Running out of time on the truth about Obama


I don’t remember how long I have been warning America that Barack Obama is a man not to be trusted; but I do know that it was even before he stole the election to become our president.  I use the word ‘stole’ because he has yet to prove conclusively that he is constitutionally qualified for that office, and regretfully, there seems to be not one solitary person in these United States with the courage to force this issue that if left unchallenged could damn our United States Constitution into worthlessness.

In any job-seeking action the seeker has to provide evidence of possession of the qualifications necessary to get selected.  Barack Obama did not provide such information and his political party, which at the time was in absolute control of our Legislative Branch, somehow or other illegally certified him to be qualified and a majority of the people of America unknowingly, of his lack of qualifications,  voted in his favor.

The opposition Republican party stood idly by without dissent while the Democrats probed the GOP candidate McCain and then, unwittingly, or perhaps even knowingly, became part and parcel of this scheme by not providing or requesting proof of Obama’s qualifications prior to the advent of his becoming an official candidate.  In that they were guilty of negligence in their duties and  responsibilities of insuring the opposing candidate was duly qualified, there have been no subsequent official actions by the leaders or members of either party demanding his removal.

Allowing this draconian (to use another liberal buzz word) miscarriage of justice to stand unchallenged is to establish a precedent that could seriously cripple if not actually destroy the highest authority of documented law in the United States.  This travesty MUST be corrected with great haste before its implications assume permanence.

We are getting into the homestretch of the next presidential election cycle, entering the final twelve months leading up to the November 06, 2012 Election Day and there are still no comments coming from ANY of the eight or nine announced Republican presidential candidates with remedies and possible legal actions that of necessity are required to guarantee that our Constitution remains the law of the land and not subverted and usurped by another unqualified office seeker.

Where are the opposition leaders who should be, if not already written into the campaign policy on the principles of behavior and prescription, drawing up rules of order to be applied to ALL candidates of ALL parties assuring conformity with the provisions of our esteemed Constitution and not some banana republic whimsical game-playing power grabs?  Will the Republican Establishment once again do nothing to insure that ALL candidates are constitutionally qualified to legally hold the office of the President of the United States thus further denigrating our Constitution?

Will the Tea Party enter the fray once again, this time insuring the proper vetting of all candidates and giving public backing and force to seeing that proper proof of qualifications for the office of the POTUS are valid?  That group of Patriots are the anti-ACORNS and others that perform by the rules of Alinsky, Farrakhan, ACLU, Ayers, Holder.  The Tea Party consists of pure Constitution-loving Americans who oppose any candidates that are not of the same country-loving mindset.

The left-wing socialist loving liberal Democrats would have us believe that the Tea Party is just an uncontrolled bunch of “radicals” who are “extreme.” This play on words is very typical of the left.  But as the dictionary identifies the word “radical” we see that by using that word on the Tea Party patriots they are covering their own sins and painting the Tea Party with them.

RADICAL – definition in the online dictionary:  “thoroughgoing or extreme, especially as regards change from accepted traditional forms and radical change in policy of a company;  favoring drastic political, economic, or social reforms, radical ideas; radical and anarchistic ideologues.

Now let me ask you the reader just which political party fits the official dictionary description of the word ‘radical’, the socialistic-communistic left wing liberal Democrats or the purveyors of accepted and traditional American values as put into our Constitution and other theorems by our Founding Fathers as espoused by the Tea Party Patriots?

People like the DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Senators Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer and of course, Nancy Pelosi seem to have a daily commitment to calling ANYONE from the right wing conservative side, ‘radical and extreme’. Of course we know the answer to this question in advance, but I’ll ask it anyhow:  “Just who are the liars in this discussion?”


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s