Monday, May 27, 2013
Dear San Francisco Chronicle:
I wanted to make a comment on this article linked below and written by Richard S. Dunham 5-27-13 and so am supplying this info according to your more stringent standards.
The reason I wanted to comment on this article is because I thought it labeled "Birthers" racist and it was directly associated with the "unfair", "biased" , misinformation reported in the article.
This kind of reporting is very irresponsible and propagates through media to the public a perception that is totally averted by simple acknowledgement of facts under-reported or not reported at all. Indeed, if the facts are meant for the public in order for a more perfect union.
McCain was referred to in the article, but left out was the fact as a write-in candidate for Pres. his candidacy was challenged in Las Vegas, NV Federal Court. Judy v. McCain a simple google brings it up..so you can't say its that hard to find.
I also sued Obama as a candidate in the Democrat Party clear to the U.S. Supreme Court Judy v. Obama 12-5276 The shame of justice should be held at the feet of this court for cowering to hear the case and the media indeed has a part to informing the public of the contest in court and the Courts shallow hearing.
Of course we are not asking the Court to side politically with any party. That is not what this is or was about. Its about the principle of the Constitution that would remind BOTH parties that there was no question with the precedent sited Minor v. Happersett for those born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents. This is clearly natural law rather than man made law.
The McCain case was considered "moot" after the election, but it could also be reported that McCain and the RNC knew about the law suit days before McCain was made the nominee. Sen Res 511 was co-sponsored by Obama and Clinton and needs to be addressed as "non-binding" meaning it did not replace the Constitution's demand for a natural born citizen nor abolish countless hours of legislative hearings the held precedent.
You know showing the facts might lead to a better understanding and less bias and hatred in the public mind. I've always thought this was what we were trying to accomplish..rather than promoting the opposite.
The Constitution's demand for a natural born citizen (NBC) I believe is based in a sound defensive Principle not in race as is insinuated by the SF Chronicle representation. I'm afraid NOT REPORTING intelligence on a subject when it is known merits being an accomplis.
This is also very relevant in the Jack McCaskill Memorandum that more than fogged Congress's brain, but rather deceived Congress on the term Natural Born Citizen according to the case Minor v. Happersett. The details here on a video I did. You know if things like this were'nt happening the deception of Benghazi might not be happening either.
I ran articles against Santorum who collected millions of dollars from unsuspecting donors who thought he was eligible along with Sen. Rubio.
Believe it or not, its the Republicans have more immediate candidates that are not eligible then the D's do and this may haunt the D's much more then the R's in the future of American politics.
The concerning thing is that the Legislative Mandate has been upheld for the life of our Constitution. Legal Opinion does not trump natural law and you know as well as I do that Born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents prevents the dictators of the world from bedding American Women and financing their heirs on to a thrown rather than the Office of the President. You know this can happen with the direction we're headed.
The only office demanding a Natural Born Citizen was the Office of Pres and VP because it held the keys to the military. Do we really want our nukes used against us? If the world is so welcome why not hand those codes to Russia, China, North Korea, or Iran for that matter if your so sure about that not being a concern on this very dangerous path that concerns our National Security.
I don't think its uncalled for to ask for a consideration of this information to be included as "information" that became available to the reporter after the article was printed.
I'm including this on my blog as a matter of record to be understood of exactly what is represented by the SF Chronicle. Let it appear as it is according to your inclusion abilities.
Thank You for your consideration
Cody Robert Judy