Obama

[Soldier4Christ]

Federal judge breaks rules, donates to Obama
President Bill Clinton's appointee shows partisanship, contributes to Democrat

A federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton broke judicial rules to contribute to Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign on multiple occasions.

Utah's chief federal judge, Tena Campbell, violated the Judicial Code of Conduct and give hundreds of dollars to the Democratic Party nominee, the Salt Lake Tribune reported.

Federal Election Commission campaign disclosures reveal Campbell described herself as a "lawyer" employed by the government and gave $100 to Obama's campaign on Aug. 28, 2007. She gifted additional funds totaling $300.

The seventh canon of the Judicial Code of Conduct states, "A judge should not … solicit funds for or pay an assessment or make a contribution to a political organization or candidate, attend political gatherings, or purchase tickets for political party dinners, or other functions."

According to the Tribune, Cynthia Gray, an ethics expert with the American Judicature Society, said judges are not supposed to show partisanship.

"Federal judges are supposed to be as apolitical as possible, not to show any sort of indication that they would tip to one side or the other," she said.

However, citizens shouldn't expect to see the federal judge face serious consequences for violating the rules, Gray said. The chief circuit court judge may receive a complaint and simply remind Campbell not to violate the code.

President Clinton nominated Campbell in 1995. She became the first female district judge in Utah after being unanimously confirmed by the Senate.

Obama spokeswoman Shannon Gilson told the newspaper the campaign plans to return the money.

"When problems are brought to our attention, we take immediate steps to correct them," she said.

_______________

Another judge that needs to be removed from the bench. After all how can this person be expected to enforce the laws if they themselves cannot obey them.

[Soldier4Christ]

GOP headquarters manager's home shot up over McCain signs
'It says this campaign is getting vicious'

The home of a Central Florida Republican headquarters manager was shot up and damaged over his support of Sen. John McCain, the man told police.

Rog Coverely said several pellets pierced his Longwood home. Coverely showed several spiderwebbed-holes in the front windows of his home.

The Republican manager said he is convinced he was targeted because of new McCain signs he added around his home.

"All I can tell you is this, I have a very good relationship with my neighbors," Coverely said. "I mow my lawn. The only thing that has changed is I have two McCain signs in my front yard."

Coverely said he has taken about 300 calls concerning stolen or vandalized McCain signs in the area.

"It says this campaign is getting vicious," Coverely said.

Coverely said it appears Democrats are becoming more aggressive in the county.

"I wouldn't say slipping, but I would say the Democrats have become far more aggressive in Seminole County because it is such a heavy Republican area," Coverely said.

__________________

But according to Obama it's the republicans that are inciting violence, encouraging other republicans to do so. After all this has nothing to do with Obama's call to get in the face of others.

[HisDaughter]

Newspaper shows Obama belonged to socialist party
Democrat's campaign denied allegations, but new evidence indicates membership
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

JERUSALEM – Evidence has emerged that Sen. Barack Obama belonged to a socialist political party that sought to elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic Party far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a socialist agenda.

Several blogs, including Powerline, previously documented that while running for the Illinois state Senate in 1996 as a Democrat, Obama actively sought and received the endorsement of the socialist-oriented New Party, with some blogs claiming Obama was a member of the controversial party.

The New Party, formed by members of the Democratic Socialists for America and leaders of an offshoot of the Community Party USA, was an electoral alliance that worked alongside the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN. The New Party's aim was to help elect politicians to office who espouse its policies.

Among New Party members was linguist and radical activist Noam Chomsky.

Obama's campaign has responded to the allegations, denying the presidential candidate was ever a member of the New Party.

But the New Zeal blog dug up print copies of the New Party News, the party's official newspaper, which show Obama posing with New Party leaders, list him as a New Party member and include quotes from him.

The party's Spring 1996 newspaper boasted: "New Party members won three other primaries this Spring in Chicago: Barack Obama (State Senate), Michael Chandler (Democratic Party Committee) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary). The paper quoted Obama saying "these victories prove that small 'd' democracy can work."

The newspaper lists other politicians it endorsed who were not members but specifies Obama as a New Party member.

New Ground, the newsletter of Chicago's Democratic Socialists for America, reported in its July/August 1996 edition that Obama attended a New Party membership meeting April 11, 1996, in which he expressed his gratitude for the group's support and "encouraged NPers (New Party members) to join in his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration."

Becoming a New Party member requires some effort on behalf of the politician. Candidates must be approved by the party's political committee and, once approved, must sign a contract mandating they will have a "visible and active relationship" with the party.

The New Party, established in 1992, took advantage of what was known as electoral "fusion," which enabled candidates to run on two tickets simultaneously, attracting voters from both parties. But the New Party went defunct in 1998, one year after fusion was halted by the Supreme Court.

Following the initial reports of Obama's purported membership in the New Party, Obama associate and former Chicago New Party activist Carl Davidson posted a statement on several blogs claiming his former party was not socialist, but he admitted it worked with ACORN.

"[The New Party] was a pragmatic party of 'small d democracy' mainly promoting economic reforms like the living wage and testing the fusion tactic, common in many countries but only operational in New York in the U.S. The main trend within it was ACORN, an Alinskyist outfit, which is hardly Marxist," wrote Davidson.

But the socialist goals of the New Party were enumerated on its old website.

Among the New Party's stated objectives were "full employment, a shorter work week, and a guaranteed minimum income for all adults; a universal 'social wage' to include such basic benefits as health care, child care, vacation time, and lifelong access to education and training; a systematic phase-in of comparable worth and like programs to ensure gender equity."

The New Party stated it also sought "the democratization of our banking and financial system – including popular election of those charged with public stewardship of our banking system, worker-owner control over their pension assets, community-controlled alternative financial institutions."

Many of the New Party's founding members were Democratic Socialists for America leaders and members of Committees of Correspondence, a breakaway of the Communist Party USA. Obama attended several DSA events and meetings, including a DSA-sponsored town hall meeting Feb. 25, 1996, entitled "Employment and Survival in Urban America." He sought and received an endorsement from the DSA.

According to DSA documents, the New Party worked with ACORN to promote its candidates. ACORN, convicted in massive, nationwide voter fraud cases, has been a point of controversy for Obama over the presidential candidate's ties to the group.

In 1995, the DSA's New Ground newsletter stated, "In Chicago, the New Party's biggest asset and biggest liability is ACORN.

"Like most organizations, ACORN is a mixed bag. On one hand, in Chicago, ACORN is a group that attempts to organize some of the most depressed communities in the city. Chicago organizers for ACORN and organizers for SEIU Local 880 have been given modest monthly recruitment quotas for new New Party members. On the other hand, like most groups that depend on canvassing for fundraising, it's easy enough to find burned out and disgruntled former employees. And ACORN has not had the reputation for being interested in coalition politics – until recently and, happily, not just within the New Party."

[Soldier4Christ]

Newspaper shows Obama belonged to socialist party

lol ... another double whammy.

[HisDaughter]

Obama seeks delay in voter fraud investigation
ONN 10/24/08

Barack Obama's presidential campaign is pressuring the Department of Justice to put off a probe of voter registration fraud allegations leveled against the now infamous liberal group ACORN.

Lawyers for the Obama campaign have written U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey, asking him to delay any investigations of voter fraud until after the election. The Obama campaign's general counsel, Robert Bauer, says the FBI should instead be investigating those who have lodged complaints of voter registration fraud against groups like ACORN.  Bauer contends that concerns about voter registration fraud are "manufactured allegations" being used to intimidate and disenfranchise low-income voters. (See earlier article on ACORN)
 
Former Oklahoma Republican Congressman Ernest Istook is a distinguished fellow for government relations at the Heritage Foundation. He says the Obama campaign is encouraging ACORN to continue its "nefarious" conduct.
 
"They're saying that they think that there's a plot between the McCain campaign and the Justice Department to suppress voter turnout by complaining about voting fraud and irregularities in registration, and so forth," says Istook.
 
"Naturally, they pooh-pooh the very notion of the problems that have been uncovered -- hundreds of thousands of questionable voter registrations, [including] one man in Ohio who says ACORN got him to register to vote 72 different times."
 
Istook says ACORN and "its minions" represent a large part of the Obama base, so the senator's camp is trying to keep them motivated by standing up for them and "showing them they have will have a friend and a protector in the White House."
 
U.S. criminal statutes say that someone who either is involved in a voter registration fraud effort or casts a fraudulent vote himself could receive up to five years in prison.

[Soldier4Christ]

Obama staffers admit casting bogus ballots
Threat of felony charges persuades campaigners to rescind their registrations

Thirteen campaign workers for Barack Obama yesterday yanked their voter registrations and ballots in Ohio after being warned by a prosecutor that temporary residents can't vote in the battleground state.

A dozen staffers - including Obama Ohio spokeswoman Olivia Alair and James Cadogan, who recently joined Team Obama - signed a form letter asking the Franklin County elections board to pull their names from the rolls.

The letter - a copy of which was obtained by palestra.net, a Fox News affiliate - came a day after prosecutor Ron O'Brien publicly urged out-of-state campaign workers for both Obama and John McCain to "examine your conscience" before the elections board beings begins opening absentee ballots today.

Earlier in the week, O'Brien spoke with lawyers for both camps and urged them to make sure their staffs met permanent-residency rules, or face possible felony charges.

Also pulling his ballot yesterday was Hofstra University grad Jake Smith, an Obama volunteer who had voted in Knox County, Ohio.

On Thursday, O'Brien cut a deal with 13 out-of-staters, including four from New York, who tossed out their already-cast ballots and admitted they didn't meet residency requirements.

[Soldier4Christ]

Law threatens thousands of military votes
Virginia tossing some absentee ballots cast using federal form

An obscure state law and an ambiguous federal ballot form are combining to invalidate some of the thousands of absentee votes being cast this fall by Virginians overseas, most of them in the military.

State officials confirmed Thursday that they've instructed local registrars to set aside any vote submitted on a federally furnished write-in ballot unless the ballot includes both the name and address of the person who witnessed the vote. An advisory to registrars was distributed earlier this week, said Susan Pollard, a spokeswoman for the State Board of Elections.

Every absentee ballot requires the signature of a witness, who vouches for the identity of the voter. The witness address requirement is specified by Virginia law but not spelled out on the federal form.

Adding to the confusion is the fact that the state does not require the witness address for absentee voters who opt for a different, state-furnished form.

"I want to count these votes, but under the law we cannot," said Rokey Suleman II, the voter registrar in Fairfax County, where the problem came to light.

"The law stinks.... That said, I cannot ignore the law," he added.

"We need a solution right away.... This is clear inequity," said Pat Herrity, a Fairfax County supervisor who called a news conference Thursday to spotlight the situation.

Republicans sought to capitalize on the situation. Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign branded the practice "unfair."

Herrity argued that the state law is in conflict with federal statutes designed to make it easier for deployed troops to vote.

"If anyone deserves to cast a ballot in the presidential election, it should be the men and women who protect our right to vote," he said.

Just how many votes are in jeopardy is not clear.

Suleman, whose office serves the state's most populous locality, said he's received 360 of the federal forms so far. Sixty of those came from voters who had not also applied for a state form and who did not provide the address of the witness; those votes are being set aside, he said.

In Hampton Roads, several registrars contacted Thursday said they either have not received any of the federal write-in forms or have not sorted their absentee ballots to identify the forms. Registrars typically do not review absentee votes until Election Day, when they're treated as a separate precinct and counted.

Service members deployed overseas are encouraged to apply for absentee ballots from their home states. The process typically must be initiated months before the election so that ballots can be mailed and received by Election Day.

The system "doesn't work very well," said Kevin Sidenstricker, a retired Navy commander who took part in Herrity's news conference. Because of that, many service members take advantage of a federal law that allows them to download and mail in a federal ballot form, commonly referred to as a "backup ballot."

The federal form has a blank for a witness signature and "address, if required," but it does not say which states, like Virginia, impose the address requirement.

Virginia's address requirement was adopted in 2002 as part of a sweeping revision of state election laws sponsored by Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, a Republican who was then a state senator from Hanover County. The legislation grew out of studies following the disputed 2000 presidential election.

Randy Marcus, a spokesman for Bolling, said his boss learned of the problem with witness addresses on Thursday and wants to review the law before commenting.

The bill was intended to lower barriers to voting by service members and to ensure their votes are counted, Marcus said.

_____________________

And guess who the majority of the Military is not voting for.

[Soldier4Christ]

Who dug dirt on Joe the Plumber?
Authorities probe possible illegal use of government computers to pry into man's past

 "State and local officials are investigating if state and law-enforcement computer systems were illegally accessed when they were tapped for personal information about "Joe the Plumber."

Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher became part of the national political lexicon Oct. 15 when Republican presidential candidate John McCain mentioned him frequently during his final debate with Democrat Barack Obama.

The 34-year-old from the Toledo suburb of Holland is held out by McCain as an example of an American who would be harmed by Obama's tax proposals.

Public records requested by The Dispatch disclose that information on Wurzelbacher's driver's license or his sport-utility vehicle was pulled from the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles database three times shortly after the debate.

Information on Wurzelbacher was accessed by accounts assigned to the office of Ohio Attorney General Nancy H. Rogers, the Cuyahoga County Child Support Enforcement Agency and the Toledo Police Department.

It has not been determined who checked on Wurzelbacher, or why. Direct access to driver's license and vehicle registration information from BMV computers is restricted to legitimate law enforcement and government business.

Paul Lindsay, Ohio spokesman for the McCain campaign, attempted to portray the inquiries as politically motivated. "It's outrageous to see how quickly Barack Obama's allies would abuse government power in an attempt to smear a private citizen who dared to ask a legitimate question," he said.

Isaac Baker, Obama's Ohio spokesman, denounced Lindsay's statement as charges of desperation from a campaign running out of time. "Invasions of privacy should not be tolerated.  If these records were accessed inappropriately, it had nothing to do with our campaign and should be investigated fully," he said.

The attorney general's office is investigating if the access of Wuzelbacher's BMV information through the office's Ohio Law Enforcement Gateway computer system was unauthorized, said spokeswoman Jennifer Brindisi.

"We're trying to pinpoint where it came from," she said. The investigation could become "criminal in nature," she said. Brindisi would not identify the account that pulled the information on Oct. 16.

Records show it was a "test account" assigned to the information technology section of the attorney general's office, said Department of Public Safety spokesman Thomas Hunter.

Brindisi later said investigators have confirmed that Wurzelbacher's information was not accessed within the attorney general's office. She declined to provide details. The office's test accounts are shared with and used by other law enforcement-related agencies, she said.

On Oct. 17, BMV information on Wurzelbacher was obtained through an account used by the Cuyahoga County Child Support Enforcement Agency in Cleveland, records show.

Mary Denihan, spokeswoman for the county agency, said the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services contacted the agency today and requested an investigation of the access to Wurzelbacher's information. Cuyahoga County court records do not show any child-support cases involving Wurzelbacher.

The State Highway Patrol, which administers the Law Enforcement Automated Data System in Ohio, asked Toledo police to explain why it pulled BMV information on Wurzelbacher within 48 hours of the debate, Hunter said.

The LEADS system also can be used to check for warrants and criminal histories, but such checks would not be reflected on the records obtained by The Dispatch.

Sgt. Tim Campbell, a Toledo police spokesman, said he could not provide any information because the department only had learned of the State Highway Patrol inquiry today.

[Soldier4Christ]

Lawsuit Against Obama Dismissed from Philadelphia Federal Court

by Jeff Schreiber at America’s Right

The order and memorandum came down at approximately 6:15 p.m. on Friday. Philip Berg's lawsuit challenging Illinois Sen. Barack Obama's constitutional eligibility to serve as president of the United States had been dismissed by the Hon. R. Barclay Surrick on grounds that the Philadelphia attorney and former Deputy Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania lacked standing.

Surrick, it seemed, was not satisfied with the nature of evidence provided by Berg to support his allegations.

Various accounts, details and ambiguities from Obama’s childhood form the basis of Plaintiff’s allegation that Obama is not a natural born citizen of the United States. To support his contention, Plaintiff cites sources as varied as the Rainbow Edition News Letter … and the television news tabloid Inside Edition. These sources and others lead Plaintiff to conclude that Obama is either a citizen of his father’s native Kenya, by birth there or through operation of U.S. law; or that Obama became a citizen of Indonesia by relinquishing his prior citizenship (American or Kenyan) when he moved there with his mother in 1967. Either way, in Plaintiff’s opinion, Obama does not have the requisite qualifications for the Presidency that the Natural Born Citizen Clause mandates. The Amended Complaint alleges that Obama has actively covered up this information and that the other named Defendants are complicit in Obama’s cover-up.

A judge’s attitude toward the factual foundation of a plaintiff’s claims is an essential factor in understanding just who indeed has standing to sue. The question running to the heart of the standing doctrine is whether or not the plaintiff indeed has a personal stake in the outcome of the otherwise justiciable matter being adjudicated. As has been discussed before many times here at America’s Right, a plaintiff wishing to have standing to sue must show (1) a particularized injury-in-fact, (2) evidence showing that that the party being sued actually caused the plaintiff’s particularized injury-in-fact, and (3) that adjudication of the matter would actually provide redress.

In this case, Judge Surrick’s attitude toward the evidence presented by Berg to support his allegations figures in heavily because, while there is a three-pronged test to standing in itself, there is no definitive test by which the court can determine whether a certain harm is enough to satisfy the first element of that three-pronged test by showing true injury-in-fact. Traditionally, it hasn’t taken much to satisfy the need for an injury-in-fact, but as the plaintiff’s claimed injury is perceived as being more remote, more creative, or more speculative, the injury-in-fact requirement becomes more difficult to satisfy.

As it were, much of Berg’s basis for injury-in-fact could be considered threatened injury–he felt that the country was at risk for “voter disenfranchisement” and that America was certainly headed for a “constitutional crisis”—and, while threatened injury can certainly be injury enough to satisfy the injury-in-fact element, such satisfaction depends upon the threat being perceived by the judge as being not too creative, speculative or remote.

When it came to Philip Berg’s personal stake in the matter at hand, Surrick compared his action with those of Fred Hollander—the man who, earlier this year, sued Sen. John McCain in New Hampshire on grounds that, born in the Panama Canal Zone, he was not a natural born citizen—and held that Berg’s stake “is no greater and his status no more differentiated than that of millions of other voters.” The harm cited by Berg, Surrick wrote, “is too vague and its effects too attenuated to confer standing on any and all voters.”

So, who does have standing? According to the Hon. R. Barclay Surrick, that's completely up to Congress to decide.

If, through the political process, Congress determines that citizens, voters, or party members should police the Constitution’s eligibility requirements for the Presidency, then it is free to pass laws conferring standing on individuals like Plaintiff. Until that time, voters do not have standing to bring the sort of challenge that Plaintiff attempts to bring in the Amended Complaint.

Judge the 34-page memorandum. In one such instance, Surrick noted that Berg had misinterpreted the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in asking the court to permit him to amend his complaint. The first amended complaint was deemed admitted by Judge Surrick on grounds that, under FRCP 15(a), a party can amend once so long as it’s done before being served with a responsive pleading and that [just as I had not-so-confidently suggested] the motion to dismiss filed on Sept. 24 by Obama and the DNC was not a responsive pleading. Because Berg perceived the motion to dismiss as a responsive pleading and was waiting on the court to grant or deny the motion for leave to amend, he did not serve the additional defendants added in the amended complaint. This, too, was noted by Surrick.

Berg’s attempts to distinguish his own case from Hollander were deemed by Surrick to be “[h]is most reasonable arguments,” but his arguments citing statutory authority were said by the judge to be a venture “into the unreasonable” and were “frivolous and not worthy of discussion.” All in all, the judge wrote, it was the satisfaction of the injury-in-fact requirement which was the problem. Berg’s harm was simply too intangible.

…regardless of questions of causation, the grievance remains too generalized to establish the existence of an injury in fact. To reiterate: a candidate’s ineligibility under the Natural Born Citizen Clause does not result in an injury in fact to voters. By extension, the theoretical constitutional harm experienced by voters does not change as the candidacy of an allegedly ineligible candidate progresses from the primaries to the general election.

Intangible or not, Berg said, we have a case where "an American citizen is asking questions of a presidential candidate's eligibility to even hold that office in the first place, and the candidate is ducking and dodging questions through legal procedure."

In fact, the motion to dismiss and motion for protective order filed by Barack Obama and the DNC were not only proper but also an expected maneuver by the defense attorneys. The very idea behind such motions is to foster the adjudication of the matter with minimal damage to the named defendants, and both are measures used more often than not. Still, Berg believes there is more to it.

"While the procedural evasions may be proper," Berg said, "it only makes me believe more that we were correct in the first place, that Obama does not have the documentation we've requested."

While the evidence presented by Berg was largely circumstantial, the attorney says that he is learning more about this narrative--and about the Democratic Party nominee for president--with each passing day. For example, regardless of whether it could be attached to the proceeding as it goes through the appellate process, Berg said, he is in possession of a native-language audiotape of Sarah Obama, Barack Obama's paternal grandmother, stating on the day of the last presidential debate that her famous grandson was indeed born in Kenya, and that she was present in the hospital for his birth.

"The tape is in the native language there," Berg said. "I will release it as soon as translation is confirmed by affidavit, and we are waiting on affidavits from contacts over here and in Kenya."

Berg, nonetheless, is disappointed by Surrick's decision and will issue a press release today detailing his plans to appeal to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and then to the United States Supreme Court.

"This is a question of who has standing to stand up for our Constitution," Berg said. "If I don't have standing, if you don't have standing, if your neighbor doesn't have standing to ask whether or not the likely next president of the United States--the most powerful man in the entire world--is eligible to be in that office in the first place, then who does?"

[Soldier4Christ]

Law threatens thousands of military votes
Virginia tossing some absentee ballots cast using federal form

More on this article:

Virginia Officials Illegally Discard Military Votes, Allow Out-of-State Votes

In Virginia’s liberal Fairfax County, officials are illegally discarding absentee ballots cast by members of the military based on a technical requirement that is preempted by federal law. Meanwhile, people who live out-of-state are being allowed to vote (some people have boasted of being registered to vote, and voting, both in Virginia and another state) in Virginia elections, contrary to state law, based on instructions from liberal state voting officials and false claims by liberal advocacy groups.

The Washington Examiner reports on October 24 that “Fairfax County elections officials are rejecting about 200 overseas ballots, many of them from members of the military, saying the voters failed to observe a minor technicality in filling out their absentee forms.” As retiring Congressman Tom Davis notes, that technicality “violates federal law” through its “disparate treatment of overseas voters.”

“The State Board of Elections last week instructed county officials to adhere to the letter of the [state] law,” even though it is preempted by contrary federal law. Officials at the State Board of elections are appointed by liberal Governor Tim Kaine.

Meanwhile, that same Board of Elections ordered Norfolk registrar Elisa J. Long to ignore state law by allowing college students not domiciled in Virginia to register and vote in Virginia elections.

The military votes in Fairfax County are being discarded by long-time Democratic operative Rokey Suleman, who became the Fairfax County registrar (a supposedly non-partisan position) after long being “active in Ohio Democratic politics.” Suleman earlier sent staffers into the Fairfax County jail to register criminals to vote.

______________

This illegal action will benefit Obama and hurt McCain tremendously.

[Soldier4Christ]

In a 2001 Chicago Public Radio Interview Obama is discussing the best way to bring about a Redistribution of Wealth.

If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court. I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order as long as I could pay for it I’d be o.k.  But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendancy to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.

I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. You know, the institution just isn’t structured that way.

______________

Here we can see his true agenda and it isn't a good one. To "break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution" is a desire to destroy The  Constitution. This is now showing that his statements to Joe the Plumber were not just an arbitrary statement as his party tries to claim but the actual plan to implement socialism.

[Soldier4Christ]

Obama's birth certificate
sealed by Hawaii governor
Says Democratic senator must make
request to obtain original document

Although the legitimacy of Sen. Barack Obama's birth certificate has become a focus of intense speculation – and even several lawsuits – WND has learned that Hawaii's Gov. Linda Lingle has placed the candidate's birth certificate under seal and instructed the state's Department of Health to make sure no one in the press obtains access to the original document under any circumstances.

The governor's office officially declined a request made in writing by WND in Hawaii to obtain a copy of the hospital-generated original birth certificate of Barack Obama.

"It does not appear that Dr. Corsi is within any of these categories of persons with a direct and tangible interest in the birth certificate he seeks," wrote Roz Makuala, manager of constituent services in the governor's office, in an e-mailed response to a WND request seeking the information.

Those listed as entitled to obtain a copy of an original birth certificate include the person born, or "registrant" according to the legal description from the governor's office, the spouse or parent of the registrant, a descendant of the registrant, a person having a common ancestor with the registrant, a legal guardian of the registrant, or a person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant.

WND was told the official reason for denial of access to Obama's birth certificate would be authority granted pursuant to Section 338-18 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, a provision the anonymous source claimed was designed to prevent identity theft.

Still, the source told WND confidentially the motivation for withholding the original birth certificate was political, although the source refused to disclose whether there was any information on the original birth certificate that would prove politically embarrassing to Obama.

The source also refused to answer WND's question whether the original document on file with the Department of Health was a hospital-generated birth certificate or a registration of birth that may have been filed subsequent to the birth.

The anonymous source made clear the Hawaii Department of Health would immediately release Obama's original birth certificate, provided Obama requested the document be released, but the Department of Heath has received no such request from the senator or from anyone acting officially on his behalf.

WND also found on microfilm in the Honolulu downtown public library a notice published under the "Births, Marriages, Deaths" section of the Honolulu Sunday Advertiser for August 13, 1961, on page B-6, noting: "Mr. and Mrs. Barack II Obama. 6085 Kalanianaole-Hwy, son, Aug. 4."

In searching through the birth notices of the Honolulu Advertiser for 1961, WND found many birth notices were published between one and two weeks after the date of birth listed.

The notice in the Honolulu Advertiser does not list the hospital where the Obama son was born or the doctor who delivered the baby.

In a startling development, Obama's Kenyan grandmother has reportedly alleged she witnessed Obama's birth at the Coast Provincial Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.

Friday, U.S. Federal judge Richard Barclay Surrick, a Clinton appointee, dismissed a lawsuit brought by Pennsylvania attorney Phillip J. Berg who alleged Obama was not a U.S. "natural born" citizen and therefore ineligible for the presidency under the specifications of the U.S. Constitution, under Article II, Section 1.

Berg told WND last week he does not have a copy of a Kenyan birth certificate for Obama that he alleges exists.

In Kenya, WND was told by government authorities that all documents concerning Obama were under seal until after the U.S. presidential election on November 4.

The Obama campaign website entitled "Fight the Smears" posts a State of Hawaii "Certificate of Live Birth" which is obviously not the original birth certificate generate by the hospital where Obama was born.

"Fight the Smears" declares, "The truth is, Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii in 1961, a native citizen of the United States of America."

Although the Obama campaign could immediately put an end to all the challenges by simply producing the candidate's original birth certificate, it has not done so. And the "Fight the Smears" website offers no explanation as to why Obama has refused to request, and make public, an original hospital-generated birth certificate which the Hawaii Department of Health may possess.

[Soldier4Christ]

ATF Disrupts Plot to Assassinate Obama

The plan was to shoot or decapitate black people in Tennessee.
Monday, October 27, 2008
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Authorities have foiled a plot by neo-Nazi skinheads to assassinate Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and kill black people in Tennessee, the Associated Press reported on Monday.

The AP said the plot had been broken up by agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

The Obama campaign had no comment on the report.

Obama, who would be the first black president, is leading Republican John McCain in opinion polls ahead of the November 4 election.

[Brother Jerry]

I was just reading this report.  Sad, but I do believe that will be a real fear he will have if he wins.  And you know it chaps me to no end the last bit of that article....this is an article about how some skin heads wanted to kill Obama...and they have to toss in the comment about how Obama is ahead in the polls.  there is no reason for that line, it is simply part of the indoctrination tactics the media uses.

[Soldier4Christ]

I thought the same thing. Also the comment about him being the first "black president". Yes he is dark skinned and yes he does associate himself with black people in many ways but the truth is he would be the first "mulatto president" and more truth to the matter is what difference does that make ... none. What does matter are those things that he stands for in a political nature not his skin color or his ancestral lineage. What will he do as president to this nation in the way of laws. This whole race issue being made a part of this political season makes it all that much sadder.