About Me

Name: Doug
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Sarah Palin: Does Resigning Make Her a QUITTER?

In these, the early days of the Obama Administration, trying to keep up with current events for the simple purpose of remaining informed has been dizzying. Trying to process all that information and analyze it for commentary is like trying to drink from a fire hose! The swirling vortex of info-speak out there babbles on incoherently; and any story of mass interest goes 24/7 wall-to-wall coverage. It is into that environment that I am reluctantly venturing with my thoughts on Sarah Palin’s surprising announcement that she will not seek re-election as Governor of Alaska – and more surprisingly, that she will not complete her term.

 

The talking heads are split into two camps. The majority presume this is a move toward a 2012 run at the presidency. Their commentaries focus on whether or not the strategy is a good one and helps or hurts such a run. Some call it a “brilliant” strategy. Others declare the action to be political suicide, and pronounce her political future dead or on life support.

The remaining pundits call her “erratic” and a “quitter”. They say she “couldn’t take it”. They accuse her of “taking her marbles and going home”.

It would be easy to get caught up in all this back and forth banter, but instead I will look at Sarah Palin as actually possessing the unconventional leadership that has carried her to national prominence; and try to analyze her actions in light of a broader set of possible motivations than simply a choice between 2012 presidential aspirations or the throwing up of her hands and running away!

Unlike most politicians, who seek office with a sense of self-importance and craft their positions and policies in a way to win votes and retain power… Sarah Palin has approached politics as public service. She has always put principles first and has sought to do what she believes is RIGHT, even if it’s not politically expedient. She stood up against the Old Boys Network in her own party in Alaska and cleaned up corruption. She held politicians and oil companies and others feet to the fire and held them accountable. She acted in the best interest of the people, and not of her political career.

Why would we not presume her to be consistent? Why do we not take her at her word that she is responding to a “higher calling”? Is it possible that she sees a role OUTSIDE of elected office where she believes she can better advance her principles and policies? Is her decision to leave office unreasonable, irrational, or emotionally charged?

A small child who’s losing a game might flip over the gameboard and go home in a huff. That’s immature and inappropriate behavior. But if an adult has had their quotas increased, their pay scale reduced, and feels his employer looks upon him as a greyhound to be run for profit and put down when no longer winning races… is it anything other than reasonable for him to consider quitting and seeking employment elsewhere?

Palin has been subjected to incessant harassment since being named as McCain’s VP running mate. She is not thin-skinned – and she brushed off the criticisms of her throughout the campaign. But since the election she has been targeted by every left leaning loon there is, as she is perceived as a viable threat from the right. The ethics investigations have been nonstop, despite there being no basis for them. The expenses of defending against them have exceeded half a million dollars for a family that is not comprised of old-money bluebloods. Todd and Sarah are people who WORK for their money and don’t have a fortune.

In addition to the COST of dealing with these accusations, they DISTRACT from her ability to advance her programs as Governor. She is hamstrung. Instead of devoting her considerable energies to moving the state forward, she is forced to address these frivolous charges, which consume her time, her energy her money, and state resources as well. This is not a good or effective use of her time in office. She sees it as silly to continue the status quo for another year and a half when she could be doing something else which would contribute to the agenda she believes is important!

Consider the OTHER possibilities! By leaving public office, she is free to pursue any of the following potential courses:

1) Hit the Lecture Circuit. Sarah Palin would be a high-demand speaker who could command significant speaker fees.  She could pay off her legal expenses and begin to amass a significant nest-egg.

2) Media: Is there any doubt that Roger Ailes would be THRILLED to sign her as a “Fox News Contributor”? How about Talk Radio? Imagine the freedom to espouse her views if she had 2-3 hours a day on-air!

3) Writing: Conservative books hit the best-seller list BEFORE they hit the shelves!! Pre-sales of Glenn Beck’s “Common Sense” had it the #1 seller the week BEFORE it was released! When a book comes out by Mark Levin, Newt Gingrich, Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham etc… sales go thru the roof. Is there any doubt Sarah Palin has a story to tell?

4) UNCONVENTIONAL politics: The Republican Party is still trying to define itself. Conservatives are disillusioned with the GOP. Blue Dog Democrats are bewildered by the Progressive/Fabian Socialist/Marxist lurch to the left of their party. There are currently more people identifying themselves as INDEPENDENT rather than members of EITHER party. The time is right for a REAL alternative, and with someone like Sarah Palin as the catalyst and leader, a new conservative party might be viable. Her Gravitas might act as gravity to draw in all those conservatives and right of center moderates who find themselves feeling unattached or disenfranchised. Nader singlehandedly started the Green party. Teddy Roosevelt started the Bull-Moose party. Who’s to say Palin couldn’t kick off a viable national Conservative Party?

No, Sarah Palin isn’t erratic or crazy. She’s crazy like a fox. She’s not quitting. She’s shifting tactics.

Copyright © 2009 by Doug Edelman

Doug Edelman is a conservative political commentator and has been a contributing editor for The Conservative Voice.  His work is also seen on News By Us, The American Daily, The Post Chronicle, New Media Journal, Capitol Hill Coffee House etc. For the support of his family, however, he is also an IT Consultant/Contractor and owner of a Computer Services Business.  He has taught PC Maintenance & Repair and Networking at his local Community College, and maintains a blog at http://edeldoug.blogs.com/

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

An Open Letter to America's African-American Community

First off, let me say that is truly is a great day in America when a person of color can stand at the very threshold of the presidency of the United States!  This is testimony indeed of the great strides made by our population as a whole towards a color-blind society.  We are moving past the ignorant bigotry and intolerance of previous generations.
 
With that said, however, we must now question whether the African-American community is themselves falling short of Martin Luther King's dream that one day his children would "be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."
 
Barack Obama enjoys almost monolithic support (around 90%) within the black community.  Is this based on anything more than ethnic identity?  Is it any less repugnant for the black community to embrace a candidate BECAUSE he's black than it would be for the white community to OPPOSE a black candidate for the same reason?  Isn't it more appropriate to support one candidate or another based on the criteria of character, experience, policies and past performance?
 
Now, I am NOT telling you not to support Barack Obama.  I'm asking you, WHY do you support Barack Obama?  If it's nothing more than ethnic kinship, I would ask that you honestly examine both candidates on the other criteria before deciding soley on the color of a man's skin!  You KNOW what it's like to be judged on that basis!  It is no less rediculous to assign VIRTUE based on skin color than it is to presume dishonor or unworthiness soley on skin color.
 
And if you are determined to vote for a "black man" just because he IS a "black man... Have you ever realized that Obama is only 1/16 Black African, and has no "slave blood" at all?  He is 50% white.  His father was 7/8 North African Arab (think Khadaffi) and 1/8 Black African (think Mandella or Tutu).  So you are not even voting on the basis of RACE!  You're voting on the basis of high melanin pigmentation!  Would you vote for ME if I sat long enough under a sunlamp?
 
Let me appeal to your intellect.  WHY do you support Barack Obama?  For that matter, why do you support DEMOCRATS?
 
The Democrats have talked for 50 years about "the poor" and have been presumed to be the champions of the minority community.  What have they done to enable and facilitate the success of the black community?  Don't you find it DEMEANING when liberals talk about the black community as though they are incapable and must be "helped" by the "parenting" of government?  Don't you resent if people wonder whether you EARNED your degree or your position at work, or whether some Affirmative Action program elevated you above your qualifications?  Doesn't it bother you that the "soft bigotry of low expectations" permeates Democratic thought and policy when it comes to the black community?  Don't you feel taken for granted when the Democrats PRESUME upon your vote because you are expected to vote nearly unanimously to keep them in power?
 
Liberals define "compassion" by the number of dependent people they dole out meager government "help" to.  Conservatives define "compassion" by the number of people enabled to be no longer dependent and who don't need governmental help!
 
Do you realize that the most vocal OPPONENTS of the Civil Rights Act were Democrats?  Do you realize most Civil Rights Legislation would not have passed if it were not for the strong support of Republicans?  Did you know that LINCOLN, who freed the slaves, was a REPUBLICAN?  George Wallace, the segregationist, was a Democrat!
 
What has Obama done?  Can you name an accomplishment?
 
Did you know that John McCain has a long list of legislative credits, with a history of coalition building and working across the aisle?  Did you know Obama has never introduced a single piece of legislation in the Senate?
 
Does "community organizing" qualify one to be president?  What is a community organizer? - Think ACORN.  Are you concerned about ACORN's activities?  Do voter-fraud and racketeering investigations give you pause to consider that maybe there's something fishy going on there?
 
Does Rev. Wright represent your thinking?
 
Do you support abortion up to (and beyond) the moment of birth?  Would you deny medical care for an infant born alive in a failed abortion?
 
Why is it ok to pursue the American Dream... but as soon as you achieve it, it's ok for the Government to take it away from you?
 
Robbing Peter to pay Paul may sound like a great idea, if you're Paul... but isn't the one doing it nothing more than a benevolent THIEF?
 
Do you know what Socialism or Marxism is?  Do you believe it to be a BAD thing for America?  Would you recognize a Socialist when you see one?  If not, check out:  http://starboard.blogtownhall.com/2008/10/31/obamas_socialist_roots_run_deep.thtml
 
Did you know Obama views our Constitution as an OBSTACLE to his policies?  I thought the President is sworn to "preserve, protect and defend" the Constitution.  Obama views the RESTRICTIONS on Government placed in the Constitution by our founders to be a TRAGEDY!  Don't believe it?  Check it out:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck 
 
If the so-called "Trickle Down" theory of economics isn't valid, then why are you worried about the Wall Street Collapse, the Sub-Prime Mortgage crisis, or failures of insurance companies, banks and brokers?  Maybe it's true that when Business does poorly, EVERYONE does poorly and when business does well, EVERYONE does well.
 
Barack says his tax plans won't raise taxes on 95% of "small businesses".  What he doesn't tell you is that the 5% of small businesses that he WOULD be raising taxes on are the source of nearly EVERY new job created in the last decade!!  Sure, there are a large number of smaller businesses that make under $250K a year, but these businesses also do not employ more than a few people.  The 5% of "small businesses" (defined as those that are privately held and employ under 500 people) that WOULD experience increased tax burdens are the ones that employ 100, 200, 500 workers.  THEY have been hiring over the last decade while the big fortune 500 corporations have been simply maintaining, outsourcing or downsizing.  Do you work for an employer who is NOT on the Fortune 500 list?  HE will probably get hit in the wallet.  What happens when a small businessman sees his cost of doing business go up?  He must do one of two things.  Either he will raise the prices of his goods and services to cover the increased expenses, or he will cut his costs where he can.
 
In a down economy, raising prices may be impossible, as the market may not be able to sustain a price increase and his customers will stop buying.  If he does raise prices, that is an added cost to everyone who buys his product or service.  But if he doesn't raise prices, his options to cut costs are limited, and usually fall to workforce reduction.  YOUR JOB maybe!
 
So, if Barack wants to "soak the rich" by taxing those making over $250K - he may be costing YOU your JOB!
 
Remember, too, that the government doesn't tax "wealth" it taxes "income".  The wealthy HAVE money.  Tax policy doesn't take that away (until you die).  The wealthy make still more money by investing.  Sometimes they invest in municipal bonds, which fund local government projects like roads (that helps YOU).  Those investments are tax free.  Sometimes they invest in the Stock Market.  Those earnings are Capital Gains, which are taxed differently than ordinary income.  And those investments are the engine which enables companies to expand an create jobs.  And finally they invest OFFSHORE where the tax man doesn't get his hands on it.  Who bears the biggest burden of "Soak the Rich" policies?  The small businesses that employ the vast majority of US!
 
Are you willing to consider that while America may finally be ready to elect a black President, perhaps Barack Hussein Obama shouldn't be that one?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Another Lawsuit Filed on Obama's POTUS Eligibility

Thanks to the lawsuit filed by Philip Berg, Obama now ADMITS (on his "Fight the Smears" website and factcheck.org) that he held dual citizenship with Kenya as a child.  This, in and of itself, may arguably disqualify him under Article II as the whole point of the "Natural Born Citizen" requirement is the avoidance of divided allegiances.  (Which makes his covert and quite possibly illegal activities [Logan Act?] on behalf of Kenya's thugocrat, Odinga, all the more relevant and disturbing.)

Image
Obama and thugocrat Odinga
 
 

There is a further complication, however.  His subsequent adoption by Lolo Soetoro and resultant INDONESIAN citizenship is a bigger fly in his ointment.  (I laugh whenever reference is made to "citizen of the WORLD'... Obama truly is a WORLD CITIZEN!)

Indonesia, at the time Obama lived there and was deemed an Indonesian citizen, did not recognize dual citizenship, and neither did the US recognize dual citizenship with Indonesia.  Thus, whether he held dual citizenship with the US and Kenya, whether he was born in the US or Kenya, or even - as some suggest - CANADA, is irrelevant as the ONLY legitimate citizenship he held once his adopted father moved him to Indonesia was Indonesian!  His US Citizenship would be forfeit!

http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008/09/05/breaking-photo-documents-barry-soetoro-indonesian/

Image

Whether and when Barry Soetoro/Barack Obama might have regained US Citizenship thereafter, it would be thru NATURALIZATION and that is SPECIFICALLY and EXPRESSLY ineligible to serve as President of the United States under Title II.  (Could this be why he uses the politically risky name Barack Hussein Obama instead of the more innocuous "Barry Soetoro"?  Perhaps Barry Soetoro is STILL an Indonesian citizen?  Perhaps there are naturalization papers in the name of Barry Soetoro?  I'm just asking...

The judge in the Berg suit has not, to this date, granted Obama's motion to dismiss the case and it continues to move forward.  (If the case has no merit, why hasn't the judge granted the relief Obama filed for??)  Now Obama has a second suit he must contend with.  Both could be easily dispensed with by providing the demanded documentation which would prove he is a "natural born citizen" and thus eligible to serve.  He has not produced these documents and instead seeks to DELAY discovery and production of any documents while he makes motions to dismiss.  The "proof" of eligibility he's offered is a "Certificate of Live Birth" posted on his "Fight the Smears" website, and duplicated on Factcheck.org and the Daily Kos sites!  (Forensic experts have declared it a forgery!) Even if it were a genuine Hawaiian "Birth Certificate" with raised seal (and it's not), it would still not adequately address the Indonesian citizenship issue which Obama has yet to acknowledge!

The text of the new suit appears below.  Note the factual argument in section 5 which is the basis of the case.

(Hey, anyone know a good pro-bono attorney in MO???  I'd love to bring a similar suit that our loony leftist Missouri Secretary of State, Robin Carnahan, would have to respond to!!) 


STEVEN R MARQUIS Plaintiff

vs.

SAMUEL SUMNER REED, ACTING IN THE OFFICE OF WASHINGTON STATE, SECRETARY OF STATE

Defendant


CIVIL ACTION NO___________


1. MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR AN INJUNCTIVE RELIEF ORDER

1.1. Plaintiff Steven R Marquis, [hereinafter “Plaintiff”] hereby offers this memorandum in support of his motion for injunctive relief, to demand performance of constitutional duties related to the Office of Washington State, Secretary of State by Samuel Sumner Reed, a/k/a Sam Reed, [hereinafter Defendant”].

1.2. Plaintiff’s complaint challenges the presidential candidate Mr. Barack Obama’s eligibility to run for the Office of President and demands that the Office of Secretary of State make such determination by acquisition of original documentation or by receipt of verifiable information from another government entity so charged with overseeing the election process such as the Federal Elections Commission.

1.3. Plaintive argues that when a challenge is received by the Washington State, Secretary of State to the qualification for office of a candidate appearing on the Washington State Ballot that the entire burden of proof falls on the Candidate for Office to present such information and documentation to the Washington State, Secretary of State as would be normal and customary to establish ones minimum qualifications for office.

1.4. Plaintiff argues that the Office of Secretary of State has the Constitutional and Statutory authority to make such determinations as part of certifying and executing fair and open elections.

1.5. Plaintiff argues that is it only sufficient to show reasonable cause for complaint to the Secretary of State for his Office to require documentation of the respective candidate relevant to determination of minimum qualification; that lacking explicit statute defining the requisite documentation that the Secretary of State has the intrinsic authority to set those reasonable standards that would establish certain confidence in the people in the electoral process.

1.6. Plaintiff seeks focused and expedited review, to protect the veracity of the electoral process and maintain the people’s confidence in the government.

2. COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

2.1. Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution, states in particular part, "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." .

2.2. Mr. Barack H. Obama is a candidate for United States Office of the President. However, Mr. Obama must meet the qualifications specified for the United States Office of the President, which is, he must be a "natural born" citizen. Mr. Obama has failed to demonstrate that he is a "natural born" citizen. There are other legal challenges before the Federal Courts regarding aspects of lost or dual citizenship. That challenge in an of itself further demonstrates plaintiff’s argument that reasonable doubt exists as to the veracity of the electoral process that would allow such fundamental questions exist at this late hour preceding the election.

2.3. The Washington State office of Secretary of State is responsible for the veracity of the Washington State election process from verifying ahead of time the qualification of the voters, the ballots themselves, the candidates and the final counting and certification of results. That office is intended to be non-biased and to provide the critical sense of fairness and correctness necessary for the people to have faith in the fundamental underpinnings of the democratic basis for our republic.

2.4. There is a reasonable and common expectation by the people that to qualify for the ballot that the individuals so listed meet the minimum qualifications as outlined in the constitutions and that proof of those minimum qualifications has been received by the officials executing the election process. Heretofore, only a signed statement from the candidate attesting to meeting those qualifications was requested and received by the Office of the Secretary of State with no verification demanded. This practice, it should be noted, represents a much lower standard than that demanded of one when requesting even a driver’s license. Since the office of Secretary of state has at its core the mission of certifying and establishing the veracity of the election process, this complaint seeks a directive to the Washington State Office of Secretary of State to receive appropriate verifiable documentation and certify any individual’s qualification for Office whose basic credentials for that Office have been challenged by formal request to the Office of Secretary of State from a citizen of Washington State.

2.5. In the case of individuals seeking the Office of President of the United States, the US constitution prescribes a system of electors where citizens of the respective state have a state controlled election wherein electors representing the interest of the named individual on the state ballot are so elected to represent the interests of the respective state at the electoral college. Thus, we do not have a federal ballot controlled by the federal government; we have a Washington State ballot where we elect electors who in turn represent the named individual on the ballot. That is one more reason that the Washington Secretary of State has prevue over the certification of not just the counts of the ballots so cast, but also the veracity of the contents of the ballot.

2.6. This complaint of failure to carry out a key task in our election system could be satisfied should verification of candidate qualifications be received from original or certified documents from primary sources or from a verifiable report generated from government agencies such as the Federal Elections Commission. It is the Washington State, Secretary of State’s duty to certify the veracity of documents or reports so received.

2.7. To avert likely civil unrest and a constitutional crisis which would certainly accrue after the election through laborious legal challenges and impeachment process, this complaint seeks to resolve such complaints prior to the election. It was incumbent on the candidates to present such documentation, but to date Mr. Obama has failed to do so.

2.8. This complaint seeks specifically to verify through the office of the Washington Secretary of State that Mr. Obama is a "natural born" citizen.

2.9. At this point, Mr. Obama has not allowed independent or official access to his birth records and supporting hospital records. Mr. Obama’s citizenship status has and is being challenged in the federal courts which challenge will cast doubt on the veracity of the electoral system regardless of outcome if not resolved prior to the election. The Washington State, Secretary of State Office is specifically charged with certifying and guaranteeing the veracity of official documents and overseeing the elections to wit the people’s confidence in the fundamental aspect of democracy is maintained. To date, in this regard, Secretary of State Sam Red has not carried out that fundamental duty.

2.10. The Federal Elections Commission FEC is generally tasked with providing oversight and verifications of federal candidates. To date the FEC has not produced either certification or verifiable documentation regarding the candidates basic qualifications for office. Lacking that certification from the FEC, this complaint request the Washington State - Secretary of State Sam Reed to formally request of Hawaii State Health Department officials to produce forthwith a certified copy of his “Vault” [original long version] Birth Certificate.

2.11. This complaint requests that Washington State - Secretary of State Sam Reed formally requests primary backup materials if they exist of hospital records that would lend veracity to a Hawaii live birth declaration. A court order of discovery is requested to assist that investigation directed to the respective hospital if so identified on a live birth certificate.

2.12. Should Mr. Obama be discovered, whether by virtue of malfeasance, or negligence, or ignorance on his part to not have a valid certified US birth certificate or to otherwise due to have been revealed by such examination of original records to be ineligible for the Office of President of the United States of America and thereby his nomination be declared void by the appropriate authorities acting under the law, Plaintiff as well as other Americans will suffer irreparable harm including but not limited to:

2.12.1. Functional, or actual, disenfranchisement of large numbers of citizens, being members of the Democratic Party, who would have been deprived of the ability to choose a qualified nominee of their liking;

2.12.2. Irreparable harm to the structure and integrity of the Democratic Party and the Democratic National Committee. In turn, this too would lead to disenfranchisement.

2.12.3. If the candidate Mr. Obama were to secure the election and later be discovered ineligible, the resulting constitutional and national security crisis that would ensue would generate a severe and genuine likelihood of civil disturbance by virtue of reaction to said disenfranchisement and upset.

2.13. It was well expected that after all the public concern that has been raised over the preceding months now that Mr. Obama would have released for public or official scrutiny the relevant documentation to back up his claim of qualification as a “natural born citizen”. His reaction to public concern and his recent actions in Federal District Court 9/24/2008 demonstrate that Mr. Obama has no intentions of releasing said documentation for review or cannot because they do not exist. The late hour of this request was dictated by the delaying tactics of the candidate Mr. Obama, and the non-responsiveness to Plaintiff’s repeated request to the Office Washington State - Secretary of State Sam Reed.

3. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

3.1. As we do not have federal ballot per se, Washington State, through the office of the Washington State, Secretary of State creates its own ballot and supervises the same, electing electors to represent our choice for the Office of President. This case arises under the Washington Constitution RCW 42.04.020 and Section 15, Article III, Section 17 of the Washington State Constitution and Chapter 43.07 RCW. and the laws of the United States and presents a state question within this Court's jurisdiction.

4. PARTIES

4.1. Plaintiff, Steven Russel Marquis [hereinafter "Plaintiff'], is an adult individual with a home address of 34077 SE 56th St Fall City, WA 98024. Citizen USA.

4.2. Defendant, Samuel Sumner Reed, a/k/a Sam Reed is an adult individual with an office address of PO Box 40220 Olympia, WA 98504-0220. Washington State, Secretary of State.

5. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS THAT DEMOSTRATE THE NEED TO PROOF THE CANDIDATE’S MINIMUM CONSTITUTIONAL QUALIFICATION.

5.1. These allegations and statements are not intended to be proof of the status of Mr. Obama’s citizenship or lack thereof. That will be determined in the venue of the US District court. The listing of the allegations detailed below are included to demonstrate the reasonable assertion of the need for the Washington State, Secretary of State to reestablish public confidence in the veracity of the electoral process and the obvious need for precertification as to a candidate’s meeting the minimum constitutional requirements.

5.2. By the U.S. Constitution, in order to run for office of the President, you must be a "natural born citizen" and you may not hold dual citizenship or multiple citizenships with foreign countries. U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1.

5.3. There are questions as to where Obama was actually born; in the United States or abroad but subsequently registered in Hawaii. There are further questions regarding Obama's United States citizenship, if he ever held such, being expatriated and his failure to regain his citizenship by taking the oath of allegiance once he turned eighteen (18) years of age. There are additional questions regarding Obama's multi-citizenships with foreign countries, which he may still maintain. To date, Obama has refused to prove he is qualified under the U.S. Constitution and his eligibility to run as President of the United States despite requests and recent opportunities to do so in Federal Court.

5.4. The "certificate" that Mr. Obama has posted on his official WEB site is a "Certification of Live Birth," and not a “Birth Certificate” from Hawaii. There is no indication on even this certificate as to specifically where the birth took place.

5.5. Researchers have claimed to have been unable to locate any birthing records in island hospitals for Barak Obama’s mother. Mr. Obama has offered none for review.

5.6. Three forensic document experts have published extensive reports claiming that there is evidence of tampering on even the Obama WEB site displayed certificate.

5.7. Numerous Freedom of Information Requests have been sent to Officials in Hawaii with no response from the public officials nor has Mr. Obama granted access for release of the information lending to the concern over the veracity of the attestation on the candidate’s application for candidacy for the office of President of the United States.

5.8. The facts are undisputed by Obama that his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, was a U.S. citizen however, his father, Barack Obama, Sr., was a citizen of Kenya. Obama's parents, according to divorce records, were married on or about February 2, 1961.

5.9. Obama claims he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961; however, has never given the name of the hospital he was born in; whereas there are reports that Obama's grandmother on his father's side, half brother and half sister claim Mr. Barack H. Obama was born in Kenya. Reports further reflect that Mr. Obama's mother went to Kenya during her pregnancy. Wayne Madsen, Journalist with Online Journal as a contributing writer and published an article on June 9, 2008 stating that a research team went to Mombassa, Kenya, and located a Certificate Registering the birth of Barack Obama, Jr. at a Kenya Maternity Hospital, to his father, a Kenyan citizen and his mother, a U.S. citizen. There are claims of records of a "registry of birth" for Obama, on or about August 8, 1961 in the public records office in Hawaii, but these have not been released for scrutiny. It is alleged in the Federal trial and is a matter of much general speculation that Mr. Obama’s mother was prevented from boarding a flight from Kenya to Hawaii at her late stage of pregnancy, which apparently was a normal restriction to avoid births during a flight. It is likely that Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama) gave birth to Obama in Kenya, after which she flew to Hawaii and registered Obama's birth.

5.10. Regarding the alleged birth of Barack Hussein Obama in Honolulu, Hawaii, it is variously circulated that Obama's birth is reported as occurring at two (2) separate hospitals, Kapiolani Hospital and Queens Hospital. Obama has provided no proof of birth from of either of these or any other US based facility. He has made no effort to address these public concerns.

5.11. There are no published or known hospital birthing records for Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama), Obama's mother. There are only claims of records of a "registry of birth" for Obama, on or about August 8, 1961 in the public records office in Hawaii.

5.12. There is even a Canadian Birth Certificate posted on the Internet in the name of Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.; however, the date of birth shows to be August 23, 1961

5.13. At the time of Obama's birth in 1961, Kenya was a British Colony. Subsequently, under the Independence Constitution of Kenya, Mr. Barack H. Obama became a Kenyan citizen on December 12, 1963. There are no indications or reports that Mr. Obama ever renounced that dual citizenship conferred either by nature of birth or by virtue of his father’s Kenyan citizenship. On Mr. Obama’s Senate web site, Mr. Obama acknowledges his father holds Kenyan nationality but avoids addressing that that he (Mr. Obama) also held/holds Kenyan nationality.

5.14. If in fact Obama was born in Kenya, the laws on the books in the United States at the time of his birth stated if a child is born abroad and one parent was a U.S. Citizen, which would have been his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, Obama's mother would have had to live ten (10) years in the United States, five (5) of which were after the age of fourteen (14). At the time of Obama's birth, his mother was only eighteen (18) and therefore did not meet the residency requirements under the law to give her son (Obama) U.S. Citizenship much less the status of “natural born.” The laws in effect at the time of Obama's birth prevented U.S. Citizenship at birth of children born abroad to a U.S. Citizen parent and a non-citizen parent, if the citizen parent was under the age of nineteen (19) at the time of the birth of the child. Obama's mother did not qualify under the law on the books to register Obama as a "natural born" citizen. Section 301(a)(7) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of June 27,1952,66 Stat. 163, 235, 8 U.S.c. §1401(b), Matter of S-F-and G-, 2 I & N Dec. 182 (B.I.A.) approved (Att'y Gen. 1944). Obama would have only been Naturalized and a Naturalized citizen is not qualified nor eligible to run for Office of the President. U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section Clause 4.

5.15. Furthermore, if Obama had been born in Kenya, his birth father Barack Obama, Sr. was a citizen of Kenya; therefore, Obama would have automatically become a citizen of Kenya.

5.16. The Nationality Act of 1940 provided for the loss of citizenship when the person became naturalized upon the naturalization of his or her parent having custody of such person. Obama's mother expatriated her U.S. Citizenship when she married Lolo Soetoro, a citizen of Indonesia and relocated herself and her son (Obama) to Indonesia.

5.17. Obama was enrolled by his parents in a public school, Fransiskus Assisi School in Jakarta, Indonesia. Plaintiff has available copies of the school registration where it clearly states Obama's name as Barry Soetoro and lists his citizenship as Indonesian, Obama's father is listed as Lolo Soetoro, Obama's date of birth and place of birth are listed as August 4,1961 in Honolulu and Obama's Religion is listed as Islam. This document was verified by television show Inside Edition, whose reporter, Matt Meagher took the actual footage of the school record.

5.18. In or about 1971, Obama's mother sent Obama back to Hawaii. Obama was ten (10) years of age upon his return to Hawaii.

5.19. Sometime after the return of Obama to Hawaii, Obama's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham returned to Hawaii and divorced her husband, Lolo Soetoro. At the time of divorce, Obama's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham could have regained her U.S. citizenship. In order to regain her citizenship, Obama's mother would have had to take the oath of allegiance required. Such oath of allegiance may be taken abroad before a diplomatic or consular of the United States, or in the United States before the Attorney General or the judge or clerk of a court. Such Oath of Allegiance would have been entered in the records of the appropriate embassy, legation, consulate, court or the Attorney General and upon demand, a certified copy of the proceedings, including a copy of the oath administered, under the seal of the embassy, legation, consulate, court or the Attorney General shall be delivered. The certified copy shall be evidence of the facts stated therein before any court of record or judicial tribunal and in any department or agency of the Government of the United States. 8U.S.c.§1435.

5.20. Obama's mother failed to take the oath in order to regain her U.S. Citizenship. Therefore, Obama would not have been able to regain his U.S. Citizenship until he turned eighteen (18) years and then only after he took the Oath of Allegiance before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States, or in the U.S. before the Attorney General or the judge or clerk of court. Since the Oath of Allegiance would have been entered in the records of the appropriate embassy, legation, consulate, court or the Attorney General, then Obama should be able to produce in court a certified copy of the proceedings, including a copy of the oath administered. No such copy has been to date produced for public examination.

5.21. After many attempts of the public to obtain Obama's Certificate of Birth, a Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) was placed on Obama's campaign website. However, as posted all over the internet, three (3) independent Document Forensic Experts performed extensive forensic testing on the Certificate of Live Birth as posted on Obama's campaign website. The Forensic Expert findings were that the posted Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) was a forgery. It was further discovered that the posted COLB had evidence of having been created from an altered/forged from a COLB issued to Maya Kasandra Soetoro, born in 1970. Maya Kasandra Soetoro is Obama's half sister who was born in Indonesia and her birth was later registered in Hawaii. The altered and allegedly forged COLB is still on Obama's website located at http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/birthcert

5.22. Even if Obama had and subsequently maintained his United States Citizenship, which citizenship he has failed before District Court to demonstrate, he may still carry citizenships in Kenya and/or Indonesia. These facts call into question what the constitution attempted to address regarding potently divided loyalties with foreign countries. Thus, Mr. Obama carries multiple citizenships and would be ineligible to run for President of the United States. United States Constitution, Article II, Section 1.

6. Failure to grant injunctive relief will realize these detriments:

6.1. Failing to officially and publically vet the status of the citizenship claims of Mr. Obama will cast a pall of doubt on the election process and taint the election results themselves.

6.2. Failure to grant injunctive relief would allow a potentially corrupted, fraudulent nomination and election process to continue.

6.3. Failure to grant injunctive relief demanding the Washington State, Secretary of State certify the minimum qualifications of challenged candidates not only allows, but promotes an overwhelming degree of disrespect and creates such a lack of confidence in voters of the primary and electoral process itself, so that it would cement a prevailing belief that no potential candidate has to obey the laws of this country, respect our election process, follow the Constitution, or even suffer any consequence for lying and defrauding voters to get onto the ballot when they have no chance of serving if they fraudulently manage to get elected.

6.4. As stated above, Plaintiff as well as all American citizens will suffer irreparable harm if injunctive relief is not granted. Plaintiff does not have any other way of redress regarding these very significant and important issues.

6.5. Despite many complaints, the FEC has failed Plaintiff and the American citizens by their failure to date to perform due diligence and inquire into Mr. Obama's eligibility to run for Office of the President. Lacking such certification, it is incumbent on the Washington State, Secretary of State to certify or decertify as to the eligibility for office before the election based on the availability of clear documentation demonstrating that minimum qualifications for the respective office has been met by candidates.

7. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays that this Court:

7.1. Grant injunctive relief demanding that Washington State, Secretary of State Sam Reed immediately acquire primary documents or certified copies from primary sources such as Health Department and hospital records or verifiable reports regarding same from the FEC.

7.2. Plaintiff requests Washington State, Secretary of State Sam Reed to immediately demand such verifiable report from the FEC or demand a certified copy of Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth and subpoena as needed for the release hospital records if so claimed on said Live Birth Certificate to further prove he was born in Hawaii as Mr. Obama claims.

7.3. Direct Washington State, Secretary of State Sam Reed to certify or decertify the challenged candidates prior to the election based on the availability of clear documentation.

7.4. Plaintiff requests the Washington State, Secretary of State to immediately demand a certified copy of Obama’s Oath of Allegiance proving he regained his United States Citizenship.

7.5. If Secretary Sam Reed is unable to document a certified record of Obama’s oath of allegiance and birth and hospital records, Secretary of State Sam Reed must decertify Mr. Obama as a valid candidate for the office of President of the United States Office of the President under the United States Constitution, Article II, Section I;

7.6. Award Plaintiff such costs and fees applicable by law; and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

Respectfully Submitted,

Steven R Marquis

34077 SE 56th St Fall City, WA 98024

               425-698-7084        

VERIFICATION

I, STEVEN R MARQUIS, hereby state that I am the Plaintiff in this action and verify that the statements made in the foregoing Complaint for Injunctive Relief are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements therein are made subject to the penalties law relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.  

Copyright © 2008 by Doug Edelman

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »