Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Expose the fradulence but not out of spite.


Let me put it to you all straight so no one really gets the wrong idea or have a stumbling blocked assumption to my many brash commentaries of our President or any other immoral matters based on facts and not mere opinions that I consistently and sometimes negatively report which is not really easy for me because I would rather always like to talk about the good things if this was reality alone. But it isn't. Immorality is spreading like an epidemic and the cure is JESUS. And I am motivated by earnestness to continue to be used by the Spirit of CHRIST JESUS and want so many to be saved from what we deserve and it is coming to those who remain dead in their sins. OH such an awful terror to fall into the hands of an angry GOD who will punish the well deserved and HE must punish sin if HE is a RIGHTEOUS GOD and slay the wicked when HE comes the second time like LION roaring swift with HIS terrible swift sword. If it is brash reports such as what I have been writing lately that wakes many up and rubs them the wrong way then so be it until the LORD directs my attention to something else or another approach. But I must tell it like it is.

In the case and many articles against OBAMA, I actually like the character of Obama and his smoothness of personality. Obama definitely has a cult of personality and charisma, how could you not like how his personality and character is. He seems he would be a wonderful friend doesn't he if you knew him personally. How he he gives speeches, addresses the media, and speaks in all respectable matter to everyone as a role model should be and this is actually what America needs actually from all those that run for such powerful office. If it is personality and character that is a test to win WE THE PEOPLE well Obama passed with flying colors as we all know. Even if he is one of the lessor of two evils (no pun intended) so to speak he is very likable and deserves to be prayed for continuously correct? We need to pray for his and his families soul regardless of the outcome of negitivity if there ever is one. The many articles I read questioning his citizenship and his eligibility to be President, which is very serious indeed and should never be allowed to be covered up at all costs, we should never gnash our teeth at him or curse him in such ways like the wicked do always against the righteous. We Christians who truly trust in Christ alone and know Christ alone is the only SOVEREIGN and in control, are of a higher mentality as well and we truly need to examine ourselves to see if we are. YES, we are of a higher standard in which I many times forget (laughs) and many who are still in bondage to immorality cannot stand our high given mentality because we are forgiven and they are ignorantly condemned already and we should never give them or allow them to witness such Pharisee-isms . We are Christ example if we follow HIM correct? Get it? FOLLOW HIM? As the Apostle and Saint Paul put it clearly;

Colossians 3:2
And set your minds and keep them set on what is above (the higher things), not on the things that are on the earth.

AND

Colossians 3:15
And let the peace (soul harmony which comes) from Christ rule (act as umpire continually) in your hearts [deciding and settling with finality all questions that arise in your minds, in that peaceful state] to which as [members of Christ's] one body you were also called [to live]. And be thankful (appreciative), [giving praise to God always].

Even in the situations I report against all immorality from the weakest to the strongest forms of it, I still must learn to be as graceful as the LORD is to US who were so justified by what our LORD Christ JESUS did on the cross, His resurrection, and HIS ascension for all of US who are called according to HIS purpose.
And if it seems that I have failed at this, well forgive me and I will fail sometimes because original sin still battles within me and praise GOD in Christ JESUS HE knows this and is ever at work in US, preparing for the perfection in US to come all to GOD's Glory alone, Amen? But sometimes we fall short and daily.

So I just wanted again to clear up the waves I make and make known that it is all in warning motivated by the LOVE that is within me and this LOVE offers to anyone who will have HIM. For HE does call all to repentance if they will come but HE also says few that find it. Are you one of them that desires above all things to be that few? I surely do. Nothing compares to greatness of knowing JESUS CHRIST, THE SOVEREIGN KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS who alone does satisfy US alone if we not harden our hearts.

RICHARD WHITE JAN 27 2009

Government Actions portrays that Children are the enemy especially the unborn that is the problem of the economy?


COMMENTARY. Immoral reasoning the dumbing down of humanity.

We all know that our American Government today is mostly ran by immoral-ites, owned by special interest wealthy agenda-ites who have no care for the US Constitution or have any respect for our 200 year old system and the Fore Fathers that help bring this into effect blessed by GOD. I continue to blow the same Trumpet continuously possibly annoying most of you with the same old stories, but it is the same old story. Tell what is new? What will really change? Corruption and self interest in Government will never change while sin still owns the world technically. And self absorb behavior will continue to allow sin to lead many down that WIDE road that only leads to destruction. I ask when will we truly have a Moral society again if that can be possible before Christ comes back. Some Christian re constructionist believe this is a possibility through prayer and action. Some others in the faith just give up because they are taught a systematic pessimistic eschatology or think they will be raptured and really just go on with their lives until that happens, and many are just comfortable thinking GOD blessings of God gien materialism will not waver for them in this crises because they are "living their best life now" why would GOD subject me to wrath or tribulation when HE loves me and says we are not subject to HIS wrath or judgments as they take Scripture way out of context to justify their cares for the world. Take a place for a Majority Leader and leaders who claim Christianity but act against morality at all cost to keep themselves as lifers in office so they can get paid all the days of their indulgent lives. Especially blaming now that Children are the problem of all these drains of economy and that contraception and abortion is a final solution for our economy? But hey what do we really expect from a sinful world? I do believe as the example of the book of Jonah and his sign it is still possible to CHANGE with prayer and action, but then again will the Church ever act? Again Judgment starts in the house of GOD first.

RW Jan 2008



Pelosi: Fewer babies = stronger economy
Charlie Butts and Jody Brown - OneNewsNow - 1/27/2009 6:00:00 AMBookmark and Share
Updated 8:45 a.m. Central

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stirred up a hornet's nest by promoting the idea of spending of millions of dollars on birth control and abortion as part of the economic stimulus package.

"Contraception," argued Pelosi, "will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government." Her comments came on ABC's This Week when asked by host George Stephanopoulos how expanding "family-planning services" to the tune of millions of dollars will stimulate the economy. OneNewsNow sought reaction from Susan Fani, director of communications for the Catholic League.

"It's quite shocking, actually, that the Speaker of the House -- who claims to be Catholic -- would go on national television and claim that contraception would reduce the cost to the government," exclaims Fani. "It's just beyond words, really."


Pelosi has five children and six grandchildren. Catholic League president Bill Donohue finds her comments revealing. "We have reached a new low when high-ranking public office holders in the federal government cast children as the enemy," he offers in a press statement. "But at least it explains their enthusiasm for abortion-on-demand."

Will the spending on "family-planning services" help dig America out of its economic doldrums?

"That's not going to help grow the economy," Fani responds. "It doesn't even make sense as a prospect for helping this country through our economic crisis. So it's wrong on so many different levels, and just shows...a very flawed thought process."


American Life League calls Pelosi's remarks "a betrayal" of her Catholic faith, and the Christian Defense Coalition says it is "unthinkable" that she would try to stimulate the economy by "seeking to reduce the number of children."

America needs to produce 2.1 children per couple to keep up with births to support the population -- and that rate is not being maintained. Economies in Europe have been especially hurt by a drop in birth rates.

"Pelosi should abstain from social engineering"

Ron Paul's Approach to Reversing Roe v. Wade



Proverbs 6:16-19
16These six things the Lord hates, indeed, seven are an abomination to Him:

17A proud look [the spirit that makes one overestimate himself and underestimate others], a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,(D)

18A heart that manufactures wicked thoughts and plans, feet that are swift in running to evil,

19A false witness who breathes out lies [even under oath], and he who sows discord among his brethren.



COMMENTARY. And here we still are since 1973 proving that the legalization of murder and a death sentence in the first degree to humans not out of the womb yet is still one of the worst selfish blows to America this country has ever witness outside of illegalizing prayer in the Schools and the TRUTH etc etc in 1961. Ever since stupid Americans elected immoral persons in office since the 50's because of how these CASE LAW inventors established and ruined actual JUSTICE in this country because of how CASE LAW which is truly UN_American practice if you actually study the law books since Professor Christopher Columbus Langdell was bent on ruining the Courts system to have his evolution fairy tail the norm and to have all morality ethic removed so self indulgence can be without guilt which will never happen to any human truly. Humans are condemned already if they do not trust in the SON and live their SELFish lives against HIM. So we have the worst holocaust ever in front of US daily and we wonder why we are in economic crises, and why Obama was elected and remains silent of his natural origin and he is President and possibly an illegal one at that. END ABORTION becuase GOD HATES the shedding of innocent blood remember. It is one of the 7 things HE hates.


Ron Paul's Approach to Reversing Roe v. Wade

Written by Warren Mass
Friday, 23 January 2009 15:38

Yesterday, January 22, saw a veritable army of pro-lifers participate in the 35th annual March for Life in Washington, D.C. This demonstration of public sentiment was first held in 1974 to mark the first anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision. In that decision, of course, the Supreme Court ruled that all state laws prohibiting abortion were unconstitutional. Since then, an estimated 50,000,000 babies have been killed in the womb in the United States.

As we observed yesterday, ever since the Roe v. Wade (and the less publicized Doe v. Bolton) decision, the primary strategy among pro-life people has been to overturn Roe by electing so-called pro-life Republican presidents who will appoint strict constructionist justices to the Supreme Court. Theoretically, this strategy will eventually lead to the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

This writer and his wife have been active in the pro-life movement for decades. Between us, we have participated in life rallies, life marches, life chains, and prayer outside abortion mills in states as widespread as Massachusetts, California, Texas, Wisconsin, and Florida. This year, we donated money to help send a group of 60 students from Ave Maria University in Florida to the March for Life in Washington. Needless to say, we have great admiration for the many thousands of people who marched down Constitution Avenue yesterday, and for Nellie Gray, who has organized this event from its inception. However, at yesterday’s rally, Gray told those gathered that the battle for life had to be won at the federal level, that it was not enough to send the issue back to the states, where abortion could be legal in one state and illegal in the next.

Of course, that strategy overlooks the fact that abortion, like other crimes, was criminalized on the state level prior to Roe v. Wade. In fact, it was Roe v. Wade that interjected the federal government into the abortion issue in the first place and at the same time made abortion on demand legal throughout the United States. Since the federal "solution" to the abortion issue has resulted in a holocaust of 50 million preborn babies since 1973, why should a return to the pre-1973 approach of prohibiting abortion on the state level be rejected now in favor of another federal "solution"?

Transferring powers from the states to the federal government does not automatically mean that the laws would be better or that they would be applied as originally intended. (Such transfers of power can be a very dangerous thing and can have unintended consequences, since they result in a consolidation of power as well as more distance between the governed and government.) This is true even when the intent behind giving more power to the federal government is to end injustice, as was the case with the language in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that was intended to extend civil rights to freed slaves after the Civil War. Despite the intent, it was this same 14th Amendment that eventually provided the Supreme Court with its convoluted justification for writing Roe v. Wade. The 14th Amendment, adopted in 1868, provided: “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” (Emphasis added.)

Prior to the adoption of the 14th Amendment, it was the responsibility of each state to provide its citizens with equal protection of the laws. However, a series of court rulings eventually culminated in using the 14th Amendment as a pretext to make the states’ business the federal government’s business. Following this precedent, the Supreme Court that wrote Roe v. Wade first completely ignored the literal meaning of the 14th Amendment, which, (quite ironically) states that “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” (Emphasis added.) The court then reaffirmed a right to privacy unknown to the authors of the Constitution and found only in the “penumbra” of the Constitution (which had been cited in previous “privacy” decisions, most notably, in Griswold v. Connecticut in 1965) and — following the precedent of previous courts — included the “right” to abortion in this newly invented right.

It is a case of reaping what we sow. By transferring the authority to oversee equal protection of the laws from the states to the federal government (particularly the federal courts), we have inadvertently also given the federal courts the converse power to abolish those rights! In this case, the most fundamental right of all — the right to life!

Fortunately, there exists a simpler, more practical strategy to protect life (and other things we cherish), provided for in Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution. This section allows Congress to strip the Supreme Court of any cases (e.g., abortion cases) where the Supreme Court does not possess original jurisdiciton. Congress can also limit the jurisdication of any lower federal courts, since Congress created those courts. Congress could make Roe v. Wade a nonproblem overnight, since by prohibiting the federal courts from hearing abortion cases the states could then put back in place anti-abortion laws.

This remedy has already been introduced by Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) in the new (111th) Congress as H.R. 539, the “We the People Act.” H.R. 539 would remove the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and other federal courts from cases related to the free exercise or establishment of religion; the right of privacy, including any such claim related to any issue of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction (e.g., abortion); the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation (same-sex marriage).

The legislation would also prohibit the federal courts from relying on any judicial decision involving any issue referred to in the above list. In other words, it would remove Roe v. Wade and similar decisions from judicial precedent.

In 2003, Rep. Paul (an obstetrician who has delivered over 4,000 children) wrote an essay entitled “Pro-Life Action Must Originate from Principle.” We encourage you to follow the link and read the entire essay, but here are a few of its key points:

• "Those who cherish unborn life have become frustrated by our inability to overturn or significantly curtail Roe v. Wade. Because of this, attempts were made to fight against abortion using political convenience rather than principle."

• "When we surrender constitutional principles, we do untold damage to the moral underpinnings on which our Constitution and entire system of government rest. Those underpinnings are the inalienable right to life, liberty, and property."

• "Pro-lifers should be fiercely loyal to this system of federalism, because the very same Constitution that created the federal system also asserts the inalienable right to life."

• "Pro-life forces have worked for the passage of bills that disregard the federal system…. Each of these bills rested on specious constitutional grounds and undermined the federalism our Founders recognized and intended as the greatest protection of our most precious rights."

• "Each of these bills transfers to the federal government powers constitutionally retained by the states, thus upsetting the separation and balance of powers that federalism was designed to guarantee. To undermine federalism is to indirectly surrender the very principle upon which the protection of our inalienable right to life depends."

Following the March for Life, marches were encouraged to visit their congressional representatives to lobby for the right to life. As to how many of these marchers knew about H.R. 539, or encouraged their representative to cosponsor it, we have no way of knowing. But we suspect most missed the boat on what may be the only way to reverse the scourge of Roe v. Wade in most of our lifetimes.

However, each marcher (and each supporter who watched from home) still has the opportunity to contact his representative by e-mail, phone, fax, or an old-fashioned letter.

The fight for life must continue!

Friday, January 23, 2009

Lawyer challenging eligibility raises issue of secret conference??? HERE WE GO AGAIN.


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."

More of this SOAP OPERA as it continues. OBAMA JUST PROVIDE PROOF OF NATURAL BORN CITIZENSHIP JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER CITIZEN IN AMERICA HAS TO FOR THE SAME REASONS AND END THIS SOAP OPERA ONCE AND FOR ALL IF IT IS NOT TRUE AND YOU ARE A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. WHAT PART OF THAT QUESTION AND ANSWER DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND AND YOU SAID YOU WOULD BE TRANSPARENT?
WELL SO FAR EVEN AFTER ONE DAY IN OFFICE YOU HAVE PROVED OTHERWISE. AGAIN SAME OLD POLITICS OF US CONSTITUTION DESTROYING, DIFFERENT LIAR.

OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
President's meeting with judges questioned
Lawyer challenging eligibility raises issue of secret conference
Posted: January 23, 2009
12:25 am Eastern

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A lawyer who is working on one of the cases before the U.S. Supreme Court that challenges the eligibility of President Barack Obama to occupy the Oval Office is raising concerns over a meeting between the defendant in the case and the judges who are expected to review it.

The case is one of many brought before U.S. courts that allege Obama doesn't meet the "natural born" requirement of the U.S. Constitution for the president. It's one of about half a dozen that have reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which already has declined to grant hearings to several cases.

Orly Taitz, whose case is scheduled to be heard tomorrow in a conference among justices, a private meeting at which they review cases and decide whether they should hold a hearing, confirmed on her website today that a supplemental brief in her arguments had been distributed.

But the website also reported she "had to explain … many of us citizens are also concerned about the eight out of nine justices meeting privately with Mr. Obama (while the cases are pending)."

(Story continues below)


Click Here


The blog continued, "No reporters were allowed. No attorneys were invited on behalf of the plaintiffs. This causes many of us citizens to question the rules of judicial ethics and causes us to question the impartiality on behalf of the justices."

The report said "quite a number of people" have raised their questions with their U.S. representatives over the issues.

According to a CBS report, Obama visited the Supreme Court before his inauguration at the invitation of Chief Justice John Roberts. The report described it as a protocol visit.

According to a separate published report, Obama and then-Vice President-elect Joe Biden met in a court conference room with Roberts and seven other justices for about 45 minutes.

The report said the only absent justice was Samuel Alito.

Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 215,000 others and sign the petition demanding proof of eligibility now!

The supplemental documents
in the Taitz case cite an executive order concerning qualifications issued by President George Bush on Jan. 16.

"This action is seeking the mandate for the U.S. State Department, the FBI and the Director of the Personnel Department to seek the documents for verifying Obama's legitimacy as president and also his citizenship of the United States," the blog reported.

The Supreme Court document reveals that the Taitz case is scheduled for conference tomorrow, and her supplemental briefs have been distributed to the justices.

Taitz said her arguments 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 the ruling. The Constitution requires a president to be 35. Her case raises not the issue of age, but Obama's birthplace and citizenship status, which also are specified in the Constitution.

The lawsuits that have been brought allege in various ways 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 allege his birth took place in Kenya, and his mother was a minor at the time of his birth – too young to confer American citizenship. They argue Obama's father, Barack Obama Sr., was a Kenyan citizen subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time and would have handed down British citizenship.

There also are questions raised about Obama's move to Indonesia when he was a child and his attendance at school there when only Indonesian citizens were allowed and his travel to Pakistan in the '80s when such travel was forbidden to American citizens.

One case, being handled by Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation, is seeking Obama's school records from Occidental College, which could reveal if Obama, for example, attended class on aid intended for foreign students.

Another lawyer working on similar allegations, Philip J. Berg, has written to Congress seeking an investigation, while Taitz' filings have been before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Berg, whose information is on his ObamaCrimes.com website, said the issue isn't going to disappear.

Others agreed.

"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 California 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."

WND twice has organized opportunities for readers to send FedEx letters to the Supreme Court, asking for consideration of the issue on its merits.

The most recent campaign generated 12,096 messages, following the earlier effort that resulted in 60,128 letters.

Obama has claimed in his autobiography and elsewhere that he was born in Hawaii in 1961 to parents Barack Hussein Obama Sr., a Kenyan national, and Stanley Ann Dunham, a minor. But details about which hospital handled the birth and other details provided on the complete birth certificate have been withheld by Obama despite lawsuits and public demands for release.

Meanwhile, a separate report has emerged in the Buffalo, N.Y., News about a woman who said she recalled being told about Obama's birth in Hawaii. Barbara Nelson reported she was having a dinner with Dr. Rodney T. West, an obstetrician, when he discussed the birth of a baby boy to Stanley Ann Dunham, Obama's mother.

She said she later taught Obama as a high school student in Hawaii.

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?

TELL ME WILL ALL THIS CONTINUOUS CORRUPTION SPARK ANOTHER CIVIL WAR ACTION BASED ON THE 2ND AMENDMENT SO MORALITY AND OUR US CONSTITUTION CAN HAVE ITS RULING PLACE WHERE ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL AGAIN? THIS I HOPE AND PRAY WON'T HAPPEN BUT SOME PEACEFUL PATRIOTIC MUST HAPPEN TO SAVE AMERICA FROM THOSE WITHIN WHO ARE TRYING SO DESPERATELY AND IMMORALLY TO RUIN WHAT OUR FOUNDING FORE FATHERS LOST THEIR LIVES FOR AND I DO NOT JUST MEAN THE POLITICIANS AND STATESMEN, I MEAN THE ACTUAL MEN AND WOMEN WHO GAVE THEIR LIVES SO WE CAN LIVE IN PEACE AND FREEDOM UNDER GOD. SUCH A SAD TIME. MAY CHRIST JESUS THE KING COME QUICKLY AND TAKE OVER HIS KINGDOM COME.

Revelation 21:8
But as for the cowards and the ignoble and the contemptible and the cravenly lacking in courage and the cowardly submissive, and as for the unbelieving and faithless, and as for the depraved and defiled with abominations, and as for murderers and the lewd and adulterous and the practicers of magic arts and the idolaters (those who give supreme devotion to anyone or anything other than God) and all liars (those who knowingly convey untruth by word or deed)--[all of these shall have] their part in the lake that blazes with fire and brimstone. This is the second death

Tuesday, January 20, 2009

More Video evidence: Question about Obama's birth certificate avoided

Luke 12:2
Nothing is [so closely] covered up that it will not be revealed, or hidden that it will not be known.

So again tell me why this isn't Public news and why no answer is given for these accusations to clear up this mess? Come OBAMA tell the truth. What is this whole Presidential madness seemingly like just entertainment? Tell me is our whole American Government just for entertainment? IS IT ENTERTAINMENT TO DISMANTLE THE US CONSTITUTION AND SLAP IT IN THE AMERICAN PUBLICS FACE?
Will the real truth come out. YES it will and HE is coming quickly to judge the wicked and the Righteous. Which side will you be on?

Question about Obama's birth certificate avoided


Nov. 24 Obama Birth Certificate Forgery Smoking Gun Revealed by Dr. Ron Polarik



Unsolved Mystery; Obama's Birth Certificate

Show us your birth certificate, Barack Obama! Are you hiding something?!


Can we just end this dilemma OBAMA? Come out and Prove who you are and shut up this whole mess.
You can see tons more on youtube

So sad.

RW

Monday, January 19, 2009

Alan Keyes lawsuit warns America may see 'usurper' in Oval Office


I now ask if the country wanted the first Black American President (no pun intended) then why oh why did you not support Alan Keyes when he time and time again ran for President. Was it because Alan Keyes is a Moral American and cannot be bought by any corruption or wickedness from any political party but chooses what political party he should serve because of what he morally stands for? Was it because Alan Keyes upholds the US Constitution and allows it to speak for itself by itself as his record shows?Just look at his resume. Even though I voted for Ron Paul, I still considered Alan Keyes as well but thought negitively because of what I was fed by the poopagandic immoral Media to which I am very sorry to have been fooled by, by not searching the truth out because of my selfish lazyness from my past. Praise GOD woke me up to reality and gives me HIS strength For the America Media these days are not truly Moral Americans supporting save a few. It is no wonder I write like I do. But as for Alan Keyes, If I were you listen to what he says............................

WND Exclusive CHANGING OF THE GUARD
'Constitutional crisis' looming over Obama's birth location
Alan Keyes lawsuit warns America may see 'usurper' in Oval Office
Posted: November 14, 2008
8:40 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Alan Keyes

The California secretary of state should refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until President-elect Barack Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office, alleges a California court petition filed on behalf of former presidential candidate Alan Keyes and others.

The legal action today is just the latest is a series of challenges, some of which have gone as high as the U.S. Supreme Court, over the issue of Obama's status as a "natural-born citizen," a requirement set by the U.S. Constitution.

WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi even traveled to 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 is why Obama, if a Hawaii birth certificate exists, simply hasn't 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's half-sister, Maya Soetoro, has named two different Hawaii hospitals where Obama could have been born, while a video posted on YouTube features Obama's Kenyan grandmother Sarah claiming to have witnessed Obama's birth in Kenya.

The California action was filed by Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation on behalf of Alan Keyes, the presidential candidate of the American Independent Party, along with Wiley S. Drake and Markham Robinson, both California electors.

"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, Petitioners, as well as other 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," the action challenges.


California Secretary of State Debra Bowen

The petition is a request for the Superior Court of California in Sacramento County to issue a peremptory writ barring Secretary of State Debra Bowen "from both certifying to the governor the names of the California Electors, and from transmitting to each presidential Elector a Certificate of Election, until such documentary proof is produced and verified showing that Senator Obama is a 'natural born' citizen of the United States and does not hold citizenship of Indonesia, Kenya or Great Britain."

It continues with a request for a writ barring California's electors from signing the Certificate of Vote until documentary proof is produced.

An Obama spokesperson interviewed by WND described such lawsuits as "garbage."

The popular vote Nov. 4 favored Obama over Sen. John McCain by several percentage points. But because of the distribution of the votes, Obama is projected to take the Electoral College vote, when it is held in December, by a 2-to-1 margin.

Named as defendants in the action are Bowen, Obama, vice president elect Joe Biden and the long list of California party electors.

Citing the constitutional requirement that a president be a "natural born" citizen, the case discusses other state and federal court cases regarding "aspects of lost or dual citizenship concerning Senator Obama. Those challenges, in and of themselves, demonstrate Petitioners' argument that reasonable doubt exists as to the eligibility of the Democratic Party’s nominee for President," the case said.

Get Brad O'Leary's blockbuster book detailing the agenda for the upcoming Obama White House, "The Audacity of Deceit."

"There is a reasonable and common expectation by the voters that to qualify for the ballot, the individuals running for office must meet minimum qualifications as outlined in the federal and state Constitutions and statutes, and that compliance with those minimum qualifications has been confirmed by the officials overseeing the election process," the complaint said, when in fact the only documentation currently required is a signed statement from the candidate attesting to those qualifications.

"Since [the Secretary of State] has, as its core, the mission of certifying and establishing the validity of the election process, this writ seeks a Court Order barring SOS from certifying the California Electors until documentary proof that Senator Obama is a 'natural born' citizen of the United States of America is received by her," the document said.

"This proof could include items such as his original birth certificate, showing the name of the hospital and the name and the signature of the doctor, all of his passports with immigration stamps, and verification from the governments where the candidate has resided, verifying that he did not, and does not, hold citizenship of these countries, and any other documents that certify an individual’s citizenship and/or qualification for office.

"To this date, in this regard, SOS has not carried out that fundamental duty."

The case said a simple attestation from the candidate or his party isn't sufficient.

"Historically, California Secretaries of State have exercised their due diligence by reviewing necessary background documents, verifying that the candidates that were submitted by the respective political parties as eligible for the ballot were indeed eligible. In 1968, the Peace and Freedom Party submitted the name of Eldridge Cleaver as a qualified candidate for President of the United States. The then SOS, Mr. Frank Jordan, found that, according to Mr. Cleaver's birth certificate, he was only 34 years old, one year shy of the 35 years of age needed to be on the ballot as a candidate for President. Using his administrative powers, Mr. Jordan removed Mr. Cleaver from the ballot. Mr. Cleaver unsuccessfully challenged this decision to the Supreme Court of the State of California, and, later, to the Supreme Court of the United States."

Similarly, in 1984, the Peace and Freedom Party candidate Larry Holmes was removed from the ballot.

The "certificate of live birth" posted by the Obama campaign cannot be viewed as authoritative, the case alleges.

"Hawaii Revised Statute 338-178 allows registration of birth in Hawaii for a child that was born outside of Hawaii to parents who, for a year preceding the child’s birth, claimed Hawaii as their place of residence," the document said. "The only way to know where Senator Obama was actually born is to view Senator Obama's original birth certificate from 1961 that shows the name of the hospital and the name and signature of the doctor that delivered him."

The case also raises the circumstances of Obama's time during his youth in Indonesia, where he was listed as having Indonesian citizenship. Indonesia does not allow dual citizenship, raising the possibility of Obama's mother having given up his U.S. citizenship.

Any subsequent U.S. citizenship then, the case claims, would be "naturalized," not "natural-born."

"Based on all of the above, it is the duty of the SOS to obtain proper documentation of Senator Obama's citizenship to confirm his eligibility for the office or the President of the United States," the case said.

Just this week, WND has reported on more than half a dozen other legal challenges have been filed in federal and state courts demanding Obama's decertification from ballots or seeking to halt elector meetings, claiming he has failed to prove his U.S. citizenship status.

Among the states where cases are being tracked are Ohio, Connecticut, Washington, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Georgia and Hawaii, and there were reports of other cases being developed in Utah, Wyoming, Florida, New York, North Carolina, Texas, California and Virginia.

“Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair; the rest is in the hands of God.” – George Washington

IS OBAMA A NATURAL CITIZEN BEING SWORN IN OR NOT????? IF THIS INFORMATION IS TRUE THEN THE US IS IN DANGER OF LOSING OUR CONSTITUTION WAKE UP!


Does the US CONSTITUTION matter anymore IN OUR NATION? What in the world is truly going on and why is this such news never being reported on? WAKE UP STUPID AMERICAN your freedom is being stripped because this is an all out attack on our VERY AMERICAN foundation. DO YOU CARE? IF THIS INFORMATION IS TRUE THEN YOU BETTER WAKE UP AND PREPARE AMERICAN.
READ ON IF YOU CARE.



The United States Constitution Requires

that our President be a natural born

citizen of the United States ( http://www.obamacrimes.com/)


12/09/08 - My brother, Norman Barry Berg, just passed away. My brother meant so much to me, I gave the attached Eulogy in loving memory of him at his funeral. I go forth in my efforts to find the truth of Obama in memory of my brother.

01/15/2009: PRESS RELEASE -Berg is ‘outraged’ at Congress as they failed the citizens of the United States by ‘not’ challenging Obama during the Electoral Vote on January 8, 2009 and Demands that Congressional Hearings be held regarding the ‘qualifications’ of Obama as we are headed for a ‘Constitutional Crisis’ by having an ‘ineligible’ President

01/19/09: PRESS RELEASE - Berg sends 2nd letter to Oprah, stressing that she is one that can have Obama withdraw his name to avoid damage to racial relations in the U.S. for years to come because when the truth comes out that Obama does “not” meet the “qualifications” for President as Obama is “not” “natural born” we are headed for a ‘Constitutional Crisis’ by having an ‘ineligible’ President


WND Exclusive
Eligibility battle rages on 3 fronts
Court, Congress and college challenged on constitutionality
Posted: January 18, 2009
12:05 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Officials at Occidental College in Los Angeles have been served with a demand to produce records of Barack Obama's attendance there during the 1980s to determine whether he was registered as a foreign national.

The case is one of three fronts now established that contest the president-elect's constitutional eligibility for the Oval Office.

The Supreme Court and Congress also are being challenged to address concerns that Obama doesn't meet the requirements of the U.S. Constitution that the president be a "natural born" citizen.

WND has reported on a long list of legal cases raising questions over the issue, including several that have reached the U.S. Supreme Court. Justices have declined to give any of the cases full hearings on their merits, but another conference remains on the Supreme Court docket for Jan. 23 on the issue.

"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,'" said Philip J. Berg, a lawyer who has brought several cases to court.

Berg, whose information is on his ObamaCrimes.com website, indicated the issue isn't going away.

Orly Taitz, a California lawyer
whose dispute remains pending before the high court, agreed, noting that one of the hearings already is scheduled for the days following Obama's inaugural Tuesday.

Taitz said her arguments 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 the ruling. The Constitution requires a president to be 35.

In one of the latest developments, Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation petitioned Occidental College with a demand for its records concerning Obama.

"The gravamen of the petition is the question as to whether United States Senator Barack Hussein Obama, of Illinois, is eligible to serve as president of the United States pursuant to the requirements for that office in the United States Constitution," he wrote. "The records sought may provide documentary evidence, and/or admissions by said defendant, as to said eligibility or lack thereof."

Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 200,000 others and sign the petition demanding proof of eligibility now!

College officials confirmed they received the notice but had not decided how to respond. The decision, however, may be removed from their hands because of the team of lawyers Obama has engaged to prevent such inquiries into his past.

"Senator Obama has filed responsive pleadings in this matter and is represented by counsel, and has the opportunity to object to this production, should he so desire," the affidavit from Kreep said.

"Good cause exists for this production under Subpoena Duces Tecum, in that testimony will be elicited from the original records obtained through the witness named herein, and there is no other process available to secure said testimony," he wrote.

The lawsuits allege in various ways 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 allege his birth took place in Kenya, and his mother was a minor at the time of his birth – too young to confer American citizenship. They argue Obama's father, Barack Obama Sr., was a Kenyan citizen subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time and would have handed down British citizenship.

There also are questions raised about Obama's move to Indonesia when he was a child and his attendance at school there when only Indonesian citizens were allowed and his travel to Pakistan in the '80s when such travel was forbidden to American citizens.

The lawsuit on which USJF is working was filed on behalf of presidential candidate Alan Keyes and others, and describes the potential damage 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 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."

On his ObamaCrimes.com website, Berg sent his message directly to the U.S. Congress.

He's asking in an open letter to members of Congress for congressional hearings "to determine the truth regarding qualifications of Barry Soetoro, otherwise known as Barack Hussein Obama…"

"As you must be aware, there are many unresolved questions concerning Soetoro/Obama's status or lack thereof, as a 'natural born' American citizen, as required by 'our' U.S. Constitution," he wrote.

He noted the failure by Congress to challenge Obama's eligibility during the process through which the Electoral College vote was adopted.

"Because of your failure to 'question' the eligibility of Soetoro/Obama, we are headed for a 'Constitutional Crisis.' Yes, a 'Constitutional Crisis' because Soetoro/Obama who appears not to be a 'natural born' U.S. citizen is 'ineligible' under 'our' U.S. Constitution to serve as president," he said.

He cited the document published on the Internet by Obama's campaign, the "Certification of Live Birth," as no more than an effort to "quash" questions. Other critics have noted the state of Hawaii granted such certifications to parents of children not born in the state at the time.

"Without truthful information concerning Soetoro/Obama's eligibility to serve as President, 'We the People' have been injured," he wrote.

Taitz took a different route, submitting to the U.S. Supreme Court a motion "to declare that by default, the president elect respondent Barack Obama has failed to qualify under [the] U.S. Constitution."

"Does the burden of proof lie with the petitioner to prove standing and evidence lack of qualification by a candidate/president elect, where election officers rely on a candidate's declaration? OR does the [Constitution] place the burden of proof on the president-elect to provide objective government certified witnessed proofs, with election officers under oath to challenge, examine and declare that the president elect has or has not qualified, enforceable by petition for redress of grievances?"

Not only has the respondent, Obama, "failed to submit proofs … for any of the qualifications," she wrote. "Respondent has hindered discovery."

She argued that having Obama declared ineligible until he would provide documentation would "cause far less political trauma" than allowing his inauguration because it would uphold the constitution.

She also raised the issue of the concealment of Obama's records.

"Obama has refused to submit certified copies of any of his original long form 'vault' birth certificates in Hawaii to any public officer or to any Petitioner. Relevant records in Kenya have also been officially restricted," she said. "Obama has sealed all educational records which might reveal his stated citizenship. These include Punahou High School, Occidental College, Columbia University, and Harvard Law School."

Her letter included a warning, too.

"Thirty-three democracies descended into tyranny during the 20th century by failing to uphold constitutional protections," she said. "Petitioner humbly prays this Court evaluate the Petitioner's case in context of how best to enforce restrictive qualifications for president to preserve the Constitution and Republic from tyranny."

WND twice has organized opportunities for readers to send FedEx letters to the Supreme Court, asking for consideration of the issue on its merits.

The most recent campaign generated 12,096 messages, following the earlier effort that resulted in 60,128 letters.

Obama has claimed in his autobiography and elsewhere that he was born in Hawaii in 1961 to parents Barack Hussein Obama Sr., a Kenyan national, and Stanley Ann Dunham, a minor. But details about which hospital handled the birth and other details provided on the complete birth certificate have been withheld by Obama despite lawsuits and public demands for release.

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?

IS OBAMA TRULY LEGAL, THEN WHY CAN'T HE SHOW THE PROOF?

Urgent – Write Letters to Supreme Court Justices and Urgent - Please donate toward the costs of bringing these actions

Urgent – Need for Money

Time is our enemy and we have to be prepared.

We are working day & night to be prepared for the next proceeding: whether to appear in Court in Washington, D.C., or to prepare documents for Court, or to prepare Press Releases to keep people aware of our progress.

As you know, this Friday, January 9, 2009 our case, Berg vs. Obama, is being "Conferenced" by the nine [9] Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court [Docket No. 08 – 570]. Then, on January 16, 2009 again, we have a "Conference" before the U.S. Supreme Court in this case.

Also, we have pending two [2] other cases because we are determined, no matter how long it takes, to expose Obama’s “Hoax” on the 305 million people in our country, that Obama is “not qualified” pursuant to our U.S. Constitution to be President.

The new case is Hollister vs. Barry Soetoro a/k/a Obama filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Docket # 08-02254 (JR). Hollister is a retired U.S. Air Force Colonel that can be recalled at any time by the President. His dilemma – is Obama a “qualified” President that he must take orders from or is he “not qualified” and therefore, he is required to legally disobey Obama’s orders? The other case is “under seal” and therefore, I cannot discuss.

Request – Everyone who can - Please raise, by asking five [5] friends @ $10.00 each, or contribute $50.00 to us now. You can use PayPal or credit card on our website [obamacrimes.com] or mail a check to:

Phil Berg for Obama Crimes
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531

Thank you.

Respectfully,

Phil