The Imposter at the Rostrum?

On Tuesday, January 25, 2011, a man by the name of Barack Hussein Obama took his place at the rostrum before the two houses of Congress to deliver his State of the Union address. He was greeted by the members with smiles and great courtesy even though a growing number of Americans believe that he is not eligible to be President — an imposter.

Here is a man with the greatest power on Earth, who can order Air Force One to take him anywhere on the planet, who has spent the last two years transforming America — yet he will not reveal his birth certificate. What is he hiding? And why is the Congress of the United States willing to sit and listen to this man who may very well be the cleverest imposter who ever existed?

We know of men who have pretended to be medical doctors and surgeons, who have actually performed the duties of a physician before they were uncovered as frauds. Men such as that usually go to jail. Americans are a very trusting people, and we tend to believe what people tell us about themselves.

Yet, we have a Constitution that describes the qualifications of a President. Article II, Section I states: “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

Well, how do we know for sure that a candidate for the office of President was born in the United States? By his birth certificate. But no one in Congress or on the Supreme Court has ever seen Barack Obama’s original long-form birth certificate. Should he not have made it public when he sought the nomination for the presidency? Why was it not demanded of him by the proper authorities? Would his birth certificate actually reveal that he is not eligible to be President?

Is not the office of President important enough to require irrefutable proof of eligibility on the part of any candidate for that position of enormous power? He holds the fate of 300 million people in his hands. What if it is later determined that Obama is indeed an imposter — what then?

All of us, at some point in our lives, have to show our birth certificates to proper authorities, whether it’s to obtain a passport, or to be hired to a sensitive position in government or private industry, or to prove our citizenship. So why is Obama exempted from providing proof of his citizenship by birth? He is no ordinary American applying for a passport. He is the Commander in Chief of our armed forces, he lives in our presidential mansion known as the White House, and he had the entire Congress of the United States listening to his every word last night, even though he refuses to provide them with his birth certificate.

As a master imposter, he is also a master hypnotist. Otherwise, how could he convince everyone in Congress that he is the genuine article? What he said in his State of the Union address is irrelevant compared to the fact that he stood before the lawmakers of America and refused to prove that he is a citizen of the United States by birth. There should be no doubt in the minds of Americans that their President was indeed born in the United States and is eligible to hold that office. And as long as Obama refuses to show us his birth certificate, those doubts will persist.

Meanwhile, Hawaii's Governor, Neil Abercrombie, announced that he would dig up Obama’s Hawaiian long-form birth certificate in order to finally put an end to speculation about his eligibility to be President. However, it turns out the greatly frustrated Governor was unable to find any documentation. Apparently, there are no papers that name either the Hawaiian hospital in which Obama was born or the physician who attended his birth. And if such a doctor existed, would he not by now have identified himself?

Most likely, the eligibility issue will come up in the election of 2012. Obama will be forced to produce documentation that he is indeed a natural born citizen of the United States. And if he cannot come up with such documentation, then what?

As for his address, it was lackluster and boring, full of the usual clichés for which he is famous. He spoke a lot about education, proposing to replace No Child Left Behind with a Race to the Top. Thus, he expects the government to play an even bigger role in education, when the proper role for the federal government in education is no role at all. Education is not mentioned in the Constitution.

As for the country’s enormous debt, he expressed no sense of urgency about reducing it, offering only some minor spending cuts. He said nothing about inflation, which most people are concerned about. But he intends to oppose any attempts to repeal his healthcare program, even though the last thing our debt-ridden country needs is another costly entitlement program. He offered to help Republicans improve the program, not repeal it.

He’s obviously not in favor of smaller government. In fact, he advocated more government “investments” in clean energy technology, electric cars, more roads and bridges, more high-speed rail lines. He is still on the road to socialism, but pledged to work with Republicans in promoting “reform.” He will defend his agenda, but work with Republicans, he said. To what end? To prevent them from dismantling his socialist program. He doesn’t want smaller government — he wants more efficient big government.

He sounded remarkably like a clever, intelligent imposter trying to act like a legitimate President. But the speech was hollow. He is an excellent actor — which is what an imposter has to be. But a man without a birth certificate ought not to be President.

*****Gov. Abie claims she was or maybe he was told she left a post it note*****

Another lie - POST IT notes were not yet invented!!!!

From Wiki:
In 1968, Dr. Spencer Silver, a chemist at 3M in the United States, accidentally developed a “low-tack”, reusable, pressure sensitive adhesive.[1] For five years, Silver promoted his invention within 3M, both informally and through seminars, but without much success. In 1974, a colleague of his, Art Fry, who had attended one of Silver’s seminars, came up with the idea of using the adhesive to anchor his bookmark in his hymnbook.[2][3] Fry then developed the idea by taking advantage of 3M’s officially sanctioned “permitted bootlegging” policy.[3] 3M launched the product in stores in 1977 in four cities under the name “Press ‘N Peel”, but its results were disappointing.[4][5]A year later, in 1978, 3M issued free samples to residents of Boise, Idaho, and 95 percent of the people who tried them said that they would buy the product.[4] On April 6, 1980, the product debuted in US stores as “Post-It Notes.”[6] In 1981, Post-its were launched in Canada and Europe.[7]

Despite any gag order, you’d think that by now some nurse or night janitor at the hospital/s would have sneaked a peek at the records and told their hairdresser, who told their cousin, who told their dog walker, who told their neighbor, who told their mailman if the big O was born there. There are far too many sources where births are recorded - doctor’s notes, nurse’s notes, various hospital paperwork, hospital billing office, the county clerk

You have a point on the baby showers and friends, but for the medical side, it's a different matter. As a medical person who had to take a course on HIPAA, I can tell you it's not that simple. It doesn't have to go with a gag order, but rather HIPAA law. Any hospital worker of any type is bound by HIPAA, which imposes a big fine and possible prison time for release of Protected Health Information.

Further, the information won't just be lying around, easy to access. If records from 1961 are still retained, they will be paper and stored offsite (cheaper than expensive hospital space) in a secured facility. Anyone wanting access will have to go through an administrative procedure and leave a trail. Hospitals are absolutely paranoid about violating HIPAA law.

You have a point on the baby showers and friends, but for the medical side, it’s a different matter. As a medical person who had to take a course on HIPAA, I can tell you it’s not that simple. It doesn’t have to go with a gag order, but rather HIPAA law. Any hospital worker of any type is bound by HIPAA, which imposes a big fine and possible prison time for release of Protected Health Information.

Further, the information won’t just be lying around, easy to access. If records from 1961 are still retained, they will be paper and stored offsite (cheaper than expensive hospital space) in a secured facility. Anyone wanting access will have to go through an administrative procedure and leave a trail. Hospitals are absolutely paranoid about violating HIPAA law.

To back up what Sometime Lurker is saying, “Octomom’s” hospital got fined a cool quarter of a million for state privacy law violations of her birth record privacy.The Feds could impose HIPAA fines and prison terms on top of the state penalties.

The California Department of Public Health has fined Bellflower Hospital in Los Angeles County $250,000 for numerous violations of the privacy of Nadya Suleman, the mother of octuplets.

The fine is the maximum under privacy legislation enacted last year in California. The hospital, part of Oakland-based Kaiser Permanente, is the first organization to be fined under the new laws. The department assessed the fine after determining the hospital failed to prevent unauthorized access to medical records. “This fine should be a reminder that there are consequences for violations of medical privacy,” Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) said in a statement.

All total, 21 employees and two physicians, some from other Kaiser facilities, improperly accessed Suleman’s medical records. The organization in March fired 15 employees and disciplined eight others.

California Senate Bill 541, enacted last fall, authorizes fines against health facilities for privacy breaches. Companion legislation signed at the same time, AB 211, authorizes fines against individuals. It also authorizes referral of licensed practitioners to appropriate licensing boards.

Text of the bills is available at leginfo.ca.gov. Click on Prior Session, and then click on the Chaptered version of the bills.

Yes... that is the article I was referring to....

Directly from the article:

From extremely high and very credible sources within the Judicial system, it has been reported that Obama and his legal team lost their arguments to have this case dismissed. The Court heard the applicable arguments from each side and held, in short form; the Obama did not meet the residency requirements as set forth in the Constitutional of the United States of America. A preliminary vote in favor of the Plaintiff was taken, with Associate Justice Elena Kagan not voting due to her previous political relationship and involvement with Obama's birth certification issues.

The Supreme Court is holding on to the decision and will not publish its decision for the sake of the American political process. What does this mean and why would they choose this path?

However, this article appears to STAND ALONE!

Why no other mention of this if it is credible?
What the hell is going on?

Why no other mention of this if it is credible? What the hell is going on?

I cant' vouch for it that it's credible!

However, one would think it's very strange that every single records possible for the pResident in the Whit-Hut has been sealed like a can of tuna in olive oil. We do NOT know anything about this "plant" that purportedly is dismantling our country DOWN to a Marxist/Islamic country. UK media just revealed he secretly is behind the "uprising" aka Islamic Brotherhood takeover in Egypt, hmmm!!

Then again if you start peeling the "Onion" it becomes a total Constitutional crisis and mess that we've never experienced before, involving enablers and high ranker from both parties who will do the utmost to protect themselves and sweep it under the rug. It's like a "Titanic" on collision course and ALL its "passengers" will go down with the ship launched by outside chess players. We certainly live in some very interesting times!!!

>>> I cant’ vouch for it that it’s credible!

Well, We DO KNOW that SCOTUS heard the case on the 11th.

1. If SCOTUS had ruled in favor of Obama, or had they dismissed the case, the media would have been ALL OVER IT!

2. If SCOTUS had ruled in favor of the plaintiff, the alternative media would have been all over it!

3. So what we have now is SCOTUS unable to rule (or publish its ruling) for national security reasons.

Is this where we are now??? SCOTUS cannot rule against or for the plaintiff for fear of what will happen???

IS THAT THEIR JOB?????

Why havn’t we heard anything from the plaintiff about the case???... Are they under a gag order?

Or is it as the article suggests that SCOTUS has instructed the president to resign under other false pretense?

I can understand the president, media, and congressmen playing hush-hush... but not SCOTUS. Who holds them accountable?

Even more recent hospital firings for inappropriate accessing of records:

University Medical Center in Tucson has fired three clinical support staff members and a contracted nurse for “inappropriately accessing confidential medical records,” the hospital reported on its website Wednesday. The records were related to Saturday’s shootings at a Tucson supermarket that killed six and wounded 13 — including U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D- AZ). “We are not aware of any confidential patient information being released publicly,” the hospital said in a statement.

Note that in this case no information was released, the employees were fired merely for looking. If information was released, the employees would have faced prison time under HIPAA

Those who think medical workers can casually access medical information and pass it along think in preHIPAA terms. Heck, I have had bureaucratic problems getting information from a paper chart that's only 4 years old, and I was treating the patient involved.

I figure the birth cert is the pry bar to let loose all the other documents.

I would hope the Republican sec'ies of state in the various states will grow a pair this year and make it clear that Obama will not be on the ballot in their States in 2012 if he pulls that stunt that he did with Hawaii again.

The problem as I see it is John Boehner and the established RNC game of cashing every political chip they ever get for small-change favors like tax breaks for various industries.

Another FReeper asserted it, and I really think he put his finger on something, that the GOP has been dedicated to Old Money and the Fortune 500, and to this end has cashed every political advantage for tax and regulatory breaks in backroom deals.

Since Reagan left office, only the Neocons and the Rush-and-Newt combination that gave us the Contract have been able to raise the GOP's game.

Ronald Reagan was a great President, but the only reason he got the chance was that Main Street raised him up and he swept to two back-to-back landslide victories. The Republican Party and RNC never wanted him, or any of his policies. Look what Poppy Bush and Dick Cheney did to the military, the minute they got into office. Shrub, too, embarked on the same course in 2001, and was only reversed by 9/11.

The Tea Party is the new Contract, and I hope they can raise their game and expand their agenda beyond the narrow taxes-and-government dyad on which they've heretofore concentrated.

Why so narrow a focus for the Tea Party? I wonder at that, and whether backstairs RiNO influence is again "turning off" social-conservative themes and support.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.