Archive | January, 2011

ACTUAL PASSPORT APPLICATION LETTER SENT BACK TO STATE DEPARTMENT

30 Jan


ACTUAL PASSPORT APPLICATION LETTER SENT BACK TO STATE DEPARTMENT

Dear Mrs. Ms. or Sir:

I’m in the process of renewing my passport and still cannot believe this.

How is it that Radio Shack has my address and telephone number and knows that I bought a cable TV from them in 1987 (23 years ago), and yet, the Federal Government is still asking me where I was born and on what date.

For heaven sakes, do you guys do this by hand? Ever heard of computers?

My birth date you have in my social security file. It’s on EVERY income tax form I’ve filed for the past 30 years. It’s on my Medicare health insurance card and my driver’s license, It’s on the last eight damn passports I’ve had, It’s on every stupid customs declaration form I’ve had to fill out before being allowed off the plane for the last 30 years. And it’s on all those census forms that we have to do at election times.

Would somebody please take note, once and for all, that my mother’s name is Maryanne, my father’s name is Robert and I’m reasonably confident that neither name is likely to change between now and when I die.

Between you an’ me, I’ve had enough of this bureaucratic bullshit!

You send the application to my house, then you ask me for my #*&#%*& address.
What is going on? You must have a gang of bureaucratic Neanderthal morons working there!

Look at my damn picture. Do I look like Bin Laden? And “No,” I don’t want to dig up Yasser Arafat, for shit sakes. I just want to go and park my ass on a sandy beach. And would someone please tell me, why would you give a damn whether I plan on visiting a farm in the next 15 days?

If I ever got the urge to do something weird to a chicken or a goat, believe you me, I’d sure as hell not want to tell anyone!

Well, I have to go now because I have to go to the other end of the city and get another #*@&#^@*@& copy of my birth certificate to the tune of $100.

Would it be so difficult to have all the services in the same area so I could get a new passport the same day? Nooooo, that would require planning and organization. And it would be too logical for the @&^*^%@% government.

You’d rather have us running all over the place like chickens with our heads cut off. Then, we have to find some asshole to confirm that it’s really me in the damn picture – you know, the one where we’re not allowed to smile……

Hey, you know why we can’t smile? We’re totally pissed off!

Yours truly – An Irate Citizen,

Garry K. Taylor.

P. S. Remember what I wrote about getting someone to confirm that the picture is me? Well, my family has been in the United States of America since 1776.

I have served in the military for something over 35 years and have had security clearances up the ying yang. However, I have to get someone important to verify who I am – you know, someone like my doctor…….. WHO WAS BORN AND RAISED IN INDIA !

And you assholes want to run our health care system?????

Photobucket

This is one political Pearl Harbor that we are not going to let happen.
Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.

written by: Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a recently retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve. He is a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.

29 Jan

This letter was sent to Mr. Rand the Executive Director of AARP.

Dear Mr. Rand,

Recently you sent us a letter encouraging us to renew our lapsed membership in AARP by the requested date. I know it is not what you were looking for, but this is the most honest response I can give you. Our gap in coverage is merely a microscopic symptom of the real problem, a deepening lack of faith.

While we have proudly maintained our membership for several years and have long admired the AARP goals and principles, regrettably, we can no longer endorse it’s abdication of our values. Your letter specifically stated that we can count on AARP to speak up for our rights, yet the voice we hear is not ours. Your offer of being kept up to date on important issues through DIVIDED WE FAIL presents neither an impartial view nor the one we have come to embrace. We do believe that when two parties agree all the time on everything presented to them, one is probably not necessary. But, when the opinions and long term goals are diametrically opposed, the divorce is imminent. This is the philosophy which spawned our 200 years of government.

Once upon a time, we looked forward to being part of the senior demographic. We also looked to AARP to provide certain benefits and give our voice a power we could not possibly hope to achieve on our own. AARP gave us a sense of belonging which we no longer enjoy. The Socialist politics practiced by the Obama administration and empowered by AARP serves only to raise the blood pressure my medical insurance strives to contain. Clearly a conflict of interest there!

We do not understand the AARP posture, feel greatly betrayed by the guiding forces that we expected to map out our senior years and leave your ranks with a great sense of regret. We mitigate that disappointment with the relief of knowing that we are not contributing to the problem anymore by renewing our membership. There are numerous other organizations which offer discounts without threatening our way of life or offending our sensibilities.

This Presidential Administration scares the living daylights out of us. Not just for ourselves, but for our proud and bloodstained heritage. But even more importantly for our children and grandchildren. Washington has rendered Soylent Green a prophetic cautionary tale rather than a nonfiction scare tactic. I have never in my life endorsed any militant or radical groups, yet now I find myself listening to them. I don’t have to agree with them to appreciate the fear which birthed their existence. Their borderline insanity presents little more than a balance to the voice of the Socialist mindset in power. Perhaps I became American by a great stroke of luck in some cosmic uterine lottery, but in my adulthood I CHOOSE to embrace it and nurture the freedoms it represents as well as the responsibilities it requires.

Your website generously offers us the opportunity to receive all communication in Spanish. ARE YOU KIDDING??? Someone has broken into our ‘house’, invaded our home without our invitation or consent. The President has insisted we keep the perpetrator in comfort and learn the perp language so we can communicate our reluctant welcome to them.

I DON’T choose to welcome them.

I DON’T choose to support them.

I DON’T choose to educate them.

I DON’T choose to medicate them, pay for their food or clothing.

American home invaders get arrested.

Please explain to me why foreign lawbreakers can enjoy privileges on American soil that Americans do not get?

Why do some immigrants have to play the game to be welcomed and others only have to break & enter to be welcomed?

We travel for a living. Walt hauls horses all over this great country, averaging over 10,000 miles a month when he is out there. He meets more people than a politician on caffeine overdose. Of all the many good folks he enjoyed on this last 10,000 miles, this trip yielded only ONE supporter of the current administration. One of us is out of touch with mainstream America. Since our poll is conducted without funding, I have more faith in it than one which is power driven.

I am disappointed.

I am scared.

I am MAD, and I’m NOT gonna take it anymore!

Written by:
Walt & Cyndy
Miller Farms EquineTransport

Photobucket

This is one political Pearl Harbor that we are not going to let happen.
Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.

written by: Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a recently retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve. He is a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.

COMMUNIST,SOCIALIST,MARXIST,PROGRESSIVES,LIBERALS CONTROL OUR COLLEGES

29 Jan



COMMUNIST,SOCIALIST,MARXIST,PROGRESSIVES,LIBERALS CONTROL OUR COLLEGES

The Left’s last LIBERAL paradise

Republicans Outnumbered
In Academia, Studies Find

Oh, well, if studies say so. The great secret is out: liberals dominate campuses. Coming soon: “Moon Implicated in Tides, Studies Find.”

One study of 1,000 professors finds that Democrats outnumber Republicans at least seven to one in the humanities and social sciences. That imbalance, more than double what it was three decades ago, is intensifying because younger professors are more uniformly liberal than the older cohort that is retiring.

Another study, of voter registrations records, including those of professors in engineering and the hard sciences, found nine Democrats for every Republican at Berkeley and Stanford. Among younger professors, there were 183 Democrats, six Republicans.

But we essentially knew this even before The American Enterprise magazine reported in 2002 of examinations of voting records in various college communities. Some findings about professors registered with the two major parties or with liberal or conservative minor parties:

Cornell: 166 liberals, 6 conservatives.

Stanford: 151 liberals, 17 conservatives.

Colorado: 116 liberals, 5 conservatives.

UCLA: 141 liberals, 9 conservatives.

The nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics reports that in 2004, of the top five institutions in terms of employee per capita contributions to presidential candidates, the third, fourth and fifth were Time Warner, Goldman Sachs and Microsoft. The top two were the California university system and Harvard.

But George Lakoff, a linguistics professor at Berkeley, denies that academic institutions are biased against conservatives. The disparity in hiring, he explains, occurs because conservatives are not as interested as liberals in academic careers. Why does he think liberals are like that? “Unlike conservatives, they believe in working for the public good and social justice.” That clears that up.

A filtering process, from graduate school admissions through tenure decisions, tends to exclude conservatives from what Mark Bauerlein calls academia’s “sheltered habitat.” In a dazzling essay in The Chronicle of Higher Education, Bauerlein, professor of English at Emory University and director of research at the National Endowment for the Arts, notes that the “first protocol” of academic society is the “common assumption” — that, at professional gatherings, all the strangers in the room are liberals.

It is a reasonable assumption, given that in order to enter the profession, your work must be deemed, by the criteria of the prevailing culture, “relevant.” Bauerlein says various academic fields now have regnant premises that embed political orientations in their very definitions of scholarship:

Schools of education, for instance, take constructivist theories of learning as definitive, excluding realists (in matters of knowledge) on principle, while the quasi-Marxist outlook of cultural studies rules out those who espouse capitalism. If you disapprove of affirmative action, forget pursuing a degree in African-American studies. If you think that the nuclear family proves the best unit of social well-being, stay away from women’s studies.

This gives rise to what Bauerlein calls the “false consensus effect,” which occurs when, due to institutional provincialism, “people think that the collective opinion of their own group matches that of the larger population.” There also is what Cass Sunstein, professor of political science and jurisprudence at the University of Chicago, calls “the law of group polarization.” Bauerlein explains: “When like-minded people deliberate as an organized group, the general opinion shifts toward extreme versions of their common beliefs.” They become tone-deaf to the way they sound to others outside their closed circle of belief.

When John Kennedy brought to Washington such academics as Arthur Schlesinger Jr., John Kenneth Galbraith, McGeorge and William Bundy and Walt Rostow, it was said that the Charles River was flowing into the Potomac. Actually, Richard Nixon’s administration had an even more distinguished academic cast — Henry Kissinger, Pat Moynihan, Arthur Burns, James Schlesinger and others.

Academics, such as the next secretary of state, still decorate Washington, but academia is less listened to than it was. It has marginalized itself, partly by political shrillness and silliness that have something to do with the parochialism produced by what George Orwell called “smelly little orthodoxies.”

Many campuses are intellectual versions of one-party nations — except such nations usually have the merit, such as it is, of candor about their ideological monopolies. In contrast, American campuses have more insistently proclaimed their commitment to diversity as they have become more intellectually monochrome.

They do indeed cultivate diversity — in race, skin color, ethnicity, sexual preference. In everything but thought.

written by:George Will
Washington Post Writers Group


THE GETTIN AFTER LEFTY SHOW HOMEPAGE
CLICK HERE

Photobucket

This is one political Pearl Harbor that we are not going to let happen.
Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.

written by: Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a recently retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve. He is a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.

28 Jan

Asian-American lawmakers demand Limbaugh apology

Rush Limbaugh’s imitation of the Chinese language during a recent speech made by Chinese President Hu Jintao has stirred a backlash among Asian-American lawmakers in California and nationally.

California state Sen. Leland Yee, a Democrat from San Francisco, is leading a fight in demanding an apology from the radio talk show host for what he and others view as racist and derogatory remarks against the Chinese people.

In recent days, the state lawmaker has rallied civil rights groups in a boycott of companies like Pro Flowers, Sleep Train and Domino’s Pizza that advertise on Limbaugh’s national talk radio show.

“The comments that he made — the mimicking of the Chinese language — harkens back to when I was a little boy growing up in San Francisco and those were hard days, rather insensitive days,” Yee said in an interview Thursday. “You think you’ve arrived and all of a sudden get shot back to the reality that you’re a second-class citizen.”

During a Jan. 19 radio program, Limbaugh said there was no translation of the Chinese president’s speech during a visit to the White House.

“He was speaking and they weren’t translating,” Limbaugh said. “They normally translate every couple of words. Hu Jintao was just going ching chong, ching chong cha.”

He then launched into a 20-second-long imitation of the Chinese leader’s dialect.

The next day, Limbaugh said he “did a remarkable job” of imitating China’s president for someone who doesn’t know a language spoken by more than 1 billion people.

“Back in the old days, Sid Caesar, for those of you old enough to remember, was called a comic genius for impersonating foreign languages that he couldn’t speak,” Limbaugh said. “But today the left says that was racism; it was bigotry; it was insulting. And it wasn’t. It was a service.”

A telephone and e-mail to Limbaugh’s station operator Clear Channel Communications Inc. was not returned Thursday. Clear Channel’s Premiere Radio Networks Inc. is home to Limbaugh, Jim Rome, Ryan Seacrest, Glenn Beck, Bob Costas and Sean Hannity.

An e-mail to Limbaugh’s show requesting comment was also not returned.

Yee has been joined by Asian-American state and federal lawmakers who say Limbaugh’s comments are inciting hate and intolerance amid a polarized atmosphere. A number of civil rights groups, including Chinese for Affirmative Action, Japanese American Citizens League and the California National Organization for Women, have joined Yee in calling on sponsors to pull advertisements from Limbaugh’s program.

An online petition has been created on Yee’s website.
http://dist08.casen.govoffice.com

“I want an apology at the very least,” said New York Assemblywoman Grace Meng, a Queens Democrat. “Making fun of any country’s leader is just very disrespectful for someone who says he is a proud American.”

She added: “He was, in his own way, trying to attack the leader of another country, and that’s his prerogative as well, but at the same time he offended 13 percent of New York City’s population.”

There are about 14 million, or 4.5 percent, Asian-Americans in the United States, more if counting those of mixed races.

In California, Asians make up more than 12 percent of the state’s 38 million population.

While Asian-American lawmakers demand an apology from Limbaugh, some are increasingly concerned for Yee’s personal safety. Public officials have been put on alert after the deadly rampage in Tucson where U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot while meeting with constituents.

Shortly after condemning Limbaugh’s remarks, Yee said he received racist death threats to his San Francisco and Sacramento offices. The lawmaker also received a profanity-filled telephone message Thursday.

The caller, who did not identify himself, called Yee a “cry baby” and urged him to resign from office.

Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Tony Beard Jr. confirmed the Legislature has launched an investigation and is cooperating with other security agencies.

He said Yee had received similar faxes in April after he called on a state university to disclose how much it was paying Sarah Palin for a fundraiser.

“We need to stand up for civility and be respectful of one another. Otherwise the consequences are dreadful as we can already see in the death threats against Senator Yee,” said Rep. Judy Chu, a Democrat who represents a large Asian district outside Los Angeles.

Yee, who has a chance to become San Francisco’s first elected Asian mayor, said he has no plans to change his behavior because doing so would amount to “stepping down.” He said his staff has received additional security training.

“It’s just been a disappointing experience,” Yee said. “I’m not angry about it, more disappointed that in the year 2011, we still have individuals who are racist.”

Threats to minority lawmakers are not new. California state Assemblyman Paul Fong said he was the target of racist comments in 2009, when he introduced a resolution officially expressing California’s regret for the way it treated Chinese living in the state.
————————————————–
Comments from Gary Gatehouse

Hey Senator YEE-The American people who care, don’t expect Limbaugh to apologize to the Chinese people-we will expect Limbaugh to apologize when your guy the china man on the piano apologizes to the American people and Korean War Veterans for playing that anti America music at OUR paid for STATE DINNER where two socialist brothers met-Obama and the guy you really hold allegiance to China’s President

The Communists Chinese Government were/are allied with the North Korean communists. How can this not be taken as a slight to the allies at the very least? Calling them Jackals is profane. They insult the American people with this propagandists instrumental. Chinese govt have shown aggression and will continue to.

Please do not play innocent communists.

Drop Senator YEE a e-mail and let him know what your think of his Bull Shi.
http://dist08.casen.govoffice.com

Photobucket

This is one political Pearl Harbor that we are not going to let happen.
Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.

written by: Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a recently retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve. He is a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.

28 Jan

Obama Threatens To Bring Country To Dead Stop
If Republicans Don’t Capitulate

In Tuesday night’s embarrassing campaign speech State of the Union address, Obama delivered a strange stew combining Jimmy Carter “malaise speech” with a failed attempt to channel Ronald Reagan’s amiability. It went over like a lead balloon.

Obama talk incessantly of American decline, and leveled a not-so-veiled threat at Congress’ newly elected Constitutional Conservatives: “We will move forward together or not at all” – and further warned that new laws will only pass his veto pen if Republicans compromise their reform agenda, and kowtow to his Democrat-Socialist vision of massive and profligate government.

What Obama, Pelosi and Reid don’t seem to comprehend is that the November elections weren’t about compromise. Rather, November was a clarion, unequivocal demand for our government to return to the Constitutional principles – and limits on its scope – that made this country great.

There can be no compromise with the forces that mean to expand government, carve away our liberty and dissolve our exceptional Republic. Every compromise represents a slower, but still steady slide toward the Venezuelan-style, single party authoritarian dictatorship Obama openly admires.

But like a wolf in sheep’s clothing, Obama turned on his campaign charm, and attempted to mask the undercurrent of extremism in his power-consolidation, threats, and “let’s imitate rising powers like China” agenda with empty rhetorical flourishes of bi-partisan moderation and appeals to our history – smiling and praising the poor miserable, oppressed people of America who need government’s help so they once again can be, and do, better.

After two years of denying American exceptionalism, trashing America’s values, fostering divisiveness, threatening patriots, conducting worldwide apology tours and bowing to every foreign leader on the planet, Obama has a new meme. He has discovered we are in decline, but claims we can be great again – if only the federal government helps us.

He now expects us to forget his disdain for the America way, and join with him to seize our new “Sputnik moment.” In a weak attempt to channel Reagan’s success, the Malaise Obama suddenly offered smiling platitudes of optimism; praising our ingenuity, innovation and the bootstrap initiative that made us great while he proposes grand plans to undermine them. For every time Obama mentioned the things that make America great, he countered by insisting that these things are only possible with more government, through more government, because of more government.

If Obama truly believed in Reaganesque ideals, he would recognize the absolute truth in the great man’s now famous quote: “Government is not the solution to our problems. Government is the problem.”

Obama insists he is not interested in “re-fighting the battles of the last two years.” As far as he is concerned, ObamaCare and the Marxist policies Pelosi and Reid pushed through the Congress, in violation of all decent standards of responsible self-government, are a done deal.

We the American people beg to differ. November was about real change, and we will not be intimidated into silence by the mouthing of high-sounding phrases while the ground is ripped from our feet, and our hard-earned wages from our hands. Our representatives in Congress must be told in no uncertain terms –

HOLD THAT LINE – JUST SAY NO – WE SHALL NOT COMPROMISE THE PRINCIPLES OF LIBERTY!

This piece was written by
Mr Alan Keyes
Declaration Alliance PAC
National Processing Center
PO Box 131728
Houston, TX 77219-1728

Photobucket

This is one political Pearl Harbor that we are not going to let happen.
Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.

written by: Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a recently retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve. He is a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.

27 Jan
Just a reminder of who WE are! Please listen
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG,

OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ,

AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT

STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD,

INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND

JUSTICE FOR ALL!

If Muslims can pray on Madison Avenue, why are Christians banned from praying in public and erecting religious displays on their holy days? 

Prayer before a sporting event banned 

Obama says we can’t have that, yet Muslims are allowed to block off Madison Ave. in N. Y. and pray in the middle of the street! And, it’s a monthly ritual!


Tell me again, whose country is this? Ours or the Muslims?

Polls taken say 86% of Americans believe in God.

Therefore I have a very hard time understanding why

there is such a problem in having ‘In God! We Trust’ on our money and having ‘God’ in the Pledge of Allegiance.

CHRISTIANS/PATRIOTS  it’s time we stand up for what we believe!


This is one political Pearl Harbor that we are not going to let happen.
Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.

written by: Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a recently retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve. He is a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.

27 Jan


BORN IN THE USA?
Game-changer! Arizona to pass 2012 eligibility law

Obama will have to produce birth certificate to run again

A plan in Arizona to require presidential candidates to prove their eligibility to occupy the Oval Office is approaching critical mass, even though it has just been introduced.

The proposal from state Rep. Judy Burges, who carried a similar plan that fell short last year only because of political maneuvering, was introduced yesterday with 16 members of the state Senate as co-sponsors.

It needs only 16 votes in the Senate to pass.

In the House, there are 25 co-sponsors, with the need for only 31 votes for passage, and Burges told WND that there were several chamber members who confirmed they support the plan and will vote for it, but simply didn’t wish to be listed as co-sponsors.

The proposal, which also is being taken up in a number of other states, is highly specific and directly addresses the questions that have been raised by Barack Obama’s occupancy of the White House. It says:

Within ten days after submittal of the names of the candidates, the national political party committee shall submit an affidavit of the presidential candidate in which the presidential candidate states the candidate’s citizenship and age and shall append to theaffidavit documents that prove that the candidate is a natural born citizen, prove the candidate’s age and prove that the candidate meets the residency requirements for President of the United States as prescribed in article II, section 1, Constitution of the United States.

The critical phrases are “natural born citizen” and the requirements of “article II, section 1, Constitution of the United States,” which imposes on the president a requirement not demanded of other state and federal officeholders.

Montana

Under Montana’s plan by Rep. Bob Wagner, candidates would have to document their eligibility and also provide for protection for state taxpayers to prevent them from being billed for “unnecessary expense and litigation” involving the failure of ‘federal election officials’ to do their duty.

“There should be no question after the fact as to the qualifications [of a president],” Wagner told WND. “The state of Montana needs to have [legal] grounds to sue for damages for the cost of litigation.”

Wagner’s legislation cites the Constitution’s requirement that the president hold “natural born citizenship” and the fact that the “military sons and daughters of the people of Montana and all civil servants to the people of Montana are required by oath to defend and uphold the Constitution of the United States and Montana against enemies foreign and domestic.”

But there are estimates of up to $2 million being spent on Obama’s defense against eligibility lawsuits. There have been dozens of them and some have been running for more than two years. So Wagner goes a step beyond.

“Whereas, it would seem only right and just to positively certify eligibility for presidential and congressional office at the federal level; and whereas, it is apparent that the federal authority is negligent in the matter; therefore, the responsibility falls upon the state; and whereas, this act would safeguard the people of Montana from unnecessary expense and litigation and the possibility that federal election officials fail in their duty and would ensure that the State of Montana remains true to the Constitution,” says his proposedlegislation.

Pennsylvania

In Pennsylvania, there was excitement over the GOP majority of both houses of the state legislature as well as the governor’s office.

Assemblyman Daryl Metcalfe said he is working on a proposal that would demand documentation of constitutional eligibility.

He described it as a “problem” that there has been no established procedure for making sure that presidential candidates meet the Constitution’s requirements for age, residency and being a “natural born citizen.”

“We hope we would be able to pass this legislation and put it into law before the next session,” he said.

He said any one of the states imposing such a requirement would be effective in solving his concerns.

“I think the public relations nightmare that would ensue if any candidate would thumb their noses at a single state would torpedo their campaign,” he told WND.

Georgia

Rep. Mark Hatfield has confirmed that he will have a similar proposal pending.

He had introduced the legislation at the end of last year’s session to put fellow lawmakers on alert that the issue was coming.

“I do plan to reintroduce the bill,” . “We’ll move forward with trying to get it before a committee.”

In Georgia, Republicans hold majorities in both houses of the legislature as well as “every constitutional statewide office,” he noted.

“I would be optimistic that we can [adopt the legislation],” he said.

Hatfield said if only one or two states adopt such requirements, it readily will be apparent whether a candidate has issues with eligibility documentation or not. And while he noted a president could win a race without support from a specific state, a failure to qualify on the ballot “would give voters in other states pause, about whether or not a candidate is in fact qualified,” he said.

“My goal is to make sure any person that aspires to be president meets the constitutional requirements,” he said. “This is a first step in that direction.”

Texas

A bill prefiled for the Texas Legislature by Rep. Leo Berman, R-Tyler, that would require such documentation.

Berman’s legislation, House Bill 295, is brief and simple:

It would add to the state election code the provision: “The secretary of state may not certify the name of a candidate for president or vice-president unless the candidate has presented the candidate’s original birth certificate indicating that the person is a natural-born United States citizen.”

It includes an effective date of Sept. 1, 2011, in time for 2012 presidential campaigning.

State Rep. Leo Berman

Berman told WND he’s seen neither evidence nor indication that Obama qualifies under the Constitution’s requirement that a president be a “natural-born citizen.”

“If the federal government is not going to vet these people, like they vetted John McCain, we’ll do it in our state,” he said.

He noted the Senate’s investigation into McCain because of the Republican senator’s birth in Panama to military parents.

Berman also said there will be pressure on any lawmaker who opposes the bill, since voters would wonder why they wouldn’t want such basic data about a president revealed. And he said even if one state adopts the requirement, there will be national implications, because other states would be alerted to a possible problem.

“If Obama is going to run for re-election in 2012, he’ll have to show our secretary of state his birth certificate and prove he’s a natural-born citizen,” he said. “This is going to be significant.”

Berman said he’s convinced there are problems with Obama’s eligibility, or else his handlers would not be so persistent in keeping the information concealed.

A year ago, polls indicated that roughly half of American voters were aware of a dispute over Obama’s eligibility. Recent polls, however, by organizations including CNN, show that roughly six in 10 American voters hold serious doubts that Obama is eligible under the Constitution’s demands.

——————
Ladies and Gentlemen of America -Patriots

I bet you a dime to a dollar Obama or what ever the hell his name is feeling the heat, Ibet Pelosi, Reid and the DNC are cooking too.

Birthers have stood by their guns for many months now and the above states are leading the way to settle this issue once and for all.

Brack Hussein Obama Jr has tried for two years to keep his birth certificate from Americans and we who have followed this from the beginning have always asked the question “”WHY””” if you or I had to show our birth certificate if asked to prove citizenship I don’t think any of us would have a problem. When I enlisted in the military I had to produce a legit long form birth certificate with raised seal, to verify who I was and that I was a United States citizen.

Why is Obama so adamant about not producing his long form birth certificate, could it be he does not have one, or it will reflect he was not born in the United States, is this the reason.

Well just maybe we will find out and yes if these states get theri respective bills passed, Obama will have to produced his birth certificate before he can run for re-election in 2012.

WE AMERICANS WHO ABIDE BY THE CONSTITUTION ARE WAITING OBAMA ARE YOU A FRAUD, A LIAR, TIME WILL TELL!
This is one political Pearl Harbor that we are not going to let happen.
Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.

written by: Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a recently retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve. He is a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.