Showing posts with label Rush Limbaugh. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rush Limbaugh. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Obama is Eligible to Serve and ‘Birthers’ are Vindicated? The BOPAC Report

The BOPAC Report:

Obama is Eligible to Serve and ‘Birthers’ are Vindicated?

Two days ago I read an American Thinker article that challenged my current thinking. The result - I may have to acknowledge the possibility that Obama is a ‘natural born citizen’ and therefore eligible to serve as President. If either possibility presented in the article proves true and a few loose ends are tied up concerning Obama’s mother, I will be forced to stop referring to Obama as Obama and begin referring to him as President Obama. Time will tell if ‘facts’ come out that beckon such a change. Jack Cashill’s presentation is very compelling, but will journalists and historians use their gravitas to drive the final nails in the eligibility issue coffin?



I do so want to turn away from the eligibility issue temporarily and focus on the cliff Obama is taking America over. Did you see that a majority of Democrats have a favorable view of Socialism? That’s going to be a main focus of the 2010 battle for Independents because spending, taxing, personal responsibility, voter dependency, federal debt, job creation, technological innovation and the role of government are all intimately intertwined with it. The reality is that November is fast approaching and every effort needs to be made to stop Obama’s socialist objectives.



But, because Presidential eligibility is such a bedrock issue, it’s almost impossible for those of us who care deeply about the Constitution and the rule of law to turn away based solely upon political calculations. Something has to be added to the calculation to tip the scales. If real journalists could find documentation verifying Mr. Cashill’s suppositions, I’m sure most of us challenging Obama’s eligibility would fall away satisfied because there would in fact be a there there.



As much as it has been denied and misconstrued, determining the ‘truth’ has always been the objective regarding the ‘eligibility’ question for the vast majority of those trying to look behind the Obama curtain. The media can name call and ridicule each and every one who has questioned Obama’s eligibility to serve as President. (‘We’ certainly didn’t choose the moniker ‘birther’.) They can maliciously imply that each and every question we raise involves some race-based angst or worse. They can manipulate public opinion. They can even shape the public’s understanding of the Constitutional requirements for the Presidency. It’s not right, it’s not true, it’s not journalism - but they can do it. What they can’t do is rewrite history to say there wasn’t (isn’t) a ‘there, there’ regarding Obama’s eligibility to serve as President of the United States. What exactly the ‘there’ is hasn’t been discovered. Obama knows - but he’s not cooperating.



Let’s be honest, don’t you think objective legal historians/researchers looking at the facts, the circumstantial evidence, the testimony of his grandmother, the news reports from years earlier, the actions of Obama (withholding documents from the public, spending vast sums in legal fees, etc.), the ‘founders’ understanding of the term ‘natural born citizen’, the reasons for the Constitutional provision, the actual limitations of what can be proven from Obama’s online ‘Hawaiian birth certificate’, the lack of on point court decisions talking about the term ‘natural born citizen’, the differences in meanings for the terms ‘citizen’ and ‘natural born citizen’, etc., etc. - would realize that it’s almost a certainty that legitimate issues of some type exist? It may take historians many years to acquire the documentation that will vindicate the ‘birthers’. But rest assured, this issue is important enough that some historian will continue to pay attention. I wonder if a book is being out-lined at this very moment, maybe a few law review articles?



But seriously, looking at the big picture, is the status quo really the best situation for Obama?



Everyone knows that there’s a huge secret being kept. You know it. I know it. Orly Taitz knows it. Larry Sinclair knows it. Ahmadinejad knows it. Netanyahu knows it. Hu Jintao knows it. It’s like your driving on the interstate; you see a car pulled over with a police car on its bumper, lights flashing. As you drive past, you see one passenger toss something in the bushes when the State Trooper approaches the driver. You don’t know exactly what’s up but you know something is.



Right now the situation is that a substantial number of Americans cannot ethically recognize Obama as President. How can that be good for America? How can that be good for the military? Given that Obama has done nothing except post a document of limited evidentiary value online, how can anyone expect the concerns of Americans to be allayed?



The reason Obama is fighting this so hard, spending so much, is because he knows the outcome is a crapshoot. Taking the facts in a light most favorable to Obama, it still requires the judge(s) to find that Obama was born in Hawaii and that the meaning of the term ‘natural born citizen’ is either American citizenship equals ‘natural born citizenship’ or being a ‘natural born citizen’ requires only one of Obama’s parents to be an American citizen by birth or naturalization at the time of Obama’s birth.



Such an interpretation by the courts would necessarily require activist judges who believe that the Constitution is a living breathing document that changes with the times. Fortunately, the American justice system is not there yet because that would make the Constitution subject to the political whims of judges and politicians. Nevertheless, if such a decision did occur most Americans would live with the result.



Additionally, such a decision outcome would vindicate the ‘birthers’ because the Constitution had to be stretched beyond its original meaning and that would be the ‘there’. It would give Obama what he wants. But, it would be the crapshoot of his life!



The other factual possibility that could establish Obama as a ‘natural born citizen’ brings us back to the American Thinker article - the existence of a secret so big that it jumps right over the inconvenient problems arising from the citizenship of Barack Obama, Sr.



The nice thing about this possibility is that (for me) it explains a lot if true and it vindicates the ‘birthers’. And to top it off, it follows the principle of Occam’s razor.


… When competing hypotheses are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selection of the hypothesis that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities while still sufficiently answering the question.…


It acknowledges the common sense desire a parent would have to make sure baby Obama has American citizenship and family legitimacy. It also recognizes that a parent would not have been worried about making sure Obama was a ‘natural born citizen’ because it is not realistic to think that a particular child will grow up to be President.



It makes it possible to imagine how and why the CIA and FBI appear to be covering for Obama.



It partly explains why Hillary Clinton, John McCain and the Republican Party didn’t raise the issue. What politician would risk raising such a possibility without absolute proof? (Gov. Jindal’s situation may have factored in for Republicans and for far left Democrats- effectively eviscerating one more parts of the Constitution is a progressive’s dream.)



It exposes how judges might have been persuaded to do a kabuki dance to avoid getting to the merits of eligibility cases and being forced to make the choice of wrongly expanding the meaning of ‘natural born citizen’ to avoid rioting in the streets or expose a huge secret.



It also partly explains why Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Hannity are being so reluctant to fully address the issue. However, if the possibility of an election-changing secret is true and Glenn Beck did not reveal it, did Mr. Beck aid the Progressives in gutting the meaning and force of Article 1, Section II of the Constitution?



It explains why the media is going so far out of their way to misdirect and vilify those asking questions. (Not they needed a lot of arm-twisting to go - given their coverage of John Edward’s affair/love child and Larry Sinclair’s allegations of cocaine use and sex with Obama in 1999.)



And finally, it vindicates the much-maligned ‘birthers’ because there is a there there. Either Obama is not a ‘natural born citizen’ and is not eligible to serve as President or Obama is a ‘natural born citizen’ and every other part of his life is a ‘natural born lie’/deception. (As more and more Americans are discovering.)



Regardless of outcome, ‘birthers’ will be vindicated.



Notwithstanding ‘birther’ vindication, it remains essential that we know the truth because though the actions and non-actions of the media, courts, talk-radio, and politicians - Article I, Section II of the Constitution has been weakened (eviscerated) for future elections unless individual States require Presidential Candidates to present proof of theirs and their parents’ citizenship.



Sorry, I haven’t given specific details about the American Thinker article’s revelations. To briefly mention the actual details doesn’t do justice, given that Jack Cashill has done such a nice job of laying it out. It’s a must read.

END

NOTE:

Thank you for considering this article!

I think the next phase has to be turning to State Legislatures to require proof of eligibility. Such legislation may stop Obama from attempting another run for which he may well not be eligible and protect Article II, Section 1.
...Notwithstanding ‘birther’ vindication, it remains essential that we know the truth because though the actions and non-actions of the media, courts, talk-radio, and politicians – Article I, Section II of the Constitution has been weakened (eviscerated) for future elections unless individual States require Presidential Candidates to present proof of theirs and their parents’ citizenship....
Hopefully some of you will write your State legislators. Feel free to copy any article on my blog if it can aid in your efforts.
Stress the need for 3 birth certificates. One from the candidate and 2 from parents (or proof of naturalization)! Candidate's parents have to have been US citizens at the time of his or her birth.
Thank you for your time and efforts.

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

Constantly Ignored by Congress, Americans Left Little Choice but to Shut Washington, D.C. Down!

The BOPAC Report:


Constantly Ignored by Congress, Americans Left Little Choice but to Shut Washington, D.C. Down!




(I would like to suggest a date – the day of the 2010 State of the Union Address)


Today I was listening to Rush Limbaugh’s radio program when one of his listeners shared an interesting idea that got my attention. The listener was a small business owner, 30 years in business, who was fed up with Congress not listening to the wishes of the American People. He was calling for all small business owners to fire half of their employees (for a few weeks?) and the resulting loss of tax withholdings and concurrent demands for unemployment benefits, food stamps, etc. by the fired workers would overwhelm the system.



Rush immediately recognized that this idea was actually the same idea that Obama and the left are employing, the Cloward-Piven strategy.



…”The Cloward/Piven Strategy is named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. Their goal is to overthrow capitalism by overwhelming the government bureaucracy with entitlement demands. The created crisis provides the impetus to bring about radical political change….”



It is an interesting concept of turning a wholly leftist/fascist strategy for radical change back on the instigators. Naturally, the caller understood that his idea would involve substantial “short-term pain for long-term gain” and would require a lot of employers taking part to be effective.



What’s obvious is that Rush’s caller was basically expressing the extreme frustration that millions of Americans are feeling right now. How can ordinary citizens get the attention of Congress when they are taking the phone off the hook and locking their doors?



Even though it’s probably not ripe today, the Rush caller idea is simple, powerful, and definitely would get Washington and the media’s attention. However, I believe the pain to the “innocent” temporarily unemployed would be too much. It might be something to try next year during hunting season for hunters looking for some time to hunt and draw a check; or when school’s out for summer so they can go on family vacation. By summer, prior to the 2010 elections, both the to be laid off employees and millions of stressed employers could be eager to take part in such an act of political disobedience. I’m ready now but later might be better.



So what can be done now to get the attention of Obama, Reid, Pelosi and Congress? What if for the days before and the night of the next Presidential State of the Union at the end of January another “Tea Party”/strike is organized to descend on Washington, D. C.? Trucks, RV’s, Cars, Motorcycles, Bikes, Strollers, Wheel Chairs, Veterans, Law Enforcement, Firefighters, 9/11 Families, Navy Seals’ families, College Students, High School Students, Elementary School Students, Lawyers, Judges, former AARP members, Ordinary Americans carrying bull-horns, cowbells, bag pipes, drums, and every other manner of noise making device imaginable coming to Congress to be HEARD! Wow!



Maybe, everyone could ask his or her Congressional Representative to boycott the 2010 State of the Union Address. (Are you there Representatives Bachmann and Wilson?)



Even though previous D.C. Tea Party demonstrations have had over a million participants, the media have found ways to ignore/ridicule/minimize them. What if 2 or 3 million Americans came to Congress to be heard – could the media ignore that? I don’t think so! What if the sound could be heard when Obama begins spinning his lies and misrepresentations – could the media ignore that? I don’t think so! What if traffic is tied up for days – could the media ignore that? I don’t think so!



Americans are upset and frustrated because they are not being listened to by Obama or the Congress. If fact even Blue Dog Democrats are frustrated. The level of frustration must be extremely high to cause a Freshman Democratic Representative from Alabama, Parker Griffith, to switch parties today.



Why are they so upset and frustrated? Let me count the ways:



Obama and Eric Holder are planning to have 9/11 mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s trial in NYC! Polls show that 59% of Americans are opposed to this travesty. Congress has power to prevent it but again they choose not to listen the American people.



Obama is closing GITMO and bringing the terrorists to Illinois (within 20 miles of a nuclear power plant). When you ask Americans you find that 64% are opposed to bringing GITMO terrorists to America. Is Obama or Congress listening? No.



Three Navy Seals are being prosecuted for allegedly giving Islamic terrorist, Ahmed Hashim Abed, a fat lip during his capture. Abed was the mastermind of the brutal attack in Falluja in 2004 where 4 Blackwater security contractors were hung on a bridge and burned. Where is Obama and Congress? AWOL.



The Joint Chiefs of Staff are ignoring the very real possibility that Obama is not a “natural born citizen” and is therefore not eligible to serve as President or Commander in Chief. Are they listening? No. Is Congress listening? No. All that is happening is that Obama has/is spending over 2 million dollars trying to keep his school records, long form birth certificate, bar application, college papers, etc. hidden.



Americans opposed to Obamacare are being ignored by Congress. The latest Quinnipiac poll show that “53 percent of voters disapprove of plans to make over the health-care system, with 36 percent in support.” Will Congress listen? No.



Shockingly, Reid and Pelosi’s Democrats are putting measures in the Healthcare legislation that tries to make parts of it not subject to repeal. How’s that for Congress not listening!



No matter what you believe about abortion, the vast majority of Americans (72%) recognize that it is wrong to force taxpayer who believe abortion is wrong to fund abortions. Will Congress listen? No.



The majority of American small business owners (66 against/24 for) and the public (53 against/37 for) are against Cap and Trade legislation. Is the Congress listening? No.



Americans, who keep their own budgets balanced, expect Obama and Congress to keep America’s budgets balanced! Do they listen? No.



And there’s Inspector General Walpin’s firing, Obama bowing to every world leader he can find, Obama photo ops with our returning war dead, ACORN, SEIU, Larry Sinclair, attacks of FOX, Obama’s boot licking media, Cambridge Police “acted stupid”, coming attacks on the Second Amendment, not showing proper respect when our soldiers were slaughtered by a terrorist at Ft. Hood, etc., etc., etc. It never ends.



Americans have been trying hard to have their voices heard vis-à-vis Tea Parties nationwide. Were they heard? No. They were ridiculed and vilified by Obama, Gibbs, Pelosi, many Members of Congress and the mainstream media.



Everyday, more Americans are waking up.



It is time to start saying ENOUGH a little more loudly.