An associate lawyer in a Chicago-based firm whose partner served on a finance committee for then Sen. Barack Obama has advocated for the elimination of the U.S. Constitution's requirement that a president be a "natural-born" citizen, calling the requirement "stupid" and asserting it discriminates, is outdated and undemocratic.--Bob Unruh, Worldnetdaily.comHumm… now I don’t know but isn’t there some questions whether or not President-elect Barack Hussein Obama is Constitutionally qualified to be President of the United States of America? And weren’t there numerous court filings before the election questioning that fact. And wasn’t a paper advocating for the fundamental change of the constitution to allow other than U.S. natural borns to be President of the United States written two years after Obama won his senate seat in 2004 by an Obama associate? (see paper)
Is there a connection? You bet your sweet American birth right there is!
Today the Supreme Court is reviewing petitions as to whether President-elect Barack H. Obama is constitutionally qualified to be President of the United States of America. (see story)
This issue has been going on since before the Democrat National Convention and was filed in August of 2008. Hillary Clinton supporter and attorney Philip Berg filed suit asking someone, anyone to take responsibility and protect the American people and the U.S. constitution from possible fraud. Berg’s suit named Barack Obama, Howard Dean and the entire DNC his petition asked to enjoin the Democratic National Committee from nominating Obama. The petition stated that is was feared that if Obama were nominated as the Democrat Presidential candidate his questionable citizenship would at some point cause a constitutional crisis.
Do not be fooled they all knew well before the Democrat nomination process and well before the November 4 general elections that there was a major constitutional problem with Obama running but they did nothing!
Neither the DNC nor any lower courts would ask Obama for his birth certificate committing what I consider political and legal malfeasance and negligence. So now we find ourselves with a constitutional crisis just 46 days away from inaugurating a person which he and his entire Political Party possibly knowingly campaigned and fraudulently presented himself, Barack Hussein Obama, as someone eligible to be elected president of this country.
Nevertheless, this question is larger than Barack Obama. The question is should a Political Party that knowingly committed fraud in an election be awarded victory based on that fraud? In other words if Obama is found constitutionally ineligible to be President of the United States of America the constitution allows for the Vice president-elect to be designated President in the disqualified person’s place.
However if the entire Party knew directly or indirectly that Obama was not qualified to be president and knowingly defrauded the constitution and the American people by aiding and abetting Obama in his fraudulent pursuit of the presidency it is my sense that that Party logically should not be allowed to enjoy any of the fruits of their ill-gotten gains. (see story)
Simply stated no Democrat should benefit from the fraud perpetrated on the American people by Obama and the Democrat Party. And since we are in unprecedented waters here, in that, never has a national Party attempted to knowingly fraudulently run a candidate for president it would not be out of the question to undo what the Democrats have done by holding another national election and retain the current president until the taint of fraud over the national elections which Democrats cause is corrected.
This is the constitutional crisis that the Democrats and Barack Obama have perpetrated on the American people and none of them can say that they didn’t know.
As a web blogger suggested, "So it sure looks like Obama's people have looked into the matter of 'natural born' as far back as early 2006. What is even more disturbing is that it would appear that they are following the thought of: 'If the facts do not support the theory, Destroy the facts!"
If Obama and his people knew, as it appears, that he was not eligible to be President as far back as 2006 before he announced his candidacy in 2007 then it is apparent that he being a constitutional attorney knew or thought he would be able to perpetrate this fraud on the American people and there would be no controlling legal authority to stop him. It is every American’s hope that the U.S. Supreme Court proves otherwise.
So stated this would appear to be a criminal act as well as a direct affront to our constitution one which the Democrats and Mr. Obama should have to pay an exacting toll for!
May the Supreme Court find the wherewithal to protect and defend the constitution of the United States of America in spite of the fact that Barack Obama feels that to do so is stupid, biased, outdated, undemocratic and against current trends of globalization.
God save the Republic!