From $1 trillion in debt
to $4 trillion in debt in six weeks
event
description
Organizing For America
A sitting President of
the United States is organizing a political organization loyal to him,
bound by a pledge, outside the government and existing party apparatus.
The historical precedents are ominous. (video)
Obama's
movement,
Organizing for America (OFA), was announced in late January but
officially unfurled last weekend. Obama describes OFA as a "grass-roots
movement" -- it is no such thing. It is really a highly
organized, top-down project, created, funded
and managed by the Obama Campaign. It
identifies itself with the "O"-shaped logo of the Obama campaign.
New OFA enrollees will expand Obama's existing 13
million person database that is being used to mobilize support for
Obama's agenda.
The OFA
website reveals that
supporters are not simply asked to sign up, they are asked to take a
pledge. A pledge to support -- not the constitution, not
the country, not the flag, not even the Democratic party -- but Obama and his "bold plan."
Organizing Update - March 9, 2009 (02:37)
You will
not find any mention of OFA`s governing structure, their budget, their
bylaws, or their officers at the OFA website. Donations to the website
go to the DNC, but OFA is managed out of the White House. If you click
on the comments button, you are taken to a link to the White House
email.
Those who take the pledge are asked to "talk with people
about the President's plan" and to "ask them to sign their names to the
pledge" in support of Obama's policies.
So we have a Movement --
their term, not mine -- organized by, and loyal to, a sitting
President. Pledge canvassers, armed with your name, will ask you to
pledge loyalty to the President too. A president whose term has already
become a permanent campaign, is signing up ground forces in a mass
organization pledged to personal loyalty to their Leader.
Does
you know of any historical precedents for US citizens pledging fealty to
a politician? And, these are the same people who won't pledge
allegiance to the flag.
ACORN And The Census
The U.S. Census is
supposed to be free of politics, but one group with a history of voter
fraud, ACORN, is participating in next year's count, raising concerns
about the politicization of the decennial survey.
The Association
of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN)
signed on as a
national partner with the U.S. Census Bureau in February 2009 to assist
with the recruitment of the 1.4 million temporary workers needed to go
door-to-door to count every person in the United States -- currently
believed to be more than 306 million people.
A U.S. Census "sell
sheet," an advertisement used to recruit national partners, says
partnerships with groups like ACORN "play an important role in making
the 2010 Census successful," including by "help[ing] recruit census
workers."
The bureau is currently employing help from more than
250 national partners, including TARGET and the National Association for
the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), to assist in the hiring
effort.
But ACORN's partnership with the 2010 Census is worrisome
to lawmakers who say past allegations of fraud should raise concerns
about the organization.
And, remember, Rahm Emanuel is now
in charge of the Census.
We are soooooooo screwed!
The Lawsuits Are Dead
It’s true that --
technically -- Donofrio v. Wells could still be pending if I chose to
submit a full petition for writ of certiorari. Many have written to me
and asked why I haven’t resorted to that tactic. The answer is fairly
simple: my case is moot.
The same is true for Wrotnowski v.
Bysiewicz, Lightfoot v. Bowen and the Berg cases, all of which asked for
emergency stays or emergency injunctions to stop a candidate from
becoming "president-elect" and later president.
Once my case stay
application was denied, I had exhausted the only emergency procedure
available to me and the US Supreme Court Rules would not have
facilitated the resolution of a full petition before the candidate was
sworn in as President (or become president-elect).
When Obama was
sworn in by Chief Justice Roberts, our Constitutional
separation of powers kicked in big time. Because of the separation of
powers enumerated in our Constitution, the United States Supreme Court
has no ability to remove a sitting President. Nowhere in the Document
does it give the Supreme Court (or the judicial branch) any authority to
remove a sitting President.
All of the eligibility law suits --
brought before electoral college votes were counted in Congress -- sought
to challenge the qualifications of candidate Obama to be President. Once
he graduated from "candidate Obama" to "President-elect Obama" and later
"President Obama", every single eligibility law suit pending before
SCOTUS became moot.
Those actions are moot because SCOTUS has no
authority to act on the relief requested in those law suits. And SCOTUS
knows this better than anybody else.
