Let's make an "Obama Bombshell"!

[WhiskeyTango]

I have been posting as much as I can on this site, Was going to put this onto my myspace and get others to post about it as well!

This is another great find by Granny!

GREAT job legal!!! EVERYONE should be doing this at LEAST daily. Lets get this done people! The cant ignore sheer numbers. And I think this may be the guy to actually listen, so lets not waste any time!

Hope you dont mind granny, but I put a link to this thread in my siggy
good vibes all,
:joint1:

[boaz]

when our veep elect was talking about the need for "more police on the street" during the primaries, i thought, well, there they go again, but . . . President Elect Obama seems to have a respect for the Constitution, unlike former presidents. i am fairly confident he will see that the people and govts, of our United States can make our own important life and death decisions. there is no need, or right, of the feds to interfere. :twocents:

[WhiskeyTango]

BUMP****
get to work guys!!!!

[Mississippi Steve]

This isn't a news article, it's just Granny spouting off again! It's no secret that Obama will be "dropping bombshells" via executive orders as soon as he's president.

Lets not get in too big a hurry... I just got this in the mail this morning...


Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:16:47 -0600
Subject: Fwd: Supreme Court [will be] Ruling on Obama's Eligibility for Presidency

I think I still don't believe this! And in fact, I've no confirmation other than the article on Freedoms Phoenix Web site. So, maybe I haven't got the right info here, but I truly hope I do.



http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Featu...1441&From=News





Supreme court ruling on Obama's eligibility for presidency

Date: 11-18-2008
Subject: Obama Administration


Supreme court ruling on Obama's eligibility for presidency
Docket for 08-570

Supreme Court Of The United States (SCOTUS) Justice David Souter has agreed that a review of the federal lawsuit filed by attorney Phil Berg against Barack Hussein Obama II, et al., which was subsequently dismissed for lack of standing is warranted. SCOTUS Docket No. 08-570 contains the details.

A review of that docket and the Rule 10 of the Supreme Court makes abundantly clear that Justice Souter's granting of a review on the Writ of Certiorari is not a right entitled to citizen Phil Berg, but rather is a matter of judcial discretion based upon a compelling reason. That compelling reason is the Constitutional requirement that "No person except a natural born citizen ... shall be eligible to the office of President..."

What this means is that on or before 1 DECEMBER 2008 Barack Hussein Obama II must respond to the writ of certiorari, and since the Berg v Obama case hinged primarily on the question of Obama's place of birth, it is almost inconceivable that Barack Obama will thumb his nose at the Justices of the Supreme Court and he is absolutely compelled to provide a vault copy [of] his original birth certificate.

Another very salient fact to consider at this time is that, despite all of the
pronouncements of the print and broadcast media, Barack Obama is not yet the
President-elect of the United States. Barack Obama can only become the
President-elect after the Electoral College convenes on 15 DECEMBER 2008 in
their respective state capitals around the nation and casts their votes to elect
the President and the Vice President. As you can see this election day occurs
two weeks after the required response to the Supreme Court granted Writ of
Certiorari.

The bottom line is this: the presidential election of 2008 remains an ongoing
process, the outcome of which remains undetermined, and all talk about a
potential Constitutional crisis in the United States are at least 36 days
premature.

The inevitable constitutional crisis regarding President-elect Obama, of course,
revolves around his inability (or unwillingness) to produce an authentic
Hawaiian birth certificate with the raised certificate stamp that the Federal
Elections Commission can independently verify.

Here are some of the unanswered issues hanging over the head of President-elect
Barack Obama and the question of his American citizenship:

· The allegation that Obama was born in Kenya to parents unable to
automatically grant him American citizenship;

· The allegation that Obama was made a citizen of Indonesia as a child and that
he retained foreign citizenship into adulthood without recording an oath of
allegiance to regain any theoretical American citizenship;

· The allegation that Obama's birth certificate was a forgery and that he may
not be an eligible, natural-born citizen;

· The allegation that Obama was not born an American citizen; lost any
hypothetical American citizenship he had as a child; that Obama may not now be
an American citizen and even if he is, may hold dual citizenships with other
countries. If any, much less all, of these allegations are true, the suit
claims, Obama cannot constitutionally serve as president.

· The allegations that "Obama's grandmother on his father's side, half brother
and half sister claim Obama was born in Kenya," the suit states." Reports
reflect Obama's mother went to Kenya during her pregnancy; however, she was
prevented from boarding a flight from Kenya to Hawaii at her late stage of
pregnancy, which apparently was a normal restriction to avoid births during a
flight. Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama) gave birth to Obama in Kenya, after which she
flew to Hawaii and registered Obama's birth."

· The claim could not be verified by inquiries to Hawaiian hospitals, since
state law bars the hospitals from releasing medical records to the public;

Even if Obama produced authenticated proof of his birth in Hawaii, however, the
suit claims that the U.S. Nationality Act of 1940 provided that minors lose
their American citizenship when their parents expatriate. Since Obama's mother
married an Indonesian citizen and moved to Indonesia, the suit claims, she
forfeited both her and Barack's American citizenship.

[wbbs464]

Thanks for the site Granny. I have just lost a sister with disc disease to pain killers. I have the same problem, with autheritis, and i just want to voice my choice in my treatment. I am now taking 120 10mg hydrocodones a month for pain. It is gonna give me yet another monkey to feed if ya know what I mean. It takes about 1 damn ounce a week and i can cope. But weed here is 200.00 an ounce so who can afford that.
I don't want to accidently die as my sister did. You showed me an outlet, I will take your advice and e-mail them everyday. For this I am greatful.
Keep up the good work
Bill Bunting

[cannakeeper]

Here's what I wrote to Mr. Obama through that form:

Dear President-Elect Obama

I have an idea that crosses across Civil Rights, Healthcare, and Taxes in one fell swoop.

Since 1937, America has been under the rule of an oppressive war on drugs. I do believe that so-called "hard drugs", as well as many prescription painkillers, need to be monitored and fought much more closely than they have been in recent memory. I say that because, by comparison, the DEA and Federal Government spend far too much money already on fighting one drug that, at the very least, should not be illegal.

That drug is marijuana.

Marijuana has been proven by many medical agencies to be very effective at treating a myriad of diseases ranging from psychological disorders to the side effects of chemotherapy and conditions with severe chronic pain.

The FDA, and other opponents, say it is not legitimate as a form of medicine because it is smoked. There are other ways of ingesting marijuana besides smoking that are just as effective at delivering THC and other cannabinoids to the body. Eating or drinking in a tea has proven very effective for patients, and so has vaporization (A device is used that heats the cannabis to just above the boiling point of THC delivers the active ingredients for inhalation without burning any material). Also, the side effects even from smoking cannabis pale in comparison to the long list of those from modern pain medications.

My second point on this issue is that taxes could be spent more wisely than arresting medical and recreational users of cannabis. Silly and untrue ad campaigns sponsored created by the Office for National Drug Control Policy have resorted to such silly arguments as marijuana users will be reduced to a career as a "burrito taster". This is absurd, as millions of marijuana users lead very successful lives, from plumbers and construction workers to teachers, lawyers, doctors, and businessmen. Secondly on this point, the State could tax the sale of cannabis as it does alcohol and cigarettes, and still keep it less expensive than it is on the black market. Which, by the way, makes billions of dollars on the sale of cannabis. If it were legal for recreational use, not only would you be able to cut the supply of money that lines the pockets of terrorists and criminals, but it would effectively keep it from reaching the hands of minors. Right now, it is much easier for a teenager to find an amount of cannabis than it is to buy beer. In a well-regulated, legal industry, we could control who gets it and how much they're allowed to get. The tax revenues from this multi-billion dollar business would be jaw-dropping.

Lastly, this is a question of civil rights. My body is not the government's. It is mine. I can do whatever I like with my body as long as I don't hurt anyone else, can I not? True, those under the influence may pose a threat when operating machinery or, although I've never heard of it, intentionally harm others while "high". However, there are better solutions to these problems than across-the-board criminalization. Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana can become a new law that is enforced just as Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol is. Much like hate crimes, we could amplify the punishments of those who commit a crime while under the influence to strongly discourage would-be criminals. The point is, there is no plausible reason to keep Marijuana, a drug that has never directly caused a death in medical history, illegal and claim it is too dangerous to allow people to use it when alcohol, a destructive drug that eats people away emotionally and physically, and tobacco, an equally destructive drug that kills hundreds of thousands a year, are allowed under the idea that a person can do what they want with their own bodies.

I emplore you, President Elect Obama, to consider these ideas as honest issues, for they are very important to the citizens. Nine out of ten pro-marijuana ballot measures passed on the same day you won the presidency. The people who elected you have weighed in on this issue in favor for change, which was the central focus on your campaign. You owe it to the American People to get your hands dirty with this issue, by at least making a public statement containing your opinions on the matter.

Thank you for your time, Mr. President Elect. I know you are very busy with your transition team, and I hope for you to be happy and healthy while in office, while "redistributing" that happiness to the people you govern.

If possible, please respond. I would love to hear what you have to say.

Sincerely,
Jake Martinez

Think I'll hear from him?

VERY WELL STATED!!! If this does not make a politicion/lawmaker feel like a dickweed than nothing will!! I just left a similar book on that site and I believe an innendation of this type should eventually get a favorable resolution, hopefully in our lifetime.

[Sandm4n]

I sent in my message, great going granny! :jointsmile: let freedom reign its a herb my bruddahs!! :rastasmoke:

[mjslover1]

MAKE THIS A STICKY FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!! :hippy:

:rastasmoke:

[Storm Crow]

We just have to keep posting about what we write! This post needs to last for two months, roughly. Just keep bumping it! We can do that! And every time it gets bumped, someone new will see it, write in, and post about it!

I do a different aspect why cannabis should be legal, each time I write- the fear of a young MMJ mother too afraid of CPS even to write to Change.gov: The Obama-Biden Transition Team | Of the People, By the People (!), vets with PTSD, the latest refusal by SCOTUS, hemp, Rick Simpson, breast cancer, AIDS, and many more. What have you written?

Change.gov: The Obama-Biden Transition Team | Of the People, By the People and FreeRice are part of my daily routine!

Make them part of yours, too! Bookmark them and visit every day! thumbsup:




Granny:hippy:

[boaz]

Look, Obama will be looking for popular issues to usher in his presidency with his "Obama bombshells". Let's make medical cannabis one of those issues. 65% of the US voters seem to be in favor of this- as evidenced by the recent voting results! If enough of us talk enough about it on his site, we might get more than "just" the DEA ending their raids! How about rescheduling? How about re-prioritizing the DEA to go after DANGEROUS drugs and foreign cartels? How about Kucinich for "drug Czar"?

:thumbsup:

these are all great starting points, granny. maybe we just need to post links to this thread all over their internets.

here's what i think . . . med use is protected by our basic common law human rights. the end. just because previous presidents have ignored that for their crooked friends means nothing. Obama can recognize this without publicly stating it, it think.

personally i believe all use is protected by the constitution, and we could see a test of this in 2010 if eneough Californians get aboard and pass this.