Concerns about Obama in 2010 by a former Congressman who should have demanded Obama's eligibility proof to serve as US President at any time in 2008 to "before leaving" in January 2009.

Congressman Pearce of New Mexico, left office in January 2009...oblivious to the US Constitution's eligibility clause.  Now there is a video circulating around the Internet, and he has created anxiety in the Leftist Communist-Socialist friendly and/or proselytizing (and clearly subjective) media.

One might humorously put a new internet video sensation in this way:

The Huffington Post (comically) just about wet its pants when they viewed and posted Candidate Pearce, a former Congressman
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/p000588/
 running again for Congress,
http://www.peopleforpearce.com/
kind of considering agreeing to challenging Obama’s eligibility, but will not commit to it.

I guess that would just about sum the ff. video.

Was Pearce's reservations about Obama because he actually picked up a magazine or print media and for the first time "read" about it, and only thereafter decided maybe he should "google" about the birther issue?

Might it have been in September 2010 in an issue of  Newsweek, where it called and listed Barack Obama as NOT a US Natural Born Citizen, but an “anchor baby” with a Kenyan National Father that Pearce first was motivated to do at least a preliminary check on the Obama eligibilty issue?
http://media.eyeblast.org/newsbusters/static/2010/09/NewsweekAnchorBaby-full.jpg

Story at:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2010/09/03/newsweek-insults-barack-obama-anchor-baby

Or is the "Pakistan passport" issue, a leftover recollection of an "oh, yeah" moment?

 "Oh, yeah...I guess when I was in Congress the last time, there were these concerns about Obama traveling to Pakistan when it was alleged by some that it was illegal for US Citizens because of the Russian Invasian and that War they were having in Afghanistan and other geo-centric political issues that factored into the alleged State Department prohibitions, such as with fanatical anti-Western Islam in Pakistan going mob frenzy at the time.  Gee, I guess when I was in Congress, I should have done my job.  Oh, yeah.  Uh, huh." 

Was it that kind of "Oh, yeah" moment in the video above?  Probably.

Or could it have possibly instead have been in relation to how the pro-Muslim Brotherhood
(i.e. the pro-Jihad http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32430
and Sharia Law)

[“Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.” -- Muslim Brotherhood motto]

Obama Administration
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/p18084.xml?media=print

(via some 200 specifically sought out by his own January -February 2009 policy Muslim / Muslim Botherhood new hires into the West Wing of the White House, and the pro-Shia Islamic speeches and Ramadan observances of Obama while tossing all Christian symbolism and holiday observances)?

Mind you, Obama never hires born-again evangelical "come to Jesus" Christians.   Not even any non-Communist-Socialist Ultra-Orthodox Conservative Rabbis, which would be a help and a hope that at least he might act somewhat like a true Christian "leader" should in at least going back and considering the Jewish roots and advisement to help enable them in making wise and Biblical decisions in regard to public policy and the proclamation of their faith in the G-D of Israel as their G-D.   Barack would rather deny Israel, and Israel's G-D: .i.e., the G-D of the Bible, the one true Holy Book given from G-D to mankind.

We and Congress and the Media known there was at least a problem for 3 1/2 years now, starting with the NY Times article on April 30, 2007, where Jodi Kantor of the NY Times reported: “My whole family was Muslim, and most of the people I knew were Muslim,” said Maya Soetoro-Ng, Mr. Obama’s younger half sister.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/30/us/politics/30obama.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

For Quid Pro Quo nepotism, she has since stated intentionally various degrees of ...what might best be described as..."contradictory clarifications."

Bill O’Reilly and Charles Krauthammer on Foxnews decided to critique what we might best relabel as the CNN “Let’s bully people into Islam” with Christianne Amanpour Show in which the promise of Islam is to bring America into Captivity under Sharia Law, to fly the Islamic Flag over the White House, and the confession that Islam is NOT a religion of "peace", but of violence and forced submission of others (i.e., the Imam from London should have simply called himself and Islamists as "tyrannical").




Could that generate enough fear in Congress or Congressional Candidates to stop bloviating a pseudo-peace and pseudo-facts presumed, at least long enough to actually INVESTIGATE for themselves about Obama and Islam, and see if or not there is a real danger they need to address for the sake of National Security?
What else may have been enough to rattle the "middle-of-the-roaders" out there?

In an "in depth" interview published August 5, 2010, at the Post & Email, Sharon Rondeau did an incredible interview which brought out these pertinent details to the Barack Obama / Indonesia connection, that demonstrates the possibility that Obama may not even be a legal US resident, having both lost his citizenship, and never re-naturalizing officially via the Department of State.

http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/08/05/native-indonesian-soebarkah-most-likely-name-given-to-obama-upon-adoption-by-indonesian-stepfather/


7 Significant Points Brought Out In Rondeau's Interview:

1. In Indonesia, Soebarkah would be Barack Obama's "other name" in Indonesian culture.


2. This "other name" would be required as a sign of an official and legal adoption by an Indonesian Citizen of the child.

3. The child must lose his nationality claims to any and all legiences but the nation of Indonesia. Indonesia recognizes NO DUAL LEGIENCES. If one moves away and applies for and obtains the passport of another nation, they must be treated as renouncing their Indonesian citizenship.

4. The singularity of the "other name" as one name, such as "Soebarkah", testifies that Obama bore a Muslim name...that of his Indonesian stepfather, from which he bore legal Indonesian citizenship; and that of his given or birth name, as from his biological Kenyan national father. (Both of these men, in the use of the name, and to be used exclusively by Indonesian Muslims, testify that Obama's biological peaternal and adopted paternal roots were at least represented as pure or 100% Muslim).

5. The use of the family names in the Muslim singular name, represents that Barack was obtaining a name having claims to two families claiming Muslim royal bloodlines and royal ancestry.

6. According to the native Indonesian being interviewed, it is impossible (under Indonesian culture, especially in the late 1960s) to have Barack's other name of "Soebarkah" to ever be considered as merely a nickname, and those who attempt to deflect Soebarkah in that way are utterly ignorant of Indonesian culture and customs of the relevant period in question (the late 1960s).

7. Even though it illegal for both those who are Indonesians and those who are Americans to have both an Indonesian and US Passport simultaneously, it was and still is known to occur from the 1960s to the present day as a means or sake of convenience by those who travel in between the US and Indonesia.

So could that "Post & Email" interview have been on Candidate Pearce's mind?  Perhaps.  We just do not know.

But for some, when they get rattled down to their bones, they view it as the same kind of thrill they get from being scared at an Amusement Park ride or from a horror movie flick.  After they recover, they go into denial, eventually laugh it off, and re-enter life in a sort of "well if we ignore it, it will either work itself out, or go away".  I bet those who died in the Concentration Camps of Hitler's Germany, hoped along the same lines as well.  Even if America could but have a "Boy Scout's" innocence, at least their motto would be around exercising due diligence to "be prepared", and do what is neccessary (legally and properly) to protect this nation, in such a context .