“Challenging Obama’s eligibility – What now?” By Linda Bentley

by

sonoran

cave-creek1

in historic Cave Creek, Arizona

http://www.sonorannews.com/archives/2008/081224/FrntPgObama.html

December 24, 2008

EXCERPTS

What all these lawsuits have raised so far is the question as to exactly who is responsible for ensuring candidates are eligible to appear on the ballot.

And, so far, no one will own up to that responsibility.

The Democratic National Committee claimed, in one of its reply briefs, as a private organization, it has no authority to dictate to the states, which would appear to mean no secretary of state may legally rely on the DNC to properly vet presidential candidates before certifying them for the ballot or before certifying the electors to vote for a “qualified” candidate.

In fact, the DNC admits it has no authority to assume any type of “state action.”

Every single secretary of state that has been challenged so far has declined to take responsibility for candidates they have “certified” as eligible, admitting they have done nothing themselves to determine eligibility.

Rep. John Linder, R-GA

On Dec. 17, “Phil” posted a comment on www.therightsideoflife.com saying he had sent an e-mail to Rep. John Linder, R-Ga., through an online submission form, asking Linder for his views on President-elect Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility for the presidency.

From Linder’s response:

“On January 8, 2009, both the U.S. Senate and House shall meet for the purpose of counting and certifying the electoral votes. After the vote has been counted, the President of the Senate shall call for objections. It is at this time that federal officials in both the House and Senate may object to the certification of President-elect Obama by alleging that he fails to meet the constitutional requirements to serve as President of the United States. Please be assured that I will continue to monitor this issue very carefully, and I will act when appropriate and necessary.”

After reading Linder’s response, some interpreted that to mean Linder plans to object.
Former Congressman J.D. Hayworth, a KFYI radio talk show host contacted Linder, a friend of his, who denied that he plans to object.

Phil responded to Linder’s reply asking if he could further elaborate on what his threshold would be to make a move to object. However, he has yet to receive a response.

Philip Berg’s Case

Meanwhile, Pennsylvania Attorney Philip Berg’s case is next to come out of the hopper for conference of the U.S. Supreme Court justices on Jan. 9, the day after Congress counts the electoral votes.

Berg previously told World Net Daily (www.wnd.com) he wants Obama to quickly prove him wrong or the court to quickly prove him right and stated, “We’re dealing with the U.S. Constitution and it must be followed.”

When Sonoran News spoke to Berg, a Democrat, he said the main reason he filed his complaint was because the Constitution is the most important document we have and it must be enforced.

The issue will now be in the hands of Congress on Jan. 8. If no objections are raised, it will be in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 9.

johnlinderofficialphoto

Photo: Rep. John Linder, R-Ga. Responding to an e-mail about President-elect Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility, Rep. John Linder, R-Ga., explained, on Jan. 8, 2009, after Congress counts the electoral votes, the president of the Senate calls for objections, which is when officials may object to the certification by alleging Obama fails to meet the constitutional requirements.

Phil Berg Barack Obama Ron Polarik Jeff Schreiber

31 Responses to ““Challenging Obama’s eligibility – What now?” By Linda Bentley”

  1. rosettasister Says:

    http://obamacrimes.com/

    For Immediate Release: – 12/25/08

    U.S. Supreme Court No. 08 – 570

    (Lafayette Hill, PA – 12/25/08) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States and his case, Berg vs. Obama, is pending before the U.S. Supreme Court with [2] Conferences scheduled – January 9, 2009 and January 16, 2009 wishes everyone a Happy Chanukah, a Merry Christmas, a Happy Kwanzaa and a Healthy and Happy New Year.

    For copies of all Court Pleadings, go to obamacrimes.com

    For Further Information Contact:

    Philip J. Berg, Esquire
    555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
    Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531

    (610) 825-3134
    (800) 993-PHIL [7445]
    Fax (610) 834-7659
    Cell (610) 662-3005

    philjberg@obamacrimes.com

    http://www.obamacrimes.info/pressrelease1225080001.pdf

  2. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    Evening everyone

  3. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    Link to photos of the new puppies are in my name……

  4. patriotamy Says:

    Very cute puppies…

  5. rosettasister Says:

    Latest from Dr. Orly:
    “Disinformation”

    http://drorly.blogspot.com/2008/12/disinformation.html

    EXCERPT

    What about the statements that claimed that the Hawaiian Health Department had confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii? They were all incorrect; more fakes.

    http://drorly.blogspot.com/2008/12/hawaiian-health-department.html

  6. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    Thanks patriotamy 🙂

  7. rosettasister Says:

    That was fun, Cindy! Thanks.

    Poor shy momma.

    She was huge!

    Puppies look like Daddy?

  8. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    Rose
    yes the puppies look like daddy,….. but the one boy of the bunch is starting to turn blue…. I have my fingers crossed…

  9. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    lol,…… yes she was huge,…. rememeber even though she has 4 she actually gave birth to 7 ….I had to hold her through the whole labor and delivery……. 14 hours…….such a mommy’s girl

  10. rosettasister Says:

    justanamericancindy4 Says:
    December 27, 2008 at 10:18 pm

    ————————

    I do believe there must be a special place in heaven reserved for those who comfort creatures who are in labor.

    Job well done, Cindy!

    I know I’ll never forget my maternity nurses!

  11. rosettasister Says:

    Why Obama’s BC was Sealed?

    http://laika22.blogspot.com/2008/12/why-obamas-bc-was-sealed.html

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2154367/posts

    To: Polarik
    Ok, Thanks.
    That was the purpose of my question. Was it SOP for the Hawaiian govt. or was it done at the request of Obama/DNC/Soros etc..? If it was sealed by SOP doesn’t that indicate he is indeed a foreigner?
    I think we should have thousands camped at SCOTUS and Congress demanding a clear answer. Is there nothing else we can do??

    58 posted on Saturday, December 27, 2008 1:38:40 AM by usar91B

    To: usar91B
    It was SOP for the Hawaiian government to seal all birth certificates that were exchanged for new ones, regardless of where that person was born — even if they were born in Hawaii.
    In fact, when Hawaii became a state in 1959, there were a whole lot of old BC’s that read, Territory of Hawaii, exchanged for new BC’s that read, State of Hawaii, and had the State seal on them.

    60 posted on Saturday, December 27, 2008 6:37:25 AM by Polarik

  12. rosettasister Says:

    Well, this is just weird!

    http://drorly.blogspot.com/2008/12/obamas-atatements-about-his-mothers.html

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2154841/posts

    To: Free America52
    This is similar to the posts originally made by Pam Geller over at AtlasShruggs.

    http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/10/how-could-stanl.html

    Why is it that nobody recalls seeing Ann Dunham pregnant? nor are there any photos?
    I think that BHO Sr. was entrapped.

    55 posted on Saturday, December 27, 2008 10:38:20 AM by Polarik

    To: Polarik
    Could it be that Obamas real mother is his grandmother Madelyn Dunham?

    58 posted on Saturday, December 27, 2008 10:50:07 AM by jarofants

    To: jarofants
    Anything is possible.

    66 posted on Saturday, December 27, 2008 11:34:48 AM by Polarik

  13. rosettasister Says:

    I believe Polarik is referring to Techdude here:

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2152257/posts

    This web page:

    http://ObamaTheFraud.blogTownHall.com/

    attempts to list all links relevant to the controversy surrounding Obama’s continued concealment of his birth-related documentation. The purpose is to provide a one-stop shop for those interested in researching this further. The media is ignoring this story altogether, apparently in hopes that it goes away. It the story does not go away, then they’ll be forced to explain why they failed to ever investigate this obvious question.

    Please send suggestions for links to add. I will try to update when possible, at least until some responsible news organization begins properly covering the story.

    To: MelSmith

    Pull the Atlas Shruggs story on the forgery as that was written by a fraud whom I exposed, and replace it with one just around the corner from you:

    Obama’s Born Conspiracy

    31 posted on Saturday, December 27, 2008 11:26:00 AM by Polarik

  14. rosettasister Says:

    “The Rights of Citizens and the Powers of the State”

    http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=2276

    Yesterday, blogger Mario Apuzzo, Esq., wrote a phenomenal piece

    http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2008/12/obamas-personal-right-to-privacy-cannot.html

    about how Barack Hussein Obama’s right to privacy with respect to his birth certificate is trumped by the right of the People to know who their next President is to be.

    In my view, if Barack Hussein Obama were simply an American citizen, then I would fight for his right to not have his personal information divulged. In that case, nobody has an inherent right to know about his personal affairs.

    However, we’re not talking about a private citizen. We are talking about someone who is on his way to officially becoming President-elect (once Congress counts and subsequently certifies the Electoral College votes).

    Guess what? The following trusim now applies:

    The onus of eligibility is on the nominee for the office of President to show his credentials.

  15. rosettasister Says:

    Found at CountryFirst:

    “Obama’s pal Eric Whitaker, his Tony Rezko tie”

    http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/10/obamas_pal_eric_whitaker_his_t.html

    ———————————————-

    “Probe that led to Blagojevich began with fed-up administrator”

    http://www.twincities.com/allheadlines/ci_11309765

    Rezko was an important catch. A multifaceted businessman with interests in real estate and pizza parlors, Rezko became a gatekeeper to Blagojevich, advising him on appointments to boards and commissions.

    Obama, for example, acknowledged he had “formal discussions” with Rezko in 2003 when a close friend of Obama’s, Eric Whitaker, emerged as a candidate for director of the Illinois Department of Public Health.

    In the job, Whitaker’s agency oversaw funding for the staff of the health facilities planning board, but he has not been implicated in the scandal. Whitaker has said he did not actively seek the job.

    —————————————————

    Today in Hawaii

    By today, Obama returned to his vacation routine: a workout at the local Marine Corps Base Hawaii gym and a quick “hello” to the military families who stood across the parking lot from his motorcade.

    Michelle Obama and friends from Chicago — Valerie Jarrett, Eric Whitaker and Martin Nesbitt — joined the president-elect. Obama has skipped working out only one day — Christmas — on the base since he arrived in Hawaii on Dec. 20.

    Obama and his family have tried to keep a low profile during the vacation, although the man who becomes president on Jan. 20 is finding that difficult. Although the president-elect has no public schedule, his infrequent trips to play golf and grab quick lunches have drawn dozens of gawkers who want to catch a glimpse of Obama, who was born and raised on the island.

  16. patriotamy Says:

    rosettasister Says:

    December 27, 2008 at 11:21 pm
    Although the president-elect has no public schedule, his infrequent trips to play golf and grab quick lunches have drawn dozens of gawkers who want to catch a glimpse of Obama, “who was born and raised on the island.”
    ————————————-
    The media does it again. What happened to him living in Indonesia with his mother and LS?

  17. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    Excerpt from Michigan Law review.. >
    ________________________________
    Does Congress possess the power to adjudicate a dispute over a presidential candidate’s qualifications through this vote-counting process? The answer is not completely clear. On one hand, there is historical precedent for Congress exercising its power not to count electoral votes. In 1873, three of Georgia’s electoral votes cast for Horace Greeley, who died after the November election but before the date the Electoral College met, were not counted. The Senate voted to count those votes while the House voted not to do so and, due to the nonconcurrence of the two chambers, the Greeley votes were not counted under a joint rule. In the event that there is a dispute over a president-elect’s qualifications to serve, it is conceivable that an objection could be made by at least one Senator and one member of the House, which Congress would then have to rule upon. On the other hand, the process of counting the state electors’ votes is, arguably, purely ministerial. This is especially true for states that comply with the safe harbor deadline. As a matter of federal statutory law, those states are entitled to have their electoral votes counted, where controversies are resolved by the safe harbor date.

    Of course, Congress could simply refuse to comply with the safe harbor statute. Suppose, for example, that Colorado is the pivotal state in 2008, that it completes its post-election dispute resolution proceedings by the safe harbor date, and that it timely transmits its list of votes for McCain. Suppose further that Congress refuses to count those votes on the ground that McCain is ineligible and instead counts a competing slate sent by Obama’s electors, in plain violation of the federal safe harbor statute. What then? Would McCain have any legal recourse?

    A candidate in these circumstances would almost surely have Article III standing, as the party most directly injured by Congress’s failure to abide by federal law. The candidate would also have prudential standing, given that he would have suffered a particularized rather than a generalized injury, through its refusal to count the electoral votes to which he was arguably entitled. The big problem is the political question doctrine. The court might deem the question of how to count electoral votes as being entrusted to Congress’s unreviewable discretion, and therefore non-justiciable. It is very difficult to predict whether a federal court would intervene in such a nightmare scenario, particularly given the slipperiness of the political question doctrine. The Twentieth Amendment adds to the confusion. It provides that “if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified.” Unfortunately, it does not explicitly say who is to make the determination whether a president elect has “failed to qualify,” and there is little scholarship on the subject. Vasan Kesavan’s article Is the Electoral Count Act Unconstitutional? argues that the Constitution’s structure “suggests that neither the President nor Congress makes these determinations.” It is anyone’s guess, however, whether the Supreme Court would agree or whether it would deem this a nonjusticiable political question.

    _________________________________
    The article is about McCain and dated October, but still an excellent read
    about standing and what can be done.

    michiganlawreview.org/firstimpressions/vol107/tokaji.htm

  18. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    The wording of the Resolution congress passed to qualify McCain
    ________________________________
    RESOLUTION
    Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.

    Whereas the Constitution of the United States requires that, to be eligible for the Office of the President, a person must be a `natural born Citizen’ of the United States;

    Whereas the term `natural born Citizen’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;

    Whereas there is no evidence of the intention of the Framers or any Congress to limit the constitutional rights of children born to Americans serving in the military nor to prevent those children from serving as their country’s President;

    Whereas such limitations would be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the `natural born Citizen’ clause of the Constitution of the United States, as evidenced by the First Congress’s own statute defining the term `natural born Citizen’;

    Whereas the well-being of all citizens of the United States is preserved and enhanced by the men and women who are assigned to serve our country outside of our national borders;

    Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to be President; and

    Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a `natural born Citizen’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United Calendar No. 715110th CONGRESS2d SessionS. RES. 511RESOLUTIONRecognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.April 24, 2008Reported without amendmentStates.

  19. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    echo echo echo
    geeeeez nobody around today

  20. Barry Says:

    if they pass the bill requiring all candidates to prove their eligibility it’ll be interesting to see if Obama runs for re-election…if he isn’t sitting in a fed pen by then.

  21. roving Says:

    I keep going into moderation. maybe others are to

  22. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    Hi Roving

    been really quiet in here today

  23. Diamond_Dave Says:

    Whereas the term `natural born Citizen’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;

    Whereas such limitations would be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the `natural born Citizen’ clause of the Constitution of the United States, as evidenced by the First Congress’s own statute defining the term `natural born Citizen’;

    Talk about speaking out of both sides of your mouth! No wonder nothing gets done without a congressional pay raise attached to it.

  24. ddlew2 Says:

    Bad login the first time…..

    Whereas the term `natural born Citizen’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;

    Whereas such limitations would be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the `natural born Citizen’ clause of the Constitution of the United States, as evidenced by the First Congress’s own statute defining the term `natural born Citizen’;

    Talk about speaking out of both sides of your mouth! No wonder nothing gets done without a congressional pay raise attached to it.

  25. susie hudson Says:

    hi all, hope your holidays were filled with joy..now we have new years to celebrate…, I need a break….sleep for forty days and nights!!!!!

  26. Bob Says:

    Remember the 20th Amendment, Section 3: ” . . . If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified . . .”

    This was ratified in 1933 — (and not the distant past, in which Congress forgets that it repealed its 1790 Act 5 years later in 1795, because to expand the term ‘natural born Citizen’ to include children born overseas requires an amendment to the Constitution, and not simply an act of Congress adopted under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4) — which is important, because several sitting (or recently deceased or retired) justices, were born in the 1920s and 1930s.

    1933 is only 75 years ago this year: therefore, we are talking about relatively recent constitutional history that “we the people” thought it might be very possible for a President-elect not to “qualify,” and therefore, “the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.”

  27. thinkingmom11 Says:

    Good Morning, y’all! I didn’t fall off the face of the earth although it felt like it for a while. I have been crazy busy but things should be slowing down a bit. I thought of you all yesterday when I heard Berg got another conference scheduled. I have not been able to keep up with much but I am hoping to get some catching up done in the next couple of days.

    I hope everyone had a wonderful Christmas spent with family and friends. I will be checking in periodically and wish everyone a fabulous and prosperous New Year if I don’t get a chance to post much…

  28. sliderblaze Says:

    From Jawareport. I knew this day would come when i first heard this song back in April of 07. I guess we should also hold Obama accountable for having his “rally’s” being co hosted by T.I. and Ludacris. Now, i like both T.I. and Luda. but they have no place on a stage with someone running for Pres.

    “March, 2007 – “Barack The Magic Negro” Debuted On Rush Limbaugh”

    The MSM is appalled again. RNC candidate Chip Saltsman’s sent Christmas greetings to committee members and included a music CD making fun of liberals. Titled “We Hate the USA”, it includes a song called “Barack the Magic Negro” as well as “John Edwards Poverty Tour”, “Wright Place, Wrong Time”, and other goofy titles.

    Rush Limbaugh first played “Barack the Magic Negro” on his show almost two years ago. The song title came from LA Times op-ed piece titled “Obama, the Magic Negro”.

    AS EVERY CARBON-BASED life form on this planet surely knows, Barack Obama, the junior Democratic senator from Illinois, is running for president. Since making his announcement, there has been no end of commentary about him in all quarters — musing over his charisma and the prospect he offers of being the first African American to be elected to the White House.

    But it’s clear that Obama also is running for an equally important unelected office, in the province of the popular imagination — the “Magic Negro.”

    The Magic Negro is a figure of postmodern folk culture, coined by snarky 20th century sociologists, to explain a cultural figure who emerged in the wake of Brown vs. Board of Education. “He has no past, he simply appears one day to help the white protagonist,” reads the description on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro.

    The MSM would do well to research the reason behind this song instead of making complete fools out of themselves. Obama even thought the song was funny.

    (Emphasis by Good Lt): I think it is important to remind the idiots in the mainstream media and on the left – of whom there is no shortage – that this phrase originated from a LIBERAL columnist. David Eherenstein is a LIBERAL columnist for the LA Times, you adorable little fact-challenged journalists and leftards. The operative word here is LIBERAL COLUMNIST DAVID EHERENSTEIN, not “Rush Limbaugh.” If you want to spray your faux-outrage, spray it in his direction, for this is a creation of one of your own. This phrase did not originate on the Rush Limbaugh show. He merely repeated it (and also foretold that by him playing it, it would be picked up and attributed to him, which of course, happened). You lefties would be hilarious if you weren’t so goddamned predictable, but wise man say -“don’t let the facts get in the way of a good circle jerk of manufactured outrage. Fap fap fap fap fap….”

    Jawareport.com sorry bout the language, but, i didnt right it….lol but it kinda resembles something i would right.

  29. sliderblaze Says:

    ok DD, i’m still going with the 17-24 Eagles win….yai yai

  30. sliderblaze Says:

    it’s funny to hear them bash Caroline Kennedy for saying “you know” and dub her as “almost inarticulate” but, they give O a pass on his uh, uh,..uh..uh…and..so…uh uh… i pointed that out to my babies mommas parents, and at his press conference, we laughed our asses off at every uh…uh. and so…uh

  31. rosettasister Says:

    Good Sunday, all!

    New Thread:

    https://rosettasister.wordpress.com/2008/12/28/hugh-hewitt-asks-a-good-question-%E2%80%93-was-the-dog-that-didn%E2%80%99t-bark-barack-obama-under-oath/

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: