See other (s)Elections Articles
Title: R. Barclay Surrick dooms the Democratic Party
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/2008 ... -surrick-dooms-democratic.html
Published: Oct 25, 2008
Author: Staff
Post Date: 2008-10-25 23:34:27 by Horse
Keywords: None
Views: 269
Comments: 3
I sort of hope that Phil Berg has learned his lesson concerning the liberal bunch of communists he has dedicated his life to are nothing but a bunch of liberal communists who will screw even Phil Berg over. It seesm that R. Barclay Surrick decided today in a most amusing "finding" that honestly makes the Carter appointed judges and their wacko "findings" sound less wacko. R. Barclay Surrick decided to cover his butt in getting rid of the Obama fraud case in a 34 page statement which concluded that the Constitution gives citizens, political parties or voters no jurisdiction over policing if someone qualifies for the presidency. Like all liberals R. Barclay Surrick apparently has not heard of the 10 Amendment which grants all powers not granted the government to the states and the people respectively. Clinton appointee R. Barclay Surrick just ripped up the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights and made kings of those 435 dictators in Congress who are all bought and paid for by George Soros or some other big money interest. R. Barclay Surrick cares nothing about checks and balances of the judiciary. Phil Berg should have learned his lesson but I highly doubt it, because Phil Berg might just be surprised in getting exactly what he wants now in Hillary Hamrod as President. Listen closely to what Surrick granted in turning this over to Congress to pass laws for what Berg wants. Surrick is noting that Congress is the only power to police this election. OK, so who controls Congress? Democrats. Who controls Obama's fate? Democrats Now just say that Obama steals the election in November. Our little system of checks and balances states that each state does not elect the President, but it elects the Electoral College delegates who then in December vote for the President. In knowing this, it is quite possible that come November, someone in the Clinton clique with New York backing will reveal a British birth certifcate which Obama knowingly hid in fraud. The Electoral College will be controlled by Democrats, many of whom are Congressional Democrats. A number of whom are Hillary elected members. It is beyond conjecture that in a mayhem like this that Congress as in other close election stalemates will take control "for the good of the country". Who would be left according to Judge Surrick, but Democrats to decide what will become of the presidency as he has covered his butt and thrown all the power back to the Clinton's who appointed him. Take a guess who the blue dog sell outs, Stenny Hoyer, are going to side with? Hillary Clinton. Who is leading the charge in the Senate? Hillary Clinton. So America has a criminal fraud in Obama. Hillary whispers sweet nothings about prison time time to for Joe Biden for what he did to Lawrence Sinclair and in a miraculous conception Hillary Clinton is birthed upon the American public. Phil Berg wants such a Hillary in office and will get what he desires, but does America really want a selected president that all the Democrats and media know very well is moving this agenda while Barack Obama is a fraud. See that is the ruin of Hillary Clinton and the entire Democratic establishment. Want to see real anarchy? Just tell Americans the entire scam was known and John McCain had the election stolen from him in more ways than one so either Obama got in or another Democrat all due to R. Barclay Surrick making this once again liberal Democrat ruling. That is why I will never understand Democrats like Phil Berg. They think it is wonderful when their Democrats are rigging the system, but when they get it rigged against them they run to court expecting a ruling that is honest and find the entire place is crooked. The catch being Berg might get Hillary as President in what he wants, but it will bring down the entire Democratic party in 2010. 2010 might see more independents in Congress in their numbering 2 than Democrats. What I have written before is fact. The Hillary Clinton voters have the power to save her, save the Democratic party and save themselves by simply voting for John McCain. Sweep this entire fraud of Obama away as you know very well from the vote fraud, money fraud and birth certificate fraud that Obama will be impeached. The last thing Democrats want is Nancy Pelosi banging her gavel along with Hillary Clinton trying to defend Barack Obama in the same way Nixon had people marching in the streets for his impeachment. Remember PUMA people what you did to the GOP over Nixon. This is coming on you in spades over Barack Obama in a bigger smear that will have the media heads fired as your radicals storm the gates demanding retribution for why all of this information was hidden which would have saved this nation this trauma. PUMA people you have the power to reign this in and save yourselves from the Obama meltdown. I would suggest strongly that you in your elections remove a few of the Congressional criminals who started this fiasco. I don't have to agree with Stenny Hoyer, but you know you have a leader in him your party needs compared Pelosi and her stooge Murtha. Throw that clack out and for your own sakes you had better figure out what to do with the insane people you have running. Do you really want Al Franken as your presence in Congress tainting Mrs. Clinton for the next 4 years? Some of you had better be pulling levers for some moderate Republicans and tossing out the major problems your majority would be saddled with. Let Hillary control the Senate, work on some better policy and show the nation she can lead without being polarizing and it will be a good launching pad in 2010. You Democrats know she is like a child in grabbing things when opportunity arises. Don't put her into the position of melting herself down that R. Barclay Surrick just did. Democrats, you take out this Chicago syndicate now in a resounding defeat and they will never be back. If you elect Obama, he is going to take the entire party down and you will rue the day you didn't vote for John McCain. It is time for the adults to stand up as the juveniles have been jerking the Democratic wing of America around since Tip O'Neill went room temperature. Hoyer can make the House work. Clinton can make the Senate work if you stay on her. Let McCain fix the nation and then give a go at the politics in 2012 or the politics are going to bury you all in 2010.
Poster Comment: The next week and a half will be the most interesting of the whole 2008 campaign.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Horse (#0)
This is purely speculation, very speculative, and what if? clearly labeled as such. Disclaimer made let's play "What if?". What if you wanted to have a Hitlery Preznitcy but knew that she could not be elected? What if the "you" was the same manipulators etc., ... that put the Imbecile-in-Chief in power? What if someone hit on the idea of putting up someone electable who could then be disqualified and discarded thus freeing the Electors in the Electoral College to vote in Hitlery? What if?
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
Title: SPACE RESERVED FOR NEWS ON COURT ORDER (BERG Vs. OBAMA)
See also the challenge to McCain's status as a natural born citizen, Hollander v. McCain, which found a lack of standing for Hollander: Hollander v. McCain, 566 F.Supp.2d 63, July 24, 2008
#2. To: Horse (#0)
#3. To: Original_Intent (#1)
This is not to demean the sincerity of Hollander’s challenge to McCain’s eligibility for the presidency; as discussed supra Part II, that challenge has yet to be definitively settled, and, as a number of commentators have concluded, arguably cannot be without a constitutional amendment. What is settled, however, is that an individual voter like Hollander lacks standing to raise that challenge in the federal courts. See Dugan & Collins, supra, at 115 (recognizing debates over meaning of Art. II, § 1, cl. 4, but concluding that voters lack standing to raise that issue judicially). Indeed, “[t]he purest reason to deny standing is that the plaintiff is not able to show an injury to the voter interest, however much the plaintiff may feel offended by the challenged practice.” 13 Charles Alan Wright et al., Federal Practice & Procedure § 3531.4 (2d ed. 1984 & 2007 supp.) (footnote omitted). Because Hollander can show no such injury, this court lacks jurisdiction over his attempt to resolve the question of McCain’s eligibility under Art. II, § 1, cl. 4. Whatever the contours of that constitutional provision, Article III has been definitively read by the courts to confer no jurisdiction over this kind of action.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest