law (59)

One Question

One Question

      I have a question. One to which I would really appreciate an intelligent answer. Not, I repeat NOT a rant.
The question is how does passing a new law prevent a criminal from breaking the law? Yes, it is a serious question. Just to give a few examples, there are, according to one report, twenty seven federal laws and tens of thousands of state and local laws against prostitution. In Nevada prostitution is legal in much of the state except in Clark County, the home of Las Vegas. Where are the most prostitutes per capita? Right! Clark County. Yep, I lived there for almost twenty years and can attest to that one. There are so many examples of laws that don’t stop anyone except the good citizen from doing anything that a litany of them here would be superfluous.
       So here comes the people that want to abuse the second amendment and take guns from the good people claiming that it will save lives and prevent gun violence. Where are the most gun violent crimes committed? In places like Chicago, New York and Washington D.C. where there are strict gun laws. Sure. A criminal intent on murder is going to tremble at the thought of breaking the no gun law. Just like the Sandy Hook shooter did when he saw the “Gun Free Zone” sign at the school. I’m sure he thought twice about shooting people when he saw that sign. More likely he felt more like he could achieve his goals because there were not going to be anyone but him with a gun.
       One of the sponsors of the limited magazine law said in public (I paraphrase but this is the essence of it) … once those are shot they can’t use them any more …! She actually thinks a magazine is BULLETS! I suppose we have to allow for ignorance in people who have to make a living as public officials.
I had a friend in Las Vegas, a good guy who made a mistake in his younger years and learned his lesson, that wanted to have a hunting rifle, but the law said he couldn’t. He was and is a convicted felon. Never mind that he had been a good citizen for over twenty years since then. He couldn’t go into a store and buy one so he bought one on the street. A really nice semi-automatic hunting rifle. His had an extended clip. If memory serves it held twenty rounds, but that might be wrong. He actually paid less than he would have at Wall Mart for the same rifle. He ended up buying two .357 Colts for him and his wife. The three of us spent many a pleasant afternoon plinking away at rocks and trash thrown away by those law abiding citizens that littered the desert with their trash for us to use as targets.
       So now many in Congress want to abrogate our second amendment rights and pass gun “control” laws. My question stands. The question is how does passing a new law prevent a criminal from breaking the law?
I will be happy to read and respond to any intelligent comments.

Read more…
Can Local Sheriffs Refuse to Enforce Gun Control Laws?

The short answer to the question in the title of this missive is yes. Let us look at how I arrived at this.
     We start with a quote from the Federalist Papers specifically No. 78: “No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
     Further in the 1886 Supreme Court decision Norton v. Shelby County: “An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties, affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”
     Far from undermining the rule of law, the local police and county officials taking these stands are actually supporting constitutional law and fulfilling their oaths to defend the founding document.
     Want more corroboration? OK. Back we go to the Federalist Papers. Remember the Federalist papers were written by the people who drafted the Constitution and were published to aid in letting the people know what that Constitution would mean to them. Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers (#78): There is a misconception in our time that the court somehow is the arbiter of what is constitutional; that’s not true! Every official that raises their right hand and says they’re going to adhere to the constitution, seek to protect it to the best of their ability, ‘so help me God’ – that’s something that they’re all obligated to do.”
     If it be said that the legislative body are themselves the constitutional judges of their own powers, and that the construction they put upon them is conclusive upon the other departments, it may be answered, that this cannot be the natural presumption, where it is not to be collected from any particular provisions in the Constitution. It is not otherwise to be supposed, that the Constitution could intend to enable the representatives of the people to substitute their WILL to that of their constituents. It is far more rational to suppose, that the courts were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and the legislature, in order, among other things, to keep the latter within the limits assigned to their authority. The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents.(The emphasis is mine) (end of quote)
     Even if the Constitution of the United States is ignored by our legislators, these sheriffs have the constitutional and oath driven obligations to take a stand and follow the Constitution and the ruling of the Supreme Court. If it is an unconstitutional law, it has no affect on the citizenry and should not be enforced; not by local sheriffs or police – not by the FBI nor the NSA. It certainly should not be adhered to by any citizen.

Read more…

Do you aware what method mr obama is using to destroy our Nation? 

The method he is using is called the "Cloward Piven Strategy". It was "designed" back in 1966 and has been successfully tested in New York City in 1975.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJCpe-SasC0

If you look at the Big Picture, look at everything obama has said and done - it is not a stretch to understand this at all... it matches 100% to the Cloward Piven Strategy and this cannot be a coincidence it matches 100%.

How can we stop it?

We can stop it by educating every person we know with irrefutable evidence - truth and everything around us, everything that has happened under obama - and strongly encourage them to start writing their Congressman, demanding they defund this entire administration.

This is treason at the highest level folks.

The House holds the purse strings and under the rule of law - the only ones who can stop it in it's tracks.

If you look at the "strategy" the only determining factor of how soon an establishment "fails" and descends into bankruptcy - is how much money it started with and how long it takes to "spend" it...... Obama is spending taxpayer money at a rate of millions a minute.... the US has a lot, but note; last November it was 16 trillion plus deficit - it is 17 trillion plus right now.... only 7 months later. We are quickly running out of time.

If we fail in this, expect this Nation to be bankrupt before the end of mr obama's second term, expect martial law to be declared, UN Troops on the ground here in the US, all of our rights removed, Constitution revoked, all of our earnings redistributed...

Our Nation will be enslaved.

Read more…

Immigration Perspectives

Immigration Perspectives

Summary

  • The current estimated net cost of illegal immigrants ( excluding Border protection which is part of National Security is ~ $10.4 B per year
  • If S.744 becomes law it will balloon to $28.8 B per year
  • The approximate cost of Border Protection is $9 B per year.. we could pay all of it
  • Greta put forth a one page Immigration bill. Here is my one sentence Bill
    • Since Illegals are largely Citizens of Mexico, we should honor their heritage by applying their Home Country Immigration to them…..
    •  scan below for just summary Headings from that Law
    • If you need details scan down and read……….
    • Any comments?

 

Details

  • we will feed, clothe, educate, house, and provide benefits of every kind for them. This is an unlawful invasion by a foreign country. http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message2272497/reply38650845
  • What if ALL (most)of those $$$ went to enforcing existing law. Including Border Protection? As reported below that is more than $25 B per year.
  • The cost of Border Protection = ~ $9B per Year
    • The price tag, until now, has not been public. But AP, using White House budgets, reports obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests and congressional transcripts, tallied it all up: $90 billion in 10 years.
    • Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/06/22/20110622us-border-security-huge-costs-mixed-results.html#ixzz2XcVLyoRI
    • From The High Cost of Cheap Labor , Stephen Camerota – 2004
      • http://www.cis.org/High-Cost-of-Cheap-Labor#balance
      • If the estimated net fiscal drain of $2,736 a year that each illegal household imposes on the federal treasury is multiplied by the nearly three million illegal households, the total cost comes to $10.4 billion a year. (before any amnesty/legalization)
      • Both simulations show that legalization would increase the net fiscal costs dramatically. Simulation 1 shows that the net fiscal costs to the federal government would increase from $2,736 to $6,022 per household. Simulation 2 shows the net fiscal cost would be even larger, increasing to $7,668 per household.
      • If illegals were given green cards and began to pay taxes and use services like legal immigrants with the same education levels, the net annual fiscal deficit at the federal level would likely increase from $2,736 to $7,668 per household under the most likely scenario. Total costs could grow from $10.4 billion a year to $28.8 billion.
      • Mexican Immigration Law
        • http://factreal.wordpress.com/2010/05/08/mexico-vs-united-states-mexican-immigration-laws-are-tougher/
        •  Mexico welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society:
        • Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country:
        • Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned:
        • Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons:
        • Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony.
        • Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law:
        • The Mexican constitution expressly forbids non-citizens to participate in the country’s political life.
        • The Mexican constitution denies fundamental property rights to foreigners.
        • The Mexican constitution denies equal employment rights to immigrants, even legal ones, in the public sector.
        • The Mexican constitution guarantees that immigrants will never be treated as real Mexican citizens, even if they are legally naturalized.
        • An immigrant who becomes a naturalized Mexican citizen can be stripped of his Mexican citizenship if he lives again in the country of his origin for more than five years
        • Foreign-born, naturalized Mexican citizens may not become federal lawmakers (Article 55), cabinet secretaries (Article 91) or supreme court justices (Article 95).
        • The president of Mexico must be a Mexican citizen by birth AND his parents must also be Mexican-born citizens (Article 82), thus giving secondary status to Mexican-born citizens born of immigrants.
        • The Mexican constitution singles out “undesirable aliens.
        • The Mexican constitution provides the right of private individuals to make citizen’s arrests.
        • The Mexican constitution states that foreigners may be expelled for any reason and without due process.
Read more…

By Rebecca M

Islamic law continues to threaten America with their attempts at free speech and blaspheme laws. Sharia Law requires submission of all infidel lands and is their goal for the world. The Islamic culture presses an influx of demands perpetrated against women as a force of patriarchy. And the world powers continue to bow to the Islam culture, although primitive, with the assassination of their own countries due to the suicide of political correctness.

The Miss American Beauty Pageant was yesterday, June 7, 2013, in Indonesia which is the largest populated Muslim country in the world. Whoever thought this was a prime location to bring women needs their heads examined. A world beauty pageant held in a country where women are regarded as 1/2 human and abused like animals to men who shudder at the sight of a woman without a veil. What a callous and preposterous decision. Thus, catering to the Muslim culture and shying away from offending them, the contestants for the beauty pageant were forbidden from wearing bikinis and told to wear a wrap-around sarong styled one-piece style garment, all to appease the Muslim elitists as the world blindly submits to Islam.

Accordingly, the enforcement of Muslim women to shroud themselves in hijab is to prevent the gaze of the male species and prevent him from uncontrollable lust. Evidently, Muslim men are like savage wolves that have no self-control. It is the woman's fault, always, in Islamic culture if a man is a lust-crazed rapist even if the woman did nothing to provoke it - other than she glanced upward from staring at the ground or her veil accidently slipped off of her head! The man is rarely held accountable. That is why when a female is raped - the female is punished and the rapist goes free. Four male witnesses have to attest to the rape and other than the gang-rapists, which are common, none of them will attest to anything.

In some Muslim countries 65% of the women in prison awaiting sentencing, or execution in Arab countries, are there because they were raped. A raped female is labeled as a fornicator and worthy of death; in many cases an "honor killing" is done by close family members including Fathers, Uncles, Cousins, Brothers, Mothers and even Sisters.

In the early 1970's, the Belgium parliament banned the burqa. The repercussions of violence by Muslim men was purposely done as they crawled out of the woodwork, sexually harassing and raping the women as a form of punishment for daring to go unveiled in public. The French parliament went so far as to completely ban all hijab and burqa coverings in the public school systems, in 2004, and has continued to enforce this policy. Too bad they didn't ban the burqa permanently across the land! However, this bylaw is only in the French school systems and once the young women exit the doors, they must be covered. Therefore, the shadow of the veiled culture of Islam that is penetrating Western civilization can be seen in every country and increases each year.

This intimidation procedure by the Muslim male population is intentional to press the governments to protect the women and even to enforce a form of 'non-discrimination law,' that only throws the ball in the Sharia ball court to be used against that nation - thus forcing the women to veil, rather than convict the perpetrators.

The continued abuse of women eventually puts them at such high risk many women choose to veil rather than be abused and raped, Muslim or non-Muslim alike. There are areas in Europe that are so threatening and highly populated by Muslims and patrolled by Sharia morality advocates - that woman who are not veiled are considered easy prey and regarded as "easy whores." In France many non-Muslim women are choosing the veil over the harassment of possible rape. The Qur’an teachings permanently stain the Muslim male’s mind-set with a 'booty' license to rape and abduct women, especially young girls under age 16. The fear the Europeans harbor, in their originally non-Islamic cultures, may eventually cause a war to break out in these countries as they fight for their homelands and freedoms; and, if they do not stop the oppression of Islam's attempts to conquer their lands, soon the entire world will be shrouded in Islamic hijab darkness.

Many scorn the imposing threat of "the religion of peace," but they are living in a cocoon and are not aware of the travesties occurring in Europe due to Muslim immigration. Europe is warning America to stop the invasion of Muslims into our country. All of Europe, as well as America, need to take a stand against this infringement of humanity and women's rights because it is the possible future of your wives, daughters, nieces and granddaughters. If something isn't done soon, all of Europe will be forced to veil in subservience, or will be so threatened that if they do not veil - there will be no safety anywhere for an unveiled woman in the near future.

And the threat to American civilization will be following soon, thereafter . . . . .

burqas-or-bikinis-L-FQ9zzd

Although the burqa is a looming oppression, the Western world is embracing the culture of Islamic style without even realizing it. The Islamic globalization of the world is happening. Yes, the fashion trend is leaning to the culture of Islamic-Egyptian style ......

Have you noticed this? Are you supporting it? Are you even aware of it? The globalization to impute Sharia Law is manifesting before our eyes. The question is.... will we continue to tolerate it and support it.

 

Read more…

I watched this video and could not believe what the officer in charge describes the purpose of this armored vehicle.  Listen very carefully to what the DHS officer is saying, you should be very concerned.

  1.  It's basically bomb proof.
  2.  Weighs 15 tons
  3. Tires will not run flat.
  4. Top Speed of 70 MPH.
  5. Four side Gun Ports for operators.
  6. Bullet proof windows including 50 caliber .
  7. Side rails for officers for rapid deployment.
  8. He comments we can support teams in other states if needed.
  9. Used to serve special warrants.
  10. Built for urban assault on US Soil.

Why would we need these ominous assault teams and vehicles in our streets?

Who are the decision makers for the warrants?

What are warrantable offenses?

There is no room for detainees in the vehicle so were will the hold those arrested?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MA2l_qsynB0

Read more…

THE BORDER HAS NEVER BEEN SAFER

That was Janet Napolitano’s testimony recently. She praised her Department’s accomplishments (in other words: boasted in her own) saying that the border “has never been stronger.”

Check it out for yourself in the video and don't be surprised when you get pulled over and it's not law enforcement, but instead it's DHS. The next words you'll hear are everyone please exit the vehicle and keep you hands where we can see them. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=u4Ku17CqdZg

And she has evidence to back this up. The number of illegal aliens apprehended by the Department of Homeland Security has never been lower. Obviously, this means that fewer of them are managing to penetrate our border security and arrive in this country illegally. Obviously, we have less to fear than ever before as far as a foreign terrorist getting onto US soil with a plan and a weapon.

But perhaps you can think of another possible implication of the fact that DHS is catching fewer illegal aliens than ever before. Even under the best of circumstances, it would be possible that more illegal immigrants are escaping detection than ever before. How do we know that DHS is really doing its job? Can DHS offer us any way of double checking that this?

I don’t know if Janet Napolitano has an answer to that question. I could understand that it is hard to prove a negative. But there is a further problem. Rather than attempt to give us assurance of that point, DHS has changed their record-keeping to make it even harder to find out if they are really keeping the border strong. Fox News reports that DHS “no longer measures illegal immigrants who get away — only those it catches.”

Got that? Every single suspected or identified illegal alien who is pursued but who evade capture goes unreported and unaccounted for. So while she’s bragging on her record, she has actually made that record less accurate and herself less accountable.

These people are not our protectors, they are our prison guards. If some terrorist actually did manage to breach our border and kill Americans, we all know that the immediate response would be to give more power and money to DHS. That’s become the American way. No one with authority and a duty to guard Americans has anything to fear from a disaster. Quite the opposite. When Americans die, new powers are given to government agencies and new programs That really doesn’t matter. You simply can’t keep people safe if the most important overseers of safety know they will never be held to account. That may seem like a cruel truth in the case of a genuine anomaly, but it is still true. Presidents are supposed to protect the American people, not high ranking friends.

So no wonder Napolitano isn’t bothering to keep records that would give her a clue as to whether or not she was really doing her job. If no attack comes, she’ll brag on her record. If an attack comes, she’ll demand more money and power. She knows from history that we have a long tradition of never actually blaming the people in charge when anything goes wrong.

In the meantime, DHS is out there stopping Americans and interrogating them without cause within a hundred miles of a border. We’re not protected. We’re in prison.

Read more…

Coming soon to a town near you.

Please remember we are here to help protect you and make sure you follow orders too.  "Lie of the century"

The armies of the Soviet Union, Eastern Germany, Poland, Hungary and Bulgaria crossed Czechoslovakia’s borders just before midnight on August 20, 1968 and by the next morning, the streets of all major cities were full of invading troops with tanks.

“On the outskirts of the town, a crowd of people stopped our battalion. Tanks pulled over by the curb, and the battalion commander ordered to wait for further orders. Meanwhile, the people approached us and began talking to us:

‘Why did you come here?’

‘To help you out in difficult times!’  We had no idea times were difficult for us, glad they told us>

‘We’re good without you. Go home!’

‘Don’t you know about an attempt at a counter-revolutionary coup? Do you want to lose your freedom?’

4063675888?profile=original

It has now been confirmed that the goal of the Department of Homeland Security is to purchase a total of 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition.  A portion of that ammunition is hollow point bullets, which have been banned from use in war by international law.  Another portion is specialized sniper ammunition.

In case you have a difficult time comprehending the significance of 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition, allow me to give you a couple of comparisons.  During the height of the war in Iraq, the US Army fired less than 6 million rounds per month.  That means DHS has enough ammunition to supply the US Army for 266.67 months (22.22 years) of intense war.

Currently, the DHS uses approximately 15 million rounds of ammunition every year at their various training facilities.  At that rate, they have enough ammunition for 106.67 years of training.

So ask yourself, what is the justification for the purchase of 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition by the Department of Homeland Security, especially when some of it is illegal to use in war?  Now ask yourself why Sen. Dianne Feinstein is so concerned about private citizens stockpiling ammunition, weapons and using high capacity magazines when the federal government is doing the same time only a thousand times more?

Perhaps the abundance of ammunition goes along with the purchase of ‘Mine Resistant Protected’ MaxxPro MRAP vehicles that are scheduled to be deployed on the streets of America.  The number of vehicles they are purchasing has not been released, but they are part of the 2,717 that have been recently retrofitted by the manufacturer.  The DHS appears to be taking delivery of the armored vehicles through the Marine Corps Systems Command located in Quantico, Virginia.

The scary part of the DHS acquiring MRAP vehicles is that they have been already been spotted in a number of cities throughout the country.  DHS cannot deny their existence since a number of them have been photographed and videoed by citizen observers.  Why would DHS need so many, assuming they are purchasing over a thousand, MRAP vehicles deployed throughout the US, unless they are preparing for a war of some kind?  Now add to that question the fact that the MRAP vehicles are equipped with gun ports.

There can be no doubt that Barack Hussein Obama is preparing for the bloodiest war in American history and it’s going to take place here on American soil.  When?  It has to be prior to the 2016 election, unless he manages to force a constitutional amendment allowing himself to run for a third term.  However, I truly don’t think the amendment will be necessary, because he plans to forcibly take control of the country prior to the election.  Everything points to the conclusion that this is all in preparation for a hostile military takeover.

Credit

DA Tagliare

Read more…

OK I am comiing out of the closet.   I have become a birther over the last few months.   Anyone with so much to hide he will spend an estimated seven million dollars ($7,000,000) to be sure it stays hidden from the American public makes me think he may have something to hide about who he is.   No verifiable birth certificate (the one on his web site has been proven in several venues to be a phony) no school records, traveling to Pakistan in 1981 when no AMERICAN citizen was allowed to travel there all just makes me suspicious.    Yeah.  Suspicious.

By the way, just where did a community organizer and first term senator get even one million????

This is copied from the filing attorney's web site.

President  Harrison J. Bounel

February 15, 2013  by Bob  Livingston

Who is Harrison J. Bounel? According  to the 2009 tax return submitted by President Barack Obama he’s the  President of the United States. All nine U.S. Supreme Court Justices arescheduled to discuss this anomaly  today.

The case in  question is Edward Noonan, et al v. Deborah  Bowen, California Secretary of State, and the  Justices are finally looking at it thanks to the dogged determination of Orly  Taitz. The case calls into question many  of the documents Obama (Bounel, Soetoro, Soebarkah, etc.) has used and/or  released as authentic since he came on the national scene. The case contends  that the documents — birth certificate, Social Security number, Selective  Service registration, etc. — are fakes or forgeries. If that’s the case, Obama  should not have been on the California ballot in 2008 and, therefore, should not  have received the State’s electoral votes.

Four of the nine  Justices must vote to move the case forward. We’ll see.

Meantime, on Feb.  4, Kathleen O’Leary, presiding judge of the 4th District Court of  Appeal, reinstated the appeal of Taitz v. Obama et al filed by Taitz when  she ran for Senate.   That case involves evidence of 1.5 million invalid voter  registrations in the State of California.   The appeal also involves Obama’s lack  of legitimacy to hold the office of President based on his forged IDs, stolen  Connecticut Social Security number, the fact the last name he’s using is not  legally his and his fraudulent claim to be the U.S.  citizen.

Evidence in the  case includes:

  • A certified copy of the passport   records of Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, showing her son’s legal last   name to be Soebarkah, not Obama.

     

  • Obama’s school records from   Indonesia, showing his citizenship to be Indonesian.

     

  • Sworn   affidavits of top law enforcement experts and investigators, showing Obama’s   birth certificate and Selective Service certificate are forgeries and that the   Social Security number used by Obama on his 2009 tax returns as posted on   WhiteHouse.gov was fraudulent.   (The SSN failed when checked through both   E-Verify and the Social Security Number Verification   Service.)

On another legal  front, Obama defaulted in the case of Grinols et al v. Obama et al on  Jan. 30 when he failed to file a response within 21 days of being served notice  of the suit. This case also involves Obama’s phony SSN.

Read more…

Is martial law the ultimate goal?

With everything happening to this country of ours it is getting harder and harder to maintain a cool head and not jump to conclusions but if we sit back and view the last four years as well as what’s happening now an image is starting to appear of what might possibly be our future.

During President Obama's first term he laid the ground work. President Obama issued over 144 executive orders, many dealing with martial law. As the Supreme Court already opinioned when looking at President Lincolns use of martial law, "Martial law ... destroys every guarantee of the Constitution.". This means when martial law is declared we as Americans have no rights at all.

During President Obama's first term he wrote Executive Orders granting the government the power to take over all communications media, electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals. He also wrote an Executive Order where the government can take over all modes of transportation and control of the highways and sea ports. That means Obama can confiscate your horse, your donkeys, your bicycle or even your riding lawn mower. All forms of transportation. Executive orders signed by Obama also include railroads, inland water ways, public storage facilities, airports and airplanes including commercial planes can all be taken over by the government.

Think that’s bad, well it gets worse, much worse.

Executive Orders have also been signed allowing the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision. To take over all health education and welfare functions. To allow the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate and establish new locations for populations, AND grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute Industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

If that doesn’t scare you then look at this. An Executive order has also been signed which allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit, and the flow of money in U.S. financial institutions in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when the president declares a state of emergency, Congress cannot review the action for six months.

Now why that last part that congress cannot review the action for six months? To understand why President Obama wanted that executive order lets look at what martial law is. Martial law is the suspension of civil authority and the imposition of military authority. When we say a region or country is "under martial law," we mean to say that the military is in control of the area, that it acts as the police, as the courts, as the legislature. The president is the commander in chief of the military and as such in full control of the martial law. Seeing how the constitution is suspended during martial law and the President is in control the only ones able to stop martial law is the congress. In effect that Executive order that says Congress cannot review the action for six months in effect give the President full unchallenged control for six months.

A little tidbit to add to martial law here is that our constitution Article 1, Section 9 states, "The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." The concept of the of Habeas Corpus is that a person may not be held by the government without a valid reason for being held. A writ means the government would have to provide a person to a court to show just reason for holding them. With the suspension of the writ the government can detain and hold a person indefinitely.

In a nut shell a President can declare martial law, would have six months of free reign to do as he pleases while rounding up any congressional opposition to his martial law and detaining them indefinitely and doing this totally legally.

In order for a president to declare martial law he must have a valid reason to do so. For that lets look at our present situation. Today we have a president whom has openly declared war on the second amendment to our constitution. This is causing a great deal of civil unrest in the nation. Being told that their actions are unconstitutional doesn’t slow the President down at all, in fact it emboldens him to push even harder. To top that off our President is also pushing us to the fiscal cliff of ruin. When asked about the out of control spending our President replies that we do not have a spending problem. Top that off with our government printing money as fast as possible as well as demanding unrestricted borrowing powers we can see we will be heading to a financial meltdown very soon. A financial meltdown coupled with civil unrest over constitutional violations would be the catalyst for open revolt and exactly what would be needed in order to openly declare martial law. Then we all are doomed.

Read more…

4063641029?profile=original                           Michigan State Police protect Right To Work  Law supporters

                                 from assaults from organized union protesters

 

“There will be blood,” angrily threatened State Representative Douglas Geiss openly from the floor of the Michigan House of Representatives on Tuesday, according to Fox News. His frustration in the chamber was shouted out by thousands of organized labor supporters who rallied outdoors in the state capitol in opposition to Michigan’s 'Right to Work’ law. The legislation was signed into law by Republican Gov. Rick Snyder late Tuesday afternoon. Is union tyranny over?

Over the past several weeks, union unrest over right to work legislation had surfaced into slowly burning embers waiting to be ignited. On Monday, the igniter-in-chief arrived. So on Monday when, President Obama visited the Detroit area; he had been scheduled to discuss the fiscal cliff and its impact on Michigan families.

Instead he moved to shove Michigan elected Republican lawmakers off the legislative cliff. He eagerly chided legislators for supporting Right to Work legislation coming to a vote the next day in Lansing, the state capitol.

His invasion into the privacy and sovereignty of the state of Michigan was unnecessary, unwanted, unneeded and served to ignite hot language in an already combustible atmosphere. Instead of sticking to his script or teleprompter, Obama forgot his place and scolded Michigan’s governor and state house and senate leaders by sarcastically stating:

“These so-called 'right-to-work' laws, they don't have anything to do with economics. They have everything to do with politics," He then went on to add, "What they're really talking about is they're giving you the right to work for less money." President Obama

It is abundantly clear that Obama never took an economics course, if he believes that out-of-whack union wages and benefit packages have not placed a stranglehold on state, and local government budgets as well as private sector job creation. In fact, according to Fox News, seven of the states that have the most improved job creation numbers have Right to Work legislation on the books.

If you are a resident of Michigan or any other state and are or have been a member of a union, you know what it feels like to be threatened by union goons. They openly tell you when you can work, and when you cannot, and who you have to support for political office and who you should not. This is not union protection of wages, this is union thuggish behavior, used to harass, threaten and intimidate you!

To add insult to injury all of this is done courtesy of union dues paid by workers!

Yet, the Right to Work drive for Michigan workers arrived this year, past due on the desk of state capitol legislators. Just how could this happen in the cradle of organized unionism? To workers who have long supported this effort, it seems crystal clear. They want the right to jobs and the right to work!

( click to read more )

 

Read more…

Senior Obama Campaign official David Axelrod, admitted Sunday, August 5th on Fox News that Ohio military voters who are allowed early voting was indeed the target of the lawsuit filed against the state of Ohio. He incorrectly claimed that military early voting was an exception, which must be corrected, so that all Ohio voters can have the right to vote early

As Ohio Democrats and the Obama campaign were targeting the military overseas voters and lambasting the Ohio state legislature and the Secretary of State for engaging in alleged discriminatory practices, they conveniently avoided mentioning that federal law protects early voting rights of overseas soldiers.

The Obama lawsuit’s claim for relief states that as a matter of fact, Ohio voters are similarly situated as military overseas voters, in their inability to vote early. The lawsuit states: “Whether caused by legislative error or partisan motivation, the result of this legislative process is arbitrary and inequitable treatment of similarly situated Ohio voters with respect to in-person early voting,”

What is clear is that the intention of the lawsuit is to convey a sense of voter rights imbalance where none exists both legally or factually. The Obama lawsuit claims that the action by the state of Ohio was, ‘arbitrary’ and unconstitutional to allow three extra days of in-person early voting to military voters and their families who are overseas.

Yet, the 1986 and amended 2010 Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act allows this preferential treatment as a matter of fact and of law.

The very purpose for the law’s passage was due to congress’ recognition that tens of thousands of soldiers could not avail themselves of their U.S. Constitutional voters rights due to actual physical impossibilities related to their military service. Ohio voters are not confronted with similar physical service impossibilities. This is a matter of fact. So, where are the factually similar ongoing warfare conditions that military soldiers face, to be found for Ohio voters in the state? The Obama camp claims that the Ohio’s law provides, arbitrary and inequitable treatment of similarly situated Ohio voters. The Ohio democrat’s claims do not add up.

This lawsuit filing was more a political ploy by the Obama campaign and their desperate democrat allied officials in Ohio, to use the heroic military soldiers of Ohio as part of their ominous chess game. In fact, Ohio democrats could legally surmise before filing the lawsuit, that the state could legally establish voting procedures.

In fact earlier in July, Ohio democrat officials first claimed urban voters, i.e. democrat base voters would be deprived of their “right to early voting.” In fact, the few counties that used this practice saw a dwindling number of voters using this option. Democrats lost that round, and then turned their targets on the one group of voters, who were overseas defending the nation: Ohio military voters. Democrats hoped that this inconvenient mistruth would stick against the legal wall.

The Ohio democrats and the Obama political voter bean counters in Chicago went into court with this fallacy of reverse discrimination being practiced in Ohio. It is probable that they concluded that a federal judge would ignore the federal Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, which gives military overseas personnel the legal right to have access to early voting and extended voting. Not going to happen.

The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act reads in part under Section G, paragraph D: “Hardship Exceptions”, that congress recognized as a matter of both fact and law, that military voters who are serving overseas are materially situated differently than other voters and therefore their voter rights must be protected and insured.

The law specifies that states must develop:

“(D) a comprehensive plan to ensure that absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters are able to receive absentee ballots which they have requested and submit marked absentee ballots to the appropriate State election official in time to have that ballot counted in election for Federal office, which includes:

"(i) the steps the State will undertake to ensure that absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters have time to receive, mark, and submit their ballots in time to have those ballots counted in the election;

Ohio state officials were keeping consistent with federal law which legally grants an exception for overseas military voters. In fact, the Obama administrations own U.S. Justice Department asserts that it works vigorously to enforce the federal Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act. It states the, “department has worked to aggressively enforce UOCAVA and the MOVE Act in order to ensure that all military and overseas voters can exercise their right to vote, and have their votes counted.”

The facts are clear. The U.S. Justice Department is aware of the law and says it enforces it. The state of Ohio election officials are attempting to do the same. The Ohio legislature’s intention was to protect the federal rights of military overseas voters. So don’t be fooled by the bait and switch legal and campaign tactics by the Obama campaign and Ohio democrats.

In the end, Ohio democrats and the Obama campaign are engaged in a high takes politically charged chess game and they are unfortunately using Ohio military overseas soldiers as the pawns. In November, the Ohio voters…all of them including the military voters will checkmate the Obama campaign and the Ohio democrat cronies.

Let me know what you think: http://shar.es/vlz4r4063553529?profile=original

Read more…

The Constitution of the United States[i] is much more than just a piece of paper; it is a document written by God fearing men who believed in Liberty and Justice for all who are citizens of this great nation and their Posterity. While the U.S. Constitution is a guide for ourselves and for those who represent us, the U.S. Constitution is much more; it is the “law of the land” and should be viewed as such, as well as considered whenever any of the three branches of government, i.e., Executive, Legislative or Judicial, enact new laws or perform the duties of their respective offices. I also believe every Citizen of the United States should question themselves with regard to their actions; are we Just, are we promoting the general Welfare, are we striving to ensure Liberty, are our actions helping to form a more perfect Union? These ideals cannot simply be for one, they must be for all, as eloquently stated by our fore-fathers, “We the People of the United States.”

 

On the 17th day of September in 1787 the ordination and Establishment of the Constitution was ratified. This document gave us reasonable guidelines by which to govern ourselves in a responsible and civil manner and the delineation of the process by which we elect government officials, the formation and function of the three separate branches of government and the duties of each within the boundaries of the Constitution of the United States. Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution also guarantees to each and every State in the Union a “Republican Form of Government,” whereby the individuals as well as the States themselves are sovereign.

 

Enough cannot be said about the value and intent of the words within the U.S. Constitution itself. Article II, Section 1 clearly states the President shall, “Preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Article VI clearly states, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States; shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” Article VI goes on to further state, “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution.” Undeniably, the framers of the Constitution of the United States demanded the continued preservation, protection, defense and support of the Constitution in perpetuity for the People of this great nation. There can be no doubt the Constitution of the United States is the Law of the Land. Our leaders are bound by the oaths of their offices to uphold the Constitution of the United States.

 

The U.S. Constitution is a means to promote not only the general Welfare, but to promote an equitable system of governance, through just laws which provide the framework to form a more perfect Union. As stated in Article III, Section 2, “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority.” The U.S. Constitution is the conception of an ideal by decent, free thinking men, whose sole purpose was to live a life free of tyranny from those who would oppress us, and to ensure those same ideals existed for their Posterity.

 

The United States of America is, in effect, not only a conglomeration of people, but of ideas as well. Through the supreme Law of the Land, the U.S. Constitution, sovereign citizens of sovereign States, within a sovereign nation act to establish a just and equitable society, where Liberty is unfettered and the government exists to serve the People.

 

While the art of articulation does not elude me, I find myself unable to match what I consider to be a perfect man-made statement of Truth and Wisdom: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and to our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

 

Read more…

United We Stand

"We The People's" authority to amend the Constitution of the United States is derived from

Article V of the Constitution

The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a “two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, or  by a “constitutional convention” called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures and since the President does not have a constitutional role in the amendment process, the joint resolution does not go to the White House for signature or approval.

A proposed amendment becomes part of the Constitution as soon as it is ratified by three-fourths of the States (38 of 50 States).  The process is called “Constitutional Convention”.

Constitutional Convention has only been used once in the entire history of this country.  I was astonished that it wasn’t congress that got the credit for ending “prohibition” but rather it was because of the united efforts of “We The People” through our collective state legislatures resulting in a forced joint resolution through the people’s right of Constitutional Convention.

What the Constitutional Convention does  is, if the President of the United States refuses to faithfully uphold his oath of office, just as President Obama did when he refused to enforce the“Defense of Marriage Act”(DOMA), and a U.S. Congress Committee fails to put forth an amendment in the  form of a joint resolution, just as the House Judiciary Committee has and is still doing to prevent a vote to amend the United States Constitution defining marriage to be the union between one man and one woman, the citizens of the United States can have their state legislatures  demand and force the U.S. Congress to do so through “Constitutional Convention” and bring forth a joint resolution to amend the U.S. Constitution and the United States President is powerless to do anything about it.

It means “We The People”, through “Constitutional Convention” could hold the U.S. Senate accountable to pass a budget by amending the U.S. Constitution preventing any further spending until it is done.

It means “We The People” through “Constitutional Convention” could establish the law of the land that no tax could be levied against the people without the ratification of (38 of 50) states of the union.

It means the people have a course of action to define and limit the scope of authority of any appointed or elected official.  The Supreme Court’s authority can be limited to the interpretation to the U.S. Constitution and any law or executive order would require the ratification of (38 of 50) states.

It means “We The People” could amend the Constitution to enhance the checks and balances of government  to allow the majority vote of either the House or Senate be sufficient cause for dismissal of any elected official or appointed official, including the Supreme Court Justices.

The Tea Party is in an excellent position to collaborate the state cooperation needed to make this course of action a reality for the American People.   

Will you help spear head the practice of "Constitutional convention" on behalf of “We The People”?  If the Tea Party of Each State were to coordinate efforts and topics of "Constitutional Convention" to each state legislature, "We The People" would not only have a greater voice but also would begin having a greater impact in Washington instead of just every four years or time of re-election

Please coordinate with your Tea Party commander and state representatives about

your Constitutional Convention”  right, and process,  thank you.

Read more…

For those patriots who might not have received the memo on June 25, 2012 Usurper Obama sent a letter to the Speaker of the House and Head of the Senate advising them that he has issued an E.O. declaring a state of National Emergency. To view his E.O. click here!

For more information click here!

Based on the content of his "National Defense Resources Preparedness a.k.a. Peacetime Martial Law E.O." by executing the above letter to Congress he has activated the NDRP E.O.!

Read more…

← Paging Adam Edelen, Paging Adam EdelenWalking in Space →Jimmy Higdon’s Sharia Law Bill
Posted on March 8, 2012, 9:18 pm by Bob
Kentucky Republican State Senator Jimmy Higdon was credited earlier in the session with being part of the bipartisan support for the expanded gaming amendment to try to save what is left of the horse industry.

For one brief, shining moment….

And then this:

Senate Bill 158 introduced by Sen. Jimmy Higdon, R-Lebanon, would require the government to exempt people from laws that contradict their religious beliefs unless there is an overriding reason why those laws should be enforced. We have seen no language that explains who gets to determine what an “overriding reason” means, and who gets to make the determination when it should be allowed or disallowed. This constitutional amendment would seriously attack the current constitutional separation of religion and the state, and would allow anyone.
We can’t understand how the separation of the state and religion can be argued by Senator Higdon to have failed us over the last two centuries. Why would anyone want to make the Commonwealth a Theocracy?
Kentucky courts would have to let people opt out of obeying some laws that run counter to their religious beliefs if a constitutional amendment that passed a Senate committee Wednesday becomes law.
Once you allow one religious body to be exempt from the laws of the state, then you allow all religions, and quasi-religions, and weird fringe groups who call themselves religions to also be exempt from State Laws. Sharia law has been cited to justify physical violence against authors, wives, daughters etc. The law requires women to wear veils and robes, be totally subject to her husband, and condones the killing of women by their family if they have sexual relations outside of marriage. (Author’s note: There are many pretty women in Lebanon, Kentucky and we can’t understand why Sen. Higdon would want to hide their faces behind veils.)
The Family Foundation of Kentucky and the Catholic Conference of Kentucky supports the proposed constitutional amendment.

Share on Facebook

Read more…

Obama ballot battle continues!

4063452775?profile=original

This issue is not going away!

Posted on The Examiner-By Linda Bentley, Maricopa County Crime Examiner-On February 14, 2012:

“NAPLES, Fla. – Sam Sewell, the Obama Ballot Challenge Project manager for the state of Florida, announced last week that Attorney Larry Klayman, founder of Judicial Watch and Freedom Watch, has joined their team to file ballot eligibility challenges against Obama in both Florida and California.

According to Sewell, who has been working to expose Obama as a fraud since before the 2008 election, Obama cannot get reelected if he fails to qualify for the ballot in these two key states.

While at Judicial Watch, Klayman obtained a court ruling declaring President Clinton committed a crime, the first lawyer to ever accomplish that against an American president.

Klayman describes Freedom Watch (FW) as “the only political advocacy group that speaks through actions rather than just words.”

Freedom Watch’s website states, “We are dedicated to not only preserving freedom, but redefining its meaning, from protecting our rights to privacy, free speech, civil liberties, and freedom from foreign oil and crooked business, labor and government officials, to protecting our national sovereignty against the incompetent terrorist state-controlled United Nations, and reestablishing the rule of law in what has become a very corrupt American legal system, where justice is only as good as your lawyer and judge – most of whom are compromised ethically and otherwise.”

On Jan. 30, 2012, as counsel for FW, as amicus curiae in United Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, Klayman has filed a motion for reconsideration to participate in oral arguments concerning the issue of the requested recusal or disqualification of Justice Elena Kagan in deciding Obamacare.

He argued, “This ‘greater’ issue is the integrity of the Supreme Court itself and whether or not it will adhere to and respect centuries old rules of judicial ethics, which require a judge to recuse herself when she has a conflict of interest and when to continue on the case would create even the appearance of partiality.”

Klayman said new evidence arose in a recent report on Fox News that shows, while she was solicitor general of the Obama Justice Department, Kagan advocated in favor of Obamacare in another case.

He said, “This act constitutes not only a conflict of interest, but creates more than the appearance of partiality, for which she must recuse herself or be disqualified by the court.”

With $5,000 on hand but little time to spare, the Article II Legal Defense Fund is seeking donations to proceed with the Florida Ballot Challenge, which may be made securely online at:  https://secure.piryx.com/donate/Owri7yAp/Article-II-Legal-Defense-Fund/FLor via check to Article II Legal Defense Fund, PO Box 940672, Simi Valley, CA 93094. Be sure to note on the check the donation is for the Florida Ballot Challenge or to the General Fund so it may be used to fund the most urgent project.

“We must raise $25,000 ($12,500 per state) for efforts in Florida and California,” said Sewell, adding, “Larry understands the threat to our country, rule of law, national finances and of course, an ineligible, hostile ‘President.’ He has very high visibility, key contacts, presence, visibility, reputation, experience, track record,” describing Klayman as a “heavy hitter.”

Sewell said, “Looming deadlines force us to act soon. This may be our last line of defense to help ensure Obama will not be in the White House four more years. Our line in the sand is here. Do you really want to count on Romney/Santorum to beat him, to just hope for a ‘fair’ election?”

Meanwhile, appeals are moving forward in the Georgia challenges while Attorney Mark Hatfield filed a Citation for Contempt on Feb. 1 with the Georgia Office of Administrative Hearings on behalf of Carl Swensson and Kevin Powell, relating to “the contemptuous behavior of the defendant before this court, for a determination of appropriate action, including a finding of contempt.”

Hatfield points out Obama was served through his defense counsel, Michael Jablonski, a notice to produce, requiring Obama to appear at the Jan. 26 hearing in Atlanta and to bring with him certain documents and other items to be used as evidence.

He argued Jablonski filed no response, noting he filed no motion for protective order, motion to quash or any other pleading objecting to the notice to produce.

And, despite being timely served with the notice, Obama failed to appear for the hearing on Jan. 26, as did his attorney.

Hatfield also notes Obama and Jablonski’s failure to appear was “knowing, intentional and deliberate,” as per Jablonski’s letter to Secretary of State Brian Kemp the day before the hearing.

On behalf of his clients, Hatfield requested Administrative Law Judge Michael Malihi certify the foregoing facts to the Superior Court of Fulton County, as provided by the rules of the Office of State Administrative Hearings, for a determination of the appropriate action to be taken with regard to defendant’s contemptuous conduct.”

Source:

http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-phoenix/obama-ballot-battle-continues?CID=examiner_alerts_article

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts and videos relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. Susan Daniels PI Discloses New Evidence Orly Taitz Refused To Allow Presented At Georgia Hearing!-Posted on CDR Kerchner’s Blog-By CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)-On February 14, 2012:

http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/02/14/susan-daniels-discloses-new-evidence-orly-taitz-refused-to-allow-presented-at-georgia-hearing/

II. Video: Dr. Manning Interviews Private Investigator Susan Daniels! (Part 1)-Posted on YouTube.com-By ATLAHWorldwide-On February 13, 2012:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLsgQ8RIbTE&feature=player_embedded

III. Video: Dr. Manning Interviews Private Investigator Susan Daniels! (Part 2)-Posted on YouTube.com-By ATLAHWorldwide-On February 13, 2012:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O90Crndu6v4&feature=player_embedded

IV. Did Judge Malihi Base Eligibility Decision On Sharia Law?-Posted on Western Jounalism-By SUZANNE EOVALDI-On February 13, 2012:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/judge-malihi-eligibility-sharia-la/?utm_source=Western+Journalism&utm_campaign=a2e2dbb148-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email

V. CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret) and a Group of Citizens in Pennsylvania will File a Ballot Access Challenge/Objection to Candidate Obama Later This Week!-Posted on CDR Kerchner’s Blog-By CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)-On February 12, 2012:

http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/02/12/a-ballot-access-challengeobjection-to-candidate-obama-to-be-filed-in-pa-this-week/

VI. Existing US Law on INS .gov Website Says Obama is Ineligible!-Posted on Obama Ballot Challenge-By GeorgeM-On February 12, 2012:

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/existing-us-law-on-ins-gov-website-says-obama-is-ineligible

VII. Was Georgia Nuke Plant the price for Obama’s Ballot Access??-Posted on Obama Ballot Challenge-By Pamela Barnett-On February 11, 2012:

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/was-georgia-nuke-plant-the-price-for-obamas-ballot-access

VIII. Obama’s mother, Stanley A. Dunham, worked for Tim Giether’s Father Peter Geither at the Ford Foundation. Ford Foundation is partnered with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac!-Posted on Faith Freedom International-By piggy-On April 16, 2009:

http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&p=29858

Note:  Americans continue to wake up!

Americans across the country continue to wake up to the fact that President Obama is constitutionally ineligible to hold the office of President, as substantiated by his newly released long-form Certificate of Live Birth, which shows that his father was in fact born in Kenya in 1936. At the time, Kenya was a British colony. Therefore Obama Senior was a British subject by birth (due to the fact that he was born within British-controlled territory). When President Obama was born in 1961, he acquired British nationality by descent, because his father was a British subject by birth. When Kenya gained its independence from Great Britain in 1963, President Obama became a citizen of the newly-formed nation.

Sources:

http://www.wnd.com/2011/12/375625/#f2cd597738

http://constitutionalreset.ning.com/video/atty-dr-herb-titus-obama-not-a-natural-born-citizen

http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/natural-born-citizenship-and-history-timeline

Additionally, Several new organizations, to include active websites, were established to educate and mobilize the American public on the significance of “natural born Citizen” and the 2012 Election, along with an initiative to assist ordinary registered voting citizens wishing to challenge President Obama’s constitutional eligibility and name placement on their state’s 2012 primary presidential ballot. The team that established and maintains this website is currently compiling election laws from all 50 states and in the near future will be providing forms, along with sample letters that registered voters can use to file a complaint. Also included is pertinent information regarding those lawsuits and/or complaints that have been filed by state, to include my own.

Sources:

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/superpac-founder-explains-mission-of-natural-born-citizen-pac

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/obama-ballot-challenge-founder-interviewed-by-post-email

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/retired-marine-captain-files-obama-ballot-challenge-in-new-mexico

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/request-that-president-obama-be-removed-from-the-new-mexico-2012-presidential-primary-election-ballot

Word of Caution:  Although its great that many Americans are now beginning to wake up and are actively taking some action to have President Obama taken off the 2012 Presidential Election Ballots we need to keep in mind that those individuals with unlimited sources and/or resources, to include the deep pockets of anti-American George Soros, our own local and national elected officials and others, with the help of the MSM, who have spent years planning and successively perpetrating what I now believe could be the greatest fraud in American history are not going to go down without a fight and thus, as a result, I also believe that now more than ever we need to stick together as Americans (it's no longer Democrat or Republican) at this crucial time when our country and/or Republic needs us more than ever to see this thru. A Republic for which so many Americans have and continue to give their all to uphold and defend.

So the question isAre you going to be part of the problem by continuing to keep your head in the sand hoping this issue goes away by itself or are you going to be part of the solution by stepping up to the plate and doing what ever it takes to uphold and defend our Republic before its too late?-You Decide.

Continue Reading:

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/the-greatest-fraud-perpetrated-in-american-history/

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

CIA Columbia Obama Cover Up!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/04/28/cia-columbia-obama-cover-up/

Why did a black preacher from Harlem have a “hit” placed on his life?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/19/why-has-a-black-preacher-from-harlem-received-a-“hit”-on-his-life/

What do Obama, Tim Geithner, The Ford Foundation, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac, China and Muslims have in common?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/what-do-obama-tim-giether-the-ford-foundation-fannie-maefreddie-mac-and-muslims-have-in-common/

Note If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide:

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/23/what-happened-to-free-speech/

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

Read more…

4063449779?profile=original

What’s disturbing about this picture?

Posted on The Patriot Post-By Mark Alexander-On February 9, 2012:

“Wherever the real power in a Government lies, there is the danger of oppression.”—James Madison (1788)

The FBI held a press conference this week on a terrorist alert bulletin, which it sent to every federal, state and local law enforcement agency across the country. Unfortunately, that bulletin continued a trend of “terrorist profiles” issued since Barack Hussein Obama has been in office. This particular alert identified such broad ideological characteristics that it can be construed to include the activities of tens of millions of law-abiding Americans.

The FBI counterterrorism division report concluded that those who believe that our government has exceeded its constitutional limits or are protesting for restoration of constitutional integrity might pose a threat. By that definition, anyone associated with the “Tea Party movement” is suspect, and that’s the problem with this sweeping and politically motivated “bureaucrap.”

Make no mistake: There are some deadly anti-government socialist and fascist radicals in America. For example, consider the man who launched someone’s political career in 1994 -- Obama mentor William Ayers, who was previously the leader of the Weathermen, a murderous group of radical “useful idiots.” They bombed the U.S. Capitol twice, the Pentagon, the Department of State, several federal courthouses, plus state and local government buildings—with intent to kill. Unfortunately, the FBI never assembled sufficient evidence to convict Ayers. (Lucky break for Obama’s career!)

Or how about Obama’s radical, racist, hate-spewing pastor, Jeremiah Wright? This is the man who married the Obamas and baptized their children; the same man who regularly sermonized about “the US-KKK-A” with assertions that “The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color;” the man who said that the U.S. government “gives [black people] drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strikes law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, g-d d--- America!”

Does that constitute a threat to the government?

The aforementioned FBI alert focused on the so-called “sovereign citizen” movement, which the FBI believes may have more than 500,000 members—though it has no leaders, no membership roster, no organization at all. There is a “sovereign citizens” website which notes boldly, “We do NOT endorse non-payment of taxes or violence to achieve these changes. We do NOT endorse giving up a social security number and we do NOT endorse violence against the police or the government.”

According to the FBI, some of those associated with this movement are engaged in crimes like underpaying taxes and other fraud, none of which should be classified as terrorism. According to a Reuters report on the press release, “Legal convictions of such extremists, mostly for white-collar crimes such as fraud, have increased from 10 in 2009 to 18 in 2011, FBI agents said.”

We did the math, and that’s an increase of eight convictions.

Meanwhile, more than 5,200 of Obama’s Occupy movement radicals were arrested in 2011, many for violent offenses, and some of those directed at police.

This is not to say that the FBI didn’t have reason to warn law enforcement agencies. In May of 2010, two sociopaths, one of whom had mentioned “sovereign citizen” on a website, murdered two Arkansas police officers. But why wait almost two years to issue the warning?

Now, I spent some years in law enforcement, and some of those devoted to counter-terrorism. I still hold a reserve national security position with the Department of Homeland Security and, as such, maintain threat currency and contacts with domestic counter-terrorism folks. I mention this to say I can assure you that most federal, state and local law enforcement personnel abide by their oath to “support and defend the Constitution” and are steadfastly accountable to that oath. In other words, they understand that broadly labeling as “terrorists” those who support constitutional limits on government is offensive to that oath.

However, we now have an established Obama-era pattern of applying such broad labels, which began in 2009 when the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis issued a report on “Right-Wing Extremism.” It claimed that those who use terms including “patriot” or “constitutionalist,” and “link their beliefs to those commonly associated with the American Revolution,” are a threat. It even went so far as to identify returning war veterans as “potential threats.”

That report was so repulsive that it received a prompt rebuke from liberal Democrat Bennie Thompson, then chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, and Republican Peter King, its ranking member. Thompson wrote, “This report appears to raise significant issues involving the privacy and civil liberties of many Americans. ... Freedom of association and freedom of speech are guaranteed to all Americans. ... I am disappointed that the Department would allow this report to be disseminated to its State and local partners. ... I am dumbfounded that I&A released this report.”

Thompson protested that the DHS report “blurred the line” between legal and illegal activity.

At the time, DHS spokesperson Amy Kudwa claimed the report was not finished and had been recalled: “This product is not, nor was it ever, in operational use.” That notwithstanding, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano defended the report and insisted, “We do not—nor will we ever—monitor ideology or political beliefs. We take seriously our responsibility to protect the civil rights and liberties of the American people.” (Trust her, she’s from the government!)

However, such monitoring is not the contiguous prerogative of DHS, but that of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies. This is why the latest national alert issued by the FBI should raise many red flags with overseers in the House and Senate.

Here are some excerpts from the FBI bulletin: “This ... domestic terrorist movement, which, scattered across the United States, has existed for decades. ... They do not represent an anarchist group, nor are they a militia. ... They operate as individuals without established leadership and only come together in loosely affiliated groups to ... socialize and talk about their ideology. They may refer to themselves as ‘constitutionalists.’ ... Several indicators can help identify these individuals. References to the Bible, The Constitution of the United States, U.S. Supreme Court decisions, or treaties with foreign governments...”

Those clips are taken out of context, but the problem with such broad profiles is that by the time they filter down through the channels, there are, inevitably, those who are not able to distinguish good from evil, or those whose political bias blinds them from such distinctions.

For example, shortly after DHS released its “Right-Wing Extremist” profile, I was contacted by Patriot readers, both officers and enlisted personnel, about a security exercise scenario at Ft. Knox. That scenario identified attackers as “Tea Party members” among “white supremacists” armed with “military grade weapons” and “bomb making components.” (In fact, many military and law enforcement personnel identify with the Tea Party movement, which is why we were contacted by military readers.)

Within hours of posting that report, senior command staff at Ft. Knox contacted us and conceded that an officer in the security loop altered the scenario to include “the Tea Party in order to make it more realistic.” The commanding officer assured us, “an official investigation has been initiated to determine the manner in which this information was included in the exercise scenario.”

To make it “more realistic”? Every reader of this column can accurately profile the political views and racial/ethnic identity of the individual who “altered the scenario.”

So, given the current FBI profile, if these “terrorists” are members of an organization with no leaders, no membership and, in fact, no organization, how exactly are they to be distinguished from law-abiding political activists who believe our government has exceeded its constitutional authority? How are they to be distinguished from patriotic Americans who advocate for the restoration of constitutional integrity and proper limits on the role of government? There are plenty of us who, in the course of our objections to the erosion of the Rule of Law, might make “references to the Bible, The Constitution of the United States, U.S. Supreme Court decisions, or treaties with foreign governments...”

What purpose does this FBI memo really serve?

In October 2011, DHS attempted to make amends by publishing a training guide for “Countering Violent Extremism.” In that directive, Section 2 notes, “Training should be sensitive to constitutional values,” and it asserts, “training should support the protection of civil rights and civil liberties as part of national security. Don’t use training that equates religious expression, protests, or other constitutionally protected activity with criminal activity.”

Perhaps Obama’s executive appointees to the FBI should adopt a similar policy and—unlike DHS—abide by it. In the meantime, we are waiting for objections from oversight committee Republicans concerning Obama’s latest attack on Bible-citing, Constitution-abiding Patriots....”

Source:

http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2012/02/09/fbi-terrorist-alert-beware-of-those-who-reference-the-constitution-or-bible/

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts and videos relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. IS AMERICA SPIRALING TOWARD FASCISM?

Posted on News With Views-By Dr. Carl Parnell, Ed,D –On February 7, 2012:

“If the “man on the street” was asked to describe the type of government that the United States has, he would very quickly say “Democracy.” However, in reality, America has a constitutional republic, which is the “rule of law” through a written constitution. But, as America’s history evolves, America’s government is slowly but surely following a new governmental trend, a trend toward Fascism, which is a monopolistic, state-controlled government, which gains control through the economy. In essence, the government makes the private sector think that they own their businesses. But, in reality, the government through its many control mechanisms, taxation, legislation, and regulation, actually controls these businesses. Also, it is a trend toward usurpation of America’s “rule of law.” Unfortunately, this usurpation has been purported that Americans must lose freedoms in order to have security. Of course, this is a lie that should not be perpetuated in a nation where the blood of millions of America’s finest has given their lives on the battlefields around the world for these very freedoms.

Unfortunately, those leaders who would attempt to deny Americans their God-given rights and freedoms belong to all political parties. In other words, voters must really do their research before they cast their votes on Election Day. Each political party has people who are working toward a new day in America when the government that they represent turns on its on people by eliminating the U.S. Constitution and instituting a new government, which would be some faction of Fascism. Of course, if our politicians are successful, America would be positioned to eventually become one of the members of a one world government that has been prophesied in the Bible many centuries ago. Also, it should interjected here that, according to new whistleblower reports that have been come out of the White House, anyone who negatively talks about a one world government has been categorized as a “potential terrorist.” Therefore, those who conspire behind closed doors to make America a state-controlled fascist nation do not want it to be publicized, since Americans might finally wake up to the reality of their abominable game plan.

However, could America actually become a fascist nation? According to Thom Hartmann, an American radio host, author, and former progressive political commentator, America could very well become a fascist nation. In his article “The Ghost of Vice President Wallace Warns: It Can Happen Here,” Mr. Hartmann writes,

Fascism could very easily replace democracy in the United States. If his ghost could appear, he would say that “it can happen here.” However, it probably would not be a frontal attack. Vice-President Wallace believed that it would be more subtle. The dangerous American fascist is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way. The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist, the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power.[1]

Also, in a 1944 New York Times article, the former Vice-President expressed his concerns of a future fascist state in America. Vice-President Wallace stated,

If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States. There are probably several hundred thousand if we narrow the definition to include only those who in their search for money and power are ruthless and deceitful.... They are patriotic in time of war because it is to their interest to be so, but in time of peace they follow power and the dollar wherever they may lead. Nonetheless, at that time there were few corporate heads that had run for political office, and, in Wallace’s view, most politicians still felt it was their obligation to represent We The People instead of corporate cartels. American fascism will not be really dangerous, until there is a purposeful coalition among the cartelists, the deliberate prisoners of public information.[1]

Mr. Wallace also believed,

American fascists would have to lie to the people in order to gain power. And, because they were in bed with the nation’s largest corporations - who could gain control of newspapers and broadcast media - they could promote their lies with ease. How would fascists then be recognized? The American fascists are most easily recognized by their deliberate perversion of truth and fact, Wallace wrote. Their newspapers and propaganda carefully cultivate every fissure of disunity, every crack in the common front against fascism. They use every opportunity to impugn democracy. They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection.[1]

Ultimately, Franklin Roosevelt’s former Vice-President exclaimed, “The myth of fascist efficiency has deluded many people. ... Democracy, to crush fascism internally, must...develop the ability to keep people fully employed and at the same time balance the budget. It must put human beings first and dollars second. It must appeal to reason and decency and not to violence and deceit. We must not tolerate oppressive government or industrial oligarchy in the form of monopolies and cartels.”[1]

References:

  1. Hartmann, Thom. “The Ghost of Vice President Wallace Warns: “It Can Happen Here” Common Dreams. 19 July 2004.

A brewing pot of Christian persecution: America’s postmodern Anti-Christian crusade.

  • Carl Parnell retired from public school teaching in 1999. He taught history and other social science courses for over forty years. He taught middle school, high school, and college level. Carl was a Lead Teacher and Principal of the On-Campus School at Georgia Baptist Children’s Home in central Georgia. Presently, he’s teaching at a private, Christian high school.”
  • Carl served in the United States Army from 1968-1971. He also served in the United States Air Force Reserves from 1983-1986, was chosen Teacher of the Year in 1991. Carl was included in the 1993, 1994 and 2007 editions of Who’s Who Among America’s Teachers. He was selected Star Teacher at hes present school in 2007 and published his first book, “From Schoolhouse to Courthouse: Exposing America’s New Terror from Within” (ISBN: 1-58736-613-4) in July 2006.
  • Carl has completed his second book, which is in an eBook format, entitled “A Brewing Pot of Christian Persecution: America’s Postmodern Anti-Christian Crusade.” My eBook, as well as over 60 of my articles, can be viewed at FaithWriters. Com 


  • E-Mail: drcarlparnell@faithwriters.net

Source:

http://www.newswithviews.com/Parnell/carl100.htm

II. It’s Going To Take ‘We The People!’

Posted on News With Views-By Chuck Baldwin-On February 9, 2012:

“Writing for WorldNetDaily, Bob Unruh reports a refreshing story of how individual sovereign states are beginning to push back against federal overreach. Unruh writes, “State and local officials in surging numbers are telling Washington they simply won’t cooperate with any plans to detain Americans the federal government may choose to describe as ‘belligerents.’

“The issue centers on provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, signed by President Obama, for the indefinite and rights-free detention of those Washington cites as belligerents, whether American citizens or not.

“WND reported when Rep. Daniel P. Gordon Jr. immediately drafted a resolution in the Rhode Island legislature to express opposition to the sections of the NDAA ‘that suspend habeas corpus and civil liberties.’

“Now the Tenth Amendment Center confirms that the resistance to the federal bureaucracy is catching on.”

Unruh continues, “‘Sources close to the Tenth Amendment Center say as many as 10 states will consider legislation or resolutions in response to the detention provisions in section 1021 and 1022 of the NDAA,’ the organization is reporting. ‘Lawmakers in Rhode Island and Washington will likely introduce resolutions authored by the Rhode Island Liberty Coalition within the next week. Additionally, local governments, including Fremont County, Colo. and El Paso County, Colo., have passed resolution condemning the detention provisions.’

“Tenth Amendment Center executive director Michael Boldin commented that ‘federal politicians never seem to repeal federal law.

“‘It’s going to take “We the People” in our states to stand up and say, “No!” to this unconstitutional monster,’ he said.”

Unruh goes on to report, “Already, Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall, R-Manassas, has introduced HB 1160, which would prevent ‘any agency, political subdivision, employee, or member of the military of Virginia from assisting an agency or the armed forces of the United States in the investigation, prosecution, or detainment of a United States citizen in violation of the Constitution of Virginia.’”

“Mike Maharrey, communications director for the TAC, said the fight is shaping up like the conflict in the 1850s when northern states refused to cooperated with fugitive slave laws that required them to capture and return escaping slaves.

“‘It is clear to me, and I am far from alone in this view, that the detention provisions in the NDAA are vague, overbroad and open to interpretation,’ he said. ‘That leaves me to trust in the good character and moral clarity of Barack Obama, Rick Santorum or whoever happens to reside at the White House, to protect me and my fellow Americans from abuse of his power. No thanks.’

“Maharrey noted that during the latter days of slavery, ‘state and local governments in northern states stepped in and thwarted the enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Acts, which allowed the federal government to arrest and detain black people, and send them back into slavery with little or no due process.

“‘We laud these men and women as heroes,’ he said. ‘I have no doubt that history will prove equally kind to those standing up for the most basic rights of Americans today.’”

See Bob Unruh’s report.

As I have said repeatedly in this column, the only hope for the preservation of liberty and freedom in America is for individual sovereign states to do what they were created to do: protect the rights and liberties of the citizens of their states from the overreach and despotic propensities of those miscreants in Washington, D.C. If freedom-loving people in the body politic truly intend to see to it that their rights and liberties are preserved, they will pay much more attention—and be much more attuned—to electing State governors, legislators, attorney generals, etc., than they are electing US congressmen, senators, and even electing the President.

With the exception of Ron Paul, there is not a major party Presidential candidate who will make a dime’s worth of difference in protecting the liberties and freedoms of the American citizenry. Both Republicans and Democrats in Washington, D.C., are all about empire-building, foreign interventionism, and expanding the Welfare and Warfare states. Furthermore, none of them (with the exception of Ron Paul) would do anything to thwart or reverse the burgeoning police state that is currently being rapidly constructed in this country. That means, as Michael Boldin said, “It’s going to take ‘We the People’ in our states to stand up and say, ‘No!’”

And quite frankly, that’s about the only thing that the power-elite in Washington, D.C., are worried about. They aren’t worried about Afghanistan, Iraq, or Iran. Those are all orchestrated conflicts to keep our troops fighting endless wars, to have an excuse to print more and more fiat currency, to satisfy the international bankers who are making trillions of dollars off the military-industrial complex, and to give them an excuse of “national security” in order to strip away more and more freedoms from the American citizenry. But State governors, legislators, and attorney generals who actually believe the Constitution and who have the courage to defend it, now THAT scares them to death! Why? Because they know that the real power in this country rests with “We the People” who, through their state governments, have the ability to actually stop their quest for globalism and feudalism.

America’s Founding Fathers clearly understood that the states are the ultimate guardians of the peoples’ liberties. James Madison (and even Alexander Hamilton) spoke to this eloquently in the Federalist Papers.

In Federalist #46, Madison said, “Were it admitted, however, that the Federal government may fell an equal disposition with the State governments to extend its power beyond the due limits, the [states] would still have the advantage in the means of DEFEATING SUCH ENCROACHMENTS” (emphasis added). By “defeating such encroachments,” Madison included “opposition,” “refusal to cooperate,” “frowns of the [State] executive,” “obstructions,” and “plans of resistance.”

Did you see that? America’s third President and Father of the Constitution said that it was the duty of the states to obstruct, oppose, resist, and otherwise refuse to cooperate with any federal policy or mandate that runs counter to the principles of liberty. And, remember, this is from the man who authored the so-called “supremacy clause” of the US Constitution!

In Federalist #45, Madison said, “Thus, each of the principal branches of the federal government will owe its existence more or less to the favor of the State governments, and must consequently feel a dependence, which is much more likely to beget a disposition too obsequious than too overbearing towards them. On the other side, the component parts of the State governments will in no instance be indebted for their appointment to the direct agency of the federal government, and very little, if at all, to the local influence of its members.”

Did you get that? In the mind of America’s founders, the federal government would be dependent upon the State governments, not the other way around! But what do we hear today? Even these so-called “conservative” politicos and talking heads say just the opposite. They keep insisting that the states are dependent upon, and subservient to, the federal government.

Even the colonists’ biggest proponent of central government, Alexander Hamilton, had it right on the power of the states to resist federal encroachment. In Federalist #26, Hamilton said, “Independent of … the national legislature itself … the State legislatures, who will always be not only vigilant but suspicious and jealous guardians of the rights of the citizens against encroachments from the federal government, will constantly have their attention awake to the conduct of the national rulers, and will be ready enough, if any thing improper appears, to sound the alarm to the people, and not only to be the voice, but, if necessary, the arm of their discontent.”

Wow! Did you catch that? Hamilton said that the states held the right and duty to resist federal encroachment with their “voice” and with their “arm.”

Does any of this sound like America’s Founding Fathers expected the states to be lap dogs for federal usurpation of power? They fully recognized that it would take the individual states standing against any potential federal overreach to protect and secure the rights and liberties of the American people.

I will say it again: it is far more important who is elected as your governor than who is elected President. It is far more important who is elected as your State attorney general than who is appointed US attorney general. It is far more important who is elected to your State legislature than who is elected to the US House and Senate. It is far more important who is elected as your sheriff than who is appointed as the Director of the FBI. But if all you watch is FOX News, CNN, NBC, CBS, and ABC, you will be mesmerized with national politics, and you will forget about that which is the most important defender of our liberties: our individual state governments. In fact, in many cases today, our State and local governments are as abusive of our liberties as is the federal government. This is mainly due to the inattention and misunderstanding of the People as to the importance of electing local and State leaders who will accept, as their first responsibility, the maintenance of liberty for the people they represent. And by nature, that means being a faithful watchdog to the incursions of the federal government against our freedoms.

It is encouraging to read that at least ten states are pushing back against the monstrously unconstitutional NDAA. If all fifty states would act as courageously as these tenacious ten—and not just against the NDAA, but also against EVERY assault of the federal government against our liberties—America could be restored to the “land of the free” very quickly. As it is, however, the protectors and guardians of our liberties (our State leaders and county sheriffs) are being bribed, coerced, cajoled, harangued, and intimidated into cowardly submission by these belligerent bullies in Washington, D.C.

Thank you Representative Daniel P. Gordon, Jr. of Rhode Island. Thank you Delegate Bob Marshall of Virginia. Thank you to all of you State legislators, State senators, and county sheriffs across our great land who truly understand the oath you took to the Constitution and who are willing to stand as the watchdogs of our liberties. It is a truism that if your tribe does not increase, our freedoms are surely lost.”

  • Chuck Baldwin is a syndicated columnist, radio broadcaster, author, and pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America was founded. He was the 2008 Presidential candidate for the Constitution Party. He and his wife, Connie, have 3 children and 8 grandchildren. Chuck and his family reside in the Flathead Valley of Montana. See Chuck’s complete bio here.


  • E-mail: chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

Source:

http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin687.htm

III. A day of reckoning for Washington!-Posted on Laigle’s Forum-By Don Hank-On February 10, 2012:

http://laiglesforum.com/a-day-of-reckoning-is-coming/2936.htm

IV. NDAA Nullification: Tennessee Bills Propose Kidnapping Charges For Federal Agents!-Posted on Western Journalism-By BREAKING NEWS-On February 8, 2012:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/ndaa-nullification-tennessee-bills-propose-kidnapping-charges-for-federal-agents/?utm_source=Western+Journalism&utm_campaign=6b25273157-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email

V. State-Controlled Mainstream Media?-Posted on Western Journalism-By KRIS ZANE-On February 8, 2012:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/state-controlled-mainstream-media/?utm_source=Western+Journalism&utm_campaign=6b25273157-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email

VI. Dick Morris: Obama’s sneaky treaties!-Posted on The Hill-By Dick Morris-On February 7, 2012:

http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/dick-morris/209283-obamas-assault-on-america

VII. Congress Calls for Accelerated Use of Drones in U.S.!-Posted on Secrecy News-By Steven Aftergood-On February 3, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2012/02/faa_drones.html

VIII. Video: Obama Is Betraying America!-Posted on DickMorris.com-By Dick Morris –On February 3, 2012:

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/obama-is-betraying-america-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/

IX. America’s Sheriffs Fight Barack Obama And Federal Government!-Posted on English Pravada-By Dr. Eowyn-On February 2, 2012:

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/03-02-2012/120412-america_sheriffs_obama-0/

X. Obama the Chicken is Being Plucked!-Posted on English Pravada-By Mark McGrew-On January 30, 2012:

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/30-01-2012/120356-obama_the_chicken-0/

XI. James Madison And The ‘Gathering Storm’ Prophecy!-Posted on News With Views-By Timothy N. Baldwin, JD.-On January 27, 2012:

http://www.newswithviews.com/Timothy/baldwin182.htm

XII. All Who Signed The NDAA Bill Should Be Impeached!-Posted on News With Views-By Dr. Laurie Roth, NewsWithViews.com-On January 20, 2012:


http://www.newswithviews.com/Roth/laurie307.htm

XIII. The Real 2012 Doomsday: U.S. Falls To Tyranny!-Posted on Personal Liberty Digest-By Sam Rolley –On January 18, 2012:

http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/the-real-2012-doomsday-u-s-falls-to-tyranny/?eiid

XIV. MAJOR NEW WEAPON IN THE FIGHT AGAINST THE U.N.!-Posted on News With Views-By Tom DeWeese-On January 8, 2012:

http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom209.htm

Note:  The following videos, articles and/or blog posts reveal how our American Constitution faces a ‘progressive’ threat, with the help of the main stream media, along with a video regarding our Constitution and our Republic-if we can keep it-You Decide:

I. Video: Obama: People Are Frustrated I Can’t Force My Will On Congress–Founding Fathers Made It Difficult!-Posted on Western Journalism-By DANIEL NOE-On February 7, 2012:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/obama-people-are-frustrated-i-cant-force-my-will-on-congress-founding-fathers-made-it-difficult/

II. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE: U.S. CONSTITUTION INFERIOR!-Posted on WND.com-By Bob Unruh-On February 3, 2012:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/supreme-court-justice-u-s-constitution-inferior/

III. EXCLUSIVE—Mark Levin on ‘Ameritopia:’ ‘We Now Live in a Post-Constitutional Country!’-Posted on CNSNews.com-By Terence P. Jeffrey-On January 16, 2012:

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/exclusive-mark-levin-ameritopia-we-now-live-post-constitutional-country

IV. Miss America: Obama Shirking the Constitution!-Posted on NewsMax.com-By Tom O’Connell-On Juy 13, 2011:

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/MissAmerica-BarackObama-Constitution/2011/07/13/id/403443

V. Florida D.A. Fired for Talking About Constitution Settles Case!-Posted on The Blaze-By Madeleine Morgenstern-On July 8, 2011:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/florida-d-a-fired-for-talking-about-constitution-settles-case/

VI. The Elite Are Not Even Trying To Hide How Much They Hate The U.S. Constitution Anymore!-Posted on InfoWars.com-By The American Dream-On July 5, 2011:

http://www.infowars.com/the-elite-are-not-even-trying-to-hide-how-much-they-hate-the-u-s-constitution-anymore/

VII. Exposing the Mindset of Modern Liberalism!-Posted on Commentary Magazine-By Peter Wehner-On July 5, 2011:

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/07/05/exposing-the-mindset-of-modern-liberalism/

VIII. American Constitution faces ‘progressive’ threat!-Posted on WND.com-By Aaron Klein-On July 3, 2011:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=316621

IX. The Constitution Matters: ‘A reply to Time magazine’s Richard Stengel.’-Posted on National Review Online-By THOMAS SOWELL-On June 28, 2011:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/270584/constitution-matters-thomas-sowell

X. Video: TIME Magazine Asks: ‘Does the Constitution Still Matter?’-Posted on The PatriotPost-On June 24, 2011:

http://patriotpost.us/perspective/2011/06/24/time-magazine-asks-does-the-constitution-still-matter/

XI. CNN Analysts Want Constitution Modernized; Bash Second Amendment Wording, Electoral College!-Posted on News Busters-By Matt Hadro-On June 27, 2011:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-hadro/2011/06/27/cnn-analysts-want-constitution-modernized-bash-second-amendment-wording-

XII. Obama Versus the Constitution!-Posted on American Thinker-By James Lewis-On April 25, 2011:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/04/obama_versus_the_constitution.html

XIII. George Soros assault on U.S. Constitution: ‘White House officials involved in rewriting nation’s founding document’!-Posted on WND.com-By Aaron Klein-On March 27, 2011:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=280277

XIV. Video: A Republic, If You Can Keep It – The American Form of Government!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGL8CiUtXF0

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

New World Order By Executive Order!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/02/13/new-world-order-by-executive-order/

It’s Getting Very Serious Now!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/it’s-getting-very-serious-now/

The Greatest Fraud Perpetrated in American History!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/the-greatest-fraud-perpetrated-in-american-history/

Who owns our supposedly fair and balanced airwaves and news outlets?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/21/who-owns-our-supposedly-fair-and-balanced-airwaves-and-news-outlets/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Note If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide:

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/23/what-happened-to-free-speech/

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

Read more…