You hit upon the problem. The media and moderate members of the government are refusing to acknowledge the 500 pound gorilla in the room.

If this continues, the only action taken will be by the tinfoil hat crowd and those with an agenda. Their actions will not be moderate or necessarily "committed in good faith with the intention of restoring the power of the Constitution."

I'm not sure the world will come to a screeching halt. We have a pretty clear system for presidential succession and congress would work overtime to get everything cleared up. President Biden would probably quickly re-sign documents reauthorizing all of Obama's actions in his own name (with the addition of pork and questionable laws that could not be enacted in other circumstances).

The biggest fear is that this "crisis", which almost seems as if it is being manufactured, could lead to very serious changes in our government. Not unlike the Patriot Act which was already written and simply awaiting a crisis to enact, there is certainly a number of pre-prepared Draconian laws awaiting this kind of crisis.

On the other hand, maintaining the System seems to be more important to the ruling elite than specifics. Look at how quickly the controversy of the 2000 Florida results disappeared. It almost seemed as if everyone got together and decided it was better to give it to Bush rather than let a cloud of uncertainty hang over the leadership of the Free World while a court battle raged for months.

Free Ride,

What do you suggest I do to "support and defend the Constitution" in this case? This whole thing is irritating, bordering on uneasy, but I'm not quite ready to dust off my pitchfork and march on Washington.

As to the question on why — both liberal and conservative, Obama and anti-Obama all come up with: "I don't know." Obama refuses to answer the question and the mainstream media refuses to confront him.

I know not many people are interested in this stuff, but it is a very simple issue and of immense importance to the future of our nation. Let me state this again:

Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution requires that the president of the United States be at least 35 years of age, have been a resident of the United States for at least 14 years, and be a Natural Born Citizen of the United States of America. There are many unanswered questions about the birthplace and citizenship of Barack Obama, because he has not provided a long-form birth certificate or other proof of his citizenship. No one knows for sure that he fits the NATURAL BORN requirement set forth in Article II, Section 1. Because his other records are all sealed by Obama, no one knows whether he is operating under a legally changed name, was legally adopted by Lolo Soetoro, was an Indonesian citizen, and end up questioning whether he is a NATURALIZED CITIZEN.

Look at a copy of the Certificate of Live Birth made available by the Obama campaign, and look at a copy of what a typical 1961 Hawaiian certificate (vault copy) looks like. See how the typical Hawaiian certificate provides all the pertinent information. See how the Certificate of Live Birth gives only the barest of information and will NOT resolve any of the questions of Natural-born or Naturalized citizenship.

Obama could have prevented this entire controversy a few months ago by obtaining a vault copy of his long-form, stamped and authenticated birth certificate from Hawaii and providing it to reporters and the courts to examine and photograph it. He has not done so, has instead retained counsel to avoid presenting the supposedly harmless documentation — and that is the reason the Obama eligibility group continues on.

The Obama eligibility group have asked the courts to suspend the Electoral College vote until such an affirmation can be made.

Any questions?

The best the DNC, State Attorney Generals, State Secretary of States, Federal Election Commission, and anyone remotely related to vetting of Obama will say is that they are not LEGALLY responsible because the Congress never delegated that authority to me. Oh, and you the voter –just shut up because you don't have any business in this. You only vote for whoever the party tells you to vote for and have no "standing" in this matter.

Meanwhile, the Obama eligibility group — including me — is becoming an embarassment to main conservative media and a pariah to the mainstream media because of a few nutcases (i.e., Andy Martin), zealots (i.e., Bob Schultz) and publicity-seekers with an agenda (i.e., Orly Tatiz). Now all of us who considered ourselves reasonable conservatives with questions are thought of as fruitcakes.

But rest assured the case has ENORMOUS implications. Should it turn out, later, that Obama has been serving as president without being constitutionally eligible to be there, he will be considered a “usurper” and the effect of the laws passed and decisions made during his tenure will be put into question. The US government domestically and internationally will cease to function — all treaties made during his tenure will be suspended, economic agreements will be voided, trade pacts nullified. The military actions that we are involved in will be immediately suspended. The world will come to a screeching halt.

Any questions?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2136…

This guy made a good point that all Obama has to do is scan the back side of his certificate of live birth and this whole issue would be null and void because then you can see who signed off on it and see the actual state of Hawaii seals.

I am beginning to wonder though if Obama is allowing this to play out and at the last minute pulls out his birth certificate to greatly discredit all of his conservative critics?

Maybe some of you Obama supporters can come up with a theory of why he doesn't put this to rest because that is the best one I can come up with.

Yes, I believe that Obama has not been truthful about a lot of things — not by lying outright but by omission. But what I feel about him is irrelevant when it comes to the Constitution. Whether I agree with the Supreme Court Justices or not doesn't matter. They were placed there to make rulings on issues from their lofty perches — right leaning or left leaning whatever it might be. They are part of the checks and balance of the three forces — executive, legislative and judicial.

We must support the Constitution and this nation's values at all costs. If the Justices in their wisdom say that all the Obama eligibility group don't have a leg to stand on, I will accept it. Sour grapes and threats of violence is not the way to go. We need to work with the system as it is — that is what makes this country work. This means accepting the ruling of the Supreme Court — though it doesn't mean that we should stop challenging the rulings in the legal arena.

However, we will also need to close all the loopholes that the Obama folks exploited — and the ones that the courts have thrown in the faces of the voters. We need to work towards assuring that STATE legislation (such as that being introduced in Pennsylvania) is put on the books in each of the 50 states to ensure that the circumstances that occurred in 2008, do NOT occur in 2012.

But I do say that the Obama eligibility group really needs to clean house to get rid of the people that are throwing up so much flack that the mainstream media is discrediting the entire message because of these fruitcakes (i.e. Andy Martin) and zealots (Robert Schultz). What is happening is that the MSM is targetting the messenger, but forgetting about the message. I believe the message is sound and needs to be heard but the MSM is looking for every excuse to kill the message. The easiest way is to execute the messengers in the press — using ridicule and character assasination.

The next one up is Cort Wrontowski from Connecticutt on 12 Dec. And after that we have Alan Keyes/Wiley Drake — and then Ron Paul/Gail Lightfoot/Constitution Party — and then… The court fight is not over.

Disqualify Barky — reject the messianic President of the World. Every major city teeming with Obamanoids will protest. Race riots. Even the Kenyans will be hopping mad.

"Change" — Yes, we can!

In order to "get along", commoners will "change" the American Constitution. Constitutional revision after revision will ensue. Arnold — the Terminator — later gets a legal shot at at being America's dictator.

America's take-down is assured.

The American colonies return to the Queen. Pathetic rabble, you Americans.

There is a lot riding on the solidness of the American Constitution. It protects our way of life. All American citizens, for their own interests, should be vigilant in looking out for anything which weakens or subverts the Constitution.

Like other posters, I am a firm believer in the Rule of Law. I believe any threat to the Constitution should be addressed through legal means within the framework of the Constitution. In most ways, anarchy is worse than a dictatorship.

However, should the Constitution be subverted to the point where its legal mechanisms are no longer able to protect it from further subversion, many people will be sympathetic to extra-Constitutional actions which are committed in good faith with the intention of restoring the power of the Constitution.

Depending on the situation, "they" could become "we" and I could support action which restored the integrity of the Constitution and the American legal system. Anyone who chose to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC" should be of the same opinion.

If American citizens depose a leader who has illegally and unconstitutionally gained power, it says something very good about "our character".

Why do you believe that? You seem to be straining to disconnect yourself from your own comments.

"aren’t going to see this as an altogether bad thing." Does that mean that a whacko “patriot” plot against Obama might be seen as a good thing?

When you say, "a lot of people," do you mean many or most Americans? Do you believe that because you use the pronoun "we" or "they" in their relationship to you. If it is "they," why would you believe that about "a lot of" Americans? What are you saying about our character?

If Obama perpetuates this belief because he doesn't want to cooperate with upholding the constitution, a lot of people aren't going to see this as an altogether bad thing.

Donfrio's case was originally denied a conference of the judges by Justice David H. Souter, but Justice Clarence Thomas agreed to bring it back for consideration. To go forward, from conference to a full hearing, the case needed the approval of four of the Supreme Court's nine justices. Donofrio's case is only one of several filed around the country challenging Obama's eligibility to be elected president under the Constitution.

But the battle continues. The Cort Wrotnowski V Susan Bysiewicz, Connecticut Secretary of State lawsuit that is before the US Supreme Court, has been distributed for conference on 12 Dec. It is still pending as an emergency application resubmitted to the Honorable Associate Justice Antonin Scalia as of 2 Dec. Leo Donofrio, whose application for stay was denied believes that the Cort Wrotnowski case has a better chance than his case had. He states it includes a more solid brief and a less treacherous lower Court procedural history because of what Donofrio claims as "misconduct" on the part of a NJ Appellate Division Judge.

Cort Wrotnowski's case argues the same exact theory as Donofrio – that Obama is not a natural born citizen because he was a British citizen at birth. Donofrio saw hope in that Wrotnowski's case was NOT rejected along with his and was distributed for conference on 12 Dec.

But even if Wrotnowski's suit meets the same fate as Leo Donofrio's, there are still the heavy hitter suits of Alan Keyes and Ron Paul waiting in the wings. The biggest question is why Obama, if a Hawaii birth certificate exists as his campaign has stated, simply hasn't ordered it made available to settle the rumors. This issue is not going away peacefully into the night.

Thank you for your work at keeping up on this. I will paste and forward anything you post here as you have distilled it better than most members of the media.

After years of Bush's blanket secrecy, one of the few "change"s I was looking forward to in an Obama administration was openness and a higher degree of governmental honesty. So far, no change and no hope.

I believe Obama is a media creation based partially on his vague and fictional past as well as his quick rise to power and the cult-like following based on emotion rather than facts. His seemingly needless secrecy adds to this belief and gives it a more sinister angle.

As the government likes to say, "If you aren't hiding anything, you shouldn't be concerned about privacy."

Funny how limousine liberalism works.

Regardless of what party one supports or what candidate one favors, the Constitution should be held above all. The Bush administration did their best to move down the slippery slope of skirting it. If Obama manages to ignore it in such a blatant way, America moves one large step farther from a free constitutional republic. This should be of concern to all.

Keep up the good work.