Spread the love


by John Charlton

Eric Erickson praticed law for six years with Sell & Melton, LLP, which is located in the same Federal District, as that of Judge Clay D. Land. Above the William Augustus Bootle Building, Macon, Georgia.

(Feb. 13, 2010) — Many Republicans are outraged following the discussion ban of the eligibility question imposed yesterday by the Editor-in-Chief of Redstate.com, a leading Republican News Blog published from Washington, D.C.

Eric Erickson justified his action in a post entitled, “Vigilance: I’m Banning Birfers, Truthers, and Groups Affiliated Therewith” for the following reasons:

We must be vigilant. We must be willing to draw a line in the sand and stand against fatuous nonsense that opens up the right to attacks by a left-leaning media intent on embarrassing the good people who have developed through the tea party movement a renewed sense of civic involvement.

Birfers and Truthers have no place among us. And they are most decidedly not welcome at RedState.

Erickson is evidently that kind of Republican who believes politics needs a sort of Inquisition-like approach, ever- vigilant for political “heretics,” and sees his duty as requiring him to ban them from exercising their free speech on constitutional issues.

He is also that kind of Republican effete who runs when Democrats shout “Boo!” on any issue, not wanting at all to seem politically incorrect to liberals.

He is also that kind of clever progressive, who, in order to hide the fact that he is banning a legitimate discussion, bans  at the same time a position often advocated by those with an extreme anti-American or anti-government stance  (in this case, “Truthers,” who believe 9-11 was engineered by the U.S. government), so as to appear to be middle-of-the-road.

But just who is Erickson, and why does he have such animus against the Eligibility question?

I decided to do some simple investigative reporting and found an amazing connection.

It appears that Eric Erickson, the Editor-in-Chief of Redstate.com, is an attorney who once practiced law in the same federal district as the infamous Judge Clay D. Land, who sanctioned Attorney Orly Taitz for having the daring to plead the Eligibility question in the case of Captain Connie Rhodes’s deployment.

Erickson himself admits that he was an attorney with Sell & Melton, L.L.P, of Macon, Georgia. His former law firm proudly displays an image of the William Augustus Bootle Building, which is the headquarters of the U.S. Middle District Court of Georgia, in which district Judge Clay D. Land presides. Erickson resides current in Macon, Georgia.

It is not known if the clients of Sell & Melton are known political donors to the Democrat Party, but if any were, that might be a reason for Erickson’s animus.

According to an anonymous source, The Post & Email has been informed that Judge Clay D. Land’s frequent drinking partner is none other than a local attorney who is notoriously opposed to the questioning of Obama’s eligibility, one who is affiliated with the Southern Poverty Law Center.  It is not known who this individual is, but it seems that Eric Erickson shares the same prejudices as the personal friends and acquaintances of Judge Land.

Perhaps that is the real reason he has banned the Eligibility Question over at Redstate.com.  He just cannot afford to lose an invite to any social gathering down in Macon, Georgia.

Does that sound like a Republican to you?  Certainly it is a far cry from the manliness exhibited by our Founding Fathers.

More importantly, however, it should be recognized that Erickson does not stand alone. He is just one apparatchik of an entire generation of Republicans who have joined forces with the Democrats in a mass apostasy against the U.S. Constitution, and who have deemed themselves so worthy to rule, that they can dictate which terms of that document you and I must obey, and which they do not have to.

If America is to be taken back by the People, it would be naive, very naive indeed, to believe, as many writers are attempting to insist, in the face of the Tea Party Movement, that trusting the Republican Party to restore the constitutional order is a good bet.  Like Scott Brown, how many will ride the wave of popular discontent, and when in office merely hand power back over to that same Elite (which includes Senator John McCain), which put Obama into power in the first place? Such an Elite shows no sign of repentance, rather, they glory in the rape they have perpetrated, and contemplate further crimes of moral turpitude against Lady Liberty.

As Editor of The Post & Email, I must, finally, deplore the slide into puerility, as evidenced by the use of the term “Birther” and now “Birfer.”  My generation should know better than to babble, especially in public.

[Please note:  White we have linked to Redstate.com in our article, we caution our readers that that site has syndicated ads with nudity.  As The Post & Email is a child-friendly site, which as a policy permits no such images, we issue this disclaimer, as the link to Redstate.com is necessary for this report.]

Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. American Majority has now also done the same thing, even calling it “truthers and birfers” just as Erickson did. Sheep. Follow the leader…. They are all following their leader…and it must be Obama.

  2. I have never been to that website either as I have seen Erickson on Hannity several times and had already concluded he was an idiot. He is a good example of people inside the beltway losing their minds and forgetting about normal lives.

  3. You have oft heard it said ; that we are a nation of immigrants well…..
    The Founders/Framers had no intentions, what-so-ever, of permitting NON- U.S. immigrants to install their offspring as Commander in Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces aka “The President”

  4. Red State/Conservatives?
    I went to this web site for the first time, thought It was for Obot’s. Maybe they are the Country Club, Beck/O’reilly variety of Conservative who get a little queasy when things get uncomfortable. Cowards
    I have more respect for the Dem’s who challenged John Mc Cain on the NBC issue.

  5. Dear readers of The Post & Email,

    Eric Ericson has posted his “final thought” on the Eligiblity Question…


    Read it, it’s juicy…

    “final thought” is a misnomer, however; as it seems that Erickson is not really capable of the exercise of his rational faculty, and actually seems emotionally tied up with the impulse to deny such a use….for someone with a law degree, Erickson is a shocking example of a closed liberal mind.

  6. I’d never heard of this Redstate.com website, so it didn’t matter much to me, but it was very funny when I heard my husband say this morning that he was deleting any future communication from them after he read about the “no further posts regarding the Obama b.c.” I had no idea that it was one of the ones that he frequently read. Over 40 years together and there’s still some surprises. We are both conservative, but read different news sites for our information. I tend to think that it gives us double the conservative news exposure.


    Mr. Charlton replies: Redstate.com proposes itself as a leading Republican news source from Washington D.C..

    What I do not understand, being someone who has never affiliated with any party, a sort of political neophyte…is how naive politically Redstate.com’s editor is.

    If the opposition is making fun of you for an issue, you don’t stop talking about that issue, you first investigate as to the motivations of the opposition and why they feel so vulnerable on that issue, and if they are vulnerable, you don’t comply with their ridicule, you double your push of that issue and use it to defeat them.

    If you are afraid of the laughter of your enemies, you only show yourself to be pyschologically and emotionally unprepared for war.

    I gather that this Ericson does not come from a military family, because he shows little signs of the virtues which reign therein.

    If I were a big supporter of Redstate.com financially, I’d give them a phone call and ask them when did they lose both their marbles and their masculinity.

  7. Eric is now a CNN apologist, who wants to be in the in crowd”. He is not a conservative if he blatantly ignores this issue. We must make sure that psudeo conservatives (like Eric) that we are here to stay. His blog is currently a subsidiary of Eagle Publishing, Inc., a conservative publishing house…despite Eagle Publishing’s ownership, RedState “claims” to remain a grassroots organization.

    RED STATE & Plagiarism

    Domenech, an owner for RedState under the pseudonym “Augustine,”[10] was hired by the Washington Post’s online arm to write a blog providing “a daily mix of commentary, analysis and cultural criticism.”[16] The blog, “Red America”, launched on March 21, 2006, but Domenech resigned three days later after only six posts, after other bloggers posted evidence that Domenech had plagiarized work from the Washington Post, The New Yorker, humorist P. J. O’Rourke, and several other writers.

    In 2007 he began publishing posts at RedState again.



  8. Gotta love Erickson’s rationalization for banning the “birfer” issue – it gives the left ammunition. Yet as soon as he announced his “ban”, the moonbats began burning up the intardnets announcing with delight: “Redstate.com bans Sarah Palin!”
    Nice going Erick, you little genius.

  9. John Charlton,
    Thought I would share this with you and others.

    James Monroe
    First Inaugural Address
    Tuesday, March 4, 1817

    “While, then, the constituent body retains its present sound and healthful state everything will be safe. They will choose competent and faithful representatives for every department. It is only when the people become ignorant and corrupt, when they degenerate into a populace, that they are incapable of exercising the sovereignty. Usurpation is then an easy attainment, and an usurper soon found. The people themselves become the willing instruments of their own debasement and ruin. Let us, then, look to the great cause, and endeavor to preserve it in full force. Let us by all wise and constitutional measures promote intelligence among the people as the best means of preserving our liberties.”



    Mr. Charlton replies: Prophetic!

  10. I emailed Erick Erickson the following message:

    Dear Erick,

    I just signed up for your site, in order to post a comment on your “birther” thread. But, the site’s software would not allow it, because I had not been a member long enough. This made me think that perhaps I should send this post, directly to you, and let you decide if you are okay with having it on your site/thread.

    The post follows:

    Obama lived in Indonesia and schooled there, as a child, at a time when Indonesia did not allow duo citizenship and required citizenship in order for children to attend school there.

    Also, Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen, something that is needed in order for Obama to be a “natural born citizen.” Now, I realize that many people do not understand that “natural born citizen” means that both parents had to have been born in America. But that is only due to the high number of liberal teachers and professors, who refuse to teach correctly on many issues. –Let’s remember, liberal schools and universities also say we evolved from nothingness.

    So, if you do not allow posters who believe that Obama was not born in the U.S., do you still allow posters who believe that his parents would have given up any American citizenship, in order for him to have gone to school in Indonesia? And or, do you allow posters who believe that “natural born citizen” means both parents had to have been born here.

    Basically, do you allow people who simply believes Obama does not qualify, for reasons other than his actual place of birth?

    I have often said, even if Obama was born in the U.S., he still does not qualify for these two reasons. I have often said that I believe that any original birth certificate that does exist, wherever, would most likely have him listed as an Arab. –This is something that would have caused many African Americans to have not voted for him. You see, Obama is not an African American. His father’s side, which is where his African heritage comes from, is Arab, through the male blood-line. It was his father’s mother that was African. His father’s father, was Arab, Muslim Arab. There was only one reason that his Muslim Arab grandfather, was in Africa.

    Note: An Arab Muslim man, is not going to allow his son to have anything other than “Arab” on a birth certificate. His grandfather was Arab Muslim, therefor his father was Arab Muslim, therefore he (Obama) would have been born Arab Muslim.

    Debra J.M. Smith

    PS… I was sent your article by a friend. I had actually never heard of your site before. But, perhaps you may want to know that there are a lot of people who are talking about boycotting your website over this. Who knows, maybe you will ban me after reading this. –I’ve learned not to stay long on most sites, because of all of the drama, due to over inflated egos that all too often goes on. :o)

    1. Debra,

      Erick posted the following on his site:

      All that was said to these whiners was drop the damn birfer subject, that is all. Take it elsewhere. Or else.
      Leaving with your crayons is totally voluntary, unless you keep bringing up that birfer/troofer garbage.
      Seriously, there’s no place else anywhere on the internetz you can take that stuff but here?

      At the bottom of his post was written – Note to lefties; “Don’t be afraid to see what you see.”
      Ronald Reagan

      My response was:

      With all due respect, you quote Ronald Reagan’s, “Don’t be afraid to see what you see,” but yet you intimidate the “birthers” by saying, “Or else..” You are adopiting the Left’s tactic of negatively labeling anyone who dares to challenge Obama’s eligibility.

      Sergeant Schultz to Hogan – “I see nothing…”
      Soup Nazi to George – “No soup for you…”

      I forgot to add another quote:

      “You see these dictators on their pedestals, surrounded by the bayonets of their soldiers and the truncheons of their police. Yet in their hearts there is unspoken – unspeakable! – fear. They are afraid of words and thoughts! Words spoken abroad, thoughts stirring at home, all the more powerful because they are forbidden. These terrify them. A little mouse – a little tiny mouse! – of thought appears in the room, and even the mightiest potentates are thrown into panic.”

      Winston Churchill

  11. I care not a whit what Redstate or any other website says.

    I care only what the Joint Chiefs of Staff say after the first judge orders discovery of the original documents which would prove Mr. Obama’s eligibility for office . . . and what the Supreme Court says the penalty is for treason.

  12. RedState like Bill O’Reilly in thought, word, and deed has openly broadcast to the American public, the voting population, and everyone concerned that they don’t care about the United States Constutition.
    The question and concern is real and blantant disregard for the law of this or any nation, it what tears the fabric of a civil population to pieces.
    Guilt by association or compliance within the media is no different then an accomplice to a crime, in this case the crime is treason.
    There is no statute of limitations for that crime and as more of the populace wakes up to the travesty fermenting in Washington DC, the courts and the crimes against the American people the words of the Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence and the words of Thomas Paine in ‘Common sense’ ring all the more true.

  13. Many people justify their opinions with the facts and the law, whereas others do not let the facts and the law get in the way of their reasoning. Which one are you? If you are one of those people out there who thinks that the birthers are nuts, then let’s consider something that is not nuts — which one of the three burdens of proof applies to any candidate for President regarding his Article II eligibility? Is it by a preponderance of evidence? By clear and convincing evidence? How about by beyond a reasonable doubt?

    Once you decide which one applies, and you must pick one if your argument is to be credible, then consider this before drawing a conclusion — Although Hawaii calls the posted Certification of Live Birth an “official” birth certificate, it is nothing more than a digital copy of a summary of a 1961 vital record that derives from one of the six birth records procedures in place at the time of Obama’s birth, five of which arguably lacked adequate indicia of reliability and trustworthiness because they were fraught with the potential for fraud.

    Does anyone know which one of these procedures was used to generate a 1961 birth record for Barack? Barack won’t tell. Was it the one with a doctor’s signature and hospital documentation, or was it from one of the other five, one of which allowed a family member to mail in a form attesting to an at-home birth and receive a Hawaiian BC? Consider this hypo — state A issues a birth certificate to a person who supplies a hand-written note that claims baby B was born somewhere on so and so date. No independent witnesses are required. Later, the state issues an “official” scant summary of the “original” birth certificate.” The issue is, do you trust that summary? You can read the actual Hawaii Revised Laws in effect in 1961 at birther.com that would have allowed for such a thing to happen.

    To date, not one single solitary person in the three branches of government has bothered to subject Obama’s 1961 vital record to any meaningful scrutiny. Furthermore, they have not even identified which burden of proof was applied to reach their conclusions. They have instead chosen to accept his posted Certification of Live Birth, a summary, as conclusive evidence of his alleged birthplace simply because it reads -“Born in Hawaii.” It reminds me of someone who tells another, “Because I say so.”

    Now, for those on the Left who like to pretend that the birthers believe that the Hawaii newspaper birth announcement was planted so Obama could run for president 47 years later. Nobody on either side of the fence really believes that scenario. It is nothing but a ridiculous distraction from an alternative, plausible motive — the announcement could have been placed so Ann Dunham would have had documented evidence for immigration purposes should Barack’s birthplace ever be called into question by the INS when he was younger. Even if you are not willing to accept this scenario, in 1961 a family member could mail in a form attesting to an at-home birth and receive a Hawaiian BC. The state registrar would then send that information to the papers. So the Hawaii newspaper announcement is not reliable or trustworthy evidence either.

    On a closing note, assuming arguendo, that Obama is completely barred from getting a copy of his original 1961 birth certificate, what prevents him from either admitting or denying that his 1961 vital record on file at the DOH Hawaii is the one with a doctor’s signature and supporting hospital documentation?

  14. I got kicked off that site last week for responding to Aaron Gardner’s blog post about O’s eligibility. It was like a total gang-bang situation. I got pretty beat up as there was no one else around. THEY WERE POSITIVELY DRIPPING WITH CONTEMPT. Another regular there even commented on the negative unusual atmosphere this issue brought on. I cannot even go there. what I said was not that radical. I was shocked. I am just now getting my blood temperature back after several days. I will speak of this site wherever and whenever I can.

  15. This issue never ceases to amaze me. Didn’t the senate rule on the eleigibility issue relative to Mccain? Of two citizen parents? Where is the argument? Even if you feel McCain as not NBC, the ruling still indicates BHO is not eligible. Unless someone can provide a counter argument, I am still confused. McCain himself ignores this ruling. Very strange.


    Mr. Charlton replies: As a resolution, it was not binding; however it sets a precedent if there is ever an impeachment, because then the Senate sits as a court with the constitutional power, not to decide what a nbc is, but to investigate the facts as to Obama being or not being one, and rule justly in accord with that.

    If we get a good group of new congressman in with the 2010 elections, we can hope for impeachment proceedings with 12 months. While some charge that impeachment is for a sitting president, I think it is sufficient to consider that impeachment is the highest form of trial, and can be used for anyone purportedly holding the highest office; so it would be a valid forum for removing an imposter to that office, since it is the holding of the office, not the imposter holding it, which would be the question considered; and that is suitable to an impeachment hearing…in my opinion. Though the impeachment procedings would in fact, be a sort of trial not of obama, but of the previous congress, a reconsideration of that action of Jan 8th, 2009.

    1. Let’s not forget that the Republicans have a rising star by the name of Bobby Jindal who could be their nominee (or VP to the nominee) in 2012. Jindal is not a natural born citizen despite being born in Louisiana. His parents, who are presently US citizens, were not US citizens at the time of Jindal’s birth.

    2. Please put no confidence in the 2010 elections. Community organizers, such as ACORN, get out the vote and register huge numbers of ineligible voters, felons, illegal aliens, dead people, pets, Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, and in the state of Nevada, the entire Dallas Cowboys football team. In NewsWithViews.com http://www.scribd.com/doc/23495809/Jon-Christian-Ryter-Forgot-the-Past-Here-s-the-Future , Jon Christian Ryder reported that Sen. Obama garnered 69½ million votes and Sen. McCain 58 million votes, while the Federal Election Commission reported that fewer than 97 million votes were cast. If community organizers could do that much damage in 2008, just think of what ACORN can do with the $3.9 BILLION earmarked for it in Mr. Obama’s requested budget!

      We have all marveled at the House, the Senate, and Mr. Obama stiff-arming and snubbing the populace as they drive toward the goal of government control of healthcare. They have ignored the Tea Party’s million (and a half?) person march on the Capitol Mall, the elections in Virginia, New Jersey, and the People’s Republic of Massachusetts, and the polls indicating that more than half of doctors and nurses would change occupations rather than work in a government-controlled healthcare system. Not to mention their continued efforts to grant amnesty to illegal aliens, in the face of overwhelming (up to 77%) public opposition to any such comprehensive immigration swindle.

      I will not call these Washington politicians “public servants,” because they consider themselves the nobility and the common folk in flyover country the serfs. But in light of their arrogant contempt toward the voters who elected them, they obviously feel no threat from the ballot box. That can ONLY be because the ballot box is stuffed for the foreseeable future, perhaps until U.S. sovereignty can be turned over to a Eurocentric global government, not empowered by military might, but based upon finance and commerce, consisting of member states driven into confederation by fear of Is|am (Revelation 13).


      Mr. Charlton replies: Minuteman, I find it hard believe there were 20 million bogus votes in the 2008 national election, since if you were going to attempt that much fraud, it would (1) take a lot of work, (2) be eaiser to tell the Federal Election Commission to tally the fraudulent votes.

      Secondly, if you give into fear, you merely advance tyranny, because by sending individuals around to blogs instilling fear and dispair, Obama maintains control on peoples’ souls.

      Perhaps you have already surrendered in this manner to Obama’s false Messiah-hood. I have not. I still believe that elections can make the difference.

    3. “If we get a good group of new congressman in with the 2010 elections, we can hope for impeachment proceedings with 12 months.”


      Are there any in this potentially “good group of new congressman” that will be absolutely willing to take on the eligibility issue and not be affected by the present “Inside the Beltway” mentality of: “Don’t broach the elligibility issue!”?


      Mr. Charlton replies: Only if those of you who are members of the Eligbility Movement, run for office.

      It’s time to save the country, and sacrifice for it. The Post & Email promises coverage of all who take his bold step. We can even set up a pac to support such candidates, and now with the Recent Supreme Court Ruling, there is no limit on how much our corporation can give to a campaign, if only our readers support us.

      Let’s use the political tools to take back the country for the People.

  16. Lame move by Erickson. Why doesn’t he simply pen an article debunking every claim and suspicion of the “birfers”? If the issue was such “fatuous nonsense”, a clever, “sane” scribe like him could easily put it to bed.

    Right-wing media fears the eligibility issue as much as the left. Right-wing media is making a killing off Obama being in office. The same pundits lamenting the economic woes of “the folks” are making the biggest money of their lives. O’Reilly, Beck, Coulter, Morris, et al can pen a best seller whenever they want. Profitting off the fear and unease of the public, which they stoke nightly.

    1. Simply because he cannot debunk “birfers”, he represents bunk and only has ridicule.
      No statutory citizen is ever a natural born citizen, it’s not difficult to prove that they have absolutely no credibility.

      It’s best to identify false patriots like Eric anyway.


      Mr. Charlton replies: Let’s not call Eric, Erica, because there is a staunch patriot, who’s goes by the latter name. It is also unseemly to stoop to the same level as one’s opponent.

  17. Erickson is apparently more concerned about giving leftists in the media ammunition to use against the Tea Party movement than in following the U.S. Constitution. To serve as president, one must be a natural born citizen; to be a natural born citizen one must be born on U.S. soil to two citizen parents. Because Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen, Obama is not a natural born citizen and is ineligible to serve as president. Any determination to the contrary must be made by the U.S. Supreme Court—not MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann or the Saudi Arabian investors in Fox News Channel.

    Note to Erickson: Read THE OBAMA TIMELINE, and then stand up for the U.S. Constitution.

  18. Thank you, John, for exposing this properly. I read that RS post and immediately removed my bookmark to RedState. I will not return unless there is an apology. I am not holding my breath.

  19. Erickson is just one more vermin attempting to discredit a legitimate inquiry by association with loonies or traitors like the “9/11 internal job crowd”. For what in the world can be more legitimate than inquiry about “cloth of an emperor having no cloth”?!

    To be a natural born citizen one must have both parents US citizens and be born on American soil. This definition was applied to McCain, damn it!


    The truth is that as soon as you recall the definition “natural born” or even mention it, the entire GOP, Bush, McCain, Palin are immediately become guilty in overlooking or rather orchestrating of the ascend of the impostor.

    That is why the official GOP line is “We have already left it behind”, and so think also many Tea Party’s phonies. So all those dishonest GOP’s water carriers like Ann Coulter, Malkin, Glann Beck, Orielly and similar just keep repeating their screed as they are told to do.

    DO NOT TRUST REPOO-OO-BLICAN PARTY! They are not saviours at all! On the contrary: They are co-conspirators of this crisis. Do not allow them to change the topic. Be rude! Always return back to one and only issue: who is a natural born citizen, and why Obama has only one parent US citizen instead of two.

    And where is his typewriter issued full birth certificate.

    And why he has a Social Security number of a dead person from Connecticut, and many other Social Security numbers.

    This crisis is the matter of honor for America! By no means must we allow the impostor to hold the full term. For no nation can be treated as a civilized nation if it is so paralyzed and impotent that it cannot prosecute a fraud at the highest position.

  20. Looks like RedState.com is just another RINO site.

    I believe the Fix was in by both parties in the 2008 presidential election cycle to subvert and ignore Article II of our Constitution using progressive rhetoric to justify what they did … and the cover up is still going strong. Both political parties are now using all their operatives in the Main Stream Media, various Internet Sites, the Congress, and their friends in the Courts to try and shut down those who know what they did in 2008 and prevent more of “We the People” from learning what they did to subvert Article II of the U.S. Constitution. Their fraud and the continuing cover-up have created the Perfect Storm for a Constitutional Crisis of historic proportions. This crisis is going to make Water Gate look like a walk in the park once this usurpation of the black letter law fundamental law of our nation and national election fraud is exposed to the American people. Read my essay at this link for more details:


    CDR Kerchner

  21. From my email box:

    ———- Forwarded message ———-
    From: Erick Erickson
    Date: Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 10:55 PM
    Subject: Re: Nashville Tea Party Birthers?
    To: Durus Helm

    I think that if Jesus Christ himself were to testify that Obama were a natural born citizen, you people would crucify him as a liar.

    Erick-Woods Erickson
    Editor, RedState.Com
    1 Massachusetts Ave, N.W.
    Washington, D.C. 20001

    Sent from my iPhone

    On Feb 6, 2010, at 10:43 PM, Durus Helm wrote:

    > Greetings Erick,
    > I just read your comments in “Thoughts of the Nashville Tea Party”. More in particularly your comments about ‘birther’ Joseph Farah hijacking the convention by trying to treat the ‘birther’ issue as legitimate. And then you stated, “The ‘birther’ issue is not legitimate.”
    > I also read the article about Breitbart getting into a squabble with Farah where Breitbart would appear to agree with you.
    > Reading your comments caused me to do some looking around on RedState to find other comments by you, regarding the ‘birther’ issue… and I am sure that you know what I found… frequent bannings of RedState members who discussed what you deemed to be so called ‘birther’ issues.
    > Before you go lumping me in as a ‘birther’, a term that I find to be very offensive, considering that I have served in the Armed Forces of this great Country, where I gave the following oath:
    > “I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”
    > (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).
    > Sir, I respectfully ask you, what you have against those of us who just want to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic… when we would be preventing a domestic enemy from becoming POTUS… by ensuring that candidates for office of POTUS and VPOTUS prove that they are “natural born citizens” of the USA prior to their being elected to those offices… as required by Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the US Constitution, which states:
    > No person except a natural born Citizen … shall be eligible to the Office of President?
    > Can you say with any surety at all, that Obama is a “natural born citizen” of the United States of America, who would be eligible to serve as the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of America?
    > If you can not, then why have you been ridiculing those who just want to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all domestic enemies?
    > Can you say with any surety at all, that if Obama was to enlist in our Nation’s Armed Forces following a career path which requires qualification through a stringent background investigation, in order to obtain a high level security clearance, that he would be able to obtain that high level security clearance?
    > I dare say, having gone through several of those background investigations for a high level security clearance, several times during my tour of duty in the US Army, that I would have never qualified for the security clearance necessary to do my job, if I had gone to Kenya and helped a radical communistic/socialistic tyrant Raila Odinga get re-elected.
    > If you cannot say that Obama deserves to possess one of the highest security clearance in America, then why have you been ridiculing those who want to ensure that Obama is eligible to obtain one of the highest security clearance in America, at least through, proving that he is a “natural born citizen” who would be qualified for the office of POTUS and CIC of America’s Armed Forces?
    > Therefore, your statement: “The ‘birther’ issue is not legitimate.” was… giving you the benefit of the doubt… made without much thought given to the issues that would arise when an Unconstitutional Illegal Putative President assumes the office of POTUS as a wolf in sheep’s wool… USURPER.
    > However, you might just be too stupid to realize the damage that a USURPER can do to “Our Country”… just within over one lousy year.
    > I really do not care about where the man was born, or the color of his skin. The man has stated that his father was a foreign student, who never became a citizen of the United States of America throughout his entire life.
    > The Democratic National Committee has stated on their “Fight the Smears” website:
    > “As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.”
    > “The fact is Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii in 1961, a native citizen [They admit he is a “native citizen” not a “natural born citizen”] of the United States of America.”
    > How can anyone whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948, be a “natural born citizen” of the United States, who would be eligible to serve as POTUS and CIC of America’s Armed Forces?

    1. That is THE question they do not want asked nor answered! The beauty and strength of that question is that it has absolutely nothing to do with where Obama was born or his birth certificate.

  22. Thank you once again, Mr. Charlton, for pointing out the obvious: “a mass apostasy against the U.S. Constitution, and who have deemed themselves so worthy to rule, that they can dictate which terms of that document you and I must obey, and which they do not have to.”

    But I don’t see this as a RINO vs. conservative issue; they’re BOTH doing the same thing – hiding the truth, and using Alinsky’s bully tactics on anyone who dares to bring it up. RedState and Glenn Beck have attacked the birthers viciously and aggressively, but all the rest are part and parcel of the massive cover-up. Hannity, Limbaugh, Levine, Coulter, and on and on. They’ve ALL sold out the Constitution, right along with the rest of the media and our Congress. What other parts of the Constitution will they sell out? And how many other parts of the Constitution will we let them sell out?

    I fear for the TEA Party, because I believe it has been infiltrated and tainted, and close to being hijacked, by the status quo. We have to be careful of wolves in sheep’s clothing. Banning the eligibility issue tells me they won’t protect our Constitution – and therefore our rights under that Constitution.

    Is the Constitution the law of the land or not? Do we live under a rule of law or not? Is Obama above the law or not?

  23. One thing good about serious issues like the constitutional eligibility issue is that it tends to expose who the real conservatives are and who the fake ones are. Redstate.com and Eric Erickson have now been revealed as RINOs and part of the media that is destroying America with their control and suppression of information and free speech. A free society must support free debate. Political censorship is the sign of a closed society.

    Redstate.com is appropriately named, if you think of red as the color of soviet style communism and state as in totalitarian state where free speech is not allowed.

  24. Here is a article that theorizes 2 scenerios that seem to make more sense than the ‘official’ version – Gramps as Dad and Frank Davis as Dad.


    These scenerios, especially Gramps as Dad seem to fit the few facts better than the ‘official version. The photo of Granddad Dunham and BHO Sr. when BHO arrived seems to interesting. These 2 guys knew each other prior to any random meeting on campus by SAD and BHO. There is no sign of a real ‘marriage’ between BHO and SAD. No marriage cememony, a shady divorce, no visible sign of actual relationship of any sort from interviews with family, friends, etc. BHO does Dunham a favor of being named father since he is a transient on the island anyway and is half a world away from his real home. He does the ‘divorce’ to close the chapter and off he goes to live his life.

    Could something like this really happen? Ask John Edwards.

    1. Who.
      If Obama lied about his parentage he’s just as guilty of fraud as if his Dad was BHO, Sr. making him a non-natural-born-citizen.
      He forged an official document, defrauded the citizenry,

      If anyone else is his dad or mom, we fully invite him to divulge, and then explain his lies from behind prison bars.

      1. It does not make any difference as to the real parentage of Obama, because Obama Senior claimed him as a product of a marriage. In the time of our Founding Fathers, all that was necessary was for the father of record to claim he was the father in actuality, which Obama Senior did in the divorce papers. In the time of our Founding Fathers there was no way to test (such as with DNA) for paternity. If a man claimed to be the father of a son, then that was good enough for all legal purposes of identity, passing on of inheritance, land grants, and especially citizenship.

        Obama’s citizenship status at birth was dual (US and British/Kenyan) and so was his allegiance. His status at birth was “governed” by the laws of Great Britain. Natural born citizen status is the “strong check” against foreign influence, and this influence was present at the birth of Obama, as well as in the years that followed. These are all facts which will not go away should his father turn out to have been an American.

  25. Americans have a right to know the background of any candidate for president. We know next to nothing about Obama. He says he went to Harvard, but published no papers. He says he went to Columbia University, but no one remembers him. He was a senator, and voted “present” over 100 times. What was his real opinion? What we do know about him is, that he was a friend of the radical, Bill Ayers, and announced his candidacy for Senator from Ayer’s home. We know Obama’s mentor was Frank David Marshall, a well-known communist. We know that Obama has named extremist radicals to head newly formed offices to control our economy and schools. We know that he promised transparent government, and then held meetings behind closed doors, excluding Republicans. Why are all of his records sealed? What is he hiding? When Lou Dobbs dared to say that Obama should just show his original birth certificate and shut up the birthers, BANG-ZOOM!, he was fired!

  26. I followed your link to Redstate, signed up for an account just so I could post a comment, and found out that even comments are not allowed if Erickson doesn’t agree with them. What a sorry excuse for a human being, much less a Republican! Sure hope decent people of all political persuasions will stop patronizing his stupid website.

  27. Erica Erickson of Sellout and Mellonhead, LLC, + Clay D. Land fraud-judge, kind of like Obama and Larry Sinclair drinking buds, mint juleps donchaknow?

    All RINOs all false patriots, better to be gone with them. Be gone!
    Actually this is a blessing, we don’t want fraudsters who legitimize
    “The Fraud”

  28. Another traitor has just been exposed and so has his ignorance. A lawyer yet he doesn’t understand the Constitutional requirement for the POTUS? Or does he know but not care? And he still hasn’t figured out that the Tea Party movement is about upholding the Constitution. Or does he know but not care? He might call himself a Republican but he is the kind that is dragging the party into the sewer. A Republican who won’t allow discussion about the Constitution is no friend of ours!

    He is just another money grabbing lawyer who has to suck up to his fellow lawyers, the MSM and Obama. Anyone who uses the term “birfer” only shows his lack of class or his ignorance – or both. Dump this guy and his crummy site. There are much better sources of information on the net.

  29. “Red” State is off my list, Post & Email is on.

    Any source that won’t discuss the biggest political scandal in history, perpetrated by the Left and enabled by RINO’s, is not fit as a source of Conservative news.

    1. Gmiller, well said!
      They should be renamed rinostate.com!

      Seeking the truth about Obama’s constitutional eligibility is ‘fatuous nonsense that opens up the RIGHT to attack by a left-leaning media intent on EMBARRASSING the good people……the Tea party movement…….”????????

      Again: Asking Obama for proof of constitutional elig gives the left the RIGHT to embarrass us???

      The right????

      Hallo! Don’t the left call the Tea Party people who won’t allow talks of Obama’s elig issue the ‘tea-bagg***’ and the anti-Americans, the mobs, the racists……….?