Tag Archives: Obama eligibility

H. Brooke Paige V State of Vermont petition for rehearing, June 13, 2014, Obama eligibility, US Supreme Court, Obama not natural born citizen, Question of eligibility not moot

H. Brooke Paige V State of Vermont petition for rehearing, June 13, 2014, Obama eligibility, US Supreme Court, Obama not natural born citizen, Question of eligibility not moot

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the
constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no
rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be
inspected by him?”… Marbury versus Madison

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

 

 

H. Brooke Paige has filed a motion for rehearing with the US Supreme Court.

“The election of President Barack Obama does not render the question of his eligibility moot. In addition to the authorities cited by petitioner in the petition for a writ of certiorari, these authorities also demonstrate that the passing of the election and that Mr. Obama will not run in the future does not render this case moot”

 

H. Brooke Paige V Vermont et al US Supreme Court case update, April 24, 2014, Obama eligibility, Natural born citizen status challege, Marbury V Madison revisited

H. Brooke Paige V Vermont et al US Supreme Court case update, April 24, 2014, Obama eligibility, Natural born citizen status challege, Marbury V Madison revisited

 

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

 

 

From H. Brooke Paige April 24, 2014.

“Wells,

Current “scoop” at: http://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docket.aspx  docket
13-1076 additional information appears at:
https://certpool.com/dockets/13-1076 where the case will be shown as
scheduled for conference when a date is set (no sooner than 14 days after
date set for response).

The State filed a response waver March 26th, if the case passes muster in
the conference, SCOTUS would request that the State file a response – in
the absence of which the case would proceed on the merits outlined in my
writ.

Another Vermont SCOTUS case just after mine – Daniel Brown v Vermont,
State filed response waver on was received on April 4th with the case
“distributed” on April 16th for the conference on May 2nd.
https://certpool.com/dockets/13-1113, the conference schedule is found at:
https://certpool.com/conferences/2014-05-02

I suspect that SCOTUS is awaiting “candidate Obama’s” response
(required by April 9th) before scheduling the case for conference. All
cases are considered in conference.

For now patience seems in order – the conference review is the
“gatekeeper” for SCOTUS cases – the “rule of four” decides which cases
will proceed – possibly on the May 22 or 29
http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/2013termcourtcalendar.pdf

Thank You for Your Continued Interest,

Brooke”

The FEC recently ruled in Hassan that since he was not a natural born citizen, he was ineligible for federal matching funds. That case was simple. Hassan admitted that he was not born in the US. The FEC may soon be confronted with a more complex ruling because the definition of natural born citizen has not been clarified. The US Supreme Court has failed to do their duty.

 
“The government of the United States is of the latter description. The powers of the legislature are defined, and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken, or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing, if these limits may, at any time, be pruledassed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction, between a government with limited and unlimited powers, is abolished, if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibited and acts allowed, are of equal obligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it; or, that the legislature may alter the constitution by an ordinary act.

Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.”
“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each.

So if a law be in opposition to the constitution; if both the law and the constitution apply to a particular case, so that the court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the constitution; or conformably to the constitution, disregarding the law; the court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty.

If then the courts are to regard the constitution; and the constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature; the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.”
“The judicial power of the United States is extended to all cases arising under the constitution. Could it be the intention of those who gave this power, to say that, in using it, the constitution should not be looked into? That a case arising under the constitution should be decided without examining the instrument under which it arises? This is too extravagant to be maintained.”
“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be inspected by him?”

Marbury V Madison

 

Paige v. State of Vermont et al, US Supreme Court Writ of Certiorari, March 7, 2014, Update, Mario Apuzzo and counsel, Obama eligibility, Natural born citizen deficiency

Paige v. State of Vermont  et al, US Supreme Court Writ of Certiorari, March 7, 2014, Update, Mario Apuzzo and counsel, Obama eligibility, Natural born citizen deficiency

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the
constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no
rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be
inspected by him?”… Marbury versus Madison

From comment notification of H. Brooke Paige last night.

“Mario Apuzzo and Counsel Press filed a Writ of Certiorari with SCOTUS on behalf of H. Brooke Paige in the constitutional qualification ballot challenge case of Paige v. State of Vermont, et al. Wells will have more information and the Writ to post shortly.”

“Mario Apuzzo and Counsel Press filed our petition with SCOTUS today (Paige v. State of Vermont , et al). I would like to chat and more importantly forward our petition to you for your review.

All the Best, Brooke Paige”

H. Brooke Paige V State of Vermont SCOTUS Writ of Certiorari.

 

From Citizen Wells December 8, 2013.

“I received an update from H. Brooke Paige yesterday, December 7, 2013.

Mr. Paige filed a motion on November 15, 2013 for a reargument before the Vermont Supreme Court.

“2- The Appellant’s supporting brief request this court to consider and
favorably amend its decision of October 18, 2013 to more accurately depict
the record and more succintly annunciate its decision relating to the
following issues and reverse its decision as to mootness and rule on the
underlying issues as to law:

a – Correct the record to accurately documents the Appellant’s definition
of “natural born citizen” as consistently advanced and articulated
throughout the record.

b – Correct the record to accurately document the Plaintiff/Appellant’s
efforts to advance and expedite the action to a timely conclusion.

c – Fully delineate and document the Appellee’s efforts and actions to
delay and impair the advancement of this action both in the lower court and
before this Court creating a pall of “mootness” to despoil he (sic)
appellant’s effort to obtain a decision based on the merits of his case.

d – To reverse its decision that this case is mootness.

e – To render a decision on the definitional standard that should be
applied by the Vermont Courts as to the meaning of the Constitutional
Presidential Qualification of “natural born citizen” so as to remove the
confusion that currently exist for those involved in the Vermont Election
process at currently exist for those involved in the Vermont Election
process.”

http://www.scribd.com/doc/190256398/Paige-Vs-Vermont-and-Obama-Motion-For-Reargument

From Citizen Wells October 19, 2013.

“I received the email from H. Brooke Paige last night.

“VT Sup Court ruled today. Interesting decision that will allow us to
proceed to SCOTUS.”

Instead of expediting this case the lower court and VT Supreme Court dragged their feet thus making their decisions after the election.

In essence, the case is moot because Obama is already president and cannot run again.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2013/10/19/vermont-supreme-court-obama-eligibility-october-18-2013-h-brooke-paige-appeal-vt-justices-rule-case-is-moot-obama-already-president/

From the Vermont Supreme Court response.

“¶ 9. Recognized principles of mootness apply to the present case because it no longer involves a live controversy. Plaintiff has no legally cognizable interest in the outcome. Barack Obama’s name was on the ballot, and he is now the President of the United States. President Obama is also unable to seek re-election.”

OBAMA IS NOT PRESIDENT IF HE IS NOT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2013/12/08/paige-v-state-of-vermont-and-barack-hussein-obama-update-december-7-2013-h-brooke-paige-filed-motion-for-reargument-on-november-15-2013-natural-born-citizen-definition-mootness/

More to come soon.

Voeltz v Obama hearing June 18, 2012, Natural Born Citizen definition to be decided, Judge Terry Lewis, Attorney Larry Klayman, Obama eligibility

Voeltz v Obama hearing June 18, 2012, Natural Born Citizen definition to be decided, Judge Terry Lewis, Attorney Larry Klayman, Obama eligibility

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“I do not know where Barack Obama was born. I do know that he has used taxpayer dollars to keep his records hidden.”…Citizen Wells

“Why is Obama now employing private attorneys to keep his name on state ballots, despite compelling evidence that he is not a natural born citizen?…Citizen Wells

From Obama Ballot Challenge May 31, 2012.

“FLORIDA COURT SETS HEARING ON OBAMA BALLOT CHALLENGE FOR JUNE 18, 2012

Judge Terry Lewis States “Natural Born Citizen” Definition Will Be Decided
May 31, 2012, Tallahassee, FL – Activist attorney Larry Klayman announced today that Judge Terry Lewis of Leon County, FL has set a hearing on June 18th, 2012 at 9:00am to hear arguments from both sides about whether the eligibility of President Barack Hussein Obama can be determined in open court. Judge Lewis made crucial rulings in the famous Bush v. Gore case in 2000.
Florida’s election statutes provide broad protections for voters to ensure that the integrity of the election system is beyond reproach. One of such laws allows voters to challenge the nomination of a candidate who is not eligible for the office he is seeking. Plaintiff Michael Voeltz, a registered Democrat, challenged the eligibility of President Obama because he was not born to two citizen parents and thus not a “natural born citizen” as required by Article II the U.S. Constitution.
During the hearing over discovery issues, which Mr. Klayman wants to take the week of June 18, Judge Lewis noted that Mr. Klayman’s brief cited legal authority that a president, to be eligible, must have two (2) U.S. citizen parents, but President Obama and the other defendants cited no authority to the contrary. Mr. Klayman had cited the U.S. Supreme Court case of Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875). Judge Lewis ordered further briefing on this issue prior to the hearing.

Klayman stressed that the eligibility is very important particularly with this president, Barack Hussein Obama. He added: “The framers were not stupid. They understood that a president with divided loyalties could present a security and other risks for our nation. Obama’s Muslim heritage, which emanates from his Kenyan father (who had to be deported from the U.S.), frankly explains why he frequently sides with and takes actions to further the interests of Muslim nations against the United States; specifically his refusal to take forceful action against the Islamic Republic of Iran and its leaders over nuclear armament and human rights violations and atrocities.”

In a CNN interview yesterday Donald Trump stated ‘Obama hates this subject’ meaning the eligibility issue. This is because he appears not to be a legitimate American president, but instead an imposter who has fooled many. Unfortunately, the American people are the victims. It’s time that Obama, despite his protestations in proving his eligibility, either put up or shut up by coming forward with real proof, not doctored, computer-generated “proof” that he is eligible. The courts should finally require this real proof as to whether he is eligible for office,” Klayman added.

Larry Klayman’s work on Voeltz v Obama is being supported by ConstitutionActionFund.org, a non-profit raising money for the legal challenge. PLEASE help.

The case is entitled Voeltz v. Obama, et. al. (No. 2012 CA 467) and is being heard in the Circuit Court Of The Second Judicial Circuit In And For Leon County, Florida. To request an interview please contact Adrienne Mazzone at (561) 750-9800.”

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/florida-court-sets-hearing-on-obama-ballot-challenge-for-june-18-2012

 

Thanks to commenter Starla.

Joe Arpaio news conference March 1, 2012, CBS article, Obama eligibility, Natural born citizen deficiency, Obama records hidden with Justice Dept Attorneys help

Joe Arpaio news conference March 1, 2012, CBS article, Obama eligibility, Natural born citizen deficiency, Obama records hidden with Justice Dept Attorneys help

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Why is Obama now employing private attorneys to keep his name on state ballots, despite compelling evidence that he is not a natural born citizen?…Citizen Wells

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

The Sheriff Joe Arpaio news conference scheduled for today, March 1, 2012, is getting press coverage.

From CBS March 1, 2012.

“The Arizona lawman who calls himself America’s toughest sheriff is taking aim at President Obama’s birth certificate issue.

The controversy over the certificate has been widely debunked, but it remains alive in the eyes of some conservatives.

On Thursday, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio says he’ll unveil preliminary results of an investigation conducted by members of his volunteer cold-case posse into the authenticity of Obama’s birth certificate.

Arpaio is facing problems of his own, including a federal grand jury probe over alleged abuse of power and Justice Department accusations of racial profiling.

Rather than seek cover, Arpaio is moving into the spotlight in a fashion that has helped boost his career as a nationally known law officer.”

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501363_162-57388245/arpaio-investigates-obamas-birth-certificate/

This CBS article must be bestowed with Orwells because it is heavy on negative press on Joe Arpaio and lacking on reporting on Obama’s baggage. They are only receiving 2 Orwells because there was an attempt at accuracy. Instead of stating that the birth certificate issue had been completely debunked they stated:

” widely debunked”

CBS could have reported something like this.

From Citizen Wells September 17, 2011.

“Below is the Orwellian attempt by the Obama camp on AttackWatch.com to discredit Americans who have challenged Obama’s eligibility and his birth certificate.  One only has to revisit “1984″ by George Orwell for a deeper understanding of this revisionist history.

From AttackWatch.com.

“Attack

Attackers:Jerome Corsi, Donald Trump, conspiracy theorists
Attack Type:Written statements, interviewsThree years after President Obama’s campaign released the President’s certification of live birth, conspiracy theorists continue to question the document’s authenticity—despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

•Where’s the Birth Certificate author Jerome Corsi was unmoved by repeated validations of the authenticity of the President’s birth certificate, saying “I was called by my insiders, several of my informants in Hawaii about three weeks before it was released, and I was told that the document had been forged.”
Fact

Truth posted:September 1, 2011
President Obama is an American-born citizen. The authenticity of his short-form birth certificate was verified by the State of Hawaii as well as nonpartisan organizations like FactCheck.org and PolitiFact.com.

•President Obama’s short form birth certificate

•Read FactCheck.org’s article on the birth certificate “controversy”

•PolitiFact.com released this statement about the authenticity of the President’s birth certificate

In spite of this overwhelming evidence, conspiracy theorists continued to attack the legitimacy of the President’s citizenship. In April 2011, President Obama and his attorneys asked the State of Hawaii to release his long-form birth certificate in order to end the distraction. The Hawaii State Department of Health granted the request, and the President’s long-form certificate is available online.

•President Obama’s long form birth certificate

•Read the White House’s correspondence with the State of Hawaii

In his address to the American people, President Obama expressed hope that the country could move on. “We’ve got big problems to solve. And I’m confident we can solve them, but we’re going to have to focus on them—not on this.”

•Watch the President’s address”

http://www.attackwatch.com/attack-files-entry/obama-birth-certificate/

The above is a collection of lies, half truths and references to heavily biased websites. They will not be addressed further at this time. Instead we would like a simple answer to a simple question.

Citizen Wells question (or if you are Obama, attack).

Why has Obama used taxpayer dollars and resources to assist him in keeping his birth certificate, college records and other records hidden since he took control of the White House?

AND

Why did Obama make Robert F. Bauer, an attorney with Perkins Coie, who helped Obama keep his records hidden before taking control of the White House, part of his administration as White House Counsel?

Here is a list of some of the US Justice Department attorneys who have assisted Obama in keeping his records hidden. Their representation of Obama is a matter of public record. This list does not include the support staffs.

Eric Fleisig-Greene

Elizabeth A. Pascal

Neal Kumar Katyal Acting Solicitor General

R. CraiG Lawrence

Mark B. Stern

Andre Birotte Jr.

Leon W. Weidman

David A. Dejute

Roger E. West

George S. Cardona

Tony West

Paul J. Fishman

Please report this “attack” at AttackWatch.com. Any response to this article by the Obama camp would have to qualify as a great work of fiction.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/09/17/attack-watch-obama-birth-certificate-justice-department-attorneys-robert-bauer-attackwatch-com-report-citizen-wells/

Obama ballot challenge cases update, Obama eligibility, Natural Born Citizen Status, Georgia New Hampshire cases, Orly taitz

Obama ballot challenge cases update, Obama eligibility, Natural Born Citizen Status, Georgia New Hampshire cases, Orly taitz

“Why did Obama, prior to occupying the White House, employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to assist him in avoiding the presentation of a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells


“Why is Obama now employing private attorneys to keep his name on state ballots, despite compelling evidence that he is not a natural born citizen?…Citizen Wells

From Citizen Wells January 3, 2012.

“The Obama motion to dismiss the Georgia ballot challenge has been denied.”

“On December 15, 2011, Defendant, President Barack Obama, moved for dismissal of Plaintiffs’ challenge to his qualifications for office. The Court has jurisdiction to hear this contested case pursuant to Chapter 13 of Title 50, the “Georgia Administrative Procedure Act.”

For the reasons indicated below, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/01/03/obama-motion-to-dismiss-georgia-ballot-challenge-denied-david-farrar-et-al-vs-barack-obama-judge-michael-m-malihi/

Here is another excellent report from The Post & Email on the Obama ballot challenge cases in Georgia and New Hampshire.

“Is Barack Hussein Obama constitutionally eligible to serve as president?”

“Atty. Orly Taitz has provided an update on six active cases, the first of which has a hearing on January 6 in Hawaii. In Taitz v. Fuddy, Taitz has filed a Motion for Reciprocal Subpoena Enforcement against Loretta Fuddy, Director of the Hawaii Department of Health, which she has requested be heard in addition to the scheduled motion for “production of documents.”

The Reciprocal Subpoena motion is a request for Fuddy to comply with a subpoena issued to her by the state of Georgia in a case there. Taitz reported that Deputy Attorney General Jill T. Nagamine wrote a letter to Taitz stating that her client, Fuddy, “will not comply with a a subpoena from Georgia,” which Taitz is attempting to enforce.

Taitz has requested to inspect the original birth record of Barack Hussein Obama as well as the original long-form birth certificate of a deceased infant born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961, Virginia Sunahara, whose long-form birth certificate was not provided to the family and the short-form birth certificate, which was provided, contained a number which was suspiciously out of sequence.

The Georgia case is scheduled for trial on January 26, 2012. Taitz represents a registered voter, David Farrar, and four presidential candidates in a lawsuit against Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp and the Executive Committee of the Democrat Party of Georgia. “There is one more presidential candidate who might join as well,” Taitz said. “The case began as a ballot challenge by one person, and it was transferred to the Administrative Court of the state of Georgia. It’s currently a legal action seeking declaratory relief and an injunction which would prevent Obama from being on the ballot in Georgia.”

Taitz reported that after David Farrar filed his challenge, the judge joined his case with two others cases, challenging Obama’s constitutional eligibility. One case is being brought by Atty. Mark Hatfield, who is also a Georgia State Representative; the other has been filed by Atty. Van Irion, who has also filed lawsuits against the DNC in three states on behalf of Liberty Legal Foundation. Taitz stated that separation of the cases was requested by the other attorneys. She said it was granted to one of them, and the other request is pending.”

“Taitz stated that she believes there has to be a holding issued directly on point in regard to the definition of “natural born Citizen” as it applies to the US Presidency, there has to be a holding, as to whose responsibility it is, to vet Constitutional and factual eligibility of candidates. ”I believe that based on the writings of the Framers of the Constitution, their intent was to include children of citizens, not children of foreigners. The court needs to come up with a holding directly on point in regards to this issue, in regards to children of one citizen parent, their eligibility for the U.S. Presidency.

In New Hampshire, Taitz has filed, an appeal with the state Supreme Court regarding its recent denial to hear a case brought against the New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission. “Actions of the Ballot Law Commission were outside the norm of what is normally done by the agency,” she said. She filed an application for stay which the court denied. She stated that she “will be going further, either with a Motion for Reconsideration in New Hampshire or straight to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

In the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Taitz is planning to file a Motion for Rehearing en Banc in which she represents former Ambassador Alan Keyes, ten state representatives, and 30 members of the military. The case was heard on May 2, 2011, by a three-judge panel, which issued a decision stating that presidential contenders have the right to challenge another candidate’s eligibility during the campaign period.

Two cases filed in Washington, DC are Taitz v. Astrue and Taitz v. Ruemmler, which are currently in the Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia Circuit, in which Taitz stated that she is waiting for the schedule which contains the docket of pleadings.

Regarding the costs and hours of work involved in the various cases on which she is working, Taitz said, “People don’t realize how much time it takes to prepare the filings and exhibits. The filing with the New Hampshire Supreme Court came to almost 300 pages. I had to prepare seven books for the New Hampshire Supreme Court which had to be printed, bound and mailed, and filing fees have to be paid. People have no idea how much I’m spending. Travel to New Hampshire and all of the other trips is very, very expensive. I am spending hundreds of hours as well; it took me a full week to prepare the New Hampshire filing. I had to spend $1,221 for my plane ticket to Honolulu. I ask that people donate to this cause.””

Read more:

http://www.thepostemail.com/2012/01/02/atty-orly-taitz-upcoming-actions-on-six-obama-eligibility-cases/

Rick Santorum endorsement, Citizen Wells endorses Santorum for presidency, God Family Constitution Defense Budget, Legal immigration, Obama eligibility

Rick Santorum endorsement, Citizen Wells endorses Santorum for presidency, God Family Constitution Defense Budget, Legal immigration, Obama eligibility

My friends have been asking me for weeks what my preference in a presidential candidate is. For weeks I have been stating, Rick Santorum. An intelligent, well informed friend of mine who I have known for many years agrees.

So far my biggest gripe with Santorum was his response to Obama’s eligibility deficiency. However, many otherwise good Americans have been fooled by the Orwellian brainwashing of the mainstream media. Like many decisions in life, Santorum for me is the lesser of evils, however, I find most of his positions appealing.

From the DesMoines Register August 7, 2011.

“Candidate profile: Rick Santorum refuses to compromise on principles”

“Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum knew he was in trouble as he sought re-election to his third term in 2006.

Public opinion was hardening against the war in Iraq and the president who started it. All signs pointed to a bad year for Republicans.

His supporters were blunt, recalled Charlie Artz, a Harrisburg lawyer and a friend since they were in their 20s. To win, they said, you need to change
course. You need to soften your opinions.

But Santorum wouldn’t budge. He described the state of America’s families as a moral crisis. He declared the nation at a critical crossroads in a fight
against radical Islamists. And he ultimately lost by 18 points to Bob Casey Jr., the largest margin of defeat for an incumbent senator since 1980.

“Rick is a very devout Catholic guy, and he believes in the principles of the founding fathers of this country,” Artz said. “He is not willing to compromise
on that. He will stand for his beliefs and his principles above any political expediency.”

Santorum, 53, is not about to start mincing words now that he’s seeking the Republican presidential nomination. That leaves little room in the middle between his supporters and his detractors.

Jamie Johnson of Stratford is a Christian pastor who has worked in 40 Republican political campaigns over the past two decades. He said he was drawn to join Santorum’s presidential bid after watching him lead the charge on family values legislation in Congress.

“I thought, ‘Wow. This guy is a guy of energy and passion and convictions,’ ” Johnson said. “If there was ever a time for a muscular Republican leader to
stand up against President Obama, it is now. I don’t see Michele Bachmann or Tim Pawlenty or Rick Perry having the intellectual or spiritual muscle to go toe
to toe with Barack Obama.”

Jim Burn, chairman of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party, has closely monitored Santorum’s political career, too, but sees him in an entirely different light.
By 2006, Pennsylvanians had come to view Santorum as completely out of touch with their values, he said.

“He was viewed as a Republican with extreme right-wing beliefs and was not viable,” Burn said.

His story starts with emigrating granddad
Santorum’s political outlook is firmly rooted in family.

On the campaign trail, he frequently tells the story of how his grandfather came to America from Italy in the 1920s because he detested living under fascist
dictator Benito Mussolini. His grandfather worked in Pennsylvania’s coal mines until he was 72, Santorum said.

During a campaign stop in July in Marion, Ia., Santorum told of kneeling before his grandfather’s casket as a teenager and looking at his large folded hands,
holding a rosary. His grandfather’s independence and hard work brought freedom to his family, he said.

“He gave me the opportunities that I have,” Santorum said. “I feel like I am standing on his shoulders.”

He describes his grandfather, Pietro, known as Pete, and his father, Aldo, a psychologist, as strong-willed, a trait he shares.

His dad was a typical Italian father who “would always yell first and speak softly later,” he said.

Santorum grew up in Virginia and Pennsylvania. Both his father and mother, Catherine, a nurse, worked for the Veterans Administration.

After earning bachelor’s and master’s degrees, he became a staffer for Republican state Sen. Doyle Corman while he earned a law degree. Then, too, he
demonstrated his strong-willed streak.

Corman said he hired Santorum because he was bright and ambitious, and Corman let Santorum know he was free to argue with his boss about politics.

“If Rick thought that I was headed in the wrong direction, we would have debates over it, and the staff couldn’t believe how hot our debates would get at
times,” Corman recalled in a phone interview. “You could hear us through the walls, but I wanted that, and Rick made me think things out well.”

Fast-rising career in U.S. House, Senate
He was a young man on a fast track. He started work for a prominent Pittsburgh law firm and did some lobbying at the Pennsylvania Capitol. Four years after
graduating from law school, he launched a bid for Congress.

Corman and others told him to forget it because it would be too difficult to defeat a long-term Democratic incumbent.

“He beat that seven-term incumbent, and the rest is history,” Corman said.

As a 32-year-old freshman, Santorum joined former U.S. Rep. Jim Nussle of Iowa and others to focus on government reform, becoming a member of the “Gang of Seven” that exposed the House banking and post office scandals.

In 1994, at 36, he won election to the Senate, once again unseating an incumbent, Democrat Harris Wofford. Two years later, he was an author and floor manager of a landmark welfare reform act that moved millions of people from the welfare rolls to the work force.

Again and again, he pressed abortion fight
It was about this time that he and his family experienced a defining moment, underlining his commitment to reverence for life.

After Santorum and his wife arrived in Washington, D.C., their family quickly grew to three children. But in 1996, Karen Santorum, who had worked as a neo-
natal nurse and a lawyer, experienced a difficult pregnancy.

During labor, she developed a severe infection in her uterus, and her temperature soared to 105 degrees. Their son was born prematurely and lived only two hours.

Karen Santorum describes how she and her husband brought their deceased infant home instead of allowing the child to be placed in a refrigerated morgue.
Their daughter, Elizabeth, cuddled the infant and announced, “This is my baby brother, Gabriel; he is an angel.”

A priest celebrated the Mass of the Angels in his grandparents’ living room, and the casket was placed in the back seat of the family’s van as they drove to
the cemetery.

Karen Santorum wrote a book about her son, “Letters to Gabriel: The True Story of Gabriel Michael Santorum,” which includes a forward by Mother Teresa of Calcutta.

At the same time, Rick Santorum was leading efforts in the U.S. Senate to ban what he describes as partial-birth abortions.

Santorum acknowledges that other Republican presidential candidates also say they oppose abortion. But he portrays himself as the candidate who has a proven
record fighting to restrict it.

He has spoken of losing a battle against President Bill Clinton for a partial-birth abortion act.

“I didn’t just offer (the bill), but I stood there and fought … year in and year out,” Santorum said. “We lost because Bill Clinton would veto the bill. …
But I continued to fight. I continued to stand up for life, and God blessed us.” (The bill was signed into law under President George W. Bush.)

As senator, called for balancing the budget
Besides championing anti-abortion legislation in the Senate, he supported a balanced federal budget and a line-item veto to curb spending.

That record makes him the right choice to lead a nation confronting out-of-control spending and a downgraded credit rating, he says.

Even before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Santorum proposed transforming the U.S. military from a Cold War force to a more agile one to meet modern threats. He was also a leader on U.S.-Israeli relations, authoring the “Syria Accountability Act” and the “Iran Freedom and Support Act,” despite initial opposition from President Bush.”

“Santorum has campaigned more days and conducted more events in Iowa than any other candidate. But he has had difficulty gaining traction. In The Des Moines Register’s Iowa Poll in June, he registered 4 percent support among likely Republican caucusgoers.

But he takes heart in a Quinnipiac University poll released last week that showed him in a dead heat with Obama in a theoretical presidential matchup in
Pennsylvania, a key swing state. And he reminds voters that he has twice defeated incumbent Democrats.

He also notes that Abraham Lincoln lost two Senate races before he was elected president.

His friend Artz says Santorum will outwork other candidates and would make a great president because he would always put the country first.

“I think he is going to surprise some people out there,” Artz said.”

““Rick won’t apologize for America being great, and he will defend Israel. He didn’t shy away from taking on the partial-birth abortion ban or welfare reform,
and he’s certainly not going to shy away from getting this country back on track.” — Kim Lehman, Iowa’s National Republican Committeewoman and former president of Iowa Right to Life

“I don’t comment on who would be a good president or a bad president, but I can tell you that a lot of Rick Santorum’s policies and priorities are not in
keeping with core constitutional principles.” — Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director for Americans United for Separation of Church and State

“Not many politicians have spine; this one does.” — Talk-show host Glenn Beck, introducing Santorum before a June interview on Fox News”

http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/08/07/santorum-refuses-to-compromise-on-principles/

Rick Santorum meets my priorities of :

God
Family
Constitution
Defense
Budget

Rick Santorum, like other decent members of Congress such as Howard Coble was brainwashed by the mainstream media and their own congressional resources.

Rick Santorum told WND, “My understanding is that issue was solved. If there’s evidence to the contrary [showing Obama is not eligible], they should bring it forth.”

When Santorum was reminded about the Natural Born Citizen requirement he allegedly responded “I don’t think that’s what the Constitution requires, and he (President Obama) was born in the country, so it doesn’t matter.”

I personally believe that Rick Santorum, when properly advised , will reconsider his position on Obama’s eligibility and will be open to ask more questions and seek more answers.

Mr. Santorum, I am at your service.

Contact me.

Wells