Obama

[Soldier4Christ]

Eligibility case
finds 'standing'?
New suit claims unique state law
enables citizens to demand proof

A new case challenging Barack Obama's natural-born citizenship and, therefore, constitutional eligibility to serve as president has the potential to clear a hurdle that caused several other similar cases' dismissal: the issue of "standing."

In the case brought by Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg, for example, a federal judge ruled against the lawsuit in deciding Berg lacked the "standing" to sue, arguing that the election of Obama wouldn't cause the plaintiff specific, personal injury.

In Washington state's Broe v. Reed case, however, plaintiff's attorney Stephen Pidgeon says a unique state statute grants everyday citizens the required standing.

"These lawsuits have pointed their fingers at the various secretaries of state and said, 'You handle the elections, it's your job [to verify Obama's eligibility],'" Stephen Pidgeon told WND, "and the secretaries of state have said, 'No, it's not our job. You the voter have to prove he was ineligible.' But when the voters try to do it, the courts tell them they have no standing. So it presents a catch-22.

"Here, we have standing by means of statute," Pidgeon continued. "This particular statute provides for any registered voter to challenge the election of a candidate if the candidate at the time of the election was ineligible to hold office."

Further, Pidgeon explained, "In Washington we also have a constitutional clause in Article 1 that says the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of land, so it's very much a state issue that the secretary of state has a duty to enforce the U.S. Constitution.

"He doesn't think he does; we think he does. That's really the issue before the court," Pidgeon said.

Washington's secretary of state, Mr. Sam Reed, has opposed the lawsuit, brought by a group of 12 registered Washington voters with Pidgeon's representation, on several grounds, including the argument that the issue is moot now that Obama has been voted upon by the people.

Pidgeon argues, however, that even if Obama remains in office two years from now, the issue will not be moot.

"The Constitution's criteria for president are never moot," Pidgeon explained. "Article 2, Section 1 says 'eligible to the Office of President'; it doesn't say 'eligible for candidacy to the Office of President."

Therefore, Pidgeon argues, the Constitution's natural-born citizen clause specifically and expressly addresses the man sitting in the Oval Office, not just the main elected and waiting to get in.

"If, at any time during his tenure, a birth certificate actually surfaces showing [Obama] born in Kenya," Pidgeon said, "he is disqualified from the presidency at any time. And the constitutional crisis that is rising out of this – the longer he's in that office, the greater the problem becomes, because everything he does will be illegal."

The Washington Supreme Court is set to hear Broe v. Reed on Jan. 8, but the entire case may be delayed intentionally, as the plaintiffs wait to see if the court will rule first on a requested subpoena of Obama's birth certificate from Hawaii.

Unlike other states where lawsuits challenging Obama's natural-born citizen status were required to move through lower courts, Washington law grants the case "original jurisdiction" at the state Supreme Court, which means the plaintiff can present new evidence, including – if the court will indeed subpoena it – Obama's birth records.

"We have opportunity to present facts before the Supreme Court, where you wouldn't have that normally," Pidgeon told WND. "With original jurisdiction, we have the opportunity to present factual argument, and so what we have said to the court is, 'At no time did Senator Obama produce a single piece of evidence upon which the secretary of state could rely to establish that he was a natural born citizen, or that he was even an American citizen, or that he was running under his legal name.' Those are the three facets of our lawsuit."

Pidgeon also told WND that the case's primary hurdle now is the natural predisposition judges have toward complying with the democratic will of the people. They rarely "upset the apple cart," Pidgeon said, by overturning the results of an election.

Still, Pidgeon believes pursuing Broe v. Reed is necessary.

"I expect the truth of Senator Obama's birth is going to come out," Pidgeon told WND. "It may not be today, it may not be tomorrow, but the truth of his birth is going to come out, and when that true fact comes out that he was born in Kenya, we will have an unprecedented constitutional crisis in this nation.

"The question is," Pidgeon figures, "will the Washington Supreme Court stand for the rule of law or are they going to stand for an overthrow of the constitutional republic by the will of the electorate?"

Last month, WND reported on the potential complications an ineligible president could create.

"Should Senator Obama be discovered, after he takes office, to be ineligible for the Office of President of the United States of America and, thereby, his election declared void," argues a similar case brought by Alan Keyes and pending in California, "Americans will suffer irreparable harm in that (a) usurper will be sitting as the President of the United States, and none of the treaties, laws, or executive orders signed by him will be valid or legal."

With such high stakes potentially at risk, WND earlier launched a letter campaign to contact Electoral College members and urge them to review the controversy.

That followed a campaign that sent more than 60,000 letters by overnight delivery to the U.S. Supreme Court when one case contesting Obama's eligibility for the Oval Office was pending.

A separate petition, already signed by more than 200,000 also is ongoing asking authorities in the election to seek proof Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution.

WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi had gone to both Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama's birth. But his research and discoveries only raised more questions.

The biggest question was why, if a Hawaii birth certificate exists as his campaign has stated, Obama hasn't simply ordered it made available to settle the rumors

The governor's office in Hawaii said there is a valid certificate but rejected requests for access and left ambiguous its origin: Does the certificate on file with the Department of Health indicate a Hawaii birth or was it generated after the Obama family registered a Kenyan birth in Hawaii?

[Soldier4Christ]

Berg files new challenge to eligibility
'There is nothing more important than our U.S. Constitution'

A lawyer who already has two conferences pending before the U.S. Supreme Court on the issue of Barack Obama's eligibility to be president has filed a new lawsuit, this one on behalf of a retired military colonel who would need to know whether to follow any orders issued by Obama as commander-in-chief.

Philip Berg's earlier case and a request for an injunction in the case are scheduled for conferences with the justices on Jan. 9 and Jan. 16.

The new case, filed with co-counsel Lawrence J. Joyce, was submitted to U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., and names as defendant "Barry Soetoro a/k/a Obama."

It demands to know Obama's real name and his constitutional qualifications to occupy the Oval Office. The plaintiff is Gregory S. Hollister, a resident of Colorado Springs, who has "standing" and "needs a decision so he knows whether or not to follow any order of Soetoro a/k/a Obama."

Berg reported the case is in the nature of an interpleader, shifting the burden of proof to Obama and Joe Biden.

"I am determined, on behalf of the 320 million citizens in the United States, to see that 'our U.S. Constitution' is followed. Specifically, in the case of Soetoro a/k/a Obama, does he meet the constitutional qualifications for president?" Berg said.

He said he doubts that is the case based on his information that Obama was born in Kenya, his mother was not yet 19, Obama later was a citizen of Indonesia and several other factors.

"I am appalled that the main stream media continues to ignore this issue as we are headed to a 'Constitutional Crisis.' There is nothing more important than our U.S. Constitution and it must be enforced," he said.

Berg said he was pleased the U.S. Supreme Court has scheduled two conferences to look into the merits of the claims in his earlier case.

"I know that Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally qualified 'natural-born' citizen and therefore, is ineligible to assume the office of the president of the United States," he continued. "Obama knows he is not 'natural born' as he knows where he was born and he knows he was legally adopted/acknowledged in Indonesia; is an attorney, Harvard Law head of the Law Review and graduate who taught constitutional law; knows the Obama candidacy is the biggest 'hoax' attempted on the citizens of the United States in over 200 years; places our constitution in a 'crisis' situation; and Obama is in a situation where he can be blackmailed by leaders around the world."

[Soldier4Christ]

Atheists: No praying at inauguration! 
'It is a secular event of a secular country that includes all Americans'

Atheists are planning to crash the inauguration invocation, claiming the government is choosing between "believers" and "those who don't believe" and imposing religion on atheists and agnostics.

Michael Newdow, a California attorney who pushed a case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court in an unsuccessful effort to remove the words "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance, is joining Dan Barker, co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, in a lawsuit to stop the Presidential Inaugural Committee's sponsorship of prayer on Jan. 20.

Their 34-page grievance, filed Monday in Washington, D.C., District Court, names Supreme Court Justice John G. Roberts Jr., officials in charge of inaugural activities, Rev. Joseph E. Lowery, pastor Rick Warren and others as defendants. It also aims to prohibit Roberts from using the phrase "So help me God" in the traditional oath of office, Fox News reports.

"We're hoping to stop prayer and religious rituals at governmental functions, especially at the inauguration," Barker said. "The inauguration is not a religious event. It is a secular event of a secular country that includes all Americans, including those of us who are not Christians, including those of us who are not believers."

Barker told Fox the government is not supposed to choose sides when it comes to religion.

It's "hard wired into our Constitution," he said, insisting that the 29 atheists and agnostics named in the lawsuit love their country.

"[W]e are subjected to someone else's religious views with the endorsement of the government, which makes us feel like second class outsiders," Barker said.

Rather than having religious figures such as Warren and Lowery delivery the invocation and benediction at his inauguration, Barker suggested Barack Obama host a private religious ceremony.

"... Defendants will have an invocation and benediction during the inauguration," the lawsuit states. "Both of these activities are completely exclusionary, showing absolute disrespect to Plaintiffs and others of similar religious views, who explicitly reject the purely religious claims that will be endorsed, i.e., (a) there exists a God, and (b) the United States government should pay homage to that God."

"Those people who do pray do believe in God and they are in fact trying to use the government to pick sides," Barker said. "In America we are free to disagree. We can disagree with Rev. Rick Warren but we're not free to ask our government to settle the argument."

But Peter Sprigg, vice president for policy at the Family Research Council, told Fox News the decision is up to Obama, not the government.

"The atheists, while they have every right to practice their atheism, they do not have an absolute right not to be exposed to viewpoints they don't agree with," he said. "So I think this lawsuit has no merit whatsoever."

Sprigg said Barker, Newdow and other atheists involved in the lawsuit are simply confused about the Constitution's meaning. He believes the suit will fail, just as Newdow was unsuccessful in his lawsuits to ban prayer at President George W. Bush's ceremonies in 2001 and 2005.

"These atheists who are suing to prevent prayer at the inauguration are showing a fundamental misunderstanding of what the First Amendment is all about," he told Fox News Radio." The establishment of religion that is forbidden by the First Amendment means the official declaration of an official national church. It doesn't mean that public ceremonies cannot include prayers or acknowledgement of the existence of God."

However, when asked if banning prayer would mean the government is favoring atheists over believers, Barker responded, "There is a difference between neutrality and hostility."

Newdow also recently lost a defamation complaint he had filed against a pastor who criticized him for his efforts to have "under God" removed from the Pledge of Allegiance.

The case had been brought against Rev. Austin Miles.

The case previously involved WND, the Internet's leading independent news site.

But shortly after naming WND as a defendant, Newdow agreed to drop the organization from the complaint.

The case, which originated about six years ago, alleged WND published a quote from Newdow that his daughter "was forced to recite, caused her emotional damage, stress, anxiety and a sense of being left out."

The lawsuit alleged the quote was never said by Newdow.

But WND did not publish the quotation, and Newdow quickly agreed to dismiss WND as a defendant.

[Shammu]

Atheists are planning to crash the inauguration invocation, claiming the government is choosing between "believers" and "those who don't believe" and imposing religion on atheists and agnostics.

.

[Soldier4Christ]

600,000 new government employees?
Obama looks to create 3 million jobs, more than 80% in private sector

In his radio address today, President-elect Obama uses some new language when discussing what he wants the stimulus package to achieve in terms of jobs. First off, he has a name for the package -- the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan."

The president-elect says he wants to "create three million new jobs" -- this is a change from a few weeks ago, when he said he wanted the plan to create OR SAVE two million jobs.

He says the "No. 1 goal of my plan ... is to create three million new jobs, more than 80 percent of them in the private sector.”

If you do the math: 20 percent of three million means 600,000 new government employees.

[Soldier4Christ]

Kissinger: Obama primed to create 'New World Order'
Policy guru says global upheaval presents 'great opportunity'

Conflicts across the globe and an international respect for Barack Obama have created the perfect setting for establishment of "a New World Order," according to Henry Kissinger, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and former secretary of state under President Nixon.

Kissinger has long been an integral figure in U.S. foreign policy, holding positions in the Nixon, Ford and Reagan administrations. Author of over a dozen books on foreign policy, Kissinger was also named by President Bush as the chairman of the Sept. 11 investigatory commission.

Kissinger made the remark in an interview with CNBC's "Squawk on the Street" hosts Mark Haines and Erin Burnett at the New York Stock Exchange, after Burnett asked him what international conflict would define the Obama administration's foreign policy.

"The president-elect is coming into office at a moment when there is upheaval in many parts of the world simultaneously," Kissinger responded. "You have India, Pakistan; you have the jihadist movement. So he can't really say there is one problem, that it's the most important one. But he can give new impetus to American foreign policy partly because the reception of him is so extraordinary around the world. His task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period when, really, a new world order can be created. It's a great opportunity, it isn't just a crisis."

The phrase 'new world order' traces back at least as far as 1940, when author H.G. Wells used it as the title of a book about a socialist, unified, one-world government. The phrase has also been linked to American presidents, including Woodrow Wilson, whose work on establishing the League of Nations pioneered the concept of international government bodies, and to the first President Bush, who used it in a 1989 speech.

"A new partnership of nations has begun, and we stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment," said Bush before a joint session of Congress. "Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective – a new world order – can emerge: A new era … in which the nations of the world, east and west, north and south, can prosper and live in harmony."

The phrase "New World Order" causes alarm for many Americans, particularly those concerned about an international governing body trumping U.S. sovereignty or those that interpret biblical prophecy to foretell the establishment of a one-world government as key to the rise of the Antichrist. Conspiracy theorists, too, have latched on to the phrase, concerned that powerful financial or government figures are secretly plotting to rule the world.

Kissinger's ties to government and international powers – as well as his use of the phrase – have made him suspect in the eyes of many who are wary of what "new world order" might actually mean.

"There is a need for a new world order," Kissinger told PBS interviewer Charlie Rose last year, "I think that at the end of this administration, with all its turmoil, and at the beginning of the next, we might actually witness the creation of a new order – because people looking in the abyss, even in the Islamic world, have to conclude that at some point, ordered expectations must return under a different system."

As WND reported, Kissinger was also part of last year's super-secret Bilderberg Group, an organization of powerful international elites, including government, business, academic and journalistic representatives, that has convened annually since 1954.

According to sources that have penetrated the high-security meetings, the Bilderberg meetings emphasize a globalist agenda and promote the idea that the notion of national sovereignty is antiquated and regressive.

CNBC's Haines concluded the Kissinger interview by asking, "Are you confident about the people President-elect Obama has chosen to surround him?"

Kissinger replied, "He has appointed an extraordinarily able group of people in both the international and financial fields."

[David_james]

why did they even let obama run if they are not sure he was born in America?

[Soldier4Christ]

That is a question that has been asked many times without an answer.

[nChrist]

I think that Henry Kissinger hit the nail on the head.  By the way, I don't think that all of these things came together by COINCIDENCE. The timing is TOO PERFECT for many other things going on the world right now! CHAOS WAS NEEDED - AND WE HAVE CHAOS on the way!

[Shammu]

By the way, I don't think that all of these things came together by COINCIDENCE. The timing is TOO PERFECT for many other things going on the world right now! CHAOS WAS NEEDED - AND WE HAVE CHAOS on the way!

That is because God is in control, not man. Mans influence in thing is only adding to the chaos. Biblical Prophecy tells us what is to come, but not when. So yes it is easy to piece things together as they happen.

But you know this brother.

[Shammu]

Obama commercial they don't want you to see
Fox, CNN, MSNBC refuse ads questioning Barack's eligibility
Posted: January 08, 2009
12:14 am Eastern

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

The video can be seen, by following the link at the bottom of the page.

Barack Obama's campaign officials and transition office repeatedly have rejected reporters' requests for comment on questions raised over his lack of documentation regarding his birth and the resulting concerns over his eligibility to be president. Now a number of media organizations apparently don't want questions raised either.

WND columnist Janet Porter told WND she found that out when her organization, Faith2Action.org, tried to purchase airtime to publicize information about the eligibility concerns.

She told WND that national networks that refused to sell her time for a 60-second commercial included CNBC, MSNBC, Headline News, CNN and Fox. Washington, D.C., outlets for the same organizations did the same.

"With the date for congressional approval (of the Electoral College today), we wanted them to have access to the facts," she told WND. "Congress is sworn to uphold the Constitution."

She said the donors who contributed the funding that was to be used for the ads were being contacted to find out whether they wanted to reach another direction in the media.

It cites a statement from the president-elect's paternal grandmother that she was present at his birth in Kenya, his refusal to release his original birth certificate, his attendance at school in Indonesia "as Barry Soetoro when only Indonesia citizens were permitted to attend," and Obama's travel to Pakistan in 1981 "when it was illegal to enter as a U.S. citizen."

It concludes, "Our Constitution still matters."

"As requested, we backed up every sentence of this ad, and still it was rejected," Porter said. "What does that say about freedom of speech when we not only cannot count on the media to cover the story, but we can't even buy time to publicize what may be the biggest story of the century."

She raised several questions about the issue in her recent column.

"What if an impostor from another country ran for the presidency and won?" she asks. "What if the media blocked any news of his birthplace and citizenship? What if the media censorship even blocked paid advertising which tried to expose it?

"What if no one had the courage to challenge or verify it? What if he was inaugurated illegally? What if the military had to answer to a commander in chief who was illegitimate? What if every law he signed was invalid?"

And, she wonders, "What if it all happened on our watch?"

WND reported the U.S. Supreme Court has scheduled Friday a conference – a private meeting at which justices consider whether to take individual cases – on a lawsuit challenging Obama's eligibility.

Twice before the justices have heard the questions, and twice before they've decided to ignore them.

The lingering questions continue to leave a cloud over the impending presidency of a man whose relatives have reported he was born in Kenya and who has decided, for whatever reason, not to release a bona fide copy of his original birth certificate in its complete form.

Multiple lawsuits have been filed around the nation alleging Obama does not meet the "natural born citizen" clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, which reads, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

Some of the legal challenges have alleged Obama was not born in Hawaii, as he insists, but in Kenya. The woman identified by Obama as his American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time – especially if it took place in a foreign country and the man identified as his father, Barack Obama Sr., was a Kenyan citizen.

Other challenges also have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. Such cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Several details of Obama's past have added twists to the question of his eligibility and citizenship, including his family's move to Indonesia when he was a child, his travel to Pakistan in the '80s when such travel was forbidden to American citizens and conflicting reports from Obama's family about his place of birth.

On Friday the justices will consider Philip J. Berg's Petition for Writ of Certiorari.

"This is a historic occasion that will impact the office of the president of the United States as never before. No one has ever brought an action against a president-elect candidate challenging his eligibility to serve based on the 'natural born' citizen requirement provided in the United States Constitution, Article II Section 1," said a statement on Berg's ObamaCrimes.com website.

Berg suggested if Obama "is allowed to be sworn in as president of the United States, there will be substantial and irrevocable harm to the stability of the United States of America and to its citizens."

"Because Barack Obama is not a 'natural born' citizen as required by the United States Constitution, then all of his actions as president would be null and void," Berg said.

Last month, WND reported similar concerns raised in a lawsuit filed in California.

"Should Senator Obama be discovered, after he takes office, to be ineligible for the Office of President of the United States of America and, thereby, his election declared void," argues a case brought on behalf of Ambassador Alan Keyes, also a presidential candidate. "Americans will suffer irreparable harm in that (a) usurper will be sitting as the President of the United States, and none of the treaties, laws, or executive orders signed by him will be valid or legal."

Berg, who has another case on the issue pending on behalf of a retired military officer, earlier stated, "I am determined, on behalf of the 320 million citizens in the United States, to see that 'our U.S. Constitution' is followed. Specifically, in the case of Soetoro a/k/a Obama, does he meet the constitutional qualifications for president?

"I am appalled that the mainstream media continue to ignore this issue as we are headed to a 'constitutional crisis.' There is nothing more important than our U.S. Constitution and it must be enforced," he said.

The Supreme Court also has another hearing on an issue raised by Berg for Jan. 16, and the Supreme Court just confirmed today yet another conference is scheduled Jan. 23 on a separate case, this one handled by California attorney Orly Taitz, challenging Obama's eligibility.

Because of the high stakes, WND earlier launched a letter campaign to contact Electoral College members and urge them to review the controversy.

That followed a campaign that sent more than 60,000 letters by overnight delivery to the U.S. Supreme Court when one case contesting Obama's eligibility for the Oval Office was pending.

A separate petition, already signed by more than 200,000 also is ongoing asking authorities in the election to seek proof Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution.

WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi went to both Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama's birth. But his research and discoveries only raised more questions.

The biggest question was why, if a Hawaii birth certificate exists as his campaign has stated, Obama hasn't simply ordered it made available to settle the rumors

The governor's office in Hawaii said there is a valid certificate but rejected requests for access and left ambiguous its origin: Does the certificate on file with the Department of Health indicate a Hawaii birth or was it generated after the Obama family registered a Kenyan birth in Hawaii?

Obama commercial Fox, CNN, MSNBC refuse to air

[Soldier4Christ]

Latest eligibility challenge rejected
Justices' conference results in no action on constitutional questions

Another case challenging Barack Obama's eligibility to be president has been turned back by the U.S. Supreme Court, but the man who brought it, Philip J. Berg, said the issue won't disappear.

"I am committed to keep our efforts going to continue litigation until the truth of Obama being 'not qualified' for president comes out. The Obama candidacy is the biggest 'HOAX' ever put forth to the citizens of the United States in 230 years," Berg said in a statement today confirming the latest arguments submitted to the high court weren't given a further hearing.

According to Berg's statement, his case was dealt with at a conference among the justices Friday.

WND has reported on the long series of legal cases challenging Obama's eligibility to occupy the Oval Office based on questions and allegations about his birth place that could disqualify him because of the Constitution's demand that the president be a "natural born" citizen.

"In addition to the current case in the U.S. Supreme Court, we have or will have … a case filed two months ago captioned Berg vs. Obama," Berg's statement said.

He said that case remains "under seal," and he isn't commenting on it.

Another case, Berg pointed out, Hollister vs. Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama, also is pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The suit by a retired U.S. Air Force colonel raises the issue of whether military personnel would be required to obey an order from Obama if the commander-in-chief is not qualified to hold office.

Several other cases also remain pending, including a motion on an issue related to Berg's case scheduled for a Supreme Court conference Friday. A conference on yet another case is scheduled Jan. 23, which means the dispute will follow Obama into the White House, since his inauguration is Jan. 20.

"If Obama is sworn in as president, we will file a Petition for Writ of 'Quo Warranto,' a case that will challenge Obama as being ineligible to serve as president because he is 'not qualified,'" Berg said.

Berg said Obama simply should hold a news conference and affirm, "Because of things in my background, I cannot be sworn is as president."

Berg,, whose information is on his ObamaCrimes.com website, said he was concerned by the court's most recent decision.

"I am disappointed for the 300-plus million U.S. citizens, our 'forefathers' and for the tens of thousands that have died defending 'our' Constitution," he said.

"Obama is setting himself up to be blackmailed and perhaps he is already being blackmailed," said Berg. "He was the candidate for 'change,' but look at his cabinet – 70 percent from President Clinton's days and how about his Secretary of Defense, Gates. Give me a break!"

The court earlier denied full hearings to cases brought by Cort Wrotnowski and Leo Donofrio. But following a pending hearing on a related issue to Berg's case this Friday, a conference also is scheduled Jan. 23 on the case Gail Lightfoot et al v. Debra Bowen, California Secretary of State.

The Lightfoot case is being handled by Orly Taitz, who said the issue is significant.

"Each and every member of the U.S. Congress and Senate owes it to 320 million American citizens to do his due diligence and demand all necessary records," she said.

Taitz said her case was rejected by the California Supreme Court with a single-word decision, "Denied." Her arguments, she said, rest on precedents from both the California Supreme Court, which years ago removed a candidate for president from the ballot because he was only 34, and the U.S. Supreme Court's affirmation of that ruling.

"We'll see what happens," she told WND. "This is not going to go away."

There have been no substantive answers to date about the questions raised, and Obama has decided, for whatever reason, not to release a bona fide copy of his original birth certificate in its complete form.

The lawsuits allege Obama does not meet the "natural born citizen" clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, which reads, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

[nChrist]

He's right that this WILL NOT GO AWAY!

It will never go away and will be dealt with sooner or later in an open and TRUTHFUL WAY! As time goes on, many will see through the THIN veneer on their own. However, the TRUTH is going to come out. Who knows how things will DECLINE in this SAD world during the meantime. The things and systems of man are falling apart, and we should all know that the 7 year Tribulation Period will be a REALITY. We should also know that things are definitely going to get much WORSE!

I was just visiting with my wife a little bit, talking about some of the insane and bizarre things going on. We don't have to wait long for a new list of things now. For Christians, there is ONE BLUNT FACT THAT WE ALWAYS NEED TO REMEMBER:  WE TRUST GOD AND HE NEVER FAILS! HE IS OUR ROCK, OUR FORTRESS, OUR REFUGE, AND OUR ETERNITY! This is simple, sure, concrete, and ABSOLUTE FACT! We shouldn't look to the world for these things. If we do, we'll be disappointed. Let's get REAL - ONLY GOD IS WORTHY OF OUR COMPLETE AND UNQUESTIONED FAITH AND TRUST! Lastly, we shouldn't be depending on ourselves either. We should know that we are just humans and subject to frequent failures in this short life. The BIG difference for Christians is that WE BELONG TO GOD, so we need to learn to put ALL of OUR FAITH AND TRUST IN HIM! IN PERSPECTIVE, THIS SHORT LIFE IS LIKE A BLINK OF THE EYE, AND GOD DID NOT DESIGN US FOR JUST THIS SHORT LIFE! As Christians, GOD is going to let us experience what we were designed for IN ALL ETERNITY!

Love In Christ,
Tom

Psalms 118:6-7 NASB  The LORD is for me; I will not fear; What can man do to me? The LORD is for me among those who help me; Therefore I will look with satisfaction on those who hate me.

Philippians 2:1-2  If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies,  2  Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind.

Philippians 4:8  Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.

Psalms 133:1  Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!

[Soldier4Christ]

ISNA (Unindicted Co-conspirator) to Give Obama Inaugural Prayer...

What's ISNA? As I have written, the US government has identified ISNA   as a Muslim Brotherhood front organization. Actually, the Muslim Brotherhood itself has identified ISNA as a Muslim Brotherhood front organization. And the Muslim Brotherhood is all about extending Islamic law globally--even in America. According to its 1991 grand strategy document, the Muslim Brotherhood "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

A prayer will be offered at the National Cathedral by Ingrid Mattson, the first woman president of the Islamic Society of North America, according to an official who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to release the information. The Islamic Society, based in Indiana, is the nation's largest Muslim group.

Outrage over Rick Warren's participation in the inauguration but not a whisper heard over this.

[nChrist]

Brothers and Sisters,

I would hope that all real Christians can see and at least partially understand what's going on. It isn't "Politics as usual", even as dirty as it was, rather something WORSE and yet to be defined.

As Christians, we should pray for our new administration, regardless of what we think and regardless of what agreement or disagreement we have with what we're watching. This does not mean that we pray for GOD'S Speed for anything evil or immoral - rather we pray for GOD'S Guidance and that HIS Will be done. I would hope that all Christians have a list of concerns that should be given to GOD in prayer. If we are confused and don't know what to pray for, the HOLY SPIRIT OF GOD living within us will help us.

We don't know what tomorrow brings in this lost and dying world, but we are in the ALMIGHTY HANDS OF GOD - OUR CREATOR. In the meantime, GOD has a purpose for us, and our part is to do HIS Will until we are caught HOME to GLORY.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Colossians 1:9-12 NASB  For this reason also, since the day we heard of it, we have not ceased to pray for you and to ask that you may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, so that you will walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, to please Him in all respects, bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God; strengthened with all power, according to His glorious might, for the attaining of all steadfastness and patience; joyously giving thanks to the Father, who has qualified us to share in the inheritance of the saints in Light.