"THE INVISIBLE HAND . . ."

OBAMA SWORN TO UPHOLD, but PROCEEDS TO DESTROY CONSTITUTION - H.R. 45

OBAMA SWEARS TO UPHOLD & PROCEEDS TO DESTROY 

U.S. CONSTITUTION

courtesy of Mike Church

On January 20, 2009, Barack Hussein Obama took an oath to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution.  But soon after that oath, Obama, has taken calculated steps in procession to destroy the document that makes us uniquely American.  The U.S. Constitution gives the Federal Government 18 enumerated powers, and the powers not exclusive to the federal government are reserved for the states and the people.  The Stimulus Package, DC Voting Rights, Taking over the Census, now the 2nd Amendment is under attack.  H.R. 45, introduced in January in the U.S. House of Representatives as "Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 ... To provide for the implementation of a system of licensing for purchasers of certain firearms and for a record of sale system for those firearms, and for other purposes."

The bill was introduced by Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Illinois.

Possibly the most ominous part of this bill is the definition of firearms covered by the legislation:

"SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

"(a) In General - In this Act:

"(1) FIREARM; LICENSED DEALER; LICENSED MANUFACTURER; STATE - The terms 'firearm', 'licensed dealer', 'licensed manufacturer', and 'State' have the meanings given those terms in section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code.

"(2) QUALIFYING FIREARM - The term 'qualifying firearm' has the meaning given the term in section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, as amended by subsection (b) of this section.

"(b) Amendment to Title 18, United States Code - Section

---

---

921(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

"(36) The term 'qualifying firearm' --

"(A) means ---

"(i) any handgun; or

"(ii) any semiautomatic firearm that can accept any detachable ammunition feeding device; and

"(B) does not include any antique."

As you might have noticed, that pretty much covers everything except your fake Civil War musket and your water pistol.

If there's any good news, it's that the bill appears stuck in committee.

And speaking of Democrats and Illinois, state Rep. Kenneth Dunkin wants all gun owners to be forced to carry at least $1 million in personal liability insurance.

Ever checked out new Attorney General Eric Holder's attitude toward the Second Amendment? The Volokh Conspiracy, a Web site focusing on the courts and legal system, lists some Holder stances when he was deputy attorney general. He:

 advocated federal licensing of handgun owners;

 proposed a three-day waiting period on handgun sales;

 backed the rationing of handgun sales to a maximum of one per month;

 advocated giving the federal government the power to shut down gun shows;

 favored national gun registration.

This from someone who has sworn to uphold the Constitution and yes, that still includes the Second Amendment.

Did you notice what might be the scariest part of H.R. 45? It talks about the implementation of licensing and acquiring sales records for firearms ... "and for other purposes."

"Other purposes" could easily become handy catch-all way for any federal agency to collect any information it wanted on anyone it wanted. It could be effectively argued that such is already the case, but "other purposes" would sure make information-gathering a lot easier.

H.R. 45 is a measure that is absurd in its sweep, but absurdity too often rules the day in the halls of Congress. It appears that H.R. 45 shouldn't have a chance of passing out of committee, but stranger things have happened.

To help keep stranger things from happening, call your senators and representatives and tell them what you think of H.R. 45.  I guess the American People were justified in going out and stocking-up on guns and ammo, I am sure glad I received my Walther PPK, now for some more ammo.  

-Lex Rex 

LET THE REVOLUTION BEGIN: KANSAS TO DECLARE SOVEREIGNTY

STATES RIGHTS

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

On February 4, 2009, the Invisible Hand reported about the first shot being fired in New Hampshire.  States are following Thomas Jefferson's lead and declaring Sovereignty, based upon the 10th Amendment.  I am proud to announce Kansas has joined the list of 28 States (so far) that are following Thomas Jefferson's Change We Can Believe In.  Here is a LINK to all the States.

Kansas, my home state has joined the fight to take back the power the federal government has usurped.   Sen. Mary Pilcher Cook (R-Shawnee) courageously filed a Senate Concurrent Resolution, SCR-1609, that asserts the sovereignty of the state of Kansas under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Here, is SCR-1609, read it with pride and after you are done, lets begin to stock-up on ammo, because a revolution is coming sooner rather than later.

Senate Concurrent Resolution No.1609
By Senator Pilcher-Cook

A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION claiming sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over certain powers; serving notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain mandates; providing that certain federal legislation be prohibited or repealed; and directing distribution.


WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United
States reads as follows:
‘‘The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.’’; and

WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and

WHEREAS, The scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and

WHEREAS, Today, in 2009, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government; and

WHEREAS, Many federal laws are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and

WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment assures that we, the people of the United States of America and each sovereign state in the Union of States, now have, and have always had, rights the federal government may not usurp; and

WHEREAS, Article IV, Section 4 says, ‘‘The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government’’, and the Ninth Amendment states that ‘‘The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people’’; and

WHEREAS, The United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v United States, 112 S. Ct.
2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and

WHEREAS, A number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States.


Be it resolved by the Senate of the State of Kansas, the House of Representatives concurring therein: That the State of Kansas hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States;

Be it further resolved: That this serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as out agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers;

Be it further resolved: That all compulsory federal legislation which directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed; and

Be it further resolved: That a copy of this resolution be distributed to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate of each state’s legislature of the United States of America, and each member of the Kansas Congressional Delegation.

NOW, GO BUY SOME AMMO!!!!

-LEX REX

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DON'T TREAD ON ME: STATES FOLLOW NH LEAD

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT vs. STATE RIGHTS

A REVOLUTION COMING?

The Federal Government's Power is LIMITED, it is time for States to Stand Against the TYRANNY of the Federal Government, New Hampshire is trying to fire the First Shot, here is an article by Larrey Anderson of the American Thinker.

The Shot Heard Round New Hampshire

Larrey Anderson
Four New Hampshire state legislators have introduced a resolution affirming Thomas Jefferson’s defense of states' rights. House Concurrent Resolution 6 was recently introduced into the New Hampshire’s State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs Committee by Rep. Itse, Rep. Ingbretson, Rep. Comerford, and Sen. Denley.

Interestingly, the authors of the New Hampshire Resolution took most of the language from the document commonly known as “Jefferson and Madison’s Kentucky Resolutions of 1798.”*

Following in the footsteps of the Founding Fathers the New Hampshire Resolution declares:

That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress….

The New Hampshire Resolution boldly defends the state’s (and its citizens') rights preserved under the 9th and 10th Amendments to the Constitution:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Representative Daniel Itse, one of the resolutions co-authors, appeared yesterday on the Mike Church Show radio program. A transcript of the interview can be found here.

Representative Itse explained the reasoning behind the introduction of his resolution:

As a statement of the founders’ principle that it is the states who are in charge, and not the federal government; that it’s they [the states] who have the power to interpret the Constitution; and that the federal government has only definite delegated powers; and that any law enacted outside those delegated powers is null and void.

A concurrent resolution lacks legal authority. It is a non-binding expression of the intentions of the legislature. Nevertheless, these four New Hampshire state legislators have shown much courage by introducing (or reintroducing) these precious principles that have been the bedrock of our republic.

Maybe HCR 6, the shot heard round little old New Hampshire, will inspire more Americans to realize the desperate need to free ourselves from an overreaching federal government. In which case, the shot heard round New Hampshire might become the next shot heard round the world.

*Thomas Jefferson was the chief author of the Kentucky Resolutions and Madison was primarily responsible for the similar Virginia Resolutions. Both men may have worked on each set of resolutions.

-Posted by LEX REX a.k.a Tim Tompkins

NO NEWS GOOD NEWS FOR OBAMA; SCOTUS SILENT DONOFRIO v. WELLS

December 5, 2008, and not a word form the Supreme Court on the Natural Born Citizen of the U.S. case Donofrio v. Wells.  The SCOTUS BLOG announced TODAY's Orders from the United States Supreme Court and Donofrio v. Wells, is absent from the cases granted Certiorari, click here. 

However,  THE SWAMP reports that from a Supreme Court watcher, that that does not necessarily mean THE END to Donofrio v, Wells.  READ FULL STORY

 

It looks like good news for Obama, cert denied on natural born citizen of the USA case CERT DENIED.

-LEX REX

JUSTICE THOMAS BREAKS CUSTOM: WILL SUPREME COURT DECIDE OBAMA CITIZENSHIP CASE? WE THE PEOPLE ADVERTISE IN CHICAGO

Donofrio v. Wells No.08A407 has been distributed and is scheduled for conference on December 5, 2008,  thanks to Justice Clarence Thomas.  The U.S. Supreme Court scheduling docket for No.08A407

shows the history of the writ of certiorari of Donofrio v. Wells.  Justice Thomas has asked his colleagues to consider the lawsuit challenging President-elect Obama's status as a United States citizen.

Thomas action took place after the presiding Justice over the New Jersey district had rejected the petition known as an application for a stay of writ of certiorari that asked the court to prevent the Electoral College on December 15, 2008, which will certify Obama as the 44th president of the United States.

The AFRO American News reports

Thomas's actions were rare because, by custom, when a justice rejects a petition from his own circuit, like Justice Souter did in this case, the matter is dead.  Even if, as can be the case under Rule 22 the matter can be submitted to another justice for consideration, that justice out of respect, will reject it also.  Trevor Morrison, a professor of law at Columbia University School of Law, said that "Thomas's actions are once in a decade."  "When that does happen the case has to be of an extraordinary nature and this does not fit that circumstance."  Read the Full Story.

What will it take for the Justices to docket this cause and hear oral arguments?  The RULE OF FOUR, four of the nine justices must agree to hear this case, if four of the justice agree then the case will be heard.  Donofrio v. Wells, the lawyer turned "citizen advocate is not questioning Obama's birth certificate, but rather his citizenship, in fact the Kansas City Star in todays A-1 front page article mistakenly stated that this action dealt with Obama's birth certificate, that is not the case as Donofrio states that Obama was born in Hawaii, that is not the issue in this action. You may read more at Donofrio's blog naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com 

Now this is not the only lawsuit in the courts, yes there are more, many more, concerning Obama's Birth Certificate, Natural Born, citizenship, etc.  For a review you can check out this article from the New American.  READ FULL STORY.

On December 1, 2008 & again today December 3, 2008, WE THE PEOPLE FOUNDATION in a full page ad displayed the following open letter to Barack Obama in Obama's back yard the Chicago Tribune: 

An Open Letter to Barack Obama:

Are you a Natural Born Citizen of the U.S.?

Are you legally eligible to hold the Office of President?

December 1, 2008 Mr. Barack Obama Barack Obama Transition Office Kluczynski Federal Building 230 So. Dearborn St. Chicago, Illinois 60604   Dear Mr. Obama: Representing thousands of responsible American citizens who have also taken an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America from all enemies foreign and domestic, I am duty bound to call on you to remedy an apparent violation of the Constitution.   Compelling evidence supports the claim that you are barred from holding the Office of President by the “natural born citizen” clause of the U.S. Constitution. For instance: Your father was a Kenyan citizen at the time of your birth and your mother was 18.   Legal affidavits state you were born in Kenya.   Your grandmother is recorded on tape saying she attended your birth in Kenya.   Hawaii Dept of Health will not confirm your assertion that you were born in Hawaii.   You have posted an unsigned, computer-generated birth form that was created in 2007, a form that lacks vital information found on an original, hand signed Certificate of Live Birth, such as hospital address, signature of attending physician and age of mother.    U.S. Law in 1961 denied U.S. citizenship to any child born in Kenya if the father was Kenyan and the mother was not yet 19 years of age.   In 1965, your mother legally relinquished whatever Kenyan or U.S. citizenship she and you had  by marrying an Indonesian and becoming a naturalized Indonesian citizen.  You have repeatedly refused to provide evidence of your eligibility when challenged to do so in a number of recent lawsuits. Instead, you have been successful in having judges declare that they are powerless to order you to prove your eligibility to assume the Office of President. For instance, the judge in Pennsylvania ruled the challenger had no standing to question your eligibility because his harm would be no different from the harm to be suffered by all other American citizens if you, as an ineligible person were to assume the Presidency. The judge in Hawaii actually said it would be an invasion of your privacy for him to order access to your original birth certificate in order to prove your eligibility to hold the Office of President. Before you can legitimately exercise any of the powers of the President you must meet all the criteria for eligibility established by the Constitution. You are under a moral, legal, and fiduciary duty to proffer such evidence. Should you assume the office as anyone but a bona fide natural born citizen of the United States who has not relinquished that citizenship, you would be inviting a national crisis that would undermine the domestic peace and stability of the Nation. For example: You would always be viewed by many Americans as a poseur - a usurper.   As a usurper, you would be unable to take the required “Oath or Affirmation” on January 20 without committing the crime of perjury or false swearing, for being ineligible you cannot faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States.   You would be entitled to no obedience whatsoever from the People.    The armed forces would be under no legal obligation to remain obedient to you.   No civilian in the Executive Branch would be required to obey any of your proclamations, executive orders or directives, as such orders would be legally void.   Your appointments of Ambassadors and Judges to the Supreme Court would be void no matter what subsequent actions the Senate might take.   Congress would not be able to pass new laws because it would not be able to acquire the signature of a bona fide President.    As a usurper, Congress would be unable to remove you from the Office of the President on Impeachment, inviting certain political chaos including a potential for armed conflicts within the General Government or among the States and the People to effect the removal of such a usurper. In consideration of the escalating constitutional crisis brought on by the total lack of evidence needed to conclusively establish your eligibility, I am compelled to lodge a First Amendment Petition for a Redress of this constitutional tort. With all due respect, I ask that you immediately direct the appropriate Hawaiian officials to allow access to the vault copy of your birth certificate by our forensic scientists on Friday, Saturday and Sunday, December 5, 6 and 7, 2008. In addition, I ask that you to arrange to have the following documentary evidence delivered to the National Press Club by 10 am on December 8, 2008. a certified copy of your “vault” (original long version) birth certificate.   certified copies of all reissued and sealed birth certificates in the names Barack Hussein Obama, Barry Soetoro, Barry Obama, Barack Dunham and Barry Dunham.    a certified copy of your Certification of Citizenship.   a certified copy of your Oath of Allegiance taken upon age of maturity.   certified copies of your admission forms for Occidental College, Columbia University and Harvard Law School.    certified copies of any court orders or legal documents changing your name from Barry Soetoro.  “In a government of laws, the existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously.  Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher.   For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example.  Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.” Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation in this urgent matter. Sincerely,  Robert L. Schulz Chairman   We The People Foundation For Constitutional Education, Inc. www.WeThePeopleFoundation.org   2458 Ridge Road  Queensbury, NY 12804 [email protected]

Here is my clear and practical legal analysis on the question of whether Obama is or is not a natural born citizen of the United States of America. As a criminal defense attorney, if my clients are guilty they will hide and conceal the truth as long as they are able. Mr. Obama reminds me of some of my clients, if you are innocent expose the evidence, reveal the truth, if you are guilty conceal, hide, & deny. Here Obama has continued to conceal, hide, & deny. He continues to conceal his original Birth Certificate, his college records, and his law school records. If he was actually a natural born citizen would he not want to readily prove this, instead of making this a issue that may or may not be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.  

So what does this mean? Obama is hiding or trying to conceal something, I do not know what it is, but this is the typical behavior of someone who does not want the truth revealed, whatever that is?  However, the end result is this, the electoral college will convene on December 15, 2008, President-elect will be certified as the 44th president of the United States of America. On January 20, 2009 at 12:00 noon, Mr. Obama will place his left hand on the Bible and will be sworn in as the 44th President. President Obama will swear to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution, and he will occupy the White House as the President at least for four years. 

-LEX REX

CHANGE IS COMING . . . BUT BEWARE

An Amazing thing has happened . . . for the first time in the 219 years that the United States has operated under the U.S. Constitution there are now two Executive Offices.  Article II Clause 1 expressly states:  Clause 1: Executive power

"The Executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:"

President-Elect Barack Obama has instituted  for the first time the OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT-ELECT, its web presence is at www.change.gov , the header reads: 

OFFICE of the PRESIDENT - ELECT.

No other PRESIDENT - ELECT in the history of the United States of AMerica has ever had the nerve to face the U.S. Constitution and operate THE OFFICE of the PRESIDENT-ELECT.  So What?  This is just the little tip of the ICEBERG and it is just an indication of how Mr. Obama feels about our Founding Document.  However the real purpose of this article is to direct your attention to the CHANGE that is coming and  the Office of the President -Elect at www.change.gov gives you a taste of that change, BUT BEWARE.

"A Little bit better"

President-Elect Obama starts out his change with his defining purpose "Today we begin in earnest the work of making sure that the world we leave our children is just a little bit better than the one we inhabit today."  "Just a little bit better"  is this the expectation that your CHANGE will employ, according to you our economy is that of the "Great Depression" and all you want is a little bit better?   Check out how Mr. Obama is going to make it just a little bit better at www.change.gov, BUT BEWARE.

"AMERICA SERVES /youth corps"

The Office of President-Elect under AMERICA SERVES heading has indicated a plan for America Service: 

"When you choose to serve -- whether it's your nation, your community or simply your neighborhood -- you are connected to that fundamental American ideal that we want life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness not just for ourselves, but for all Americans. That's why it's called the American dream." -- Barack Obama

The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation’s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start.

What is the CHANGE the Office of the President-Elect proposes expansion of government youth corps programs, creation of several new corps, I especially like the Classroom Corps, to help teachers in urban schools, if teachers cannot teach a classroom corps will not solve the probelm.  Now the kicker, the Office of the President-Elect will REQUIRE, I repeat, REQUIRE community service for all youths of AMERICA.  It is so ironic that Mr. Obama starts out his quote if "YOU CHOOSE TO SERVE", however he means I am going to have you serve.  As a defense attorney, I am in the middle of the criminal justice system day-in and day-out and community service is an option of limiting or preventing jail time when a criminal breaks the law.  I love community service and my clients love community service, because it is better than jail, but what happens if the youths of America do not complete the REQUIRED hours, well my clients go to jail what does Mr. Obama propose.

The second issue with a national requirement on our youth is just the logistics of keeping track and verifying all those hours, the President-Elect Office will need to create a "Keep Track of Community Service Corps."

But finally, the major problem with a National REQUIREMENT on the youths of America is that it violates the GOOD SAMARITAN Rule,  What do I mean by that?  You see helping your fellow man is not the jurisdiction of the Government but is the jurisdiction of the heart.  If you look at the Good Samaritan story, many people walked around and left the injured person.  Did the people that failed to help break any civil laws or governmental laws, of course not, becuse the government does not have the right to exercise its authority over the heart of a person.  Now, those people that left the injured party on the road to Jericho morally were wrong, but that is between God and their heart.  The Government does not have the authority or the jurisdiction to REQUIRE community service on the youths of America. America wanted CHANGE and now my prayer & hope is that does not lead down the road to this change:

The OFFICE of the PRESIDENT - ELECT is now open at www.change.gov, CHANGE IS COMING . . .BUT BEWARE.

-LEX REX