• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
 Name, left out, author has authorized use of this document by any and all citizens to passon to their US Senators & Congressmen/CongresswomenAddressCity, statePhonefaxemail December 30, 2008RE: Confirmation of 2008 Presidential Electoral College VotesDear I can not begin to say how Senator Johnson’s response to my previous letter  pertaining to this year’s election has me even more concerned and I now know personallywhy the general public for the 1
st
time in American History has given our elected officialsin Congress the lowest approval rating ever. It is because of the lack of respect for thefollowing oath that all of you have taken that leads us to begin work to explore our options under the Constitution to turn this country around and get it back to a truly FreeConstitutional Republic and away from the Socialist Democracy path you all have beentaking us.
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend theConstitution of the United States against all enemies
 
 , foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same
 
;that I take this obligation freely
 
 , without any mental reservationor purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully dischargethe duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.” 
Obviously, this oath is just words, as according to Senator Johnson’s letter &others I have received in the past from all of you, you really have not read theConstitution for a very long time and thus have forgotten what responsibilities &restrictions it places on you to protect and defend the Constitution and We the Peoplewhom you are obligated to serve honorably, responsibly and lawfully without reservation.Please allow me a bit of your time to reply to Senator Johnson’s letter and correct somemost important Constitutional Laws that seem to have mistakenly been brushed off asinternet rumors as most Elected Officials have done nationwide to their constituents thiselection year.The 1
st
thing I will take issue with is your perception of the role of the internet. Ido agree that it can be a vast source of misinformation, but if 
used properly &responsibly
as I did and verified sources beyond the internet for credibility, the internetcan be a vast source of good. Obviously Sen. Johnson or his staff just read my letter andsaw the references and neither he nor his staff took the time to verify as I did. If they had,they would not have had the audacity to spurn my use of the internet, yet they themselveshave relied on 2 internet sources for their facts instead of the Constitution, US laws andlegal government documents as I have. Also, their reference to reputable sources is initself an oxymoron when you consider that fact that those sources have deep ties to thecandidates, especially Barack Obama.
1995 Ayers makes Obama Chairman of Annenberg Challenge
 
Factcheck.org is run by Annenberg…this a common well known fact and is listedat their site and Ayers is no source of reputable information either. All I had to do wasfollow the money to realize that those were paid sources and should not be trusted. But Ido trust official government documents which most of them have been barred from beingseen for some reason. It has been reported that Obama has spent in excess of $500,000fighting lawsuits and keeping his information sealed. I ask you: why would a person whocampaigned on transparency & who claims to be qualified pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep a $20 copy of an official original vault long form copy of a governmentdocument if they had nothing to hide? Please give me a responsible non-bureaucraticanswer to that question. And please do not come back with the old line all the other Senators & Congressmen/Congresswomen have used that states that Hawaiian officialshave stated publically they have seen it and have stated that he was born in Hawaii.“Theyonly verified that an original vault copy existed in the file.” The End.
Fukino said she has “personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record inaccordance with state policies and procedures."
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
So what is the big deal about seeing the original as McCain was forced to dowhen the Democrats screamed for his because he was born in Panama. You could helpme quiet those who claim Obama was born elsewhere, but it still will not escape the factthat he is not “natural born” due to the fact that Obama’s father was a British subjectunder British jurisdiction at the time of Obama’s birth. The reason for all those claims isthe Hawaiian law that allowed US citizens who gave birth overseas to obtain an officialHawaiian birth certificate if they applied for it within a year of the child’s birth and theWomen’s Center that has been reported as being his place of birth have denied having anyrecords of him being born there or his mother ever being a patient there. The long formhere is from 1963, but the only difference from that one to a 1961 long form vault copy isthat in 1961 they were black & white, not green & black. $20 could fix this and shutthose who claim he was born elsewhere up so why not do it? Now, back to the real issueat hand…the Constitution. 
 A. From Hawaii’s official Department of Health, Vital Recordswebpage:“Amended certificates of birth may be prepared and filed with the Department 
 
of Health, as provided by law, for 1) a person born in Hawaii who already has abirth certificate filed with the Department of Health or 2)
a person born in aforeign country“
(applies to adopted children). B. A parent may register an in-state birth in lieu of certification by a hospital of birth under  HRS 338-5 .C. Hawaiian law expressly provides for registration of out-of-state births under  HRS 338-17.8.A foreign birth presumably would have been recorded by the American consular of the country of birth, and presumably that would bereflected on the Hawaiian birth certificate. D. Hawaiian law, however, expressly acknowledges that its system is subject toerror. See, for example, HRS 338-17  . E. Hawaiian law expressly provides for verification in lieu of certified copy of abirth certificate under  HRS 338-14.3 .F. Even the Hawaii Department of Home Lands does not accept a certified copyof a birth certificate as conclusive evidence for its homestead program. Fromits web site: “In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original 
Certificate
of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the
Certification
of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting theoriginal 
Certificate
of Live Birth will save you time and money since thecomputer-generated 
Certification
requires additional verification by DHHL.” 
Further more from Obama’s own site:http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate
 
“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenyawas a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindlingempire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subjectwhose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Actof 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.
2
.
I never claimed in my letter that Barack Obama was bornanywhere other than Hawaii and I am insulted that a Senator would putwords in my mouth and make assumptions based on what is obviouslytheir opinion, not mine.
The Constitution is very clear as to the qualifications forPOTUS, and there is no birth certificate of Barack Obama that would make anydifference. The fact that he had dual citizenship at birth proves he was not a“Natural Born” citizen. He is a citizen under the 14
th
amendment which definescitizens born to parents when one parent is not a US citizen.
To the issue of John McCain; if he was a “natural born” citizen, why did it take astatute to give him citizenship( see box checked on his birth certificate & papers his parents filed after he was born) also and why did the Senate deem it necessary to pass aSenate Resolution proclaiming him a “natural Born” citizen? This resolution has noweight, is not legal or binding and mostly it is unconstitutional. There is nothing naturalabout having to have ones birth be defined by a statute or an Amendment due to a parentnot being a US citizen. The only conclusion I can come up with is that both parties knewof the dilemma they had as so they created a very good smoke screen to keep most of usin the dark until it was far too late to get anything done prior to Nov 4
th
election. I offer you the following references from our history & official government documents located
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...