Sunday, November 3, 2013

Why and What Congress Is Debating In The Natural Born Citizen Silence

To the American People:

Certainly is disconcerting to say the least when attacked so viciously as I have been the past few days by those supposedly known as Birthers in regards to my last post here. One might presume to ask where such flagitious defamation comes from especially considering the supposed common cause of our United States Constitution and the absolute destruction we are facing now with Obama-scare which if fully implemented will be the greatest tax hike in United States history under the coat of the biggest United States fraud - Obama?

Let me say first, It is my hope that all Birthers can come together under the Constitution for that is the reason we were called Birthers ultimately, with each one contributing what they can. You know I'd like to start right out of the gate with a statement: it wouldn't bother me if Obama was removed as a disability through a disability impeachment hearing and I had nothing to do with it. I am quite simply one of you, going to work and paying my bills as best as I can. Many members of Congress are debating 'disability hearings', 'impeachment hearings', and a combination called a disability impeachment hearing. Why and What they are debating is certainly up for good ole debate and speculation which everyone is able to chime in on. Let's take a little walk, you and I and just discuss some things.

Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity have repeatedly spoke about Obama playing his 'race' card, and this has been the very most effective tactic against Birthers by the mainstream media in the secret meetings behind closed doors. Yes, the 'race card' has not been something off limits for them to discuss. In fact I believe that is the reason the conservative talk show host are not out right Birthers. The bed they made with McCain in 2008 is a very large bed.

Now its debatable wither they were either "going along" with Republican leadership with non-binding Senate Resolution 511 in the Senate which ever single Republican U.S. Senator voted for in 2008, or the trail of tid-bits enticed them with money. It doesn't matter now it is spilt milk, but that's also when Obama-scare was passed with a full majority of Democrats in the House, the Senate, and the White House with many smiling faces.

In 2010 Republicans took over the Majority in the U.S. House, and the U.S. Senate received its first dose of new Republican's who had not voted for non-binding Senate Resolution 511. These new guys coming in the House and Senate are staring at Obama-scare in their sites saying, "no way", and, "we didn't vote for Senate Res 511 so we are not bound to deals the Republicans made in 2008."

This is why we're seeing the fraction taking place in the U.S. Senate with folks like Ted Cruz elected in '12 and Mike Lee elected in '10 that came in after Obama or prior U.S. non-binding Sen. Res 511 passed in April 2008. These new people are looking around asking themselves, "What can we do about what happened before we came in that was wrong and shouldn't have happened, and still have a working relationship with our colleagues?"

The problem with a regular "impeachment hearing", [which I might remind you can only be held upon a Constitutionally Qualified President which Obama is not], with Obama in total frustration of every single scandal coming out in 2013 is the 'security question' that comes under the President of the United States to enforce the law, as well as preserve, protect, and defend the U.S. Constitution with. That responsibility is given great regard to the President by Congress as it is necessary. Obama knows that and so does Congress.

That said, the events of Benghazi, the IRS Profiling, the NSA spying, even Fast & Furious come under the 'security' of the White House and the Administration can indeed simple state the word "Security" to justify every single decision. Frankly, when Hillary Clinton screamed back at the Legislature "What difference does it make now?", she was absolutely correct. It was a "Security" decision made by the Executive Branch Congress has limited checks to.

The justification for 'lack of security' can be made against a full blown escalation which would have been a another choice other than a 'video tape' used to justify the opposition's heightened state of anger. That said there is little recourse for the "legislative branch" who are 'law makers' more than 'law enforcers'.

In reality, there is only one avenue available to remove Obama with a "security" principle, and that is the qualifications of the Constitution demanded by the qualifications of the Office of the President in the Constitution, which Congress can come in on with hearings in drafting and passing an ACT of Congress, and the Senate is deemed able to also as well as hold trial on.

The reality of this is not a secret. Everything that I've related covers the facts. Our Nation faces a very difficult choice now. Can Obama implement Obama-scare while Congress's hands are tied behind their back with the 'race' card, that McCain actually instituted, propagated, through a very large ego or can we stop it and how best to do that?

We shouldn't need a reminder that a 'natural born citizen' does not need two Acts of Congress about his Citizenship and his Natural Born Citizenship for identification as McCain has had. Both actions declare with a very loud voice, "naturalization of alien." I've said many times I'm a natural born citizen Born in the U.S. to Citizen parents and I didn't need an action of Congress to tell me that. McCain needing two, should tell you something at the very least.

The challenge Congress has got is to figure out a way to take the 'race' card away from Obama on a 'national security issue'. Read that again, let it sink in deep and understand it. How can that happen if Obama's race card has folded in it every Republican Senator in 2008? That challenge is made only by hearing someone who was hurt in the Presidential Election directly, on the Democratic Party side for two reasons.

1) First it is the point of the "first liability for standing". Within the Democratic Party was a fight for the nomination and Obama's constitutional qualification challenged from the moment in 2008 when he was made the nominee by me as a candidate and from the point of nomination in 2012 is certainly unique in acquiring standing within the race months before any Republican nominee would have the chance to claim an interest as the nominee of the Republican Party would after he was made the nominee. Which in no way shape or form still would never clear the 'race' hurdle of letting McCain have a pass and throwing down on Obama in the main stream media's eyes.

While Democrats didn't think it relevant at the time, if their nominee was discarded on qualifications of the Constitution in the race after he was made the nominee you better believe they'd see to it the next nominee from their party was qualified.

This could be the single biggest lesson to political parties in the entire United States that Congress could enforce much like a Court striking down a law Congress had worked to pass as un-constitutional. It doesn't matter how much work, time, or money went into passing it, if its not constitutional, its a leaf in the wind.

2) Second, is in affect and effect the issue of being "non-partisan". The importance of this cannot be over-looked. If a GOP Congress is seen so bull headed that its strictly Republican v. Democrat the American people will see to it Republicans are punished in the 2014 Election. They can't take that chance unless its very thoroughly discovered and understood all their bases are covered.

Now, there is only one Presidential Candidate who sued McCain in 2008 included Obama and also sued Obama in 2012 as a Presidential Candidate. That candidate was me.

No one else in the entire United States can put that glass slipper on, but at least for God's sake someone can! Shouldn't everyone facing the monumental tax increase Obama-scare seeks to reel in via the IRS be jumping for joy? Maybe jumping for joy rather than being so furious with the messenger that can fill the shoes needed that they simply try to destroy with a character debate what happened to me twenty years ago?

If you open the can-of-worms of 20 years ago and my past, you mind find a protest of a particular religion which is perfectly legal and an un-constitutional prosecution that violated many aspects of our Constitution. Of course it happens in America but we don't like to talk about it.

If you do open it, open it thoroughly not half baked and buried like it was with the media twenty years ago and while your doing that you might as well open up Obama's can-of-worms twenty years ago also and find out why his Mother did not have him listed on her passport, and why his passport was tampered with in the first place under the cloak of McCain's and Hillary Clinton's and why someone who saw that is dead now.

I'm very prepared to open either, but I'd much rather do that in front of Congress where it matters rather than with someone who has absolutely no authority or position of direct standing in the argument of Obama's natural born citizenship violation.

Lawmakers have had their hands tied, and they are shall we say "fit-to-be-tied" about it as one might imagine. Is Obama-scare so bad they would admit my witness is indeed relevant as far as being non-partisan, non-racist, and actually that my actions and position of standing on McCain and Obama speak many more volumes then people with only words do? Or on the flip side of the coin, can my witness unravel a very tangled web law makers find themselves in facing the barrel of the gun we are calling Obama-scare? I can attest my witness ought to be heralded by Congress as a a voice of angels in making life easier for all Americans.

Do actions speak louder than words? Find me a single Presidential Candidate who had a campaign of integrity with commercials, websites, news reports ect., representing and standing for the Constitution in 08 and 2012 on the biggest fraud in American history that does what mine did, suffering the intolerable losses by the edicts of the Constitution directly as its documented in Courts of Law and I think you will still come back to my campaign. If you think that is not valuable, start adding up what Obama-scare is going to cost this Country with everyone in it and you'll begin very quickly to see the value of 1/6th the entire economy, not to mention freedom and liberty lost.

Speaking of value, let me relate another little tid-bit for everyone who may be concerned. The total receipts taken from outside sources or campaign contributions on my Campaigns for U.S. Congress 2002,U.S.Sen. 2004 & 2010, and U.S. Pres., 2008, 2012, and 2016 thus far are probably around $500. The fact is, related as simply as it can be, if my witness amounts to anything in Congress, it certainly didn't cost the American People anything, which should be a great relief to them or even a matter of joy to be excited about. So, where is all the excitement? Well, right now I'd say its lost in mis-understanding the facts as they have been laid out quite reasonably to you.

This testimony, stands as a witness for everyone how important the United States Constitution is to me, and the respect I have for our framers and founders as well as those who have spilt their blood on our soil as well as foreign soil for our freedoms and liberties. Make of it what you will, my record exist to stand any test especially one from Congress.


[ If you would like to help Cody Robert Judy in his bid for upholding the Constitution in “America’s Birther Campaign”, or ABC Campaign ,which highlights the United States Constitution with information and education for voters to understand the tough questions politicians should be answering in 2014, and in the coming 2016 election for the Office of the President please make a contributions here: ]

No comments:

Post a Comment