The Unseen Hand
People are constantly asking
for our opinion about which court case against Obama is the best, or who we think
is the best lawyer.
We have stayed away from
picking sides for a reason. Every lawyer involved has done this country a
service. Every plaintiff from the individuals suing their Secretaries of
States, to the individuals and members of the military suing Obama, and to
those suing both Obama and Congress for the good of our Nation has the absolute
right to be called a patriot.
What we have noticed is that
each lawsuit has approached the issue differently, in the beginning there was
no case law as how to stop a usurper from causing this constitutional train
wreck. The attorneys used their best judgment and no one should play armchair
quarterback. What we have noticed is that each new lawsuit either added
something new or took a previous case and applied the lessons learned. Through
a learning experience, each new lawsuit is becoming stronger and stronger. The
disappointments that we all shared in not having a court hear any of the
lawsuits were not in vain, because we have learned from our collective experiences.
To be respectful to the
courts some decisions given by the courts were vague, while others pointed out
that while a candidate, Obama was protected under the first amendment to run
within the political process, for he was not yet subject to the eligibility
requirements of Article II, Section 1. Some decisions before the civilian
courts were trumped by the application of military law and policies. Other decisions have applied the rules of
standing of civil proceedings because the cases were presented as civil
proceedings.
We cannot judge the legal
talents of these fine and brave attorneys who are risking their careers in our
common pursuit of demanding that our Constitution be observed. Attorney Berg concentrated
on the issue of the native-born, (birth certificate) and dual citizenship issue
but he was denied standing because Obama was still in the political process and
not yet in the constitutional process. Leo Donofrio asked a simple question, “how
could anyone whose birth was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 be
a natural born citizen.” Dr. Taitz
picked upon the native-born (birth certificate) issue and she sought out
members of our military thinking, ‘surely, they would have standing.’
Charles Kerchner expanded these arguments to Vattel’s meaning of a
natural born citizen and saw that Congress acted improperly during the process
of counting the votes of the Electoral College when they failed to open the
floor for objections as required by law. His lawsuit also points out that
Congress held hearings on McCain’s citizenship but not Obama’s
prior to the election. Attorney Apuzzo has accepted Mr. Kerchner's case. He
looked at the term natural born citizen and concluded that a would-be President
must have absolute and sole allegiance and loyalty to the United States from
the time of his or her birth and that it is only unity of citizenship (the
joining of jus soli, or citizenship from the soil, and jus sanguinis,
citizenship descended from both parents) that can provide this type of
allegiance and loyalty. Attorney Apuzzo also approached the standing issue
differently than other attorneys have by arguing that Obama's and Congress's
actions have caused his clients a loss of liberty and denial of equal
protection which gives them standing.
As you can see this is not
only a learning experience, but also a refinement of the proper argument the
court must answer. The argument has grown from place of birth, to dual
citizenship, to the citizenship of the parents at the time of birth and is now
defined for the courts to hear and focus
all these arguments upon the concept of sole allegiance to the nation by birth
and whom the founding fathers thought would exemplify this concept of total
loyalty at the moment of their natural birth. The issue of standing has also
matured from one citizen asking the courts to stop another citizen from
exercising their first amendment rights, to one that now exposes constitutional
grounds for standing.
We are trying to decide if a
President can owe to foreign sovereigns their loyalties that aught to belong
solely to the
The question of standing is
very important, we as Americans believe that we as sovereigns of the government
have standing. Our Constitution is what created the republican form federal
government that we have today. Our proof is in the Constitution, as it clearly
starts out with,
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish
Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote
the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our
Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of
America.
There can be nothing more
clear and compelling for standing on all constitutional issues as that. It is
We the People, who have not simply a legal standing, but a natural standing
in matters of constitutional importance. For one moment read those words that
start our Constitution again. These words have one meaning and one meaning
only, We the people are sovereign and our government is answerable to us.
I think about how the arguments to
eligibility that Birthers from all over, have been forming over the past year,
and how it changed and moved away from the popular, but incorrect ideas of citizenship
and became anchored to the intent of the Founding Fathers, and I think there is
a purpose to all this. Our founding fathers wrote a few simple words, that
perhaps explains everything about why we have not gotten standing yet. We find
these words of explanation at the end of the Declaration of Independence.
Sometimes simple words explain the unexplainable, words such as “with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence,” can take the question of
standing out of legal hands and seem to place it into unseen hands.
The Supreme Court is going to
agree to hear only one case, perhaps two if they are close together and can
rule on both in the same session. They know that these issues may cut across a
wide section of society and that the Nation cannot go back and forth in
uncertainty. They will decide if Barack Hussein Obama, II is President until
2013 on the merits of the case presented to them and not make it into a
Ping-Pong match. Imagine that this case only took the position that place of birth
was important. The birth certificate becomes not only the primary document, but
in essence the only document, and if the lower courts took judicial notice of
the Hawaiian COLB through the good faith
and credit clause the time going through the appeals process to the Supreme
Court could devastate the country leaving a usurper in the Oval Office. What
would the appeal process be? Of course it would change from correcting an
incorrect definition of a natural born citizen for Article II, Section 1 to that
of the changing an incorrect application of the good faith and credit clause.
Even take dual citizenship, if presented in an improper argument the court
could narrowly rule that unless it was a condition of Birth, it does not affect
the status of a natural born citizen. Again the appeals processes is not going
to be on the correct definition of a natural born citizen but rather on a
previous Supreme Court ruling on allowing dual citizenship for
“citizens” in the most generic sense of the word.
I believe it is for an unseen
reason that standing has not yet been granted, that it is the unseen hand of Divine Providence protecting this
Nation from our own sense of urgency and quietly strengthening one individual
on whose shoulders rests the hopes of everyone who believes in a Constitutional
republic and not the rule of the unbridled passions of body politic that is too
often called democracy.
Perhaps this same unseen hand
stopped the earlier lawsuits so the people could run with their passions, as
the cry for “change” at any price made many to forget that this
Nation is strong and our constitutional protections firm only when we govern
ourselves with moral guidance. Did this unseen hand feed us the sweetness of
our own egocentric desires, did this unseen hand pour a measure of the
intoxicating wine of irresponsibility to the people as they ignored the
foundations of our republic, and did this unseen hand do these things because
we have forgotten our heritage and our place that Nature’s God put us in
to guard against the events of the world that threaten the innocent? Did Nature’s God withdraw the hand of
Divine Providence in the foreknowledge that it would come back to protect the
Nation at its darkest hour, after the sweetness of desire turned bitter in our stomachs
and the intoxication of irresponsibility shows that we have tossed off our
clothes of morality only to see ourselves naked? If this is the answer then we with the hands
that can be seen should show them joined in prayer to Nature’s God upon
whose will Divine Providence is ordained.
My personal hope is that
standing will not be given to anyone in the active military for this reason. If
they present their case and loose, with todays political climate bordering more
like 1929 than 2009 I fear that the military would undergo a purge if the
member of the active military was given standing and fell. A purge of those who
are truly loyal to the Constitution United States and those people we cannot
afford to loose. If we loose them, they will be replaced by those whose
allegiance will be to the base and corrupt powers that have long sought to
enslave free people. For all our failures as a society in allowing two parties
to dominate government, they are the citizens’ last hope of keeping a
constitutional republic from turning to a people’s democratic republic
without the bloodshed of a civil war. There is no doubt that they are brave men
and women, and we do not want those brave souls obeying unlawful orders, and
most of all we want them to remember their oath to the Constitution. They know
what an unlawful order is. When ordered to turn their weapons on citizens who
are only exercising both their God given and constitutionally guaranteed
rights, or being ordered to surrender to foreign forces, we have little doubt
that they will draw the line in the sand and hold fast to their oath. We will
need them more then than now if this current government keeps usurping the
power we the people gave them and one day decided to turn the military against
us. We need them to fight if this appeasing administration decides that only
their human sacrifice will appease our enemies. For this reason, I believe the
guiding and unseen hand of that Divine Providence that our Founding Fathers
called on so many years ago has not given standing to the actions to date.
Perhaps it is we who forgot the need for Divine Providence, and I pray that the
Divine Providence that was evoked on that fourth day of July did not forget
us.
We cannot forget those
patriots who pursue other avenues to protect our Constitution. Those that
support the ninth and tenth amendments protecting the rights and powers
reserved to the people and states, or those that hold fast to the second
amendment as our final insurance against tyranny. Those grandmas and grandpas,
the stay at home moms, and the common men and women who give up their day to
join their fellow Americans in protests at town hall meetings and Tea Parties
across the nation exercising their first amendment rights. All of these are patriots
made in the same mould as those who on the morning of April 19th
1775 assembled on Lexington Green and faced the mightiest army in the world at
that time. All patriots all endowed by their Creator with an unalienable desire
to breath the free air of liberty.
Which is the best lawsuit,
who is the best lawyer? Who knows! We are not in
Who ever gets standing what
we must do is bow our heads in silent prayer for it is this person that the
Divine Providence of Nature’s God has uncovered and, that the argument
they present to the courts comes from the wisdom of our Founding Fathers. Let
us take comfort that in the unseen assurance that the same Divine Providence
that protected our nation throughout the Revolutionary War still waits to
protect us if we have the faith to call upon the name of Nature’s God.
Please join us at 2:01 PM
Eastern time on Wednesday August 19, 2009 for one moment of silence as we bow
our heads across the nation from the eastern most shores of Maine, to the
western most island in the Aleutian Islands of Alaska to Nature’s God as
we again ask for the protection of Divine Providence.
August 19th is an important
date in American history it is the day we fought the final battle of the
Revolutionary War, the Battle of Blue Licks, and it is the day that the grande
dame of our Navy, the USS Constitution (how much more fitting can that be for
those of us that swore allegiance to her namesake) scored our first victory of
the second war of independence, the War of 1812, against the British ship the
HMS Guerriere and earned her immortal nickname “old ironsides” as
the British cannon balls bounced off her hull.
The dark side of this day occurred 75 years ago in
At the appointed hour on the
August 19, 2009 let us take courage from the deeds of our history and resolve
never to allow the dark passions of a desperate world to stain our national
soul by believing that any one man or group of men are above the Constitution
that empowers them. Let us move forward in our sworn duty, “with a firm
reliance on the protection of Divine Providence,” to guard our
Constitution and our Republic from all enemies both foreign and domestic.