RSS Feed

View from the Left: Will Barack Obama be a one-term president?


December 19, 2011 by Richard Drake

By Richard S. Drake — I’ll be up-front and admit that Barack Obama has never been never liberal enough for my liking, despite all of the hysterical hand-wringing about “activist judges” and “over-regulation” stifling America’s fabled job creators. 

Also, I just read way too much to be impressed when someone starts nattering about his “socialistic” leanings; that sort of thing is only ever targeted at the paranoid and the unaware.

I have been thinking about this question of Obama’s chances of winning a second term in 2012 for quite some time now, and I have been disappointed with most of the political commentary I have read and heard on the subject. Most of it seems to be centered around the subject of the economy, which one has to admit is in pretty sorry shape these days. 

But we know presidents don’t work in a universe-of-one; their efforts are helped or hindered by such factors as the world economy, wars, and even the United States Congress. We don’t elect magicians to the office of president.

This election is about much more than the economy, as recent ads from certain GOP candidates have made so crystal clear. When politicians and pundits talk about “taking this country back,” they aren’t just talking about the Obama White House, but the millions of Americans who voted for him.

The millions of Americans who wept the night he was elected, and sat at home and taped his Inaugural Address for their grandchildren. The Americans who cheered when George Bush left office. 

The community organizers in this country, and the people they serve. 

They want to take this country back from the poets, writers, factory workers, songwriters, steel workers, disabled folks, artists and men and women of all creeds and colors who saw something of themselves in the election of Barack Obama. 

Hence the shameful attempts at voter suppression on the part of GOP-led state legislatures across the country.

They, much more than Barack Obama, are the real threat to the powers-that-be in this country. Politicians come and go. But  movements? And the passions of the people involved in those movements? They don’t go away.

This is why the 2012 election campaign is so much more complicated. 

Each and every one of the GOP candidates would take us back to a “Golden Age” that never existed, back to a fairy tale world in which round pegs would never dream of going into a square hole, and no one goes up the down staircase. 

To a world where the words “Gay” and “activist” would never go in the same sentence, feminists are historical relics and poor kids serve food to their better-off friends in the school cafeteria — and later clean their toilets. 

The economy will play a role in the election, but it should never be forgotten that Obama’s election was not just a repudiation of George Bush, but also a celebration of the rich complexity and diversity that is America today, something we should all revel in. 

If we remember that, the answer is no.

Click here to read Mike Landry’s response to the question.

Richard Drake

Richard S. Drake has been writing about political and cultural affairs in Northwest Arkansas for 20 years. The author of Freedom Run a science fiction novel, he can also be followed on Facebook and Twitter. He can be contacted at:

More Posts


1 comment »

  1. Bob says:

    I hope that he is a one term. Just look what has he done for this Contry. OBAMA ELIGIBILITY COURT CASE…BLOW BY BLOW
    By Craig Andresen on January 26, 2012 at 9:25 am

    Given the testimony from today’s court case in Georgia, Obama has a lot of explaining to do. His attorney, Jablonski, was a NO SHOW as of course, was Obama.

    The following is a nutshell account of the proceedings.

    Promptly at 9am EST, all attorneys involved in the Obama Georgia eligibility case were called to the Judge’s chambers. This was indeed a very interesting beginning to this long awaited and important case.

    The case revolved around the Natural Born clause of the Constitution and whether or not Obama qualifies under it to serve. More to the point, if found ineligible, Obama’s name would not appear on the 2012 ballot in Georgia.

    With the small courtroom crowded, several in attendance could be seen fanning themselves with pamphlets as they waited for the return of the attorneys and the appearance of the judge.

    Obama himself, who had been subpoenaed to appear, of course was nowhere near Georgia. Instead, Obama was on a campaign swing appearing in Las Vegas and in Colorado ignoring the court in Georgia.

    Over the last several weeks, Obama’s attorney, Michael Jablonski, had attempted several tactics to keep this case from moving forward. He first tried to have it dismissed, then argued that it was irrelevant to Obama. After that, Jablonski argued that a state could not, under the law, determine who would or would not be on a ballot and later, that Obama was simply too busy with the duties of office to appear.

    After all these arguments were dispatched by the Georgia Court, Jablonski, in desperation, wrote to the Georgia Secretary of State attempting to place Obama above the law and declared that the case was not to he heard and neither he nor his client would participate.

    Secretary of State, Brian Kemp, fired back a letter hours later telling Jablonski he was free to abandon the case and not participate but that he would do so at his and his clients peril.

    Game on.

    5 minutes.

    10 minutes.

    15 minutes with the attorneys in the judge’s chambers.

    20 minutes.

    It appears Jablonski is not in attendance as the attorneys return, all go to the plaintiff table 24 minutes after meeting in the judge’s chambers.

    Has Obama’s attorney made good on his stated threat not to participate? Is he directly ignoring the court’s subpoena? Is he placing Obama above the law? It seems so. Were you or I subpoenaed to appear in court, would we or our attorney be allowed such action or, non action?

    Certainly not.

    Court is called to order.

    Obama’s birth certificate is entered into evidence.

    Obama’s father’s place of birth, Kenya East Africa is entered into evidence.

    Pages 214 and 215 from Obama’s book, “Dreams from My Father” entered into evidence. Highlighted. This is where Obama indicates that, in 1966 or 1967 that his father’s history is mentioned. It states that his father’s passport had been revoked and he was unable to leave Kenya.

    Immigration Services documents entered into evidence regarding Obama Sr.

    June 27th, 1962, is the date on those documents. Obama’s father’s status shown as a non citizen of the United States. Documents were gotten through the Freedom of Information Act.

    Testimony regarding the definition of Natural Born Citizen is given citing Minor vs Happersett opinion from a Supreme Court written opinion from 1875. The attorney points out the difference between “citizen” and “Natural Born Citizen” using charts and copies of the Minor vs Happersett opinion.

    It is also pointed out that the 14th Amendment does not alter the definition or supersede the meaning of Natural Born. It is pointed out that lower court rulings do not conflict with the Supreme Court opinion nor do they over rule the Supreme Court Minor vs Happersett opinion.

    The point is, to be a natural born citizen, one must have 2 parents who, at the time of the birth in question, be citizens of the United States. As Obama’s father was not a citizen, the argument is that Obama, constitutionally, is ineligible to serve as President.

    Judge notes that as Obama nor his attorney is present, action will be taken accordingly.

    Carl Swinson takes the stand.

    Testimony is presented that the SOS has agreed to hear this case, laws applicable, and that the DNC of Georgia will be on the ballot and the challenge to it by Swinson.

    2nd witness, a Mr. Powell, takes the stand and presents testimony regarding documents of challenge to Obama’s appearance on the Georgia ballot and his candidacy.

    Court records of Obama’s mother and father entered into evidence.

    Official certificate of nomination of Obama entered into evidence.

    RNC certificate of nomination entered into evidence.

    DNC language does NOT include language stating Obama is Qualified while the RNC document DOES. This shows a direct difference trying to establish that the DNC MAY possibly have known that Obama was not qualified.

    Jablonski letter to Kemp yesterday entered into evidence showing their desire that these proceedings not take place and that they would not participate.

    Dreams From My Father entered.

    Mr. Allen from Tuscon AZ sworn in.

    Disc received from Immigration and Naturalization Service entered into evidence. This disc contains information regarding the status of Obama’s father received through the Freedom of Information Act.

    This information states clearly that Obama’s father was NEVER a U.S. Citizen.

    At this point, the judge takes a recess.

    The judge returns.

    David Farrar takes the stand.

    Evidence showing Obama’s book of records listing his nationality as Indoneasan. Deemed not relevant by the judge.

    Orly Taitz calls 2nd witness. Mr. Strump.

    Enters into evidence a portion of letter received from attorney showing a renewal form from Obama’s mother for her passport listing Obama’s last name something other than Obama.

    State Licensed PI takes the stand.

    She was hired to look into Obama’s background and found a Social Security number for him from 1979. Professional opinion given that this number was fraudulent. The number used or attached to Obama in 1979, shows that Obama was born in the 1890. This shows that the number was originally assigned to someone else who was indeed born in 1890 and should never have been used by Obama.

    Same SS number came up with addresses in IL, D.C. and MA.

    Next witness takes the stand.

    This witness is an expert in information technology and photo shop. He testifies that the birth certificate Obama provided to the public is layered, multiple layered. This, he testifies, indicates that different parts of the certificate have been lifted from more than one original document.

    Linda Jordan takes the stand.

    Document entered regarding SS number assigned to Obama. SS number is not verified under E Verify. It comes back as suspected fraudulent. This is the system by which the Government verifies ones citizenship.

    Next witness.

    Mr. Gogt.

    Expert in document imaging and scanners for 18 years.

    Mr. Gogt testifies that the birth certificate, posted online by Obama, is suspicious. States white lines around all the type face is caused by “unsharp mask” in Photoshop. Testifies that any document showing this, is considered to be a fraud.

    States this is a product of layering.

    Mr. Gogt testifies that a straight scan of an original document would not show such layering.

    Also testifies that the date stamps shown on Obama documents should not be in exact same place on various documents as they are hand stamped. Obama’s documents are all even, straight and exactly the same indicating they were NOT hand stamped by layered into the document by computer.

    Next witness, Mr. Sampson a former police officer and former immigration officer specializing in immigration fraud.

    Ran Obama’s SS number through database and found that the number was issued to Obama in 1977 in the state of MA. Obama never resided in MA. At the time of issue, Obama was living in Hawaii.

    Serial number on birth certificate is out of sequence with others issued at that hospital. Also certification is different than others and different than twins born 24 hours ahead of Obama.

    Mr. Sampson also states that portion of documents regarding Mr. Soetoro, who adopted Obama have been redacted which is highly unusual with regards to immigration records. tion records.

    Suggests all records from Social Security, Immigration, Hawaii birth records be made available to see if there are criminal charges to be filed or not. Without them, nothing can be ruled out.

    Mr. Sampson indicates if Obama is shown not to be a citizen, he should be arrested and deported and until all records are released nobody can know for sure if he is or is not a U.S. Citizen.

    Taitz shows records for Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama, showing he resides in Hawaii and in Indonesia at the same time.

    Taitz takes the stand herself.

    Testifies that records indicate Obama records have been altered and he is hiding his identity and citizenship.

    Taitz leave the stand to make her closing arguments.

    Taitz states that Obama should be found, because of the evidence presented, ineligible to serve as President.

    And with that, the judge closes the hearing.

    What can we take away from this?

    It’s interesting.

    Now, all of this has finally been entered OFFICIALLY into court records.

    One huge question is now more than ever before, unanswered.


    Without his attorney present, Obama’s identity, his Social Security number, his citizenship status, and his past are all OFFICIALLY in question.

    One thing to which there seems no doubt. He does NOT qualify, under the definition of Natural Born Citizen” provided by SCOTUS opinions, to be eligible to serve as President.

    What will the judge decide? That is yet to be known, but it seems nearly impossible to believe, without counter testimony or evidence, because Obama and his attorney chose not to participate, that Obama will be allowed on the Georgia ballot.

    It also opens the door for such cases pending or to be brought in other states as well.

    Obama is in it deep and the DNC has some…a LOT…of explaining to do unless they start looking for a new candidate for 2012.
    Snopes verifies the sourcing of this article, (for what that’s worth !)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.