For Newt

Some have asked for a speech for Newt, here is one free of charge..

Thank you all for being here tonight,

There have been very few times in our history that we have as a nation of free Americans had such an important decision to make and never has that decision been any easier to make..

For generations the liberal Democrats have at least damaged that which the rest of us hold true and at worst, within the last four years, they have intentionally destroyed these cherished beliefs which are held by the vast majority of Americans. Some may look back at the failed socialism of Lyndon Johnson, some may hearken back to the malaise days, the forlorn fascism of Jimmy Carter, but none of these Democratic meddlers can hold a candle to Barack Obama and his friends in the Democratic Congress. They truly have been “historic”, haven’t they..

We have to wonder whether that which has been forced upon America by a Democratic House, Senate and President has been either an endless series of mistakes or has it been intentional? Neither option is the least bit palatable and this November, we as Americans can make a REAL CHANGE and for our survival as a nation, we had better..

From double-digit perpetual unemployment, to Democratic deficits, defaults and crippling collectivist debt, America has suffered under the alleged empathy of those who have the fattening of their own bank accounts as their highest priority. A man who campaigned AGAINST the so-called “corporate greed” immediately went about punishing the middle class just so that he could reward those “corporate” types that supported him with “bailouts”.

Contrary to what he said that he would not do during his campaign, he rewarded “those who got us into this mess”.. The Democratic triumvirate didn’t stop there as they repeatedly raided the till for their friends and they intentionally refused to allow the few Republicans in Washington to participate in ANY of the decision making during these heady Democratic times..

Good. Now we know exactly who to blame..

In his first campaign Obama said, “elections have results”. America unfortunately found this out within hours of his inauguration and the Democratic decline hasn’t let up for a moment since.. The NEXT election will have “results” as well..

Obama’s first campaign, known to the rest of us as “smoke and mirrors”, a campaign sponsored by Barnum and Bailey, didn’t find a cause or a special interest group that wasn’t left (pardon the pun..) with a cavalcade of progressive promises after another of his perfumed appearances. Campaign promises are all fine, but the electorate has the right to expect that these promises will be kept. If Obama “promised” to increase our debt, if he “promised” to lower our credit rating, if he “promised” to have a perpetual double-digit unemployment rate and if he “promised” to create a budget deficit that now consumes more of our GDP than any other president in history, then we can consider his first term to be a success..

Obama was all about the “future” because he didn’t really have any kind of a “past” that he or his campaign was willing to talk about.. Bizarre circumstances surrounded the political beginner, not to mention bizarre “friends”. Tony Rezko, Saul Alinsky and an entire cadre of seamy Chicago back slappers and eye gougers, led this totalitarian tyro through his political “career” that is most famously known for its emptiness, its vacuity.. No one should ever be given political responsibility when all that they can lay claim to is being a mere “community organizer”. The next thing that you know, disgruntled housewives will be campaigning claiming that they have “thirty years of political experience”..

From his imaginary and fictitious past, those who were so easily gulled and repeatedly bombarded with the not-so subtle overtones of racial recognition placed him into the highest office in the land. Now we will see a campaign based upon the desperate notion that the past four years have been someone else’s fault.. Were that to actually be the case, wouldn’t it be logical to deduce that Obama is so “out of touch” and out of his element that those around him have more control over events than he does? Since this IS his fault, Obama needs to go to the place that he is very familiar with, the Obama unemployment line..

The Democrats will be going from a campaign based upon an imaginary future in 2008 to a campaign that seeks to blot out, distort and escape from the reality of the immediate past. Those so easily fooled in 2008 will not be so this time around..

What has happened since January of 2009? For starters, an ineffective series of bailouts and a health care bill that won’t begin to truly punish the middle class until 2013.. However, there are scads of experts who have already lined up and they are painting the picture in the grimmest of collectivist colors as to the eventual penalties Obama and the Democrats have saddled the middle class with for years to come.. This “green” (in more ways than one..) president generously gave the nation the Solyndra scandal that has received as much press coverage as a boy sent off in a balloon by his attention-starved father..

This alleged “political outsider” found another “friend” who wanted to help and his name is Jeffrey Immelt. This “corporate fat cat” was the head of GE, a corporation that under Obama’s watchful eye paid NO taxes last year. Immelt is Obama’s “Jobs Czar” and he has done such a magnificent job that Obama has gone from claiming fictitious numbers of “jobs saved or created” to the even more vague “jobs supported”..

We haven’t heard anywhere near the necessary amount of both coverage and anywhere near the necessary amount of criminal charges relative to the Obama “Fast and Furious” scandal. Here the duplicitous media has “moved on” when the nation needed the allegedly “impartial” media to step forward and to do their jobs as opposed to fawning over the “historic” Democrat.. This is an extreme dereliction of duty that can only be matched by the desertion of the Democratic politicians themselves..

Shadow and “undeclared” wars are taking place as we speak. This is the same man who derided a declared war by his predecessor, a war that was voted on and approved by his fellow Democrats. Or should I say the Democrats that “voted for the war before they voted against it..” Where are the protests that met President Bush? They are all protesting as “occupiers” and they are protesting the people bailed out by Obama but none of them mention this Democratic dichotomy.. Imagine if President Bush had “promised” to shut down Guantanamo Bay and then not done it.. Is there a double standard in place? I will allow you to decide for yourself..

Never has there been such a stark contrast not only between presidential aspirants but also between the two parties themselves. The choice seems obvious. Moral absolutism has now met politics head on..

Our differences are not only obvious but they are staggering as well. Unlike our opponents, we will strive to make America great again. We will work towards the concept that you NEVER go to an adversary from a position of weakness. From there you can only capitulate and appease.. That includes the terrorists and all of those that actively support them.

We will focus on getting government out of the way of the nation’s businesses for they are the ones who actually create both jobs and wealth. The Democratic government only seeks to make itself bigger so that it can redistribute the wealth of others and the only jobs that it creates are for more redistributors. On a similar note, the weather was so cold here yesterday that I actually saw a Democrat with his hands in HIS OWN pockets..

We will work ardently to create the opportunity for all Americans to succeed. This does not mean dealing in “guarantees”, this does not mean that the government will be trying to dictate the “outcome” through increased governmental intrusion into areas where the federal government shouldn’t be.. As well, if states rights aren’t applicable, then there is no need for state governments or local governments.. Does each state, local and federal government need a “Department of Education” for example? Rights, which rightfully belong to the states, need to be returned to the states.

We will never turn our backs on those Americans with a genuine need, we as Americans are too good for that. We will however, turn our attention to those who have been guided by the liberal Democrats into the delusional thinking that even though they are able-bodied Americans, the rest of us owe them something.

What we truly need is not only a Republican President but we need a full majority of Republicans in both the House and Senate. This is the only way that we can begin to overturn, to erase, the socialist stain that was placed upon the American people by the Democrats.

After actually READING the Constitution, NONE of the “rights” guaranteed in return for votes that the left copiously promises to those that they have AGAIN turned into indentured servants could actually be found WITHIN the Constitution. In reading the document, it guarantees the opportunity, NOT the outcome..

Activist liberals appointed activist judges who have generously unearthed these imaginary “rights” and in almost every case, ONE activist judge overrules the overwhelming legal sentiment of the public. The people don’t appoint these judges, politicians do..

However, when it comes to “outcomes”, based upon the dismal and embarrassing four-year performance of Obama and the Democratically controlled Congress, I can “guarantee” that if they proceed upon the same progressive path that they have been plodding along on for the last sixty years, I will “guarantee” that they will soon be on the outside looking in..

And that time will not come soon enough. Relief is in sight, head to the polls in November and “do the RIGHT thing”..


33 responses to “For Newt

  1. This is a great speech for Newt – but when would he get the chance to do it? Maybe you should submit it as the “reply” to Obummer’s State-of-the Not-so-Union speech tomorrow? Not sure we have the right guy delivering it but the words are sure dynomite!

  2. C,

    Thanks for the kind words.

    Who is doing the follow up to the fascist fairy tale?

    Sure hope the teleprompters don’t go out on Mr. “Reading is FUNdamental”..

    Thanks as always,


  3. When did the State of the Union change from being the actual required info. on the status of the country to the current shampaign crap , with the phony standing ovations ?

    When are we going to have elected officials follow the law and pass budgets on time, as required ?

    When are we going to have responsible elected officials who will uphold their sworn oath to follow and defend the Constitution ?

    Perhaps when DC , the District of Corruption , is changed to the ” District of the Constitution ” !!

    Just a thought .

  4. Aparently the MSM does not like entrepreneurs, since they are criticising
    Rick Santorum ( who does not have big money backing him ) for selling sweater vests , in order to finance his campaign. Does the MSM believe that Santorum , if elected, will have to push for legislation, or issue executive orders as “payback” to those who bought a sweater vest ?
    Just a thought .

  5. Larry –
    Last I heard, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels is giving the “response”. I think they are trying to give him some “exposure” because rumor is that the GOP establishment might try to resurrect him as a candidate (again – remember the wife didn’t want it?) if their favorite son, Romney, doesn’t make it out of Florida. This election is such a circus…with lots of clowns…. Not sure I can stomach all of this much longer. November cannot come soon enough.



    Larry you sure do have the ammunition on the big O
    Great speech option
    Heavy press out there attacking Newt but expected
    My bride of 53 years talking to her sister got the old
    line from her that women would not vote for Newt
    because of his 3 wifes and something about being Catholic
    My brides response was how about Jack Kennedy and
    his affairs Her sister said well we did not know about them
    So my wife says sure because he was a Democrat That
    made her back off
    Also note that unfortunally 50 % of marriages today end
    splitting up. Also Newt did well with the woman vote in
    South Carolina
    Who do the women vote for if Newt is nominee The big O

  7. Awesome job, Larry… I hope Newt sees it! You ought to send it to his campaign. BTW… I’d LOVE to see the teleprompters go out tonight! It would be hillarious.

    I think they are letting Mitch Daniels give the speech simply because they know we all are sick to death of listening to the rest of the candidates and their surrogates. At least he is a new face.

    You are so right, JR… Newt didn’t have any trouble with the women here in SC. We know baloney when we hear it, no matter how “pretty” the face is.

  8. Family,

    The latest TOTD: Its a hot one..

    Thanks as always,


  9. DY-NO-MITE! Thus our Wordsmith smites the Demoncrats. I hope somebody in the ‘know’ will get this to Newt. This dog and pony act of a primary is getting down below the sty. I was taught you can’t make yourself look better by tearing someone down. But the mud slinging is getting out of hand. Why or why can’t we have a Conservative moderate a debate? It seems they use the same lines, just twist them around a bit to see if there is any way to secure a ‘GOTCHA’ moment. If the audience was told to be quiet last week, we need to tell Congress to be quiet tonight!

  10. The Libs will get their ‘exercise’ tonite by jumping up and down and clapping like fools, while their boy spews his crap, just like a manure spreader. But, it will be grandiose crap, half-truths, deceptive schemes, and outright lies.

    And this nonsense will be called ” The State of the Union Address ” – how sad is that !!

  11. Owebama was correct – Congress is to blame !

    Relax. Take a deep breath. Because you’re probably thinking something other than what I’m about to say, namely that Congress , IMHO, isn’t doing anything to stop Owebama from destroying this country. The fraud in the WH is taking on powers that he doesn’t have, is by-passing the Constitution, is dividing the country with his ‘class warfare’ agendas, is single-handedly destroying our economy with his massive spending, and weakening our National security – and that’s just a few things on a long list.
    Now, he wants to “streamline” the gov’t. by giving himself additional powersa

  12. ( word press did it again -last word in above post should read ” powers” )

    Inspite of the Constitution’s delineation of 3 branches of gov’t. with EQUAL power and the system of checks and balances, he wants it all. This “wannabe dictator” wants to achieve this goal before the election, and he is doing it in a way that someone else did it in Germany – yup ….. Hitler. Look at the similarities, then decide for yourself . Just a thought.

  13. Joe: You have it correct – a grown man lying as though it’s God’s own truth. I didn’t waste my time either. The wife and I watched a good movie instead. Of course we got skewered with the news, but we were unimpressed. He has nothing to say that I want to listen to.

    JJ: I’m in total agreement that the Congress is as much to blame as OWEbama. Checks and balances have to be kept in place to keep our Republic on an even keel. Even the Supreme Court is facing left and it should be faced right in the middle and weigh everything. And if they have had a previous engagement with a case, they need to follow the law and recuse themselves.

  14. JJ, I think Ovomit’s power grab en route to a dicatatorship is closer to Hugo Chavez than Hitler, but I could be wrong… I’m not a fan of Newt; but if it’ll knock “next-in-lin” out of his stirrups – and incense the Left all at the same time – well, let ’em roll! I’ll even overlook Newt’s Regressive past and brutal political expediency! Besides, I’m ready for a little bloodbath; and if it takes down the good ol’ boys GOP Establishment in the process, so be it!! A new broom – please, God! – will eventualy sweep clean!

  15. JR,

    Thanks for your kind words.

    Sounds like the Mrs. is a chip off of the old JR block!

    No liberal could stand up to either of you!

    Thanks as always,


  16. T,

    Thanks for the kind words but it won’t go any farther than onto the computers of the family..

    It felt good to say it though..

    Thanks as always,


  17. Richard,

    Any of us could have written this article.

    Conservatives speak from their beliefs, not from polls like the liberals.

    Thanks as always,


  18. JJ,

    The analogy is spot on.

    This syndrome even effects everyday liberals.

    Don’t believe me? Just disagree with one..

    Thanks as always,


  19. I found this article while searching for the truth. It’s interesting so I thought I share it with you.

    How The Republicans Will Re-Elect Obama
    January 27, 2012 by Chip Wood from Personal Liberty Digest

    Now, the gloves are off. But Republican challengers for the White House aren’t throwing their hardest punches at Barack Obama. No, they’re flailing away at each other.

    Monday’s debate in Tampa, Fla., was particularly nasty, with Mitt Romney making his strongest attack to date against Newt Gingrich. And no wonder. Until recently, the former Massachusetts Governor’s dream of finally capturing the Republican nomination looked like a sure thing. But that was before the gods of the recount took away his victory in Iowa.

    And Gingrich found a new enemy to attack in two debates in South Carolina: the liberal media. The crowd ate it up, and a huge number of undecided voters made a last-minute decision to vote for the former House speaker.

    So after three State contests, we have three winners: Rick Santorum won the Iowa caucuses by 34 votes; Mitt Romney was an easy (and expected) winner in New Hampshire; and Newt Gingrich came from behind to win a decisive victory in the Palmetto State.

    Now it’s on to Florida, where there are more delegates up for grabs than in three previous States combined. Florida is a winner-take-all State where only registered Republicans can vote in the primary.

    The Sunshine State is huge: twice the size of any other State east of the Mississippi. To reach all Florida voters, a candidate has to saturate the airways in five different media centers. For a while, it looked like Romney’s large war chest and massive preparation gave him an unbeatable advantage. But that was before Gingrich’s impressive victory in South Carolina, which encouraged a ton of new supporters to flock to him — many with their checkbooks open. Now, pollsters say the race is virtually tied.

    Who is writing the script for this year’s Presidential contest? It’s become a cross between the Three Stooges and Monty Python. It’s an ugly “least ugly” contest.

    Is there any candidate who can electrify his supporters and unite the conservative base while appealing to independents? I don’t see one. The closest is Ron Paul, who has a wildly passionate group of base supporters. But, as much as I admire the guy and his principled stand on some vital issues (principles that haven’t changed an iota during his long career in office, unlike all of his opponents), I don’t see him garnering enough support to win the nomination.

    Nor will his support switch to either of the likely nominees. Gingrich was stupid enough to denounce Paul’s views as “outside the mainstream of virtually every decent American.” That’s sure not going to win him the support of many Paul followers.

    More and more, I think we need to start thinking the unthinkable: Come November, Barack Obama will be re-elected to a second term.

    There, I’ve said it. I know this idea will give many of you apoplexy. Believe me, I resisted coming to this conclusion for as long as I could.

    What will Obama’s re-election mean for our country? In some ways, I think an Obama victory could help in the struggle for freedom. Bear with me while I explain why.

    It’s a sad fact of nature that many of us will work much harder to defeat something we passionately oppose than to support something we like. I can’t think of anything that would unite and inspire the conservative opposition more than Obama’s re-election. The membership rolls of the various Tea Party groups would explode.

    With an aroused and determined opposition, Obama’s entire legislative program would come to a grinding halt. We would not just slow our country’s slide into socialism; with enough good guys (and gals) elected to Congress, we could actually begin to reverse it.

    Remember, the Administration can’t spend a penny on anything if Congress doesn’t appropriate it. The Constitution clearly specifies that every spending bill must originate in the House of Representatives. If enough Tea Party favorites retain their seats and enough new ones join them, the House can refuse to give the Democrats any of the money they want.

    If enough conservative Republicans also win Senate seats to gain a majority there, at the very worst we’ll have four years of gridlock. At the best, we could actually see some important bills passed — possibly with enough of a majority to overcome a Presidential veto.

    Audit the Fed, anyone? Defund foreign aid? Put the brakes on irresponsible loans, outrageous subsidies and absurd earmarks? How about slashing some budgets by 10 or 20 percent or taking away every penny from some of the worst violators of the Constitution? It could happen.

    Faced with the pathetic choices for the Republican nomination, I can tell you what I’m going to do. I’m going to give my money to the best candidates for the House and Senate I can find, because that’s where the future of liberty will be decided. And I hope you’ll do the same.

    How did we end up with such a sorry group of candidates running for our Nation’s highest office this year? I don’t know. Where were candidates like Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, Mitch Daniels, Haley Barbour and a bunch of others I could name? I said last year that my dream ticket was Chris Christie and Marco Rubio. Maybe I’ll get to see it — in 2016.

    In the meantime, here’s a suggestion for my stalwart Republican friends out there: If you don’t want to lose an election, don’t nominate losers.

    Until next time, keep some powder dry.

    –Chip Wood

  20. Here is a Tea Party straw poll from Grassfire Nation.

    Over the past three days, Grassfire Nation has conducted a massive Presidential Poll of Tea Party conservatives. The survey — which has been published nationally by NewsMax and reposted by Dallas Morning News and others — was completed by more than 29,000 Grassfire Nation team members and is one of the largest demographic polling samples of the Tea Party/ Conservative base.

    We feel this survey very accurately represents the current views of Tea Party conservatives because our polling shows that more than 92% of Grassfire Nation team members closely identify with the Tea Party ideals of Liberty and Limited Government.

    The results are clear and compelling:

    #1–Tea Party conservatives currently favor Newt Gingrich by a wide margin.

    #2–Tea Party conservatives remain very skeptical of Mitt Romney.

    #3–Tea Party conservatives have a very clear opinion on whether they will support a third-party or independent candidate (click below to reveal).

    Our Liberty News Media Director Eric Odom has published the full results of Grassfire’s National Conservative Presidential Poll allong with a very insightful analysis of what these results mean. Go here for complete poll results:

    + + The Tea Party’s Role in 2012

    Odom notes that these poll results make the upcoming Florida primary a bellweather of the Tea Party’s strength within the GOP: “The question is no longer one of who has the most support within the movement, it’s more a matter of the movement’s ability (or inability) to out-perform the traditional GOP primary voter base,” says Odom.

    Even beyond the GOP primaries, the role and strength of the Tea Party will be the central strategic political issue in the 2012 elections.

    Grassfire Nation has produced a “Survival Guide” to help Tea Party conservatives survive and thrive this year. The response has been tremendous and our team members have already pre-ordered more than half of our initial print run. We expect all the Survival Guides to be claimed by the end of next week.

    If you would like to secure your two copies of the 140-page Tea Party Survival Guide while supplies last in appreciation of a contribution of any amount to Grassfire Nation (even $5 or $10), please go here.

    Thanks for the stand you are taking,

    Steve Elliott
    Grassfire Nation

  21. Here is an article I found from Grassfire Nation regarding a Tea Party straw poll and who won!

    Over the past three days, Grassfire Nation has conducted a massive Presidential Poll of Tea Party conservatives. The survey — which has been published nationally by NewsMax and re-posted by Dallas Morning News and others — was completed by more than 29,000 Grassfire Nation team members and is one of the largest demographic polling samples of the Tea Party/ Conservative base.

    We feel this survey very accurately represents the current views of Tea Party conservatives because our polling shows that more than 92% of Grassfire Nation team members closely identify with the Tea Party ideals of Liberty and Limited Government.

    The results are clear and compelling:

    #1–Tea Party conservatives currently favor Newt Gingrich by a wide margin.

    #2–Tea Party conservatives remain very skeptical of Mitt Romney.

    #3–Tea Party conservatives have a very clear opinion on whether they will support a third-party or independent candidate (click below to reveal).

    Our Liberty News Media Director Eric Odom has published the full results of Grassfire’s National Conservative Presidential Poll allong with a very insightful analysis of what these results mean. Go here for complete poll results:

    + + The Tea Party’s Role in 2012

    Odom notes that these poll results make the upcoming Florida primary a bellweather of the Tea Party’s strength within the GOP: “The question is no longer one of who has the most support within the movement, it’s more a matter of the movement’s ability (or inability) to out-perform the traditional GOP primary voter base,” says Odom.

    Even beyond the GOP primaries, the role and strength of the Tea Party will be the central strategic political issue in the 2012 elections.

    Grassfire Nation has produced a “Survival Guide” to help Tea Party conservatives survive and thrive this year. The response has been tremendous and our team members have already pre-ordered more than half of our initial print run. We expect all the Survival Guides to be claimed by the end of next week.

    If you would like to secure your two copies of the 140-page Tea Party Survival Guide while supplies last in appreciation of a contribution of any amount to Grassfire Nation (even $5 or $10), please go here.

    Thanks for the stand you are taking,

    Steve Elliott
    Grassfire Nation

  22. Here is some information about the subpoena for Obama to appear in Court.
    A Letter from Obama’s Sleazy Attorney in Atlanta

    January 26, 2012
    By Breaking News

    From our friend George Miller of the Ventura County Tea Party):
    Per 1-25-12

    See the letter below. What Obama is asking now is totally insane. He is asking Georgia’s secretary of state to take the trial away from the judge on the eve of said trial. He is mostly crying on the shoulder of the secretary of State of Ga. and saying that Orly is bad because she issued all of those subpoenas. So, after the judge told Obama that the subpoena that I issued was perfectly valid, and he had to appear in court tomorrow and bring with him all of the documents that I demanded, Obama decided to go behind the back of the judge and send the same complaint about me to the Secretary of State. He is also asking the Secretary of State to take the trial away from the judge.
    Does this look like a behavior of an innocent person? An innocent person would have come to court and showed all the valid documents with the embossed seals, which are verifiable. Instead, he is acting like a 5 year old brat, saying “I am afraid of Orly; I want the Secretary of State of Ga. to act like my mommy and protect me from Orly.” Some leader of a free world…

    815.846.0719 (fax)

    January 25, 2012

    Hon. Brian P. Kemp
    Georgia Secretary of State
    214 State Capitol
    Atlanta, Georgia 30334
    via email to Vincent R. Russo Jr., Esq.
    Re: Georgia Presidential Preference Primary Hearings
    Dear Secretary Kemp:
    This is to advise you of serious problems that have developed in the conduct of the hearings pending before the Office of State Administrative Hearings. At issue in these hearings are challenges that allege that President Obama is not eligible to hold or run for re-election to his office, on the now wholly discredited theory that he does not meet the citizenship requirements. As you know, such allegations have been the subject of numerous judicial proceedings around the country, all of which have concluded that they were baseless and, in some instances – including in the State of Georgia – that those bringing the challenges have engaged in sanctionable abuse of our legal process.
    Nonetheless, the Administrative Law Judge has exercised no control whatsoever over this proceeding, and it threatens to degenerate into a pure forum for political posturing to the detriment of the reputation of the State and your Office. Rather than bring this matter to a rapid conclusion, the ALJ has insisted on agreeing to a day of hearings, and on the full participation of the President in his capacity as a candidate. Only last week, he denied a Motion to Quash a subpoena he approved on the request of plaintiff’s counsel for the personal appearance of the President at the hearing, now scheduled for January 26.

    For these reasons, and as discussed briefly below, you should bring an end to this baseless, costly and unproductive hearing by withdrawing the original hearing request as improvidently issued.

    It is well established that there is no legitimate issue here—a conclusion validated time and again by courts around the country. The State of Hawaii produced official records documenting birth there; the President made documents available to the general public by placing them on his website. “Under the United States Constitution, a public record of a state is required to be given ‘full faith and credit’ by all other states in the country. Even if a state were to require its election officials for the first time ever to receive a ‘birth certificate’ as a requirement for a federal candidate’s ballot placement, a document certified by another state, such as a ‘short form’ birth certificate, or the certified long form, would be required to be accepted by all states under the ‘full faith and credit’ clause of the United States Constitution.” Maskell, “Qualifications for President and the “Natural Born” Citizenship Eligibility Requirement,” Congressional Research Service (November 14, 2011), p.41.
    Nonetheless, the ALJ has decided, for whatever reason, to lend assistance through his office—and by extension, yours—to the political and legally groundless tactics of the plaintiffs. One of the attorneys for the plaintiffs has downloaded form subpoenas which she tried to serve around the country. Plaintiff’s attorney sent subpoenas seeking to force attendance by an office machine salesman in Seattle; seeking to force the United States Attorney to bring an unnamed “Custodian of Records Department of Homeland Security” to attend the hearing with immunization records; and asking the same U.S. Attorney to bring the same records allegedly possessed by “Custodian of Records of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.” She served subpoenas attempting to compel the production of documents and the attendance of Susan Daniels and John Daniels, both apparently out of state witnesses, regarding Social Security records. She is seeking to compel the Director of Health for the State of Hawaii to bring to Atlanta the “original typewritten 1961 birth certificate #10641 for Barack Obama, II, issued 08.08.1961 by Dr. David Sinclair…,” even though Hawaii courts had dismissed with prejudice the last attempt to force release of confidential records on November 9, 2011. Taitz v. Fuddy, CA No. 11-1-1731-08 RAN. In Rhodes v. McDonald, 670 F. Supp. 2d 1363, 1365 (USDC MD GA, 2009), Judge Clay Land wrote this of plaintiff’s attorney:

    When a lawyer files complaints and motions without a reasonable basis for believing that they are supported by existing law or a modification or extension of existing law, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer uses the courts as a platform for political agenda disconnected from any legitimate legal cause of action, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law….

    As a national leader in the so-called ‘birther movement,’ Plaintiff’s counsel has attempted to use litigation to provide the ‘legal foundation’ for her political agenda. She seeks to use the Court’s power to compel discovery in her efforts force the President to produce a ‘birth certificate’ that is satisfactory to herself and her followers.” 670 F. Supp. 2d at 1366.

    All issues were presented to your hearing officer—the clear-cut decision to be on the merits, and the flagrantly unethical and unprofessional conduct of counsel—and he has allowed the plaintiffs’ counsel to run amok. He has not even addressed these issues—choosing to ignore them. Perhaps he is aware that there is no credible response; perhaps he appreciates that the very demand made of his office—that it address constitutional issues—is by law not within its authority. See, for example, Flint River Mills v. Henry, 234 Ga. 385, 216 S.E.2d 895 (1975); Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.22(3).

    The Secretary of State should withdraw the hearing request as being improvidently issued. A referring agency may withdraw the request at any time. Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.17(1). Indeed, regardless of the collapse of proceedings before the ALJ, the original hearing request was defective as a matter of law. Terry v. Handel, 08cv158774S (Superior Court Fulton County, 2008), appeal dismissed, No. S09D0284 (Ga. Supreme Court),reconsideration denied, No. S09A1373. (“The Secretary of State of Georgia is not given any authority that is discretionary nor any that is mandatory to refuse to allow someone to be listed as a candidate for President by a political party because she believes that the candidate might not be qualified.”) Similarly, no law gives the Secretary of State authority to determine the qualifications of someone named by a political party to be on the Presidential Preference Primary ballot. Your duty is determined by the statutory requirement that the Executive Committee of a political party name presidential preference primary candidates. O.C.G.A. § 21-2-193. Consequently, the attempt to hold hearings on qualifications which you may not enforce is ultra vires.
    We await your taking the requested action, and as we do so, we will, of course, suspend further participation in these proceedings, including the hearing scheduled for January 26.

    Very truly yours,
    Georgia State Bar Number 385850

    Attorney for President Barack Obama
    cc: Hon. Michael Malihi (c/o Kim Beal (
    Van Irion, Esq. (
    Orly Taitz, Esq. (
    Mark Hatfield, Esq. (
    Vincent R. Russo Jr., Esq. (
    Stefan Ritter, Esq. (
    Ann Brumbaugh, Esq. (
    Darcy Coty, Esq. (
    Andrew B. Flake, Esq. (

    Someone thinks they are above the Law. No shock there. I will keep researching to find more on this subject.


  23. New Hampshire State Representatives Challenge Attorney General on Obama Election Fraud Investigation

    January 2, 2012 By Breaking News

    Today concerned New Hampshire State Representatives delivered a signed affidavit to the State Attorney General Michael Delaney, stating that in 2009 Representative Larry Rappaport, Mr. Lucien Vita (now a State Representative), and Representative Carol Vita met with New Hampshire State Attorney General Michael Delaney and argued that they believed Barack Obama was not eligible to be President of the United States and requested that Attorney Delaney launch an investigation of Mr. Obama’s credentials. The three believed that the people of New Hampshire had been defrauded by Mr. Obama’s candidacy. The Attorney General stated it was a federal matter and refused to investigate.

    We believe that according to the United States Constitution (Article ll section 1 paragraph 5) “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.”

    A natural born Citizen, as defined by the U.S. Supreme Court in “Minor vs. Happersett”, Vattel’s “Law of Nations”, and the 2008 (S.Res. 511) Senatorial resolution, is one wherein both parents of whom were Citizens of the United States of America. According to the record, Mr. Obama’s father was born in Kenya. He never was a Citizen of the United States of America, making Mr. Obama ineligible to be a Presidential Candidate on the New Hampshire ballot.

    Our attorney, Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. had previously delivered a written request to the Secretary Of State requesting him to review the challenge to Mr. Obama’s eligibility to be on the New Hampshire Ballot. The Ballot Law Commission met on November 18th to review our complaint. We were represented at that hearing by Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. Our complaint was denied, but there appears to be an inconsistency in the process of the challenge. According to the Assistant Secretary Of State, Karen Ladd, and the Ballot Law Commission, they testified that they can only rule on the Ballot Petition making sure it is filled out properly and is accompanied by a check for $ 1000.00. They claimed that it is not in their purview to determine if a person is a Natural Born Citizen. However, the inconsistency becomes obvious when the record shows that on November 15th. 2007 the Secretary of State’s office ruled that a Mr. Sal Mohamed was disqualified, and on July 19th. 2011 a Mr. Abdul K. Hassan Esq. was denied a place on the Presidential Ballot because they were not natural born citizens. Both letters were signed by Karen Ladd Assistant Secretary of State.

    Despite what we consider overwhelming evidence, our attorney, Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. was denied by the Ballot Law Commission, then was denied a rehearing, and filed an action before the New Hampshire Supreme Court where she was subsequently denied. We can provide copies of her challenges.

    The oath we took when we were sworn in as legislators was to uphold and defend the Constitutions of both the United States and that of New Hampshire. We believe it is our duty as your Representatives to support the Constitution and to insure that anyone seeking the highest office in the land is qualified to be on the New Hampshire “First in the Nation” ballot.

  24. Eileen, I like that article by Chip Wood EXCEPT the part about Christie in 2016! Unless he sheds at least 100 lbs, he’s a heart attack waiting to happen, PLUS he’s no Conservative!!

  25. I just read an important article about our next Reagan. Here is the url:

  26. Eileen… The state of Georgia has 3 pending lawsuits that are being heard on the same “eligilibity for election” issue. The Obama Administration has already had their hands slapped for demanding that a subpoena for himself to appear and bring his proof of eligibility with him be quashed. And so the saga continues………….

  27. Good article Richard. Thanks for sharing.



    A lot of action to beat up on Newt this past week
    But let us keep our eye on the goal of replacing
    the current WH sitter
    I also read Chip Wood article and now several others
    have come out blasting Romney ads as lies
    Good article out there by MARK LEVIN confirming
    the conservative qualifications of NEWT
    Also RUSH MICHAEL R. HIS MOTHER and a good
    exposure of the lies on the Rush website by a man
    that was there when Newt gave his speech on the house floor
    Also saw a poll taken by 29,000 tea party people that gave
    Newt 92% OF the vote
    Richard I read your post also good definition of what we should be looking for
    This Tuesday will be the test in Florida
    Larry enjoy your Birthday we are blessed that you came

  29. Richard,

    Thanks, also. Liked the comment about comparing Republicans and Dems. regarding the homeless persons.

  30. I found this and thought it was humorous.

    Obama Eschatology
    Editorial submitted by: Craig
    In a miraculous show of divine communication skill, God secretly called together all the leaders of the world to announce to them that he had decided the day and hour of the end of the world. He further warned them not to whine, complain, or debate as they were accustomed to do as it would only serve to accelerate the hour of their violent destruction. The decision had been made and was not open to discussion.

    Benjamin Netanyahu managed to ask without any hint of argument if the Messiah would appear before the destruction. Then Prime Minister Stephen Harper whispered, “But what about the rapture?” followed by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who vociferously asserted something about an angel named Israfil blowing a horn.

    “Enough!” bellowed the Creator of all that is and would be no more. “You have 24 hours. Return to your people to prepare them for the end, in 23 hours, 59, minutes 54 seconds, and counting!”

    As the leaders took off in their jets from Salt Lake International Airport, a surprising number of them had already filed flight plans to Las Vegas. The more serious ones, among whom were Chinese president Hu Jintao, French President Nicholas Sarkozy, and President Barrack Obama, rushed to nearby TV studios to avoid losing time taking long flights home to Beijing, Paris, and Washington, respectively.

    Jon Huntsman was first to get his buddy Hu Jintao fixed up with a studio at KSL channel 5. They immediately interrupted all programming to direct a Chinese language news feed via satellite to the great nation of China, and, at Hu’s insistence, to Taiwan. President Hu, in the most somber tones admitted to his people that he was wrong about the existence of God whom he had seen face-to-face. He further instructed them that the glorious Chinese people’s revolution for which all had fought so valiantly would soon come to an end, in fact in less than 22 hours.

    Nicholas Sarkozy found a sympathetic welcome at Fox News affiliate KSTU channel 13, where his French language broadcast was beamed to Paris and Quebec, giving French Canadians the heads up before Stephen Harper was able to arrive back in Quebec. President Sarkozy affirmed that the French had indeed done well to invest untold billions in defending the faith through crusades, religious wars, and minor disagreements with England. As the world would soon end, he lamented that confession was probably of little use at this point but to give it a try in the absence of a better alternative. He urged them to consume all the wine left in France, including his personal stash of 1787 Chateau Lafite, during their remaining 21 hours. He did not end his speech with “vive la France.”

    President Obama raced around the city in a motorcade looking for the PBS station, which they finally found at the University of Utah, KUED channel 7. After correctly positioning three Teleprompters, President Obama prepared to give his final address to the nation during the 10:30 PM slot, preempting the program “Waiting for God, episode 117. The nation was already abuzz with rumors on Twitter. Obama promised to provide the clarity the nation needed.
    President Obama boldly proclaimed that it was a great day for America. He had personally consulted face-to-face with the Creator who completely endorsed his plans to solve America’s most vexing problems. “An’ by the way, he sends his warm personal regards to the uh …, uh.. Uhmerican people,” Obama’s voice trailed off pensively.

    “False alarm,” the nation Tweeted.

    “Within the next 15 hours, my administration will have totally eliminated unemployment. While the nation sleeps this evening, I am tirelessly implementing a new program that will eliminate poverty, drug abuse, pedophilia, global warming, homelessness, the national debt, illegal immigration, and best of all…, taxes will be totally eliminated.”
    “But let me be clear: The choice we face is not between some oppressive government-run economy or a chaotic and unforgiving capitalism. This is possible without bringing the troops home, without closing Guantánamo, and with no sacrifice to national security. So again let it be clear: I am open to every demonstrably good idea. Obviously we will suspend the election, but that should be no reason to abandon your commitment to change. I urge you, my fellow Uhmericans, to go to your computers this evening to reaffirm your faith in the Uhmerican dream by logging on to” and generously support my campaign to bring Uhmerica out of the darkness and into the light ”

    The rest of the 28 minute, eleven second address was uneventful but full of clarity. When the end of the world came the next afternoon, the nation was caught off guard. It was quite a surprise. The faithful who watched the address did not believe the part about God talking to Obama so they assumed he was pandering to the religious right. Nobody else was watching. Jon knew and told Mitt but it was too late.

  31. I found another great commentary. People are wising up. That’s good to hear.

    The Death of Center-Leftism and the Decline of the Democratic Party
    Editorial by: Jett

    In the midst of all the hoopla and hype over the debt ceiling and the federal budget, my mom asked me what did I think was driving Obama? My mom initially supported him. She even bought a porcelain plaque with his picture on it and put it up in the kitchen where I had to look at it every time I went to visit. Even though she didn’t go out to vote in 2008, her support was emotionally apparent. All of that changed, however, the longer she listened to him and became more engaged with the issues. Now she can’t stand him. She’s actually become a fan of Michelle Bachman and has even warmed up to Sarah Palin (though she still doesn’t think she’s experienced enough to be president). The fact that her view of Obama has evolved the more objectively–and factually–she looked at the issues provides a measure of hope for those of us who are trying to figure out how to break the anointed ones spell over the populace before the 2012 election.

    I have the same issue with some of my liberal friends–especially the black ones. Their support of all things Democratic is reflexive. A vote for a conservative Republican is tantamount to racial treason. They view the world through the emotional prism of race and historical racial prejudice that all African-Americans (a term I hate because Africa is a very diverse continent, not a country) are indoctrinated into from birth. They then succumb to the same liberal emotional conditioning that all Americans are subject to from the two main institutions that carry out that process: the K-12 public school system and the media (both entertainment and news). Since I woke up in 2000 and started voting Republican (my evolution to that position over a fifteen year period will be enunciated and explicated in a book I’m working on) all of my left wing friends have turned their back on me. I’m persona non grata. Even my former best friend has cut the communication cord between us.

    A few years ago I asked him where he was at politically. He told me that although there were some conservative things he believed in (he didn’t get specific) he was still basically center-left. Of course, with American blacks their aversion to the more nuanced worldview of Republicanism (there are at least four, if not more, different kinds) is somewhat, if not exclusively, based on a whole host of historical fallacies and inaccuracies, not to mention the one key fact that most are either loathe to admit or completely ignorant of–that the Republican Party was founded as an anti-slavery (at least in the new territories) party. No, they weren’t abolitionists (initially), but they clearly didn’t want to see this evil system spread any further (beyond the Mississippi river) than it already had. The Democrats at the time were the party and the power of the South and of slavery. Indeed, it was their insistence on increasing their political dominance by proxy that led to the passage of the three fifths clause in the constitution. But that Democratic Party evolved and finally bought off the black community with a grab bag of affirmative action, quotas, minority set-asides, misinformation, public housing (ghetto-ization), welfare state dependency, and pop culture trinkets (and its attendant faux status).

    What I never said to my former best friend at the time of that conversation is what I’m going to say now: there is no such thing as center-left. The center-left perspective (as it were) died with the disintegration of the Lyndon Johnson administration. The anti-war riots at the Democratic National Convention in 1968 sparked the rise of the New Left which effectively put an end to Cold War liberalism and replaced it with a creeping Euro-style democratic socialism that has now completely taken over the once more pragmatic and common sense (under John F. Kennedy) Democratic Party. From the evolution of the McGovern wing of the party, to the rise and subsequent decline of the Carter Doctrine, to the ’80s rainbow campaigns of Jesse Jackson, to the triangulation of baby boomer Bill (Clinton, who graduated from Georgetown in ’68), and, finally, to the “hope and change” theme of Barrack Hussein Obama, the Democrats have clearly moved towards the only position open to them: further to the left and closer to a Gramscian (or Fabian, if you will) style socialism. Essentially, what we have in America right now are three political ideologies: the far left of the (think George Soros) driven Democrats with their Hollywood activist mouthpieces, the status quo mushy middle of faux liberals and RINOs, and, lastly, the principled populist conservatism of the Tea Party (and Republican Study Committee).

    This historical process then begs the question: what happened to center-left Kennedyesque liberalism? For the most part, it succeeded. The Voting Rights & Civil Rights Acts passed. Jim Crow died. Roe v. Wade triumphed. Virtually every law that could be passed to defend the “rights” of protected classes of people has been passed. There is nowhere else for liberalism and the Democratic Party to go but further towards implementing full blown Marxist-informed socialism. Hence, the embrace of illegal immigrant rights and amnesty, gay marriage, marijuana legalization, socialized universal healthcare insurance, and the piece de resistance: an ever-expanding government (state and federal) that is now attempting to co-opt the middle class by providing dependency-inducing entitlements and will ultimately become 50% plus of the GDP (it’s currently ballooned to 36% after a historical high of 27% during the Great Society years). The GOP, on the other hand, wants a balanced budget amendment within which federal spending will be limited to 18% of GDP. And that’s what’s driving the Obama agenda–a dogged determination culled from his own reading of radical progressivism (again, socialism) to increase spending and expand the power of the party of government (the Democrats) in order to create a permanent governing majority for the left. And, in the process of expanding government, if your rights or property or freedoms are trampled on you will have no recourse because the internal logic of this new system will be the supremacy of the collective state over the individual.

    This is why there is no more center-left in America today. The evolution of the political spectrum has made it irrelevant. You can’t embrace a philosophy that no longer has a base or a reason for being (which is why the mushy middle mentioned above is scorned and rejected by both sides of the spectrum). The bottom line is that the Obamanistas know full well that a balanced budget amendment, spending cuts, and a cap on federal spending as a specific percentage of GDP (all contained in the House passed “Cut, Cap & Balance” bill) will permanently derail the continued implementation of the ever-expanding government philosophy and, possibly, give the Republicans a majority for decades to come. So when you hear Nancy Pelosi say that the Democrats are fighting to “save the world from the Republican budget,” and “to save life on this planet as we know it today,” you know the world she’s talking about is the inside-the-beltway world of Democratic politicians and the lives she’s speaking of are the political lives of those same Democrats; for without big government, they’ll all dry up and wither away–ironically, just like Karl Marx said the capitalist state ultimately would.

  32. I’m on a roll here folks

    Eligibility Judge About To Lower the Boom on Barack?
    January 28, 2012
    By Doug Book

    At the beginning of yesterday’s hearing to determine the legal and Constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama for placement on the State of Georgia ballot in November, Judge Michael Malihi was said to have read “the last paragraph of [Obama] Attorney Michael Jablonski’s letter” to Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp. And in the barely 2 hour proceedings which reviewed 3 lawsuits demanding Obama not appear on that ballot, this might have been the most significant “statement” made by the otherwise reserved Malihi.

    Like Obama, Jablonski was a no-show in the Georgia courtroom, leaving Obama represented by no counsel at the proceeding.

    And although the judge adjourned the hearing with no decision, no ruling, in fact nothing more than a “thank you” to the participants, the last paragraph of Jablonski’s letter states “We await your taking the requested action and as we do, we will, of course, suspend further participation in these proceedings, including the hearing scheduled for January 26th.”

    Well Obama had been subpoenaed to appear in that courtroom. The subpoena had been specifically and without reservation upheld by Judge Malihi just 6 days earlier. So Obama was in obvious violation of the court’s order.
    So maybe, just maybe Judge Malihi read the final words of Jablonski’s hyper arrogant, “we don’t believe your little state or your silly hearing are worth our time” letter for the purpose of reading into the record the fact that it was indeed the decision of Obama and his attorney to NOT attend and to NOT honor legal subpoenas.

    And if that is the case, it means Malihi is clearing the decks for either a default judgment against the president, or the implementation of a legal remedy of some sort for Obama’s self-important refusal to appear or even respond to the proceeding with counsel.

    Naturally it would take an attorney to decipher any “legal” significance in Malihi’s actions, but through his past rulings the judge has made it abundantly clear that he will follow the laws of the state of Georgia to the letter and accept no grandstanding or phony arguments from either side, not even from a president.

    And it is against the law to ignore a subpoena, perhaps all the more so when the judge himself refused to allow Obama’s earlier request that the subpoena be quashed.

    It might be significant that Georgia Secretary of State Kemp backed Malihi to the hilt in his response to Michael Jablonski’s letter, telling the lawyer “…If you and your client choose to suspend your participation in the OSAH proceedings, please understand that you do so at your own peril.”

    In short, though you and your client clearly don’t think much of our state or its laws, we will conduct the business of both just as though you were mere mortals rather than privileged characters.

    When will Judge Malihi issue a ruling and what weight of law will it carry? Attorneys for both sides have until February 5th to present additional evidence for their claims. Soon after that we will know how determined the State of Georgia is in seeing to it their laws are obeyed…even by a president.

  33. More on the Georgia Court:

    A Message From One Of The Attorneys At Obama’s Eligibility Proceedings In Atlanta
    January 28, 2012
    By Breaking News

    Fellow Constitutionalists,
    One of my earliest childhood memories is of my parents talking about Nixon and the Watergate scandal. I remember the newspaper headline: “Nixon Resigns!” President Nixon’s fight against court subpoenas made international news. Yesterday President Obama completely ignored a court subpoena, and the world shrugged.

    Obama’s behavior yesterday is even more disturbing than Nixon’s. Nixon at least respected the judicial branch enough to have his attorney’s show up in court and follow procedure. Nixon’s fight in the courts followed existing law. Nixon acknowledged the authority of the judicial branch even while he fought it. Obama, on the other hand, essentially said yesterday that the judicial branch has no power over him. He ordered his attorneys to stay away from the hearing. He didn’t petition a higher court in a legitimate attempt to stay the hearing. Instead he showed complete contempt for the entire judicial branch and for the rule of law. Rather than respecting the legal process Obama went around the courts and tried to put political pressure directly on the Georgia Secretary of State. When that failed, he simply ignored the judicial branch completely.

    The rule of law, and our three-branch system of government, now hang in the balance. If the Georgia court issues a ruling on the merits and an order finding Obama in contempt of court, and if that contempt order actually results in real punishment of some kind, then we will still have a Constitutional Republic. If this doesn’t happen, then Obama will have been rewarded for showing complete contempt for the judicial branch.

    Understand that the goal of the Georgia ballot challenge was to have a court rule on the merits of the Constitutional question: Does the term “natural born citizen” in Article II of the Constitution, require a Presidential candidate to have two parents that were U.S. citizens at the time the candidate was born? Obama wants to avoid having a court rule on this question. That is why he didn’t show up and ordered his attorneys to not show up. He was hoping that the Georgia court would enter a default judgment rather than rule on the merits. If the court enters a default judgment, Obama will have succeeded in avoiding the Constitutional eligibility question. He will then appeal the default judgment, get the appellate court to suspend the default judgment pending appeal, and then delay the appeal until after the primary. This is undoubtedly Obama’s plan.
    If the Georgia Court rules that Supreme Court precedent must be followed and therefore Obama simply does not meet the minimum Constitutional requirements to hold the office of President, then we will at least have succeeded in finding one court in the nation willing to do its job. If that court finds Obama in contempt of court, then we still have three viable branches of government. The Georgia court has the authority to do both of these things. The world should be holding its breath.

    Unfortunately the world is apparently unaware that a great Republic is on life support. The Roman Empire died a slow death. It’s death was so gradual that few people living at that time probably noticed the individual events that marked the death throes of that great empire. Apparently the same is true of America. Yesterday marked a stunning turn of events in the constant power struggle between the three branches of our government. Our President openly showed that he believes he is completely above the law. I wonder if the court even noticed its own death certificate. We will see in a few days.

    I will certainly try to explain this to the court in our proposed findings of fact and law that the court requested we file before February 5th.

    All of your encouragement and prayers have been greatly appreciated. They are needed even more over the next few weeks. This battle is FAR from over. And it has taken on importance beyond what we predicted (which is truly astounding). Please tell everyone you know about Obama’s contempt of the judicial branch. Please explain to them what it really means. Even those that agree with Obama politically and disagree with our ballot challenge should be shocked, appalled, and scared of Obama’s contempt for the judicial system.

    In Liberty,
    Van Irion
    Co-Founder, Lead Counsel
    9040 Executive Park Drive, Suite 200
    Knoxville, TN 37923
    Phone/Fax: 423-208-9953

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s