LEGAL NATIVES & UNNATURAL CITIZENS

Are you a legal Native?  How about a citizen Inhabitant?
How about a citizen Native?  How about a citizen American?  How about an indigenous citizen?
None of these questions are logically legitimate.  They sound as awkward as they do for a very good reason, and that is that they combine concepts from two very separate, though related, spheres.
One of the spheres is the Natural sphere where Nature and it natural laws constitute reality.  It’s a realm that has existed as long as there has been life on earth and will continue to exist as long as life exists.

The other is the Legal realm.  Its origin came into existence when social species came into existence.  Before them, only the law of the jungle existed.  Which pretty much means there were no rules between living organisms.  “Eat, or be eaten”.

When man came into existence, it was as a social being, -meaning a member of a human society.  All societies have rules because not all behavior is acceptable, and all societies must have leadership.

Leaders enforce the rules, and in time, with the development of writing and government, those rules became written rules, which were then authoritative mandates or prohibitions.  They were then more than just informal or unwritten rules.  They were written in permanent form and that was the origin of the Legal realm.

The Natural realm and the Legal realm are two very separate things, but the legal realm is all about humans, and humans are natural beings and not robots, so their nature and natural behavior is a significant element of Law. [The other element is their Natural Rights]

The Universe is characterized by two things: The nature of its parts, -and how they relate to each other.  That includes all things and all life.  The nature of the human element is that it is social.  Its parts relate to each other in the form of social associations.  But because of friction and disagreement over desires and  rights, humans also relate to others often by a legal association intended to secure their rights or procure them justice.

In the natural social realm, the primary association is either the mate bond or the parental bond.  Both are central to the formation of a family.  It is the foundation of all social associations of all societies.  It is the model for larger associations.  In the animal world they are herds, flocks, prides, schools, pods, etc.
In the human realm they include the greater family group that’s called a Clan.  Clans that are related and live together constitute a Tribe.  Tribes that are related though living at some distance from each other, constitute a country.  That is the natural realm of human association.

Sometimes, often even, countries eventually come to be ruled by one conqueror who subjugates all of the other tribes, and then forges them into one nation.  His hegemony, or that of his off-spring, often has not stopped there, and so his megalomania turns its eyes to neighboring countries and even neighboring nations.  So he builds his armies into such a powerful size that he is able to conquer and subdue his neighbors and thus form a Kingdom, a melding of countries, nations, and peoples who are not naturally related (dissimilar language, history, culture, religion).
Such a kingdom is an unnatural thing, and so in time they disintegrate due to disloyalty, greed, distance, rebellion, or conquest by an even greater kingdom.

So Reality is seen as being comprised of those two very different realms; -the Natural realm and its natural associations, and the Legal/ Political realm with its artificial associations; -artificial meaning man-made, and not nature made.

Those two realms are dissimilar enough to be comparable to oil and water.  They don’t naturally mix, but they can be forced to mix and remain together by the use of an emulsifier.  The emulsifier in human society is fear.
The government has the power to punish and penalize, and so the fear of personal consequence for disobedience is the emulsifier that keeps individuals and natural groups in line.  That was the case in unnatural nations such as Iraq under Saddam Hussein.  Power keeps conflict in check.

But in everyone’s heart, there is no mistaking the difference between a natural mandate and a government mandate.  You know that you must honor your mother on Mother’s Day, and that you must honor the law and the IRS by paying your taxes, but you don’t confuse the nature of those two requirements.  One is from the natural realm while the other is from the legal realm.

Understanding the clear difference between them clarifies the reason why the questions that open this exposition are unnatural questions.  They improperly combine terms that are from the two different realms when they should be used only with the realm from which they spring.

Are you a legal native?  Clearly, “legal” is not from the natural realm, and “native” is not from the legal realm.  They should never be cross-associated.  It’s the same with the terms “country” and “nation”.
One can be a “legal citizen” because citizens are the legal memers of the political entity known as a nation.  But one cannot be a legal American because the term “American” refers to membership in a country.

It existed even before the creation of the unifying government and its legal structure.  “America” as a country pre-existed “The United States” as a nation.  The country had members before the nation had citizens because the members created the nation and thereby became its natural citizens.

So one can be a legal citizen of the United States or a native American / natural American but one cannot be both.  Because the natives of the country did not need to give themselves permission to be citizens of the nation that they decided to create.  And so they didn’t.   They wrote no rule into their foundational charter by which they were declared to be citizens of the nation, because their national membership did not spring from national law-making but from State law or the absence thereof.

Their citizenship was natural citizenship and so they were and are referred to by the unnatural cross-association label of “natural citizens”.  That is the counterpart to the unnatural label “legal native”.  Both are counter-intuitive in a sense because they combine concepts from different realms.  But both are in fact grounded in reality.
A “legal native” of a tribe could be created by adoption of a non-tribal child.  And a natural citizen could be created by birth to natural members of the nation.  And from a legal stand-point, a natural citizen could also be created by birth to non-natural citizens since in the eyes of the law, all citizens are deemed to be natural citizens by a fiction of law.

That makes them all equal members of an unnatural nation.  An unnatural nation is one formed by forces other than the dominance of a powerful leader using natural force to make himself ruler of all.
A nation formed by the intellectual and spiritual and natural bond between members who are related and equal is an unnatural basis of a nation, and had not existed on earth for about 2,000 years.  It is based on a higher law than natural law, -a spiritual law that is founded not on the natural strength of the few or the one, but on natural rights.

So, if you are a natural American, then you are not a legal citizen.  Rather, you are a natural citizen because your membership in the nation is not via the legal permission of the government and its legal structure.  Instead, it is natural membership which was inherited from parents who were members when you were born.
Just as members of American Tribes are not “legal natives”, so also, you are not a “legal citizen” unless your citizenship is an allowance of the government, -including the allowance of citizenship from birth which required government permission (via the 14th Amendment) because you were not born of American parents but of foreign parents, [or a foreign parent].

The 14th Amendment only describes United States citizens domestically born, and did so to declare the parameters of citizenship for those born in America, thereby making non-citizen freed slaves citizens also, -as well as leaving the door open for domestically born children of immigrants.

But it had no authority to alter or regulate or legislate the natural national membership of those who were the nation’s natural citizens.  Congress has never possessed such authority and it never will.
The citizenship of natural Americans is beyond the reach of Congress.  Only the natural members themselves, with the accompanying votes of legal members, have the authority to alter the Constitution.  Not the Congress.  With the citizenship of ex-slaves and native-born children of immigrants written in the stone of a constitutional amendment, it also is beyond the reach and authority of Congress.

But what is not beyond the reach of its authority, nor that of the Attorney General and the President, is the supposed citizenship of those who are not described by the parameters of the 14th Amendment.

Besides a domestic birth location, it equally requires that one be born subject to the full authority of the national government.  Children of illegal aliens are not under that authority unless their parents have been illegally allowed to become integrated members of American society.  If that is possible, and I suspect it is, then their children, -their sons, must register with the Selective Service when they turn 18 years old.  But since even children of legal immigrants, children who are not citizens since they were foreign born to foreigners, must register also, it is not a given that the intent of the amendment was to convey American citizenship to children of those who are in America illegally.

That is a toss-up, -a truly gray area without natural or legal boundaries.  But there is a similar situation which is not gray at all, and that is the relationship of foreign guests to the United States government.  They are not under any obligation to defend the nation that they are visiting and it is indisputable that they are not described by the 14th amendment regarding being subject to the national government’s full authority, -the authority that [male] citizens are under.

They are not under the obligation nor bear the responsibility of citizens to defend their homeland, and so a child born to them while within U.S. borders does not inherit such responsibility either and that fact eliminates them from the naturalizing power of the 14th Amendment

It requires that one be born fully subject to the national government, -meaning being subject to obedience to all of the obligations of citizens.
Since Barack Obama’s father was not under that authority, he could not inherit it and he therefore does not fall under the citizen-izing power of the 14th Amendment.

If one does not meet either of its requirements, then one is not an American citizen by law. [but don't forget that natural citizens are not citizens by law, but by nature]
If not born in the U.S., then one is not a citizen by the 14th Amendment.  If not born subject to the national authority that governs citizens, then one is not born a citizen.

O.J. Simpson is innocent and Obama is a U.S. citizen

Understand this, by the authority of the 14th Amendment and its interpretation by the Supreme Court, Barack Obama is not a United States citizen.  It does not make him an American citizen regardless of a possible birth location within U.S. borders.

One would then ask if he is a citizen via his mother, or via a naturalization statute, and the answer to both is “no”.  Neither provide him with citizenship, and neither he nor his sycophants have ever claimed that they did.
He is presumed to be a citizen because everyone presumes that everyone born in the U.S. (except children of foreign diplomats) is a citizen even though that is in fact false.  But that false presumption goes far beyond mere ignorance because it also intrudes into the area of absurdity by its accompanying presumption that everyone born in America can be President when that is even more false.
The United States Constitution does not limited the presidency to native-born citizens and no others, but limits it to only natural born citizens.

Not all natural born citizens are native-born, and not all native-born citizens are natural born citizens, but people don’t know that, nor understand what-is-what when it comes to the reality of citizenship.

But even if Obama’s citizenship was not simply “presumed citizenship” but was actual legal citizenship, he still would not be eligible to be President because legal citizens are barred from the presidency.  They are a tiny minority of American citizens since they constitute only about 3 % of the American population.   The other 97% is made up of natural citizens born of American parents.  Obama is not one of them.

He is not even one of the small percentage of people born to immigrants since his father was neither an American nor an immigrant.  He was a guest of the American government, as was the son born to him within the sacred and legal institution of marriage.  That would not be true if his father was unknown, or unrevealed.  Then he would have inherited the obligation of citizenship from his mother since she would be the “head” of the “family”.

But his story is that they were married, and so American law and tradition prevails, and by that law and tradition he was not only not born as a natural born citizen, but was not born as a citizen at all, -although always erroneously presumed to be one because of the story that his mother or grandparents told the Hawaiian Health Dept. -that he was born of a resident of Hawaii who had lived in the islands for one year.
That was true since his mother had lived in Hawaii for one year.  Or was it?   It’s known that her parents moved the family to Hawaii in summer of 1960, but where she was living from Feb. 1961 to late August of 1961 is unknown.

So not only is Obama’s birth location unknown, so also was the whereabouts of his mother during the full year that she was required to be living in Hawaii in order to legally be allowed to register her child as a Hawaiian resident and thereby receive a birth certificate which would presumably be “proof” that he was born in America, and therefore could be presumed to be a United States citizen.

Let’s delineate the facts as they are known and unknown.

Obama’s father was not an immigrant but merely a foreign student.

Obama was therefore not a citizen via the 14th Amendment.

Obama was not a citizen via any statute nor the naturalization process.

Citizenship through an American mother married to a foreign father is only transmitted by statute for a child whose birth occurs outside of the United States.  Obama has claimed since about 2007 that he was born in Hawaii, although he claimed since 1991 or earlier that he was born in Kenya.

Obama’s two counterfeit computer-fabricated, digital, abstract, unsigned, unsealed birth document images provide only proof that he is willing to engage in criminal fraud and but not proof of where he was actually born.

No one in the Hawaiian government has ever sworn under oath to any facts regarding the nature of the documentation that is located somewhere in their archives, nor characterized it as being an original Hawaiian birth certificate.

Hawaii allowed those who were residents for a year to register children born elsewhere and to receive a Hawaiian birth certificate.

A Hawaiian birth certificate is then presumed to be proof of American citizenship even though it is not proof.

Obama’s mother’s whereabouts during that important first year of residency is unknown, unprovable, and possibly lied about by her or her parents in an affidavit submitted to the Hawaiian Health Dept. claiming him as a legal resident of Hawaii though born abroad or in another state, -or as born at home in Hawaii with no proof of either other than possibly a hidden, secret birth certificate from a foreign nation.

No actual hospital birth certificate exists, and the fervent Obama supporting governor was unable to unearth one, even with subpena power.

No hospital in Hawaii claims that it is the birth place of Obama, much less the provable birth place.

The hospital named on his counterfeit long-form 9-layer birth certificate pdf image would not allow the detective from Arizona’s Cold Case Posse to examine the public record book of hospital admissions and births for 1961 as he requested.

In May 2013 an Amicus Curiae brief was submitted to the Supreme Court of Alabama by Lucas Smith which contains a certified copy of a Kenyan birth certificate for Barack Obama II.
“On the 19th day of February 2009 Amicus (Smith) walked out of the Coast Province General Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya with a certified copy of President Barack Hussein Obama II’s original hospital birth certificate.” – Lucas Smith.
He recounts that it cost him several bribes including a $5,000 remuneration for the clerk of the Health Dept. that held the original and issued a certified copy in under twenty minutes as he required.
Obama’s Purported Kenyan Birth Certificate Submitted In Alabama Supreme Court Case

That birth certificate, if a counterfeit, would have to have been fabricated by or for Mr. Smith.  The question is “why would any sane person offer an image of a fake document to a state Supreme Court unless he had the original to verify the validity of the photocopy submitted?”

That would not be reasonable, but we can’t go on what is or isn’t reasonable, because the supporters of Obama’s eligibility, (based supposed on him being a natural born citizen) and birth certificate (if there still are any) and Hawaiian birth location believe their arguments to be reasonable, (or so they pretend) so instead we must look to known and proven facts and any inescapable deductions drawn from them.

But what we find is a black hole of missing facts, missing records, sealed records, falsified records, non-existent sworn testimony and non-existent witnesses.

It’s like trying to get to the bottom of Watergate, or Enron or World Com or Bernie Madoff before the truth was exploded into public light.
It’s like trying to get the facts about Area 51 and u.f.o.s.  No one is talking.  There are more secrets that we don’t know than facts that we do.  Just ask anyone with a top-secret security clearance.  Ask them how many documents are off-limits to public eyes.  A million?  Ten million?  50 million?  Secrets are not rare, they are the norm, especially in politics.

So we are nationally governed by an Enron Administration.  A Madoff presidency.  An R.J. Reynolds government that swears under oath that cigarettes are not harmful to human health,  and a President who is as much a natural born citizen as O.J. Simpson is an innocent man who  just wants to find the real killers.

by A.R. Nash  2013  http://obama–nation.com

Barry Obama: Fraud to the Core

How does one go from being a pot-head, crack user to being invited to head the Democrat ticket for the presidency when one has never espoused any change of heart or change of values?
Any pretense of being reformed would be about as believable as his fake Christianity which he pretends is real though he attended a Marxist Black Liberation Theology America-hating Church for two decades where he learned the talk of the social gospel by which Salvation is not an individual relationship with the Savior, it is a collective thing.

As he once informed a political audience, neither he nor they could be saved individually (Individualism is the deadly enemy of communalism, i.e., communism) Salvation only comes when the whole community becomes collectivist, i.e., communist, thereby the good deeds done by and through government will yield collective salvation.  Yes, that’s what he believes.

What a heretic and a traitor to American and Christian fundamentals!  His supposed Christian conversion is a complete and utter sham perpetrated by a lying Islam loving fraud.  And that’s from someone who likes him.

He didn’t miss-speak when being interviewed by George Stephanopolis when he talked about, (until being “corrected”), his “Muslim faith”.  One thing every Christian that ever lived knows, is that such a “slip-of-the tongue is totally impossible.  It was a pure Freudian slip.  Would a devote Muslim ever mistakenly refer to his Christian faith or his Jewish faith?  Not in a billion years!

Would a survivor of Auschwitz ever refer to Hitler as their fuehrer, or bow to him as Obama bowed obsequiously to the King of Saudi Arabia?  Why would he bow to him?  Because he is the most powerful man on earth?  No, because that would be Obama.  But he bowed to him in respect of the religion which he represents as the leader of the land of the Prophet, -where Mecca and Medina are located.
That’s good news and bad news.  The good news is that part of Obama holds a deep secret reverence for the holy and spiritual.  That means he is the enemy of the devil, i.e., evil and violence (water-boarding).
The bad news is that he’s not representing the values of the people of America who are predominantly Christian, and would never bow to any man, much less one who represents what they see as a fraud of a religion, -a heresy if it were a Christian pretender, and possibly the work of Satan to deceive with false religion and false doctrine and false scripture and a false future messiah who is essentially indistinguishable from the description of actions attributed to the Anti-Christ, -the son of Perdition.
A rallying cry of the revolutionary patriots was; “No King but Jesus!”  Their knee would bow to no other.
So he is what he is, and he is not what he pretends to be.  The pretense is in order to not lose votes.  It is maintained because he can’t be seen as being the lying, two-faced hypocrite fraud that he is.

I just tried to make an omelet by cracking an egg from a carton my sister gave me.  The shell wouldn’t separate as it should have, so I pulled on it.  Guess what?  It was a fraud of sorts.  I thought it was one thing but it was another, and I couldn’t tell because it, like all eggs, was opaque.  It was hard-boiled.

Obama is a similar sort of egg.  He looks perfectly normal from the outside, but is totally different on the inside, -different from what one would expect and believe.  What you see is not what you get.  It is something different because he is different inside from what he seems on the outside, and that’s one of the reason he finds it unacceptable to call his fellow Muslims, though murders, terrorists.  It goes against his deep inner convictions to associate terror with “the peaceful religion of Islam”.
But he, like Islam, has two faces.  Both are socially schizophrenic.  One face of Islam is based on the early peaceful writings in the Koran, while the other is based on the later righteous avenger attitude to kill all opponents, all infidels or rejecters of Islamic supremacy.  Like “fools gold”, Obama appears to be more precious than he is.  But he is not really gold, though he pretends to be.  Underneath he’s something else, something like Pyrite.  The first “fools gold” Pyrite President.
by a.r. nash  may 2013  obama–ation.com

America’s Progressive Gangrene

Obama’s Fraud; the 2nd Anniversary

April 27 is the 2nd anniversary of the posting on the White House website of a counterfeit digitally fabricated image of Obama’s birth certificate, uncorroborated by an actual physical certified paper document.

Everyone knows that it is counterfeit but no one can attach blame to Obama because he never even mentioned the questionable thing one time during the press conference in which he appeared for the sole purpose of convincing everyone that it’s their moral duty to ignore it completely since he and the nation have more important things to do.  And since the entire process of producing the thing is cloaked in attorney-client privilege, his White House lawyer, who resigned the next day to become his personal lawyer, can’t be questioned about how he shepherded the whole process of producing it for his client Obama.  How convenient.

Like the short-form fake before it, the new fake facilitated the bamboozling of everyone into not questioning Obama’s qualification to be the President based on the words of the Constitution: “  “No person, except a natural born citizen,…shall be eligible to the office of the President,…”   So not only was the crime of document fraud overlooked, and the Constitution overlooked, but even the 20th Amendment was ignored like it didn’t even exist.

The 20th Amendment: its betrayal and burial

The 20th Amendment requires that the winner of the presidential race qualify to serve by proving himself to be constitutionally eligible.  That means he must show himself to be 35 years of age, 14 years resident in the United States, and foremostly he must be a natural born American.
By failing to prove that he is qualified by all three accounts, he is to be disqualified and the Vice-President is to take his place as President until a new qualified President can be elected.  If both fail to qualify, then the Congress is authorized to select a President or chose how one is to be selected.

Be it known to the American people that Congress, the American courts, and the American media, closed their lazy and dishonest collective eyes, turned the other way, and, in unmistakable violation of the Constitution, allowed an illegitimate person, -a citizen-by-policy and not by law nor nature, to usurp the highest and most powerful office on earth.

But being as the ignorant and somnambulent population has no clue as to what a natural born American is, and thus doesn’t realize that Obama isn’t one, we should be thankful that Obama’s counterfeiter failed to save his creation as a flattened jpg image instead of a 9 layer pdf.  We should count our blessings and appreciate that fact that it is never going away.
We were robbed of the rightful repercussions on his re-election that should have followed the release of the counterfeit, but like the unmistakable evidence of unexplainable unidentified flying objects being ingrained in the awareness of the population regardless of the feds efforts to ignore and downplay the facts,  Obama’s fraud is now a permanent part of the political landscape, and it does not require a paranoid conspiracy-minded fanaticism to understand what your own eyes are seeing on your own computer.

So thank you, Barack Obama, for providing the best ammunition for taking down the pretense of your legitimacy.  We should be grateful to you.  Yes, we should, just like we should also thank you for pursuing your socialist dreams all the way into the White House while falsely swearing a lying oath to protect and defend the Constitution from usurpers such as yourself.

And Thank You, Democratic Party leadership, the Congress, the Supreme Court, and all main-stream media for allowing the United States Constitution to be as front-and-center as the back side of the moon, as obeyed as the speed limit, and as revered as toilet paper. *
Thank you for your unbroken complicit silence.  Thank you for your cowardice.  Thank you for your wanton and weasely abdication of your sworn constitutional duty.  Thank you for being party to the greatest travesty against the office of the President in American history.

Thank you for putting us on unlawful ground and in growing danger.  As much as we rightfully despise you, our children and yours will one day despise you far more, because they will reap the whirlwind that you have sown.
And last but definitely not least; Thank you for wrecking the future of America via your silence and absence while allowing an incompetent, inexperienced, Marxist-oriented, highly partisan and ideologically radical affirmative-action candidate to sweep into office with a fraudulent and highly secretive background, who then does nothing to fix the damage due to the fateful fiscal and social-engineering course he has put us on and is keeping us on.
No illegitimate house of cards can stand and expand forever.  No bubble can inflate forever.  Unjust, irresponsible, and overly-powerful government cannot be tolerated forever, -not by a Free People.

Will you tolerate it forever?  Or will you strive to right that which is wrong, -to correct that which is in error, to reclaim that which has been abandoned, to hold those to account who participated or failed to resist while nefarious forces and their idealistic, naive “useful idiots” altered our nation, (and not ours alone) for the worse rather than for the better?
How long will Americans tolerate ever-greater proportions of their Freedom being taken from them and given to government bureaucrats?   If one were to guessimate based on the past, then the answer is “a whole lot longer”.  The only thing that can stem the tide toward state totalitarian authority is resistance from individuals in conservative states because those who are allied against Constitutional Freedom and Rule of Just Law are very united and motivated by the greatest gravy train in world history and the allure of the siren song of socialist security.

They will resist strongly the elimination of their power and perks and posts.  But the evidence of their legacy, the results of their policies and corruption are visible all across the country, as many of America’s formerly great cities have degenerated into swamps of bankruptcy, poverty and crime thanks to their spoiled selfish inflated sense of entitlement.

Those in control in those now decaying cities will not change course nor be ejected by their dependent voters, -the takers.  And so in time they’ll slide toward the fate of Detroit.  A basket case.  A nightmare of collapse and abandonment, reaping the results of the self-serving, greedy policies of the overlords of the lazy, incompetent, infantile and  amoral many who aren’t of the same stock as the forgers of a new free nation, the explorers of new frontiers, the defenders of Liberty, and fighters of totalitarian oppression.
Life is complicated.  Living is hard.  Effort is painful, dull, and often unrewarding.  But if the American people become a people who do not wish to live in a meritocracy that values liberty more than security, -reward more than hand-outs, then the mortar that built and holds this country together will crumble.
The results may not come tomorrow, nor a ways down the road, but they definitely will come as they have already come in places like Cyprus, Greece, and Detroit.  Resist that happening in your city and your state.  Do not assimilate, -do not comply, but if that war is already lost, think seriously about taking advantage of your liberty by moving to a state that is a free meritocracy and not a dependent mediocracy.

There you can take a stand and even thrive, while back in the over-taxed, and over-regulated socialist states of America, -as in totalitarian-leaning Germany where it is a punishable federal crime to educate your own children at home (while resisting the absolute authority of the government to kidnap them from you as punishment while slapping you with a huge fine) state and county governments, while spreading their tentacles into ever more areas, degenerate into statist, bankrupt oligarchies run by  ever-increasingly radical environmentally dictatorial bureaucracies led by a single irresponsible, short-sighted, self-serving, Freedom trampling, anti-Constitution party, -like in California where the over-spending corruptness and foolishness of the “wise” and “well-intentioned” erode what was once a sound, prosperous & free economy and society.

Like in the former film capital of the world; HOLLYWOOD!, where most film production has been chased out of the city, and even the state by the high cost of pride & selfishness that predominates in the leadership of its unions, -the free, the talented, the proud, and the unemployed and bankrupt.  [And that's in addition to high state taxes.] As if they are superior and more deserving than people anywhere else who are ready and eager to grab their jobs and do them, (and more) for a hell of a lot less.

“The pride of life” scripture calls it, and in some places, they’re infected with it in spades.  There is no way to humble such arrogant minds and egos, and so the slide they precipitate by their demands and expectations is inexorable.
That party’s opposition party isn’t the diametric opposite by a long shot, but when you are being led into slavery and crushing debt, it’s preferable to be shackled with lighter chains rather than heavier chains and leg irons.  But regardless of which of the two current parties is in power, our progress down the path to serfdom is only varied by the speed with which each one moves us.
One thing is certain, at this pace, in 50 years America will be unrecognizable, -just as it is today from the perspective of 100 years ago.  Will it be paradise or purgatory?  Will people be glad to live then and not now, or just the opposite?  Definitely future instruction in the History of the United States will be a very tricky subject because there will be no clear demarcation point at which we changed from being a Free nation to a starkly different nation of passive government drones.  We will have become the frog that was too relaxed to jump out of the slowly boiling pot of water.

by a.r. nash  april 2013

*   [The United State Constitution and Toilet Paper;  we value them both, but we're not going to put them on the mantle.  We're not going to wave them around or discuss them in public.  We will ignore them until we happen to need them, and then they will serve us, but we won't serve them.  After all, We are the Master, the Mob Majority. We can ignore anything we want.]

Obama’s Real Birth Date & Real Father

Don Wilkie, on  October 30, 2012 posted a column titled: “Just When Was Obama Born?” in which he stated: “It is beyond any reasonable doubt that Neil Abercrombie, Governor of Hawaii, and Ann Dunham’s girlfriends, Susan Blake and Maxine Box, have been telling falsehoods about the President’s origins.  It is also beyond any reasonable doubt that there are people within the Obama camp who have managed their fabrications.  It now appears that Mary Toutonghi, (Ann Dunham’s sometime babysitter in Seattle), was also ‘managed.’
Mary and her husband were the managers of the Villa Ria apartments located in the Capitol Hill section of Seattle.  The apartments were carved out of a large old house.  We now know that Ann and baby moved into Mary’s apartment house in late August or early September 1961.  This is confirmed by David Maraniss as well as by Marc Leavipp in the registrar’s office of the University of Washington.  Ann is also listed in the 1961-1962 Seattle Polk Directory at the Capitol Hill address.
In late 2008, it was revealed that Ann had enrolled in classes at the University of Washington for the fall quarter of 1961.  It is clear that the Obama camp was caught off-guard by this revelation.”

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/10/just_when_was_obama_born.html

The premise of his column is the speculation that Obama may have been the son of someone other than Obama Sr. and been born 7 months earlier than late August or early Sept., that being in January-February instead of August.  But if F.M. Davis was the father that would not have been likely.  About the earliest that he might have impregnated Ann was the night of July 4th 1960 since the family probably only arrived in Hawaii in mid-June at the earliest.  That would result in birth in early April ‘61, making Obama only 5 months old in Sept, not seven months as he speculates.
What needs to be born in mind is the fact that the State Dept. officers who dealt with the Obama Sr. case noted that the couple was considering adoption of their yet unborn baby by means of the Salvation Army.  That course of action would have two possible means, -pregnancy and birth in Hawaii, or pregnancy and birth in Seattle (or birth in Vancouver B.C.)
Ann’s parents would be scandalized by their 17 year old daughter’s pregnancy outside of marriage, and worse, (socially-speaking) with a Negro man’s child.  They probably would have wanted to hide her pregnancy from their circle of social acquaintances.  She could have remained indoors at home for months on end after dropping out of college, or she could have moved back to her home territory in Seattle, staying with some close, sympathetic family friends up until the last several weeks.  Then she could have moved into a Salvation Army home for unwed pregnant girls.  If that home was unable to find an adoptive family for her child, she may have transferred to a Vancouver branch as a Hail Mary attempt at finding an adoptive couple there in Canada.  Either way, after delivery, it would have been time to leave that home after a few more weeks of recovery and adjustment and it would have been then that she moved into the group apartment.

Taking that move and timing as an established fact, we can deduce a few things from it.  First, that she probably wasn’t doing any flying at eight-months pregnant.  So if she remained at home in Hawaii up until then, then she would have given birth in Hawaii and not have flown to Seattle.  That raises the question of when  she arrived in Seattle.  That brings one back to the issue of adoption, and whether or not there was any couple in Hawaii that was willing  to adopt a mixed-race baby and whether or not any adoption agency knew of such a willing couple.   If none was known, -and Ann’s parents had preferred that their pregnant daughter was out of public view, then they could have funded her moving back to Seattle around the time her pregnancy began to show.  If she was impregnated by Obama Sr. on the night of Halloween, during some loose boozy party, then she would have been three months pregnant in early February -the same time when records of her whereabouts end.
At that time, or a few months later, she could have moved to Seattle, and given birth (after nine full months of pregnancy) on August 4th.
If Frank Marshall Davis shot the risque and nude photos of Ann during the summer of 1960, and, (as described in his autobiographical novel) had sex with her, then by late October, she would have been interested in re-experiencing that gigantic, liberating rebellion against all that was considered “decent” and “acceptable”, (forbidden pleasure being the most intensely experienced), and a new and exotic, foreign, younger partner would have filled the bill.
With all inhibitions having already been shed with Davis, it would not have required a preliminary courtship to surrender to seduction and enjoy a forbidden one-night stand.
With there being no record of any marriage between Jr.’s parents, nor of any relationship between them, it is conceivable that Ann’s parents eventually concocted a scheme of obtaining an official divorce because that would be evidence that he was not born as a bastard, -outside of wedlock, because who gets a divorce unless they were married? (-everyone would reason)  Who?  Someone who wants to avoid that social stigma as well as secure parental custody rights that might free her from needing his permission for leaving the country or allowing adoption by a new Indonesian step-father.
If Ann’s parents faced knowing that their grandchild could not be legitimized via marriage to an unwilling father, then they might have considered that he could be retro-actively legitimized via a divorce (for which no proof of marriage is even needed) from a claimed marriage that took place before the birth.  An uncontested divorce would be easy and affordable.
There is some serious significance to the fact that she didn’t just name Obama Sr. as the father, but that she gave her son his name.   If he had been fathered by another man, if would not have occurred  to a new mother to name her child after someone who had no connection to his birth.
But if Obama Sr. was in fact the father, then naming her son after him would have been the first possibility that would have occurred to her.  Of course that would carry the eventual complication that he would be ineligible to be the President.
She could have labeled the father as “unknown” but would not have felt any reason to lie.  She was being honest and truthful in her statement of official record, unlike her son who is being just the opposite, and for darn good reason, whatever it is. If Frank Marshall Davis were the real father, and he, she, and her parents wanted to keep that fact secret because he was a friend and a fellow socialist and publisher of a communist periodical (as well as being black) and also could have been under possible criminal charges since Ann was only 17 when she became pregnant (although the age of consent could be as low as 14 years old) then she didn’t have to name him as the father, nor name her son after someone with whom she had no intimate connection.  The likelihood is that she had been intimate with both of them, just not concurrently. That would have made it quite clear who the father was and who it wasn’t.  By Ockum’s Razor one would conclude that she choose to name her son after his father, -a chip off the old block.  Being a free and adventurous independent spirit, and a broadly-minded thinker, she probably would have gotten a kick out of giving her child such an exotic, unconventional, non-American name.  And so she named him Bair ak Obama, (accent on the first syllable) -just like his father, producing the nickname of Barry.
But Barry, like his fake name (Ba Rock!) is also a fake President, having been fathered by one who made him exotic, half-foreign, international, demographically unique, appealing to uniters, to globalists, and international-socialism embracers, but who also made him constitutionally ineligible to the office of President because he was consequently not born (as required) as a 100% natural born American citizen.

by A.R. Nash  Nov.  2012  obama–nation.com