CNN Pushing Hard to Overlook Eligibility; SPLC: “Remove Mr. Dobbs”

As the press has been hitting the Obama birth certificate pretty hard lately (hey, welcome to the show!), several concerned citizens and bloggers have noticed that the press may be over-doing their hand just a wee bit too much.

Yesterday, CNN/US President Jon Klein sent an email to Lou Dobb’s staff regarding performing research on a hard (physical) copy of the original, 1961 birth certificate (via; more story at the link):

—– Original Message —–
From: Klein, Jon (CNN)
Sent: Thu Jul 23 19:00:44 2009
Subject: Important re birth certificate

I asked the political researchers to dig into the question “why couldn’t Obama produce the ORIGINAL birth certificate?”

This is what they forwarded. It seems to definitively answer the question. Since the show’s mission is for Lou to be the explainer and enlightener, he should be sure to cite this during your segment tonite. And then it seems this story is dead – because anyone who still is not convinced doesn’t really have a legitimate beef.



*In 2001 – the state of Hawaii Health Department went paperless.*Paper documents were discarded*The official record of Obama’s birth is now an official ELECTRONIC record Janice Okubo, spokeswoman for the Health Department told the Honolulu Star Bulletin, “At that time, all information for births from 1908 (on) was put into electronic files for consistent reporting,” she said.

Transcript from Lou Dobbs Tonight – 07.23.09

DOBBS: ….And a number of Americans are asking, why not? The left-wing media has attacked me because I simply asked the question. Meanwhile, the state of Hawaii says it can’t release a paper copy of the president’s original birth certificate because they say the state government discarded the original document when the health department records went electronic some eight years ago.

That explanation, however, has not satisfied some critics. Joining me now, Roland Martin. He’s CNN contributor, syndicated columnist. And joining us as well, Congressman Ted Poe.

In fact, also reported on this development (excerpted):

Bad idea. I sympathize with him wanting to protect CNN from negative press but the surest way to feed a conspiracy theory, needless to say, is to try to suppress it. This is like Roger Ailes issuing a communique ordering Fox News not to cover 9/11 Truth. What is he hiding? …

Dave Weigel, who’s been tracking the Birther phenomenon for months, floats a new story today about Team McCain having investigated the rumors last year and found nothing to them. Possible lines of Birther attack: McCain’s vetters were too dumb to find the smoking gun; even if they found the smoking gun, McCain’s eligibility was also in question at one point due to his being born in Panama so he couldn’t use it; McCain’s a RINO and wanted to lose so even if he did find the smoking gun, he probably destroyed it to help Obama out.

Whoa, stop the presses! The Hawaii Department of Health actually destroyed vital records? What else does “discarded” mean? How did that happen and by what authority?

Not only that, but now we’re supposed to be believing what’s being posted on the Internet, e.g.: the certification of live birth? And all this time I thought the press promoted the notion that you can’t trust what you find on the Internet!

Artwork courtesy

Sheesh! Don’t we have more than enough leading conclusions being bandied about the conventional press-o-sphere, much less the blosophere, to last until at least 2012? Speaking as someone who has been questioning the then would-be President’s eligibility since late October, 2008, I can say that this is a definite issue with the press.

Recently, a concerned citizen forwarded me a link to the blog which recently posted what they’re saying is an intelligence investigator’s report:

Editors Note: In December ‘08 a retired CIA officer commissioned an investigator to look into the Barack Obama birth certificate and eligibility issue.  On July 21, 2009 obtained a copy of the investigator’s report. Here is an unedited version of the report.

June 10, 2009 Report, updated July 18, 2009 [emphasis original]

The posting goes on for several pages to further consider the birth certificate aspect of eligibility.

Nevertheless, what the press is forgetting — or intentionally overlooking, as the case appears to be — is that Mr. Obama’s original 1961 birth certificate is but one part of the story.

Consider the following points of interest:

  • There is currently no definitive definition regarding the concept of “natural born citizen” with direct respect to presidential eligibility;
  • There is currently no law that requires any candidate for any office to substantiate their eligibility. Instead, as the Candidate > Qualifications category of my site shows from many months back (as well as, major political parties merely require the candidate to sign a self-ascribing document wherein they certify themselves eligible;
  • Since there is no law requiring any candidate to substantiate their eligibility, there is, by definition, no law that establishes the degree to which one must substantiate one’s eligibility. In other words, nobody has ever claimed that a birth certificate presentment would be enough to substantiate eligibility. Everyone presumes that providing a birth certificate is “good enough;”

And if those three points weren’t enough, as attorney Leo Donofrio pointed out and as I reported back on November 20, 2008 in my posting, “Could be Plainly Stating Obama’s Biggest Citizenship Problem?“:


When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children:

British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.

In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC.

Obama’s British citizenship was short-lived. On Dec. 12, 1963, Kenya formally gained its independence from the United Kingdom. Chapter VI, Section 87 of the Kenyan Constitution specifies that:

1. Every person who, having been born in Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963…

2. Every person who, having been born outside Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall, if his father becomes, or would but for his death have become, a citizen of Kenya by virtue of subsection (1), become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963.

As a citizen of the UKC who was born in Kenya, Obama’s father automatically received Kenyan citizenship via subsection (1). So given that Obama qualified for citizen of the UKC status at birth and given that Obama’s father became a Kenyan citizen via subsection (1), it follows that Obama did in fact have Kenyan citizenship after 1963. …

But the paper failed to note that the Kenyan Constitution prohibits dual citizenship for adults. Kenya recognizes dual citizenship for children, but Kenya’s Constitution specifies that at age 21, Kenyan citizens who possesses citizenship in more than one country automatically lose their Kenyan citizenship unless they formally renounce any non-Kenyan citizenship and swear an oath of allegiance to Kenya.

Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.

Again, Leo Donofrio’s case is premised on Barack Obama’s citizenship at birth, regardless of what a COLB (certificate of live birth, which isn’t the full, “vault” copy) has to say. And, in theory, it doesn’t matter whether or not Barack Obama’s citizenship changed a day, month, year or years after he was born; it’s at birth, according to Leo, that counts.

If you will recall from one of Leo Donofrio’s interviews, he mentioned that even the Founding Fathers had to “grandfather” themselves into the potentiality of being President, thusly (from Article 2, Section1):

…or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution…

Remember: the Founding Fathers were originally born (at birth) in another country, namely (in some cases), England. They were therefore born as His Majesty’s subjects. And, like Barack Obama, they would have had dual citizenship (for a time) as well! That’s why, according to Leo, they had to put in this clause, else they would have never qualified.

Why did this matter so much? The first Americans literally fought with blood, sweat, tears and treasure to found a new nation. The Founders didn’t want, say, an English monarch to therefore be able to take on the office of President; too much undue foreign influence. The same holds true today.

So, unless Barack Obama was born before or on September 17, 1787, he would not qualify for this clause.

Therefore, as someone who has been rather intimate with this story long before the press opened their recent brouhaha over the birth certificate, there is more to the story than simply a piece of paper. As such, I think it’s important to remind the media that they shouldn’t be overplaying their hand and, even more importantly, they shouldn’t be shunning those of us who continue to question by presenting endless diatribes of leading conclusions.

Not that I have a problem with the press finally coming on board the discussion; the water is plenty warm and I invite anyone to jump in. It simply sounds to me like folks at CNN — and perhaps other outlets (notice that FoxNews has been the one to stay away from the debate) — are attempting to circumvent the bigger issue of eligibility by trying to justify that no original birth certificate exists.

Bottom line: We’re supposed to believe that the HI DoH simply “discarded” vital records. Right. And we’re supposed to believe that what’s posted online — e.g.: the certification of live birth — is now what’s supposed to be trusted, even though we have no record of the transaction or the person(s) involved in procuring it. Right.

And yet the press is completely missing the point of what it means to be an at birth natural born citizen. That I believe!

Update: The site has an interesting update from Friday afternoon regarding the above email from CNN/US President Jon Kelin, showing that Mr. Klein appears to be backing off some of his original assertions:

Greg Sargent spoke with CNN’s president Jonathan Klein about Lou Dobbs, and the demands from some liberal groups that Dobbs be punished for giving airtime and credibility to birthers.

“Look, Lou’s his own show, and CNN in general has repeatedly and thoroughly reported on the facts behind this situation,” Klein said to me, adding that Lou had merely hosted “a few conversations with people representing a wide range of opinions.”

Klein said that Dobbs has repeatedly stated that he believes that Obama was born in Hawaii, and has simply been examining the “phenomenon that for some people this won’t go away.”

Asked if CNN is concerned that Dobbs’ repeated granting of airtime to theories the network has conclusively debunked amounts to overkill and could harm CNN’s credibility, Klein brushed off the possibility. “We respect our viewers enough to present them the facts and let them make up their own minds,” he said, adding that what Dobbs does is “his editorial decision to make.”

That … sort of walks back Klein’s internal CNN memo about Dobbs earlier today.

Update: From a concerned citizen, the Southern Poverty Law Center has officially rebuked CNN for allowing Mr. Dobbs to talk about Mr. Obama’s birth certificate. From their site, here is there official letter to Jon Klein asking for Mr. Dobb’s removal:

July 24, 2009

Jonathan Klein
1 Time Warner Center
New York, N.Y. 10019-6038

Dear Mr. Klein,

As an important and respected news organization, CNN has a special responsibility to ensure the accuracy of its reporting. We have written to you before about our concern that Lou Dobbs repeatedly fails to live up to this standard in his reporting on immigration. Now, Mr. Dobbs is again trading in falsehoods and racist conspiracy theories, questioning President Obama’s American citizenship.

On the July 15 edition of “Lou Dobbs Tonight,” Mr. Dobbs questioned the official certificate provided by the president and the State of Hawaii and complained that President Obama has not made public the “original document.” On his radio program, Mr. Dobbs has repeatedly questioned the president’s fitness for office, demanding he “show the documents” and, at one point, jokingly suggesting President Obama may be “undocumented.”

The truth about the president’s birth is not in dispute. It has been verified by, among many other serious news organizations, and his official birth documents have been made public. CNN itself has repeatedly reported on the falsity of the claims of the “birthers,” and the network’s esteemed legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin, recently called those claims “a joke.” As you know, even Mr. Dobbs’ frequent fill-in anchor, Kitty Pilgrim, debunked the birthers on the July 17 edition of Mr. Dobbs’ own CNN show. The fact that Mr. Dobbs suggests otherwise on CNN — while real CNN reporters tell the truth — is both deplorable and an embarrassment to all serious journalists.

As he has in several other instances, Mr. Dobbs, in taking up the birthers’ claims, is adopting an unsubstantiated conspiracy theory that originated on the radical racist right. As has reported, this particular conspiracy theory was first developed by an open anti-Semite and circulated by right-wing extremists who cannot accept the fact that a black man has been elected president of the United States. Among its adherents was neo-Nazi James von Brunn, the alleged murderer of a security guard at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., this June. Von Brunn had helped spread the birthers’ claims on the Internet and attacked the “dishonest & conspiratorial Media” for not taking them up.

This is not the first time Mr. Dobbs has pushed racist conspiracy theories or defamatory falsehoods about immigrants. We wrote you in 2007 to bring to your attention his utterly false claim that 7,000 new cases of leprosy had appeared in the United States in a recent three-year period, due at least in part to immigrants. (The real number, according to official statistics, was about 400. Mr. Dobbs took his spurious information from the late right-wing extremist, Madeleine Cosman.) In addition, Mr. Dobbs has reported as fact the so-called Aztlan conspiracy, which claims that undocumented Mexican immigrants are part of a plot to “reconquer” the American Southwest. He has suggested there is something to a related conspiracy theory that claims the governments of Mexico, the United States and Canada are secretly planning to merge into the “North American Union.” He has falsely claimed that “illegal aliens” fill one third of American prison and jail cells. And Mr. Dobbs has routinely disparaged, on CNN’s air, those who have had the integrity to point out the falsity of these and similar claims.

Respectable news organizations should not employ reporters willing to peddle racist conspiracy theories and false propaganda. It’s time for CNN to remove Mr. Dobbs from the airwaves.

J. Richard Cohen

In short, as I’ve said before to commenters here on my site, the saga has only begun.

See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:


Twitter: @trsol -=- Facebook (TRSoL) -=- Facebook (Rightside Phil)

Photo courtesy CNN

Rush, Dobbs, Press Continue Eligibility Coverage

He’s already broached the eligibility issue twice on his most-listened-to radio show, and we have already seen how the press has recently become fascinated with the question. And today, thanks to a news tip from a concerned citizen, this time a caller into Mr. Limbaugh’s radio show brought up the subject along with an overall discussion on Mr. Obama’s policies:


RUSH: John in Punta Gorda, Florida. How are you? Nice to have you with us.

CALLER: Hi, Rush. How are you doing today?

RUSH: Very well, sir, thanks much.

CALLER: Rush, I’d like to talk to you from couple of minutes about honesty and integrity versus the culture or the spirit of deception that we seem to see with Obama. I’m a graduate of the United States Naval Academy and I have three sons who also attend service academies — either the Naval Academy or the Air Force Academy — and we all each in our term have come to understand that lying is an intent to deceive. And any intent to deceive at the service academies is considered to be an honor offense. When I look at Obama — who rides a cult not only of personality but also a culture of deception; when I look at the Saul Alinsky connection deceptions, the Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn and Jeremiah Wright; more recently the birth certificate falsification question; the stimulus lies; the health care results lies; the ACORN connection lies; the firing of the inspector general; and his agenda for us, which he’s just not being forthcoming about — all of these things fall into, in my opinion, this culture of deception.

Continue reading “Rush, Dobbs, Press Continue Eligibility Coverage”

Racism Being Used to Stop Debate (Martin, Obama, Gates); Obama “Alienated Public Saftey Officers”; Defamation Lawsuit Against Gates?

Just yesterday I had analyzed the over-the-top commentary by a CNN contributor, Roland S. Martin, showing how it is not just fruitless but downright dangerous to attempt to stop the flow of debate in American society based on completely baseless leading conclusions.

Subsequently, the administrator at sent my reaction to Mr. Martin and attorney Mario Apuzzo; the following is the result of that email transaction:

Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 2:10 PM
The birthers response to your CNN article

Dear Mr. Martin,

Phil at the Right Side of Life made us aware of your recent editorial in his story .

We have posted our reply to your comments on the link below.

Continue reading “Racism Being Used to Stop Debate (Martin, Obama, Gates); Obama “Alienated Public Saftey Officers”; Defamation Lawsuit Against Gates?”

On Responding to Opponents of Presidential Eligibility

To date, a number of commentaries have appeared on the web fundamentally questioning — and producing endless numbers of leading conclusions — the rationale behind why sites such as mine are “still” questioning Mr. Obama’s eligibility. I’ve responded to a few of them, including The Politico, TheExaminer and HoustonPress (who didn’t even perform enough cursory reporting to realize that my site is not Dr. Taitz’ site), and — at the request of some in the opposition — a systematic analysis of the Holocaust Museum shooter, James W. von Brunn.

Today, however, CNN featured commentary that simply went over the top (even beyond what many opposition commenters on this site would dare venture to go). My posting is going to take the opportunity of this bombastic hyperbole to address some key points that go beyond a rational explanation for the eligibility question (links below).

From Roland S. Martin’s commentary, “Obama birth issue is nutty” (I’ll briefly embed my analysis and then continue with further points below):

Editor’s note: A nationally syndicated columnist, Roland S. Martin is the author of “Listening to the Spirit Within: 50 Perspectives on Faith” and “Speak, Brother! A Black Man’s View of America.” Visit his Web site for more information.

(CNN) — The YouTube video of an out-of-control woman yelling and screaming at Republican Congressman Mike Castle’s town hall meeting in Delaware, demanding to see the birth certificate of President Barack Obama, is utterly hilarious.

To watch others cheer her insanity, and then boo the congressman who says the president is an American, shows you that we have a serious problem with mental illness in this country.

Much more on this below, but it did not occur to me that rhetorical dissention equals “mental illness.”

Continue reading “On Responding to Opponents of Presidential Eligibility”

Eligibility Update: More HI DoH Confusion; Muslims, Obama and Harvard; Rep. Posey, GOP Support; Grand Jury Update and More

After it had been confirmed that the online certification of live birth purportedly belonging to Mr. Obama shows signs of being less than genuine, WorldNetDaily reports that laws regarding exactly how someone’s birth occurred in Hawaii aren’t exactly clear:

The “Certification of Live Birth” posted online and presented by Barack Obama as documentation of his reported Hawaiian birth doesn’t “prove” his birth alone, according to government officials interviewed by WND.

According to State Department officials, such a short-form birth document might be accepted as documentation of a U.S. birth for a passport if it meets certain requirements. Their conclusion is that the law is “complicated.”

And state officials in Hawaii independently told WND that such documents are issued only when certain standards have been met.

But those requirements and standards leave the door open to some circumstances under which the COLB image does not prove what it purports. …

Hawaii state Registrar Dr. Alvin Onaka told WND today that most birth records stem from a hospital report. Documentation for children not born in hospitals depends on other records, such as the pregnant mother’s prenatal exams, the statement of an attending midwife and a verification of the birth of a live child.

Other listings include a “foreign” birth or a “delayed” birth.

“We would not be issuing birth certificates of individuals not born in the state of Hawaii,” he said.

In fact, Hawaiian Health Director Chiyome Fukino previously made a public statement about the controversy:

“I, and Dr. Alvin Onaka have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures,” Fukino’s statement said.

But the statement didn’t reveal what the document contains, nor has any clarification ever been released.

Continue reading “Eligibility Update: More HI DoH Confusion; Muslims, Obama and Harvard; Rep. Posey, GOP Support; Grand Jury Update and More”

Kerchner v. Obama: Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Filed

Mario Apuzzo, attorney for Plaintiffs in Kerchner v. Obama, reports that he has filed a Plaintiff’s Brief Opposing Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss:

Kerchner v Obama & Congress DOC 34 Plaintiffs Brief Opposing Defendants Motion to Dismiss

In the above, Mr. Apuzzo is also requesting that the Court “Alternatively to Strike the Complaint Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f) and Supporting Cross-Motion for Leave Nunc Pro Tunc to File the Second Amended Complaint/Petition.” According to, here’s a definition of “nunc pro tunc:”

Nunc pro tunc literally means “now for then.”

Occasionally, a court or party to a divorce forgets to file the papers necessary to obtain the final decree (after the interlocutory judgment has been granted), and the result is that the divorce never becomes final. If the oversight presents a problem (for example, one party has already remarried, or there is a tax advantage to being divorced earlier), the court may agree to issue a nunc pro tunc order, which grants the final divorce retroactive to the earlier date.

This phrase is used to express that a thing is done at one time which ought to have been performed at another. Leave of court must be obtained to do things nunc pro tunc, and this is granted to answer the purposes of justice, but never to do injustice. A judgment nunc pro tunc can be entered only when the delay has arisen from the act of the court.

See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:


Twitter: @trsol -=- Facebook (TRSoL) -=- Facebook (Rightside Phil)

Rush: “Barack Obama has yet to prove he’s a citizen”

As fellow blogger Rev. Sam Sewell says on his TheSteadyDrip site:

Somehow, you know its coming. That OMG moment is just around the corner. You can feel the inescapable reality creeping up on you. Something will leak. Someone will spill the beans.

First, the nation’s number one talk radio show host Rush Limbaugh mentioned a few times, on the air, in response to Newsweek‘s Evan Thomas’ comment about Mr. Obama being “like a god,” that the President does, in fact, have a least one thing in common with God:

…Barack Obama has one thing in common with God — do you know what it is? God does not have a birth certificate either.

Now, after a slew of press coverage over Cook v. Good, El Rushbo took on the eligibility issue a second time on today’s radio show in two separate instances.

One instance came about as Mr. Limbaugh was comparing how he has to justify in multiple ways how he spends his resources in New York City versus how Mr. Obama hasn’t had to justify his eligibility:

Here’s a partial transcript:

LIMBAUGH: Barack Obama has yet to have to prove he’s a citizen. All he’d have to do is show a birth certificate. He has yet to have to prove he’s — I have to show them 14 different ways where the hell I am every day of the year for three years.

Another arguably more important instance involved a number of citizens at a town hall meeting with Rep. Mike Castle (R-DE). Here’s the YouTube video of the citizen encounter and Mr. Limbaugh’s response below:


RUSH: This is a town meeting in Delaware. An unidentified woman and Representative Mike Castle have the following exchange. It’s about Obama’s birth certificate.

WOMAN: I want to go back to January 20th, and I want to know, why are you people ignoring his birth certificate? (cheers and applause) He is not an American citizen. He is a citizen of Kenya. I am American. My father worked — fought in World War II with the Greatest Generation in the Pacific theater for this country, and I don’t want this flag to change. I want my country back! (cheers and applause)

CASTLE: If you’re referring to the president there, he is a citizen of the United States. (crowd shouting)

WOMAN: All the men and women who died for this country in 1776 ’til the present time. I think we should all stand up and give Pledge of Allegiance to that wonderful flag (cheers and applause) people that sacrificed their lives for our freedom. Everybody stand up.

RUSH: State of Delaware, Mike Castle, town meeting, woman wants to know why nobody’s interested in the fact that he hasn’t shown anybody his birth certificate. If you couldn’t understand her, she was saying he’s a citizen of Kenya. I’m American. My father worked, fought in World War II, the greatest generation, Pacific theater for this country, and I don’t want this flag to change. The crowd went nuts. There’s all kinds of stuff bubbling up out there.


Read the Background Material…
Politico: ‘You Can Boo’

It should be rather obvious to the casual reader of this site — much less many other sites on the Internet — that the eligibility issue is not going away. In fact, the references above clearly point to the fact that the issue is merely in its infancy.

Nobody can guarantee when the issue will be formally settled, but I think it’s clear that the issue is begging to be settled sooner or later. The more comfortable that media figures are in covering the issue, the more traction that the issue is going to get.

See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:


Twitter: @trsol -=- Facebook (TRSoL) -=- Facebook (Rightside Phil)

Photo courtesy

States’ Rights Update: FL and AK on Sovereignty; Firearms and the ATF

Following up on recent reports by the regarding States’ rights issues, Florida’s State Senate recently received a 10th Amendment Memorial bill for consideration:

Eustis, Florida – State Senator Carey Baker (R-Eustis) has introduced a memorial in the Florida Senate reaffirming the principles of the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The memorial, awaiting an official Senate number, urges “Congress to honor the provisions of the Constitution of the United States and United States Supreme Court case law which limit the scope and exercise of federal power.”

“Now more than ever, state governments must exercise their Constitutional right to say no to the expansion of the federal government’s reckless deficit spending and abuse of power,” Senator Baker said. “With this resolution, our Legislature can send a message to Washington that our state’s rights must be respected.”

Baker spoke at July 4th weekend Tea Parties in Gainesville and Orlando, where he announced his sponsorship of the resolution that affirms the 10th Amendment’s provision that rights not expressly given to the federal government in the Constitution are “reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Similar state sovereignty resolutions have been introduced in thirty-six other state legislatures across America. So far, seven states have had both houses of their legislature approve a sovereignty resolution, while three states have rejected them.  Two Governors, Palin of Alaska and Bredesen of Tennessee, have signed state sovereignty resolution.

Florida Groups Supporting State Sovereignty:

The full text of the bill can be found via the article’s referenced link.

Also, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin signed her State’s 10th Amendment resolution…

Continue reading “States’ Rights Update: FL and AK on Sovereignty; Firearms and the ATF”

Talk Shows, Press Begin Covering Eligibility

One might think that the proverbial Pandora’s Box has been opened — it appears that more and more talk shows and press outlets are taking on the presidential eligibility issue — and in earnest.

Most recently, the Columbus, Georgia-based Ledger-Enquirer had run with the story of Major Cook. In fact, this has been such a major story for the paper that they recently wrote about their internal experiences with the issue, including the following stats:

  • The Cook v. Good story produced the most traffic of any story ever in the history of the local paper
  • More than 1,000 comments from readers were produced, including (unfortunately) a number of threats against the newspaper
  • The paper received almost 500,000 unique hits (readers who had never previously accessed the paper)
    • A prominent spot on The Drudge Report was responsible for 84% of this new traffic
  • The paper received 712,251 page views, 7 times their normal volume
  • The reporter herself received hundreds of emails once the story broke
  • At the Courthouse, a number of public safety agencies were involved to make sure the grounds were secure, including assets from the following areas:
    • Columbus Police Department
    • Phenix City Police Department
    • Muscogee County Sheriff’s Office
    • Columbus Fire and Emergency Medical Services
    • US Marshall’s Office

One of the major papers in Georgia, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, also picked this story up, and one of their bloggers wasted no time in expressing his disdain towards the eligibility question.

Continue reading “Talk Shows, Press Begin Covering Eligibility”

Cook v. Good: Case Dismissed, To Be Refiled; Wrong Plaintiff!

The Ledger-Enquirer has reported the results of Cook v. Good: (videos at link):

U.S. District Judge Clay Land sided with the government, represented by Maj. Rebecca Ausprung, which claimed Cook’s suit was “moot” because the Army had already told him he doesn’t have to deploy, so the relief he is seeking has been granted.

“The same Constitution upon which Major Cook relies in support of his contention that President Barack Obama is not eligible to serve as President of the United States very clearly provides that federal courts shall only have the authority to hear actual ‘cases and controversies,’” Land stated in his written order. “By restricting the Judiciary’s power to actual ‘cases and controversies,’ our founders wisely established a separation of powers that would ensure the freedom of their fellow citizens. They concluded that the Judicial Branch, the unelected branch, should not inject itself into purely ‘political disputes,’ and that it should not entangle itself in hypothetical debates which had not ripened to an actual legal dispute.”

Land’s decision to dismiss the entire action came an hour and 15 minutes after the hearing began.

Cook arrived at the federal courthouse in uniform about an hour before his 9:30 a.m. hearing.

Dr. Orly Taitz was reported accordingly:

During the proceedings, Land heard from Orly Taitz, Ausprung and Cook’s attorney.

Taitz argued that her client is not opposed to military service. Instead, Cook, who claims he has been the victim of retaliation to his suit, fears that if he executed Obama’s orders, he could be prosecuted as a war criminal for following the orders of an illegitimate commander-in-chief.

Land asked Taitz whether Cook requested to simply have his orders rescinded, instead of filing a lawsuit. …

Continue readingCook v. Good: Case Dismissed, To Be Refiled; Wrong Plaintiff!”