Posted on 10/25/2008 3:52:37 PM PDT by Danae
Obama is "NOT" qualified to be President of the United States Lawsuit Against Obama Dismissed from Philadelphia Federal Court
For Immediate Release: - 10/25/08 - Contact Info at end. UPDATE: Ruling attached at end. It's a really poor copy, but it is all we have for the moment. Willl put up a better copy when we get one.
(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 10/25/08) - Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States, announced today that he is immediately appealing the dismissal of his case to the United States Supreme Court. The case is Berg v. Obama, No. 08-cv-04083.
Berg said, "I am totally disappointed by Judge Surrick's decision and, for all citizens of the United States, I am immediately appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court.
This is a question of who has standing to uphold our Constitution. If I don't have standing, if you don't have standing, if your neighbor doesn't have standing to question the eligibility of an individual to be President of the United States - the Commander-in-Chief, the most powerful person in the world - then who does?
So, anyone can just claim to be eligible for congress or the presidency without having their legal status, age or citizenship questioned.
According to Judge Surrick, we the people have no right to police the eligibility requirements under the U.S. Constitution.
What happened to ‘...Government of the people, by the people, for the people,...’ Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address 1863.
We must legally prevent Obama, the unqualified candidate, from taking the Office of the Presidency of the United States,” Berg said.
Our website obamacrimes.com now has 71.8 + million hits. We are urging all to spread the word of our website – and forward to your local newspapers and radio and TV stations.
Berg again stressed his position regarding the urgency of this case as, “we” the people, are heading to a “Constitutional Crisis” if this case is not resolved forthwith.
* * For copies of all Court Pleadings, go to obamacrimes.com
# # #
Philip J. Berg, Esquire 555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12 Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531 Cell (610) 662-3005 (610) 825-3134 (800) 993-PHIL [7445] Fax (610) 834-7659 philjberg@obamacrimes.comThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Yesterday I drove around in our immidiate neighborhood. 15 nobama sign vs 1 one McCain. People are scared, I did not put up any sign for same reason living in a mixed (most black) development!!!
For every office!
Why would you be hearing that? I find it highly unlikely the Supreme Court is going hear this case. I think Obama doesn’t deserve to be President based on his policy views, that should be enough for McCain to win. If someone can come up with concrete evidence that he is not a citizen, that would be great, Berg has yet to come through.
I get your point but who took McCain to court to prove he was natural born and how come he/she had standing?
Fantastic! Our efforts are paying off!
“Are you starting to get the feeling that this whole thing has been a big set up and has been planned for years as a Coup d’état by Obama and his thugs, and is using the Presidential election as a front and ruse to achieve their ends ? “
No but he did hang around with Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn and he was for the overthrow of Democracy. I just don’t want to see an America that my kids don’t have the rights that we have today. Nothing that Obama stands for has anything to do with freedom. His message is enslaving and he wants to dismantle the rights and freedoms that this nation has stood for since its founding.
It didn’t help his case that when Berg filed his appeal he was dressed as Bozo the Clown and squirted the court clerk with his seltzer bottle...
I think Mccain does have standing, even though the election hasn’t happened yet. But damages are obviously more apparent after the election if he’s defeated.
Again, though, McCain’s house in these matters is made of glass, so he’s not gonna throw stones.
What really seems to be the reason that courts try to avoid getting involved in this stuff is that it all concerns the operations of the executive branch(separation of powers), and furthermore the judiciary appears to be insisting that the voters are in the ones in the best position to vet and not elect anyone who is ineligible.
The courts also seem to say that nobody would be disenfranchised by having an ineligible candidate on the ballot, because they can always write-in someone of their choice!
I don’t agree with such a chickenshit attitude on the part of the judges, but heck I’m just a common slug.
VERY well said!
BRAVO!!!
Do we have standing to vote???
A LOT of cases will get overturned because of it. Its really a big deal and I think an uphill battle. There is a LOT of inertia on this one, and not in in our or Berg's favor. It will take a huge Outcry from us, the PEOPLE to get it changed.
Trained as a lawyer, Jefferson was a great writer but never a good speaker or advocate and never comfortable in court. He believed that judges should be technical specialists but should not set policy. He denounced the 1801 Supreme Court ruling in Marbury v. Madison as a violation of democracy, but he did not have enough support in Congress to propose a Constitutional amendment to overturn it. He continued to oppose the doctrine of judicial review:
“ To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem [good justice is broad jurisdiction], and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.[46]
” Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual. Thomas Jefferson
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. Thomas Jefferson
The case was to try to prove that McCain was not natural born, and it was thrown out for lack of standing.
Not after January 21, 2009 as Obama will take that and our Fox News away.
Are you enlisting people or drafting??
Who HAS standing?
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.