Tuesday, 2 July 2013

Crossing The Rubicon

from obamaballotchallenge.com: 'An Open Letter to the Courageous 242' - George M. - July 2 - posting the Opinion piece of the above name, by Brian Reilly of the Arizona Surprise Tea Party - June 30 - posted by AuxH20-64 on July 1.  My comment on July 2:

Very good summary, initiative, and attitude, Brian. Many thanks, to you and your wife.

Personally, it’s my position that we constitutionalists have made a mistake by seemingly putting all our eggs in the one basket of questions regarding the authenticity of the posted BC. Obama was ineligible from the git-go, for not having two U.S. citizen parents – period. That fact must not be overlooked as this whole charade over the posted BC works its way out to some sort of resolution, maybe years away.

At the least, his supporting of that posted BC confirms that he is ‘swearing’ that his biological father was a man who was not a U.S. citizen. That alone should have been enough to have earned him the ire and concrete action of the Tea Party types in the nation. Who are going to have to rally their troops fast, because the Republican Party is already trying to lay the psychological case for having either Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio run for the presidency in 2016 -

precisely what must have been behind the GOP’s silent support of Obama’s run for the presidency in 2008. As Cdr Kerchner has pointed out, there were 8 attempts between 2003 and 2008 to get an amendment to the Constitution going through Congress on this very issue – and they all failed even to get out of committee. Conclusion: Both the Democrat Party and the Republican Party honchos are guilty of a conspiracy to defraud the American people.

Appealing to Republican Party Congresspesons at this point is not the way to go. They are a party to the crime. What needs to happen is for the CSPOA, with a ‘posse’ of retired military oathkeepers backing them up, to ‘bite the bullet’ and go to D.C. and arrest the sitting members of Congress, who are at the least accessories after the fact, with warrants signed by a legitimate judge. If there are any left in the country. On their way to the WH to serve the same sort of warrant on the Usurper in the Oval Office.

And THAT will get the attention of Joe and Jill Public on this matter. And force the armed forces of the U.S.A. to show their true allegiance. As oathkeepers. Not as a Praetorian Guard to a would-be dictator.

It’s time for the Patriots to cross the Rubicon on this matter. The Republic is hanging by a thread. Come on, Citizen. If not now, when??

Stan, 7 hours ago
Your comment is awaiting moderation.


This issue, of the definition in the minds of the Framers of the Constitution of a "natural born Citizen" as the only type of citizen allowed to hold the office of the Presidency, should be very clear.  A main argument by the Left on this issue - and unfortunately, among many of the Right as well (occasioned, no doubt, by the very reason I allude to above, i.e., that the Republican Party honchos wanted to make some of their own ineligible potential candidates 'eligible', and saw a golden opportunity to do a quid pro quo deal with the Democrats on the matter)  - is that the Framers were going by English common law, which speaks of 'natural born subjects' - to the Crown.  You would have taken your life in your hands if you were to call one of these men a 'subject'.  They were no longer subjects to a sovereign.  They were freemen - their own sovereign, now, having fought a War of Independence over the issue.  No; they were obviously going by American common law, and/or Natural Law, which defined the phrase as someone born of two U.S. citizen parents - born jus soli (of the soil) and jus sangjuinis (of the blood).  The other point such apologists for overthrow of the Constitution try to make is that the phrase only eliminates naturalized citizens.  

If anyone tries these arguments on you, as this issue heats up to civil-war levels of criticality, point out to them - gently; at first.  Let's be civil about this.  At first - the following train of logical thought:

If the Framers of the Constitution - the rule of law that we live under in this country - made it very clear, in their express, limiting requirement for that office - and that federal office only, let us remember - that, in requiring a candidate to be a, quote, "natural born Citizen," they meant that they didn't want a naturalized citizen to be able to occupy the office of the presidency - and therefore by extension be the Commander in Chief of the nation's military forces, with the possible and potential conflicting loyalties and allegiances that that might bring into play - how much MORE would they not want a person with actual dual citizenship occupying that office, and position??  With the conflicting loyalties and allegiances that that would clearly entail???

No.  The answer is quite clear.  A 'natural born' citizen means, in American common law and Natural Law, one born - at the very least - of two U.S. citizen parents.

That's plural.

And it's time to get back to the Constitution on this matter.

And almost past time.

Because the far Left is itching to pick a fight with 'potential terrorists', like - to them - Tea Party patriots, and gun owners, and returning Vets, and third party political advocates, and 'preppers', and the like - before the counter-revolution sets in too deeply, and they miss their golden chance, to take over the nation, and turn it into a socialist 'paradise'.  Where everybody is equal.  Especially them.  


It's time to take our country back.  

And may this Independence Day be one to remember.


P.S. The Obama administration has not been stockpiling huge amounts of ammunition and other weaponry - and preparing concentration camps - just out of expectation of counter-revolutionaries.  There is a financial takedown of the country - and the world - in the works, to further the agenda of the real Powers That Be; who want the whole world as part of their gulag for the Common Man.  But that's material for another blog.
     In these heating-up days.
     (To that extent, the Global Warmists are right...)


2) from obamaballotchallenge.com: 'Orly Taitz Objects to Giving Government Extra Time to Make up Taitz v Astrue Case Default' - George M. - July 2.  My  comment:

Thank you, George, for keeping the reality and ramifications of this matter so clearly 'out there': that it is "the biggest political scandal in history".  I get the feeling sometimes that many American citizens - let alone people in other parts of the world -  think, 'Oh, what's the big deal' about it.

Whereas it IS 'a big effing deal'.  It is the purloining of the American presidency.  It is the hijacking of the American ship of state.  It is the unlawful converting (with the help of the votes of millions - millions - of former illegal aliens) of the American Republic into the People's Republic of America, or the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (which will never happen, so the breakup of the U.S.A. and the commencement of civil war is imminent).  It is  -

oh well.  I'm talking to the choir.  But you get the idea.  We MUST 'keep it out there'.  And thanks for your considerable help in doing so.

No comments: