Tuesday, January 20, 2009

Inauguration Day - The Oath & The Speech

Chief Justice Roberts, the Supreme Court, and the Oath of Office

How could the failure of Chief Justice Roberts to lead Barack Obama accurately in his oath of office be more poignant? He skipped the word "faithfully," only remembering to insert it at the end of its phrase -- and prompted Obama to say, "President," not "of," but "to the United States of America." Before that, he appeared to want to rush through the oath, not hesitating after "I, Barack Hussein Obama," for that man to state his name only, in that turn, and let it hang for a moment in the air, before proceeding with "do solemnly swear."

The words "faithfully" and "of" are piercingly pertinent indeed, to this man who would be seen as America's president.



As the members of the Supreme Court departed from the lower Capitol building on their way to the ceremony, none appeared lighthearted to me, except Justice Clarence Thomas. No, they appeared somewhat burdened, to me.

They must know that what lies before them, being brought from numerous quarters now, is their duty to immediately decide to either abide by the Constitution under which they are sworn to administer justice, or to take a path of treacherous cowardice, by failing to hold Barack Obama and the process of selecting our Commander in Chief accountable to Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5. The point which pierces his presidency is that Obama is manifestly not faithful to the Constitution as a natural born Citizen of America.

Barack Hussein Obama's Inaugural Speech

Obama's attestation of respect for America's founding documents in this speech is of fundamental dishonesty, even if it carried some heartfelt sentiment. His behavior is antithetical to both the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution which rests upon it.

One recalls, this is the same man who quoted Jesus Christ, "I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'" (NIV) and in the same forum at Saddleback Church, claimed unaccountability for the innocent least of those among us, whose mass holocaust he has so aggressively championed and to lengths not even approached by some of his most avid pro-abortion comrades. He hardly adheres to America's essential Right to Life.

But, what can one expect, from a man whose very "candidacy" is so clearly an affront to the U.S. Constitution? Let us recite the temerity involved. 1. Obama was born a citizen of the United Kingdom, by natural, patrilineal inheritance. 2. He has hidden whatever actual and evidentiary documentation exists, of his place of birth. 3. He has even refused to submit any record of naturalization into U.S. Citizenship after it was revoked by his Indonesian citizenship as a youth. The overriding evidence indicates that Barack Obama is clearly not a natural born Citizen of the United States of America. Indeed the collection of evidence so far indicates he is not a U.S. Citizen at all and that Barack Obama is an impostor, a fictitious president.

Obama attempted to signal to America a recognition that private enterprise is the critical key to the American economy. Did what he said conflict with wild sounding charges of his Marxist orientation? If he does believe his own words, this is not really in conflict with the evidence cited in Investing Obama that he is a neo-Marxist, which may also be called fascist, by what that term actually means, or anarcho-syndicalist, or anarcho-communist. (In these cases "anarchist" does not mean someone who is against any government, but refers to an extreme and libertine element in the labor movement, intending to eventually force private business to give ownership to its workers.) The false ideal of egalitarianism, controlled by the state, remains the eventual goal of this movement. And the economic end result of this, ironically, is quite similar to a capitalist system corrupted into a controlling oligopoly or monopoly. In each case, one is either among the elite or is a virtual slave. Perhaps this gives the reader an idea of how so many of the wealthiest people in America and the world can also be funding and promoting the global socialist movement.

I will continue to pray for God's mercy and justice in America. And, as Scripture mandates, I will continue to submit to this nation's authorities -- which in essence, are its People, who are its Sovereigns. However, that mandate also refers to officials and in keeping with this, I will warn America of the need to free itself from a false presidency, illegitimately held by an usurper. As for Barack Obama, as all Americans should know, sometimes one must separate the corrupt person from his corrupt practices, in order to do what is best for him, as well as for others.
<<<<<<<<<<<<> I.O.<>>>>>>>>>>>>

Update, 1/21, ~ 7:00pm: On the Fox News TV network this evening, Shepard Smith reported that Barack Obama had an oath of office do-over, today. Then, he commented (actual or close paraphrase) "There are still some people who question his citizenship."

Update, 1/20, ~ 11:25pm: Does anyone else get all smirky about it, seeing Barack Obama being so fastidious about having every jot and tittle taken care of, with his oath of office -- but the Birth Certificate? Natural born Citizenship? Compliance with the U.S. Constitution, which, by that oath, he has just promised to "preserve, protect, and defend?"

Oh, come on now, who really cares...? who needs to know...?

And after spending how much money in court costs, to keep the SCOTUS from making a decision about the natural, constitutional meaning and the evidence involved?
Who needs Casey Anthony, for a crime as entertainment fix?

47 comments:

Carlyle said...

Extra Extra - "Inaugural" Special Edition

(Hey Victor! EAT THIS)

First I want to rebut a handful of morons of my acquaintance who believe that these news editions are motivated by ideology. My observation is that these very same people are the ones who are so consumed with Bush Derangement Syndrome, that they cannot recognize a rational and well-considered report when they see one. I am a Patriot and I report on Constitutional issues.

As of noon today we have a unique constitutional situation. By law, Joe Biden is now the president. By public acclamation and ceremonial proceedings Barack Obama is hailed as the president. This puts us as a country in a unique bind.

One consequence is that any order coming from Obama as the supposed Commander in Chief that results in a soldier killing anyone, that soldier will be guilty of a war crime and punishable by international courts.

The more immediate consequence is that everything Obama does of an official nature is null and void. Any executive order, any bill that he signs, any statement he makes in regards definitive foreign policy, is legally ineffective.

Rather than slowing down and fading into the woodwork, the level and intensity of lawsuits will dramatically escalate until this crisis is resolved. For every official act Obama attempts, he will be slapped with a lawsuit until the courts are backed up and choked for months.

Ponder the following definition from Wikipedia: "A coup d’état, often simply called a coup, is the sudden unconstitutional overthrow of a government by a (typically small) part of the state establishment – usually the military – to replace the branch of the stricken government, either with another civil government or with a military government. The coup d’état succeeds if its opponents fail to thwart the usurpers, allowing them to consolidate their positions, obtain the surrender of the overthrown government or acquiescence of the populace and the surviving armed forces, and thus claim legitimacy. Coups d’état typically use the power of the existing government for the takeover. As Edward Luttwak remarks in Coup d'État: A Practical Handbook: A coup consists of the infiltration of a small, but critical, segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder. In this sense, the use of either military or another organized force is not the defining feature of a coup d'état."

Unfortunately the wheels of justice grind slowly - too slowly - but they do indeed grind. There are still a number of lawsuits before various courts and more to come. The processes that are going to blow this wide open are Subpoena and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. These are finally starting to yield results.

Last week a Subpoena was filed against Occidental College in California as part of Alan Keyes' lawsuit in California. This Subpoena demands release of the Barry Soetoro records. It is expected to show that Barry enrolled as a foreign student (Indonesian) and possibly obtained student aid designated solely for non-citizen students.

The information from FOIA requests is beginning to slowly dribble in. Not all of the information has been released by the lawyers who did the requests. But one monumental bit of information was disclosed yesterday. Barry/Barack Soetoro/Obama has never had a US Passport. This has been widely suspected - because no one could find one and he won't produce one - but this is the first legal proof. This means that all his known traveling was done on a foreign passport (Indonesian?) which could only be obtained via citizenship and allegiance to that country. AFTER the age of majority.

The USURPER will not be "president" for long. It is just a very great pity that the wheels of justice could not have been turned faster.

And, don't forget all the investigations into the Chicago criminal activities and that the widespread election fraud is still under investigation.

Finally, Soetoro/Obama could not have pulled off this hoax without a lot of help in high places. Look for a lot of dominos (very big ones) to fall over as well.

Anonymous said...

Totally agree, Caryle.

I guess karma is happening, Sen. Ted Kennedy and Sen. Byrd just left the Capital luncheon with medical issues.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28755439/?GT1=43001

Bob said...

Carlyle, where can we find the story about that one not ever having had a US passport? I would like to be able to refer to that story to some unbelievers I know.

Arlen Williams said...

Thanks to everyone for your consideration of I.O. and for communicating through it.

Be aware that I.O. has a low tolerance for AD HOMINEM attack, for hurling curses (e.g., "idiot," not just "may a camel step on your foot") or obscenitites, or blasphemies.

Posts including them are subject to deletion.

Arlen Williams said...

Carlyle, thanks for the pertinent remarks. Biden was put in place by the same delegates, electors, and false certifiers as Obama. Therefore, it is questionable, whether he or any cabinet members are constitutional.

Arlen Williams said...

Bob, I suspect that if you searched by the relevant terms, you would find that information.

Mr. Foot said...

I have been following your website and that of Mr. Berg's since I learned of this situation in mid July.

Two statements from the afternoon that struck me as thought-provoking. First, was Mr. Obama's choice of the words: "Our founding *documents* " in his address.

Was it too many words/letters to insert "Constitution" or "Dec of Indep" in there? I must be reading into this too much then.

Could the Federalist Papers be considered among those founding documents? How about Chief Justice John Jay's letter to Geo. Washington?

I did not recall any other references to the Constitution in the speech.

Then Joe Biden in brief remarks at the luncheon talked about the 3 branches of govt, and with those 3 working together they can accomplish anything. To me it was as if he used that point in time to remind his colleagues they along with the SCOTUS may have to figure out a way to get through some upcoming "problems."

Anonymous said...

Article II, Section 1, Clause 8 states: Before [the POTUS] enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation - "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

If you look at the transcript and the video, http://www.slate.com/id/2209298/?GT1=38001 that

ROBERTS: (working without a text, and also without an overcoat): Are you prepared to take the oath, Senator?

OBAMA: I am.

ROBERTS: I Barack Hussein Obama ...

OBAMA: (interrupting) I Barack ...

ROBERTS: Do solemnly swear ...

OBAMA: I, Barack Hussein Obama, do solemnly swear ...

ROBERTS: That I will execute the office of president to the United States faithfully...

OBAMA: That I will execute ... (pauses, smiles, waits for Roberts to put "faithfully" in correct spot)

ROBERTS: ... The off ... faithfully the pres ... the office of president of the United States...

OBAMA: The office of president of the United States, faithfully ... (if you can't beat 'em, join 'em)

ROBERTS: And will to the best of my ability ...

OBAMA: And will to [the] best of my ability ...

ROBERTS: Preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

OBAMA: Preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

ROBERTS: So help you God?

OBAMA: So help me God.

ROBERTS: Congratulations, Mr. President.

The Oath administered was incorrectly stated by both Chief Justice Roberts and Obama is no where in the Constitution. What does this mean? Did Chief Justice do this on purpose fully knowing that Obama is the UIC (Usurper in Chief)?

Did he does this to absolve himself of administering a perjured oath so that he can allow this fictitious usurper to get it and then remove him when evidence is shown that he does not qualify as a natural born citizen under Article II, Section 1, Clause 5.

This is interesting to say the least.

Carlyle said...

All - the passport information was reported by Phil Berg on a radio show he did last nite and further elaborated by Linda Starr today at www.obamacrimes.com.

Arlen - Sorry I used the word "idiot". I just posted a newsletter I sent to a wide group of people without editing it first.

Arlen - I agree that Biden may well be ineligible also. So would the entire cabinet, as well as all the congresspeople who were swept into office on The One's coattails. However, I just chose to address the first and most obvious level of detail in this report.

Carlyle said...

Oops - I guess it was "moron", not "idiot"!

Anonymous said...

To "anonymous":

Roberts probably got the "faithfully" wrong, because he was surprised by Obama interrupting him. That's one plausible explanation. But what you write here—"Did he do this to absolve himself of administering a perjured oath?"—could equally be possible. A Presidential oath is always something for the historical records. Words do matter. Slight changes of words do matter even more. This was very apparent during the invocation by Rick Warren, where he called Obama the "son of an immigrant", which is incorrect. I had to roar with laughter, but it may have a serious undercurrent: It's possible that Warren tried to rectify something for the historical records, obscure the truth about Obama's citizenship issues.

You have to imagine historians looking at the records in hundreds, if not a thousand years, debating whether Obama was a usurper or not: Then one part of the experts will point at Warren's invocation and say: "You see, he was the son of an immigrant! And since he became President, it's feasible to assume that his father had naturalized."

You know, these are official records. Records about dismissed court cases and blog articles etc. are more likely to not survive the ages. If you want to create a political reality, you have to make sure that your opinion/propaganda becomes part of the official political records. Those will surely be transmitted, unless some hypothetical catastrophe happens.

Anonymous said...

On second thought: Did Obama really interrupt Roberts? I think he didn't. It's custom to only state your name in the first part. So Roberts was either trying to mess up the oath on purpose or he was nervous. Both possibilities force the question: Why???

Victor said...

Hello Carlyle,

I question your description of this report as well-considered. Considering the emphasis being placed on the defendant's requirement to furnish proof, there seems to be a glaring lack of proof on the plaintiffs' side.

You assert that "as of noon today we have a unique constitutional situation." Yet, no proof of such a situation exists, unless you're referring to the boundaries of a minuscule corner of the blogosphere.

You claim that Joe Biden is President by law. Yet, until you can provide proof of that claim, it remains an erroneous and not well-considered assertion.

The consequences you describe? Again, if and only if proof of your claims can be brought to light, they're not applicable to us, here, today.

Your claim that "the level and intensity of lawsuits will dramatically escalate" may lead to two results: the first, as seen in the case of Greenberg v. Brunner, is that the courts will start to assess costs against the plaintiffs. The second, as seen in the case of attorney Andy Martin, is that lawyers representing these plaintiffs will start to be identified as "vexatious litigants," and subsequently placed under injunction and subject to sanction.

As you correctly assert, the wheels of justice do grind slowly, but they also grind surely: witness the series of dismissal after dismissal in case after case that have been brought to the courts. Does a well-considered analysis of the case history to date lead to the conclusion that any future case will succeed, or will they be just as quickly dismissed as the ones preceding?

You mention the issues of subpoenas and Freedom of Information requests, but you've neglected to mention that subpoenas are routinely quashed. You claim that Barack Obama has never held a US Passport, but the evidence seems to contradict that claim rather specifically: from a news story reported in March of 2008, the State Department disclosed that someone looked at Barack Obama's passport file on multiple occasions. If Obama has never held a US Passport, why would the State Department have a passport file in their records?

There is no usurper, Carlyle: there's only Barack Obama, natural born citizen and 44th President of the United States.

Today is the first day of a new administration. A new beginning for our country, and with it, a new call to serve our country as patriots, citizens and neighbors. Each of us will always have the freedom to heed that call, and work for a better America, or ignore that call, and expend our energies in other pursuits as we see fit.

If you, Carlyle, choose to express your opposition to the current Administration, that's your Constitutionally-guaranteed right. But as a self-professed patriot, is it your well-considered opinion that this is the best way to expend your energies? How do you, personally, benefit in this fruitless pursuit? How do your neighbors benefit? How does the Nation benefit?

Please consider that.

Arlen Williams said...

The judge which is attempting to punish the complainant in Greenberg v. Brunner is violating our right to petition of grievance; another "natural fact."

Anonymous said...

Hey Victor,
Passport file does not mean the person has a US passport. It simply means records of entering and leaving a US port. In other word, a foreign national entering the country and being processed at INS office at the port of entry has a file on record that shows his/her stamped pages of his/her passport and the passport can be a passport issued by US (if a US citizen) or a foreign passport.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 332 today welcoming the new Fraud at the 1600 Pennsylvania address.

Do not fool yourself, nothing has changed and nothing will change. One liar gone and another one replaced him. I would like to see all of them in handcuff, R or D, Left and Right wingers.

Anonymous said...

Victor, you wrote: "There is no usurper, Carlyle: there's only Barack Obama, natural born citizen and 44th President of the United States."

There is a possibility that he is not a natural born citizen due to his dual citizenship at birth. The arguments for this claim have been brought forward in many cases, especially Donofrio & Wrotnowski, relying on the Law of Nations, the Founding Fathers (like John Jay), Framers like Bingham, and yes, you can even support it with the debate accompanying S.Res.511 in the Senate. We have made the case, and we have shown lots of evidence and sources, enough reasons to have doubts about the legitimacy of his Presidency. And we therefore have every reason to say that there is at least a possibility that we have a unique constitutional situation.

Now it's your turn to bring forward your arguments and sources, why Obama IS a natural born citizen, why we do NOT have a unique constitutional situation. You can't just proclaim that he is natural born, without elaborating, without telling us why. Since we have presented our arguments, the burden of proof is now on you. Otherwise all that you say is totally irrelevant, mere conjecture.

Carlyle said...

Ah, Victor -

You and I have access to the same data so you know that my facts are at least 95% probablity of being true. The difference is, you believe the juggernaut has achieved critical momentum and cannot be stopped. Whereas I, as a Patriot, believe with all my heart that righteousness will eventually prevail - and sooner rather than later.

I am genuinely hopeful. You, on the other hand must scared spitless. I would much rather rest easy on my conscience than yours. Sleep tight!

Victor said...

To Arlen in reply to your post at 6:07 PM - I'd refer you back to The Right Side of Life and the comments contained in this post. You'll see why your assertion that the judge is violating the right to petition is incorrect.

To Anonymous in reply to your post at 7:11 PM - this page on the Department of State's website describes what information is contained in a passport file. Contrary to your assertion, and quoting from the page, "Generally, after the State Department issues a passport, all personal documents are returned to the applicant – the only document kept in the Department’s passport file is the passport application. Passport files do not contain travel information, such as visa and entry stamps, from previous passports. Almost all passport files contain only a passport application form as completed by the applicant."

To Anonymous and your post of 7:17 PM - the short answer to your question is in the first comment on this blog post, again on The Right Side Of Life. I would argue that you have raised the question, but not made the case. Until that time, no Constitutional crisis exists, except in the hypothetical.

Finally, a word to Carlyle: belief can be comforting, most especially when those beliefs are founded in fact. In this particular case, however, the facts rest squarely on the side of the defendants, and not the plaintiffs.

Arlen Williams said...

Victor, it is correct, because I know what the Constitution guarantees and what Article 2 says. Once again, other opinions do not matter -- not even those of judges and their precedents.

You sure do get around in the camps of those who apparently oppose your core beliefs. Doesn't that wear on you? What keeps you going?

Arlen Williams said...

ALL:
Does anyone else find it odd that Obama apparently felt he had to convince Americans today, that he believes in such a basic thing as private enterprise?

BTW, he didn't say "free enterprise," did he?

Ted said...

Q&A:

Who was the 44th President of the USA?

ANSWER:

Joe Biden.

He was the Acting President for at least 5 minutes under either the Constitution’s Article 2 or the Constitution’s 20th Amendment, from 12:00 Noon 1/20/09, having already taken his Oath of Office and before Obama completed his ‘oath’ at approximately 12:05 PM, 1/20/09. Under the 20th Amendment if the President-elect shall have failed to qualify, or alternatively under Article 2 if the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term, being 12:00 Noon 1/20/09, which ability and/or qualification includes that he take the Article 2 oath “before he enter on the execution of his office,” then either the Presidency shall devolve on the Vice President under Article 2 or the Vice President shall act as President under the 20th Amendment.

Here’s why this may be significant. If a subsequent Supreme Court ruling disqualifies Obama as not being an Article 2 “natural born citizen”, Biden’s automatic succession to the Presidency could be predicated upon either and/or both having been Vice President under Article 2 or, if that be deemed problematic because Obama’s unlawful Presidency is nullified, Vice President-elect under the 20th Amendment.

Glacialhills said...

Over and over I keep hearing; "What proof do you have that he is not qualified?" It is not our obligation to provide proof of his eligibility. Mr. Obama is the one that chose to run for the office of president, it is for him to provide that he is eligible under articles of the constitution.Very basic isn't it. If I want a drivers license I don't go down to the SOS and demand a license and when asked for my proof of identity tell them "no way, prove I am not eligible to get one!" (but by the way, you can not have any documents to do so,not only that I will hire a legion to hide the information from you.) guess what happens....I don't get a drivers license. I thought it was the same when asking to be our president..I was wrong. So quit asking us for our proof of usurpation. Until Barry or Barack or whoever he is provides the proof he is required to show he is eligible to run for the office of POTUS...he will be driving without a valid license.

Arlen Williams said...

Well said, Galacialhills.

And the primary proof of Obama's ineligibility is that he is by nature the son of his father. Citizenship by hereditary right is what is meant by "natural." It is self-evident reality, which is what natural is. Citizenship is of the nature of an group identity which stems from family, to tribe, to nation.

BHO II was born Obama, Luo, Kenyan, subject of the Crown of England (before any American Citizenship was revoked when he became an Indonesian citizen).

Case closed.

The United States of America is now a rogue nation.

spabeachresorts said...

delighted to share the same...and lets with the best!!

Anonymous said...

Maybe Roberts screwed it up so he can't be tried for treason--he didn't give him the right oath--so no harm done, right?

Anonymous said...

For me this issue has always been about the U.S. Constitution and the UN.

The Clinton faction desperately wants America to be under UN law.

The Republicans, and perhaps the Democrats who blocked Hillary's nomination, do not want America to be under UN law.

To be fair, the SCOTUS is in the hot seat.
Politically and ideologically, alignment with the UN is the fashionable thing for the Hillary liberals. How many of those sit on SCOTUS?

Might it be, that out of concern previously expressed by members of SCOTUS under the Clinton regime, when the U.S. was almost signed over to the UN, that the political parties were instructed to nominate candidates who were not constitutionally eligible?

By creating a dummy presidency, wouldn't this action theoretically preserve American sovereignty while placating the temporary demands of the radical liberals?

Think about it, Hillary by all counts should have been the nominee, that was blocked and in her place is what - a constitutionally ineligible candidate, now a dummy president?

Kevan said...

Prayers, praying for the TRUTH to come into the light for all to see...Amen. :) I am thankful for all those who are working so hard to bring this "secrecy" out. :)

Carlyle said...

First a post for Victor, then I will follow with a writeup for everybody.

In spite of several factions of individuals within the US either hiding from the truth or actively covering up the truth, "everybody out there" knows that Obama is a Citizen of the World and not a true American.

Our enemies are delighted, our friends are appalled, everyone else is dismayed.

In the end, you can believe and wish whatever you want, but the truth will eventually out. I have the high moral ground because I am willing to make the following statement and you are not:

"Lay the records on the table and let the chips fall where they may."

That's what is pretty much known as a discussion ender.

Carlyle said...

Interesting Tids and Bits from the Inaugural Farce

Let us for the sake of argument say that Obama is a US Natural Born Citizen and completely eligible for office. The following interesting incident still remains. Consider carefully the following chain of succession:

At the stroke of noon Tuesday, by specific decree in the Constitution, George Bush ceases to be President. But neither Barack Obama nor Joe Biden have yet been sworn in. Who is the President at that time? If George Bush is not president, the mantle passes to the Vice President. But in the absence of a VP, the mantle passes to the Secretary of State - Condoleeza Rice. For a moment she is the President of the United States. The first black and the first women. A couple of minutes later, Joe Biden is sworn in as Vice President. Having priority in the chain of succession, he then becomes the President. Several minutes later, Barack Obama is sworn in and becomes the President. This is far more than in interesting academic exercise of no practical merit. In the few minutes that Rice was President, if terrorists or disgruntled zealots had taken out Obama and Biden, Rice would be the president right now.

I have recently been reproached by several readers regarding my too-frequent use of invective such as "idiot", "moron", "witless", "imbecile", etc. In one sense they are right. Surely someone of my stature should not be using these gutter words. I will more dutifully peruse my thesaurus searching for more lofty phrases with which to express these essential thoughts. In the meantime, perhaps introspection - a sort of self quiz - will make do instead. Your reaction to the following should be highly self-diagnostic.

I lurked in numerous places frequented by Patriots yesterday. Of the several bizarre circumstances and statements made yesterday, I was looking for consensus for the recipient of the Howler Award. I was not able to achieve that goal, but have narrowed it down to two. Both specific utterances by The One.

The first three words of his address certainly raise the eyebrows. "My fellow citizens". Never before have these words been uttered (at least since Greek and Roman times) - it is always "My fellow Americans". Given his citizenship issues and his leaning to be a "citizen of the world" and not so much an "American" - can these specific words be anything other than ripe with meaning?

And, secondly, this sentence should require no comment or explanation: "To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history." WANH?

Finally we end with "a picture is worth a thousand words" moment:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_50C5_NYwrlE/SXckOlmVleI/AAAAAAAAACI/vhBFDbmifg4/s400/obama1-1.jpg

Mr. Foot said...

Some observations from the statements being made at the press "conference":

- Makes a statement about how his staff is being given instructions on how to "intrepret the FOIA."

(Rhetorical question: Why would HIS senior staff be concerned about interpreting the FOIA? Are they expecting to be soon handling requests about something the admin has not yet even done, or is there another "pressing" matter? How about FOIA requests for Columbia or Harvard records?)

- "There has been too much secrecy in this city."

- Am making a "new standard of openness" for himself. The AG is in charge of determining if a request for release of information about him or a former president is grounded in the Constitution.

- "A new era of openness." Does this then relegate prior lack of openness to be "over the dam" and not subject to public review?

Does anyone else find it highly coincidential that all of a sudden, FOIA comes charging out of the gate as an issue? At the first public statements from the White House?

As if things weren't already surreal enough. I don't know how I could go about my daily life as POTUS knowing I usurped the Constitution. The lie is just getting bigger and bigger.

Anonymous said...

I had hesitated to call His Majesty King Obama a "messiah" because I only acknowledge the One True Messiah. However the tears I witnessed yesterday in my State among the False Messiah's worshippers allow no other description. I saw a cult of personality, created by King Obama's handlers with twleve months of tv brainwashing, in unsuspecting Americans - along the lines of Stalin, Kim Il Sung and gang. Nobody I met had any knowledge of His Majesty's ineligibility; their eyes sparkled with love and trust for their "Savior". Those five media corporations with interlocking boards and 97% of the market had served their Master well...

But this also raises an interesting conumdrum: why would media corporations indoctrinate America in behalf of (according to Arlen) a neo-Marxist blahblah who represents everything they hate and would destroy? Indeed, why would the airports of DC be overflowing with the private jets of the megarich for Coronation Day, why would elite families and giant corporations contribute maximally to the False Messiah's campaigns and Coronation festivities ? (Because he's the Antichrist ? I think end-time fantasies will keep us firmly in that irrelevent 3% of the media set aside for tinfoil hat wearers - just where King Obama wants us to be.)

The truth is that King Obama is no more a Neo-Marxist blahblah than he is a black-nationalist, democrat, constitutionalist, or a Messiah: that's conjurer's misdirection. Over the last forty years Corporate America has acquired both parties, and while government, welfare and immigration control were shredded, it looted Government spending and exported production abroad. Middle America earns less now in real terms than 30 years ago. Travel abroad and you will see how much our economic position in the world has declined. I gotta tell ya: in other developed countries people spend LESS in taxes and bills, get more for it, and prices are LOWER. If you don't believe me you've been spun as much as the Obamanoids. You don't think Corporate America's media was going to tell you what they were doing, do you? Have you seen those jets, limos, and furs at the Coronation? They're doing better than ever and it's gonna keep rolling in. There won't be any bailouts for YOU, it's for them and you pay - this is Welfare Capitalism for Capitalism. "Free Enterprise=Free America" is dope: Obama's Kingdom is not "Free America" so there's no "Free Enterprise". That's why they Crowned a mobster from Chicago as King: he operates the same way as they do. Don't believe anything His Majesty says or suggests - he wouldn't be the evil Usurper he is without being a very convincing manipulator and liar. It's about the money, it's always the money. For our part we have to break through the mass-conditioning of our population; somehow we've got to break into the corporate media. Tough call. Even as I write there are heroically dedicated Americans close to evidence which proves that King Obama is not and never has been a US citizen. That truth may snap enough people out of their trance and force King Obama to abdicate. Otherwise...secession of red from blue ?

PdeB

Anonymous said...

"The truth is that King Obama is no...democrat...that's conjurer's misdirection."

Parallel thinking at http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/

10 Reasons Why We Fight Against Obama

2. Obama has No Stake in Democracy - Not only was Obama's election undemocratic, but Obama has never relied on the democratic process to win elections. This makes him an active and present danger to American democracy.

Obama reached the State Senate by using lawyers to disqualify the signatures of his opponents, including his own mentor Alice Palmer, who first gave him his start in politics.

Obama made it to the US Senate when his campaigns pushed dirt about the private lives of first his Democratic Primary opponent Blair Hull and then his Republican opponent Jack Ryan. Both men had been doing better than Obama in the polls and both saw their campaigns destroyed by allegations from their ex-wives promoted and spread by the Obama campaign.

Obama won the Democratic Presidential Primary when his party leadership shortchanged the votes of states such as Florida. He won the Presidential election through ACORN's well organized campaign of electoral fraud.

As disturbing as all of these facts are, the truly disturbing conclusion is that, Obama has no stake in the survival of American democracy. Democracy is Obama's enemy. He has never achieved anything because of the democratic process, but despite it. For the first time in our history since the forces of King George III were shown the door, America is ruled by a man to whom the Democratic system is actually a threat.

Obama has subverted Democracy before taking office. What he will do in the White House can only be imagined.



PdeB

Anonymous said...

Breaking News:
Yesterday, the 20th Hijacker entered the Whitehouse in an attempt to Hijack America. Contrary to previous reports, the 20th Hijacker did not land on the roof at 1600 PA Avenue, but rather entered through the front door while millions took pictures and cheered. It has also been reported that the same Hijacker entered the halls of US congress through the front entrance and successfully posed as a US senator for 145 days.

darkleo said...

http://drorly.blogspot.com/

Obama has been in power only one day and they are already playing games with the Supreme Court
Obama has been in power only one day. Suddenly today my case has disappeared from the docket. The case was not dismissed. It is supposed to be heard on the 23rd of January. Each and every American Citizen needs to call the Supreme court and demand decency from these Justices. They have violated all principles of judicial integrity and ethics by inviting Obama and Biden to the closed door meeting only a few days before the hearing. They have inaugurated him in from of millions of people, when 3 days after the inauguration they are supposed to hear my case, where I state that Obama is not eligible for presidency and never was eligible. They were supposed to recuse themselves from the inauguration. What is going on? Is Chicago mafia influencing the Supreme Court? If we don't have integrity with our elected officials and the whole system is corrupt, then it is time to revolt and change the system.

Arlen Williams said...

hhhhhhhhh

Arlen Williams said...

PdeB,

Looks like you emphasize one element of this and I do, the other. Suffice it to say that this is a global movement of money lords and the various kinds of Marxists -- which is very much like classic fascism, but of a global kind. (It's very similar to a theme in the Book of Revelation, while I hardly believe Obama is the 666-money-maker. Themes are called thematic because they're themes.)

Point is: these people are very bad actors and anti-American -- and they are very well studied political insurgents.

Arlen Williams said...

Victor, I deleted your post for beating around the bush, "pilpul" style. But, post it again and I might change my mind -- or not.

Maybe come back and tell us alll about how "natural" in "natural born Citizen" does not likely refer to natural law, nor one of the most natural acts around -- reproduction.

BHO II was a natural born: Obama, Luo, Kenyan, UK Subject.

Then, he went to Indonesia and became a citizen there, else he would not be allowed in school under his name, Barry Soetoro.

After that, it does get a little fuzzy.

Victor said...

It's your blog and your rules, Arlen.

I'm curious - what was so dangerous, disrespectful or subversive that you felt the need to delete a post, instead of giving your audience the chance to read it and form their own opinions?

And what, if anything, do any of these posts have to do with pilpul - a method of studying the Talmud?

Arlen Williams said...

Wow. I'll leave that one up.

Anonymous said...

I hope Victor will agree: we have been providentially served by our Democratic Presidents over the last fifty years: we are similarly blessed in Barack Obama.

President Stevenson in the 1950s with a flick of his wrist shrugged off those unproved accusations of homosexuality and his languid style gave us the dreamy, uneventful "Tough but Tender" Presidency: the Soviets just didn't know where to look...to start trouble.

When Lyndon Johnson was elected President in 1960 he in turn proved untrue all accusations of graft slung in the campaigns (not least by nomination rival "Kowardly Kennedy", himself only in it for the money, who slunk off to jobs in the CIA, Fed, and Cuban real estate - peacefully liberated by LBJ in 1962 - arranged by "Old Magnanimity" himself). I believe LBJ's greatest triumph was the 1965 Tonkin Commission, where he proved in phenomenal detail the aggressive scope of NV attacks on our naval forces: and then gave half ($125M 2009 values - proved investments) of his personal wealth to chemical decontamination in the Greening of Vietnam. "Old Magnanimity" again.

President Carter's vow to the American people during the '76 campaign that "I will never tell a lie" was never better proved than in the Iran hostage crisis of 1980: he told us he would never use force and he kept his word - planeloads of toys and roses stunned an admiring world and won the love of a still grateful Iranian nation. His open and above-board diplomacy in 1979 with NS Advisor Brezinzski (Obama's mentor), to successfully deter Soviet aggression in Afghanistan, did prove him to be: "The Peace President".

Best to last: rumors about Obama not being a natural born (or any kind of) citizen are totally baseless and nothing will come it - any more than all those rumors about President Clinton's womanizing during his election campaign ever amounted to anything. Clinton proved he never had sex with that or any other woman - that's why no case ever went to a court hearing. Mr Clinton's character in the face of a vast right-wing conspiracy served as an inspiration to an entire generation of children: think of the awkward questions parents would've had to field if Clinton's moonbat traducers had been right !

Conspiracy theorists just don't get it: where there's smoke...that's just smoke. Our new Vice President is so dismissive of the calumnies he says (well, rumor has it) he would pardon his chief and make Barack his Secretary of State, even if Obama was sentenced to 50 years in the slammer. So let us move on and trust Barack Obama as we rightly trusted Bill Clinton: Obama has the integrity, courage, and honesty that will bring America together again in the spirit of his hero Abraham Lincoln, so help me God.

PdeB

Anonymous said...

The Berg case is Toast as 1/21/2009
The Orly case is in the Toaster, result on Moday will be "denied"
so far there are 22 "denieds" on these type of cases, how many more are needed and what's next?

Anonymous said...

Supreme Court was sent a copy of Obama's Birth Certificate along with afadavits from Hawaii Officials. What ruling do you expect from them on these cases?

Man who repeatdly does same thing expecting different results is an ________.

Victor said...

PdeB,

That's a well written, but badly argued post.

You're absolutely right that each of the "what if"s you describe took place in some parallel universe, and not here in our world.

Likewise, the hope beyond all reason that someone, somewhere will save us from the predations of a usurper should also be placed within that parallel universe: there's just no usurper here, and all the wishing in the world won't create one.

Anonymous said...

"...they Crowned a mobster from Chicago as King..."

Leo Donofrio is back and has today described a Constitutional investigative process whereby Sovereign Citizens can end-run Congress and SCOTUS to legally prosecute usurpers in virtue of Their unalienable authority as THE FOURTH BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT. We are not yet powerless and the Republic may still be restored...by WE the People. Hope beyond all reason ? Counter-factual ? Or our right and heritage as Americans ? Antonin Scalia thinks so...

See The Federal Grand Jury is the 4th Branch of Government at http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/

PdeB

Hope-4-A-Change in Direction said...

Obama retook the oath in private the other night (no press or media coverage). If you look at the official press release picture you'll notice something missing from his left hand, The BIBLE!

Anonymous said...

"...their eyes sparkled with love and trust for their "Savior"."

More parallel thinking at http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/

The Seven Laws of the Obamanation

The Fourth Law - Spread the worship around. Obama's success in part owes itself to the ability to make others emotionally invested in his success, for generational or racial or political reasons. Obama's secret is that he has no investment in their success.

Obama's Conservative outreach is part of a drive to make as many Americans as possible feel invested in his success. This will further enhance Obama's Reality Distortion Field that will prevent people from realizing his failures and his general worthlessness.

Like most successful con artists, Obama feeds off the emotional energy of his marks. He needs people to believe him and believe in him. When that happens, the believers join the collective delusion, making it that much harder for them to see through him.

This is a very dangerous and manipulative process with cultlike results. Investing emotional energy in a leader makes it hard to question him, and requires a great effort of will to realize that your belief in him was mistaken. Creating that emotional identification has been the key to Obama's success, maintaining and expanding it is now his goal. All the news stories and propaganda being conducted on his behalf has this overriding purpose-- to convince as many people as possible to believe in him and his mission.


PdeB

Ted said...

Take the test.

FIRST QUESTION: Who IS the actual and lawful 44th President of the USA?

ANSWER: Joe Biden

Biden was initially the Acting President for at least 5 minutes under either the Constitution’s Article 2 or the Constitution’s 20th Amendment, from 12:00 Noon 1/20/09, having already taken his Oath of Office and before Obama completed his ‘oath’ at approximately 12:05 PM, 1/20/09. Under the 20th Amendment if the President-elect shall have failed to qualify, or alternatively under Article 2 if the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term, being 12:00 Noon 1/20/09, which ability and/or qualification includes that he take the Article 2 oath “before he enter on the execution of his office,” then either the Presidency shall devolve on the Vice President under Article 2 or the Vice President shall act as President under the 20th Amendment. (The importance of the oath in ‘commencing’ an ‘Obama Presidency’ — rather than merely the 1/20/09 Noon time — is confirmed by the re-take of the ‘oath’ by Obama at the White House on 1/21/09 after the first ‘oath’ was NOT administered by Justice Roberts NOR recited by Obama in the words as required under Article 2.)

This is significant because at such time that the Supreme Court finally rules on the merits on Obama’s disqualification as not being an Article 2 “natural born citizen” (clearly he is NOT), Biden’s automatic status (without needing to take a separate Presidential Oath) of being President would be predicated upon four different bases: First, having been Vice President under Article 2; second, having been Vice President-elect under the 20th Amendment; third, having been actual President in the hiatus before Obama took the ‘oath(s)’; and fourth, retroactively deemed President during the full period of the Obama usurpation so that the acts of the Federal Government under the usurpation can be deemed authorized and/or ratified by Biden’s legitimacy.

SECOND QUESTION: Who will be the 45th President?

ANSWER: Hillary Clinton

One must assume that Bill and Hillary Clinton have been aware of all of the above. Biden’s wife recently “let the cat out of the bag” on the Oprah Show that both Biden and Hillary had considered alternatively Veep or Secretary of State, in either case, setting up Hillary to be President on a vote of the Democratic Congress if need be.

THIRD QUESTION: Is Obama an unwitting victim of this troika or a knowing participant?

ANSWER: Yet undetermined.