Open Letter - Request to refile Petition Lightfoot v Bowen with chief Justice John Roberts

Bar of Integrity ^ | 12/21/08 | Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq.

[Calpernia]

DrOrlyTV

Defend Our Freedoms Foundation (application pending)

[Calpernia]

ping

[Calpernia]

bump

[EagleUSA]

They want to know if the justices believe in the Constitution on which this country was built, whether they are prepared to tear it apart in favor of some new world order, conceived by a few billionaires, Trilateral commission and the Bielderberg Group.
:::::::::::
So far, the SCOTUS response to this issue has been totally counter to the law of the Constitution. I frankly don’t think the law matters anymore.

[TheConservativeParty]

No BC, No peace.

[ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY]

Let’s all hope and PRAY!

[Iowan]

Excellent letter.

Thanks for posting this, Calpernia.

Ping.

[pallis]

The Supremes need to get off their derelict duffs, and give Americans proof that Obama is a US citizen. The ball is in their court, because Obama has failed to do the right thing, not because others aren’t justified in requesting the truth.

[real_patriotic_american]

I agree! Obama is not a “natural born citizen” until he proves that he is. I don’t believe that he can! It is the responsibility of the Supreme Court to require Obama to prove that he is a citizen.

http://www.rallycongress.com/constitutional-qualification/1244

[21stCenturyFreeThinker]

So far, the SCOTUS response to this issue has been totally counter to the law of the Constitution. I frankly don’t think the law matters anymore.

The Constitution specifically gives Congress the authority to manage the Electoral College and accept it's vote. The Supreme Court is given no role at all. I would hate for them to create a role out of whole cloth.

[21stCenturyFreeThinker]

The Supremes need to get off their derelict duffs, and give Americans proof that Obama is a US citizen.

The Constitution gives Congress, the most political branch of government, the responsibility to judge the qualifications of the president.

They were right to do this. Do you really want unelected, life tenured judges deciding who is qualified to be president? Also, the courts move very slowly and the founding fathers wanted to keep elections from being tied up forever.

We may not like the outcome of this election but the Supreme Court is following their Constitutional role.

[Eastbound]

The old 17th Amendment would have prevented this from happening. If our lawmakers were on a short leash you wetter believe they wouldn’t have let this clown get as far as he did.

[pallis]

Okay, play with it, and we will get a president who isn’t a US citizen. The cases are before the Supreme Court. The solution to this would take about ten minutes. Obama isn’t going to do it. Congress isn’t going to do it. What do you suggest, ...Let the Kenyan rule without having to prove his right to do it? The Supremes are hiding from something that has fallen into their laps. This is a simple matter. Take care of it.

[Eastbound]

wetter=better

So who do we look to as an example of how the rule of law should be followed? Surely as successful as our nation has been in following the rule of law, there would be at least one shining example of the law being followed instead of it being thwarted at such a critical time.

[Eastbound]

Unless I miss my guess, Obammy's private security police force will be replacing and enforcing his rule of law. I wondered why he needed one, and now it becomes evident. With Congress and the courts shirking from their duty to preserve the rule of law, it becomes necssary for some authorizitve figure to implement and enforce a new rule of law lest we have folks establishing their own laws.

Well, yeah, that makes sense, doesn't it?

[RegulatorCountry]

If that is the case, Mr. Obama is not a US citizen and will need to go back to Kenya to wait for his Green Card.

Unnecessary and inflammatory. Ms. Taitz would do well to just stick with the legalities of the matter.

... some of whose members have very questionable moral qualities (to say the least).

Again, unnecessary and inflammatory. Ms. Taitz would do well to just stick with the legalities of the matter.

They want to know if the justices believe in the Constitution on which this country was built, whether they are prepared to tear it apart in favor of some new world order, conceived by a few billionaires, Trilateral commission and the Bielderberg Group.

And, finally, Ms. Taitz all but accuses the Supreme Court of being part of a conspiracy, along with the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderbergers. This is no way to win friends or influence opinion.

I wish her and Alan Keyes nothing but good luck with their efforts. In light of this sort of communication, however, I'm down to pinning my hopes on Broe v. Reed in Washington. That case is laid out clearly and concisely, with none of the weird emotional outbursts and intemperate public statements that seem to have come to characterize so many others, from Berg to Donofrio and now this one.

[EagleUSA]

The Constitution specifically gives Congress the authority to manage the Electoral College and accept it’s vote.
::::::::::
I was referring to the ELIGIBLE BIRTH ISSUE with Obama.

[Gemsbok]

I agree.

I wish she would have stuck to the facts and left opinion and speculation out of the letter.

I doubt Keyes would have approved.

[WalterSkinner]

..that last sentence was really really dumb

Even if one bought into that Bircher conspiracy stuff--to publicly hit the Chief Justice of the U.S. in the face with it is a sure formula for no action IMO...