Obama is Disabled

©2009 drkate

Under the 25th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Obama is constitutionally disabled, is therefore unable to fulfill the duties of the office of the Presidency, and must resign.  The Cabinet and the Congress have a constitutional duty to remove a disabled President.  Instead, these three enablers have permitted the usurpation of the White House:

This advertisement is one of several placed in the Washington Times by plaintiffs in the Kerchner v. Obama case.  Please continue to support this important educational effort by clicking here.  The attorney on the case, Mario Apuzzo, has an extremely informative website containing all background materials and court documents for the case.  For a host of terrific graphics and other background material, please visit Jefferson’s Rebels.

Help rate this ad UP HERE!

47 Responses to “Obama is Disabled”


  1. 1 ramjet767 December 1, 2009 at 12:05 am

    Excellent ad. And the 25th Amendment is the likely tool in our Constitution to remove the usurper.

    RJ

  2. 3 tminu December 1, 2009 at 1:07 am

    Those in power no longer represent, no longer protect, no longer enforce…
    they just abuse the power.
    Great ad.
    The communists have planted these key people in positions such that we are in a state of judicial tyranny, media malpractice, and congressional treason.

    • 4 jtx December 1, 2009 at 8:50 am

      tminu:

      You’re exactly right!!

      The only thing I don’t understand is why the “fair weather conservatives” in this country don’t just stop their bellyaching and bitching and pontification don’t just kick in $20 or so to the Kerchner et al ad campaign here:

      http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/protectourliberty.htm

      Every donation (large or small) goes to help make Americans aware of the likely ineligibility and illegality of Barack Hussein Obama – our muslim-loving, communistic guy who has never shown himself to be legally eligible to hold the office he now occupies.

  3. 5 speedy December 1, 2009 at 7:38 am

    Bo must be removed from office and/or forced to resign. He is very destructive to our country. He has committed a lot of crimes like treason, fraud, murder, etc. I can’t understand what the heck is wrong with the congress. Maybe they like it that he is a democrat and democrats won, etc. Why would these people in congress/senate risk being guilty of being complicit in treason just to keep this evil usurper in power? They are making their democrat party look really bad. Bo has way too many social security numbers and none of them were issued to him; they are all stolen from dead people.

    • 6 d2i December 1, 2009 at 8:35 am

      speedy – the republican’s look just as bad if not worse. they too have a stake in this and have turned their cheek the other way. why is that? democrats and republicans have let “We the People” down. remember, all it took was one member to raise an objection to his approval and none did!!! none. why was that? what is the r’s game here? they have the ammo but aren’t using it, why???

      • 7 Quantum Leap December 1, 2009 at 10:16 pm

        Because they are getting paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to look the other way along with receiving many huge perks. Except for a few like Michelle Bachmann and her crony crew, money is their God. It won’t last long.

      • 8 Quantum Leap December 1, 2009 at 10:27 pm

        Why didn’t Bill Clinton say something about the BC issue? Why ask why not the Repubs? Bill Clinton had every reason to expose the mack daddy and he does not. He still begs me for money. Imagine a multi-millionare soliciting funds from the lowly peons. Outrageous elitism. I saw hom speak 5 times and even got his autograph but he failed us. He never mentioned anything about the the mack daddy’s usurpation and he knows all about it. Perhaps he got paid too?

    • 9 tminu December 1, 2009 at 12:25 pm

      My impression is that a junior senator/congressperson comes to DC and are quickly given the heads-up on the real gizmos and workings of government. “You got here on the belief you are representing your constituents, but now that you’re here, if you cross the real powers that be you’ll be out on your tookus pronto, with a ruined career to boot. And see that dead economist who both shot and hung himself? See that passport official who was shot in his car? Ha ha , never mind…you get the hint.”

      I truly think there’s a mafia takeover within the halls of government.
      They all have to be cleaned out or this will never change. Further the enforcement of the Constitution has to be BRUTAL.

    • 10 Quantum Leap December 1, 2009 at 10:20 pm

      Why would these people in congress/senate risk being guilty of being complicit in treason just to keep this evil usurper in power?

      Because they are getting paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to look the other way along with many huge perks. Pelosi is the ring leader. With the exception of Michelle Bacmann and her colleagues, they worship money as their God.

  4. 11 Erica December 1, 2009 at 8:24 am

    Even more info available at Jefferson’s Rebels, including some extremely useful graphic illustations that will help to educate the American public.

    http://jeffersonsrebels.blogspot.com

    • 12 drkate December 1, 2009 at 9:04 am

      Thank you Erica. I continue to believe Jefferson’s Rebels is one of the best sites on the internet for graphics and discussion of Obama’s eligibility, or lack thereof. I am grateful you come over here to comment…thank you.

  5. 13 No-nonsense-nancy December 1, 2009 at 8:31 am

    That is a great ad. How can we get him out of our house before he goes to Copenhagen next week and signs away our sovereignty to the UN for the World government?

    • 14 drkate December 1, 2009 at 9:05 am

      I think his signature on the Copenhagen treaty will be treason, and all of us should make that known to the whole world.

      It is a high crime to give away our sovereignty.

  6. 15 azgo December 1, 2009 at 10:12 am

    Do you know why the three monkeys’ laps are covered up in the advertisement?

    Answer, because Congress, the Courts and the Media are spayed and neutered and they appear to be ‘in-bare-a**ed’.

    “be embarrassed: create difficulties for (someone, esp. a public figure or political party) by drawing attention to their failures or shortcomings”

    Dictionary, Version 1.0.2, 2005 Apple Computer Inc.

  7. 17 alforhill50 December 1, 2009 at 12:17 pm

    drkate, have you or anyone here heard the outcome of the Tennessee Grand Jury against Barry Soetoro today? I woke up about 5 times last night and every time I woke up I had that om my mind and could not go back to sleep. I don’t know if that is a good thing or a bad sign. Judging by how most of these things turn out with spineless wimps at the helm, probably just another fluke by the wayside for the usurper.

  8. 18 alforhill50 December 1, 2009 at 12:21 pm

    If someone, just anyone would show some real gutsy tostestorone? or real nuts about ’em. maybe the ball would get rolling to get this joker and junk cards out of the WH and surrounding offices.

  9. 19 Don December 1, 2009 at 1:05 pm

    I keep searching and still can’t find any info out of Tennessee. Does anyone have any info about the case??

  10. 21 ksdb December 1, 2009 at 1:55 pm

    The U.K. edition of Politico is trying to challenge the Apuzzo ad. The story is called “Could President Obama be British? Probably not” and in it they say this is the effect of the Article II requirements in the Constitution:

    “This means the original nationality of an American child’s parents does not impact on citizenship if the child is born in the US.”

    I’ve left a comment, but have not seen it posted there yet. The Politico story is also posted at Yahoo. Disgraceful reporting or just pure ignorance??

    • 22 ksdb December 1, 2009 at 2:00 pm

      I need to correct myself: It’s not Politco by politics co uk where that article was posted.

    • 23 drkate December 1, 2009 at 2:42 pm

      both, it seems to me. But also, the effect of the ads is now evident. They are desperate to stop this movement to exposing him.

      Of course they think they know our constitution, but they don’t.

      Pass the popcorn please. When Obama’s numbers drop below 40% even the press will start to turn on him. Must be getting pretty expensive to have to buy off so many people.

      • 24 tminu December 1, 2009 at 4:19 pm

        About 2 months ago, I got verbally abused/muted by calling in about his British citizenship to the Michael Medved show. So now, I’m just going to call in to any old radio show, cooking and gardening shows even, and weave in Obama’s ineligibility into the text of my other comments. “I have a weed that doesn’t belong, it’s foreign in my garden and needs to be removed, kind of like Obama’s being a British citizen yet sitting in the president’s office.”

    • 26 tminu December 1, 2009 at 8:50 pm

      ksdb: Yes what they’re doing is more obotfuscation.

      If Obama Sr. had only been a British Citizen by descent, not by birth, then there are exceptions which since BHO Jr was ostensibly born in the US would not make him a British Citizen.

      However, BHO Sr., and grand-pappy Obama, were all British Citizens by birth, since Kenya was colonized in 1895.
      So BHO Jr. is a British Citizen by descent though born (ostensibly) in the USA.

      Further, BHO Sr worked for the UKC gov’t thus negating any exceptions right there.

      So, BHO Jr. was and is indeed, a British Citizen by descent, aka a British Citizen, aka a Brit, aka the last thing the Founders would’ve ever wanted in the White House!!

      • 27 ksdb December 1, 2009 at 9:06 pm

        You’d think that the British would understand as much as anybody that we wouldn’t consider a commoner born to a British national to be a natural born American citizen. Surely they aren’t all as stupid as this reporter who wrote the piece.

  11. 28 tminu December 1, 2009 at 4:39 pm

    BTW the Washington Times Apuzzo ad as you say, must be making the bots sweat, because they’re trying to come up with some pretty ridiculous rebuttals, such as the one… “even if his father was British since he was born on US soil that negates that”…

    Nah…even Obama twice published/admitted against interest that he was born British by the BNA of 1948

    British Nationality Act of 1948 provides in pertinent part as follows:

    5.—(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth ….”

    • 29 tminu December 1, 2009 at 4:41 pm

      and the other I read was on the order of (approximately) “If we assume he could be British and therefore ineligible, then any other nation could come along and just forcibly give their citizenship to a Natural Born Citizen and just make them ineligible too”

      Huh?

    • 30 tminu December 1, 2009 at 5:33 pm

      also, Kenya was colonized before BHO Sr.’s father was born in 1895. BHO Sr. was born in UKC in 1936, he was therefore a British Citizen BY BIRTH, so the exceptions for BHO Jr. being born in the US to a father who was a British Citizen by descent only, do not apply, because BHO Sr was a British Citizen by Birth. Further, BHO Sr was a UKC gov’t employee, so that only doubly validates that no exceptions apply, meaning that BHO Jr. was indeed a British Citizen By Descent because his father was a British Citizen by birth and also a gov’t employee. j

      So, sorry bots, just because BHOJr was born in the USA does not erase his being born a British Citizen because his daddy was a British Citizen by birth because his grand-daddy was a British citizen (UKC) and he (BHO Sr) was born in Kenya UKC.

      • 31 drkate December 1, 2009 at 8:36 pm

        lol. Kerchner told me he was getting tons of hate mail; and his site last nite already had 8,000 hits. You know when the bots come out they’re scared.

        I also have gotten more spam today than in the few months this site has been up, mostly foreign and a few obot claims that I’m desperate. lol

        • 32 Quantum Leap December 1, 2009 at 11:20 pm

          Must be the black liberation footsolidiers who are born again muslims and want USA to fail. They hate whitey. Crying all the time that they are underpriveldged but they have a computer to abuse you with. Good ole US of A.

  12. 33 ksdb December 1, 2009 at 9:11 pm

    Obama’s father had no loyalty to America. Obama’s mother had no loyalty to America. She married two foreign nationals and presumably would have left the country with Barack’s father had they stayed together. She promptly married the second foreign national and left the country with him. If she hadn’t sent Obama to live with her parents later, he would not be an American citizen in any sense.

  13. 35 IL.Blue December 3, 2009 at 6:33 pm

    Posted to Twitter,

    Hi..Dr. Kate and everyone, great article .. Sites still down..Oil for Immigration ….ThePostemail..

    10th Amendment

  14. 36 Yousaidit December 7, 2009 at 3:23 pm

    My mother was born in Scotland. Her father was born in Ireland. My mother was considered Irish as you take your nationality from your father, and when she immigrated here had to come in on an Irish visa. So especially via the British Press Obama should be considered British (from his father). Don’t know how America views it though, if he was indeed (doubtful) born in Hawaii.

    Anyone heard anything about the new case in Washington DC brought by two lawyers (one of whom is Leo Donofrio) on behalf of GM dealerships who went under thanks to Obummer? Evidently you can only sue a sitting President via the Supreme Court OR in Washington, DC. This suit has an additional Quo Warranto part included asking Obummer to prove his citizenship. Also, was pleased that Congressman Deal (GA) and nine others were requesting Obummer prove his citizenship. Surely something must stick to the Teflon Obummer.

  15. 37 Doremus Jessup April 8, 2010 at 8:44 am

    IMHO, it would be the 20th Amendment, Section 3 which would apply to removing Obama. The operative phrase is “failed to qualify”:

    “if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified”

    We have to think as if this was before the Electoral College. If Obama is found to be ineligible, than he never qualified for office in the first place, so Congress would then go back and reconvene the Electoral College. THERE IS NO CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS. This is why the founders so brilliantly gave us the Electoral College.

    No new election is needed. Obama’s presidential electors are still valid (they just can’t vote for Obama again. And, they can’t vote for Biden because he would be the “Acting President” since he was already qualified and properly elected as VP. McCains 2008 presidential electors would be there, but may be cautious about voting for him because of his Panama birth. The third party candidates could be considered: Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Nader, Chuck Baldwin, Green Party, etc. …they probably wouldn’t be able to come to consensus which would put the election in the House with each State delegation getting one vote. By the time it all rolls around, toe 2012 election will be at hand.


  1. 1 Twitted by 10thAmendment Trackback on December 3, 2009 at 7:52 pm
  2. 2 Obamacare is Dead « drkatesview Trackback on February 6, 2010 at 12:05 am
  3. 3 Prosecuting Obama « drkatesview Trackback on February 28, 2010 at 12:00 am
  4. 4 Obama’s Tacit Admission « drkatesview Trackback on March 9, 2010 at 12:31 am
  5. 5 An Alinsky Refresher « drkatesview Trackback on March 30, 2010 at 12:14 am
  6. 6 “Mal-Bama” « drkatesview Trackback on May 9, 2010 at 11:31 pm
  7. 7 THE OBAMA SHELL GAME… ARE THE POSEUR PRESIDENT’S CHICKENS COMING HOME TO ROOST? | Hillary and Me Trackback on June 22, 2010 at 8:47 pm
  8. 8 Prosecution Of Barry Soetoro aka; Barack Hussein Obama « Political Vel Craft Trackback on January 1, 2011 at 7:12 pm
  9. 9 Prosecution Of Barry Soetoro aka; Barack Hussein Obama | Political Vel Craft Trackback on September 23, 2012 at 11:58 pm
Comments are currently closed.



December 2009
M T W T F S S
« Nov   Jan »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

PROTECT OUR LIBERTY HERE!

Get Your Copy at drkatesview@gmail.com

Blog Archive

Just follow copyright law and nobody gets hurt!

The contents of this blog are protected under U.S. Copyright Law, United States Code, Title 17. Requests for use of active and archived articles in this blog must be presented in writing in the comment section, and proper attribution is expected. Thank you in advance.

drkatesview thanks you!

Donate to DrKatesView!

Donate Now!

Since 8/15/09

  • 1,854,098 views

Listen to drkate’s Revolution Radio

RSS The Post & Email

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Logistics Monster

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS American Spectator

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Button 1 120 by 90
Site Build It!

%d bloggers like this: