Welcome to JAMES: Just Americans Making Ethical Statements
Whether an election year or not, there are many extremely important issues that face us, that challenge us, as Americans. The issues we face are ours, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents alike. Rising fuel costs, the war on terrorism, economic conditions, a failing bank system, home foreclosures, and global warming are just a few of the concerns that we MUST address now.
JAMES has set up this blog to provide a forum for open, intellectual discourse; the free exchange of ideas and information.
JAMES will not tolerate IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, or FORM racial epithets, etc. The First Amendment supports our freedom of speech, of expression, of association, and to the best of our ability, within the limitations of the law.
The moderator(s) ask that the commentators be respectful of opposing views, for it is in the free exchange of information that we learn from each other, a hopefully together we can all make a difference….. a difference for us and for our children.
34 comments
Comments feed for this article
July 28, 2008 at 10:03 pm
enigma
I want to encourage those who post on James’s new blog to voice your onions in a respectful manor. I’m personally worn out from the Sinclair story and the Cesspool at M&N. The hatred is overwhelming and I just want to thank James for allowing us to have an open discussion of real topics of concerns we face in this great country of ours.
We are faced with so many challenges in these days. We as a nation are becoming so divided over issues that seem so meaningless compared to what’s most important to all decent law abiding citizens. During this hard economic time we are going through family is the most important thing that comes to my mind. I look at my children and wonder what’s in store for them in the future. They grow up so fast and it’s during these hard times that I want to cling to them more and tell them how much I love them.
Many don’t have love of family to protect and nurture them and I as a Christian feel it’s my responsibility to help those who are in need and do my best to live my life that way. My family is working on food storage and being prepared for future trials that could be on the horizon. I had a very insightful learning experience many years ago while living in North Carolina. The forecast for the next morning was Snow, snow, and snow for those of you who live in NC understand that every thing shuts down when snow is on the way. I just happened to be at the grocery store that evening and was shocked to see the masses of people getting water, bread, and other things before the weather set in. In a matter of minutes Milk, water and bread were gone from the selves and I stood there in amazement. It was at that time that I realized how important it is to have a supply of water and food in our homes. Just think if as a country if we had a major attack on our banking system; or we had a terrorist bombing in a major city that shut everything down. Think of the masses of people that would storm the stores to get food to survive and in just minutes it would all be gone.
In my line of work I talk with people everyday and see many families struggling due to lost jobs, high gas and food prices. My personal family has also been affected by this hard time we face but I try my best to think positive and hope for better days. This is the main reason I don’t support Obama. I feel he wants to take the Country in a direction that would cause more hardships then we face today. It was just a matter of time before the mortgage lending institutions were going to face the reality that you just can’t give mortgage loans to everyone who wants one. I’m sick of our tax dollars going to bail out these corrupt banks because of their lending mistakes.
July 29, 2008 at 5:10 pm
Interested Bystander
Enigma,
I agree whole heartedly.
My suggestion to you would be to keep your head up, and KNOW that things are going to get better. People felt the same way during the late 70′s and early 80′s. Positive attitudes do wonders for the country. Look at how the country came together after 9/11. We are a diverse people, and we will survive.
I do not know how old you are, but my generation (40-55) is going to be the first generation, and only generation (I hope), who will not be better off than their parents. Both my parents get PENSIONS from their place of work. I have no pension, I have a 401K that the company “matches” to a certain percentage. Don’t get me wrong, my family will be fine, but to be honest, I do practice my “Welcome to Wal Mart, do you need a shopping cart” lines……LOL. Meaning that we will have to work longer than my parents had too, to have a decent “retirement”.
I am very grateful to James for putting up this blog.
July 29, 2008 at 9:27 pm
Enigma
IB,
Thanks for the nice comments, I’m 44 years old so you were right in there on guessing my age. I think most Americans are doing all they can now to safe by shopping for good prices on clothes, food, and gas. I find that personal struggles in live bring out the best in people and make them stronger. Thanks again for all your comments it’s always nice to read your posts.
October 27, 2008 at 2:40 pm
Rusty
I couldn’t believe it when I searched and found your comments about Obama’s education and how he traveled around the world back in the early 80′s. How was he able to travel to Pakistan?
I was in my teens living in a small garage apartment. I remember how tough the times were and this guy had the money to travel the world and attend an Ivy league school despite his poor performance at Occidental college and to my understanding his grand parents where not wealthy. We are getting ready to elect this guy and there are so many un-answered questions.
October 27, 2008 at 4:53 pm
JAMES
Rusty, It’s media malpractice!
December 4, 2008 at 1:50 am
commontater
What enigma said. Excellent points. I love this site..
PopUpCommontater
December 8, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Clunker
I bet you folks have absolute evidence that Obama was born on a Martian spaceship?
December 18, 2008 at 5:59 am
The Drifter
If you truly wanted an intellectual exchange, the list of blogs on the right wouldn’t read like a Who’s Who of Right-wing Nutcases.
December 18, 2008 at 8:14 am
JAMES
Drifter- Not all right-wingers are nutcases, just as all nutcases are not left-wingers. I would welcome any blogroll additions that you might like to suggest. And I welcome all points of view, so long as the conversation does not disintegrate into the vile and viscious attacks that I have seen elsewhere. Again, please share some of the other blogs that would contribute to meaningful dialogue.
February 11, 2009 at 4:43 pm
The Administrator
“If a race has no history, if it has no worthwhile tradition, it becomes a negligible
factor in the thought of the world, and it stands in danger of being exterminated.”
–Dr. Carter G. Woodson
THE BRIEFING ROOM
Monday, February 2nd, 2009 at 12:00 am
National African American History Month, 2009
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
————————————
For Immediate Release
February 2, 2009
NATIONAL AFRICAN AMERICAN HISTORY MONTH, 2009
– - – - – - -
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A PROCLAMATION
The history of African Americans is unique and rich, and one that has helped to define what it means to be an American. Arriving on ships on the shores of North America more than 300 years ago, recognized more as possessions than people, African Americans have come to know the freedoms fought for in establishing the United States and gained through the use of our founding principles of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the right to assembly, and due process of law. The ideals of the Founders became more real and more true for every citizen as African Americans pressed us to realize our full potential as a Nation and to uphold those ideals for all who enter into our borders and embrace the notion that we are all endowed with certain unalienable rights.
Since Carter G. Woodson first sought to illuminate the African American experience, each February we pause to reflect on the contributions of this community to our national identity. The history is one of struggle for the recognition of each person’s humanity as well as an influence on the broader American culture. African Americans designed our beautiful Capital City, gave us the melodic rhythms of New Orleans Jazz, issued new discoveries in science and medicine, and forced us to examine ourselves in the pages of classic literature. This legacy has only added luster to the brand of the United States, which has drawn immigrants to our shores for centuries.
This year’s theme, “The Quest for Black Citizenship in the Americas,” is a chance to examine the evolution of our country and how African Americans helped draw us ever closer to becoming a more perfect union.
The narrative of the African American pursuit of full citizenship with all of the rights and privileges afforded others in this country is also the story of a maturing young Nation. The voices and examples of the African American people worked collectively to remove the boulders of systemic racism and discrimination that pervaded our laws and our public consciousness for decades. Through the work of Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman, Booker T. Washington and George Washington Carver, Martin Luther King and Thurgood Marshall, the African American community has steadily made progress toward the dreams within its grasp and the promise of our Nation. Meanwhile, the belief that those dreams might one day be realized by all of our citizens gave African American men and women the same sense of duty and love of country that led them to shed blood in every war we have ever fought, to invest hard-earned resources in their communities with the hope of self empowerment, and to pass the ideals of this great land down to their children and grandchildren.
As we mark National African American History Month, we should take note of this special moment in our Nation’s history and the actors who worked so diligently to deliver us to this place. One such organization is the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People — the NAACP — which this year will witness 100 years of service to the Nation on February 12. Because of their work, including the contributions of those luminaries on the front lines and great advocates behind the scenes, we as a Nation were able to take the dramatic steps we have in recent history.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in Me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby February 2009 as National African American History Month. I call upon public officials, educators, librarians and all the people of the United States to observe this month with appropriate ceremonies, activities, and programs that raise awareness and appreciation of African American history.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this
second day of February, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third.
BARACK OBAMA
August 10, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Jamp
Not bad for an Arab-American!
(Since he’s 50% white, 43% Arab, and 6 % black)
August 10, 2009 at 8:39 pm
JAMES
Thanks Jamp– O have said that several times within this blog to show that the “first black president” moniker is meaningless
February 12, 2009 at 11:23 am
The Administrator
NO COMMENT???
February 12, 2009 at 11:24 am
The Administrator
TELL THE MAYOR
THIS IS
NATIONAL AFRICAN AMERICAN HISTORY MONTH, 2009
– - – - – - -
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A PROCLAMATION
February 12, 2009 at 11:26 am
The Administrator
Fax Letter to “The White House” From: Homeless Woman Arafa Speaks Editor of New York City’s New and Improved ~ Homeless Magazines / “In The Spirit” & ~ “ENIGHTEMNENT (Homeless Delivery) MAGAZINE” for TV and Radio Re: President Barack Hussein Obama Jr.’s Name *Left out of Computer Dictionary’s* Sent February 11, 2009
CONGRATS MR PRESIDENT AND FIRST FAMILY Happy Presidenting
“Add to Dictionary” “Barack Hussein Obama Jr.”
US Computer Dictionary’s, USA, Global Village World Internet Services left out a #1 Name of tremendous and historic importance. That is the Name of The Brand New “President of The USA…WOW! Check all computers everywhere. Do they recognize President Barack Hussein Obama Jr.s? If not Red Underline will appear after typing The Chief of Staff’s Name.
Solution: Go to Spell Check, Simply Click, “Add to Dictionary”
“YES I DID” & “YES I WILL DO IT AGAIN & AGAIN & AGAIN AS LONG AS IT IS TAKES TO MAKE EVERY COMPUTER BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA JR. FRIENDLY”
SPREAD THE WORD WORLD WIDE~
From the desk of Homeless Activist and Undercover Minister, Arafa Speaks Editor of, “IN THE SPIRIT” and “ENLIGHTENMENT (Homeless Delivery) MAGAZINE” for TV and Radio
CONTACT INFORMATION
Primary Email: inthespirit66@yahoo.com
February 12, 2009 at 12:13 pm
JAMES
Administrator: Make every computer “Obama Friendly”. What is that? Why must a computer be “Obama friendly”? Were they all George Bush friendly?
Why would anyone’s name be in the dictionary?
Personally, I want my computer to be neutral, so I can effectively challenge my President when it is necessary, and to let him know when he does something that deserves positive acknowledgement as well. That is why I have programmed Acting President Biden’s fax number into my fax machine. Once Barack has shown he is eligible as POTUS, I will reprogram the fax with his fax number.
February 12, 2009 at 6:03 pm
Sharon McEachern
You say that you insist on respect of opposing views from commentors to this blog and, in fact, you moderate comments, so you can catch inappropriate ones.
That’s why I was distressed to find you let someone make a thinly-veiled threat, or suggestion toward violence. I refer to the following:
“jonolan
February 11, 2009 at 7:48 pm
Acorn and radical, neo-terrorist tactics go hand in hand. The “protesters” may have the legal right to behave like a horde of thugs, but I doubt anyone with a lick of sense would be too bothered if something happened to them…”
Now what do you suppose this anonymous person meant by “…if something happened to them?”
Please address this and your real moderation efforts. Thanks.
February 12, 2009 at 6:07 pm
JAMES
Sharon: The only comments that go to moderation are first time commenters, and those that have links pasted in them (unless you leave the “http:” off. I have only kept two or three off in the past 7 months, and only because they were so blatantly offensive to anyone.
February 12, 2009 at 6:09 pm
JAMES
Also, Sharon, I did not view his comment as a thinly veiled threat. I have had people actually threaten my family simpl because I would not vote for Obama and dared to question his substance, so I didnt think about his statement being a threat.
March 25, 2009 at 12:48 pm
tosmarttobegop
First off James I can be sharp and offensive and it often come more toward the Right. But it is because rather then give up on the party I have belonged to for over thirty years I fight for it. The left has stopped being our worst enemy. The real enemy has came from within those are the ones I tend to take to task.
If I do say something that is over the line I am sorry ahead of time, but it is distressful when I see a comment or pack of plain lies that are insulting not just to the reader but also the intelligence of those repeating them. Most of them tend to be on the same level of “ Oh yeah well the sun is not shining at 10 A.M. and that is his fault!”. You look out the window and there goes that statement and sadly that is the direction that the GOP is taking. Easily disprovable lies that make the GOP seem like a bunch of 12 y.o.s
in a school yard argument.
March 25, 2009 at 3:22 pm
JAMES
Sharp and offensive, we all can be that at times. But where are there lies that are being perpetrated. In fact, the Courts have held in similar type cases that even if Obama is eligible, he can be held accountable for perpetuatung a fraud because he has the means to satisfy the questions.
The only thing that I consider over the libe is when the attacks become persoanl in nature. I may disagree with your view, and you with mine, but we are entitled to them.
You talk about half truths, etc., and I agree. For example, I read on the Huffington Post and similar sites that the Courts have heard the Obama cases, and have ruled in his favor. That kind of statement is wrong, since NO court has yet to hear any of the cases ON THE MERITS of what evidence may be there, and the reasonable assertions that would enable a judge to force Obama to put up his documentation. Instead, the cases have been dismissed under various judicial issues, such as lack of standing.
With regard to Obama’s church, I have no reason to believe that he did not “convert” from Muslim. However, do not be fooled by Rev. Wright’s church and the christian faith. TUCC is based in Black Liberation Theology and not in Christianity.
August 9, 2009 at 7:04 pm
dalistjohn
James…Thank you for letting me a part of this blog. I have a question for you in regards to profanity. Will my comments be… “moderated”, as it were, if I choose to use certain words? I think we are all adults here, right?
September 5, 2009 at 6:23 pm
4pawsandarebel
A couple of months ago, I received the email about the IRS forcing us to list guns on 1040 forms & decided to look for myself to see if it is true. Rather than have my blood pressure blow an artery, was THOROUGHLY RELEIVED to find this is false! Just thought I’d give you some relief as well. We wouldn’t give issues like this a 2nd thought of having an oz. of truth to them if we didn’t have a goverment hostile to all that has made America GREAT for over 200 years!
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/s/sb2099.htm
October 5, 2009 at 9:01 pm
Susan
There’s a new SCOTUS suit you want and need to know about; I’m gonna give you a lot of info in a little space…case 09-6777. I’ll win and when I do? YOU CAN SUE SITTING OFFICERS FOR LIABILITY THUS DISSOLVE THEM AS THE US DEFAULTED VIA FAILING TO RESPOND TO A PRIOR SCOTUS SUIT ON 11/05/08, the day after the election, lol. That’s not as funny as the Solicitor General waiving every citizen’s interest in the Constitution and every citizen’s Constitutional rights on April 1st, 2008 when I first filed thus he later could not respond as the only response possible then is GUILTY! As ignorance is not an excuse how do you not know you have an acting, legal President of original jurisdiction, me, Susan? A constitutionally set President? Think people: In what kind of case is it impossible for the illegally sitting US government to respond and if it does fail to respond thus defaults may a Chief Justice then circumvent the US completely via acting to address the default w/o ever getting any response as he did on 11/20/08? If that happens – if a Chief Justice STANDS ASIDE a petitioner thus The People – you have a new President as that’s the only way it can and may happen…as the case is a pro se case of constitutional authority and original jurisdiction. It’s a citizen checking and balancing the Chief Justice and SCOTUS via invocation of chain of command! It makes the plaintiff or petitioner who is both victim and counsel THE constitutional authority, the legal President:
It’s foreign if it is not related to the Constitution our Founders authored and then lived out as real. You can be a foreign body of government but be born here as running around calling yourself American does not make it so any more than calling yourself natural born makes it so. As We The People ARE the government we are to take government in our hands but not the law. “Government” is the seats, the offices and institutions…if you know then you act with or without a court order as that is what a natural born American does. Marshall said you need not wait on any paper as you already have the only paper that counts – The Declaration, The Constitution and Marbury V Madison itself! Read on:
Susan Herbert V Barack Obama, John Roberts, Frank Hull And The US has been filed and docketed within the Supreme Court; it is case number 09-6777. Frank Hull is the Federal Appellate judge who issued a ruling ordering the federal court clerks to unfile documents and return them to me unfiled which is evidence tampering, obstruction of justice and in this case treason. As Frank Hull then was ordering the clerk to unfile the Declaration and Constitution – the one our Founders wrote not the made up post 1871 Constitution – and remove it from the courthouse it then rises to treason. The federal clerks did not obey this criminal order.
This case is the case to restore our original government, the original documents and the original government the Founders then lived out…it restores the constitutionally set government known as We The People in lieu of all this post Civil War nonsense – dead paper such as the DC Organic Act of 1871, the IMF, Resolution 511 and exclusionary court rules that judges invoke against the pro se nonlawyer etc. etc. – that is all unconstitutional. It makes it possible to exercise your rights of liberty, dissolution and safety. It makes every citizen sovereign…it also does away with the Federal Reserve as it is wholly unconstitutional and it was nullified by a jury in 1968 and does away with Federal Income Tax as you may not tax what is a right and as We The People check SCOTUS.
In case you do not yet understand: SCOTUS is organic to the constitutionally set government known as We The People not the paper! It answers to The People only not to any other branch. In 1790 a violation of separation of power occurred that has never been addressed as SCOTUS’ jurisprudence has never been adjudicated so I’m doing it. At Marbury we secured a do-over with SCOTUS but not one nonlawyer was ever allowed entry to the bar until I was on 11/20/08…I entered directly and forced direct action and the Chief Justice obeyed an Executive Order I issued thus stood aside We The People. I needed and wanted him to create the only paper birth certificate that rises to proof that a citizen is natural born: The SCOTUS docket naming me as both victim and pro se counsel and with the word DENIED on it. If your legal argument is that We The People have been denied justice absolutely and that even SCOTUS came to violate the Constitution then SCOTUS must write DENIED thus concurring. If they write granted? You have no case! DENIED allowed me to go back and name John Roberts exactly thus leveling the playing field as upon re-entry to SCOTUS the case then becomes all pro se litigants against those who are not: Susan and Roberts V Obama and the US, Corp US that is. John Roberts and I are equivalent legal authorities that now represent We The People meaning: Susan Herbert not Barack Obama is the acting, legal President and Commander of the US government, The People. The military already sided with me as about ten years ago the Joint Chiefs issued a statement that they would support the person who was able to restore the original jurisdiction government. They were contacted again; I highly doubt they will inform John Roberts and I that they are no longer wiling to enforce the Constitution.
As this is the case for YOU? The biggest thing you can do to help yourself is publicize that this case has been docketed in order to put pressure on the media and Congress…the reason the other branches do not want it heard is ALL OF THEM THEN WILL HAVE TO GO HOME AND/OR GO TO JAIL. The media keeps pretending that history did not happen, as privateers who will also be affected by the case own the media. They can’t ignore what The People do not ignore; if The People make a fuss they will have to get in line with me and Roberts thus the law.
So you know: I even went so far as to challenge Sotomayor’s recent unconstitutional appointment. She cannot rule in this case and may not sit after I am heard depending upon her actions. This then means one of two things: SCOTUS can tie it 4 -4 thus throwing the decision to you or Roberts can author a ruling all alone a la Marshall, 8 as 1 or unanimous, thus supporting the Executive Order I issued against Obama…you had to argue this case back to Bush V Gore as BVG sits as a tie or did until I called it in my favor thus in favor of We The People. Bush V Gore is not 9 as 5-4 as 1 as that is bad math and is unconstitutional; BVG is actually and legally 4 as 1 versus 5 as 1 or 1 versus 1, a tie, as Justices may not vote twice, as the court may not make law which installing a President is and as SCOTUS may not invoke per curiam as the math will never add up in a case re an election as it is ONE BODY OF GOVERNMENT ONE VOTE thus any dissent then created a tie as it is about the difference between absolute and whole numbers. None of you did the math correctly! “Per curiam” is only used when the issue is not of any compounding importance and it is only used in lower courts…a Presidential election, due to the President possessing the power of one or the power to make law all alone exactly like a lone voter, must be either 1 alone or 9 as 1 nothing else as a Chief Justice too may make law all alone not via legal power but via moral authority. Your lone vote is equivalent to Executive Order and as the President and Chief Justice check and balance one another, as they stand down one another then your one vote is also equivalent to a ruling handed down by the Chief Justice alone or to a unanimous ruling…BVG was a Chief Justice acting alone as Rhenquist used per curiam in violation of the law to then ‘speak’ for the court alone while still allowing for dissent thus he did not violate the spirit of the law but only the letter. He invoked moral authority, get it? What you did not know is that as We check SCOTUS all rulings leave SCOTUS and go directly to The People, either to the President who is to embody the law thus embody the People or to The People themselves if the sitting President fails. Clinton failed so then it went to us and I am the only person who caught it.
In the US as we all have the same exact legal power, one vote, the only difference is moral authority. Invoking moral authority causes you to rise. Moral authority is vertical checks and balances as we have both horizontal and vertical checks and balances. The lone voter, the military and SCOTUS comprise vertical checks and balances. If you are robbed of all of your legal power you may yet secure that legal power – liberty – thus secure justice by invoking moral authority alone. As moral authority is will you are then willing yourself to power. Apparently you never learned this! You did not know!
Oh – as Obama sat and as he claimed to be an expert, a constitutional law professor? His actions are criminal as he exploited expert knowledge of the law but first and foremost he has to appear pro se as the oath of Office is I WILL not My Lawyer Will (another problem with BVG as neither Bush or Gore acted pro se thus your custody both physical and legal was awarded to third parties – lawyers not on the ballot not to Bush; the recent Bush memos are proof! All BVG actually proved is that neither of the men suing had any ability at all to fulfill the oath of office yet you went along with the SCOTUS ruling! If Bush cannot defend his own constitution, his person, he cannot then defend THE Constitution – The People or the paper). Obama says he can defend it so let’s see if he can as that clock stopped ticking long ago as he went ahead and took the oath when he knew he was acting in open and direct violation of our Constitution thus was violating all of our rights most especially the rights of women. I’m giving him an equal opportunity to prove or disprove himself exactly as I did Clinton and Bush Jr. Roberts and I are equals acting pro se so he too must act pro se. If he does not he is entering a plea of no contest and as the US is in default and has been since 11/05/08? As the US failed to respond at all? He has to appear; you elected him to represent you not the Solicitor General; the SG’s appointment is not legal until or unless Obama’s election is legal and it is not! Plus: The Bill of Rights says I, Susan, do not need to convene a grand jury in his case!
From the actual petition:
I practice or live what I teach, US law: As further proof we are no longer a Constitutional Republic and are paying what is tribute Obama is now acting to investigate the CIA as he said his administration would be the most transparent but then he promptly acted to hide his facts by hiding his paper thus everyone but Obama is being made transparent or is subject to Obama’s arbitrary enforcement of the law. He is violating the equal protection clauses as if SCOTUS, the CIA and Susan must obey the letter and the spirit of the law so must he but he does not. He is arbitrarily picking and choosing what he will live out and what he will enforce. Proof is he first said he would not investigate the activities of the CIA but then acted to do it. That then is arbitrary, it is conditional, and as no other condition changed Obama then is the condition that changes and there is nothing lawful or equal and due about it. Obama changed his mind and upon what only he knows as our Constitution did not change nor did new case law arise nor do we have a new CIA director since he installed himself as the Executive and appointed one. The chief law enforcement officer enforces the law, period. He applies it to everyone including himself. Ideally he never violates it. But Obama has not once lived up to the letter or the spirit of our Constitution or so I truly believe and he falsely claims that he is an innocent victim of crime. Thus: I never need to see a single paper to then prove Obama is not the acting, legal constitutionally named or set President and Commander as I have what our Founders gave me: life. Plus the paper trail exists and I already entered it as Obama and CORP US hid the wrong paper. I previously stated that they failed to hide Resolution 511; I now state that they failed to hide the Declaration, Constitution and Marbury as well as Bush V Gore, the SCOTUS docket dated 11/05/08 & 11/20/08 with my name only upon it as both the victim and pro se counsel, several SCOTUS rulings that set federal precedent, the text of the missing 13th Amendment, the dates on the IMF/UN legislation, the UN Treaty, the Albany County Police report dated JUNE of 98, the Albany County Court record dated JULY of 98, the Philadelphia County Court record dated DECEMBER of 2000, the Middle District of FL court record dated APRIL 4, 2007, the Middle District of FL court RULING & ORDER dated JANUARY 20th & 21st, 2009 and the Federal Reserve as it is named on the paper being passed off as US dollars when they are not: Our money reads FEDERAL RESERVE, a private concern, and NOTE. I exactly entered a picture of a $500 NOTE as an attachment to my acted upon emergency application that has John Marshall on it; he would turn over in his grave if he knew he was pictured on a foreign note passed off as constitutional when it is not! I believe this was also entered to lower federal court. My fact is Obama and CORP US did not manage to hide one single piece of paper evidence that rises to proof. The paper they hid never rises to proof thus I never need to see it. Obama and his lawyer, Bob Bauer, can keep Obama’s birth certificate, passport and college records to themselves for all eternity as what he has to do is give birth to a record that he does not have the human ability to forge: He would have to change the exact words of our Declaration of Independence. The Constitution provides for no method of amending the Declaration. Neither does Marbury. Even the whole of SCOTUS, the Chief Justice himself and the President all working together and with every resource at their disposal cannot amend the Declaration as we won the Revolution or so I allege. This Writ needs to be granted so I can teach Americans what constitutes proof and what does not and so they learn that no piece of paper ever actually proves a thing about who and what you are or who and what we are as a nation. We The People serve – live – to be or become proof of the paper!
And:
As other judges have begun blaming SCOTUS exactly for their actions? So have members of Congress only Congress has gone one further: Granting constitutional authority to make believe, fantasy officers. They are also stating as fact that they know what is said when SCOTUS meets to discuss cases as in how they voted. Also if you merely lived here for 14 years you are natural born. YES, if you lived here in 1763 or 1777 as you left off at the time the Constitution was adopted. That would make you natural born as you were actually present when the actual Constitution both paper and People was actually naturally born, when it sprang from the minds of our Founders one of which you then are: Thus you are natural born. From a letter authored by Anders Crenshaw, my Rep, in response to why he is not addressing Obama and why he did not address the candidates on the ballot: “According to Article II of the Constitution, the eligibility requirements for the Office of the President include: 1) natural born citizenship; 2) 35 years of age, and 3) 14 years of residency in the United States. Concerned citizens have questioned whether President-elect Obama meets these minimum qualifications, and some have brought legal challenges attempting to prevent him from assuming the office based on his place of birth. However, these legal challenges to the President’s citizenship have been dismissed in several states, and the Supreme Court overwhelmingly decided that it would not issue a writ of certiorari to hear an appeal of each dismissal. In addition, Hawaii’s Health Director and Head of Vital Statistics examined and certified the authenticity of President Obama’s birth certificate following an investigation by his office. The document has also been reviewed and deemed authentic by experts at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center.” Policy??? Not Law? I reasoned: ‘I have new evidence. A Rep wrote and said he knew as fact and law Obama is qualified as A COLLEGE TOLD HIM SO. Not the one Obama went to either. It’s actually a matter of policy, Crenshaw’s personal policy. He is convinced we will believe his fact is the Constitution does not apply to himself or to Obama or even to SCOTUS, lol. Since WHEN is the word of a college via it’s Policy Center then constitutional authority??? We do not ask colleges to reason our application of the law precisely as they are not the constitutional authority. Why pay the Justices if colleges will tell me for free what the Constitution DOES NOT SAY as no where is “Health Director”, “Head Of Vital Statistics”, “UNIVERSITY” or “PHILANTHROPIC THINK TANK ASSOCIATED WITH A COLLEGE, THE WEALTHY AND MAYBE A POLITICAL PARTY” named? As nowhere is “PAPER” or “Birth certificate” named? I got a birth certificate for ya: The SCOTUS docket with my name on it pro se proving direct action took place as I directly acted to create that. I gave natural birth to it as I moved the Court to then directly act with my fact and my reasoning or knowledge and my application of the law. I proved ownership. Why pay the Rep as the Constitution and US case law is published at no cost all over the place? You’d think a Rep would act as if he is a constitutional authority not ask someone else who is not named unlike him as “Representative” is exactly named. So are the concerned citizens as “The People” are exactly named as well. A Rep, my Rep, reasoned his violation of the Constitution by citing “SUPREME COURT” exactly as the cause or reason, he names that first, and then claiming he knows the vote, as it was exactly “overwhelmingly” against The “concerned” People, the actual equal authority who have an interest and a right. SCOTUS as it exists today is not exactly named as a constitutional authority as the actual first constitutional authority, Crenshaw’s actual first cause, The People, created it ex post facto via the named Constitutional process – redress in a court of law – thus LENT THEIR CONSCIOUS AWARENESS or AUTHORITY to SCOTUS. The People not the paper empowered SCOTUS and still do. SCOTUS never acts against the citizens as that then is acting against the Constitution! Against their own selves!!! Who does that??? Who harms their own self??? Who violates their own right of safety??? We negotiate a lot of things but not the Constitution!!! So WHO does negotiate it against our will? I can’t name one Justice who is nuts and/or power hungry. I’ve met these people on paper; we have a relationship, the Constitution, so as we are related I know. Like the judges in my case and in the cases of other nonlawyer pro se litigants SCOTUS is his named excuse; SCOTUS is now the default excuse of oligarchs.’ That’s what I reasoned but I wrote back: ‘SCOTUS is not the cause. That’s not why you refuse to obey the Constitution or abide by the oath you swore. I would know as I’m IN RE SUSAN HERBERT and I live in your district. The authority, the citizens, has made a simple mistake and one they would make as you are the cause of it: They asked to see Obama’s paper as if that paper is the authority or as if they do not trust SCOTUS thus they do not own the knowledge of the Constitution or US case law…John Marshall said your action is the proof that you own the knowledge or the truth of the Constitution thus delivery or filing of the paper need not occur. He ruled as we are a living government of people then PEOPLE ACTING IS THE PROOF NOT THE PAPER. This is for anyone who does not understand why SCOTUS is so hesitant to hear a case asking Obama to produce his paper. 1, Paper is never absolute proof in any actual Constitutional nation as people or life is proof. You can’t trust paper especially if a crook is producing it! The crook has will and liberty but the paper does not thus you cannot ask the paper if it was forged as it can’t answer thus can’t be questioned – you can’t charge a piece of paper with fraud thus why would you ever suspect it? – and you can’t trust whatever the crook tells you. Well, you can but you shouldn’t. Trust is an emotion. Trust is for people not paper. I trust myself, The Creator and the signers who embodied the law not the paper copy and not you, Crenshaw. My fact? I never yet met a Rep I do trust. 2, Obama then can refuse to obey a Justice as a Justice cannot mount an argument back or against him thus a citizen must. The citizens protect the Justices and so SCOTUS thus the Constitution. Usually they enforce SCOTUS rulings by living them out as real but a citizen might have to defend an employee of SCOTUS or the institution itself from you or another crook. What if Obama refuses to obey an order of SCOTUS aka The People but yet still sits? What if no named ‘authority’ charged with the duty acts to make Obama or Biden or any of these persons comply with the Constitution? Obama would not be refusing to obey SCOTUS but the Constitution aka The People. THE authority. That’s dangerous as it sets a dangerous precedent for the crooks: it tells the crooks they can do whatever they wish w/o consequence. 3, If people acting is the proof? All you can and may do then is act pro se thus leveling the playing field as Obama then has to do the same thing – enter his legal argument pro se or in person w/o a hired gun as the oath of Office says I WILL. Thus you’ll soon know who is or is not the constitutionally set President; you’ll know who is or is not qualified to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution aka We The People. The proof, the actual President who is a natural born American citizen will rise and you can then compare that person to Obama and both to what the Constitution and US case law states; you weigh the evidence and assign greatest weight in light of the burden of proof standard thus you know. You own the knowledge or the truth of the Constitution thus your own self: are you acting as you wrote the letter and you voted constitutionally or unconstitutionally? Trust me, as you can and may: You’ll forever know what natural born is or is not. See ya in court!’
And also Gun Control:
“You are never to take the law into your own hands but the Founders said you most definitely are to take the government into your own hands, as you are the government. Grant this Writ so I can then teach The People that taking the law into your hands makes you a victimizer or worse a criminal exactly like those who injured you; taking the government into your own hands makes you a victim who has triumphed over your oppressors the lesson being: In America there is no such thing as an actual victim only a legal one. “Victim” is a legal designation; it is not reality until or unless you begin to truly believe you are one. If SCOTUS fails you and The People? Take government into your own hands: Declare yourself Chief Justice, post public notice of your appointment and confirmation and name a place where The People can access you and so the court. Trust me as you can: If a plaintiff sues me but goes to your court, you, and not the other SCOTUS headed by Roberts? As long as you establish you were denied justice by the other SCOTUS thus you then are the Chief Justice I’ll argue my defense in front of you. That’s how you take government into your own hands: you empower yourself first by making the reasoned decision basing it upon your life, the Constitution and US case law – fact and law – and then act upon it by doing something, you take action, and so you then lend that power via conscious awareness to another. If you act to post notice of you having become the Chief Justice? When I read it I am consciously aware we may have a new Chief Justice thus I then have the human ability to go to you and find out for myself. I can and may enter a petition to you as I have one criteria at this point: I know you’re constitutional if you have a gun as you have proven you have the means to enforce your own rulings. You thus we can and may execute chain of command theory. Ideally you won’t need a gun for long. Even more ideally once everyone is aware that they own all actual power upon reading this very petition the crooks will start volunteering to leave as SCOTUS recently ruled for us albeit roundaboutly: Guns, guns and more guns. US case law now is we can and may not only shoot in theory post the fact of the Revolution but we may first own the necessary constitutional element: A gun, and even if you live right next door to Congress. SCOTUS ruled against the Executive, Judiciary and Congress and for The People. Buying a gun is taking government into your own hands; shooting it before I am heard in person in SCOTUS? Before I issue the order? Before you own the knowledge it is now absolutely necessary to shoot? That is taking law into your own hands. This is why McVeigh, Nichols and all like them are criminals not patriots: none of them accessed SCOTUS. The People need to learn the difference as “government” and “law” are not the same things and if The People confuse them then they have confused perceived power for actual power.”
GUN is a necessary institution of government; it is not possible to execute the contract known as The Declaration and The Constitution without one! Gun control then is an impossible standard; it is an impossible condition for you to meet. But first you have to be willing to shoot and so as accountability and responsibility is inherent or implied in The Constitution and exactly worded in Marbury but first exactly worded in The Declaration as we have pledged our very lives upon it, and as the Revolution is federal precedent or US case law, The Revolution is a pro se case of constitutional authority and original jurisdiction, any gun owner who is acting in accordance with the Constitution would then be a responsible gun owner by his very nature. If you go to a gun store or gun show or answer an ad and buy a gun your action then is the evidence that suggests you are constitutional as you are doing it in the open. You cannot prove your case that you are constitutional as is your gun, until or unless you first own one, duh. You own it and you use it and so I then know as you are the proof. Unless I possess evidence suggesting you are a criminal like a prior jury conviction or a confession such as you tell me with your own mouth that you are securing the gun to then rob a store, I may not stop you from owning that gun or using it as you see fit as nothing exists to suggest you will use it to commit a crime but only to execute US law. The rule of law is I am to believe your testimony and you are innocent. Gun control is a joke and a crime itself. It’s repugnant! It’s automatically void; no court order is necessary as anything repugnant is automatically null and voided by you yourself once you own the knowledge. Gun control advocates should quit now, while they are ahead, before they are publicly humiliated by my legal argument.
The whole petition is online as I asked SCOTUS to adjudicate one question and then let The People govern themselves. My audience is The People not judges and politicians who are lawyers and so know the law but violate it regardless. It’s not supposed to sound as if a lawyer wrote it. It sounds as it does for constitutional reasoning! I accused the bar associations and law schools of treason, sedition, subversive activities, violating RICO in an attempt to keep me from testifying before SCOTUS in person aka to prevent me from acting as a federal witness and of price fixing. All lawyers have unclean hands! A lawyer cannot bring this suit and neither can a petitioner who is not acting pro se and claiming constitutional authority, to be the constitutional authority.
Again: What you can do to help yourself as this case is mounted on behalf of YOU is to publicize it as the media refuses to do so and the other branches do not want it heard as then they will be the first people to go. You must begin to demand that it be heard in person so you become sovereign. If The People protest loudly enough SCOTUS will hear it in person as they will know they have the support of The People. My goal is to create a situation whereby you are able to exercise actual liberty for the first time in your life thus own the knowledge of what liberty feels like and so is…liberty is an emotion and physical sensation you experience…it is actual energy; liberty is realized as justice…you’re supposed to be feeding on this constantly if you’re American and if you are living out the government our original Founders created and intended for us. This suit is meant to end rule by egomaniacs, lawyers and businessmen and institute rule by scientists and philosophers – YOU – as if your nation is a living philosophy of politics then The People are the scientists conducting the experiment and evaluating the results and The People are the very philosophers James Madison said should decide the issues via a constitutional convention. Jefferson could never get Madison to understand this in their day, as back then Madison believed the elected persons were the philosophers who should decide the issues but Madison never had to deal with Incorporated US, did he? Jefferson truly believed all authority belonged to The People and so The People hold such a convention… I always knew the way to do that is via SCOTUS with a pro se constitutional authority case as then you are making your case directly to The People as SCOTUS is of us, for us and by us and not of any other branch, exactly like the military is an all volunteer civilian force commanded by a civilian. Besides: WHO wants to keep paying income tax???
Reason #50 to Grant this Writ: Federal income taxes: Grant this Writ so they are then made just as even if we turn tribute back into just taxes how taxes are currently levied is not constitutional, as our Founders never intended People or a right to be taxed and as today the burden is placed almost exclusively on the middle income classes. The very poorest and wealthiest people do not pay taxes. Upper income classes do not pay anything close to their fair share. Harlan was correct in Pollack but he missed something. We are supposed to develop the means or the reasoning. For instance if SCOTUS rules the current income tax is not constitutional? The government or The People are then to develop a plan that is legal. We still have to run this thing…Grant this Writ so I can toss this idea into the ring: Income from property and/or stock is not a burden, at least not all of it. Stick with me: I own a rental property. Any income derived from rent was not earned DIRECTLY by the sweat of my brow. The renters DIRECTLY earned it and then I INDIRECTLY ‘earned’ it as profit. I subtract my salary as property manager, my employees salaries and expenses for maintenance then the rest is taxed. Salaries and expenses are not taxable; anything else is. Stock? The GE employees directly earn or cause profit; I indirectly earn it via stock ownership. I might only own a few shares thus it is all taxed but it should be as I’m not expending any sweat to then take in the profit. A guy who owns millions of shares? He’s using stockbrokers and secretaries and money managers. He should be able to subtract their salaries as they do burden it. And if I know whatever I pay my employees is not going to the fed? I’m going to pay them more only to keep it from the fed. I’ll be overly generous, lol, as I want The People to have the power not the federal institutions. In 1913 or 1916 we may not have had any means to keep track of who owns what and who is claiming what but today technology makes tax levied this way feasible as we can account for it. The problem before was tracking the money and then apportioning it as indirect taxes are apportioned geographically. We had no way to apportion it. Today we do. We now have the Social Security index too and that did not exist then. Besides, it is up to The People to make their fellow citizens account for their actions. The People are not to be depending upon the IRS to baby-sit the wealthy. If I say I am worth ten billion it might be true, maybe I can prove it, but if Oprah Winfrey says she is worth ten billion we know it is not the truth as she only takes in so much and her net worth is not anything close to ten billion dollars (or so the media reports). The IRS should want to get an up close and personal look at a person claiming they are worth ten billion dollars and/or worth more than they are taking in. I truly believe we can revisit the federal income tax. Also: This then frees up a whole lot of money. Money is a symbol; money represents the energy The People expend. There’s only so much energy in the US. Contrary to what Congress would have you believe they cannot create energy thus violate the law of this universe as that is a power reserved to The Creator thus all of this create money to cover the cost of legislation is unconstitutional. “Minting” is not “Printing at will”. We will have more money thus more energy circulating. The People can then pay off their debts, as nobody is to escape paying them as they chose to enter those contracts. You pay the debt off and never enter those contracts again. The People can spend what they do have. Congress can’t spend what does not exist in this universe and what is not constitutional for them to take from us if The People are informed as The People (or the President) check SCOTUS not Congress. A ruling isn’t supposed to leave SCOTUS and go straight to Committee but this one did in 1909 and so it was made ‘law’ in less than a year (See the 1911 & 12 rush to ratify to then circumvent The People and see Appendix S re the 16th’s questionable legal status and see the 1912 Presidential election as it seems to have been engineered; at the very least a massive conflict existed). Nobody checked Pollack as the power to tax is derived from Art 1 Sec 8. If The People do not know they check SCOTUS they can’t. I have zero proof the 16th is constitutional but tons of proof it is not. I, Susan, do not work for CORP US and 16 says only federal employees are subject to the federal income tax, a fact the IRS takes great pains to avoid naming in any of its literature. I engaged the IRS and they violated the law. FL, PA and VA never took 16 up. Granting this Writ then is an actual stimulus package.
Lastly in case you never thought of it: Titles of nobility? I’m addressing that as once I prove Obama is a foreigner then any federal agent who accepted and cashed a paycheck then violated this clause…if the President is a foreigner and he pays you from what is collected as tribute then that is an emolument. If I successfully restore the missing 13th Amendment then every sitting federal officer gave up his or her citizenship by doing so but even if I do not restore the missing 13th the penalty under the law is you have given up your rights by accepting benefits from a foreign ruler or nation…in the same way we do not allow some convicted felons to cast a vote the federal officer who violates the titles of nobility clause may not cast a vote!
It took me three years and four attempts but I finally did it: as a nonlawyer I have made the Constitution actual and real for every human being on Earth as now you have the ability to enter the SCOTUS bar and defend yourself thus enforce the law. Until or unless a nonlawyer did it the Constitution was only actual and real for lawyers and the wealthy who can afford to hire them and who are willing to violate the law! If nonlaywers aren’t allowed in then the BVG lawyers knew they could harm you with impunity as SCOTUS wasn’t going to allow a voter, YOU, entry to then defend us. It was a conspiracy alright, a conspiracy of the ethical pitted against the unethical when the unethical had all of the privileges, all of the advantages and all of the resources…except one resource, the secret weapon known as I, Susan.
Susan, SCOTUS cases 07-9804, 08-6622 & 09-6777, the acting, legal President and Commander of original jurisdiction as I am, even if you refuse to believe the Constitution (or the SCOTUS docket).
October 6, 2009 at 6:49 am
JAMES
Time for more reading and more research.
October 22, 2009 at 10:37 am
Bob11
My old blog had a counter for hits. ,
October 27, 2009 at 9:48 am
Paul D. Candelaria
Thank you for the “Pin Drop” articles. I like to see people who are down on the U.S.A. try to be clever at our expense especially when the debt they owe can never be repaid. Tip o’ the hat to you, JAMES!
March 8, 2010 at 11:06 am
Diane Sisemore
Brenda Elliott sent me your way regarding our desire to use of the Tea Party photo.
Please contact me at dianejoy@bancfirst.com or 405-270-1052.
Thank you.
April 26, 2010 at 7:02 pm
superace76
What has happened to the U.S.A.? Our nation is slowly boiling in a melting pot of illegal immigrants, corrupt people, and so much more!! What ever happened to freedom? Let freedom ring people and speak out!! We all have the right to think and feel what we want in this nation. If we are the best nation there is than we need to live like we are! We can all get along regardless of our differences!
June 5, 2010 at 11:27 pm
Evey
As other judges have begun blaming SCOTUS exactly for their actions? So have members of Congress only Congress has gone one further: Granting constitutional authority to make believe, fantasy officers. They are also stating as fact that they know what is said when SCOTUS meets to discuss cases as in how they voted. Also if you merely lived here for 14 years you are natural born. YES, if you lived here in 1763 or 1777 as you left off at the time the Constitution was adopted. That would make you natural born as you were actually present when the actual Constitution both paper and People was actually naturally born, when it sprang from the minds of our Founders one of which you then are: Thus you are natural born. From a letter authored by Anders Crenshaw, my Rep, in response to why he is not addressing Obama and why he did not address the candidates on the ballot: “According to Article II of the Constitution, the eligibility requirements for the Office of the President include: 1) natural born citizenship; 2) 35 years of age, and 3) 14 years of residency in the United States. Concerned citizens have questioned whether President-elect Obama meets these minimum qualifications, and some have brought legal challenges attempting to prevent him from assuming the office based on his place of birth. However, these legal challenges to the President’s citizenship have been dismissed in several states, and the Supreme Court overwhelmingly decided that it would not issue a writ of certiorari to hear an appeal of each dismissal. In addition, Hawaii’s Health Director and Head of Vital Statistics examined and certified the authenticity of President Obama’s birth certificate following an investigation by his office. The document has also been reviewed and deemed authentic by experts at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center.” Policy??? Not Law? I reasoned: ‘I have new evidence. A Rep wrote and said he knew as fact and law Obama is qualified as A COLLEGE TOLD HIM SO. Not the one Obama went to either. It’s actually a matter of policy, Crenshaw’s personal policy. He is convinced we will believe his fact is the Constitution does not apply to himself or to Obama or even to SCOTUS, lol. Since WHEN is the word of a college via it’s Policy Center then constitutional authority??? We do not ask colleges to reason our application of the law precisely as they are not the constitutional authority. Why pay the Justices if colleges will tell me for free what the Constitution DOES NOT SAY as no where is “Health Director”, “Head Of Vital Statistics”, “UNIVERSITY” or “PHILANTHROPIC THINK TANK ASSOCIATED WITH A COLLEGE, THE WEALTHY AND MAYBE A POLITICAL PARTY” named? As nowhere is “PAPER” or “Birth certificate” named? I got a birth certificate for ya: The SCOTUS docket with my name on it pro se proving direct action took place as I directly acted to create that. I gave natural birth to it as I moved the Court to then directly act with my fact and my reasoning or knowledge and my application of the law. I proved ownership. Why pay the Rep as the Constitution and US case law is published at no cost all over the place? You’d think a Rep would act as if he is a constitutional authority not ask someone else who is not named unlike him as “Representative” is exactly named. So are the concerned citizens as “The People” are exactly named as well. A Rep, my Rep, reasoned his violation of the Constitution by citing “SUPREME COURT” exactly as the cause or reason, he names that first, and then claiming he knows the vote, as it was exactly “overwhelmingly” against The “concerned” People, the actual equal authority who have an interest and a right. SCOTUS as it exists today is not exactly named as a constitutional authority as the actual first constitutional authority, Crenshaw’s actual first cause, The People, created it ex post facto via the named Constitutional process – redress in a court of law – thus LENT THEIR CONSCIOUS AWARENESS or AUTHORITY to SCOTUS. The People not the paper empowered SCOTUS and still do. SCOTUS never acts against the citizens as that then is acting against the Constitution! Against their own selves!!! Who does that??? Who harms their own self??? Who violates their own right of safety??? We negotiate a lot of things but not the Constitution!!! So WHO does negotiate it against our will? I can’t name one Justice who is nuts and/or power hungry. I’ve met these people on paper; we have a relationship, the Constitution, so as we are related I know. Like the judges in my case and in the cases of other nonlawyer pro se litigants SCOTUS is his named excuse; SCOTUS is now the default excuse of oligarchs.’ That’s what I reasoned but I wrote back: ‘SCOTUS is not the cause. That’s not why you refuse to obey the Constitution or abide by the oath you swore. I would know as I’m IN RE SUSAN HERBERT and I live in your district. The authority, the citizens, has made a simple mistake and one they would make as you are the cause of it: They asked to see Obama’s paper as if that paper is the authority or as if they do not trust SCOTUS thus they do not own the knowledge of the Constitution or US case law…John Marshall said your action is the proof that you own the knowledge or the truth of the Constitution thus delivery or filing of the paper need not occur. He ruled as we are a living government of people then PEOPLE ACTING IS THE PROOF NOT THE PAPER. This is for anyone who does not understand why SCOTUS is so hesitant to hear a case asking Obama to produce his paper. 1, Paper is never absolute proof in any actual Constitutional nation as people or life is proof. You can’t trust paper especially if a crook is producing it! The crook has will and liberty but the paper does not thus you cannot ask the paper if it was forged as it can’t answer thus can’t be questioned – you can’t charge a piece of paper with fraud thus why would you ever suspect it? – and you can’t trust whatever the crook tells you. Well, you can but you shouldn’t. Trust is an emotion. Trust is for people not paper. I trust myself, The Creator and the signers who embodied the law not the paper copy and not you, Crenshaw. My fact? I never yet met a Rep I do trust. 2, Obama then can refuse to obey a Justice as a Justice cannot mount an argument back or against him thus a citizen must. The citizens protect the Justices and so SCOTUS thus the Constitution. Usually they enforce SCOTUS rulings by living them out as real but a citizen might have to defend an employee of SCOTUS or the institution itself from you or another crook. What if Obama refuses to obey an order of SCOTUS aka The People but yet still sits? What if no named ‘authority’ charged with the duty acts to make Obama or Biden or any of these persons comply with the Constitution? Obama would not be refusing to obey SCOTUS but the Constitution aka The People. THE authority. That’s dangerous as it sets a dangerous precedent for the crooks: it tells the crooks they can do whatever they wish w/o consequence. 3, If people acting is the proof? All you can and may do then is act pro se thus leveling the playing field as Obama then has to do the same thing – enter his legal argument pro se or in person w/o a hired gun as the oath of Office says I WILL. Thus you’ll soon know who is or is not the constitutionally set President; you’ll know who is or is not qualified to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution aka We The People. The proof, the actual President who is a natural born American citizen will rise and you can then compare that person to Obama and both to what the Constitution and US case law states; you weigh the evidence and assign greatest weight in light of the burden of proof standard thus you know. You own the knowledge or the truth of the Constitution thus your own self: are you acting as you wrote the letter and you voted constitutionally or unconstitutionally? Trust me, as you can and may: You’ll forever know what natural born is or is not. See ya in court!’
+1
January 24, 2011 at 2:07 pm
Kendra Lee
Hello,
My name is Kendra Lee and I am contacting you on behalf of the PBS & NPR Forum Network. I recently found your blog posts about current political events in the U.S. and wanted to share a new series of lectures about civil discourse in America, containing free public talks from various political figures like Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer and political activist Paul Loeb, discussing the tragedy itself, as well as ways to improve American Democracy.
Along with the lectures posted within the series, there is a list of recommended readings from Jill Lepore, that relate to the topic of civil discourse in America, as well as links to other suggested reading. Again, all of our content is both free and public.
Would love it if you would discuss our new series. It’d be great for our audience to know that they can find related content within your blog. If you are interested, I would be more than happy to send you a copy of the press release for your consideration. Please feel free to contact me with any additional questions you may have.
Thanks in advance, and have a great day!
Kendra Lee
November 12, 2011 at 1:42 pm
momizms
I’ve just stumbled onto this blog today. Love the JAMES acronym. I also love that you put the US Constitution on your blog. Every American citizen should read it. Like the Bible, it is often misquoted and misunderstood.
November 12, 2011 at 3:34 pm
JAMES
Welcome to our humble small blog.
December 28, 2012 at 1:53 am
commontater
Please advise on the outcome of Susan Herbert’s SCOTUS suit, case 09-6777, viz Susan Herbert V Barack Obama, John Roberts, Frank Hull And The US, filed and docketed within the Supreme Court; it is case number 09-6777.
Or, please furnish me the URL where I can read any follow-ups on this case. Thank you.