SNOWSTORM CHANGES ANNOUNCEMENT LOCATION FROM CHICAGO TO CONCORD
by Sharon Rondeau
(Dec. 27, 2010) — A press release from Andy Martin, who has dubbed himself “King of the Birthers” and filed two lawsuits in Hawaii emanating from the Obama eligibility question, had stated that Martin would be announcing a run for the presidency in 2012 in Chicago on Wednesday, December 29. However, because of the major snowstorm which blanketed the Northeast on Monday when Martin was in New York, he has changed his plans and will be making the announcement in Concord, NH on Wednesday.
New Hampshire is the first state to hold primaries for the presidential election cycle every four years. According to Wikipedia, “it traditionally marks the opening of the quadrennial U.S. presidential election.”
The Post & Email had filed a Motion to Intervene in the second lawsuit filed by Martin in Hawaii last October with the purpose of presenting further evidence of obfuscation, failure on the part of the Hawaii Department of Health’s employees to uphold their own state statute, and falsifying statements to the Associated Press regarding the number of UIPA requests actually being made about Obama’s birth records which were never corrected after The Post & Email exposed them.
Mr. Martin granted The Post & Email his first personal interview about the launch of his campaign.
MR. MARTIN: The plan is that I’m going to take the train up to Boston and connect to the Concord bus, and then I’ll overnight tomorrow in Concord, so I’ll be there tomorrow (Tuesday) in Concord. Then at 10:00 a.m. I’ll be in-studio, at WMUR and if we can get the legislative office building to unlock for the day, we’ll do a formal announcement at 11:00. I’m not sure I can schedule it, but I’m going to be on the phone trying to cut the first TV commercial of the 2012 election at WMUR, where we’re going to talk about “Why aren’t we entitled to answers to these questions?”
An updated press release from Martin’s office dated December 28, 2010 states that on Wednesday, December 29:
Andy will make a live-on-the-air-and-on-the-Internet announcement starting at approximately 10:00 A.M. on the “Bulldog Brian Tilton Show.” At 11:00 A.M. he will take questions at the Legislative Office Building in Concord. [WTPL is live-streamed on the Internet for worldwide listening.]
Where I’m totally different is that I take an understated rather than an overstated approach in challenging Obama. That’s why I’ve had legs. My honest answer isn’t to do what some people have done. I don’t exaggerate and seek conspiracies under every rock. My view is to say, “He owes us the truth, period.” It’s not up to me to tell you what the facts of his birth are, although I will start to speculate on Wednesday in Concord as to what some of these facts might be. My role is to tell Obama that the American people want answers, and they want him to stop his rope-a-dope. But it’s not to go and produce forged documents and to make exaggerated claims.
I was just dusting off our paperwork and I found where we had, in fact, sent a letter to the Army Chief of Staff supporting Lt. Col. Lakin pointing out that in principle, his concerns were correct. I always felt that you don’t challenge the Army on something as basic as whether they tell you to clean that latrine or peel that potato. No military organization could function that way. So Col. Lakin got slammed because these lawyers used him to raise an issue in a way that didn’t give us the maximum field position. So that’s not a problem with Andy Martin’s campaign for the presidency, because the very essence of a political campaign is to ferret out the truth.
Four years ago when Obama was sacheting to the Democratic Party’s nomination, Hillary Clinton was afraid to do anything. The Republicans were trembling at asking the birth questions, and we were just developing that. The “Birther” movement was, as we lawyers would say, inchoate. It hadn’t yet become fully formed. Also, people were drinking Barry Obama’s homemade Hawaiian kool-aid. So I was literally the Jeremiah, the voice in the wilderness, saying, “Look, this guy isn’t for real, and there are lots of questions, etc.” People were listening; obviously, McCain almost won, in spite of everything. But it wasn’t enough to overcome the media.
This time, the glow is off, and I’m going to have a column coming out tomorrow. Since I’m snowed in, there’s not a whole lot we can do in the New York office. The title of the column will be “This is What the Media Calls a Comeback?” In other words, they’re trying to refocus Obama as having a comeback. He hasn’t had a comeback. The lame duck session was a confession of weakness and panic in the Democratic Party, not a confession of power and public support. So the Republican Party needs to have at least one person in the race who’s tweaking the other candidates to be aggressive with Obama instead of doing this kind of Texas two-step where they’re all afraid of tackling him.
I’m not afraid to tackle this guy, and I now have what you might call an outstanding track record of bringing the truth to the people. When the media wouldn’t bring the truth to the people, Contrarian Commentary and Andy Martin brought the truth, and today, we estimate there are 100,000,000 Americans who feel uneasy about Obama’s family history. They’re not all “birthers” in the sense that they believe all this Kenyan stuff. I’m an unusual birther, but an ideal “King of the Birthers,” as they have called me, because I believe he was born in Hawaii.
My concerns focus on Barack Hussein Obama, the father, the serial bigamist, who was married in Kenya and who then engaged in a bigamist and therefore criminally illegal sham marriage in Honolulu with this woman, and I think it’s about time that Governor Neil Abercrombie started telling the people the truth and stop trying to be a cover-up artist for the Obama scam machine.
MRS. RONDEAU: Isn’t it interesting that Abercrombie initiated the discussion on releasing Obama’s vital records by suggesting that he would contact his new attorney general and health department director about making a new law? They don’t need a new law to release Obama’s records, do they?
MR. MARTIN: No, they don’t. What’s interesting is that I think Obama hears Andy’s footsteps in the background, because he landed at the airport and within hours, Neil Abercrombie, the bobble-head, started saying, “Birther, birther, birther.” To me, the coincidence is just too great. I remember when I was in Honolulu two years ago, and I was making efforts to contact Obama’s grandmother, and all of a sudden, Obama got in his plane and turns it around from North Carolina to fly to Honolulu to see his long-lost Toots. The point is that they love to attack me, but they are afraid of the fact that I’m an honest man. The one thing politics and politicians can’t stand is an honest man, because they’re all a bunch of liars on both sides.
Don’t get me wrong: just because I’m a Republican and I’m a conservative doesn’t mean that I bow down at the temple of the Republican Party in Washington. I don’t. My goal and my belief is that the truth must come out, and I’m going to try to convince Governor Abercrombie that the time for lying is over.
By the way, I actually have a copy of a letter which I printed out asking him for an interview two years ago which he ignored. So I’ve been trying to get at the facts for a long time. The funniest thing is, I got home on Christmas Day at the office and I was tired and looking forward to going back to Chicago, and I said, “Well, I have another day here, and Monday we’re going to go back to Chicago. I don’t know if I want to run for president (laughs).” I was just so tired, but then I opened my email and I saw where that New York Times and L.A. Times propaganda exercise was launched, and I said, “By golly, he’s not going to get away with it.” That was what galvanized me to do the release thing Wednesday. So in Concord, we’re going to have an announcement.
The funny thing is, of course, is it was scheduled for Chicago, but I can’t get to Chicago, so the people in New Hampshire are all happy and delighted that I’ll be the first candidate to run for president announcing in Concord.
MRS. RONDEAU: So you’re the first candidate from any party to announce a presidential run?
MR. MARTIN: Yes. And you see, if Obama knows one thing, he knows that I know how to move the people. I don’t necessarily have the media behind me, but I have the people behind me, and we are going to create a firestorm of rebellion in both parties; actually, primarily the Republicans, but in both parties, about the fact that we have this imposter in the White House who won’t release vital documents. It’s not just the birth certificate, although that’s the Rosetta Stone; it’s the Punahou School records, the Occidental College records. Now that we have an MO on this guy and we have a much larger profile, we can be much more aggressive in speculating on where the blanks are and how you fill in the blanks.
Two or three years ago, we didn’t have a full picture of Obama, so it was difficult just to do what some of the less responsible people did. I’ve always been very cautious about that. But now, as I see patterns. One of the things which occurs in profiling is that at a certain point you get the “Aha” or the “Eureka!” moment, and you say, “There’s a pattern; that’s what goes in the missing space.”
By the way, do you have a copy of my book Obama: The Man Behind the Mask?
MRS. RONDEAU: I do not but have been meaning to order it.
MR. MARTIN: Well, what I was going to tell you is that you can get a copy (they’re almost sold out), and read Chapter 1, which was our psychological profile on Obama. I don’t think Amazon is stocking it anymore; I know you can order it from the publisher, Orange State Press. The thing of it is, if you read Chapter 1, you will get the willies, because four years ago, we explained who Obama was, and we analyzed him and laid it all out in black and white.
MRS. RONDEAU: Did you speak with psychologists and other specialists?
MR. MARTIN: A whole team of people, and we assembled a profile, just as we would be doing a profile of Ahmadinejad or Kim Jong Il. We analyzed just what would happen, and when you read it, you will say, “How did they hit it so accurately?” It’s uncanny how accurate we were in predicting what he’d be like as putative president.
So the point is, he’s not going to get a free pass this time. He is going to have to answer to the American people, and he better be ready to turn over the birth certificate, the Occidental College records, the Columbia University records and the Harvard Law School records. Khalid al-Mansour, the spokeman for the Saudi government, who is also virulently anti-white, anti-Jewish and anti-American, is going to play a much larger role in the 2012 campaign than he played in the 2008 campaign, I can assure you. Where I have a fact to work with, I work the fact. What I don’t work with is imaginary birth certificates from Kenya because there hasn’t been any evidence that I find credible. As I’ve always said, if I thought there was a document that I could turn over to a federal judge and say, “Your honor, I’d like to offer this as Plaintiff’s Exhibit #1,” I would work with it. But if it isn’t credible enough to present to a federal judge, it’s not credible enough for the American people.
As it turns out, we’re still going to be fighting the case that you’re aware of, the UIPA cover-up. That will be cranked up in early to mid-January.
MRS. RONDEAU: I did want to ask you what you believe happened with that.
MR. MARTIN: They held secret hearings which I knew nothing about. This guy, Judge Rom Trader, is as crooked as they come. I do have a motion to vacate pending, and I’m going to be asking the chief justice of the Hawaii Supreme Court to open an investigation, and we’re going to be filing more petitions. We’re not going away. If they think that Hawaiians are going to get away with this bogus birth certificate where they claim that it’s private, they’re not. There’s not “private” document involving the President of the United States.
MRS. RONDEAU: They keep saying that Hawaii law prevents them from releasing his records, but it doesn’t. Other presidents have had all of their records opened for scrutiny.
MR. MARTIN: The Hawaii court system is every bit as crooked as we find in Chicago, where it’s all politically-driven. The only difference between Honolulu and Chicago is they have palm trees in Honolulu. But as far as the rigged political structure…We can use a very good football analogy where the other side fumbled in which Neil Abercrombie has now revived this issue. And by saying he’s going to fight on the other side, he’s going to bring the armies of the right and the armies of truth and the armies of light to bear against him.
As a politician, I have to toot my own horn. Nobody’s going to toot it if I don’t do it, but the reality is that I am the ideal candidate to lead this battle for truth because I don’t overdo it. I’m not going to tell you that there are 500 conspiracies. In 2008, I was the one who told Phil Berg that his lawsuit was going to help Obama; I was the person who told people that all these bogus petitions that they were filing with the Supreme Court weren’t going anywhere. The government isn’t going to roll over and play dead for people who file documents out of time, and one of the problems that people had is they weren’t reading Contrarian Commentary when they should have been filing challenges to Obama’s status as a candidate. So he got a free ride on ballot access. This time he’s not going to get a free ride.
MRS. RONDEAU: There’s been some recent discussion at The Post & Email regarding people challenging someone’s eligibility before an election. Apparently there’s a certain window of time.
MR. MARTIN: It hasn’t started yet. Normally it revolves around the filing of petitions. I don’t know what New Hampshire’s primary date is yet. I think it might have been moved slightly, but I’m not sure. But normally, in New Hampshire, you pay a filing fee for ballot access, and that, in turn, triggers an objection period. So obviously, my campaign is going to act as a national clearinghouse for challenges to Obama in all 50 states. We’re going to be challenging his ballot access and saying, “Don’t give us the Certification of Live Birth; we want the birth certificate.” We want to know who the doctor was and we want to know where you were born and what the records at that time said. Dr. Chiyome Fukino said she’d seen the record. The issue isn’t whether they’ve claimed they have the record; the issue is this bogus defense that “It’s private.” It’s not private when he’s President of the United States and he’s burning up $200,000 an hour of costs to joyride around on Air Force One.
MRS. RONDEAU: Especially when the country is bankrupt.
MR. MARTIN: Exactly. This guy treats the federal government’s airplanes and Michelle Obama as though they’re New York City taxis. He’s the ultimate welfare recipient because he’s living off public assistance, which is to say the taxpayers.
MRS. RONDEAU: They way things are looking, pretty soon there’s not going to be any more public welfare available for anyone.
MR. MARTIN: There isn’t. But here’s the good news as of now. They’re getting excited in New Hampshire because we’re going to be first on Wednesday.
MRS. RONDEAU: Regarding the case which was dismissed without your knowledge, did the Intervenor Motion support it properly?
MR. MARTIN: Yes, it was fine. There’s a crooked judge involved. Judge Trader is like the other judges – Border, I think, was one of them…they’re just sleazy crooks who are probably trying to appease Obama so they can be appointed to be federal judges. You did fine. The record is there, and we’re going to build on that record. So you’re in good shape. Just wait for the Marines to land in Honolulu, which we will, and to storm the Bastille, as it were, and say, “Look, stop the crooked litigation tactics and open the files.” Neil Abercrombie’s attack on the Birthers was the most wonderful Christmas present I ever received in my life. When I came back to the office after Christmas Day services and I saw that, I said, “Hallelujah; there is Jesus in the sun,” because he’s the guy who has now given us the momentum to rebuild the movement.
I finally heard back from the Andy Martin camp in response to my message to him as mentioned in a previous posting. Here is the response:
We have had a number of requests similar to yours to release personal data. I strongly support the concept. However, I believe that the overall goal of making Obama release information in his case is better served by making my information available as part of a reciprocal agreement with other candidates including Obama. Premature release on my part does not serve the larger cause of getting Obama to comply. In other words, we are working to obtain release of all candidates’ information as part of a larger strategy.
In the past I have made my personal information available and no one else followed through.
Personally I would welcome the adoption of a statute requiring release, so that all candidates would then be on the same level playing field. I disagree with you that candidate releases should come individually and not as part of an overall plan. Unlike Barack Obama, which is an unusual name, identity theft is a very real problem for lesser known candidates with more common names. I was recently the victim of an identity theft incident that has made me more cautious in this regard.
We certainly need more candidate disclosure, but how and why remain to be determined as part of an overall regulatory or statutory process. Perhaps congress will designate the Federal Election Commission to receive these documents under seal for federal candidates such as president, senator and representative. My mind is open.
Thanks for your suggestion and taking the time to contact me. I am sure we will be discussing this issue during the campaign.
Andy Martin
Thanks for the update. I simply asked him to state his name and he refused. So far, I’m unimpressed with this gentleman.
Still have yet to hear back from Andy, so I sent another message to him, which follows:
Since I have yet to receive a response from you via your other email address (andy@andymartinforpresident.com), I thought I would try this email address that I found on one of your blogs to ask a pertinent question before jumping on your bandwagon. After all, this kind of critical inquiry is what you are known for, so I would appreciate if you could give mine the same kind of serious consideration that you would expect from others whom you investigate.
Being that I am among those who believe that the records show that the Founding Fathers intended for a natural-born citizen to be one born on the U.S. soil of two American citizen parents, is there any truth to the rumors that your father wasn’t an American citizen at the time of your birth? If so, then I regrettably would not be able to support your candidacy.
Equally puzzling is that you believe Obama to have been born in Hawaii. So are you challenging his eligibility based on the citizenship status of his parents?
I would appreciate if you could clarify this matter for me, and thank you for your attention to it.
If Andy’s father was not a citizen at the time of his (Andy’s) birth, then he is not a natural born citizen. However, if Andy does not agree with this, I suggest that he submit a question of law to the Supreme Court asking them if he is Constitutionally qualified to be President.
I have tried to warn everyone about Andy Martin. He is not who he pretends. He is a Democrat Operative who has undermined many cases on Obama’s ineligibility.
He is not who he pretends.
DNA can definitely tell us whether he has an East African Ancestor (Kenyan) … that guy that ‘bowed him in the pickup game has some of his DNA right on his arm, haha
The problem is if you did pull such a maneuvre you couldn’t actually say how you came to any particular conclusion, it’d be such a violation of privacy …
It’s funny to think about though.
Texoma,
Once and for all –> Do you think Obama is going anywhere in the next 2 years?
Why do you keep regurgitating then? Jump on the wagon of embarrassing him — PUSH FOR THE VITAL STATS OF HIS BIRTH. The other venture is lost. Earth to Texoma …
Joe,
This is not about politics. It is not about race. It is not about Obama. It is about the rule of law and defending the Constitution. If McCain had been elected, I would be arguing for his removal (he was not born under the sovereign territory of the US). If Jindal runs for President or is a VP pick, I will argue that he is ineligible (born in Louisiana to non-citizen parents).
Obama and his ilk can and will be defeated in the arena of ideas — an arena that is made possible by the protections afforded to us by the Constitution, and hence every attack on this precious document must repelled.
Here is the answer to the question whether or not obama is/was/or would be eligible…
Since the justice system or military won’t do it… no one in the media will either… as the are controlled by other powers…
Someone simply has to introduce a BILL in congress to make sure all the electorial documents have the proper wording/writting on the forms. Meaning the wording “US Constitution” wording to be qualified. All canidates MUST show their qualifications to all the members of congress… LONG form Birth Certificate, Passport, SS#, etc… NO politican should reject this if they have nothing to hide… if they are so sure obama is qualified those people wouldn’t mind a bill like this to get passed in every state. Only those who either don’t know the facts or those that are part of the coverup will be against it. A “NO” against the bill will only validate the truth…
Any canidate to run for public office who can NOT do this should be investigated or NOT allowed to run… anyone who was voted into office prior illegally then needs to be prosecuted, including those who coveredup, knew, or helped in the fraud. They too need to be tried for treason & if found guilty, thrown in jail.
Until, a politican steps forward… regardless if they are a Democrat, Republican, Independent, Tea Party, or other… NONE are trustworthy or should be trusted… so the question will be – WHO has the guts to end this issue once-n-for all? The people/voters are waiting… A “Congressional Bill” is the only answer… so everyone now MUST contact their rep’s & demand this… NO EXCUSES!!
tz
Texoma, Because so many phony documents have been cited as evidence, anything that Hawaii produces as “evidence” is in question. Additionally, paternity tests are ordered every day. Just because a woman claims that someone is the father of her child doesn’t make it so…. and the courts know this. So, where are we going to find a handy source of Obama DNA? How about Aunt Zeituni? If Barry is proven to be an “Obama”, he is automatically ineligible.
> If Barry is proven to be an “Obama”, he is automatically ineligible.
Unless there is a potential Obama family member who could have been the father and who was a US citizen at the time of his birth.
Unfortunately, I don’t think DNA analysis makes possible such detailed deductions by just comparing the DNA of second-degree relatives.
Proving that “some Obama family member” was an ancestor does not prove much more than we supposedly know now, as it doesn’t say whether it was father or mother and who it was (thus making any inferrals as to said unknown person’s citizenship at the time of Obama’s birth impossible).
So I think DNA will not get us anywhere, nor will it get Obama anywhere. It just adds more “maybe”‘s on both sides of the fence.
Robert,
My reply to you is the same as to Daniel further down in this thread.
The intent of the Founding Fathers was to have Presidents who had exclusive allegiance to the US from the time of their birth. Obama grew up believing that Obama Senior was his biological father, and he knew that Obama Senior was a British/Kenyan citizen. Natural born citizen status is the “strong check” against foreign influence. This foreign influence was present from the time of Obama’s birth and in the years that followed, which included 3 trips to Kenya, the most recent one in 2006. These are all facts which will not go away should Obama’s father turn out to have been an American.
> The intent of the Founding Fathers was to have Presidents who had exclusive allegiance to the US from the time of their birth.
True, but it was not their intent to pry on the inner feelings of a candidate, at least not according to the wording of the Constitution.
> These are all facts which will not go away should Obama’s father turn out to have been an American.
But these are also facts which the Founders did not deem important.
The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Any presidential candidate must fulfill its 3 prerequisites, no more, no less: natural born citizen, at least 35 years old, 14 years of residency.
Who that candidate “believes” his father was or how much other “foreign influence” there may have been is not relevant as far as the Constitution goes. It may be your personal opinion which you are fully entitled to, but that does not trump the Constitution.
Natural born citizenship is, at least as far as I’m aware, based on the actual ancestry and not on what someone believes his ancestry is or on what is falsely documented anywhere.
If it could be proven Obama has a US citizen father, nothing can argue that away.
So if (and I think the chances are really less than 1%) Obama actually turned out to be the son of a US citizen father and mother, he would be eligible. (If lying about his ancestry results in not being a legitimate POTUS is another question.)
Why would any president REFUSE to show a $10 dollar birth certificate to an officer of the military who had served for 17 years his life for country?
At this point, it doesn’t even matter if the usurper had a birth certificate, knowing he betrayed NOT only our own but the country as well.
U.S. Army Doctor Lieutenant Colonel Terrence Lakin has every RIGHT to insure his sworn oath to the U.S. Constitution, so that NO man is ABOVE the law!
———–
We Americans have grown soft thinking that the government will take care of us, not realizing all along that WE are the government and its our responsibility to take care of ourselves.
If your government is not protecting you, travel the paths of politics and throw them out and replace them with people who do understand the meanings between right and wrong.
> Why would any president REFUSE to show a $10 dollar birth certificate to an officer of the military who had served for 17 years his life for country?
Because given the history of frauds and fakes, there is no way Lakin (or anyone else, for that matter) might have been able to tell if it was real or not.
Sharon,
I think even to bring an eligibility challenge to Obama in the Democrat Primary someone will have to be a candidate for President on the Democrat Primary ballot (not the Republican Primary ballot like Andy Martin is doing that wouldn’t work).
This should not be hard to find one natural born citizen like Philip Berg who is willing to be on the Democrat Primary ballot in New Hampshire.
Then all we have to do according to New Hampshire election law RSA 654 is help that person “file between the first Monday in November and the third Friday in November, or during such other time period as the secretary of state shall announce” and help them pay $1000 to file.
Hard part will be having to wait until November 2011 to file. Then we need an election lawyer to help us file suit with the NH Secretary of State to disqualify Obama in the Democrat Primary because Obama is not a “Natural-Born” US Citizen.
All this is hard to do because apparently election law lawyers don’t want to get involved.
Consider this: What if a Hawaiian birth certificate turns up and it shows Obama’s “real” father to be Frank Marshal Davis? Sure, it would be “embarrassing” to Obama, as some have claimed a birth certificate would be. It would “prove” illegitimacy” in spite of Obama Sr.’s serial “marriages”. But Davis being the father would probably satisfy the NBC requirement in spite of Stanley Ann’s age. This could prove to be another can of worms.
If Davis is the father, it would not satisfy the natural born citizen requirement. It does not make any difference as to the real parentage of Obama, because Obama Senior claimed him as a product of the 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.
> It does not make any difference as to the real parentage of Obama, because Obama Senior claimed him as a product of the marriage.
Then who, in your opinion, governs the “citizen father” part of the NBC definition? The biological father? The father according to the birth certificate? The father who “claimed the child” (where/when/how?) as you write? It’s the first time I read this argument and I don’t think you have properly thought about what you actually are trying to say.
(Or have you misread Robert? He wrote about what the birth certificate says, not what a DNA test would say.)
The original birth certificate is prima facie evidence of who the father is. If it says “Obama sen.”, then Obama is, for all intents and purposes, a dual citizen at birth. If it says “Frank Marshall Davis”, then Obama is, for all intents and purposes, a natural born citizen.
Of course one could easily go on with this argument until total confusion:
Suppose FMD is the biological father but the BC says “Obama sen.”.
Suppose US law says that the biological father governs citizenship (making Obama an NBC) but British law still considers Obama a dual citizen. Or the other way around. Who “wins”? You cannot say “US law” because then you would reject the “NBC cannot be dual citizen at birth” theory as that requires that some other country claims the child as its citizen at birth, like Obama is a British citizen because of his British citizen father.
Daniel,
The intent of the Founding Fathers was to have Presidents who had exclusive allegiance to the US from the time of their birth. Obama grew up believing that Obama Senior was his biological father, and he knew that Obama Senior was a British/Kenyan citizen. Natural born citizen status is the “strong check” against foreign influence. This foreign influence was present from the time of Obama’s birth and in the years that followed, which included 3 trips to Kenya, the most recent one in 2006. These are all facts which will not go away should Obama’s father turn out to have been an American.
See my comment above.
I do not give so much credit for arguments trying to guess the intent of the Founders if the clear wording of the Constitution is there to guide me.
I don’t mean it personally, but this always reminds me of the people who try to turn the Ten Commandments on its head because of their personal reading of what “God’s will” might be.
There are citizens who have been trying to get this matter before a federal court including the SCOTUS and it seems like every time the courts refuse to hear their case. They seek at the very least answers to a legitimate matter of Constitutional Law and the courts turn them away! This is not how America is supposed to work in the eyes of our Founding Fathers! Our government along with all conservative pundits of the MSM are engaged in a massive cover up of a Constitutionally illegal president. There is something seriously wrong here in the United States of America and the American People had better open their eyes to recognize that this is true!
Has Mr. Martin ever won in court or an election? What is his connection to the Bushes? Just when the Hawaii Obama Hoax turns cold up pops Andy. Thanks
Do you think Obama might bring up the question of Martin’s eligibility? LOL
Self-promotor aside, it is perfect to have one of the top challengers of obama ineligibility running for the presidency to shine the light on this usurpation fraud! Martin will be most vocal on the required proof of presidential elig. Whether Martin himself is constitutionally eligible, as someone here has questioned, is all the better to ensure this time obama will have to provide the genuine documentary proof of his constitutional eligibility! We will all be lining up to demand obama show proofs before his name can get on the ballots!
Keep his name off the ballots should he has the audacity to ‘run’ again!!!!!!
Who can tolerate another 2 years of obumo’s ‘hope and change’ again?????
I’m sure curious to know what evidence compels Martin to believe that Obama was born in Hawaii, especially in the face of the Kenyan birth cert obtained by Lucas Smith, which has very high face validity and has never been disproven. Martin’s supercilious snub of the available evidence for Obama’s African birth suggests that Martin is not the objective seeker of truth he purports to be. Nevertheless, he is doing some good even working from false assumptions.
If Obama had a legitimate Hawaiian birth cert, he would be insane not to have released it long ago. That in itself is compelling evidence that no such document exists. The fact that Obama claims the online image of a secondary document as his genuine bc is proof positive that he is lying about his birthplace. Whereever he was born, it was not Hawaii.
Andy, you’re the man! I hope you are the one who cleans the usurping Obama’s clock, and the man who will be sitting in the Oval Office after 2012.. Patriots will surely all be standing behind you. Congratulations on your presidential intentions! We need a truthful man in Washington for a change.
Don’t shoot the “Watercarrier”. Let Andy do the job that needs doing. He will expose the fraud that needs exposing and will demand documentation (I would assume including his own) be filed to support a candidates eligibility to be on the ballot. Personally I think Andy is a bit of a “self promoter” , but he’s also doing a job that needs doing. Let him run with the ball – what have we got to lose – he has no prayer of surviving the primaries.
Andy Martin should do a good job of shining the light into some dark corners.
ELmo
Good Luck Andy. You can set the stage for all candidates to establish their eligibility.
Before I jump on Andy Martin’s bandwagon, is there anything to the talk about his father not having been an American citizen when Andy was born? I ask this because I’m among the many who believe that the requirement that a candidate be a natural-born citizen to be eligible for the presidency means that he/she must have been born on U.S. soil of two American citizen parents.
———————
Mrs. Rondeau replies: The question is certainly valid, given that there is so much that is unanswered about Obama. My advice would be to contact Mr. Martin’s campaign directly and ask to see his documents.
Thanks for the suggestion, Sharon. I did just that, and I’ll let you know if he or his staff respond.
——————-
Mrs. Rondeau replies: Good. Every presidential candidate should be obligated to release documentation proving he or she is eligible.
sharon —- i contacted andy directly on that and never got a response. he asked who i was and i told him i was not running for president that he intended to run.
Why doesn’t he release them “sua sponte”? Talk about giving a good example… :-(
> You can set the stage for all candidates to establish their eligibility.
Don’t Jindal and Rubio make good cases for that already if they decide to run?
> the man who will be sitting in the Oval Office after 2012.. Patriots will surely all be standing behind you.
Not until we know what else he stands for except “remove the usurper”. If that alone was the litmus test, everyone on this site could/should be President.