See other (s)Elections Articles
Title: Service union contends signatures for Nader petition faulty (Article from 2004 election where I kept Nader off the Oregon presidential ballot)
Source:
Oregonian
URL Source: http://libertypost.org/cgi-bin/read ... cgi?ArtNum=62365&SC=1&EC=40#C1
Published: Aug 16, 2004
Author: JEFF MAPES
Post Date: 2008-11-01 11:18:00 by Ferret Mike
Keywords: None
Views: 454
Comments: 38
A public employees union claimed Monday that it has uncovered widespread fraud in the Ralph Nader campaign's effort to gather enough signatures to qualify for Oregon's ballot. Nader's campaign discounted the allegations and said the Service Employees International Union -- which supports Democrat Sen. John Kerry -- is trying to intimidate its petitioners as a way of keeping the independent presidential candidate off the state's ballot. Nader must collect 15,306 valid signatures from registered voters by Aug. 24 to run in Oregon. Earlier this year, he twice failed to draw 1,000 voters to a convention, which is another way of qualifying. In those attempts, he received help from some Republicans -- who think his presence would help President Bush win the state -- and hindrance from Democrats -- who fear Nader's candidacy would drain votes from their nominee. The service employees union, which said it has spent as much as $25,000 to investigate Nader's petition drive, held a news conference to release dozens of examples of what it said appear to be falsified names and addresses. It provided written statements from 26 Portland-area voters who said their names were on petitions they did not sign. The documents included many examples of duplicates, including one woman whose name showed up on three petition sheets. One man was listed twice on the same sheet with two addresses, one of which is in the middle of a park in Gresham. "The evidence of systemic fraud is clear and convincing, and goes beyond anything we have seen before in Oregon," said Alice Dale, president of SEIU Local 49. Margaret Olney, a lawyer representing the union, said investigators checked 269 signatures and found 87 were valid. In the rest of the cases, she said, the addresses were incorrect or nonexistent, or the voters told investigators they did not sign a Nader petition. The union also presented the sworn statement of a janitor who said he heard three Nader petitioners, who are paid by the signature, sitting in an isolated stairwell discussing techniques for forging names. Michael McCarthy, who said he overheard the conversation at the Skidmore Fountain Building where Nader's canvassing operation is headquartered, told reporters that one of the petitioners described "ways to make sure the forged signatures looked more real." Later, he said, he saw a petitioner with pages ripped out of the telephone directory copying names onto a sheet. Ellen Lowe, a veteran human-services lobbyist, also appeared at the news conference to say she has filed 17 complaints with the state Elections Division accusing canvassers of fraud. Greg Kafoury, a Portland attorney who is Nader's top campaign aide in Oregon, argued that SEIU was picking out isolated examples of problems that crop up in almost any petition campaign. He said some petitioners were fired early in the drive for falsifying signatures. Kafoury said he was incensed that union investigators had visited many canvassers to deliver a letter warning that falsifying petitions is a felony. He said the letter was worded to scare petitioners into thinking they could be held liable for an invalid signature, even if they believed the signer was a properly registered voter. "The obvious goal is to intimidate people so they stop gathering signatures because they know we are close," Kafoury said. "Visiting people at their homes at night to threaten them with prison is gangster tactics. Nothing like this has ever been seen in Oregon before." The letter tells petitioners that "your signature certifies that you personally witnessed each signature collected on the petition and that you obtained the signatures from qualified voters. Falsely signing the petition may result in conviction of a felony with a fine of up to $100,000 or prison for up to five years." Olney said the letter simply restates elections law. She also said investigators weren't picking out only suspicious signatures when they began investigating about 4,000 signatures the Nader campaign submitted to Multnomah County elections offices last week. Kafoury said the Nader campaign has collected about 10,000 signatures, adding that about two-thirds of those submitted to the counties have been approved. That is a standard error rate, he said. If he doesn't lose many petitioners, Kafoury said, he is confident of making the ballot. But Nader's campaign is under mounting time pressure. Elections officials have warned that the campaign needs to submit all of its signatures to the counties early this week so they can be verified and turned over to the state by Aug. 24. In addition, Multnomah County elections officials say they have tightened procedures as a result of the SEIU investigation and are watching for duplicate signatures. Anne Martens, the secretary of state's spokeswoman, said, "We take fraud very seriously, and we will investigate every complaint." Jeff Mapes: 503-221-8209; jeffmapes@news.oregonian.com
Poster Comment: My press conference statement: Good morning, I’m Michael McCarthy and I’m here today to describe the fraudulent behavior I have witnessed. First, let me tell you a little about myself. I am a longtime forest activist and a strong supporter of Ralph Nader and his work. In 2000 I was an ardent Nader for President supporter and worked hard on his campaign here in Oregon. I still believe that he would be a wonderful President and have the utmost respect for him and his lifetime of activism. That is why I was shocked to discover the fraud and identity theft that was being committed on his behalf – I know what it feels like to have my identity stolen, it happened to me and it took several years for me to clear up the situation. In the course of my duties as a janitor for the Portland Saturday Market I work in and around the Skidmore Fountain Building, where the signature gathering office for the Nader for President Campaign is located. In late July I encountered a number of signature gatherers and began to witness a number of events that got me very worried. One afternoon I noticed a group of three signature gatherers, one of whom had already approached me about signing his sheet, sitting together in a back corner of the office building. I was curious as to their activities because it is an area that was not usually frequented by the other circulators and was quite out of the way from their normal traffic flow. I was in a position to overhear their conversation and was shocked at what they were saying. All of them expressed dismay over how difficult it was for them to gather signatures on the street, because of, as they described it, the bad vibes they were getting from Oregonians when asked to sign the Nader petition. One of the three circulators was telling the others how this could be “free money.” He told them how to copy signatures from previous initiative sheets like he does, and how he had copies of those sheets that they could use. He went on to describe ways to make sure the forged signatures looked more real, like using different pens, how to alter the angle of the pens to make the writing look different and many other ways to make “the product look as real as possible” They kept using the phrase “free money” over and over again. Four days after overhearing that conversation, I observed a different circulator sitting at a table in a public area of the building frantically writing on a number of petition sheets. I looked closer, and saw that he had ripped-out pages from the phone book in front of him and was copying names onto his sheets from the pages. To me all of this activity was plain theft. It is the right of the individual to sign or not sign any petition. When someone falsifies signatures, they are stealing someone’s identity and they are directly assaulting a very important tool – direct access to democracy past the oligarchy. We need to keep that process honest. Being on the Oregon ballot is a right that ought to come through the support of the people, not the fraudulent efforts of those only interested in easy money. Thank you, Mike McCarthy
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Ferret Mike (#0)
Shocked, simply shocked, I say. Methinks the believer in the fascist Dem/Rep game doth protest too much.
Ahmadinejad in 2008! Here is the written statement of the other person besides me who spoke as an independent party at the press conference. He is a nice guy, an Air Force vet who I enjoyed talking to immensely: If you look at a copy of my real signature and a copy of the signature on the petition, it is clear that the two don't match. The most obvious difference is that I don't sign my name that way. The other obvious problem with the forgery is that it lists my residence in Portland. That is not correct, I live in Gresham. It is ridiculous to think I would sign a petition to help Ralph Nader do anything, let alone run for president, considering the small business that I operate in Gresham. I run a Corvair parts reproduction service. You may recall that the Corvair was the car that Mr. Nader harshly criticized trashed in the book that made his career, "Unsafe at Any Speed." Now, he was right about the problem with the Corvair, but by the time the book came out and he got all that publicity, Chevrolet had already fixed the safety concerns and it became a fine little car. Still, given all that, I am not likely to give Mr. Nader any help anytime soon. You should also be made aware of the fact that I am a registered Republican and I support the re-election of President Bush. I have recently learned of news accounts of Oregon State Republican leaders circulating Ralph Nader petitions to help him qualify for the ballot. I guess they think that without Nader's help in taking away from the Democratic challenger, the president cannot win. I find such tactics despicable. I would never stoop to such a level and I believe that President Bush can win without such dirty tricks. But the bottom line is that my signature was forged and there are two things I want done about it. I want the Oregon State Elections Division to immediately investigate my complaint of fraud and I join the others in calling on the Ralph Nader campaign not to attempt to qualify for the Oregon ballot using illegal means. Thank You. That's all fine and dandy. There's more fraud that goes on with Rep/Dem games in the states than with the indies. This strikes me as the Right and the Left Wings of the American Fascist Party just protecting their franchise.
Ahmadinejad in 2008! Absolutely spot-on correct. If you're not cheating, you're not trying - to quote an old baseball saying.
Contact: Danny Haro of Reform 6434 Now, +1-626-622-7279 Members of Local 6434 to Demand Answers and Democracy From SEIU International President Andy Stern and other Leaders -- Workers Say Washington-based Officers and Lack of Oversight are Responsible for Corruption in Largest Calif. Local Union Monday News Conference Scheduled Outside Secret Discipline Hearing into Misdeeds of Former Union Pres. Tyrone Freeman MANHATTAN BEACH, Calif., Oct. 27 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Homecare and nursing home workers from across California will attend the disciplinary hearing of former SEIU Local 6434 president Tyrone Freeman and give their reaction at an 11:30 am news conference today, Monday, Oct. 27. The caregivers say the hearing -- held by SEIU officials to discipline one of their own -- is a smokescreen to deflect attention from the role national union leaders played in promoting and protecting Tyrone Freeman from scrutiny and opposition by rank-and-file union members. Reform 6434 Now members will present SEIU with a list of demands which include the repayment of union dues stolen by Freeman, and free and fair elections so that members themselves can choose new leaders. WHAT: SEIU Local 6434 members and supporters react to disciplinary hearing and announce demands for the return of rights and money to local caregivers WHEN: October 27, 2008, 11:30am WHERE: Sidewalk in front of Manhattan Beach Marriott, 1400 Park View Ave Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 SOURCE Reform 6434 Now Calif. Healthcare Workers to SEIU: We Want Our Money Back and Our Rights
The U.S. Constitution is no impediment to our form of government.--PJ O'Rourke
Tyrone Freeman, head of SEIU's largest California union local, ordered employees of a charity he ran to campaign for candidates, some ex-workers allege. A Los Angeles labor leader now the target of a corruption probe routinely ordered employees of a charity he headed to work on campaigns for political candidates -- a practice barred by law -- according to people who said they participated in such activities. Tyrone Freeman, president of the Service Employees International Union's largest California local, later denied to the Internal Revenue Service that the charity employees were required to do campaign work, said a person close to an IRS inquiry into the matter. Because they are subsidized by taxpayers, charities are forbidden to take part in campaigns for public office, directly or indirectly. Violations can cost charities their tax exemptions and lead to other penalties. It is unclear what resulted from the 2006 IRS inquiry into Freeman's nonprofit, a training center for low-income workers. Citing privacy statutes, an IRS spokesperson declined to discuss any investigation of the group. The charity's tax-exempt status apparently remained unchanged. Six people who worked for either the union or the charity told The Times that Freeman, and others at the labor organization acting on his behalf, ordered the nonprofit's staffers to join partisan get-out-the-vote drives and other campaign efforts during and after their regular hours. The former employees spoke on condition of anonymity because they feared retaliation and legal jeopardy. "We constantly told Tyrone that it was inappropriate, but he constantly had us out in the field," said one former charity worker. "Lists were always provided to him. If you weren't there, you got ratted out." Freeman could not be reached for comment, and attempts to interview his attorney were unsuccessful. An SEIU spokeswoman in Washington, D.C., said the union knew nothing about any campaign work by the charity workers or an IRS examination. "They did not report it to us, as far as we can tell," Michelle Ringuette said of Freeman's local. A staffer made an anonymous tip to the IRS in late 2004 or early 2005, and the agency eventually sent a letter to the charity raising questions about the alleged political activities, two people familiar with the events said. An IRS examiner subsequently interviewed Freeman at the union's Beverly Boulevard headquarters, and he denied that the work was performed, according to the source with knowledge of the inquiry. By that time, Freeman had stopped using the charity staffers on campaigns, former employees say. The March 2006 letter specified the 2004 race by future Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, a Los Angeles Democrat; John Kerry's presidential run that year; and former Gov. Gray Davis' 2003 bid to defeat a recall, one source said. There was no indication that they or the other politicians who benefited from the work knew the employees were from a nonprofit, several sources say. Bass became speaker this year. Calls to her and Davis for comment were not returned. "We campaigned very heavily for Karen Bass, very heavily," said a former charity staffer. "You didn't have a choice." The former workers say that employees were required to distribute fliers, walk precincts and staff phone banks for individual candidates and the Democratic ticket during the days leading up to primary and general elections. "Generally, it was door-to-door," said a former union employee. "Every single person was required to work." Freeman and his local, the United Long-Term Care Workers, are the subjects of a criminal investigation by the U.S. Labor Department, the FBI and the U.S. attorney's office, people with knowledge of the probe say. The investigation grew out of Times reports in August that the charity and Freeman's local had paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to home-based companies owned by his wife and mother-in-law. The SEIU has removed Freeman from the payroll pending an internal review of his actions. The former workers say Freeman called meetings at which he directed all employees to show up for election duty at union or campaign offices. "Tyrone said there would be consequences for anybody who didn't sign in," said one former charity employee. A former union staffer said of the nonprofit workers: "It was mandatory that they attend all the meetings. They would complain about it." Freeman founded the Homecare Workers Training Center in 2000. It is located at the union's offices near downtown, where it provides programming services and space for vocational classes and English language courses. The charity came under scrutiny after The Times reported that it has paid a home-based day care service owned by Freeman's mother-in-law nearly $100,000 annually for the last several years. The union also has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on resort golf tournaments, expensive restaurants, a Beverly Hills cigar club and a Hollywood talent agency. And the SEIU has accused Freeman of billing the union for $8,100 in costs incurred during his Hawaiian wedding. Most of the local's 160,000 members earn about $9 an hour caring for the elderly and infirm in their homes. Freeman also heads an affiliated local, California United Homecare Workers, which has about 40,000 members. The spending scandal has spread to other SEIU chapters as well as the union's national headquarters. An SEIU executive vice president, Annelle Grajeda, has gone on leave because of allegations that a former boyfriend received improper union payments. Grajeda also is president of the SEIU's California council and a second L.A.-based local. The president of the union's biggest Michigan chapter, Rickman Jackson, a former chief of staff to Freeman, has been removed from office. The Times reported that his Bell Gardens residence was used as the address of a housing corporation associated with Freeman's local. The SEIU later said that the corporation improperly paid to lease the house; the union has required Jackson to return $33,500 in payments. The housing organization never obtained the tax exemption it sought when it was founded as a nonprofit, and had lost the right to do business in California. The city of Compton is investigating whether it was defrauded when the corporation enlisted it as a partner in the nonprofit enterprise to develop homes for low-income workers. In the meantime, the SEIU has fired four of Freeman's top managers and assistants. Two other employees either were fired or resigned after being accused of threatening colleagues suspected of speaking to The Times, according to an SEIU official. L.A. labor leader used charity's employees for politics, workers say
The U.S. Constitution is no impediment to our form of government.--PJ O'Rourke
Notice how he isn't shocked, shocked let him tell you, over Obama's refusal to produce a CERTIFIED COPY OF HIS ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE? Apparently it is fine and dandy for his hero to run for President even if the sob was born in Kenya and not even a citizen of this country. Just another hypocrite.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Except he was born in Hawaii. That small detail eludes you still. You fools don't even get it do you? That the lies were designed to make a native born American possibly tainted with the suspicion he is dangerous, exotic, not worthy. It was designed to bring out the worst in people. And this is completely in keeping with Rovian divide and conquer campaigning. I am not bothered by a man born in Hawaii who has proved himself worthy of the hire as POTUS next Tuesday taking office. Damn right I'm not, if fact I am quite happy to see it happen.
Obama won't release his records from Harvard or Columbia either. I think even Bush the Dumbass released his.
Ahmadinejad in 2008! So you say. Please provide proof. Without proof, the claim is empty, just like the promises of most politicians.
"A leader, for a change." - Jimmy Carter, 1976 campaign slogan. Sound familiar? Here it comes again!
I see. So, if Barack Obama got a DUI, he would be innocent until proved guilty in a court of law. But if agenda laden Swift Boat operatives drum up false accusations complete with hearsay and false or distorted evidence, he is guilty of being born abroad until he provides concrete evidence he was born in Hawaii. Of course, as I pointed out, you could test the paper, ink, check the control number, find it identical in every way to all the birth certificates stored around it, but you idiots still would not believe he was born in Hawaii. Then you would be screaming about the treacherous jackals you face and how they diabolically forged the document as part of their plan to destroy the white race as we all know it. Get a life.
Mike, you need to get a clue and get a life yourself. I don't trust anyone's claims of anything. Not you, not Bush, not Obama - nobody. Its called "Trust but verify". Its time for the "verify" part which is not coming. Color me a Missouri person. Show me. Until you can do that, you're whistling in the wind making claims you can't back up. I trust that you believe what you do. Now verify it. Honestly, it can't be that tough, can it?
"A leader, for a change." - Jimmy Carter, 1976 campaign slogan. Sound familiar? Here it comes again!
Truthfully, nobody need go past the proof currently established which is well beyond what the Swift Boaters running this crap deserve. I know this was a load of shit when it was raised, and all it continues to do is continue to stink, from the Swift Boater side of things. It is now established beyond a reasonable doubt that he was born in Hawaii. The issue is moot. You have beaten the skin completely off this dead horse.
Best I can tell he hasn't released ANY kind of school records. So it could be that he is not the "intellectual giant" some folks make him out to be. Just sayin'.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Have one got the other as well.
I don't accept Obama's claims or those of his supporters. I want to see a CERTIFIED COPY OF HIS ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE, not something someone dummied up in Photoshop or Gimp. I know Obama is a liar and I fear most of his supporters are not above stretching the truth into unrecognizable shapes if they think it will benefit the Obamasiah.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. As he's a product of Chicago politics, we can rest assured that Obama's well-schooled in Straussian theory.
Ahmadinejad in 2008! He is apparently "well schooled" in hiding crucial documents like that birth certificate and the transcripts of his college grades, thesis papers and whatnot. Now why would someone who was actually born in America and who is the genius he and his followers want everyone to believe want to hide all the proof of those things?
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. a. When you use the term Swift Boating, it implies that the opposing party is questioning Obama's eligibility as "natural born." But it's actually Phil Berg, a high profile and long standing Democratic Party member who started the ball rolling and is in the vanguard of questioning Obama's eligibility. It's not a GOP'er, to be knowledge. b. Former pres candidates have set a past precedent, commonly accepted and understood protocol of releasing birth certificate, medical records, college transcripts. It's my understanding McCain even took his birth certificate to a Congressional Committee to be sure he met the "natural born" rule before accepting the GOP Pres candidacy. c. Here's the problem with Hawaii's birth certificate procedures and also why Obama's mother's status at the time would not give her the right to automatically pass on US citizenship to Obama if he were born in Kenya per State Department rules - this is all explained rather nicely by another person on another forum,"The Swamp", discussing this very matter: According to information from the U.S. State Department, Obama cannot be a natural-born citizen if he we born outside the US. Here is quote from their website (travel.state.gov/law/info/info_609.html) : "Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock: A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) INA provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child." As you correctly stated in the article, the problem for Obama is that his American mother was only 18 at the time of his birth. It was impossible for her to meet the requirement of living the US for 5 years after the age of 14 because she was too young. According to the information from the State Department, the original requirements are in effect and there is not retroactive change in the law for people born between 1952 and 1986. You also referenced the Hawaiian birth certificate that Obama has shown a few select reporters as evidence of being a natural-born citizen. While some question the authenticity of this document, even if it is a real document it does not prove that Obama was born in Hawaii. According to the state of Hawaii, birth certificates can be issued for foreign births. (See hawaii.gov/health/vital-r.../vital-records/index.html ) Here is the quote from that webpage: "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 a birth certificate filed with the Department of Health or 2) a person born in a foreign country." The only way to verify Obama's claim to be a natural born citizen is to see his full birth records, but Obama refuses to release this information. Please check out the references for yourself. I hope and expect that you will correct the information in the article as soon as possible.
Sure bud, and oooh, the way he hides the way the Klingons beam him up to the bird of prey to take him to the monthly debriefings by the Klingon High Council, that take a real pro; doesn't it? Idiot.
Sorry I forgot to ping you two. Please read my #19 post and the problems associated with the Hawaii birth certificate procedure - Hawaii even gives a Hawaiian Certificate of Birth to foreign births - hello, what's wrong with that picture? Quotes from their web site included. Enjoy! The 2 Hawaii bureaucratic clowns who attested to Obama's Hawaiian birth certificate left out telling the public about the loop holes that exist for acquiring a Certificate of Birth from Hawaii. Ha!
Excellent, thank you.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Yes, I'd demand proof from the Swift Boaters as well to back up their claims. Wouldn't you? Another thing you're not getting it this - you work for the Obama campaign and all you do is run around antagonizing people. One can only assume that the Obama campaign condones this and hires people who just run around insulting voters. You need to get a clue. You may have a life, but you're clueless and hopelessly so until you look at your own actions and see what results they are having. So far, you've managed to antagonize a lot of people with your stuff. Its fine to support a candidate, but its not fine to resort to insulting people when all they want is to see claims be backed up. That is clueless behavior and you should be admonished for it.
"A leader, for a change." - Jimmy Carter, 1976 campaign slogan. Sound familiar? Here it comes again!
Obama's either hiding his real birthplace or his parentage. I don't care about his parentage. That's his biz. None of us can help that. I don't lie about where I was born.
Ahmadinejad in 2008! Asking for proof is obviously just "hate".
Ahmadinejad in 2008! Getting proof and never being satisfied is Machiavellian. I mean, Swift Boating would be a new chapter in the book "The Prince" if it were written today.
Spiffy, Jiffy; neither did Barack Obama.
I would like to say Thank You for doing your part to further the one party system. This message has been paid for by the Globalist Bankers Union.
Well, the effort to put Nader on the ballot was funded by Republicans. Oregon was a battleground state that year, and Nader failed in his attempt to get on the ballot with two mini-conventions where you get 1000 signatures the same day to qualify someone for the ballot here. He had had no trouble at all doing this in 2000, but in 2004, Oregon Democrats and many Greens were reticent at allowing Nader to possibly throw the state to bush, or at best cost Kerry resources he would need to use to shore up the political situation here. The petition gathers this company hired were not the usual assortment of migrant specialists you see going state to state to do this work. Most of them sere homeless and drug effected people from the metro ares Portland, Oregon is part of. I found lists of people they fired for fraud in their garbage they had put in the public domain by putting it in the hall. They gave me enough indication of fraud to warrant my ferreting out what these folks were doing to get their pay per signature. In fact, one thing not covered in this article is how the lists I mined revealed a rich vein of fraudulent petitions from these fired people that they had already turned in to the Oregon Secretary of State's office for certification. It was so fortunate too finding this interesting and unique survival custodial job up in PDX just before I was able to do this. Aren't coincidences great? I haven't found anything near as fun as that story was this election - so far - as I did four years ago up there in Little Beirut. I like Nader, I did not like the fraud, and I didn't like the fact Republicans were using Nader to their own ends.
Nader is a pretty smart cookie. I don't think he's easily taken advantage of especially by the golf shirted Country club Republican Party machinery crowd. They're too busy keeping track of their golf game these days than interested in winning an election and proof of that defeatist mentality is that they chose McGeezer to run as their Presidential candidate. If the Republican Party machinery had wanted to beat Obama, all the GOP needed to do was run Romney for Pres and the evangelical Governor from Arkansas for VP. Obama wouldn't have stood a chance, especially in light of the economic melt down. Given the choice between a self-made businessman billionaire and an affirmative action college professor to be head of state and navigate the nation through these troubled economic times - duh, who do you think Joe 6 pack and Suzy Homemaker would pick. I rest my case. The GOP machinery is throwing this race. They want Obama and his Marxist pals to really screw up - as they will - so the GOP can own the Oval Office from 2012 to time in immemoriam
It hasn't been proven where he was born.
Ahmadinejad in 2008! According to some, that may just be the case. This reminds me of something that went on at work on Friday. One of the helpdesk people closed out a ticket saying that the request "violated policy". The ticket was escalated and the request was not unreasonable (it was justified) so I asked the gal who dumped the ticket what the policy was that the ticket violated and where one could get a copy of it. Of course, there wasn't any such policy, the request had a legitimate business purpose, and so the ticket was reopened and taken care of. It is always fine to say "Show me" when someone makes a claim; burden of proof is on the person making the claim. What bothers me about the court cases surrounding the Obama candidacy is that the courts are saying that Citizens don't have "standing" to enforce the Constitution. If that is the case, then the Courts are advocating for fascism. Fascism seems to be fine for the Obama supporters so long as it serves their purpose. Where they are being absolutely and totally clueless is is not looking past their own noses at the long-term ramifications. If citizens are not allowed to bring a motion to the Courts to enforce the Constitution, then who is? The GOVERNMENT???? Yeah right -- that's the REALLY scary part of all of this, but it is something that Obama supporters are missing completely in their desire to serve their candidate. If citizens cannot sue to enforce the Constitution, then it is a completely dead document and we're completely screwed. If that's just fine by the Obama supporters, then they need to wake up and look at the problem from the longer-term perspective, get over themselves, and decide which is more important: The Constitution and their rights or their Candidate. This is a case where you can't have both, unfortunately. Which is the correct choice? The Constitution or the Candidate?
"A leader, for a change." - Jimmy Carter, 1976 campaign slogan. Sound familiar? Here it comes again!
Well done. The weasel goose steps for the cabal; probably always has. More Communist more better.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Fascism seems to be fine for the Obama supporters so long as it serves their purpose. Tailgunner Joe was right. We didn't go far enough to remove the cancer and look at us now. Look at all these pathetic, weak people and their fraud-savior ! This is what you get when government is the god of the God-less. "Take care of my family, Obama !" ~ El Paso jumper
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Yeah right -- that's the REALLY scary part of all of this, but it is something that Obama supporters are missing completely in their desire to serve their candidate. If citizens cannot sue to enforce the Constitution, then it is a completely dead document and we're completely screwed. If that's just fine by the Obama supporters, then they need to wake up and look at the problem from the longer-term perspective, get over themselves, and decide which is more important: The Constitution and their rights or their Candidate. Excellent post!!!!! Indeed, it troubled me as well that the lower court said that a) Phil Berg, as a US citizen and a voter, had no standing/ no right to request that a candidate for the highest elected office in the land show proof of natural born eligibility to run for that office AND b) that whether or not Obama was eligible to run for President would not be an "injury" to the Constitution. That's why I said at the time the news came out that judge should be impeached or sent for psychiatric examination. The judge as either mentally unsound or he was consciously under mining the Constitution, which he was appointed to protect and defend. It's interesting that liberal judges always love to "interpret intent" (ie. read into the Constitution) when it suits their leftie cause ( eg. abortion = privacy? huh) but when they are faced with the need for a common sense understanding of the intent of the Founding Fathers and the Constitution - ie. like understanding that the Constitution is all about giving powers to individual citizens and ensuring that they have a say in their nation's business and have the right to petition/question government ( and one would assume elected officials of government like Senator and Pres candidate Obama), the leftie judge suddenly morphs into a literalist and says in effect "I don't see anything written in the constitution that specifically says citizens have standing to ask for proof of a Kenyan born being natural born and who cares anyway."
Historically, people that worship Great Leaders (Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Obama, etc.) will always betray principle for Der Leader. The Constitution, or any other law, matters not one whit to the worshippers.
Ahmadinejad in 2008! excellent post, mirage. in case you missed it, Edwin Vieira eloquently enumerates the consequences/ramifications in his latest article posted here: What are some of those consequences? First, if Obama is not “a natural born Citizen” or has renounced such citizenship, he is simply not eligible for “the Office of President” (Article II, Section 1, Clause 4). That being so, he cannot be “elected” by the voters, by the Electoral College, or by the House of Representatives (see Amendment XII). For neither the voters, nor the Electors, nor Members of the House can change the constitutional requirement, even by unanimous vote inter sese (see Article V). If, nonetheless, the voters, the Electors, or the Members of the House purport to “elect” Obama, he will be nothing but an usurper, because the Constitution defines him as such. And he can never become anything else, because an usurper cannot gain legitimacy if even all of the country aid, abets, accedes to, or acquiesces in his usurpation. Second, if Obama dares to take the Presidential “Oath or Affirmation” of office, knowing that he is not “a natural born Citizen,” he will commit the crime of perjury or false swearing (see Article II, Section 1, Clause 7). For, being ineligible for “the Office of President, he cannot “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States,” or even execute it at all, to any degree. Thus, his very act of taking the “Oath or Affirmation” will be a violation thereof! So, even if the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court himself looks the other way and administers the “Oath or Affirmation,” Obama will derive no authority whatsoever from it. Third, his purported “Oath or Affirmation” being perjured from the beginning, Obama’s every subsequent act in the usurped “Office of President” will be a criminal offense under Title 18, United States Code, Section 242, which provides that: [w]hoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States * * * shall be fined * * * or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined * * * or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, * * *, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined * * * or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death. Plainly enough, every supposedly “official” act performed by an usurper in the President’s chair will be an act “under color of law” that necessarily and unavoidably “subjects [some] person * * * to the deprivation of [some] rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution * * * of the United States”—in the most general case, of the constitutional “right[ ]” to an eligible and duly elected individual serving as President, and the corresponding constitutional “immunit[y]” from subjection to an usurper pretending to be “the President.” Fourth, if he turns out to be nothing but an usurper acting in the guise of “the President,” Obama will not constitutionally be the “Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States” (see Article II, Section 2, Clause 1). Therefore, he will be entitled to no obedience whatsoever from anyone in those forces. Indeed, for officers or men to follow any of his purported “orders” will constitute a serious breach of military discipline—and in extreme circumstances perhaps even “war crimes.” In addition, no one in any civilian agency in the Executive Branch of the General Government will be required to put into effect any of Obama’s purported “proclamations,” “executive orders,” or “directives.” Fifth, as nothing but an usurper (if he becomes one), Obama will have no conceivable authority “to make Treaties”, or to “nominate, and * * * appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not * * * otherwise provided for [in the Constitution]” (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2). And therefore any “Treaties” or “nominat[ions], and * * * appoint[ments]” he purports to “make” will be void ab initio, no matter what the Senate does, because the Senate can neither authorize an usurper to take such actions in the first place, nor thereafter ratify them. One need not be a lawyer to foresee what further, perhaps irremediable, chaos must ensue if an usurper, even with “the Advice and Consent of the Senate”, unconstitutionally “appoint[s] * * * Judges of the Supreme Court” whose votes thereafter make up the majorities that wrongly decide critical “Cases” of constitutional law. Sixth, and perhaps most importantly, Congress can pass no law while an usurper pretends to occupy “the Office of President.” The Constitution provides that “[e]very Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States” (Article I, Section 7, Clause 2). Not to an usurper posturing as “the President of the United States,” but to the true and rightful President. If no such true and rightful President occupies the White House, no “Bill” will or can, “before it become a Law, be presented to [him].” If no “Bill” is so presented, no “Bill” will or can become a “Law.” And any purported “Law” that the usurper “approve[s]” and “sign[s],” or that Congress passes over the usurper’s “Objections,” will be a nullity. Thus, if Obama deceitfully “enters office” as an usurper, Congress will be rendered effectively impotent for as long as it acquiesces in his pretenses as “President.” Seventh, if Obama does become an usurper posturing as “the President,” Congress cannot even impeach him because, not being the actual President, he cannot be “removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” (see Article II, Section 4). In that case, some other public officials would have to arrest him—with physical force, if he would not go along quietly—in order to prevent him from continuing his imposture. Obviously, this could possibly lead to armed conflicts within the General Government itself, or among the States and the people. Eighth, even did something approaching civil war not eventuate from Obama’s hypothetical usurpation, if the Establishment allowed Obama to pretend to be “the President,” and the people acquiesced in that charade, just about everything that was done during his faux “tenure in office” by anyone connected with the Executive Branch of the General Government, and quite a bit done by the Legislative Branch and perhaps the Judicial Branch as well, would be arguably illegitimate and subject to being overturned when a constitutional President was finally installed in office. The potential for chaos, both domestically and internationally, arising out of this systemic uncertainty is breathtaking. The underlying problem will not be obviated if Obama, his partisans in the Democratic Party, and his cheerleaders and cover-up artists in the big media simply stonewall the issue of his (non)citizenship and contrive for him to win the Presidential election. The cat is already out of the bag and running all over the Internet. If he continues to dodge the issue, Obama will be dogged with this question every day of his purported “Presidency.” And inevitably the truth will out. For the issue is too simple, the evidence (or lack of it) too accessible. Either Obama can prove that he is “a natural born Citizen” who has not renounced his citizenship; or he cannot. And he will not be allowed to slip through with some doctored “birth certificate” generated long after the alleged fact. On a matter this important, Americans will demand that, before its authenticity is accepted, any supposed documentary evidence of that sort be subjected to reproducible forensic analyses conducted by reputable, independent investigators and laboratories above any suspicion of being influenced by or colluding with any public official, bureaucracy, political party, or other special-interest organization whatsoever.
Same exact modus operandi as Clinton, who refused to release his medical records and has never to this day accounted for his college travels behind the Iron Curtain with a complete debriefing of who he met and what was discussed. The MSM is complicit in denying the right of the American people to know the whole truth in both candidates.
I was shocked to discover
Everyone agrees that unanimity is hard to find.
#2. To: bluegrass (#1)
Statement by Robert Anderson, August 16, 2004 My name is Robert Anderson. I am an elector in the State of Oregon/ My signature was forged onto the petition to qualify Ralph Nader for the presidential ballot. Today I will be filing a complaint with the Oregon State Elections Division against Marlena Griffin, the signature gatherer who certified that every signature on the page was accurate.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#3. To: Ferret Mike (#2)
Everyone agrees that unanimity is hard to find.
#4. To: bluegrass, FM, all (#3)
There's more fraud that goes on with Rep/Dem games in the states than with the indies. This strikes me as the Right and the Left Wings of the American Fascist Party just protecting their franchise.
#5. To: Ferret Mike (#0)
#6. To: All (#5)
#7. To: bluegrass (#1)
Lord Acton
#8. To: James Deffenbach (#7)
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#9. To: James Deffenbach, Ferret Mike (#7)
Everyone agrees that unanimity is hard to find.
#10. To: Ferret Mike (#8)
Except he was born in Hawaii. That small detail eludes you still.
#11. To: mirage (#10)
(Edited)
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#12. To: Ferret Mike (#11)
#13. To: mirage (#12)
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#14. To: bluegrass (#9)
Obama won't release his records from Harvard or Columbia either. I think even Bush the Dumbass released his.
Lord Acton
#15. To: mirage (#12)
"Mike, you need to get a clue and get a life yourself."
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#16. To: mirage (#10)
So you say. Please provide proof. Without proof, the claim is empty, just like the promises of most politicians.
Lord Acton
#17. To: James Deffenbach (#14)
Everyone agrees that unanimity is hard to find.
#18. To: bluegrass (#17)
Lord Acton
#19. To: Ferret Mike, Original_Intent, Jethro Tull, lodwick, rowdee, christine, X-15, Lady X, farmfriend, All (#11)
Swift Boat operatives drum up false accusations complete with hearsay and false or distorted evidence, he is guilty of being born abroad until he provides concrete evidence he was born in Hawaii.
#20. To: James Deffenbach (#18)
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#21. To: James Deffenbach, bluegrass (#16)
. I want to see a CERTIFIED COPY OF HIS ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE, not something someone dummied up in Photoshop or Gimp.
#22. To: scrapper2 (#19)
Lord Acton
#23. To: Ferret Mike (#13)
I know this was a load of shit when it was raised, and all it continues to do is continue to stink, from the Swift Boater side of things.
#24. To: scrapper2 (#19)
Everyone agrees that unanimity is hard to find.
#25. To: mirage, Ferret Mike (#23)
Everyone agrees that unanimity is hard to find.
#26. To: bluegrass (#25)
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#27. To: bluegrass (#24)
I don't lie about where I was born."
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#28. To: Ferret Mike (#0)
#29. To: Vitamin Z (#28)
(Edited)
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#30. To: Ferret Mike (#29)
Republicans were using Nader to their own ends
#31. To: Ferret Mike (#27)
neither did Barack Obama.
Everyone agrees that unanimity is hard to find.
#32. To: bluegrass, Ferret Mike (#25)
Asking for proof is obviously just "hate".
#33. To: Vitamin Z (#28)
I would like to say Thank You for doing your part to further the one party system. This message has been paid for by the Globalist Bankers Union.
#34. To: mirage (#32)
What bothers me about the court cases surrounding the Obama candidacy is that the courts are saying that Citizens don't have "standing" to enforce the Constitution. If that is the case, then the Courts are advocating for fascism.
#35. To: mirage (#32)
What bothers me about the court cases surrounding the Obama candidacy is that the courts are saying that Citizens don't have "standing" to enforce the Constitution... Where they are being absolutely and totally clueless is is not looking past their own noses at the long-term ramifications. If citizens are not allowed to bring a motion to the Courts to enforce the Constitution, then who is? The GOVERNMENT????
#36. To: mirage, Ferret Mike (#32)
This is a case where you can't have both, unfortunately. Which is the correct choice? The Constitution or the Candidate?
Everyone agrees that unanimity is hard to find.
#37. To: mirage (#32)
Where they are being absolutely and totally clueless is is not looking past their own noses at the long-term ramifications. If citizens are not allowed to bring a motion to the Courts to enforce the Constitution, then who is? The GOVERNMENT????
#38. To: scrapper2 (#19)
but Obama refuses to release this information.
-Schweizerische Schuetzenzeitung (Swiss Shooting Federation) April, 1941
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest