Monday, March 15, 2010

Ad - Obama Flouts the Constitution - 22 & 15 Mar 2010 Issue of Wash Times Natl Wkly - pg 5

Ad - Obama Flouts the Constitution - 22 & 15 Mar 2010 Issue of Wash Times Natl Wkly - pg 5

Commander Kerchner makes a statement in this new ad concerning what he believes was an absolutely incredulously lame legal brief filed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) lawyers for the putative president Obama on March 8th because it shows the total disregard for the Constitution of the United States held by the Administration and his subverted Department of Justice. The DOJ should be standing up to support and defend the U.S. Constitution and honor the oath they took to do so, instead of defending the constitutionally ineligible usurper putative president in the Oval Office, Mr. Obama, and helping him hide his true legal identity and all his early life records. Obama was born a British Subject. How can a person born British be eligible to be President and commander of our military? He cannot. A person born a British Subject, and a dual-Citizen at best, is NOT a "natural born Citizen" of the USA which is the Article II eligibility requirement in the U.S. Constitution for the person who would be President. See the new ad for more information.

22nd: http://www.scribd.com/doc/28694793/Obama-Pelosi-Flout-the-U-S-Constitution-20100322-Issue-Wash-Times-Natl-Wkly-pg-5

15th: http://www.scribd.com/doc/28403528/Obama-Flaunts-the-Constitution-20100315-Issue-Wash-Times-Pg-5

Charles Kerchner, Commander USNR (Retired)
Lead Plaintiff, Kerchner v Obama & Congress
http://www.protectourliberty.org
http://puzo1.blogspot.com
####

15 comments:

jayjay said...

Charles:

Greeat ad and let's hope it helps to bring in funds to pay for more ads ...

Ryan said...

Thank you, Charles and Mario!

medical said...

I believe the ad should have been entitled "Admitted foreign national illegally occupying White House. Corrupted DOJ, Constitution hating courts, and self serving losers pretending to be "Congressmen" complicit in yet another treasonous violation of our Constitution." It is COWARDLY and DEAD WRONG of the courts to claim Citizens do not have "standing" to bring an eligibility complaint against the Usurper. As the backlash of the totally fed-up Citizens goes into dangerous hyper drive mode (which is now beginning), those individuals who have failed in their sworn duties shall be shown no mercy. Congressmen and Senators are much more concerned with being seen at "so and so's important party" than they are in representing the Citizens. Just as Nero fiddled while Rome burned, Congress and the Usurper brag about what a fine job they're doing while they bankrupt and destroy America. What a sorry bunch of losers! Congress is a DISGRACE. NEVER VOTE FOR ANY INCUMBENT! Do you realize that Muslims admit they are training for an "American Jihad" right under our noses and federal officials will not touch them? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebg6AFylios

Incredulous said...

Mr. Apuzzo (first thank you for all your informative answers):
Hawaii says it requires explicit permission from the party of interest to disclose information from vital documents.
However Ms. Fukino said that based on Hawaii "vital documents" that BHO was born in Hawaii and is a "Natural-Born American Citizen" (note the terminology is not natural born United States citizen)...
AND Hawaii says simultaneously it cannot disclose information from BHO's birth certificate.
THEREFORE Ms. Fukino a) needed explicit permission from BHO to disclose information from his vital documents such as a COLB which is not a birth certificate, and b) Hawaii has NOT received permission to disclose information from his birth certificate which they state they hold and cannot disclose and c) the statement that he was born in Hawaii did not come from his birth certificate (Hawaii had a law allowing foreign-borns to claim Hawaiian births).

If Fukino disclosed without permission, it is a misdemeanor crime in Hawaii.

So, is it possible to verify what exact permission was granted for her to make her statement?
And once she made that statement, are not those vital documents, as well as BHO's published COLB, no longer privacy-protected?

Either they're trying to close the gate after the horse is out, or they never got BHO's permission at all, or the documents are non-existent and Fukino is guilty of treason.

In any case, it does not look like Hawaii's entire government is ready for the proverbial firing squad over Obama's fraud, and they've resorted to playing with words only.

F. said...

Isn't the word supposed to be "flouts?"

cfkerchner said...

To F.

The word has multiple meanings depending on context. In the context we used it we were referring to Obama's contempt for the Constitution.

From Webster's Collegiate Dictionary:

Flaunt - to treat contemptuously as in he flaunted the rules

But your suggestion is well taken as Flouts is a word with more unity of meaning, independent of context. If we re-run the ad, I'll change it to Flouts.

CDR Kerchner
www.protectourliberty.org

Benaiah said...

F. and Charles,

I can think of another F word gets the point across better than either Flaunts or Flouts...

Shalom,

Benaiah

Benaiah said...

Obama has crossed the line
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=171110

[...]

Obama's 'strategy of “engaging” Islamic rogue states has been disastrous. The effort to prevent the nuclearization of Iran by appeasing the Iranian tyrants backfired with the ayatollahs literally mocking the US. The response of Syrian President Bashar Assad to US groveling and the appointment of an ambassador to Damascus, was to host a summit with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hizbullah terrorist leader Hassan Nasrallah and ridicule the US demand that he curtail his relationship with Iran. President Obama did not consider this “insulting,” prompting the editor of the Lebanese The Daily Star to say that “the Obama administration these days provokes little confidence in its allies and even less fear in its adversaries."'

Puzo1 said...

This morning I got a call from a client. He told me he is getting married. The local registrar told him he needs to submit to her office a birth certificate before she will issue a marriage license. He faxed one to her. She told him that the copy was not good enough. He asked why. She said because anybody can make up a copy of a birth certificate.

I guess in America a little guy needs an original birth certificate to get married but a guy who is going to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military and wield the enormous power of those offices just needs a computer image of one to be eligible for those offices.

Incredulous said...

Mr. Apuzzo, why not sue the marriage license office for discrepant standards, discrimination? Is your client even a tiny bit of some race or ethnic group that could make an ALINSKY stink over this?
"They" don't play fair, why should we?

jayjay said...

Mario:

Pricelsss anecdote! Why not include it in your response to the response (if you have room).

Incredulous said...

Maybe my challenge isn't meritorious afterall!

Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli of Virginia noted that any state or person, when prosecuted or federal challenges are made in court, can challenge Obama's authority in signing any law in not having standing in his executive branch hauling them into court.

The mandatory American Community Survey the U.S. Census Bureau will be sent to a sample of some 3 million U.S. households in addition to the 2010 Census.

Refusing to answer the questions or answering them incorrectly will subject citizens to hefty fines.

The U.S. Census website for the American Community Survey warns that under Title 13 of the U.S. Code, Section 221, anyone who refuses to answer the 11-page 48-question survey, or who answers the questions with false information, will be subject to a possible $5,000 fine.
Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, introduced H.R. 3131 to make participation in the extended ACS survey voluntary.

Why doesn't this couple protest that they put their COLB online and that should suffice?

Incredulous said...

bad typo: "IS" meritorious

medical said...

Has anyone performed an old style background search on the Usurper and his family? I'm sure various libraries maintain a wealth of undiscovered information. Contrary to what many persons believe, not much older personal information is available on the internet. "Hard copies" of old telephone directories, "City Directories", "Blue Books", census records, and many other sources of information are readily available to the public. Librarians can be particularly helpful, they assist with requests for information of every type every day and they know about resources which the average person doesn't even know exists. Look for information in any area where the Usurper or his family have claimed to reside.

William said...

Incredulous

I might be one of those fined or jailed. I filled out my Census and mailed it the other day. Most of it was X’ out with the exception of number of occupants and names. I also sent this letter in with it….

Letter sent…

Article I, Section 2 of our constitution reads: "The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct." The purpose of the headcount is to apportion the number of seats in the House of Representatives and derived from that, along with two senators from each state, the number of electors to the Electoral College.

I want to know what does my race, age or sex have to do with apportioning the U.S. House of Representatives? The next census might ask what type alternative fuel sources I use, amount of water use monthly or type of vehicle I drive, and again I will ask; what does that have to do with apportioning the U.S. House of Representatives? The answers will be the same in accordance with the Constitution, Name and number of occupants; unless the census taker can show me a constitutional amendment stating such information is required for deriving the number of Representatives.

Sincerely,