," she said then. "People are willing to hand over their God-given rights and the Constitution to the prevailing wicked forces."
The video reveals she shouted what sounded like, "except Obama, except Obama," and "Help us Jesus."
She said officers grabbed her arm and took her out of the chamber. She was processed, cited and released after several hours, she said.
She also has been an staunch advocate for former Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, the Army doctor who challenged Obama's eligibility to be president by refusing to deploy to Afghanistan. After a military judge ruled he would not be allowed to seek evidence to support his case because it could "embarrass" the president, could not argue his case in court, could not bring in evidence and could not call the witnesses he sought, he was court-martialed.
"I took a personal responsibility knowing that if I did not speak what was so deep in my heart … I would first and foremost be responsible to the God of Israel," Cao told WND.
She warned that the leaders of the U.S. repeatedly have rejected requests that Obama's eligibility be documented.
"You have been brought up to become leaders of this nation," she said. "You have not defended God, country and the Constitution."
Cao has her ministry work posted at GotHeavensBailout.blogspot.com.
In an interview with NBC not long after the interruption, House Speaker John Boehner said he wouldn't question Obama's eligibility, but he also wasn't going to dictate what other people believe.
Asked by NBC, "It was to express doubt over the president's American citizenship. Provided you believe the president is an American citizen, you've got 12 members co-sponsoring legislation that does about the same thing, it expresses doubt. Would you be willing to say, 'This is a distraction, I've looked at it to my satisfaction. Let's move on?'"
"The state of Hawaii has said that President Obama was born there. That's good enough for me," Boehner said.
But when NBC asked, "Would you be willing to say that message to the 12 members in your caucus who seem to either believe otherwise or are willing to express doubt and have co-sponsored legislation?," Boehner said, "When you come to the Congress of the United States, there are 435 of us. We're nothing more than a slice of America. People come, regardless of party labels, they come with all kinds of beliefs and ideas. Uh it's, it's the melting pot of America. It's not up to me to tell them what to think."
Actually, state officials in Hawaii have claimed they have seen Obama's birth documentation, but they never have revealed what it says. The "Certification of Live Birth" that was posted online by Obama's campaign is a computer-generated form that can be obtained by non-residents.
The reading of the Constitution was described by those on the left as being done because of a "fetish."
That's how it was put by Dahlia Lithwick of Slate.com, who wrote, "Read It and Weep: How the tea party's fetish for the Constitution as written may get it in trouble."
"The way some people rub Buddha and they think the magic will come off, I think there's a longstanding tradition in this country. We're awfully religious about the Constitution," she later told MSNBC. "I think there is this sort of fetishization that is of a piece with the sort of need for a religious document that's immutable and perfect in every way."
She added: "Part of what's a little bit fraud about this conversation is that the same people who are fetishizing the document as written, as framed by the framers – and bracket the idea that there wasn't one framer and there was no one agenda embodied in this – but even if you bracket that idea, I think there's a real problem with the idea that we're trying to sort of fetishize the document at the same moment that we're falling over ourselves to amend and change the parts we don't like."
Lithwick's remarks came under heavy fire from Rush Limbaugh, the top-rated radio host, who ripped into that sentiment.
"They're perverts themselves," Limbaugh said. "These are perverts perverting the founding documents. If the Constitution's not that big a deal, how come the same people had such a cow when they thought Christine O'Donnell didn't know what she was talking about regarding the Constitution? If it's so unimportant, how come Obama's so proud to have been a constitutional lawyer or professor or lecturer, whatever he was?
"Abraham Lincoln. They hate him? Abraham Lincoln had a fetish for the U.S. Constitution? Here's what Lincoln said among many other things: 'We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.' That's Lincoln. Is he a pervert? Lincoln have a fetish? Lincoln also said, 'Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties.'"
Syndicated columnist and commentator Charles Krauthammer said the objection to reading the Constitution aloud by many on the left "is truly astonishing."
He said on Fox News that in the 1960s, "Liberals got in trouble for being on the wrong side of the flag," and are now in danger of being on the wrong side of the Constitution, which he called "the essence of America." He noted for liberals to think there's an advantage in dismissing the public reading of the document "is real bad politics."
Members of the U.S. House rotated by party as they read short parts of the Constitution. The House also for the first time this session is requiring members to document the constitutionality of their plans when they are proposed.
WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "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."
Some of the challenges question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.
Several of the cases have involved appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court in which justices have declined even to hear arguments. Among the other cases turned down without a hearing at the high court have been petitions by Mario Apuzzo, Philip Berg, Cort Wrotnowski, Leo Donofrio and Orly Taitz.
Complicating the situation is Obama's decision to spend sums estimated in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest the questions.
Obama wrote in his own book that he was born a dual citizen of the U.S. and Great Britain due to the fact his father was a subject of the British crown when Obama was born.
BORN IN THE USA?
Protester charges Obama a 'tyrannical dictator' bent on bringing down U.S.
By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WorldNetDaily
The woman who burst out with "except Obama" when New Jersey Democrat Rep. Frank Pallone today read in Congress the Constitution's requirement that the president be a "natural born Citizen" says she felt compelled to let representatives know of the absence of proof for Barack Obama's eligibility.
Theresa Cao, who was arrested by Capitol police, given a court date and then released, told WND in a telephone interview after her release, while she was standing in front of the Hart Office Building near the Capitol, that the only hope for the United States is a return to the faith of the Founding Fathers.
And that direction, she said, is opposite from the one Obama is leading the nation, citing his "socialism," such as a nationalized health-care system and the takeover of private companies including banks, insurance companies and car companies.
Get the free, in-depth special report on eligibility that could bring an end to Obama's presidency
She said she had come to the U.S. House chambers to see the launch of the new Congress under the leadership of the Republicans. She said she was overwhelmed when the Constitution was being read, which came about as part of an effort by the new GOP majority to return the nation to a sense of its founding principles.
Pallone was reading Article II, Section 1, regarding the required qualifications for the president, which demand that the president be a "natural born Citizen," when she burst out, "except Obama."
"Literally if this question of the natural born citizenship, if this question does not get answered, then I am allowing a tyrannical dictator – the spirit of the anti-Christ, the new world order system that has their plans right this second to collapse the U.S. economy, and we know their plan, the new world order system's plan is to literally destroy humanity," she said.
She said "God made sure" that such a message "got out to every single American leader and every leader [now] knows the truth.
"He [Obama] has fought it not only for two years, not only has he fought it pre-election but historically all of his connections, every single connection [has been] blacked out."
Her description of the day's events was permeated with explanations of her belief that the God of the Bible is being abandoned by America, especially under Obama's rule because of his leanings toward "one-world" endeavors, through the United Nations and other channels.
"It's prophesied this new world order system will devastate America and the world, and Satan's plan is to take as many people to hell with him as he can," she said.
"God is saying, 'no way,'" she said.
Cao told WND she obtained tickets for the House gallery a day early, and was impressed by the idea that a House speaker would be dedicated to doing "the will of the people," following California Rep. Nancy Pelosi's tenure at the speaker's desk, which included forcing the Obamacare mandate on Americans even though a majority oppose it.
"I knew that this was truly a historic moment in the history of America. … I heard John Boehner, the new House speaker. It was overwhelming to understand and know finally we have a House majority leader who will make it a priority to do the will of the people."
She said she saw in the incoming Congress what her own ministry, "Heaven's bailout," has been working on for several years.
"It's all about defending God, country and the Constitution."
"I understood that I as an American [needed] to do my part to defend God's country and the Constitution, that when and if America does become a nation that is going to be really not just socialist, fascist or communist, but really controlled by a dictator, if I, TC from DC, personally did not do something to 'change' what was going on for the good and to bring true 'hope,' I would have failed."
It was almost a year ago when she was profiled in WND as a lone woman evangelist delivering the message that "heaven is offering a 'bailout' far greater than dollars."
At the time, Cao told WND, "I have a standard location literally right in front of the White House" – encouraging people to follow the Bible to see God's miracles on earth and its companion warning of punishment for those who disobey.
The message applies not only to individuals but to nations, she believes.
"Most Americans really are asleep concerning what's taking place," she said then. "People are willing to hand over their God-given rights and the Constitution to the prevailing wicked forces."
The video reveals she shouted what sounded like, "except Obama, except Obama," and "Help us Jesus."
She said officers grabbed her arm and took her out of the chamber. She was processed, cited and released after several hours, she said.
She also has been an staunch advocate for former Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, the Army doctor who challenged Obama's eligibility to be president by refusing to deploy to Afghanistan. After a military judge ruled he would not be allowed to seek evidence to support his case because it could "embarrass" the president, could not argue his case in court, could not bring in evidence and could not call the witnesses he sought, he was court-martialed.
"I took a personal responsibility knowing that if I did not speak what was so deep in my heart … I would first and foremost be responsible to the God of Israel," Cao told WND.
She warned that the leaders of the U.S. repeatedly have rejected requests that Obama's eligibility be documented.
"You have been brought up to become leaders of this nation," she said. "You have not defended God, country and the Constitution."
Cao has her ministry work posted at GotHeavensBailout.blogspot.com.
In an interview with NBC not long after the interruption, House Speaker John Boehner said he wouldn't question Obama's eligibility, but he also wasn't going to dictate what other people believe.
Asked by NBC, "It was to express doubt over the president's American citizenship. Provided you believe the president is an American citizen, you've got 12 members co-sponsoring legislation that does about the same thing, it expresses doubt. Would you be willing to say, 'This is a distraction, I've looked at it to my satisfaction. Let's move on?'"
"The state of Hawaii has said that President Obama was born there. That's good enough for me," Boehner said.
But when NBC asked, "Would you be willing to say that message to the 12 members in your caucus who seem to either believe otherwise or are willing to express doubt and have co-sponsored legislation?," Boehner said, "When you come to the Congress of the United States, there are 435 of us. We're nothing more than a slice of America. People come, regardless of party labels, they come with all kinds of beliefs and ideas. Uh it's, it's the melting pot of America. It's not up to me to tell them what to think."
Actually, state officials in Hawaii have claimed they have seen Obama's birth documentation, but they never have revealed what it says. The "Certification of Live Birth" that was posted online by Obama's campaign is a computer-generated form that can be obtained by non-residents.
The reading of the Constitution was described by those on the left as being done because of a "fetish."
That's how it was put by Dahlia Lithwick of Slate.com, who wrote, "Read It and Weep: How the tea party's fetish for the Constitution as written may get it in trouble."
"The way some people rub Buddha and they think the magic will come off, I think there's a longstanding tradition in this country. We're awfully religious about the Constitution," she later told MSNBC. "I think there is this sort of fetishization that is of a piece with the sort of need for a religious document that's immutable and perfect in every way."
She added: "Part of what's a little bit fraud about this conversation is that the same people who are fetishizing the document as written, as framed by the framers – and bracket the idea that there wasn't one framer and there was no one agenda embodied in this – but even if you bracket that idea, I think there's a real problem with the idea that we're trying to sort of fetishize the document at the same moment that we're falling over ourselves to amend and change the parts we don't like."
Lithwick's remarks came under heavy fire from Rush Limbaugh, the top-rated radio host, who ripped into that sentiment.
"They're perverts themselves," Limbaugh said. "These are perverts perverting the founding documents. If the Constitution's not that big a deal, how come the same people had such a cow when they thought Christine O'Donnell didn't know what she was talking about regarding the Constitution? If it's so unimportant, how come Obama's so proud to have been a constitutional lawyer or professor or lecturer, whatever he was?
"Abraham Lincoln. They hate him? Abraham Lincoln had a fetish for the U.S. Constitution? Here's what Lincoln said among many other things: 'We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.' That's Lincoln. Is he a pervert? Lincoln have a fetish? Lincoln also said, 'Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties.'"
Syndicated columnist and commentator Charles Krauthammer said the objection to reading the Constitution aloud by many on the left "is truly astonishing."
He said on Fox News that in the 1960s, "Liberals got in trouble for being on the wrong side of the flag," and are now in danger of being on the wrong side of the Constitution, which he called "the essence of America." He noted for liberals to think there's an advantage in dismissing the public reading of the document "is real bad politics."
Members of the U.S. House rotated by party as they read short parts of the Constitution. The House also for the first time this session is requiring members to document the constitutionality of their plans when they are proposed.
WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "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."
Some of the challenges question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.
Several of the cases have involved appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court in which justices have declined even to hear arguments. Among the other cases turned down without a hearing at the high court have been petitions by Mario Apuzzo, Philip Berg, Cort Wrotnowski, Leo Donofrio and Orly Taitz.
Complicating the situation is Obama's decision to spend sums estimated in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest the questions.
Obama wrote in his own book that he was born a dual citizen of the U.S. and Great Britain due to the fact his father was a subject of the British crown when Obama was born.
Thursday, December 30, 2010
'We no longer have republic subservient to Constitution'
BORN IN THE USA?
Officer: Lakin case is end of 'rule of law'
By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
A retired military officer who pursued all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court a legal challenge to Barack Obama's occupancy of the Oval Office says the conviction and sentencing of an active duty officer who raised similar questions signals the end of the "rule of law" in the United States.
Cmdr. Charles Kerchner's legal case, handled by attorney Mario Apuzzo, alleged that Congress failed its constitutional duty to examine the legitimacy of a successful candidate during the Electoral College vetting process on Capitol Hill. The Supreme Court ultimately decided not to hear arguments, leaving standing a lower court's dismissal.
Sign a petition to state elections officials demanding they remove the constitutional cloud over the presidency by requiring documentation of candidates' eligibility.
Now Kerchner has attended, and is analyzing, the military's court-martial of now-former Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, who refused to deploy to Afghanistan because of concerns that Obama consistently refused to document his eligibility to serve as commander in chief.
His comments came in an interview with Sharon Rondeau of The Post & Email.
The judge in Lakin's case, Col. Denise Lind, ordered that Lakin could not raise the issue of Obama's eligibility, could not seek through the discovery process evidence that would support him, could not bring in evidence to the trial and could not bring in the witnesses he sought.
The conviction, then, was assured before the panel of officers ever deliberated the question.
That means, warned Kerchner, "we no longer have a rule of law and a constitutional republic subservient to the fundamental law of the land, the U.S. Constitution."
He explained how Lakin, before publicly challenging Obama's eligibility to serve as president under the Constitution's "natural born citizen" requirement – an issue that remains undocumented – had gone through every available channel seeking resolution.
"Terry had been questioning Obama's eligibility for over two years, and not only did he go to his elected representatives; he used a formal path available to soldiers, filling out a form or writing a letter, to request a congressional inquiry," Kerchner told The Post & Email.
"If a soldier is having some issue with the military chain of command or for any reason feels that he has been unjustly treated, there is the Article 138 where you can directly ask your senior chain of command about it. He also filed another form or letter to request a congressional inquiry; he requested more than once that an investigation be done about Obama's eligibility because as an officer, he had sworn an oath to the U.S. Constitution. He had great doubts that Obama was eligible, and he wanted them to investigate, and they didn't even answer him," Kerchner explained.
"The Congress did nothing. Terry, as a soldier, had a further right to one, and he didn't even get an answer. For example, if you allege that your commanding officer is mistreating you, Congress investigates those allegations. Terry asked for a congressional inquiry because no one in his chain of command was answering his questions, and they didn't answer him. He felt he was being unjustly treated and ignored by his chain of command in their not addressing or answering his questions about the eligibility of Obama to be the commander-in-chief and president," he said in the lengthy interview with Rondeau.
"Not even statutory laws are being obeyed," he said. "Not even regulations regarding congressional inquiries from soldiers are being obeyed. It's strictly to defend one man, a phony, a fraud, the usurper-in-chief, Obama. Our whole system of government, our whole culture has been corrupted and turned upside-down and completely rotted from the inside out to protect this man. All of our laws are being subverted and ignored because they know the answer: he's not eligible."
WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "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."
Some of the challenges question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.
Several of the cases have involved emergency appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court in which justices have declined even to hear arguments. Among the other cases turned down without a hearing at the high court have been petitions by Philip Berg, Cort Wrotnowski, Leo Donofrio and Orly Taitz.
Complicating the situation is Obama's decision to spend sums estimated in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest all of the questions.
Obama wrote in his own book that he was born a dual citizen of the U.S. and Great Britain due to the fact his father was a subject of the British crown when Obama was born.
Lakin announced nearly a year ago that he would not deploy as per Obama's orders until his eligibility to issue such orders was verified. Lakin was stripped of his duties, then court-martialed and now is imprisoned in Ft. Leavenworth for six months.
Lakin supporters have established a fund to support Lakin's legal defense and provide for the needs of his wife and children while he is incarcerated.
Financial contributions should be sent to the Terry Lakin Action Fund, the only fund authorized by Lakin's family. Donate online at Terrylakinactionfund.com using any major credit card, or mail checks made payable to the Terry Lakin Action Fund, PO Box 1116, Bel Air, MD 21014.
Cards and letters, but no packages, can be sent to Lakin at the following address, and should not mention rank: Terrence Lakin #89996, 830 Sabalu Road, Fort Leavenworth, Kan. 66027.
No hospital has admitted Obama was born there, and while state officials in Hawaii say they have confirmed his birth documentation, they refuse to reveal what it states. The type of document posted online by Obama is available to those not born in the state.
Kerchner also said the defense counsel for Lakin should have raised the issue of the so-called Nuremberg defense. That refers to the trials after World War II where Nazi officers explained they simply were following orders, and many ended up convicted for their atrocities.
"I would have brought up the Nuremberg defense and cited the officer(s) tried at Nuremberg who told that court it was not his duty to question orders from the supreme commander, meaning Adolf Hitler, and that your duty is to obey orders, and that man was hanged for that: for blindly accepting all orders from the supreme commander," Kerchner said.
It is up to officers to evaluate orders and follow those that are legal and disobey others, he said.
"And what is a lawful order? That is the officer’s decision to make and ask his superiors and a congressional inquiry to find out if he has a doubt, and he did that, and they ignored him. The Constitution is not a piece of parchment paper down there on display in Washington. It is the fundamental law of the land. The lawfulness of all orders issued by officers and the people above them shall be judged by that law, because his officer's oath is to do just that, to support and defend the Constitution," he said.
For now, hope must rest with Republicans in the new Congress, he said.
"The only thing left is to go back to the political process which failed us the first time and hope that the new Congress, with a Republican-controlled House finally listens to the people and holds a congressional investigation with full subpoena power. We need to force them to do that. They can now justify it by saying, 'The prior Congress made a mistake, but we're not going to do it,'" he said.
He warned that if that does not happen, other repercussions will follow.
"If they don't, the only thing left is John F. Kennedy's words and the Declaration of Independence: 'Those who make peaceful resolution (to paraphrase; he used the word 'revolution') impossible make violent resolution inevitable.' This is not going to stand with the people forever. It's going to boil over at some point, and what they thought they were preventing – violence in the inner cities if he were properly vetted and revealed he was not eligible – will result in and cause far, far, far worse by what they have done by corrupting every institution and system of our government to protect an ineligible man, a phony, the usurper-in-chief, Mr. Zero."
He pointed out that if Obama's eligibility is not fully documented, "not only should Lakin have his conviction expunged; he should be given the Medal of Freedom."
"The truth always wins. If the truth always comes out and Obama is proven to be a fraud, which we know he is, then justice mandates that Lt. Col. Lakin be vindicated, pardoned, and his kangaroo court conviction record expunged from history and a new history written that he did the right thing in the face of adversity," he said.
Meanwhile, Hawaii's new governor, Neil Abercrombie, is promising he wants to find a way to release Obama's documentation to put the story to rest, which appears to be not going away anytime soon.
According to the Supreme Court's own website, there is scheduled to be a conference Jan. 7, 2011, on a case submitted by Orly Taitz.
This particular case has had a long proceeding; it began as a challenge to the legality of the military orders under Obama, whose eligibility to hold the office of president never has been documented to date. While that officer, Capt. Connie Rhodes, ultimately followed her orders, the attorney was fined $20,000 in the case, and it continued its path through the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals and now is pending in Washington.
Whether it will fall by the wayside as have other cases on the same issue that have been submitted to the court remains to be seen. But even if this case falls, it doesn't appear the issue itself will fade.
Consider:
* More than a year ago, polls revealed that a bare half of the people in the United States even knew there was an issue over Obama's eligibility but recent polls have indicated up to 58 percent of Americans now have doubts over that issue.
* Fining attorneys, even jailing defendants, as happened to Lakin, hasn't caused the issue to disappear.
* A billboard campaign that simply asks "Where's the Birth Certificate" has appeared in many dozens of locations, and one billboard company that a year ago concluded it was more or less a settled issue now has asked to be allowed to participate in the campaign.
* Various officials have "verified" Obama's eligibility but have declined to document their statements.
* Extensive examinations of the available record suggest Obama likely is, in fact, ineligible.
* There remains a multitude of lawsuits still making their way toward Supreme Court review:
* In Congress, a pending proposal would require all candidates for the office of president to document their eligibility under the Constitution's requirement that they be a "natural born citizen."
* Similar plans are moving even more quickly at the state legislature level.
* And there even are predictions that Congress will take up the dispute.
Read more: Officer: Lakin verdict is end of 'rule of law' http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=245529#ixzz19cjV74Db
Officer: Lakin case is end of 'rule of law'
By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
A retired military officer who pursued all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court a legal challenge to Barack Obama's occupancy of the Oval Office says the conviction and sentencing of an active duty officer who raised similar questions signals the end of the "rule of law" in the United States.
Cmdr. Charles Kerchner's legal case, handled by attorney Mario Apuzzo, alleged that Congress failed its constitutional duty to examine the legitimacy of a successful candidate during the Electoral College vetting process on Capitol Hill. The Supreme Court ultimately decided not to hear arguments, leaving standing a lower court's dismissal.
Sign a petition to state elections officials demanding they remove the constitutional cloud over the presidency by requiring documentation of candidates' eligibility.
Now Kerchner has attended, and is analyzing, the military's court-martial of now-former Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, who refused to deploy to Afghanistan because of concerns that Obama consistently refused to document his eligibility to serve as commander in chief.
His comments came in an interview with Sharon Rondeau of The Post & Email.
The judge in Lakin's case, Col. Denise Lind, ordered that Lakin could not raise the issue of Obama's eligibility, could not seek through the discovery process evidence that would support him, could not bring in evidence to the trial and could not bring in the witnesses he sought.
The conviction, then, was assured before the panel of officers ever deliberated the question.
That means, warned Kerchner, "we no longer have a rule of law and a constitutional republic subservient to the fundamental law of the land, the U.S. Constitution."
He explained how Lakin, before publicly challenging Obama's eligibility to serve as president under the Constitution's "natural born citizen" requirement – an issue that remains undocumented – had gone through every available channel seeking resolution.
"Terry had been questioning Obama's eligibility for over two years, and not only did he go to his elected representatives; he used a formal path available to soldiers, filling out a form or writing a letter, to request a congressional inquiry," Kerchner told The Post & Email.
"If a soldier is having some issue with the military chain of command or for any reason feels that he has been unjustly treated, there is the Article 138 where you can directly ask your senior chain of command about it. He also filed another form or letter to request a congressional inquiry; he requested more than once that an investigation be done about Obama's eligibility because as an officer, he had sworn an oath to the U.S. Constitution. He had great doubts that Obama was eligible, and he wanted them to investigate, and they didn't even answer him," Kerchner explained.
"The Congress did nothing. Terry, as a soldier, had a further right to one, and he didn't even get an answer. For example, if you allege that your commanding officer is mistreating you, Congress investigates those allegations. Terry asked for a congressional inquiry because no one in his chain of command was answering his questions, and they didn't answer him. He felt he was being unjustly treated and ignored by his chain of command in their not addressing or answering his questions about the eligibility of Obama to be the commander-in-chief and president," he said in the lengthy interview with Rondeau.
"Not even statutory laws are being obeyed," he said. "Not even regulations regarding congressional inquiries from soldiers are being obeyed. It's strictly to defend one man, a phony, a fraud, the usurper-in-chief, Obama. Our whole system of government, our whole culture has been corrupted and turned upside-down and completely rotted from the inside out to protect this man. All of our laws are being subverted and ignored because they know the answer: he's not eligible."
WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "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."
Some of the challenges question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.
Several of the cases have involved emergency appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court in which justices have declined even to hear arguments. Among the other cases turned down without a hearing at the high court have been petitions by Philip Berg, Cort Wrotnowski, Leo Donofrio and Orly Taitz.
Complicating the situation is Obama's decision to spend sums estimated in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest all of the questions.
Obama wrote in his own book that he was born a dual citizen of the U.S. and Great Britain due to the fact his father was a subject of the British crown when Obama was born.
Lakin announced nearly a year ago that he would not deploy as per Obama's orders until his eligibility to issue such orders was verified. Lakin was stripped of his duties, then court-martialed and now is imprisoned in Ft. Leavenworth for six months.
Lakin supporters have established a fund to support Lakin's legal defense and provide for the needs of his wife and children while he is incarcerated.
Financial contributions should be sent to the Terry Lakin Action Fund, the only fund authorized by Lakin's family. Donate online at Terrylakinactionfund.com using any major credit card, or mail checks made payable to the Terry Lakin Action Fund, PO Box 1116, Bel Air, MD 21014.
Cards and letters, but no packages, can be sent to Lakin at the following address, and should not mention rank: Terrence Lakin #89996, 830 Sabalu Road, Fort Leavenworth, Kan. 66027.
No hospital has admitted Obama was born there, and while state officials in Hawaii say they have confirmed his birth documentation, they refuse to reveal what it states. The type of document posted online by Obama is available to those not born in the state.
Kerchner also said the defense counsel for Lakin should have raised the issue of the so-called Nuremberg defense. That refers to the trials after World War II where Nazi officers explained they simply were following orders, and many ended up convicted for their atrocities.
"I would have brought up the Nuremberg defense and cited the officer(s) tried at Nuremberg who told that court it was not his duty to question orders from the supreme commander, meaning Adolf Hitler, and that your duty is to obey orders, and that man was hanged for that: for blindly accepting all orders from the supreme commander," Kerchner said.
It is up to officers to evaluate orders and follow those that are legal and disobey others, he said.
"And what is a lawful order? That is the officer’s decision to make and ask his superiors and a congressional inquiry to find out if he has a doubt, and he did that, and they ignored him. The Constitution is not a piece of parchment paper down there on display in Washington. It is the fundamental law of the land. The lawfulness of all orders issued by officers and the people above them shall be judged by that law, because his officer's oath is to do just that, to support and defend the Constitution," he said.
For now, hope must rest with Republicans in the new Congress, he said.
"The only thing left is to go back to the political process which failed us the first time and hope that the new Congress, with a Republican-controlled House finally listens to the people and holds a congressional investigation with full subpoena power. We need to force them to do that. They can now justify it by saying, 'The prior Congress made a mistake, but we're not going to do it,'" he said.
He warned that if that does not happen, other repercussions will follow.
"If they don't, the only thing left is John F. Kennedy's words and the Declaration of Independence: 'Those who make peaceful resolution (to paraphrase; he used the word 'revolution') impossible make violent resolution inevitable.' This is not going to stand with the people forever. It's going to boil over at some point, and what they thought they were preventing – violence in the inner cities if he were properly vetted and revealed he was not eligible – will result in and cause far, far, far worse by what they have done by corrupting every institution and system of our government to protect an ineligible man, a phony, the usurper-in-chief, Mr. Zero."
He pointed out that if Obama's eligibility is not fully documented, "not only should Lakin have his conviction expunged; he should be given the Medal of Freedom."
"The truth always wins. If the truth always comes out and Obama is proven to be a fraud, which we know he is, then justice mandates that Lt. Col. Lakin be vindicated, pardoned, and his kangaroo court conviction record expunged from history and a new history written that he did the right thing in the face of adversity," he said.
Meanwhile, Hawaii's new governor, Neil Abercrombie, is promising he wants to find a way to release Obama's documentation to put the story to rest, which appears to be not going away anytime soon.
According to the Supreme Court's own website, there is scheduled to be a conference Jan. 7, 2011, on a case submitted by Orly Taitz.
This particular case has had a long proceeding; it began as a challenge to the legality of the military orders under Obama, whose eligibility to hold the office of president never has been documented to date. While that officer, Capt. Connie Rhodes, ultimately followed her orders, the attorney was fined $20,000 in the case, and it continued its path through the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals and now is pending in Washington.
Whether it will fall by the wayside as have other cases on the same issue that have been submitted to the court remains to be seen. But even if this case falls, it doesn't appear the issue itself will fade.
Consider:
* More than a year ago, polls revealed that a bare half of the people in the United States even knew there was an issue over Obama's eligibility but recent polls have indicated up to 58 percent of Americans now have doubts over that issue.
* Fining attorneys, even jailing defendants, as happened to Lakin, hasn't caused the issue to disappear.
* A billboard campaign that simply asks "Where's the Birth Certificate" has appeared in many dozens of locations, and one billboard company that a year ago concluded it was more or less a settled issue now has asked to be allowed to participate in the campaign.
* Various officials have "verified" Obama's eligibility but have declined to document their statements.
* Extensive examinations of the available record suggest Obama likely is, in fact, ineligible.
* There remains a multitude of lawsuits still making their way toward Supreme Court review:
* In Congress, a pending proposal would require all candidates for the office of president to document their eligibility under the Constitution's requirement that they be a "natural born citizen."
* Similar plans are moving even more quickly at the state legislature level.
* And there even are predictions that Congress will take up the dispute.
Read more: Officer: Lakin verdict is end of 'rule of law' http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=245529#ixzz19cjV74Db
Friday, December 17, 2010
Obama's urgent treaty push called 'contempt of Congress'
FROM JOSEPH FARAH'S G2 BULLETIN
Analysts fear START doc holds something prez wants concealed
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
Editor's Note: The following report is excerpted from Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, the premium online newsletter published by the founder of WND. Subscriptions are $99 a year or, for monthly trials, just $9.95 per month for credit card users, and provide instant access for the complete reports.
Concern is mounting among experts in the arena of international treaties that the Obama administration is forcing U.S. senators to ram through a new strategic arms reduction document with the Russians without fully understanding the implications or its provisions – described by critics as unverifiable, according to a report from Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.
"(President Barack Obama's) demand that senators approve this defective accord during the few days remaining in the lame-duck session amounts to contempt of Congress," said Frank Gaffney who is president of the Center for Security Policy. "It must not be tolerated, let alone rewarded."
Critics say the treaty could "restrict" the nation's ability to defend itself, and suggest that there may be provisions Obama doesn't want members of the Senate to analyze, and possibly oppose.
Gaffney, a former acting assistant secretary of defense for international security policy, is versed in START treaties; he was involved in arms reduction negotiations during the Reagan administration.
He claims that senators have not had time to review the extensive negotiating record which reflected Russian opposition to U.S. positions while the administration decided to push for its approval anyway.
He and other critics claim that the treaty sets up a Bilateral Consultative Commission that will affect the treaty's terms materially – and make those changes without giving the Senate its constitutionally outlined advise and consent process.
The Senate requires a two-thirds vote, or approval by 67 members, before it is ratified.
Now, the Senate leadership has announced that it will hold a weekend session in an effort to ratify the treaty.
But critics are alarmed the treaty draft establishes a relationship between missile offense and missile defense, and as the U.S. shrinks its inventory of strategic nuclear weapons, it presents less latitude to beef up U.S. defenses against potential missile attacks not just from the Russians but other countries as well.
Critics are concerned that limitations in this treaty will preclude bolstering missile defenses against such countries as North Korea and Iran which are developing their own intercontinental ballistic missiles that soon could reach the U.S.
The net effect of any changes that could occur without U.S. approval would restrict U.S. missile defenses and make other reductions in U.S. nuclear deterrent forces, Gaffney said.
Other former leaders from the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, along with top nuclear weapons and arms control experts, oppose the new START.
In a Dec. 13 letter to U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, they raised objections to consideration of START, especially in a lame-duck session, given all of the issues that still persist with the treaty draft.
"It is our considered professional judgment that this treaty and the larger disarmament agenda which ratification would endorse are not consistent with the national security interests of the United States, and that both should be rejected by the Senate," they wrote.
Keep in touch with the most important breaking news stories about critical developments around the globe with Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, the premium, online intelligence news source edited and published by the founder of WND.
For the complete report and full immediate access to Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, subscribe now. http://g2bulletin.wnd.com/
Analysts fear START doc holds something prez wants concealed
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
Editor's Note: The following report is excerpted from Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, the premium online newsletter published by the founder of WND. Subscriptions are $99 a year or, for monthly trials, just $9.95 per month for credit card users, and provide instant access for the complete reports.
Concern is mounting among experts in the arena of international treaties that the Obama administration is forcing U.S. senators to ram through a new strategic arms reduction document with the Russians without fully understanding the implications or its provisions – described by critics as unverifiable, according to a report from Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.
"(President Barack Obama's) demand that senators approve this defective accord during the few days remaining in the lame-duck session amounts to contempt of Congress," said Frank Gaffney who is president of the Center for Security Policy. "It must not be tolerated, let alone rewarded."
Critics say the treaty could "restrict" the nation's ability to defend itself, and suggest that there may be provisions Obama doesn't want members of the Senate to analyze, and possibly oppose.
Gaffney, a former acting assistant secretary of defense for international security policy, is versed in START treaties; he was involved in arms reduction negotiations during the Reagan administration.
He claims that senators have not had time to review the extensive negotiating record which reflected Russian opposition to U.S. positions while the administration decided to push for its approval anyway.
He and other critics claim that the treaty sets up a Bilateral Consultative Commission that will affect the treaty's terms materially – and make those changes without giving the Senate its constitutionally outlined advise and consent process.
The Senate requires a two-thirds vote, or approval by 67 members, before it is ratified.
Now, the Senate leadership has announced that it will hold a weekend session in an effort to ratify the treaty.
But critics are alarmed the treaty draft establishes a relationship between missile offense and missile defense, and as the U.S. shrinks its inventory of strategic nuclear weapons, it presents less latitude to beef up U.S. defenses against potential missile attacks not just from the Russians but other countries as well.
Critics are concerned that limitations in this treaty will preclude bolstering missile defenses against such countries as North Korea and Iran which are developing their own intercontinental ballistic missiles that soon could reach the U.S.
The net effect of any changes that could occur without U.S. approval would restrict U.S. missile defenses and make other reductions in U.S. nuclear deterrent forces, Gaffney said.
Other former leaders from the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, along with top nuclear weapons and arms control experts, oppose the new START.
In a Dec. 13 letter to U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, they raised objections to consideration of START, especially in a lame-duck session, given all of the issues that still persist with the treaty draft.
"It is our considered professional judgment that this treaty and the larger disarmament agenda which ratification would endorse are not consistent with the national security interests of the United States, and that both should be rejected by the Senate," they wrote.
Keep in touch with the most important breaking news stories about critical developments around the globe with Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, the premium, online intelligence news source edited and published by the founder of WND.
For the complete report and full immediate access to Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, subscribe now. http://g2bulletin.wnd.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)