Obama's Communist-Socialist Imperial Presidency?

Obama defenders think that it is crazy for anyone to ask to see Obama's credentials to vet his US Citizenship.  While I would first nail him on his admission that his father was always a Kenyan National and never a US Citizen (denying him US NBC status immediately) and then move on to his fraudulent Social Security Card and his Indonesian Name Change and Brennan's Quid Pro Quo post for destroying Obama's pre-2008 passports, others would approach this issue much the way the Media might already know...and call crazy, because they in the Media wish to soft revolution the US into an uber-liberal Communist-Socialist State, where they attain some sort of ruling class and demi-god status.  So the expected response?

http://www.proof-positive.com/one.php?a=Home










The ff. video demonstrates how easy it is to obtain a Long Form Birth Certificate, but in the ff. TWO videos  makes the egregious common error by effectually stating simply being US born will equal US Natural Born Citizenship, when US Supreme Court Law has been consistent that there is a need for a US Citizen Father as well as a US Soil irth.













However, the unexpected response should be this, and it should hopefully have the same effect on some as "scared straight" for telling it like it is: 



See also: http://frontpagemag.com/2010/05/06/a-game-changing-weapon/

Those who are Liberals who complain about US Colonialism of the world are lying hypocrites and pseudo-intellectuals.  Think about the hypocrisy...they support China, which is in the midst of a 5-6 Trillion dollar colonialism of international asset purchases of the worlds precious metals, scarce minerals, oil resources, etc. in what I think is to the effect of 92 nations world wide.  (I may have to be corrected on the number at 92 as being higher though).

The Communist and colonializing Chinese are a hand-in-hand financial partner of the Petrobras scheme with George Soros, Hugo Chavez, Communist Brazil and GE, and the Obama Administration using the US Import/Export bank via a notorious homosexual with a co-Progressive Agenda.  They are buying up oil fields in Iraq, mines and natural resources in deepest Africa and South America, and of the same Cold War Agenda that the Russians tried to further from the late 1940s to the late 1980s and bankrupted on.  Soft Revolutions of internal Government changes is what is going on. 

 Obama must be a little more than upset that his religious comrades, the Islamic Literalists that normal Americans call terrorists,  haven't exploited all the gaps he/Obama has made in US Domestic Defense.  His aggressive tactics to allow the CIA and DOD a war of drone bomber revenge, he must have thought, would surely send their lazy carcasses from the Middle East to attacking here.  Obama offers them US Constitutional Rights and ACLU Lawyer protections if they get caught.  Obama has removed the funding for nuclear detection in US Ports in May 2009.  Obama has offered increasing a pro-Islamic Agenda after each US Domestic terrorist attack, such as with the underwear bomber who burned his phallus off, and the Ft. Hood shooting of Major Hasan.  Attack America, Obama says by his actions in Administrative Policy...this will help me (Obama says) Islamicize America to the will of the Devil (i.e., Allah, who is Satan, a fallen cherub). 

But lo, now the Russian Bear returns.  Russia has joined China in the marketing and selling of high tech stealth weapons, cargo trailer container missiles.  Obama has provided the funding to Hamas, and I believe personally expects Hamas to front terror attacks against the US.  But greed on Hamas' part has probably derailed that plan, as they were paid off for helping Obama get elected less than a month or two of his usurping the Office by their fraud assistance on the elect Obama phone lines. 

But wherever and whenever the next serious terror attack comes, it will probably have to include the possibility of high tech  (such as expensive cargo container missile activations) as well as the low tech advances (suicide/homicide bombings, spray and pray like Major Hasan, and sue for Allah approaches).

These new high tech to terrorists "with real money" sales will potentially turn the top tier of any cargo transports, in which 100 can span the top tier of a super cargo transport, into a floating arsenal more devastating than the attack on Pearl Harbor was to the US Navy was in 1941. 

Any US coastal target is now vunerable, and activation is likely optimum at about 20-30 miles out...well beyond US detection capabilities, except AFTER the fact of an activation and/or launch. 


So while Obama wants to denuclearize the US, and the rest of the world builds its nuclear arsenals (while Russia merely discards a few non-working obsoletes it would have anyway)...the above video is what Obama probably prays every night for.  Why?  Because he is NOT a US Natural Born Citizen, born with a trio of citizenships at birth, and was given a fourth legience to which he pledged as a child every day in school too.  He is a Muslim defined "Christian", or a Wahabi "anointed" secret zealot, and a Communist-Socialist by his deeds-and-actions while in the obtained by fraud Presidency.

In July 2006, it was clearly reported that the aim of the George Soros political Action subversive wing, the Open Society Institute was this:


"Open-society advocates would reinterpret the U.S. Constitution to better suit the "age of fallibility," which no longer recognizes unalienable rights or divine providence. The Soros open-society concept requires that the United States be removed as a superpower and that the American people be subjected to the will and wants of all the world's people.


...Open-society, open-borders advocates seek to vilify the United States as a war-mongering, empire-building, brutish abuser of the world's impoverished nations. The United States thus is worthy of internal and external contempt and global defeats as part of the nation's deconstruction."
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/7/25/104735.shtml

That is not only George Soros, but that is also exactly who and what Barack Obama is. Both are deserving of our contempt for their Communist-Socialist anti-American Agendas that are in motion to deconstruct and destroy -- not only the Government of the United States -- but all of us US Citizens (except any few ruling class insiders with them).



Wake up America.  If the US gets Missile Struck by weapons such as the above, or homicide bombings and car bombs become almost as much as a norm here as they became in Israel, will you pseudo-intellectual Liberals of either major Party then stop saying all this lying sewage that people only oppose Obama based on skin color, and then admit it is and has always been a combine of Constitutional and National Security issues after all?    Or will you be rooting for the terrorists until they kill off your own family members for Allah, before realizing the error of your idiotic one Party rule at all costs philosophies? 

What will it take, America?  When a  perhaps Soviet-Communist  (by that, I personally think George Soros should be investigated to see if he is de facto and de jure the deepest cover public handler the Soviets ever had) takes up this low-level Communist asset and molds him so that he usurps the US Presidency, mouthing the words of another Communist asset's words like gospel off the telepromter with greater fervor than anchor newcasters, and a third Communist asset plays the 60s headgames of SDS and the Weather Underground  as the new Governor of Hawaii on the Obama having a lack of a Long Form Birth Certificate issue...what is it going to take to have the US Military Veterans and the rest of WE THE PEOPLE as declared by the US Constitution, to legally and peacefully rise up, and cast these vermin out of office and into Leavenworth or some Super-max prison somewhere in the USA ?   Or will America one day turn on the radio and television, see all the newspeople gush about a new era and praise the new hammer and sickle, and Obama as if he is the new Messiah of theirs to worship, and anyone who disagrees needs to go to a New Holocaust Death Camp after all?    Liberalism is as much a drug on the mind as any Nazi fanaticism they berate ever was.  I say, let's enforce the US Constitution's Natural Born Citizen Clause. 

It needs to be a "WE THE PEOPLE" T.E.A.M. (Together Everyone Achieves More) effort based upon allowances in Constitutional Law according to the Founders' Intent. One possible solution, perhaps? 

Contingent on a popularity of likemindedness and co-determination: how about  a nationwide grass roots effort for the passing a 3/4ths of the States 2008 election recall through the State Legislatures?  

R. Lee Ermey Video snippet: Obama Administration destroying this Country, imposing Socialism

R. Lee Ermey, popular military weapons show host,

for example,



as well as Commercial spokesman, Animated soldier character voice(s), etc.

After coming out on-stage to a USO benefit to the Rolling Stones tune ('Paint it Black'), Ermey states that the US Marine Corp. has been around since 1775, celebrated 235 years, and will be around forever...and that we should all rise up against this present Administration (of Obama) which is trying to impose Socialism on us, and bring the USA to its knees. 

Though not near as far as I would like a public blast against Obama and his Communist-Socialist traitors, it is a good start and a good sign that Americans are realizing  in greater numbers among military families how true the accusations against Obama are.  Even though NBC cut the mikes to all but Ermey's mike, you can hear the crowds cheer him on in positive agreement to his words.  They who are still deceived by Obama and his Communist-Socialist co-conspirators are shrinking in numerical support;  while we who are not deceived (and  those who are no longer deceived by Obama and are joining us) continue to grow;  because the Law, the facts, and the Truth is on OUR side.




Semper Fi, Marine. 

 Oooorah!!!

CBO report no longer Non-Partisan and intelligent, but into unintelligent Leftist Partisan myth-making under Obama: video

Chris Matthews and Pundits: Trust the former Soviet Assets now in power in the USA to put this Obama "Birther issue" to rest, or inferrences to this effect.

[[[[[ Update video from 12/29/2010, posted 12/31/2010  on Neil Abercrombie empty (while addressing in the same Bill Ayers mannerism style) boasting he will release Obama's Hawaii Long Form Birth Certificate.  While Abercrombie may have been living in Hawaii when Obama was born somewhere in the world, he was NOT PRESENT AT BARACK'S BIRTH, and without sole US Legience @ Birth, Barack is NOT a US Natural Born Citizen.




end of update.     ]]]]]





Question: Can I take the "Natural Born Citizen Clause of the US Constitution" literally?

Answer:  Yes, and there is an 18th Century US Supreme Court case we can cite for this, even as a Treaty was in the intent of this language, we have within a generation other US Supreme Court Cases saying basically the same language and intent as it regards the US Constitution and Framers Intent in the cases of the early 1800's.

Ware v. Hylton, 3 U.S. 3 Dall. 199 (1796) @ 240 states:

       “When we collect the intention from the words only, as they lie in the writing before us, it is a literal interpretation, and indeed if the words and the construction of a writing are clear and precise, we can scarce call it interpretation to collect the intention of the writer from thence. The principal rule to be observed in literal interpretation is to follow that sense, in respect both of the words and the construction which is agreeable to common use.”

And @ 245 “This principle is recognized by the Constitution….”

As I have stated previously, the US Constitution to be understood in the natural sense per South Carolina v. United States, 199 U.S. 437 @ 448 - 450 (1905), Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U. S. 1 (1824) @ 188-189, taking also into account the influence of Vattel -- even as cited in The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253 @ 289-290 (1814) -on the definitions of the framers in using "natural born citizen" in place of indigenes (indigenous) as used by Vattel.   And further, every word of the US Constitution (according to the Framers Intent, as stated by the US Supreme Court) is to have its due force, as stated by Holmes v. Jennison, 39 U.S. (14 Peters) 540 @ 570-71 (1840).  This includes  the word "natural" in front of "born citizen" in Article 2.1.5 of the US Constitution in order to designate the Government of the father is passed on to his seed or child. 

The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253, 289 (1814) - Chief Justice John Marshall: “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.’”

 

Those who argue that by English Common Law, Obama becomes a US NBC.  Problem is, this is America...not England, and since the Treaty of 1651 with Virginia.   America has had a unique distinction from England, though patterned after much English common law, as British America, it had variances to those Common Laws that were uniquely American.  But even were we to accept the Doctrine of Natural Allegiance in English Common Law, what the Left fails to inform you is that in citizenship of the child, it is famously and best expressed as:

Nemo potest exuere Patriam... [expanded and reiterated by me, is translated in that context as]:

"No one has the power / ability / authority to leave / reject / disown himself from the Father's Land."

Barack Obama Sr. was NEVER a US Citizen, and ever a Kenyan Citizen his entire life (with a dual British Commonwealth Citizenship at the time of his death and at the time of Barack II's alleged 1961 birth ).

In the context of Barack Obama, that means he has an attachment and legience to Kenya at birth, something a United States Natural Born Citizen can NOT legally have AT BIRTH.

Chris Matthews, the guy that allegedly got sexually aroused by Obama at the 2008 DNC Convention with a tingle up his leg, and his Liberal Pundits, want you to disregard the US Constitution "natural born citizen" clause, and to now trust Hawaii's new Governor Neil Abercrombie,  a documented Soviet Communist Agent sponsored "asset" over patriotic Constitutionalist Americans.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

So MSNBC's Chris Matthews and friends say that we are to trust the same Neil Abercrombie who was sponsored by a known alleged Communist Soviet Agent?

Chris Matthews and his MSNBC friends (the same company own by GE, whose subsidiary bought the Royal Bank of Scotland just before they received $92,000,000,000 in Obama given "stimulus monies at US Taxpayer expense), these say that we are to trust the same Neil Abercrombie who has close ties with the American Communists offshoot the Democratic Socialists of America? That Neil Abercrombie?

Let me give you a brief background by a New Zealand Investigator, Trevor Loudon, http://newzeal.blogspot.com/
who deserves research and background investigation credit on Abercrombie et al., and who also deserves financial support by those of you who are able to give to this pro-US ally.

http://www.keywiki.org/index.php/Neil_Abercrombie_%28Summary%29

"Neil Abercrombie was a covertly socialist Democratic member of the United States House of Representatives 1st district of Hawaii, until he resigned in early 2010 to seek the Governorship of Hawaii. While attending the University of Hawaii in the early 1960s, Neil Abercrombie was part of a circle that included Barak Obama and Stanley Ann Dunham, the parents of future U.S. President, Barack Obama. Abercrombie has been a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus from as early as 1998 to the present. The Council for a Livable World, founded in 1962 by long-time socialist activist and alleged Soviet agent, Leo Szilard supported him in his successful run as U.S. Representative for Hawaii.
DSA Controversy: Following evidence that Abercrombie had been a member of the Democratic Socialists of America circa 1990…."

See also http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2010/08/is-neil-abercrombie-lying-further.html


So if the Communist Agent sponsored Neil Abercrombie knew Obama's parents (and perhaps the Communist Frank Marshall Davis on whose FBI file I already posted on at:  http://brianroysinput.blogspot.com/2010/07/frank-marshall-davis-review-of-obamas.html ) intimately, and Obama was the right hand man (a Chief of Staff in the early 1990s) for Alice Palmer, who herself was sponsored and assisted by another known and registered Communist Soviet agent, Chicago lawyer David S. Canter,
http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-file-47-paid-soviet-agent-behind.html#links
 (the same registered and known Soviet agent that recruited Communist David Axelrod), while she (Palmer) pushed Soviet Bloc propaganda and interests, and worked closely with the Communist Soviet Journal Izvestia...
http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2009/11/obama-file-90-alice-palmer-re-examined.html
...Chris Matthews and his yes men  casus fæderis (if one may say so) are themselves  in flagrante delicto (in blazing offense) by  saying that they would rather trust the American Soviet assets on being more reliable on the Obama Birth Certificate Issue than real patriotic Americans merely wanting the US Constitution to be upheld equally for everybody, and so should you.

  Do you trust known Soviet Assets over the US Constitution and US Supreme Court case law?  I sure don't...neither should you. 

Resolving the claims by FOIA documents released on Lolo Soetoro by the US Department of State as it pertains to Barack Obama, and a refocusing of effort to State Legislatures?

An Obama worshiper offered that I should look at a Scribd site in which Freedom of Information Act documents were posted, as originally obtained the US Department of State 

Lolo Soetoro U.S. Records - Allen v DHS State and Allen v USCIS - FOIA Releases Final 7-29-10


The essential page they referred me to was page 38 of the pdf. 

[State Dept. doc quoted  to reflect the original document. Please click on above go to pdf page 38 to view original. If they take it down, I  intend that I will reScribd specific FOIA approved for release pages of interest and repost the link. ]

Memo to fi*e


A *4 *28 294


Sept. *4, *967


Pursuant to inquiry from Centra* office regarding the status of the applicants’ spouses’ child by a former marriage.




The person in question is a united states citizen by virtue of his birth in Hono*u*u, Hawaii Aug. 4, *96*. He is *iving with the app*icants’ spouse in Hono*u*u, Hawaii. He xxxxxxxxx is considered the app*icants step-child, within the meaning of Sec. *0*(b)(*)(B), of the act, by virtue of the marriage of the app*icant to the chi*ds’ mother on March *5, *965.


W. **. Mix

Direct link:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35192432/Lolo-Soetoro-U-S-Records-Allen-v-DHS-State-and-Allen-v-USCIS-FOIA-Releases-Final-7-29-10


---------------------------------------
* is י
** is like a sub-scripted   I    with a longer base, and capped on top like the capital I.


Question: Whom is W. (**) Mix?

Question: From what source was the alleged memo derived?

          A. Was it from Hawaii? We have no office origin, no stamp, no header or footer, nada.


               1. Was it by an Immigration Naturalization Service employee?

               2. Was it by another source? We do not know what they meant by "Central Office" as it could have been a memo other than a US Government Agency by the unprofessionalism of the typist.

               3. Is the alleged memo even genuine?

                    (a). it is assumed that each yod (י ) shape is either a the tip of a small "l" or the tip of the same small “l” used as a numerical number "1", even though specifically, that is NOT the literal reading, but the subjective interpretation that must be placed upon the text for translation. If the letter "L" is intended as in the word "chi*d", notice in both the anomaly of height and of that in W. ** Mix, where the letter there as an alleged capitalized letter “L”, that Letter has a solid base, out of font character and size and of an entirely different key set that would not be found on the same 1967 era typewriters, manual or electric, as I remember them.  Those who know intimately know more of 1967 era US Government or Commercially used typewriters, and can aid in specifics, feel free to comment. 

                   (b). the words United States are in small case letter emphasis as "united states". By comparison, actual official documentation from the same cache and time period will capitalize nations, states, and even university titles. Suggesting that this is a rogue addition and highly suggestive of being a forgery added to the requested files.

The discrepancies of date and the case letters should be compared with file letter 000047, an ACTUAL US Gov't Memorandum -- to the "District Director, Honolulu, Hawaii" --in which the Central Office had (past tense) REVIEWED as of August 21, 1967 and dated August 25, 1967 and that of 000068, an actual Honolulu, Hawaii "memorandum for file" insert (although dated November 22, 1966). That latter Memorandum for file, would be what format Hawaii would have used, and inserted that with 000038 and the letter of 000039 to 000040. But with John Brennan's 2008 State Department Breach to destroy Obama's pre-2008 passports,
http://brianroysinput.blogspot.com/2010/10/greta-van-susteren-and-others-in-media.html
on one of the 3 breaches, this memo of what the W. ? Mix insert says as of Sept. ?4. ?967 could have been inserted then.

Regardless, the very unprofessionalism of the pdf's p.38 memo, to even the childs' (pluralization of child to children), suggests that not only is p. 38 or 000046 addendum suspect, but it is so out of place we might as well confidently label it as a 90% likely forged document presented by either Brennan who was Quid Pro Quoed to his position for breaching Obama State Department files (etc.), or by those of the Obama Administration State Department (it seems to me).

Further, the marriage certificate of Lolo and Ann on page 20 of the link dates as March 24, 1965. On page 36 of the link (file page 000044), here and elsewhere we are informed that the date of marriage was on March 15, 1965.


Which is correct? March 24 on the actual Marriage Certificate of Lolo and Stanley Ann Dunham (Lolo Soetoro signing after her on her line, as well as directly abover her, too) or March 15, on the claims to the US State Department as testified to by District Director John F. O'Shea?

Barack is still never mentioned by name, nor do we have any other testimony than that Ann lived with and was supported by her parents until she was married to Lolo. Then she becomes the bread winner, acts as if she never went away to Washington State, always lived with her Mom and Pop in their apartment, yada, yada, yada. She lied, and reinvented her past in order to live with her new husband. She spoke French, was learning Indonesian, and left out (Balshoye Spasiba - Thank you very much" ) her Russian Language classes. She clearly knew enough phrases like : Ya ni gevayoo n'vashim yikazye -- "I don't speak your language". But why tell them she knew Russian when she eagerly wished to enter an "anti-American" nation over-run by "Communists at a fever pitch"? Or words to that effect. Unless such a pro-Communist anti-American locale "felt like home" to her liberal anthroplogical ideologies?

We know that Barack grew up to be an ideologue in the pro-Communist offshoot as a Communist-Socialist in the Chicago Unit of the Democratic Socialists of America (formed specifically by Communists wishing to morph their names to something more "Democratic" and "American" sounding). He is also anti-American Usurper in the Presidency without a 333 US 640 @ 653 required 533 US 53 @ 54, 62 Hospital Birth Certificate with Witnesses to the Birth.

The pro-Obama  link and documents would be skewered in a Court of Law as having no reason to be taken as credible, nor meeting the Supreme Court legal definition of proof of identity as laid out in 533 US 53 @ 54,62, and as 333 US 640 @ 653 says, Obama is obligated by Law to provide that proof...nobody else is required to have to disprove him as regarding his "birth certificate and identity". And apparently, those who worship and defend Obama cannot even meet the basic minimums of one simple Supreme Court Requirement of producing a simple hospital record with witnesses to the birth, and then mock others for their hypocrisy?

Oh yeah, uh huh....

But then, I cannot always say that I am always right either.  Such as needing Congress (as well as the Courts)  in order to overcome a Usurper like Obama.  In 1800, the answer from a US Senator was to look to the State Legislatures, NOT Congress, for help.  I wasted many letters and many months writing Congress, and getting no where there.  But this Usurpation angle of the Left to overthrow the Country from within via the Presidential Elections was new to me, and I believe all Americans but for those who planned, conspired,  and enabled it to happen (it seems to me).  



Reflection upon an 1800 quote I came across:

It seems that in 1800, there was a reference on how to properly go about challenging an unqualified person becoming President, like Obama the foreign natural born citizen via his foreign national father.   Unfortunately for us, the circumnavigation of Article 2 of the US Constitution was with perhaps the knowledge that only by a written and announced protest during one moment in Congress, when the Vice President was supposed to allow for any written challenge or protest by a combined agreement of at least one House Representative and one Senator in protest together.  But as I previously reported, on January 6, 2009, VP Richard Cheney violated protocol and refused such protocol.

The remedy to Obama, according to then Senator Charles Pinckney in 1800, is for us to make remedy, not through petitioning Congress, but through a concentrated effort via the State Legislatures.

Although, in today's politics, it would still mean a challenge and assault by the Usurpers at the Federal Level to use the Department of Injustice to prosecute in Court as they did Arizona on Immigration Law, and in pushing a pro-Islamic Agenda on those resisting Islamic proselytization. Even the military chaplains are now being forbidden to declare Jesus as their L-RD and Savior publicly in the military :

"Chaplains in the United States military are not allowed to pray in the name of Jesus Christ. " Franklin Graham lamented

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/fran...mo_code=B5BB-1

while Islamists continue to proselytize, and Obama demands we give US Lands and sovereignty piece-meal to Indian (aka. Native American ) Tribes

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=243153

like Van Jones was raising his voice to his crowds (shouting "Give them the wealth! Give them the wealth!") in his speech that Glenn Beck used to like to run.

@ca. 1:00 ff.



But then, all that "greening" to him is a means to an end and a purposeful deception.



I want a traditional  and literal regreening of our evironment in the US, including billions of trees planted, as I have previous proposed,
http://brianroysinput.blogspot.com/2009/12/canadian-firm-plants-trees-to-absorb.html
 unlike Leftist hypocrites who blow this off.  Private fruit trees and gardens should not be outlawed and over-regulated  as the
Obama Administration is more and more encroaching upon Americans in their anti-Liberty pro-Communist regulations upon Americans. This was known as far back as March 2009
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92002
but has increasingly become enforced as a reality.

At any rate...our deliverance Legislatively, says an 1800 US Senator, will come via the rise of the State Legislatures exercising their State Rights to pass and enforce Laws to uphold and strengthen the US Constitution's Intent.

The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787
 [Farrand's Records, Volume 3]
CCLXXXVIII. Charles Pinckney in the United States Senate., p. 386
[From: 1 Annals of Congress, Sixth Congress, 129--139.]
March 28, 1800.

(Page Image link)

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llfr&fileName=003/llfr003.db&recNum=389&itemLink=D?hlaw:10:./temp/~ammem_4pde::@@@mdb=mcc,gottscho,detr,nfor,wpa,aap ,cwar,bbpix,cowellbib,calbkbib,consrvbib,bdsbib,da g,fsaall,gmd,pan,vv,presp,varstg,suffrg,nawbib,hor yd,wtc,toddbib,mgw,ncr,ngp,musdibib,hlaw,papr,lhbu mbib,rbpebib,lbcoll,alad,hh,aaodyssey,magbell,bbc, dcm,raelbib,runyon,dukesm,lomaxbib,mtj,gottlieb,ae p,qlt,coolbib,fpnas,aasm,denn,relpet,amss,aaeo,mff ,afc911bib,mjm,mnwp,rbcmillerbib,molden,ww2map,mfd ipbib,afcnyebib,klpmap,hawp,omhbib,rbaapcbib,mal,n cpsbib,ncpm,lhbprbib,ftvbib,afcreed,aipn,cwband,fl wpabib,wpapos,cmns,psbib,pin,coplandbib,cola,tccc, curt,mharendt,lhbcbbib,eaa,haybib,mesnbib,fine,cwn yhs,svybib,mmorse,afcwwgbib,mymhiwebib,uncall,afcw ip,mtaft,manz,llstbib,fawbib,berl,fmuever,cdn,upbo verbib,mussm,cic,afcpearl,awh,awhbib,sgp,wright,lh btnbib,afcesnbib,hurstonbib,mreynoldsbib,spaldingb ib,sgproto,scsmbib,afccalbib%230030390&linkTex t=1

"Knowing that it was the intention of the Constitution to make the President completely independent of the Federal Legislature, I well remember it was the object, as it is at present not only the spirit but the letter of that instrument, to give to Congress no interference in, or control over the election of a President. It is made their duty to count over the votes in a convention of both Houses, and for the President of the Senate to declare who has the majority of the votes of the Electors so transmitted.


It never was intended, nor could it have been safe, in the Constitution, to have given to Congress thus assembled in convention, the right to object to any vote, or even to question whether they were constitutionally or properly given.


This right of determining on the manner in which the Electors shall vote; the inquiry into the qualifications, and the guards necessary to prevent disqualified or improper men voting, and to insure the votes being legally given, rests and is exclusively vested in the State Legislatures.


If it is necessary to have guards against improper elections of Electors, and to institute tribunals to inquire into their qualifications, with the State Legislatures, and with them alone, rests the power to institute them, and they must exercise it. "



In other words, we need to grass roots pressure the States to both amend their laws to demand 333 US 640 @ 653 with 533 US 53 @ 54,62 be followed, and vet those who run for President in each respective State to PROVE he or she is US "jus soli" Born with a Hospital Birth Certificate and Witnesses to the Birth, and has the US Supreme Court required US Citizen Father, and I would argue with the advent of Amendment 19 to the US Constitution
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am19


as well as the Act of May 24, 1934, as referred to by Ruth Bader Ginsberg in the Oral Arguments of 533 US 53, we should require that of a US Citizen Mother in the State Bill language to become Law also. In other words, in order to be a US Natural Born Citizen, as was intended by the Founding Fathers and in subsequent Laws of Congress, and even the "living Constitution " evolvement argued by the Liberals etc., even by Leftist standards, a US Natural Born Citizen MUST HAVE BOTH a US Citizen Father and Mother at the time of their provable US Birth with (notarized documentation of ) witnesses to that birth. Such would stand any lawsuit thrown at it by Obama or his minions, as long as the US Constitution and this Republic as it still stands is not yet overthrown by them, or the Supreme Court outlawed or purged but for Sotomayor and Kagan, etc.




Those who will resist such State Legislation to shore up the US Constitution from those who shouldn't be President unless a 100% via both parents US Citizen, without any foreign political influence at birth, are likely those who with great temerity/rashness and vacuacy/idiocy support an alien father of any type impregnating a US minor and having her give birth on US Soil, and then claiming such is a US Natural Born Citizen, could care less if the son of any foreign dictator in power has influence upon the Presidency of the United States or not. Let us say that the father is a living terrorist like who later becomes leader of Hamas, or actively sits on the Council of Iran, or becomes some Communist style dictator like Kim Jong-il of North Korea.  Let us also say that the child keeps in constant communication with his father by phone, visits the foreign lands native to his father regularly, is indoctrinated to believe as his father believes , runs for President and is unvetted and wins. He claims to be US born but nobody really knows. There are, like with Obama, no vault Long Form Birth Certificate copies of the Hospital and Witnesses to the Birth, the Media cover up and scandalize any who question, and so forth. By having legience to his father and the lands of his father, is that child who becomes President a United States Natural Born Citizen?  Obama's supporters, as long as they sense Obama could possibly be involved in the hypothetical feel compelled to answer in the affirmative, as if they were hypnotized and compelled to answer "yes"...even when Hamas, Iran, and North Korean biological/paternal origins rule Obama out...perhaps they include him because of his equivalent anti-US philosophical and political sympathies?  Hmmn.


To further go along this route, let me ask this of those who cite St. George Tucker and James Iredell:  Is that alleged US Soil birth and alleged maternal citizenship all that was meant by those like St. George Tucker who spoke of that "happy means of security against foreign influence" ? Or is that a mistake of interpretation of St. George Tucker on your part to suppose that a soil of whatever nation they are found in birth alone, ipso facto, confers an NBC status as well? And when James Iredell spoke of a native born citizen on July 30, 1788, did he mean a child whose only claim to citizenship was via his mother to that foreign land she was born in made him a Natural Born Citizen? Even though Congress passed Legislation in 1790
http://www.indiana.edu/~kdhist/H105-documents-web/week08/naturalization1790.html


by a majority of like agreement, not long after Iredell's debate points, that any US Citizen father who sired a child in any part of the world and that child was birthed by its mother even on foreign soil, they considered that child to be a US Natural Born Citizen because of the (then) US Citizen Father, even without jus soli? So what was the intent of US Constitutional Law as it respected paternal v. maternal passing on of citizenship, with or without jus soli in US LAW during this respective period by many who also ratified the US Constitution the year before?   The US Constitution was fully ratified in 1789, keeping the wording "natural born citizen" rather than just "born citizen".  Is it so difficult, those who fawn incessantly over Obama the same way Nazi Germans used to fawn over Hitler, is it really so difficult  to use your own brain to think of the various differences of circumstances as why this might be so?  Variants as easy to discover Founder's Intent, such as the king of England or ruler in some other Nation sending his pregnant mistress to have a US soil birth, or to impregnate a US Citizen female visiting England or some other foreign power to have a US Soil birth, and then sponsoring the mother and child, providing tutors and others in rearing that child to help them one day run for offices and eventually help Usurp the US government for the glory of their nation 40 or 50 years later.  These are -- or at least should be -- easy to discern for those not under the influence of booze or drugs, or even political and anti-Christian intoxications.    


[Recolored and enlarged for better readability on 12/24/2013]

Obama, on behalf of Russia, suckers Congress into START TREATY. America will unilaterally disarm, and Russia won't. Russia could cite Obama illegal President over Birther issue, beyond quoting Treaty Article 3.6a, and be correct in doing so.

[Updated 12/25/2010...adding specific Treaty language in Article III where 1 bomber = 1 nuclear warhead in this Treaty's US unilateral down-sizing, etc.]
.
.
This is what happens when we have a non-Constitutional individual occupying the US Presidency.  A plan is concococted to emasculate the US Military of its nuclear offensive/defensive arsenal, and is successfully passed, laying the groundwork for an eventual un-MAD (a non-Mutual Assured Destruction) nuclear First Strike against the United States. 


What will happen is that the majority of America's Strategic Defense wil be moved to nuclear submarines. In 1991, then President George Bush Sr. removed our strategic Air Command Bomber capability, and stood down the nuclear defense of the air, where we always had at least several bombers at any one time in the air with nuclear deterrents.   In the 1996, then President Bill Clinton signed a directive that only the President can authorize a nuclear submarine launch.  This is public knowledge, made so in the end statement of a G. Hackman and D. Washington fictional movie about a US Nuclear Sub and the ensuing mutiny to stop a nuclear launch on Russia by that sub.  It was called Crimson Tide. 

The Presidential Decision Directive 60 (PDD-60) signed by Bill Clinton 

http://www.armscontrol.org/act/1997_11-12/focnov

goes beyond the stating that the US would not use nukes against non-nukes states, or would not allow a nuke launch until after a nuclear attack has been verified.  The power to hold the codes is in the hands of the President.  If the bombs are falling, and the President is inclined to kick back, put his feet up on the desk and wait it out, and the officer holding the Launch Codes decides to leave the room, the Secret Service can execute that officer for Treason, even though the alleged President by apathy is the one doing so as the nukes are going off.  Until the advent of Obama, such a scenario was utterly inconceivable by a President...but with the usurpation of  the America-hating Obama, that very scenario could indeed become a reality. 

Possible Real Nightmare Scenario Implication Projected
In the Obama Administration, that means the launch codes and authorization would not have to legally be decided upon being released to our land silos, nuclear storage facilities, and nuclear subs UNTIL the nukes are popping off on various US Cities, based on a prior Administration's Presidential Directive, and could merely use the ACLUese EXCUSE that the incoming missiles, regardless if it is a few to hundreds of them, "well they might be just merely be conventional warheads, and go land in the middle of nowhere and just make gopher holes in the deserts, fields, or woods somewhere".  That allged legal restriction is already  known by America's enemies, and it is why Venezuela will allow itself to be be a First Strike launch pad, in which its allies Iran and Russia as co-cooperatives will build an arsenal there, and help Venezuela to have a First Strike capability from the south to knock out key defense targets, so as to allow ICBM strikes from the other side of the planet in the same hour.  Instead of destroying nukes as per the Start Treaty signed by Obama, Russia may simply choose to nuclearize Venezuela in the same way they did Cuba in 1961.  An arsenal of 60 tactical nuclear missiles, manned by Russian Teams and Russian "advisors" (security forces) could conceivably be sitting in the jungles of Venezuela by mid 2012 - January 2013 if they have a mind to.

The OBAMA Start Treaty...Famous last words or "Who wrote this Treaty, a dope smoker?":


http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/140035.pdf


p. 1  reads:

Committed to … the achievement of the historic goal of freeing humanity from the nuclear threat….

Guided by the principle of indivisible security….



p. 2 reads:

 Taking into account the positive effect on the world  situation of the significant, verifiable reduction in nuclear arsenals at the turn of the 21st century….


Deeply appreciating the contribution of the Republic of  Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, and Ukraine to nuclear  disarmament and to strengthening international peace and security….


p.3 reads:

Article I


1. Each Party shall reduce and limit its strategic offensive arms in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty and shall carry out the other obligations set forth in this Treaty and its Protocol.



2. Definitions of terms used in this Treaty and its Protocol are provided in Part One of the Protocol.


Article II


1. Each Party shall reduce and limit its ICBMs and ICBM  launchers, SLBMs and SLBM launchers, heavy bombers, ICBM  warheads, SLBM warheads, and heavy bomber nuclear armaments,
so that seven years after entry into force of this Treaty and thereafter, the aggregate numbers, as counted in accordance  with Article I11 of this Treaty, do not exceed:
(a) 700, for deployed ICBMs, deployed SLBMs, and deployed
heavy bombers;
(b) 1550, for warheads on deployed ICBMs, warheads on
deployed SLBMs, and nuclear warheads counted for deployed
heavy bombers;
(c) 800, for deployed and non-deployed ICBM launchers,
deployed and non-deployed SLBM launchers, and deployed and
non-deployed heavy bombers.

P. 4

Article I11



1. For the purposes of counting toward the aggregate limit provided for in subparagraph l(a) of Article I1 of this Treaty:


(a) Each deployed ICBM shall be counted as one.


(b) Each deployed SLBM shall be counted as one.


(c) Each deployed heavy bomber shall be counted as one.


2. For the purposes of counting toward the aggregate limit provided for in subparagraph l(b) of Article I1 of this Treaty:


(a) For ICBMs and SLBMs, the number of warheads shall be the number of reentry vehicles emplaced on deployed ICBMs and on deployed SLBMs.


(b) One nuclear warhead shall be counted for each deployed heavy bomber.


3. For the purposes of counting toward the aggregate limit provided for in subparagraph l(c) of Article I1 of this Treaty:


(a) Each deployed launcher of ICBMs shall be counted as one.  [the language without specific clarification, based on 2b above, infers as one nuclear warhead].


(b) Each non-deployed launcher of ICBMs shall be counted as one.  [the language without specific clarification based on 2b above, infers as one nuclear warhead].



(c) Each deployed launcher of SLBMs shall be counted as one.  [the language without specific clarification based on 2 b above, infers as one nuclear warhead].



(d) Each non-deployed launcher of SLBMs shall be counted as one. [the language without specific clarification,  infers as one nuclear warhead].




p. 6

referring to Article III, reads:

6. ICBMs, SLBMs, ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers, and heavy


bombers shall cease to be subject to this Treaty in accordance


with Parts Three and Four of the Protocol to this Treaty.


ICBMs or SLBMs of an existing type shall cease to be subject


to this Treaty if all ICBM or SLBM launchers of a type


intended for such ICBMs or SLBMs have been eliminated or


converted in accordance with Part Three of the Protocol to


this Treaty.

Pay attention to the underlined sentence, because that is all the Russians need to abide by, and nothing else.  It is a Primary "escape clause".  You disarm, and we have no obligations but to monitor your unilateral disarmament.  (Escape Clause 2 is Obama is NOT a US Natural Born Citizen, therefore cannot legally sign a Treaty passed by a Congress and 3/4ths of the States, etc., but why should they challenge a nation wanting to castrate itself?)

In other words, the Russians are given a free hand to interpret this as NOT being subject to limit the “ICBMs, SLBMs, ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers, and heavy Bombers” that were earlier being counted by the Treaty, in order to reduce the US to a combined number of 700 + 100 deployable missiles and delivery systems with a max number of 750 warheads, because the delivery systems themselves (even WITHOUT nuclear warheads) are counted as if they were nuclear warheads by the language of this treaty.

 In other words, one nuclear sub and 8 missiles with 3 war heads each counts as 41 under the Treaty: the 8 launchers themselves count as if  8 under launchers and part of the 1550 warheads, and the missile themselves count as 8 of the 700 and are subtracted away from the 1550 allowable warheads as well…these are part of the  8 launchers and their 8 missiles take away from 700 number and leave 684 available; now add the sub as 1, that is part of the 800 number, and you have 683 left for the combined missiles, launchers, and deploying unit.   Above that 800 number we have 750 warheads to actually deploy, which in the case of one nuke sub of 8 missiles with 3 warheads each, is 24. Take 24 from 750, and you have 726 left by which you might defend the United States with.  So instead of reading 1550 warheads, the Obama Administration will enforce a view of  one US Nuclear sub with 8 missiles and 24 warheads as actually equaling 41. 

 Again,  this Treaty emasculates the US nuclear arsenal down UNILATERALLY, while the Russians keep theirs, and if they wish, they might destroy a few non-operable launchers and moth-balled long range bombers. The Treaty by the language of Article 3.6 does not even obligate them to do THAT much.

May I ask, was this very poorly written or intentionally anti-American subterfuge actually part of Obama’s infamous Nuke paper he allegedly wrote when he was allegedly attending (although it has never been proven) Columbia University?

Our only hope now, is that there will be a rejection by more than 13 States, so that this Treaty that signs America's nuclear annihilation from its emnemies as a Top-down Inside-out betrayal, is thwarted and exposed for the Suicide Pact that it is.

That's my input.

A plot by the Obama Administration to use the Al Qaeda excuse to shut down and starve America to overthrow our Republican Gov't? Remember Thomas Jefferson.

In his letter to Samuel Kercheval -  from Monticello, July 12, 1816, Thomas Jefferson quoted that "Governments are republican only in proportion as they embody the will of their people, and execute it." 
In regard to those who first formed our Constitution, by many debates and various drafts, Jefferson stated:
"...let it be agreed that a government is republican in proportion as every member  composing it has his equal voice in the direction of its concerns...by representatives chosen by himself, and responsible to him at short periods, and let us bring to the test of this canon every branch of our constitution."


In our day, even those who we elect by the platforms of Campaign promises and representations they allege, are often let down and betrayed by a different kind of legislator or Office-holder than the one who ran, and then either parses words and definitions, or just does not care.  Once in office, we are given a new form of governance, one that casts out Republicanism, representation of the people of their district or area, in place for a lesser or greater variant of Socialism and political corruption more often than not. 

Jefferson continues:
"The true foundation of republican government is the equal right of every citizen, in his person and property, and in their management."   
Is that true today?  It is increasingly more difficult to even grow your own garden on your own property, because the Government demands to control your life, and have the right to strave or destroy you.  The latest pseudo-crisis they are attempting to promote today, on December 21, 2010, is that Al Qaeda is going to taint US Food Supplies. 
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/12/20/eveningnews/main7169266.shtml




http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/poison_food_terror_plot_probed_4W7A5mtJem8UUy5ob47ZzM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1340481/U-S-buffets-salad-bars-threatened-poison-attacks-Al-Qaeda-group-ink-cartridge-bomb-plot.html

 In other words, the US Black Ops may use any one or several of the 1300 plus bio-weapons labs in the 48 Continental US States to create a crisis, and then ban the sale of food, not just the salad bars and buffets of restaurants, but all exposed foods such as produce, baked goods, anything readily accesible even through a thin sheet of plastic or not, create a panic, and following the panic and subsequent riots,  pass something that would create a slave state or Dictatorship in response to primarily union - anarchist - and Leftist Communist-Socialist organizers of minority led food riots.  This, by just the pseudo-news reports by Bilderburger payed off Mainstream Media sources (including those at Foxnews,





and alleged non-Leftist Mainstream Media sources)  is seemingly slated (if we Cold War Timetable this) for happening perhaps in the next 30-60 days, generally more along the lines in 5-6 weeks,  unless it gets exposed.

We have been waiting to see by what means the Tulane Executive Summary would be implemented, in which Congress is relegated to obscurity, and the more than 40 Czars of Obama seize control and become the New Legislature, overthrow the Republicanism of our Government, and become the new structure. 

But Jefferson wrote: 
Let the executive be chosen ...[as an agent for the people, a republican in his representation of their will]... and leave no screen of a council behind which to skulk from responsibility.

The Obama Communist-Socialists, for them to initiate a Black Ops coordinated food scare and riots in order to subvert and overthrow the current structure of the US Government, would NECCESSARILY HAVE TO HAVE  a New Constitution fully drafted in a drawer somewhere and agreed upon, and they would have plans to remove all US Supreme Court Justices but for Kagan and Sotomayor, because even Communist-Socialism must allow for such an institution to remain to act as arbitrators to the Dictatorship.  The principles would also have to include FDR's alleged "new bill of rights" proposals as an attempt to legitimize their "evolving" or "updating for our times and a new America" that New Constitution...focusing on the FDR proposals, and saying there is nothing to see with the rest of their alleged New Constitution.  Could we really be that close to the Communist-Socialist overthrow of the US, assisted by the very probable deep cover rogue KGB operative George Soros and his extensive subversive networks and anti-America pro-Communist agencies? 


Where there is a weakness and evolving needed, Jefferson demands AMENDMENTS, not whole changes to the US Constitution as Liberal Scholars at the University of Chicago and elsewhere like to MISQUOTE him.  For he says that he offers loose sugestions of new titles of

"...amendment, for consideration and correction; and their object is to secure self-government by the republicanism of our constitution, as well as by the spirit of the people; and to nourish and perpetuate that
spirit. I am not among those who fear the people. They, and not the rich, are our dependence for continued freedom. And to preserve their independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual
debt. We must make our election between _economy and liberty_, or _profusion and servitude_. If we run into such debts, as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, give the earnings of  fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses; and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we
must live, as they now do, on oatmeal and potatoes; have no time to  think, no means of calling the mismanagers to account; but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the
necks of our fellow-sufferers. Our landholders, too, like theirs, retaining indeed the title and stewardship of estates called theirs, but held really in trust for the treasury, must wander, like theirs,  in foreign countries, and be contented with penury, obscurity, exile, and the glory of the nation. This example reads to us the salutary lesson, that private fortunes are destroyed by public as well as by private extravagance. And this is the tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for a second; that second for a third; and so on, till the bulk of the society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery, and to have no sensibilities left but for sinning and suffering. Then begins, indeed, the bellum omnium in omnia, which some philosophers observing to be so general in this world, have mistaken it for the natural, instead of the abusive state of man. And the fore horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression.


Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the arc of the covenant, too sacred to be touched.  [For which reason Jefferson favors the using of additional Amendments to the US Constitution, not the wholesome immediate discarding as Liberals -- often themselves Communist Subversives -- like to argue of late].
 They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment. "

Notice the context, BEYOND AMENDMENT.  That is the context Jefferson argues, but those like Ginsberg, Melton and Elkins argue in their 2010 working paper of "The Endurance of National Constitutions"

in January 2010 out at the University of Chicago.  They ignore Jefferson "in context" to push the same argument as the Communist overthrow of America agenda argues.  So why is that?  Are they of that mind or are they just oblivious, seeking an acceptance of the Liberal Academic Commnity, and their words to them are just words?  I really don't care what their excuse is...but those words and misdirected combined influence of theirs are leading or perpetuating many thousands to go astray from True Reality off to the same Communist Socialist Fantasylanfd that Michael Moore did of Cuban Healthcare idealism, and the very Cuban doctors he showed the film to, allegedly cussed him as a liar and worse as they walked out at that point in his film showing.  For those that know better, there can be no acceptance or patience with the intentional canards, as if describing the gas ovens and barracks of Auschwitz as a campers park with barbeques, and a recreation facility for Jews.  There is no moral difference between that and the likeminded lies the Left uses to insist on overthrowing the current US Republican Government for one that they will offer. 



@1:14-1:16  "Barack will require you to work"

By this, she means you will be ENSLAVED in servitude with WORK.


@ 1:34 to 1:38  "Barack WILL NEVER allow you to go back to your lives as usual." 

She says you LOSE ANY FREEDOMS of American Independence.  She ends it with a period.  She then calls the masses, "Uninvolved, uninformed."    In other words, any not on the inside track as fellow travellers or co-Communist-Socialist subversives, are "production for use"...to be used for what benefits them, and discarded like an astro-turf doormat, as Pelosi likes to describe Americans who love to exercise their current Constitutional Rights and keep them.  This includes you as well, US Military.  If you are Constitutionalists, you are to be used then discarded later on by zealots to their cause.  That's their plan.

If there are problems with the Constitution, there are those POST-Constitution amendments (beyond the original 12 Amendments which are untouchable, and labeled as permanent or to that effect in Supreme Court Law) that can be repealed.  This was done with Prohibition.  How about considering a ban on DC Professional Lobbyists (especially those representing Unions, Communists, Socialists, Anarchists, and the like) and the REPEAL of the17th Amendment as a new reform of Government? The States elect Senators who become the defacto lobbyists for their States and appointed by their State Legislatures by popular vote from them, and we get back to a closer version of a working Republic prior to the early successful Progressive tamperings of circa 1916?



If we have problems with the US Constitution, there are Amendments we can add to it, as Jefferson stated:

" I am certainly not  an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions. I think moderate imperfections had better be borne with; because, when once known, we accommodate ourselves to them, and find practical means of correcting their ill effects. But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. "


Other than his 1816 letter quotes cited above, we may also refer to Thomas Jefferson  in his letter to James Madison on September 16, 1789
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=2220
...who earlier recognized that in the natural order of things:

"...it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation. They may manage it then, and what proceeds from it, as they please, during their usufruct. " 
 And that by using a hypothetical of an imaginary example where everyone is born on the same day, gives up governmental power on the same day, dies on the same day, in that instance,
"Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires...". 

But after 40 years in Government, though hoping for the best, and expecting that the US Constitution may not last , 27 years after penning those pessimisms, Jefferson in hindsight knew that what we had as a Constitution needed to be kept...and
the use of Republican or actual representation of elected officials of the will of the majority, as well as the use of Constitutional Amendments by 2/3s majority (etc.) of both Houses of Congress and 3/4ths of the States was the way to go.  If anyone thinks differently, or that Jefferson stated differently, they need to go back to original sources and think again.