Saturday, January 28, 2012

Obama Eligibility Court Case…
Blow By Blow

by Craig Andresen - January 26th, 2012 - The National Patriot

Please note: the original article is no longer accessible, so I have removed the link.

Court is called to order. 

Obama’s birth certificate is entered into evidence.

Obama’s father’s place of birth, Kenya East Africa is entered into evidence.

Pages 214 and 215 from Obama’s book, “Dreams from My Father” entered into evidence. Highlighted. This is where Obama indicates that, in 1966 or 1967 that his father’s history is mentioned. It states that his father’s passport had been revoked and he was unable to leave Kenya.

Immigration Services documents entered into evidence regarding Obama Sr.

June 27th, 1962, is the date on those documents. Obama’s father’s status shown as a non citizen of the United States. Documents were gotten through the Freedom of Information Act.

Testimony regarding the definition of Natural Born Citizen is given citing Minor vs Happersett opinion from a Supreme Court written opinion from 1875. The attorney points out the difference between “citizen” and “Natural Born Citizen” using charts and copies of the Minor vs Happersett opinion.

It is also pointed out that the 14th Amendment does not alter the definition or supersede the meaning of Natural Born. It is pointed out that lower court rulings do not conflict with the Supreme Court opinion nor do they over rule the Supreme Court Minor vs Happersett opinion.

The point is, to be a natural born citizen, one must have 2 parents who, at the time of the birth in question, be citizens of the United States. As Obama’s father was not a citizen, the argument is that Obama, constitutionally, is ineligible to serve as President.

Judge notes that as Obama nor his attorney is present, action will be taken accordingly.

This court case is the most fascinating legal process currently moving forward in America. At the very least it has finally addressed the issues in a rational way. Barack Hussein Obama II is not a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN and thus is not eligible to be President. It has nothing to do with the delusion that he was not born in Hawaii. It has everything to do with the fact that his father was NEVER a citizen.

It is also clear that Obama has used a fraudulent SSN, provided a doctored birth certificate to the public, claimed Indonesian citizenship in order to pay for his college education and generally committed a number of criminal acts regarding his identity.

The question now becomes, what will the courts do? At least one lawyer I know has claimed declaring him ineligible to be re-elected will cause a race war. In addition, none of the Supreme Justices have the stomach for the cases that will be filed challenging every single action Obama has taken as President.

 If there is any single action that could precipitate a civil war, the wrong decision in this case is clearly it. Yet that gutless unwillingness to decide cases by the law of the land renders the rule of law in our nation a farce.

Thursday, January 19, 2012

Bain Capital Saved America

by Daniel Henninger - January 19th, 2012 - Wall Street Journal

Not only did Bain Capital save America, but no matter what turn Mitt Romney's political career takes, Bain Capital may stand as the best of Mr. Romney's lifetime contributions to the nation's economic well-being. If only he'd tell the story.

We are of course putting forth "Bain Capital" as not merely the Romney private-equity house but as the stand-in for the period of American economic history that ran from 1980 to 1989. Back then it was called the Greed Decade, with asset-stripping barbarians at the gate. Virtually everything about this popular stereotype is wrong. Properly understood, the 1980s, including Bain, were the remarkable years when an ever-resilient America found a way to save itself from becoming what Europe is now—a global has-been.

What a biased and self serving discourse on how the good things that resulted from free enterprise - purging its losers - justified the near elimination of competition from the marketplace and the creation of government regulations which banned new competition. The current system is dependent on government subsidies of big corporations doing things that government wants done so that businesses that collude with bureaucrats win no matter what the market does. Or at least that was the premise. However the massive failures of "green energy" companies proves that such delusions never work in the long run.

The problem is that Wall Street has abandoned competition because it desperately wants some security for big profits. I agree wholeheartedly with the premise - whenever there are "unused or poorly deployed cash and assets" it is not just the business that loses, so does society. This premise is the justification for companies like Bain that buy poorly performing companies and reorganize them to produce strong companies in their place. The well known creative destruction process of capitalism always means some get hurt. The value to society of free markets is too important to stop the process though. That does not mean the process can be corrupted and still claim it is doing good.

The problem is when the process is interfered with as has happened here in America. The true engine of free markets includes entry into the marketplace. That entry process has been severely constrained by big corporations and government conspiring to create subsidies, special deals, regulations and barriers to competition, under the guise of consumer and worker protection.

Wall Street and its defenders are extremely defensive about the corruption that has resulted from the elimination of competition and the protection of big corporations that has become the anything but free markets of modern America. That is the reason Wall Street attacks anyone who points out the flaws of the current system with such venom.

There was a lot of good done by companies like Bain Capital during the 1980s. It sure as hell did not save America though. What has occurred instead is a collusion with government that has damaged the free markets that will serve our nation best in the coming years. We must restore competition and end stupid regulations that only protect corrupt existing businesses if we want to see our nation prosper. A corrupt Wall Street is fighting against that with every ounce of its being. Wall Street is determined to use its power to promote the concept of risk free business. Government (through its power to tax) is expected to provide Wall Street bailouts whenever business fails. That is not free markets.

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Time To Purge
The Republican Party

by Ben Shapiro - January 18th, 2012 =

The Republican Party is about to nominate Mitt Romney because it is a party in crisis. Instead of focusing on... Barack Obama -- Republicans are idiotically focusing on their internal differences. Unlike the Democratic Party, which is largely united around certain key issues... the Republican Party is all over the place. The Republican Party includes high-tax deficit hawks, and it includes low-tax supply-siders. It includes high-spending compassionate conservatives, and it includes low-spending small government types. It includes pro-gay marriage libertarians and pro-traditional marriage religious voters. It includes hard-line, anti-immigration believers and open-borders free marketers. It includes Ron Paul isolationists, George W. Bush Wilsonians and everything in between.

The Republican Party includes passionate supporters of free enterprise who defend small business while at the same time the party also includes the crony capitalist faction of Wall Street who promote the socialism of big corporations and government regulatory control.

With so much internal discord, it is no surprise that Democrats win elections even as Republicans exist in greater numbers. It is also the reason that so many independents are former Republicans who have tired of the internal Party conflict.

I am not sure how Shapiro thinks purging our ranks is a good thing, but I can certainly see how he has arrived at the idea.

Monday, January 09, 2012

Panetta: Iran Has Not Yet
Decided to Make a Nuclear Bomb

by Associated Press Staff - January 8th, 2012 - Fox News

Panetta's remarks on CBS' Face the Nation, which were taped Friday and aired Sunday, reflect the long-held view of the Obama administration that Iran is not yet committed to building a nuclear arsenal, only to creating the industrial and scientific capacity to allow one if its leaders [d]o decide to take that final step.

The comments suggest the White House's assessment of Iran's nuclear strategy has not changed in recent months, despite warnings from advocates of military action that time is running out to prevent Tehran from becoming a nuclear-armed state.

What these comments suggest is that Panetta and the White House have nothing but contempt for the intelligence of the American people. To claim Iran has not been dedicated to building a bomb for several years may be a White House "assessment" but it is an "assessment" based on delusional thinking.

Such an assertion should be enough to frighten the American people. However first it requires a press that mocks the stupidity of the idea. It appears that even Fox News is afraid to alienate the White House by such a reaction. So it is reported as if it is a credible possibility. No wonder the American people are confused. Our Press is falling down on its job.