Country is Headed to a Constitutional Crisis

[Adam]

www.obamacrimes.com/

(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 10/06/08) - 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, announced today that Obama and Democratic National Committee [DNC] filed a Joint Motion for Protective Order to Stay Discovery Pending a Decision on the Motion to Dismiss (which was) filed on 09/24/08.

While legal, Berg stated he is “outraged as this is another attempt to hide the truth from the public; it is obvious that documents do not exist to prove that Obama is qualified to be President.” The case is Berg v. Obama, No. 08-cv-04083.

Their joint motion indicates a concerted effort to avoid the truth by attempting to delay the judicial process, although legal, by not resolving the issue presented: that is, whether Barack Obama meets the qualifications to be President.

It is obvious that Obama was born in Kenya and does not meet the “qualifications” to be President of the United States pursuant to our United States Constitution. Obama cannot produce a certified copy of his “Vault” [original long version] Birth Certificate from Hawaii because it does not exist.

[stephen]

Hi Dave,

If the delay puts discovery after the election and he is subsequently disqualified it means that there will be no elected president after George W. The country would be without a President, and I'm not sure, but I don't think the constitution has provisions for such a situation. What happens next would certainly be without precedent.

[Adam]

Stephen - I don't know how the Constitution addresses the problem.

Should Obama win. With Obama declaring martial law Bush would be the last elected.

I don't see Obama breaking the law from the start and expecting reasonable to tolerate the Federal government.

The Feds are installing fire walls as fast as possible at this time.

Looks to me that the Feds can not afford Obama. The idea of civil law could break down just as fast as a bank.

[Parn]

Sounds like a recipie for civil war.

[Adam]

One more thing Stephen Obama has all ready planned and has put and will place people in position to carry out the political Inquisition that must be a part of his domestic agenda.

Parn - seems likely.

[stephen]

Here is a link to the court document regarding Philip Berg v. Obama and the DNC.

dockets.justia.com/docket/court-paedce/case_no-2:2008cv04083/case_id-281573

Seems Obama's real name might just be "Barry Soetoro" and Indonesian citizen.

[Caligastia Lanonandek]

This cause of action seems pretty solid. I can see an argument against in that his mother's abandonment of her US citizenship post dates Obama's birth. However, where's there's smoke there's fire and Obama's refusual to produce valid documentation says something.
There's more that needs discovery.

Were Obama booted from office, Biden would be pres - and where ie invalidated - Nancy Palosi.

Scarey propositions all

[Deleted]

hey cal,
your knowledge which we've come to label a prediction about the current election, i don't recall where it was mentioned on the site so i can't remember the exact wording but i believe you said that george bush would be the last president...not that there wouldn't be an election... is that correct? stephen's comment makes me wonder, it would be an interesting situation indeed if obama were elected but the discovery of the truth was soon enough that the american people didn't recognize him...though i doubt pelosi or biden would be much better...
as a side question, back when I was enthralled with Drunvalo Melchizedek's work (for those of you who don't know he is an angel who is basically doing nothing for lack of a better way to say it, his writings aren't really spiritually worthwhile...though they do sort of give you the funny feeling i got from reading the UB, presumably similar to what oph had mentioned in his post to elise, he's not of a particularly bad ilk though being most definitely routed in universal drone thought as far as i can tell he's not evil, cal correct me if i'm wrong on that...)
sorry for the long winded background but the point being his writing focused on what he call sacred geometry and in the discussion there is brought up the Fibonacci and golden mean spirals, and interestingly it mathematically correct that if you divide the previous number in the series by the following number in both of these series you end up at just about the same number, 1.618, after enough iterations, the mathematically interesting thing is that they begin with vastly different parameters the Fibonacci being 1+1=2, 2+1=3, 3+2=5, 5+3=8, and so on, while the golden mean series to truly be defined is what is referred to as an infinite series, the equation of which is rather complicated you can read more about it heremathworld.wolfram.com/GoldenRatio.html, basically the golden mean has no beginning is never ending and though the Fibonacci has a beginning it approximates the golden mean, i see this as one of the few useful nuggets of info he has to offer as I see this as symbolic of mankind's striving for divinity(don't misinterpret this i mean only that humans should strive to be like Father, or at least like Michael since we have had incarnate contact with him)
i apologize again for the length of this message but how this connects with the conversation is that I noticed the last two election being the closest we have ever had (to my knowledge), and was wondering if just for the sake of Father's own sense of humor that there might be an actual stalemate in a presidential election... i don't know about the rest of you but i would fall over laughing...

hope all is well,

Denken

[Caligastia Lanonandek]

Den

I said Bush would be the last elected american president. The office doesn't transfer until January.

I don't see Dru as a bad guy. He's promoting standard Melchezidek teachings which you've correctly identified as mostly useless. He was sent by the universe and qualifies as what the communist's say is a useful idiot. He does have an eye for money.
His followers were once charging 400.00 to view his video tapes.
I assume he got a rake from it.

[Jeremiah]

Den

I said Bush would be the last elected american president. The office doesn't transfer until January.
You've stated in someother topic that you don't like predictions with exact dates, 'cause usually they don't work that way, but yet you insist in that president bush is the last elected american president.
first: Bush was not by any democratic means elected as he's got fewer votes than Gore in the 2000 election. He was only president 'cause of the weird way of count by states that the constitution enables.
second: someone is going to be elected president of the U.S. on november 4th, even if he's not able to step in the office by january 1st.
Either way your state is uncorrect, sorry to tell you, but dont get mad it's human to fail. cheers

[Caligastia Lanonandek]

Jere

You seem to have no problem continually showing your ignorance. I suggest you learn how and why the electoral college works. Of course, you'd have to read something more informative than the UB but nothing is perfect. Apparently they didn't teach history to you in grade school.

[stephen]

According to document 11 filed in the Berg case, claim is made that neither candidate qualifies as a natural born citizen and that neither of them are eligible to be President. I thought the issue of McCain was resolved. Is it still in question as well?

[Jeremiah]

You seem to have no problem continually showing your ignorance. I suggest you learn how and why the electoral college works. Of course, you'd have to read something more informative than the UB but nothing is perfect. Apparently they didn't teach history to you in grade school.

I'm not aware of how the electoral college works as Im not u.s. citizen, but democracy is the government of the people 's majority, at least so should it be.
But we're getting away from what I posted wich is your believes that Bush was the last u.s. president elected, so we only have to wait a bit more than 2 weeks to find out weather you're right or wrong
peace

[hollis]

Jeremiah and Cal: Bush was not elected in 2000, at least in my opinion. He was appointed by the judiciary. He was elected in 2004, however.

[rob]

I'm not aware of how the electoral college works as Im not u.s. citizen, but democracy is the government of the people 's majority, at least so should it be.

That's understandable Jer. If and when you ARE a US citizen - and have educated yourself about the subjects which you admit you know nothing about - your opinions on how we Americans should conduct our elections and other internal affairs may be worth listening to. In the meantime...not so much.

Nice try though. Here's a little reading to help you know what you're talking about next time.

www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/articles/07/democracy.html

Democracy or Liberty

Does democracy really deserve the praise it receives? According to Webster's Dictionary, democracy is defined as "government by the people; especially: rule of the majority." What's so great about majority rule? Let's look at majority rule, as a decision-making tool, and ask how many of our choices we would like settled by what a majority likes.

Would you want the kind of car that you own to be decided through a democratic process, or would you prefer purchasing any car you please? Ask that same question about decisions such as where you live, what clothes you purchase, what food you eat, what entertainment you enjoy and what wines you drink. I'm sure that if anyone suggested that these choices be subject to a democratic process, you'd deem it tyranny.

I'm not alone in seeing democracy as a variant of tyranny. James Madison, the father of our Constitution, said that in a pure democracy, "there is nothing to check the inducement to sacrifice the weaker party or the obnoxious individual." At the 1787 Constitutional Convention, Edmund Randolph said, " . . . that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy." John Adams said, "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." Chief Justice John Marshall observed, "Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos."

Our founders intended for us to have a limited republican form of government where rights precede government and there is rule of law. Citizens, as well as government officials, are accountable to the same laws. Government intervenes in civil society only to protect its citizens against force and fraud but does not intervene in the cases of peaceable, voluntary exchange. By contrast, in a democracy, the majority rules either directly or through its elected representatives. The law is whatever the government deems it to be. Rights may be granted or taken away.

Clearly, we need government, and that means there must be collective decision-making. Alert to the dangers of majority rule, the Constitution's framers inserted several anti-majority rules. In order to amend the Constitution, it requires a two-thirds vote of both Houses, or two-thirds of state legislatures, to propose an amendment, and requires three-fourths of state legislatures for ratification. Election of the president is not done by a majority popular vote but by the Electoral College.

Part of the reason for having two houses of Congress is that it places an obstacle to majority rule. Fifty-one senators can block the wishes of 435 representatives and 49 senators. The Constitution gives the president a veto to thwart the power of 535 members of Congress. It takes two-thirds of both houses of Congress to override the president's veto.

In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wrote, "Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority." That's another way of saying that one of the primary dangers of majority rule is that it confers an aura of legitimacy and respectability on acts that would otherwise be deemed tyrannical. Liberty and democracy are not synonymous and could actually be opposites.