cryztalwing

How do you push the ice blocks?

So it look's like that on Monday the Supreme Court is expected to announce whether it will consider applications from Berg,Leo Donofrio and Orly Taitz who are challenging Obama's legal eligibility to be President. [hide=]On Monday, December 8, 2008, at 1:30 pm, the We The People Foundation will conduct a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington D.C. The licensed attorneys who initiated lawsuits in PA (Philip Berg), NJ (Leo Donofrio) and CA (Orly Taitz), challenging Mr. Obama's legal eligibility to hold the Office of President of the United States, will briefly summarize the facts, legal arguments and status of their cases. They will answer questions from the press. Prior to the start of the conference, at 10 am, the Supreme Court of the United States is expected to announce whether it will consider applications from these attorneys who have asked the Court to delay the proceedings of the Electoral College pending a determination of the underlying constitutional question - the meaning of the "natural born citizen" clause of Article II of the Constitution and its application to Mr. Obama. Robert Schulz will briefly discuss Mr. Obama's response to the publication of his Open Letter in the Chicago Tribune on Monday and Wednesday of this week. For the reasons given in the Open Letter, Schulz asked Mr. Obama to: (1) immediately authorize Hawaiian officials to provide a team of forensic scientists access to his original ("vault") birth certificate and (2) arrange for the delivery of other documents needed to conclusively establish Obama's citizenship status. Mr. Schulz will answer questions from the press. "Under our Constitution, no one is eligible to assume the Office of the President unless he or she is a 'natural born citizen,'" said Bob Schulz, Chairman of the Foundation. "To date, Mr. Obama has refused all requests to release his original birth certificate or other documents that would definitively establish his citizenship status and thus his constitutional eligibility." The Open Letter to Mr. Obama summarizes the evidence against Mr. Obama and the adverse consequences that would befall the Nation should he assume the Office of the President as a usurper. "Should the state members of the Electoral College cast their votes for Mr. Obama in the face of such overwhelming evidence, and without verification of Mr. Obama's eligibility, they would be committing treason to the Constitution," said Schulz. http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20081204/p ... press_club http://newsblaze.com/story/200812041223 ... story.html[/hide] [hide=]Donofrio's action against the Secretary of State of New Jersey and as such, has precedent, as Donofrio relates. He originally sought to motivate the Secretary to qualify or disqualify these three candidates on the New Jersey ballot. Donofrio also cites 2000's famous Florida case, Bush v. Gore, as precedent for a state case regarding a presidential election to be brought to the Supreme Court for emergency action In view of these considerations, being a "natural born Citizen" here requires meeting both of these two criteria: (1) citizenship must be passed on by the constitutionally pertinent principle of natural law, which assumes that citizenship is inherited from one's father's citizenship, and (2) citizenship must be granted by means of being born in the actual territory of the United States. Accordingly, to maintain the original intention of the Constitution's framers, a U.S. President is to be free of competing allegiances with other nations, from birth onward. According to Donofrio, Barack H. Obama II is not qualified, because his father, Barack H. Obama I, was a citizen of the United Kingdom as a Kenyan. Kenya was a British colony at the time of Obama II's birth in 1961. This citizenship was conferred to Obama II by U.K. law. Further to this case is the apparent fact that Obama II became a citizen of Indonesia, when he lived there as a child with his mother and adoptive father, Lolo Soetoro. This would mean Obama's U.S. Citizenship status was revoked, since Indonesia had no dual-citizenship provision with the U.S.A. http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/williams/081205 Berg talks about his action against Obama http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYgrFexn ... re=related[/hide]

I wonder what would happen if the Supreme Court ruled that Obama can't be President becuse of not being a "natural born citizen".. -.- [hide=]The United States Supreme Court had scheduled for a full conference, Leo C. Donofrio NJ Citizen suit challenging the eligibility of multiple 2008 Presidential election candidates, inculding Barack Obama. The United States Supreme Court scheduled the case - Leo C. Donofrio v. Nina Mitchell Wells, Secretary of State of the State of New Jersey - US Supreme Court Docket No. 08A407 - for a conference of the nine Justices. The conference is a completely private affair and the public may not attend. If four of the nine Justices vote to hear the case in full, oral argument may be scheduled. The conference is scheduled for December 5, 2008, ten days before the meeting of the Electoral College. http://www.thecommentary.net/us-supreme ... igibility/ Former Obama opponent now suing to prove President-elect's citizenship According to a press release from the American Independent Party, former presidential candidate Alan Keyes and other members of the party have filed suit in California Superior Court in Sacramento to stop the state from giving its electoral votes to President-elect Barack Obama until documentary evidence is provided to prove Obama is indeed a natural born citizen of the United States http://www.nbcaugusta.com/news/election ... 87804.html[/hide]

Obama won by a landslide. Rigging or not, it wouldn't have made any difference. It was not a landslide, no were near it. Take a look at the 1984 election to see what a real landslide looks like. Any way, all of you that are in Middle school,High School or are going to college get ready to do a lot of manditory community service soon.

Here is the Bob Barr, Ralph Nader, and Chuck Baldwin third party Presidential Debate. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=gHxcGan9ekQ

Cindy Sheehan may not be running for President, but she is running for Congress against the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. Some body had smash thier way into her Campaing headquarters and stoled a computer. Ron Paul will be an "official" write-in candidate in California... [hide=]Cindy Sheehans Campaign Headquarters Heavily Damaged in Late Night Attack Just 5 days before the election, at 3a.m. on October 30th, all of the front windows of the Cindy Sheehan for Congress campaign offices were shattered. Although staffers had been in the office less than an hour earlier, no one was in the building at the time of the incident. No one was hurt and there were no witnesses. Cindy Sheehan is a candidate for Congress in Californias 8th Congressional District race against incumbent Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1[/hide]

Time to get gold, silver, and stock up on food,water and other stuff that you might think that you need.

Here is what Ron Paul wants to do, help Support the Abolition of the Federal Reserve System. http://capwiz.com/jbs/issues/alert/?alertid=10887821

They should have just left Moltar hosting the show.

In New Hampshire "Ron Paul" Republicans have won 153 out of 167 primary races.

Here is what Ron Paul has to say about it.

The Montana Constitution Party and The Louisiana Taxpayers Party had put Ron Paul on thier ticket, even thow Ron Paul is still a Republican. So it looks like that Dr.No will be on the ballot in Montana and Louisiana in November. http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/a ... 22703.html

He did talk about CERN and thier Large Hadron Collider. Machine 'could create time tunnel' http://news.uk.msn.com/Article.aspx?cp- ... ID=7472425 Here is what he said about CERN and other stuff.. http://www.anomalies.net/object/titororiginalpost.html

Looks like Chrome indexes your bank accounts, and other info.

Ron Paul will be at his Rally for the Republic that takes place on August 31- September 2 near the RNC. http://www.rallyfortherepublic.com/

Ron Paul is now focusing on his Campaign for Liberty. I voted for Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution party in the poll http://www.campaignforliberty.com/

They will if Congress pass C.R. 362 and S.R. 580: Bills to Blockade Iran from Importing Refined Petroleum. [hide=]Concurrent Resolution 362 and similar Senate Resolution 580 , express the sense of Congress concerning Irans alleged pursuit of nuclear weapons. In addition to economic, political, and diplomatic means to pressure Iran into suspending nuclear enrichment activities, both the House and Senate bills strongly urge the President to lead an international effort to blockade Irans importation of refined petroleum in order to crush its economy. http://capwiz.com/jbs/issues/alert/?alertid=11646951[/hide]

There have been reports of American Blackwater and DynCorp mercenaries supporting the Georgian forces, that Russia as killed in combat during the war.

Hotdog eating and Beer drinking contests.

Right now if I had $1,000 I whould get seeds, mostly heirloom seeds. I also whould get ammo,stock pile food, and other supplies.

I still supporting Dr.No. If any thing for me it will came down to a write-in vote for Dr. No or a vote for the Constitution Party's Chuck Baldwin. :

Some are now reversing thier stance on Climate Change.. : [hide=]The American Physical Society representing nearly 50,000 physicists has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming, according to an article in The Daily Tech. The leadership of the society had previously referred to global warming evidence as incontravertible. What does this mean? It doesnt mean that the APS has abandoned its position on man made climate change. What they have done is perhaps more significant; they have opened the subject up for debate once again. And once the facts can be judged on their merits and not on who is submitting them.And the first shot across the bow is directed at the Nobel Prize winning group, the IPPC which one scientist discovered has been fudging its studies to hide the fact that increased C02 does not necessarily lead to increased temps: The APS is opening its debate with the publication of a paper by Lord Monckton of Brenchley, which concludes that climate sensitivity the rate of temperature change a given amount of greenhouse gas will cause has been grossly overstated by IPCC modeling. A low sensitivity implies additional atmospheric CO2 will have little effect on global climate. http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/200 ... _abou.html[/hide]

What is your carbon footprint? That is the wrong question to ask. A more meaningful question is--How much carbon dioxide does it take to grow the wheat required to produce a loaf of bread? Or--How much carbon dioxide does it take to grow the corn for the chicken feed required to produce a dozen eggs? Far from being a pollutant, man along with every animal on land, fish in the sea, and bird in the air is totally dependent on atmospheric carbon dioxide for his food supply. So why reduce it? To reduce the world's population? It has been estimated that more than two hundred billion tons of atmospheric carbon are fixed yearly by photosynthesis, 10%to 20% by land plants, and the remaining 80%to 90% by plant plankton and algae in the ocean, which constantly resupply us with oxygen. Atmospheric carbon dioxide acts like a thermostat for plant growth, increases triggering vast blooms of ocean algae, and spurts in the rate of growth of land plants. As long as man burns coal and oil responsibly, that is with pollution controls that minimize the production of acid rain, and air pollution sich has smog, the earth can never have too much carbon dioxide. The plants will not permit it. Anyone who has lived in a desert area where the relative humidity is frequently below 5%, knows that dry air is a lousy green house gas. It can be 115 degrees F (46 degrees C) during the day yet cool off so rapidly that a sweater is needed two or three hours after sunset. Despite the heat sink of the ground with rocks hot enough to fry an egg, the heat is radiated rapidly away through the dry air to the clear night sky. Since dry desert air has about the same .04% concentration of carbon dioxide as air everywhere else, it is not credible to conclude that carbon dioxide is causing global warming. More Carbon Dioxide there is, the better it is for plants, in turn it's better for Humans and animals. Becuse the plants grow better, produce more food, and oxygen. Among the things that are needed for life is Carbon, Water, Oxygen, heat and light.

I remember Hulk Hogan's Rock 'n' Wrestling . It was a funny cartoon.

Another news report on it, not from Worldnet Daily http://www.jbs.org/node/6813