A Letter To The RNC…

 

Obama birth certificate 4 27 11 version 791x1024 A Letter to the RNC...

Dear Sirs:

It is incomprehensible to me and thousands of others that your party or anyone in your party refuses to check out the eligibility of this President. I have heard people say that we have so much more important issues to contend with and that this one will never be dealt with. I understand that at first, there was no tangible evidence to suggest that this president was eligible to be the President of the USA. Now 4 years later, we have new information that was ferreted out by some very brave people who have always had questions about this President. There is some undeniable evidence that proves without a reasonable doubt that there is something amiss about this President.

First of all, let’s assume he was born in Hawaii, which is doubtful but believable. There is now so much more new evidence about this President that has proven to be true.

Why all the secrecy about his college records? What is in those records that would be so damning that this President chose to spend millions of dollars to keep his records secret?

Secondly, it has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that his certificate of birth was a forgery and that fact has been attested to be true by at least 5 forensic scientists.

A brave Sheriff Joe Arpaio has worked tirelessly with his “posse” to find out the truth about Obama’s birth certificate.

This President’s selective service records are false and has many facets in it that were proven to be wrong and duly noted by the experts who agreed with this analysis.

Sheriff Joe also found out that this President has more than one social security card, and where they came from had nothing to do with where the President has resided. Sheriff Joe has always said that all he wanted to do was to prove that President Obama has legitimacy; and at every step of the way, he found out that all his records have been falsified.

Why the denials by your party to look into this matter? When President Nixon resigned, it was because the Democrats stood strong as a united front; and with a Republican Senate, they made him resign his Presidency.

If only the RNC had the fortitude to follow in their footsteps, you could have saved this once-great Republic.

I have called the head of the RNC, and I have received no satisfaction. I probably will get no satisfaction from this letter, and what a shame that would be.

I want my party to act like adults and take some responsibility for their actions before we lose the greatest country in the world, The United States of America.

Respectfully yours,
Sheila Charmak

 

Do you have $25,000 in your IRA or 401(k)? This "Loophole" in IRS Code lets you move your savings to gold ... get this NO-COST Info Guide >

11 comments to A Letter To The RNC…

  • james tibbs

    My advice to the polititions/worms with no spine, impudent in their decision stand up for the requests, and beliefs of your contituints, or get the hell out of politics, and get out of DC, because we will not forget your incompetence. We will not forget you at all, because we are going to compile a list of all your adresses, and home phone numbers, so we can keep tabs on you, for the wrongs that you have done to us as taxpayers. So, Please do your jobs, as we want you to do, you work for us, your constituints. You took your salarys, and all the under the table money that you could muster, you have passed laws giving yourselves full retirement, nomatter how many terms you served, you have a social security income far superior to any one who worked for a living, and you are exempt from Oblundercare, you have superior health care for the rest of your life for free, on us, so be good to us, your constituints.

  • Dan Stewart

    I agree that all these documents are forged or stolen & that he was not born in hawaii. However, even if he was, he is NOT qualified to be potus. He is NOT a natural born citizen, his father was a british subject, making him a duel citizen & therefore NOT qualified to be potus. Regardless of how much the 'slime stream media' attempt to cover it up & belittle anyone who mentions it, it none the less is true. The supreme court, long ago, clarified this. The slime balls on the present supreme court are ducking the issue at every turn. Why is this, are they afraid, or are they as corrupt as this illegal pos potus.

  • IDart

    Will someone give me one reason for a legal citizen of this country to use a stollen SS#. I'm waiting.

    • Me_In_Canada_Eh

      Here's the straight dope on Obama. His mother's family were living in Portland, Oregon where she was going to school as a teenager. Her father, Charles Dunham, worked for the CIA. He was posted to Hawaii to check on communist activity there (1961). Ann hated Hawaii and wanted to return to Portland.

      One of the communists Charles Dunham was investigating was a black man named Frank Marshall Davis. Davis was very active in promoting communism, and wrote journalistic pieces for radical left-wing newspapers. Ann Dunham's father probably told her not to go anywhere near Davis but, as many young people do, she rebelled. Eventually, she became pregnant. So here was a CIA agent with a daughter pregnant by a known communist. Charles Dunham made a deal with his daughter. If she married Barack Obama Sr, she would be allowed to return to Portland to go to university there. She agreed because she wanted to return to Portland the whole time. Obama Sr was given the deal of a Hawaiian vacation for a month for marrying Ann Dunham, agreeing to divorcing her a year later. On the original birth certificate, the father is listed as 'unknown'.

      So Obama was born in Hawaii, but his father was not Barack Obama Sr but the communist Frank Marshall Davis. Davis had a large part in Barack Obama's (aka Barry Soteoro) youth, and indoctrinated him in communist philosophy.

      If Barry Soteoro produced his real SSN, it would lead us to his real birth certificate. Everyone would discover his mother married Barack Obama Sr but listed the father of the child as 'unknown' on Obama's birth certificate.

      Yes, Obama's American, yes, he's eligible to be president, but his father was one of the biggest communist sympathizers the world has ever known.

  • Ron

    I would like to know why we the people have not just taken this problem into our on hands to take care of, it is written in our constitution that we have the right to deal with this type of treason with whatever actoion deemed neccesary so why is it nobody has stepped up to take care of the matter??
    Why hasn't someone set up a rally to disrobe this phony from office as it is stated in our constitution??

  • Lisa

    It is just totally insane that this president was ever elected in the first place, with as many glaring inconsistencies and fabrications concerning his background and eligibility proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. Not even Fox will report on any of this. Doesn't anyone remember the huge deal that was made about Bush's military record which happened to be a blatant fabrication by Dan Rather? Here we absolute proof that massive fraud has been committed and not a peep out of the "investigative journalists" of our time. In this day and age of technology, there should be NO EXCUSE for allowing BHO and his handlers to get away with this. Just as Dan Stewart pointed out, Obama cannot be a natural born citizen. His American citizenship was given up when his stepfather adopted him and made him an Indonesian citizen which does not allow for dual citizenship with our country. Even if his mother reapplied for his American citizenship (and there's no record that ever happened), he would only receive "naturalized" citizenship, which disqualifies one to be eligible for running for president.

  • bobbi

    I hope you are aware that on January 3, 2013 at 2 PM, Judge Morrison England will be making a decision whether to issue s Temporary Restraining Order to the Electoral College preventing them from casting their Electoral votes until the matter of candidate Obsma's eligibility is resolved. http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/

    • SUSANM

      I PRAY THAT HE IS ON THE SIDE OF ''THE CONSTITUTION'' BUT THEN YOU NEVER KNOW.OBAMA MUST BE STOPPPED FROM TAKING OFFICE CAUSE IT WILL NOT BE A 'HAPPY NEW YEAR'' FOR AMERICAN CITIZENS
      GOD BLESS ALL

  • IDart

    Can anyone explain to me why a legal citizen of this country would use a stollen S.S.#. That to me proves that he is not only NOT a natural born citizen, he is hot even a citizen of this country.

  • jonodough

    our elected officials and (alleged) defenders of the constitution on both sides of the aisle refuse to do anything about this. this means that all of them are we the peoples enemy. they only care about maintaining their lucrative careers and thats it. they will not do a thing if it would jeopardize their bottom line. that is the horrible truth. unless the american people march upon washington with tar, feathers and pitchforks, we are just wasting our time, our breaths. nothing will ever change. how about it america? can we pick a date in 2013 to march upon washington and demand these people vacate so we can replace them with people who actually care about our country and will do the right thing? ? ? i don't know about you but i am sick and tired of going without just so these incompetent aholes can prosper.

  • edodaniel

    Obama's birth certificate or lack of one is simply a red herring that takes away from the REAL ISSUE – as a possible or even probable citizen he is STILL CONSTITUTIONALLY UNQUALIFIED for the office of president as with his Kenyan father who had British citizenship Obama is NOT a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN in accordance with what the founders acknowledged as the requirements for a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

    It is the duty, obligation, and responsibility of every elected representative in Congress as well as every member of the military to support and defend the Constitution. As a retired or active member of the Military it becomes difficult to adhere to the oath when the Constitutional Commander in Chief is UNQUALIFIED by that very Constitution to hold the office of President

    Our Constitution specifically states in Article II Section 1 that "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;…"

    Obama is not a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN in accordance with 3 Supreme Court decisions based upon the definition of this term, as given in a book entitled, The Law of Nations, written by Emmerich de Vattel, a Swiss-German philosopher of law in Book I, Chapter 19, § 212, of the English translation of 1797. This book was used extensively in the Constitutional Convention and also within the State ratification delegations in their discussions of Common Law.

    As a Constitutionally ineligible candidate for the office of President of the US, Congress MUST take the necessary steps to ensure that he is not seated and sworn in. Whether he was born in Kenya or in Hawaii is beside the point and has always been a red herring because the real issue is that his father was not an American Citizen and thus by definition Obama CANNOT be a NATIVE BORN CITIZEN which required BOTH PARENTS to be citizens of this country. The 14th Amendment which has been misapplied to grant so called "birthright citizenship" did not re-define NATURAL BORN CITIZEN but places such citizens within the same group as naturalized citizens – citizens BUT NOT Natural Born Citizens.

    Each of these cases will cite or apply the definition of this term, as given in a book entitled, The Law of Nations, written by Emmerich de Vattel, a Swiss-German philosopher of law. In that book, the following definition of a “natural born citizen” appears, in Book I, Chapter 19, § 212, of the English translation of 1797 (p. 110):

    § 212. Citizens and natives.

    The citizens are the members of the civil society: bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. . . .

    Vattel did not invent the notion “natural born citizen”; he was merely applying the Law of Nature to questions of citizenship. In fact the term first appears in a letter of the future Supreme Court Justice, John Jay, to George Washington during the Constitutional Convention, where the Framers were consulting 3 copies Vattel’s book to complete their work (according to the testimony of Benjamin Franklin).

    The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)

    The first was decided in A.D. 1814, at the beginning of the republic, by men who were intimately associated with the American Revolution. In that year the following men sat on the Supreme Court:

    Bushrod Washington, John Marshall, William Johnson, Henry Brockholst Livingston, Thomas Todd, Gabriel Duvall, and Joseph Story

    Nearly all these men, or their fathers, participated in the American Revolution.

    Being witnesses and heirs of the Revolution, they understood what the Framers of the Constitution had intended.

    In the Venus Case, Justice Livingston, who wrote the unanimous decision, quoted the entire §212nd paragraph from the French edition, using his own English, on p. 12 of the ruling:

    Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says:

    “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.

    “The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are strangers who are permitted to settle and stay in the country. Bound by their residence to the society, they are subject to the laws of the state while they reside there, and they are obliged to defend it…

    Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)
    Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>