Natural Born Citizen – A Place to Ask Questions and Get the Right Answers

October 20, 2009

When It Comes to Obama the Media Continues to Fail the American People

In my essay at this blog entitled, Congress and the Media Have Placed America at Risk of Being Attacked from Within, I argued how the Congress and our media have failed to adequately protect the integrity of the 2008 presidential election and consequently to protect our nation and Constitution by putting us at risk of being attacked from within.

I explained that given conflicting evidence about where Obama was born, many in the public have wanted to make sure that Obama was born in Hawaii and constitutionally eligible for the Office of President.

I also explained that Obama has asserted privacy rights to block any efforts by the public to view his Hawaii birth records and other background documents.

I explained that the media has failed us miserably in not asserting its powers to confirm whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii.

I also explained how in the past, the media has not hesitated to assert its rights to uncover the truth on matters it deemed important and I asked why has it not done the same when it comes to confirming where Obama was born.

Well, here is another example of the media getting in the fight when it wants to uncover information that it believes is important to the public.

With the general election two weeks away, six major television networks are asking a federal judge to enjoin New Jersey from enforcing a broad ban on exit polling and other expressive activity within 100 feet of polling places.

The plaintiffs, ABC, the Associated Press, CNN, CBS, Fox News and NBC, in American Broadcasting Companies Inc. et al. v. Wells , 2:09-cv-5275, are asking U.S. District Judge Peter Sheridan for a temporary restraining order and a permanent injunction, arguing that restrictions on exit polling activities have been struck down on First Amendment grounds in the 12 federal courts that have heard similar challenges.

The suit, filed on October 16, 2009, in Newark, New Jersey, seeks to block a September 30, 2009, New Jersey Supreme Court ruling that surprised the litigants on both sides. The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey had appealed the attorney general’s denial of a request to hand out voters’ rights cards at the polls. But none of the parties sought to ban exit polling within 100 feet, which the state has permitted since 1988.

The media plaintiffs say the ban serves no legitimate government interest that would justify infringement of their First Amendment rights. While conceding that courts have recognized the states’ interest in prohibiting activities that interfere with the electoral process, they argue in their brief that there is no evidence that polling voters who have cast their ballots borders on intimidation or fraud.

The plaintiffs also maintain that prohibiting exit polling within 100 feet is not a narrowly tailored approach. The state defendants “already have all the authority they need to address any potential disruption at the polls. Applying a blanket restriction to plaintiffs’ non-disruptive exit polling activities, however, is unnecessary and unconstitutionally overbroad,” their brief said.

The plaintiffs also argue they will suffer irreparable harm if injunctive relief is not granted. They cite the potential loss of valuable voter information in the election.

As we can see, the media will not hesitate to take on the big boys when it comes to fighting for what it perceives to be its First Amendment rights. But when it comes to Obama, who blocked all efforts by the public to learn about who he really is by wanting to review his birth, education, work, and travel documents, why did the media believe that Obama’s privacy rights should trump its First Amendment rights to express itself by satisfying its journalistic obligations to provide critical information of national security importance to our political institutions and the voting public? If the media could not make a successful First Amendment claim, why did it not even file any Freedom of Information Actions with all public entities possessing any of Obama’s records and arguing that any right to privacy should fail given the critical national security interest it sought to protect?

Needles to say, the President of the United States, in both his civil and military capacities, has immense powers over not only our nation but over the world. Again I ask, why has and why does the media take on these other legal fights, not affecting national security, but did not do anything of real substance to uncover the real evidence needed to assist our political institutions and the American public to find out who Obama really is?

Does not the media see the potential “irreparable harm” to our nation should Obama not be eligible to hold the Office of President? Why does the media mock and suppress the efforts of those who want our courts to confirm whether Obama is constitutionally eligible to be President, like not reporting on a pending case against Obama until the Court dismisses it on some threshold or procedural ground and not the merits and then telling the world that the case was frivolous? Is the media afraid of what may be uncovered?

The only “evidence” of his being born in Hawaii that Obama released to the public was a computer-imaged Certification of Live Birth posted on his web site and not a paper long-form, hospital-generated Birth Certificate. Now there are so many alleged and questionable birth certificates of Obama’s birth floating around the internet which show him to have been born in Kenya. Who knows how many more will come in the future. Clearly, such activity is a distraction for our nation and only takes away from the respect that the Office of President so much deserves. It is time for the media to step up to the plate and assist our nation to bring the issue of Obama’s place of birth to a close.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
185 Gatzmer Avenue
Jamesburg, New Jersey 08831
October 20, 2009
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/

Advertisements

August 2, 2009

Breaking News – Picture of Obama’s Alleged Kenyan Birth Certificate Placed on the Internet

Breaking News – Picture of Obama’s Alleged Kenyan Birth Certificate Placed on the Internet by Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq.

For over a year now, we have a picture of a paper document provided only on the internet by Obama saying he was born in Hawaii. And now we have a picture of a paper document on the internet allegedly provided from Kenya saying he was born in Kenya.

We have statements from people in Kenya, Obama’s paternal grandmother saying he was born in Kenya and she held him in the hospital the day he was born in Mombasa, Kenya. And we have the Kenyan Ambassador to the U.S. acknowledging that it is common knowledge in Kenya since 2004 that Obama was born in Kenya.

On the other side we have no contemporaneous witnesses coming forth to verify that they were present and/or have first hand knowledge that Obama was born in Hawaii. The Hawaiian official say there is a “vital record” in their files saying his birth was “recorded” in Hawaii. Their statements are only as good as the veracity of those proffered vital records back in 1961 or whenever they were provided to the state of Hawaii. But with the extremely lax birth registration laws in Hawaii in 1961, Obama could very well have been “born in Kenya” and “had his birth registered in Hawaii” by the grandmother or mother using the simple mail-in birth registration form, with no 3rd party witnesses needed, which was permitted under the rules and regs in 1961. See attached report for more about how easy it was to falsely register a birth in Hawaii in 1961.

Two pictures on the internet. Which one is real? Or are both real docs but the underlying facts in Hawaii were based on false statements by the grandmother or mother in 1961 to obtained U.S. citizenship for her new born son, born in Kenya. We need a forensic investigation both in Hawaii and Kenya to determine the truth.

Here are the links to the pictures of the documents and the CIA Officer commissioned investigators report as to how easy it would be to falsely register back in 1961 that a child was born in Hawaii when the child was not born there and could have been born anywhere.

Picture on the Internet of Alleged Obama Kenyan Birth Registration Certificate

Picture on the Internet of Alleged Obama Hawaiian Certification of Live Birth

More details on the breaking news at WorldNetDaily

Hawaii official now will NOT say if Obama’s online COLB doc image is genuine after duplicitous and carefully parsed prior pronouncements by other officials

We should have a decision date in our case this week, hopefully tomorrow. Things are going to get very interesting on this matter in August, imo. The Congress needs to convene an emergency session to do a full scale investigation of this matter in both the Senate and the House with full subpoena powers by both political parties and launch a full forensic investigation of all records in Hawaii and Kenya and in Great Britain, where duplicate copies of birth in the British Colonies were kept in 1961. They should take testimony before Congress of Obama himself under oath on this matter or get a sworn deposition done of him in the White House under oath, on this matter. Obama needs to speak personally on this and under oath. They should have done this in the Spring of 2008 when they investigated McCain. But for the sake of the country, the world, and our Constitution, they need to do it now … and as they say, let the chips fall where they may!

Charles F. Kerchner, Jr.
CDR USNR Retired
Lead Plaintiff
Kerchner v Obama & Congress

P.S. And if you want to help the current advertising and educational project also visit: http://www.protectourliberty.org/

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.