Another Barack Obama Birth Certificate Case Heads To U.S. Supreme Court...

RedCounty ^ | 12/7/08 | Matt Bruce

[pissant]

Press Release: Lightfoot v Bowen...

Mission Viejo, Ca. (NS/OrlyTaitz) -

Let me first start by saying I recieved a phonecall from Attorney Dr. Orly Taitz who will be in Washington, DC Monday December the 8th to file papers about her lawsuit which involves Barack Obama and his birth certificate...

On December 2nd a Petition for an extraordinary Writ of Mandamus was filed in the Supreme Court of California. This petition (as seen in the attachment) states that Mr. Obama has not proven his "natural born citizen" status and cannot be sworn as a president of the United States and the commander in Chief. There are 7 plaintiffs in this case and they include Vice Presidential candidate for Ron Paul, on the ballot in CA, Ms Gail Lightfoot, 4 electors and two registered voters...

A number of plaintiffs in this action are veterans and former servicemen, that are concerned about a prospect of Mr Obama becoming the Commander in Chief of the US army, without providing any information, as to his citizenship at birth and currently, particularly citizenship of Indonesia, Kenya and Great Britain (Kenya was a British colony in 1961, at the time of Mr. Obama's birth) without providing his immigration records, passports or even as much as the original birth certificate from Hawaii, that is supposed to show the name of the hospital and the name and the signature of the doctor, that can be verified against the vital records from the hospital, Within two days of filing on Friday 12.05.08. at 9:45 PM, the Supreme court of California has issued a denial, that will allow the attorney on the case, Ms. Orly Taitz, an Application for Emergency Stay in the Supreme Court of the United States as early as Monday, the 8Th of December. The case will be reviewed by the Supreme Court Judge Anthony Kennedy...

PDF file of the petition can be found on:

http://drorly.blogspot.com/...

More information on the case will be provided at the press conference at the National Press Club in the Washington DC, to be held on 12.08.08. at 1:30 Eastern time...

Ms. Taitz is also one of two attorneys, representing Ambassador Alan Keyes et all against Ms. Bowen, CA Secretary of State et all. This case will be heard in CA Superior court prior to the Certification of votes...

(pdf file of Keyes v Bowen is also on the drorly.blogspot.com)...

Ms. Taitz has also requested that any supporters of this issue that can present at the National Press Club in Washington, DC please show up to show their support of finding out the truth once and for all about Barack Obama being 'eligible' and meeting the Constitutional requirements required to be our next President...

Orly Taitz, Esq...

26302 La Paz ste 211 Mission Viejo, Ca 92691

To hear more, including interviews about the Obama birth certificate case, go to:

http://thecaptainsamerica.com

[HighlyOpinionated]

UNCTIOUS

Bland; sometimes, insincerely suave or fervid.

Choose a few of these . . . I needed an “un” word and recall my Mom using this when she ran out of long words to bless me out with.

Related Words
Pecksniffian, Tartuffian, Tartuffish, adipose, adulatory, affected, bland, blandishing, blarneying, blubbery, buttery, butyraceous, cajoling, canting, chrismal, chrismatory, complimentary, courtierly, courtly, disarming, fair-spoken, false, fat, fatty, fawning, fine-spoken, flattering, fulsome, glib, goody, goody-goody, greasy, gushing, holier-than-thou, honey-mouthed, honey-tongued, honeyed, hypocritic, hypocritical, ingratiating, insincere, insinuating, lardaceous, lardy, mealymouthed, mucoid, obsequious, oily, oily-tongued, oleaginous, oleic, pharisaic, pharisean, pietistic, pious, rich, sanctified, sanctimonious, sebaceous, self-righteous, simon-pure, sleek, slick, slimy, slippery, slobbery, smarmy, smooth, smooth-spoken, smooth-tongued, smug, sniveling, soapy, soft-soaping, soft-spoken, suave, suave-spoken, suety, sycophantic, tallowy, unguent, unguentary, unguentous, wheedling

http://www.webster-dictionary.net/definition/Unctuous

[Cheerio]

Thus, they are saying “WE are the law because WE have the mobs”.

I believe it was Senator Mel Martinez who said ....."The District Court dismissed Mr. Berg's suit and held that the question of Obama's citizenship is not a matter for a court to decide. The court further noted that voters, not courts, should decide whether a particular presidential candidate is qualified to hold office. Presidential candidates are vetted by voters at least twice - first in the primary elections and again in the general election. President-Elect Obama won the Democratic Party's nomination after one of the most fiercely contested presidential primaries in American history. And, he has now been duly elected by the majority of voters in the United States. Throughout both the primary and general election, concerns about Mr. Obama's birthplace were raised. The voters have made clear their view that Mr. Obama meets the qualifications to hold the office of President."

The voters did no such thing. The voters made their selection from the candidates placed before them, assuming that the party and officials had certified their qualifications before placing them on the ballot.

[bvw]

Originial list "illegal, unlawful, ineligible, and unctious"

I agree with ab alex that that phrasing doesn't ring right. "Unctuous" is not a "un" word for one reason, and even if you attempted a poetic twist by using a "un" word that wasn't really, you'd have to go longer in the pattern of "i-word, u-word" to establish the pattern first.

For example "illegal, unlawful, improper, unworthy, ineligible and awfully unctuous". There I stressed both the word "unctuous" and the "uh" sound "uhw"-ful, "uhn"-tuous. The use of the root word awe is also a suggestion to the reader to interpret the "unctuous" in its false piety sense -- that of someone who feels themselves "self-anointed." In the Roman Catholic tradition "extreme unction" is last rites -- an anointing with oil of and a blessing.

[real_patriotic_american]

I’m predicting that there will be some earth shattering rulings coming from the courts (and Electoral College). Obama could be on his way to DQ.

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

[Iowan]

Many thanks, LucyT

Another BC case is great news!!

Save the Constitution Ping.

[Iowan]

The posts regarding the 1961 Hawaiian newspaper are on the Long thread.

Chief Engineer, do you have the exact post number where they are located?

Ping

[Lmo56]

I believe it was Senator Mel Martinez who said .....”The District Court dismissed Mr. Berg’s suit and held that the question of Obama’s citizenship is not a matter for a court to decide. The court further noted that voters, not courts, should decide whether a particular presidential candidate is qualified to hold office. Presidential candidates are vetted by voters at least twice - first in the primary elections and again in the general election. President-Elect Obama won the Democratic Party’s nomination after one of the most fiercely contested presidential primaries in American history. And, he has now been duly elected by the majority of voters in the United States. Throughout both the primary and general election, concerns about Mr. Obama’s birthplace were raised. The voters have made clear their view that Mr. Obama meets the qualifications to hold the office of President.”

The voters did no such thing. The voters made their selection from the candidates placed before them, assuming that the party and officials had certified their qualifications before placing them on the ballot.

***

I cannot believe that ANYONE, much less Mel Martinez, said such tripe ...

I guess by HIS reasoning, if the citizens of the United States felt that the income tax was unconstitutional then they could abolish it ...

Sheeeeeeesh !!!

[Cheerio]

I guess by HIS reasoning, if the citizens of the United States felt that the income tax was unconstitutional then they could abolish it ...

Wasn't it Harry 'the body' Reed that said "We have a completely voluntary income tax system in America"? Why is the most feared agency in the entire Fed Govt? Paying income tax in America is Voluntary

One really has to question the average intellect of the Dem contingent up there in D.C.

[Centurion2000]

THIS one .. with 4 electors and a candidate? That’s the one the SC wants.

[Centurion2000]

I can only surmise that it is being done this way by the lefties to make a very clear lesson to the rest of the county: we control the mobs and those mobs will “go jihad” in your streets and towns if you dare try to enforce this very basic constitutional provision.

I forgot, what do we have? We have all the ....... crud I forget .... hmm, it's some other four letter word besides MOBS ... starts with a G.

[Polarik]

"Unctious?" As in "oily?" Or as in "obsequious, servile?"

I vote for "odious" and "noxious."

[Lmo56]

Wasn’t it Harry ‘the body’ Reed that said “We have a completely voluntary income tax system in America”? Why is the most feared agency in the entire Fed Govt? Paying income tax in America is Voluntary

***

I’ll be sure to mention what Harry said to the IRS agents when they are taking me off to prison for not paying my taxes ...

[Chief Engineer]

Sorry I don’t have the exact number but an easir way is to go to

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=SPECIALOBAMA08

then under the “Homecoming” category click the first story and you can see a scanned full page which the birth announcement appeared in.

Sorry for the delay I was caught up in my fruitless search tonight!

[CottonBall]

Sounds like you’re advocating ignoring the Constitutional requirements for president.

Surely, one or more presidential elects has had to prove compliance with Constitutional requirements. Otherwise, there’s no point even having them.

[Kevmo]

Does that make 6 in front of the supremes now? I’ve lost count.

[Lmo56]

Sounds like you’re advocating ignoring the Constitutional requirements for president.

Surely, one or more presidential elects has had to prove compliance with Constitutional requirements. Otherwise, there’s no point even having them.

***

Ya’d think ...

Actually, the Constitution provides:

Article I, Section 8: Powers of Congress

“To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”

HOWEVER:

There is NOTHING in:

United States Code, Title III, Chapter I: Presidential Elections and Vacancies

that mandates verification of candidate’s eligibility (although it SHOULD). Congress dropped the ball on this ...

STILL:

The 10th Amendment of the Constitution provides:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

This seems to suggest that the States have the power to legislate adequate methods of eligibility verification - some have, some have not ... AND, if the States DO NOT have adequate methods of eligibility verification, OR DO NOT execute them, if they do - then the power to do so rests with the People.

You may wonder the reasoning behind this ...

The Declaration of Independence states:

” ... We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed ...”

AND:

The 9th Amendment provides:

“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

The Declaration states that the Constitution is subject to the “consent of the governed” and the Constitution declares that there are OTHER rights invested in the People that ARE NOT enumerated in the Constitution. The Constitution further states that powers NOT delegated to and NOT prohibited by the Constitution are “reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”.

When the Constitution does NOT specify eligibility verification, nor does codified U.S. law, nor does State law (or if it does, it is not executed properly), then the People OUGHT to have the right to verify eligibility ...

[Lmo56]

Does that make 6 in front of the supremes now? I’ve lost count.

***

and many more to come ...

[HighlyOpinionated]

For example "illegal, unlawful, improper, unworthy, ineligible and awfully unctuous". There I stressed both the word "unctuous" and the "uh" sound "uhw"-ful, "uhn"-tuous.

Alrighty then, thanks for the poetry and English lesson. I unctiously await my next attempt at alliteration. Just kidding about the unctious part..

[seekthetruth]

FROM Leo http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/

DONOFRIO APPLICATION DENIED - WROTNOWSKI APPLICATION STILL PENDING
Posted in Uncategorized on December 8, 2008 by naturalborncitizen
My application was denied. The Honorable Court chose not to state why.

Wrotnowksi v. Connecticut Secretary of State is still pending as an emergency application resubmitted to the Honorable Associate Justice Antonin Scalia as of last Tuesday. I worked extensively on that application and it includes a more solid brief and a less treacherous lower Court procedural history.

After six days, it’s interesting that Scalia neither denied it nor referred it to the full Court.

My case may have suffered from the NJ Appellate Division Judge having incorrectly characterized my original suit as a “motion for leave to appeal” rather than the “direct appeal” that it actually was. On Dec 21 I filed official Judicial misconduct charges with the NJ Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct, and I updated SCOTUS about that by a letter which is part of SCOTUS Docket as of Dec. 22. The NJ Appellate Divison official case file is fraudulent.

On the chance that SCOTUS was looking at both my case and Cort’s case, I must stress that Cort’s case does not have the same procedural hang up that mine does. It may be that without a decision on the Judicial misconduct allegation correcting the NJ Appellate Division case file, SCOTUS might have been in the position of not being able to hear my case as it would appear that my case was not before them on the proper procedural grounds.

I did file a direct appeal under the proper NJ Court rules, but the lower Court judge refused to acknowledge that and if his fraudulent docketing was used by SCOTUS they would have a solid procedural basis to throw mine out.

I don’t know if it’s significant that Cort’s case was not denied at the same time as mine. His case argues the same exact theory - that Obama is not a natural born citizen because he was a British citizen at birth.

All eyes should now be closely watching US Supreme Court Docket No. 08A469, Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz.

If Cort’s application is also denied then the fat lady can sing. Until then, the same exact issue is before SCOTUS as was in my case. Cort’s application before SCOTUS incorporates all of the arguments and law in mine, but we improved on the arguments in Cort’s quite a bit as we had more time to prepare it.

I was in a rush to get mine to SCOTUS before election day, which I did do on Nov. 3.

Cort’s case has a much cleaner lower court procedural history.

I’m not trying to play with people’s minds here. SCOTUS has not updated Cort’s docket and until they do there can be no closure. I was expecting, if they didn’t grant certiorari, that they would deny both cases at the same time so as to provide closure to the underlying issue. I hate to read tea leaves, but Cort’s application is still pending. That’s all we can really say with any certainty.