Tag Archives: Supreme Court

Natural Born Citizen for Dummies

[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGJdN2KPf0g]

H/T My best bud, Kelleigh!

~LTG

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Agenda 21- David vs Goliath Test Case?

High court agrees to decide, case goes to the supremes this october

[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IrTh74HuGE]

The Backstory:  Priest Lake Couple Battles The EPA Over Property Rights

PRIEST LAKE, Idaho – In November of 2007 officials from the Environmental Protection Agency told Mike and Chantelle Sackett they violated the Clean Water Act by filling in their Priest Lake property without first obtaining a permit because their property is on a federal wetland. The EPA issued a compliance order requiring the Sacketts to remove the fill material and restore the land to its original condition. The Sacketts say they were completely blind sided.

“I started going around and trying to do some background work,” said Chantelle Sackett. “And I figured out there is nothing disclosed anywhere that it is a wetlands, except what they say that it’s in a wetland inventory.” Continue reading

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Retired CIA Agents Say Obama’s Birth Certificate is Fake

On June 13, 2011, on the Terry Lakin Action Fund radio show, retired Major General (and Fox News contributor) Paul Vallely confirmed what we already know.

Gen. Vallely said this: [beginning at the 5:35 mark]

“I’ve had retired CIA Agents and Investigators look at Obama’s birth certificate and 10 out of 10 say it is fraudulent.”

[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTMv2XAUHP4&feature=player_embedded]

Vallely also said this, beginning at around the 13:55 mark,

“[Obama eligibility] is probably the biggest fraud perpetuated on the American people ever in our history, at the highest level of government…. Obama was not vetted properly…on his eligibility…his college records…Social Security…his background, his life…. I hold Congress responsible…[and] the states validating candidates….

There was an organization funded by one individual named George Soros who wanted to insure Barack Obama become chief executive of the United States and take this country down a different path, a socialist path….

All of those things we’ve said and observed prior to the [2008] election have now come true, but yet we have a Congress, we have a Supreme Court that will not take the tack…. I am sure the FBI did not investigate Barack Obama….”

H/t beloved fellow Tina.

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

California Ordered to Cut Prisoner Population

"Cruel and unusual punishment"

Justices, 5-4, Tell California to Cut Prisoner Population

The New York Times reported today on the U.S. Supreme Court‘s decision to order the State of California to cut its prisoner population.  Apparently the conditions in the overcrowded prisons are so bad they violate the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.  The Court ordered the state to reduce its prison population by more than 30,000 inmates.
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority in a 5-to-4 decision that broke along ideological lines, described a prison system that failed to deliver minimal care to prisoners with serious medical and mental health problems and produced “needless suffering and death.” Shocker: The court’s more liberal members — Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — joined Justice Kennedy’s opinion.
Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel A. Alito Jr. filed vigorous dissents. Justice Scalia called the order affirmed by the majority “perhaps the most radical injunction issued by a court in our nation’s history.” Justice Alito said “the majority is gambling with the safety of the people of California.”
The picture above was part of the majority opinion that showed “cruel and unusual punishment”. The order requires state officials to reduce the prison population to 110,000, which is 137.5 percent of the system’s capacity. There have been more than 160,000 inmates in the system in recent years, and there are now more than 140,000.
The ruling did not dictate how California should comply with the order — whether it should release inmates, transfer them out-of-state to for-profit prisons, change its parole rules, or take other actions.
Given the fact that the State of California is broke, you may be seeing a lot of these inmates released.  I’d rather these inmates remained locked up in their “horrific” conditions than be released to do more harm to citizens. Just another reason for me not to go to California (Sorry Eowyn!). 
DCG

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Obama Eligibility Is Now a Conspiracy


A conspiracy is a secret agreement by two or more persons to perform an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.
Somehow, conspiracy theories have become synonymous with kooky nutcases, sneered at by the MSM. But there are real conspiracies, for example, the assassination of Julius Caesar, the Dreyfus Affair, Nixon’s Watergate scandal, and the Iran-Contra Affair.
It is now incontrovertible that there is a massive conspiracy about Obama’s eligibility. Every branch and institution of our government is covering up for Obama.
First, it was the Democratic Party at both the state and national levels who looked the other way in 2008, choosing not to vett Obama’s birth documents to ensure he indeed is constitutionally eligible for the presidency. This was followed by the McCain campaign and the Republican Party acting like the eunuchs that they are in not questioning Obama’s eligibility.
Then, it was Congress that failed to screen his eligibility, using the lame excuse that no law requires them to do so, conveniently forgetting that the Constitution itself is the highest law of the land.

Next, the courts failed us. Beginning in 2008 even before Obama was elected president, American citizens brought one lawsuit after another challenging Obama’s constitutional eligibility. But judge after judge in state after state refused to even grant a hearing to the lawsuits, using the lame excuse that the litigants “lacked standing” and in so doing, effectively said that the constitutional eligibility of the President of the United States is not a matter of concern or interest for We the People.
Last Monday, November 29, 2010, the judicial branch of the American government completed its surrender to Obama when the Supreme Court denied the Kerchner v Obama’s petition for a writ of certiorari (translated into ordinary English: SCOTUS refused to review/hear the case). Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., the lead plaintiff, is a retired Commander of the US Naval Reserve.
Then there’s the United States Army. It, too, capitulated to the Mighty Obama when the top military brass decided to court martial decorated (Bronze Star) Army surgeon Lt. Col. Terry Lakin who defied his deployment orders on the grounds of the dubious constitutional eligibility and authority of the top of the command chain — his Commander In Chief. To complete the Army’s self-castration, the military judge in Lakin’s court martial, Denise Lind, refused to grant the defense’s discovery request of Obama’s concealed documents (original long-form birth certificate, kindergarten and college records…), thereby making impossible Lakin’s defense.
The latest government agency to join the Conspiracy of Silence and Coverup is the Social Security Administration.
Last May, private investigators discovered that not only are multiple social security numbers associated with Barack Obama (when we are all supposed to have only one number each), the social security number that Obama is presently using is one that’s set aside for residents of the state of Connecticut — a state in which Obama has never lived and with which he has no association. As I explained in my post of May 13, 2010, Obama Uses Dead Connecticuter’s Social Security Number“:

The first three (3) digits of a person’s social security number are determined by the ZIP code of the mailing address shown on the application for a social security number. (See Q. 18 of “Frequently Asked Questions” on the Social Security Administration’s website, HERE.) Connecticut’s SS numbers begin with 040, 041, 042, 043, 044, 045, 046, 047, 048, or 049. Obama’s SS number begins with 042.
The most plausible explanation is that Obama’s Connecticut SS number once belonged to a Connecticuter, born in 1890, who is now diseased. This means that Obama is using that number illicitly because the SS administration says a SS number is never re-issued or re-used. (See Q. 20 of “Frequently Asked Questions” on the Social Security Administration’s website, HERE.)
Furthermore, since Obama’s first job was in a Baskin-Robbins ice cream shop in Oahu, Hawaii, when he was 14 or 15, he would have obtained a SS number then as a Hawaii resident. Hawaii’s SS numbers begin with the prefix 575 or 576. This means that he has used at least TWO different SS numbers, which is against the law, because the law says a person can have only one SS number in a lifetime.

Now, the Social Security Administration is introducing a new policy in an attempt to conceal, obfuscate, and evade Obama’s curious Connecticut social security number. Jerome Corsi of WorldNetDaily reports on November 30, 2010: 

Without addressing questions regarding the apparent assignment of a Connecticut-based Social Security number to President Barack Obama, who reportedly spent his growing-up years in Hawaii and Indonesia, the federal agency now is moving quickly to make certain such questions never come up again about political figures.
The administration is starting down a path that is intended to randomize all future Social Security numbers – a move critics allege is designed to make it impossible to tell where any future Social Security number is issued.
In a notice currently published on the Social Security Administration website, the SSA announces Social Security numbers issued in the future will be randomized starting on or about June 25, 2011.
A spokeswoman in the Social Security press office confirmed to WND the plan is moving forward.
“In an effort to increase the number of Social Security numbers (SSNs) available for use by the Social Security Administration (SSA) and in order to help reduce identity theft, SSA plans to change the methodology by which SSNs are issued. In June 2011, we will begin to issue SSNs randomly, regardless of the address on the application. As a result, we will have the ability to continue to issue SSNs in all areas of the country for many more years without having to make additional changes,” said Trish Nicasio….
Ohio licensed private investigator Susan Daniels says the government policy change is an attempt to cover up in retrospect the controversy over Obama’s Social Security number by making it impossible in the future to trace where a Social Security applicant lived at the time the person applied for a Social Security number.
“Now all the Social Security Administration has to say is that they have been experimenting with randomized numbers for some time,” Daniels said. “How would anybody prove differently?”
She continued, “With Obama, there is obviously a case of fraud going on here. In 15 years of having a private investigator’s license in Ohio, I’ve never seen the Social Security Administration make a mistake of issuing a Connecticut Social Security number to a person who lived in Hawaii. There is no family connection that would appear to explain the anomaly.”

The White House has refused to answer queries about Obama’s social security number.
If Diogenes were alive today, he’d be consigned to an eternal and fruitless wandering in his search for just one honest man in the U.S. government. Sadly, there is none.
H/t beloved fellows Tina & FS.
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

New Jersey Schools Ban "Silent Night"


At the same time as public schools in Cambridge, Massachusetts, will close down one day a year as a Muslim holiday, “Silent Night” and other “religious” Christian songs will be banned at holiday concerts in New Jersey’s South Orange-Maplewood schools.
Jeanette Rundquist of the Star-Ledger reports on October 4, 2010 that the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up an appeal of the ban by deciding not to hear the petition brought by Michael Stratechuk, a parent who sued the school district in 2004. The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals had upheld the ban last year, and Stratechuk attempted to take the case to the higher court.
Stratechuk’s attorney, Robert J. Muise of the Thomas More Law Center in Ann Arbor, Mich., said: “There’s nothing more, short of the school district changing its policy. There’s no other legal avenue to take. I’m sure he will be disappointed, but he put up the fight, and I think it was the right fight.”
Stratechuk, a musician whose two sons were in 7th and 9th grades when he brought the case, could not be reached for comment.
In a statement, school Superintendent Brian Osborne said “We have always felt our policy was constitutional and are pleased with the outcome” and that the policy “was adopted to promote an inclusive environment for all students in our school community.” Blah, blah, blah.
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

If Military Won't, The People Will Remove Obama

I’m grateful to my friend, Mark McGrew, for allowing Fellowship of the Minds to re-publish his outstanding article. Highly recommend!
P.S. I recently asked him why he publishes in Pravda. It was as I had thought: When Mark wrote his first article about Obama during the 2008 campaign season, he had sent it to every major newspaper in America. They all turned him down. Then he sent it to the major regional and local papers. They all turned him down as well. So he turned to FOREIGN news organs — and Pravda immediately snapped it up.
Sad commentary on the American media. What good is the First Amendment  when the press-media abuse their constitutional freedom by being so politically partisan and compromised that it censors itself?
~Eowyn

American military officers against Obama
By Mark S. McGrew
October 13, 2010
41981.jpegLieutenant Colonel Terrence Lakin, Major General Carroll D. Childers, Captain Neil B. Turner, Commander Charles Kerchner, Lt. Commander Walter Fitzpatrick, Captain Connie Rhodes, Lieutenant Colonel David Earl Graef, Major Stefan Frederick Cook, Paul Vallely, Major General (Ret), US Army, Jim Cash, Brigadier General (Ret), USAF, Harry Riley, Colonel (Ret), US Army, Michael A. Trudell, Captain (Ret), USN, Harry Soloman, Lieutenant Colonel (Ret), USAF, Carmen A. Reynolds, Lieutenant Colonel (Ret), USAF, Debra A. Gunnoe, Lieutenant Colonel (Ret), USAF, Greg Hollister, Lieutenant Colonel (Ret), USAF, Richard C. Morris, Lieutenant Colonel (Ret), US Army, William Harker, Commander (Ret), USN, Bill Little, Commander (Ret), USN. John Johnson, 1st Lieutenant (Ret), USAF, Luther B. Neff, Captain (Ret), USAF, Fred Herndon, Captain (Ret), USAF, Jerry Curry Army Major General (Retired), General Thomas McInerney.
All of these people are either engaged in a legal action against Obama or have publicly expressed their support for people in legal actions against Obama.
What motivates these people to risk their lives, their freedom and their fortunes by publicly stating their position against a US President?
It is their sworn duty.
Upon entering the service of the American military, everyone must take this oath:

“I, __________________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God”

The oath of an OFFICER of the United States Armed Forces, is as follows:

“I, __________________, having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of Major do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.”

Notice that for an Officer, there is no “promise to obey the orders of the President”.

This oath is based on Title 5, §3331 of the United States Code:

More can be seen here: https://www.history.army.mil/faq/oaths.htm

The question is: Are these men committing Treason or Mutiny?

Mutiny is described in Merriam Webster’s Dictionary as: Forcible or passive resistance to lawful authority especially concerted revolt (as of a naval crew) against discipline or a superior officer.

And they define Treason as: 1. The betrayal of a trust. 2. The offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance.

IF…Obama is a lawful eligible President or lawful or eligible superior officer, their actions may be construed as Mutiny. IF……Obama is a lawful eligible President and IF he is “the government”, which he is not, then their actions may be construed as Treason.

It is looking more and more that Obama is not a lawful eligible President. And no President is “the government”. “We the People” are THE government. The President is just part time hired help.

Lt. Commander Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III filed a charge of “Treason” against Obama in Federal Court in Tennessee.

Commander Charles Kerchner, through his attorney, Mario Apuzzo, has filed a lawsuit against all of the US Congress, Dick Cheney, Nancy Pelosi and Obama for violating the US Constitution in certifying the Electoral College votes for Obama’s favor.

Lieutenant Colonel Terrence Lakin has refused to be deployed until he sees proof that Obama is an eligible President. He is now being Court Marshaled, with a military Judge telling him that he can not see, nor present evidence pertaining to Obama’s eligibilty to be President, because Colonel Denise Lind ruled, “It may embarrass the President”.

Of the 100 or so legal actions against Obama to prove he is eligible to hold the office of President of The United States, most are dismissed without any trial, without any hearing, without any evidence presented by either side, never being judged on the merits of the case.

Instead, Judge after Judge says, “You don’t have “Standing”. It is none of your business if Obama is eligible or not.”

One Judge’s excuse was, “This has been tweeted and twittered on the Internet”. The Judge knows that the Internet is not a realm of unadulterated truth.

Many of these dozens of cases can be found on

Philip Berg, an attorney in Philadelphia has a case www.ObamaCrimes.com sitting in the US Supreme Court with Justice Thomas and his associates. Orly Taitz, an attorney with several dozen military Plaintiffs has cases https://www.orlytaitzesq.com before the US Supreme Court. Mario Apuzzo’s case https://puzo1.blogspot.com against Congress is now in the Supreme Court after being told his client has no “Standing” to ask if the US Congress is corrupt.
And it is not just legal actions against Obama personally. There are dozens of legal actions against his policies, such as Health Care, closing Chrysler dealerships, Gulf oil spill and many other totally un-American policies. Policies that most Americans were taught are repugnant to a free people.
Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli, on behalf of the Commonwealth of Virginia, filed suit against Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius directly after the Health Care legislation was passed by Congress in March 2010.
20 individual states filed a similar lawsuit led by Attorney General Bill McCollum of Florida. In Attorney General Kenneth Cucinelli’s case, Federal District Court Judge Henry E. Hudson has ordered a Motion questioning the legality of the Health Care Bill because it was signed into law by someone (Obama) who is ineligible to do so. The question of Obama being eligible to be the President is based on Obama’s refusal to provide verification that he is a Natural Born Citizen as required by the US Constitution.
And that question has finally, after dozens of denied legal actions, been made a part of a valid case in Federal Court.
American citizens and military officers from Coast to Coast are told they have “No Standing” to question Obama’s eligibility to be President.

What is this new legal buzzword, “Standing“? According to www.FindLaw.com it is: The status of being qualified to assert or enforce legal rights or duties in a judicial forum because one has a sufficient and protectable interest in the outcome of a justiciable controversy and has suffered or is threatened with actual injury.

According to www.dictionary.law.com “Standing” is: “The right to file a lawsuit or file a petition under the circumstances. A plaintiff will have standing to sue in federal court if a) there is an actual controversy, b) a federal statute gives the federal court jurisdiction, and c) the parties are residents of different states or otherwise fit the constitutional requirements for federal court jurisdiction.”

America is being decimated by a foreigner, acting as a President, and the Federal Judges want to say that an American citizen has no “Standing”?

In the matter of Obama’s eligibility, there:

1. Actual controversy.
2. Federal Statutes do give the federal court jurisdiction.
3. All parties are residents of different states.
4. It does fit the constitutional requirements for federal court jurisdiction.

Consider this: If none of the cases asking Obama to prove he is eligible have “Standing”, why is a Federal Judge and Obama’s Department of Justice allowing 11 foreign Nations to join a lawsuit against the State of Arizona?? NONE of those Nations are… residents of different states and NONE of those Nations has suffered or are threatened with actual injury.

Regarding the current cases pending in the Supreme Court of the United States, US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is on record answering a question about Obama’s eligibility, “We’re evading that one.”

We are witnessing corruption at the highest levels of government. The military officers listed in this report are attempting to correct that corruption.

Is the situation so serious that America may experience a “Military Coup”? Under normal circumstances that would be a delusional consideration. America is not a 3rd World country. Our Constitution allows for a “peaceful revolution” every four years.

But, under present circumstances, with an illegitimate President who has spent nearly $2 million to keep his citizenship secret, with a Congress ignoring Constitutional requirements to certify Obama’s Electoral Votes, with a Department of Justice attacking an individual State attempting to enforce Federal Immigration Law and allowing 11 Nations to join in that attack, with Federal Judges across the country resorting to the illicit reasoning of “Standing” to prohibit questions about Obama’s citizenship, with a Supreme Court whose job it is, to consider cases before them, and instead is proudly “evading that issue”, with certain factions of the military illegally and unconstitutionally attempting to silence any questions of Obama’s eligibility, with record unemployment, with record foreclosures, with record poverty levels, and with Obama going out of his way to insult every World leader he meets, there are only three options to restore the operations of the American government to its rightful owners:

  1. We the People, take to the streets and forcibly remove every anti-American politician and government employee and/or forcibly remove any politician or government employee that the People “perceive” to be anti-American.
  2. The United States Military must do a “surgical strike” to permanently remove the correctly identified anti-American forces in government positions.
  3. Foreign intervention of overwhelming force.

There are no other options. All other options have been exhausted.

In 1934 Colonel Smedley Butler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler was asked by extremely anti-American forces to amass an Armyof 500,000 soldiers and forcefully take over the sitting government, including President Franklin Roosevelt. Then, like now, their own arrogance was their downfall. Who but an idiot would ask the most highly decorated United States Marine Corps Officer in history to use weapons and soldiers to destroy his own government? The same government that granted them the ability to amass the wealth that they could not have acquired in any other Nation or any other time period in history.
Why were those traitors not arrested and executed? Some stories say it is because Franklin Roosevelt, who was a Democrat, did not want to tarnish the reputation of Democrats, being as the conspirators were Democrats.
In the summer prior to the election of Obama, there was perhaps 1 or 2% of the population questioning Obama’s eligibility. Obama said that that issue would go away 2 weeks after he was elected. However, 2 years after that election, over 65% of the American People question his eligibility and that number is growing.
If Obama is not eligible to be President, ALL of his Executive Orders, Laws, Treaties and Agreements can be reneged on by future administrations and by foreign entities. ALL orders being given to the United States military are unlawful orders and no soldier or officer has the duty to obey them. In fact, any and all military personnel who do obey his orders are subject to immense criminal punishment and possibly can be charged with and prosecuted successfully for War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity. Their duty is to not obey unlawful orders.

The vast majority of American citizens, “We the People” are fed up with Obama’s grossly anti-American policies. The vast majority are fed up with major media’s lies and distortions, as evidenced by massive amounts of readers and listeners abandoning the major news sources.

They are sick of billions or trillions of their dollars going to reward the crooked banks and other financial institutions who stole from them to begin with. They are sick of being punished for the crimes of the politician’s friends and campaign donors.

Obama and his supporters are so far detached from reality, they have absolutely no concept of what 100 million angry American’s are capable of inflicting upon them.

IF the military of America does not eliminate the corrupt Obama regime, the American people can and will do to them, far worse that the military would do.

The World has learned the hard way, that when America sneezes, their Nations catch a cold. If hard, fast and brutal remedies are not applied to the Obama Flu virus, America and other Nations will cease to exist as we know them and hundreds of millions of this Earth’s population will die a miserable death, far worse and farther reaching than the Black Plague of the Middle Ages. Poverty kills. Massive poverty kills massively.

In America, the opposing forces are not Liberal vs. Conservative or Right vs. Left or Democrat vs. Republican. The effective forces are only American vs. Anti-American.

If the American forces had one message to deliver to the Anti-American forces, it would be this: “We have been tolerant of your actions. We have been respectful of your Constitutional Right to Free Speech. We have been such, not solely because we are gentle people and respect your Rights, but also, because of our Biblical principles. The Bible says, “Know thine enemy.” How could we have known you if we did not allow you to speak? And this is why you don’t know us and don’t realize what we are capable of, because you have attempted and succeeded in many areas to silence us. In public maybe. And now, the bell can not be un-rung. You have spoken and We the People know you. And you will be destroyed as We the People have destroyed you many times in the history of America.”

Here are some links to just a few of the hundreds, maybe thousands of sites of organizations that are fighting Obama and his policies:

When it is all added up, when it is all understood by the American people, there is one solid truth that will become self evident: The forces controlling Obama can not legally execute us for what we are doing, but We the People can hang them by the neck until dead, for what they have done and are doing.

Mark S. McGrew can be reached at McGrewMX@aol.com. More of his articles can be seen at www.MarkSMcGrew.blogspot.com Please include a link to www.English.Pravda.ru if you republish this article.

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Obama's Post-November Strategy: Rule by Decree

Design by bkeyser: https://www.cafepress.com/RTKArtistry


A decree is a rule of law issued by a head of state, such as a king or queen. In the United States, the executive orders made by the President are decrees. In non-legal English usage, however, “decree” refers to any authoritarian decision and, in this sense, the word carries a decidedly negative connotation.
Rule by decree appears to be the route Obama will take after the expected defeat of Democrats in the upcoming midterm elections on November 2.
Peter Nicholas and Christi Parsons of the Los Angeles Times report on October 6, 2010:

As President Obama remakes his senior staff, he is also shaping a new approach for the second half of his term: to advance his agenda through executive actions he can take on his own, rather than pushing plans through an increasingly hostile Congress.
A flurry of staff departures and promotions is playing out as the White House ends a nearly two-year period of intense legislative activity. Where the original staff was built to give Obama maximum clout in Congress, the new White House team won’t need the same leverage with lawmakers….
Winning passage of legislation wasn’t easy for Obama, even with Democrats in firm control of both houses of Congress. Conditions will get tougher if, as expected, the Republicans pick up seats in the midterm election next month, or possibly take control of Congress.
“Whether or not the Republicans take over majorities in one or both houses, the margins will be so much narrower that the strategy of putting together a Democratic bill and picking off a handful of Republicans to push it over the top won’t be viable anymore,” said William Galston, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.
So the best arena for Obama to execute his plans may be his own branch of government. That means more executive orders, more use of the bully pulpit, and more deployment of his ample regulatory powers and the wide-ranging rulemaking authority of his Cabinet members. “This would fit into the status quo for the White House,” said Brad Dayspring, a spokesman for House Republican whip Eric Cantor of Virginia. “The White House is showing no effort to work with Republicans. It has shown no interest in listening to the American people and has at all costs tried to ram through legislation that was tremendously unpopular.”

Here’s what Wikipedia says about Executive Orders:

U.S. Presidents have issued Executive Orders since 1789, usually to help officers and agencies of the Executive branch manage the operations within the Federal Government itself. Executive orders do have the full force of law since issuances are typically made in pursuance of certain Acts of Congress, some of which specifically delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power or are believed to have their authority for issuances based in a power inherently granted to the Executive by the Constitution.
But it is these cited or perceived justifications made by a President when authoring Executive Orders that have come under criticism for exceeding Executive authority and have been subject to legal proceedings even at various times throughout U.S. history concerning the legal validity or justification behind an order’s issuance.
Although there is no Constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits Executive Orders, there is a vague grant of “executive power” given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 4. At the minimum, most Executive Orders use these Constitutional reasonings as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President’s sworn duties….
Until the 1950s, there were no rules or guidelines outlining what the president could or could not do through an Executive Order. However, the Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) that Executive Order 10340 from President Harry S. Truman placing all steel mills in the country under federal control was invalid because it attempted to make law, rather than clarify or act to further a law put forth by the Congress or the Constitution. Presidents since this decision have generally been careful to cite which specific laws under which they are acting when issuing new Executive Orders.

This means that America is not supine before Obama’s Rule by Decree. He is not king, but an elected official accountable to The People and subject to the Constitution. It will take Congress to challenge his Executive Orders and, eventually, for the Supreme Court — now packed with two Obama appointees puppets — to adjudicate on those orders’ constitutionality. And those two institutions — Congress and SCOTUS — will do what is right only with the insistence of the American people.
All of which means that We the People must remain vigilant even if we win the November elections. Remember what Thomas Jefferson wrote in his letter to Edward Carrington, 1787:

“If once they [the people] become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress, and Assemblies, Judges, and Governors, shall all become wolves.”

H/t beloved fellows FS and Tina.
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Will Supreme Court Confront Obama?

Although this essay by Anthony Martin was published on July 9, 2010, I only just discovered it. Given that it’s now 3 months later and the Supreme Court has done nothing about Obama, I’m dubious about Martin’s prediction of an imminent, if at all, “smack down.” Still, we can pray, can’t we? LOL
H/t Glenn Neal, author of The Second American Revolution.
~Eowyn


Obama being sworn in, again, as POTUS by Chief Justice Roberts.


Sources say smackdown of Obama by Supreme Court may be inevitable

By Anthony G. Martin – Conservative Examiner – July 9, 2010
According to sources who watch the inner workings of the federal government, a smackdown of Barack Obama by the U.S. Supreme Court may be inevitable.
Ever since Obama assumed the office of President, critics have hammered him on a number of Constitutional issues.  Critics have complained that much if not all of Obama’s major initiatives run headlong into Constitutional roadblocks on the power of the federal government. 
Obama certainly did not help himself in the eyes of the Court when he used the venue of the State of the Union address early in the year to publicly flog the Court over its ruling that the First Amendment grants the right to various organizations to run political ads during the time of an election.
The tongue-lashing clearly did not sit well with the Court, as demonstrated by Justice Sam Alito, who publicly shook his head and stated under his breath, ‘That’s not true,’ when Obama told a flat-out lie concerning the Court’s ruling.  
As it has turned out, this was a watershed moment in the relationship between the executive and the judicial branches of the federal government.  Obama publicly declared war on the court, even as he blatantly continued to propose legislation that flies in the face of every known Constitutional principle upon which this nation has stood for over 200 years.
Obama has even identified Chief Justice John Roberts as his number one enemy, that is, apart from Fox News and Rush Limbaugh.  And it is no accident that the one swing-vote on the court, Justice Anthony Kennedy, stated recently that he has no intention of retiring until ‘Obama is gone.’
Apparently, the Court has had enough.
The Roberts Court has signaled, in a very subtle manner, of course, that it intends to address the issues about which Obama critics have been screaming to high heaven. A ruling against Obama on any one of these important issues could potentially cripple the Administration. Such a thing would be long overdue.
First, there is ObamaCare, which violates the Constitutional principle barring the federal government from forcing citizens to purchase something. And no, this is not the same thing as states requiring drivers to purchase car insurance, as some of the intellectually-impaired claim. The Constitution limits FEDERAL government, not state governments, from such things, and further, not everyone has to drive, and thus, a citizen could opt not to purchase car insurance by simply deciding not to drive a vehicle.
In the ObamaCare world, however, no citizen can ‘opt out.’
Second,  sources state that the Roberts court has quietly accepted information concerning discrepancies in Obama’s history that raise serious questions about his eligibility for the office of President. The charge goes far beyond the birth certificate issue. This information involves possible fraudulent use of a Social Security number in Connecticut, while Obama was a high school student in Hawaii.  And that is only the tip of the iceberg.
Third, several cases involving possible criminal activity, conflicts of interest, and pay-for-play cronyism could potentially land many Administration officials, if not the President himself, in hot water with the Court. Frankly, in the years this writer has observed politics, nothing comes close to comparing with the rampant corruption of this Administration, not even during the Nixon years. Nixon and the Watergate conspirators look like choirboys compared to the jokers that populate this Administration.
In addition, the Court will eventually be forced to rule on the dreadful decision of the Obama DOJ to sue the state of Arizona. That, too, could send the Obama doctrine of open borders to an early grave, given that the Administration refuses to enforce federal law on illegal aliens.
And finally, the biggie that could potentially send the entire house of cards tumbling in a free-fall is the latest revelation concerning the Obama-Holder Department of Justice and its refusal to pursue the New Black Panther Party.  The group is caught on tape committing felonies by attempting to intimidate Caucasian voters into staying away from the polls. A whistle-blower who resigned from the DOJ is now charging Holder with the deliberate refusal to pursue cases against Blacks, particularly those who are involved in radical hate-groups, such as the New Black Panthers, who have been caught on tape calling for the murder of white people and their babies.
This one is a biggie that could send the entire Administration crumbling–that is, if the Justices have the guts to draw a line in the sand at the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Be sure to catch my blog at The Liberty Sphere.

Please follow and like us:
error0