Obama documentation activists - - not conspiracy theorists

Michael is a writer for renewamerica.us

January 22, 2009
Obama documentation activists - - not conspiracy theorists

By Michael Bresciani

A theorist is someone who holds and expounds a theory. Often the elements of the theory are expostulated on things that may never be known. Was there another shooter on the grassy knowle, where is Osama Bin Laden? Those trying to vet Obama even post inaugural are not trying to prove a theory, here is why.

Most of those filing law suits to subpoena Obama's documents are lawyers, politicians and military people none who have ever been known to be conspiracy theorists on any subject. The attempt to put them in the same class with those who chase UFO sightings or those who are still looking for the Holy Grail is demeaning and ridiculous.

Questions about the body of Hitler, the whereabouts of Osama and how many shooters were on the grassy knowle and other conspiracy questions all have one thing in common; they are speculative and nearly un-answerable. Bringing a birth certificate or school records up out of a vault does not require a bit of speculation. All that's needed is a subpoena not a theory. Producing a document is in no way comparable to proving a theory.

The birth certificate in question is only one document that is conspicuously missing from Barack Obama's past. The list of documents is huge and it is one of the reasons all of them have been sought by various lawyers and interested parties.

Article II of the Constitution says "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

Those refusing to produce the requested documents are turning up their noses to the Constitution, to "we the people" and calling them "conspiracy theorists" will by no means make the question go away.

The premise of all the pending lawsuits is uniform and consistent even if they are poorly understood. The most common mistake is to see it as a few discontented people who don't like Barack Obama or who just can't handle the results of the election. It is true that this small but rapidly growing body of questioners think they have been victims of a fraud but the truth is that if what they are trying to show us has even an ounce of truth to it then 305,000,000 Americans have been subject to the fraud.

Neither the inauguration nor the crowds chanting "Obama" on the concourse will deter those who are determined to know the truth. After all even Jesus had people throwing palm branches in front of him one day and crowds crying out for his crucifixion the next. Many of those who called for Christ's death were no doubt the same ones who only the day before hailed him as their King. While Barack Obama may have the next four to eight years to sit in the oval office he may have no more than Andy Warhol's fifteen minutes of fame like everyone else on this planet.

It is the more obvious contradictions to the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution that has most of us worried about Obama's plans for America. His willingness to sign FOCA (freedom of choice act) into law would allow an abortion at any time during a pregnancy. That would nullify the "right to life" part of the Declaration and would render the "liberty and the pursuit of happiness" aspect of the Declaration a total impossibility. Isn't it a contradiction to say "all men are created equal" without including the unborn?

The Reverend Joseph Lowery elicited smiles and amen's at the Obama inauguration as he finished his prayer with the words "we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, and when white will embrace what is right." Why did he not add "when the unborn will be allowed to live on?"

Obama's willingness to re-insert hate crime legislation into the congress for approval ignores the provisions of the fourteenth amendment and creates a conflict between the first amendment and the proposed provisions of the hate crimes bill.

It takes no genius to see that if the Congress can make no law regarding the establishment of religion then to enact hate crime legislation that prohibits someone from declaring the tenants of their religion as it pertains to the practice of homosexual behavior is to defy the first amendment of the Bill of Rights and do great damage to the first amendment of the Constitution.

This nation has produced some of the most amazing personalities the world has ever known but we must not forget that it is not a nation of personalities but a nation of laws. It is those laws that create the field in which great personalities can be fostered.

A refusal to remember that laws are our very foundation can result in something other nations have already learned. Disregarding founding principles is possible and only how long it takes to recover from such a path is what remains to be answered.

It took Germany sixty years to go from crowds of people chanting "Heil Hitler" to a recovery and re-establishment into the world community. It took three decades for China to recover from crowds of youth smashing every semblance of their long and historic past under the sway of Mao. It has taken the bully Soviet Union around six decades to realize that every individual has rights and the "state" is not greater than the sum of its parts.

How long will it take America to realize that its Constitution is the immovable rock of our free republic? The answer to this is up to us. It may take years but it does not have to, it may take only as long as it takes to comply with the law and answer only one or two well placed subpoenas.

God help us to get on with it.

© Michael Bresciani



The subpoenas from us, document activists, can be reviewed here:

http://drorly.blogspot.com/2009/01/raft-of-subpoenas.html

http://drorly.blogspot.com/2009/01/re-raft-of-subpoenas.html