SOCIALIST HEALTH CARE THAT KILLS
By Dr. Laurie Roth
February 13, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

Now you have stepped over the line you wanna be politicians! This is war now. I already knew this stimulus package had nothing to do with stimulating anything but was rather a bunch of porky pig entitlements and dreamed about programs that the democrats wanted for ages, but now this! The democrats and 3 turn coat republicans decided it was ethical, appropriate and also a national emergency to sneak in a national health care plan that would be run by the Federal Government, just like Europe. Daschle must be drooling from the ecstasy of it all!

Its bad enough that something so critically important as health care was snuck in without major discussions and reviews, but upon reading through it we find that along with national electronic tracking of health data by the feds, we will now have a new bureaucracy of control put in place, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology. You’re asking yourself as I did what in God’s creation is this??? This is the federal department that will track treatments your Doctor is offering and guide them to a new level that will make sure they act more like a socialized mob, not solo practitioners with a heart and brain. Isn’t that precious?

The brainchild, inspiring this and wanting this with all his black little heart is Tom Daschle. He adores the European, socialist model of health care, where they push a sea of “cost” appropriate diagnosis such as “hopeless diagnosis” and “forgo experimental treatments.” The bottom line with Daschle’s position and the European plan is that seniors need to get out of the way. They should take less and less care as they age, certainly not get premium or experimental care if need be to fix a real problem. They should rather be honoring enough to stand aside and let the REAL health care be given to younger folks. You know, the tax paying sucker crowd.

The Federal board has their mathematical, socialist formula ready to role. According to Betsy McCaughey, writer for Bloomberg.com she says the Federal Council accepts or rejects treatments using a formula from hell, where they divide the patient’s age with the cost of treatment and looking at the number of years they will actually benefit from treatment. The bottom line is this! Older folks, yeah our parents will be waiting in endless lines for care, I predict as this nationalized health care plan rolls out there will be an organized and concerted effort to manipulate our seniors into having less care, being more content to suffer in silence and use less services. Daschle and the Democrats can only hope for the mother load………seduce the seniors into assisted suicide and be rid of all the expense.

Don’t think I’m completely a loon. They already have legalized assisted suicide in Washington and Oregon. I predict this will be pushed nationally as the Obama administration rallies the troops to push the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) through. Just think of it. If we can kill enough babies and seniors we can heal our economy. Won’t that be grand? Excuse me, while I throw up.

© 2009 Dr. Laurie Roth - All Rights Reserved

OBAMA SNUCK SOCIALIST HEALTH CARE REFORM IN THE STIMULUS BILL

By Byron J. Richards, CCN
February 13, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

Under the cover of emergency economic legislation the front wave of an entire new system of health care is being pushed on Americans. The strategy for this ploy was once explained by Obama’s former appointee to head the Department of Health and Human Services, and now exposed tax cheat, Senator Tom Daschle. Daschle spells out the plan on pages 196-197 of his book, Critical – What We Can Do About the Health Care Crisis, “The next president should act immediately to capitalize on the goodwill that greets any incoming administration. If that means attaching a health-care plan to the federal budget, so be it. This issue is too important to be stalled by Senate protocol.” In other words, public debate should be avoided, forget about democracy – so that Obama-care does not meet the same fate as Hillary-care.

In the last few days a debate on this issue has blown up on national TV, talk radio, and the internet. It began with an article published on Bloomberg titled, “Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan” by Betsy McCaughey. McCaughey says the plan could be used to ration care to the elderly, putting government, not doctors, in charge of what care will be delivered. She has been interviewed on Lou Dobbs and Glenn Beck. Fox News, the Drudge Report, and even Rush Limbaugh have spread the news. Limbaugh warned his listening audience that their patient privacy was at stake and that “Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system.” The bottom line of their messages: quality of care and type of care will not be determined by the doctor, but rather by a new system of cost containment implemented by the federal government.

Democrats have found themselves on the defense. While getting grilled on FOX news Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) said, “There is nothing in this legislation that interferes with a doctor making a decision, with the patient, on what is appropriate care. What is in this legislation is an effort to make sure we share information – generically, appropriately – so doctors and medical providers can have the best information, but there’s nothing in this bill that compromises the decision-making between the doctor and the patient.”

Democratic websites have attacked McCaughey, saying she is reading more into the bill than is actually there. She has fired back, saying the health-care language in the bill has nothing whatsoever to do with new jobs and jump starting the economy. She says, “Americans deserve an open and honest debate about creating a federal healthcare infrastructure of this magnitude. These health provisions should be removed from the stimulus bill and offered to Congress in separate legislation.”

We even have Scott Gottlieb getting into the discussion, the former second in command at the FDA, who during his time at the FDA advocated the industry-friendly position that Americans should be exposed to dangerous and expensive drug experiments and have no right to recourse if they are injured. Now he says, “The bill will be used to create guidelines to direct doctors’ treatment of difficult, high-cost medical problems.” His statement means that Big Pharma and Big Biotech are really concerned that their future cash-cow experiments may not be covered by the new plan.

Indeed, Big Pharma was really upset about parts of the plan that called for spending government money to try and compare the effectiveness of drugs, one to another. This provision has now been changed based on intense lobbying over the past few days. Such a provision would have been really bad news for Big Pharma, as it would quickly be discovered that their drugs hardly work at all to produce positive health outcomes, especially in preventive medicine. For a more comprehensive understanding of Big Pharma in relation to the health care handouts in this bill, read my article “Is Obama Bailing Out Big Pharma’s Bursting Bubble.”

The Hill website reported in early December that Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) wanted health IT in the stimulus bill to help avoid a fight on healthcare early in 2009 when lawmakers were drafting broader healthcare legislation. “There are going to be certain costs of healthcare reform — upfront costs. If I can put some of those upfront costs in the so-called stimulus bill, I’d rather put them there….We’ve got to create a very significant upfront effort early on and keep the momentum going on healthcare,” said Baucus, who added he was in regular contact with the Obama team, Kennedy and other key lawmakers.

Several things are certain. Health IT has nothing to do with meaningful stimulus for the economy. It is in the stimulus bill to get its own financial stimulus, helping to jump start Obama-care without any public debate.

The Scope of Obama’s Health IT

In the 680 page House version of the stimulus bill (H.R.1.E.H., pdf version), almost 200 pages are spent on Health IT (434-627). Right away you can understand that this is a comprehensive piece of legislation, taking up almost 1/3 of the bill. The legislation establishes within the Department of Health and Human Services an Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, which will be headed by a National Coordinator. This is like creating a new FDA, meaning the size of this new branch of government will end up quite large. It states various admirable purposes, such as ensuring electronic health information is secure and that it is used to better patient care. An overall goal is to have an electronic health record for every American by 2014 (page 445).

This is not a passive IT system that is collecting data. It is intended to be used as a tool to deploy a type of care it deems appropriate based on government employees making policy-related health decisions, with a stated purpose so the IT system “provides appropriate information to help guide medical decisions at the time and place of care.” (page 442)

Anybody reading this legislation quickly realizes that it is much more than a health IT system. It is a new type of health care with a blank check on expanding its regulatory powers to accomplish anything it deems appropriate. For example, on page 447 it reads, “REPORT ON ADDITIONAL FUNDING OR AUTHORITY NEEDED.—Not later than 12 months after the date of the enactment of this title, the National Coordinator shall submit to the appropriate committees of jurisdiction of the House of Representatives and the Senate a report on any additional funding or authority the Coordinator or the HIT Policy Committee or HIT Standards Committee requires to evaluate and develop standards, implementation specifications, and certification criteria, or to achieve full participation of stakeholders in the adoption of a nationwide health information technology infrastructure that allows for the electronic use and exchange of health information.”

A short version of this is “the National Coordinator shall report on any additional authority required to achieve full participation of stakeholders.” In other words, everyone will play ball and or else the National Coordinator must seek more power to be able to get everyone in line.

The legislation makes it clear that this is not just about your personal health. On page 455 it says, “the HIT Policy Committee may consider the following additional areas: The appropriate uses of a nation wide health information infrastructure, including for purposes of biosurveillance and public health.” This approves the use of your health information for military-related needs and other public health measures (meaning did you get all your vaccinations? etc.). It is not at all a stretch of the imagination to interpret this to mean that your electronic health record will be used to ensure you are in compliance with public health initiatives.

The legislation specifically mandates compliance by the private sector, page 470: “SEC. 4112. APPLICATION TO PRIVATE ENTITIES. Each agency (relating to promoting quality and efficient health care in Federal government administered or sponsored health care programs) shall require in contracts or agreements with health care providers, health plans, or health insurance issuers that as each provider, plan, or issuer implements, acquires, or upgrades health information technology systems, it shall utilize, where available, health information technology systems and products that meet standards and implementation specifications.”

In other words, all health professionals are required to abide by the standards of care that are determined in conjunction with the cost containment and “best practices” ideas of the federal government, whatever they may be. This means that the government is directly telling doctors how to practice medicine, and even what kind of medicine is allowed, contrary to what Senator Cardin told FOX news.

The theme and importance of conforming to the government’s idea of medical care is further spelled out in the section on the MEDICARE PROGRAM - INCENTIVES FOR ELIGIBLE PROFESSIONALS. This section introduces the term “meaningful user,” which is repeatedly used in the context of a health professional who is conforming to whatever the IT system tells them to do with their patients. It offers them bonuses up to $15,000 per year to comply with the IT health guidelines. (page 513) This means your doctor’s bonus could be more important than the right decision for your health.

The goal is to get doctors in the loop and then force them to comply with guidelines of care: “The Secretary shall seek to improve the use of electronic health records and health care quality over time by requiring more stringent measures of meaningful use.” (page 518) This is an open-ended and vaguely defined approach that could mean almost anything.

Freedom and Choice are Being Sacrificed

The price of this legislation cannot be measured in dollars. The price of this legislation should be measured in your loss of freedom, loss of privacy, and loss of choice relating to your own health. The government will want your DNA in its database next. It will want a chip in your arm to really keep track of you and your health. One thing will lead to another.

This legislation represents a broad and sweeping change in the type of care you will be able to receive. And that care will be set by the government, by unelected bureaucrats with who knows what agenda.

If this is what Americans really want then it should be debated and discussed openly on its merits. Freedom is not easily regained once it is lost. Once upon a time the people of Germany had a truly advanced health care system called the “freedom to cure.” It encouraged alternative health practitioners to practice side by side with medical doctors, offering true freedom of choice, all in the best interests of the patient. That was a long time ago.

In the name of public health, those freedoms were set aside for the rise of a socialist system. It was recognized that health freedom fostered mental health and free thinking citizens, and those rights were not compatible with socialism. Health freedom and general health choice were obliterated in the name of the greater good. The government had control. Even though Hitler was stopped, Germany has never regained its health freedom and today has one of the most repressive socialist health care systems on earth.

Certainly we want to do what we can to help Americans who are struggling with health problems, especially when those problems were not created by their own poor choices. It is simply not right to sacrifice our identity as a free people to accomplish that objective.

Emergency Call to Action

The only chance to stop sweeping health care reform, which is being pushed through without any public debate, is to flood the Senate with objection to the Health Care IT portion of the bill – demanding its removal from the Stimulus bill. The Senate is expected to vote on Friday. In addition to calling and faxing your own Senators, also let the three Republican Senators who are supporting this legislation know that you are opposed to Health IT, which is really major health care reform, being included in the Stimulus bill. Simply say, “I adamantly object to the Health IT provision in the Stimulus bill, which are designed to drastically change health care and are not relevant to stimulus.
Americans deserve an open and honest debate on this very important topic. These health IT provisions should be removed from the Stimulus bill and offered to Congress in separate legislation.”

Contact Your Senators
Capitol Switchboard – (202) 224-3121
Or find your Senator’s contact information online by clicking here

The Three Key Senators to Also Contact:
Collins, Susan M. - (R - ME)—Direct: (202) 224-2523, Fax: (202) 224-2693
Specter, Arlen - (R - PA)—Direct: (202) 224-4254, Fax: 202-228-1229
Snowe, Olympia J. - (R - ME)—Direct: (202) 224-5344, Fax: (202) 224-1946

shummer60 - If there is nothing to hide why is the President working so hard to keep all his records sealed?

'Sanctions' sought in eligibility case
President's attorneys file motion demanding
birth, college records be withheld from public

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: February 13, 2009
12:15 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WorldNetDaily

A high-powered team of Los Angeles attorneys representing President Obama in his effort to keep his birth certificate, college records and passport documents concealed from the public has suggested there should be "monetary sanctions" against a lawyer whose clients have brought a complaint alleging Obama doesn't qualify for the Oval Office under the Constitution's demand for a "natural born" citizen in that post.

The suggestion came in an exchange of e-mails and documents in a case brought by former presidential candidate Alan Keyes and others in California. The case originally sought to have the state's electors ordered to withhold their votes for Obama until his eligibility was established. Since Obama's inauguration, it has been amended to seek a future requirement for a vetting process, in addition to the still-sought unveiling of his records.

In the case, handled largely by Gary Kreep of the U.S. Justice Foundation, records were subpoenaed documenting Obama's attendance at Occidental College.

The lawyer for the college, Stuart W. Rudnick of Musick, Peeler & Garrett, urgently contacted Fredric D. Woocher of Strumwasser & Woocher.

"This firm is counsel to Occidental College. The College is in receipt of the enclosed subpoena that seeks certain information concerning President-Elect Barack Obama," he wrote via fax. "Inasmuch as the subpoena appears to be valid on its face, the College will have no alternative but to comply with the subpoena absent a court order instructing otherwise."

Within hours, Woocher contacted Kreep regarding the issue, telling him, "It will likely not surprise you to hear that President-elect Obama opposes the production of the requested records.

"In order to avoid the needless expense of our bringing and litigating a Motion to Quash the subpoena, I am writing to ask whether you would be willing to agree voluntarily to cancel or withdraw the subpoena."

Woocher warned, "Please be advised, in particular, that in the event we are forced to file a motion to quash and we prevail in that motion, we will seek the full measure of monetary sanctions provided for in the Code of Civil Procedures."

Kreep, out of town for a business trip, did not respond immediately, and the motion eventually was filed. It states that the records, which could reveal on what name Obama attended classes at Occidental and whether he attended on scholarship money intended for foreign students, "are of no relevance to this moot litigation."

The motion also claims the petitioners failed to serve the subpoena properly.

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 235,000 others and sign up now!

"The subpoena directed to Occidental College should therefore be quashed. Alternatively, this court should issue an order directing that the deposition of the custodian of records of Occidental College not take place," the firm working on Obama's behalf stated.

"The central issue in this lawsuit … is whether any Respondent had a legal duty to demand proof of natural born citizenship from Democratic Party's nominee," the motion said. "None of the documents sought by petitioners could possibly assist in answering this question."

The motion then cited a precedent from a case involving a "former law firm client who brought malpractice action against firm claiming unconscionable rates was not entitled to discovery regarding amount paid by law firm to contract staff attorney because such information is irrelevant to unconscionability claim."

The case, with Keyes, Wiley S. Drake and Markham Robinson as plaintiffs, names California Secretary of State Debra Bowen, Barack Hussein Obama, Joe Biden and the state's electors as defendants.

"OBAMA has been inaugurated as the president of the United States. However, to properly assume such office, OBAMA must meet the qualifications specified in Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution for the Office of the President of the United States, which includes that he must be a 'natural born' citizen," the amended complaint states.

"OBAMA has failed to demonstrate that he is a 'natural born' citizen. There have been a number of legal challenges before various state and federal courts regarding aspects of non-, lost, or dual citizenship concerning OBAMA. Those challenges, in and of themselves, demonstrate Petitioners' argument that reasonable doubt exists as to his eligibility to serve as President of the United States.

"To avert a constitutional crisis which would certainly accrue after such an election through laborious legal challenges, this writ seeks to require SOS (Secretary of State) to verify the eligibility of a Presidential candidate prior to the candidate appearing on the California ballot. It is incumbent on the candidates to present the necessary documentation confirming his or her eligibility, but, to date, for this past election, OBAMA has failed to do so," the complaint continues.

"An unprecedented and looming constitutional crisis awaits if a President elected by the popular vote and the electoral vote does not constitutionally qualify to serve in that capacity," the case said. "In addition, if OBAMA is not a 'natural born' citizen and not eligible for presidency, OBAMA will be subject to the criminal provisions of the California Elections Code, stating, 'Any person who files or submits for filing a nomination paper or declaration of candidacy knowing that it, or any part of it, has been made falsely, is punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000) or by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months or two or three years or by both the fine and imprisonment,'" the complaint states.

WND has reported on multiple legal challenges that have alleged 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 claim he was not born in Hawaii, as he insists, but in Kenya. Obama's 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.

Other challenges 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. The 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 and on what nation's passport he traveled to Pakistan in the '80s, as well as conflicting reports from Obama's family about his place of birth.

In just the last few days, WND has reported on a developing lawsuit by a team of state lawmakers as well as military officers, both of whom would be bound to follow orders from the president and would need to know whether the orders were legitimate.

WND also reported this week on a separate case that accuses Congress of failing to investigate President Obama's birthplace before approving the Electoral College vote giving him the presidency, after going through that very investigative process for GOP candidate Sen. John McCain.

Several of the cases – including those brought by Orly Taitz, Cort Wrotnowski, Leo Donofrio and Philip Berg, already have been discussed in conference at the U.S. Supreme Court, which has decided not to hold a hearing on any of the merits.

Here is a partial listing and status update for several of the cases:

Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania Democrat, demanded that the courts verify Obama's original birth certificate and other documents proving his American citizenship. Berg's latest appeal, requesting an injunction to stop the Electoral College from selecting the 44th president, was denied.

Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.

Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.

Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support.

Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.

Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.

In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.

In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.

In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.

California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.
In addition, other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions about Obama's eligibility include:

In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed.

In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed.

In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.

In Washington, L. Charles vs. Obama.

In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.
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 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, which the state's procedures allowed at the time?

WHO IS PULLING GEITNER'S STRINGS?

By Cliff Kincaid

February 12, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

Appearing behind a podium that proclaimed, “Financial Stability and Recovery,” Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Tuesday carefully read from a teleprompter and provided what his flack said was a “comprehensive” plan. It was not comprehensive in any way. It seemed so amateurish and shallow that the market dropped and commentators and Senators were almost incredulous at the lack of detail.

But what were they expecting? Geithner doesn’t know the details because he hasn’t been given them yet. Those who expected the details of the plan were operating under the false assumption that the Treasury Secretary -- and by extension, the U.S. Government -- is in practical control and charge of the U.S. economy.

Geithner’s performance followed President Obama having advertised Geithner’s appearance in advance by saying, “He’s going to be terrific. I’m going to make sure that Tim gets his moment in the sun.” The sun? One analyst said Geithner looked like a deer caught in the headlights.

It turns out the speech, which did mention the spending of trillions of dollars, was delivered in the Treasury Department’s “Cash Room.” No kidding.

Senator Orrin Hatch had voted to confirm Geithner, saying that he “is not merely acceptable for the job – he is highly qualified.” That was largely because of his role as President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank in previous financial bailouts that have yet to succeed. Hatch understood this, but said that Geithner’s recognition that mistakes had occurred “makes him more valuable, in my view, in the continuing effort to right our economic ship.”

Why is he so valuable? It’s not because he learns from his mistakes. As we have argued in previous columns, Geithner is valuable because he is a major player in the global financial community, a prominent figure in the “Group of Thirty” organization of central bankers and the Council on Foreign Relations. He is a former employee of Kissinger Associates and lived in China and speaks Chinese. His father, Peter Geithner, is a former top official of the Ford Foundation who knew Obama’s mother when she was working on “microfinance” in Indonesia.

It would be a serious mistake to say that Geithner is incompetent. He knows exactly what he’s doing. Essentially, his programmed performance was designed to send the message to the American people and the Congress that we can’t be trusted with the details, even when they are available. It was pathetic to watch our elected Senators at a subsequent hearing pleading for details. But it was also a “teaching moment.” This is out of our hands. This is the “New World Order” and we had better get used to it.

The media couldn’t help but notice that Geithner’s performance fell flat. The Washington Post reported that, “…the lack of detail in his plan dismayed lawmakers and investors, triggering a steep sell-off on Wall Street.” The New York Times said, “Initial reviews for the man and his plan were not good…” and that “withering punditry on the business-news cable channels” made Geithner look even worse.

You didn’t have to be a pundit to be aghast at Geithner’s performance.

But wait a minute. Wasn’t this the guy who was so smart that his tax cheating had to be overlooked in order to be confirmed?

What is going on here? Is Geithner’s “plan,” such as it is, designed to fail? Or doesn’t he know what he’s doing? Or could there be another explanation?

Geithner may not have all the answers because he has not gotten his marching orders. Those orders come from China, the global elite and the international bankers. After giving non-answers to Congress, Geithner is preparing to take off for a G-7 Meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors in Rome, Italy. These foreign finance officials may determine the nature and fate of Geithner’s “stability and recovery” plan.

These top finance officials include central bank governors, who play a role in what press reports described as “economic coordination among the top industrialized nations.”

One key global player is China. “Geithner spoke late on Sunday evening with Chinese Vice Premier Wang Qishan,” Reuters reported. Hence, Geithner was talking to a Chinese official even before he outlined his “plan” to the American people and the Senate. This was the second such conversation in a week.

In a statement, the Treasury Department said that Wang and Geithner “agreed that strong cooperation on macroeconomic financial and regulatory matters was an essential part of the U.S. relationship with China and that it was important to sustain close dialogue, particularly at this time of global financial turmoil.”

Wang Qishan was honored last year at a dinner sponsored by the United States Committee on United States- China Relations, on whose board Kissinger and Peter Geithner serve. Another speaker at the dinner was Bush Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Geithner’s predecessor.

Meanwhile, in her first trip abroad since taking office, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton will be traveling to Asia, including in China from February 20-22. The State Department explained that she will be discussing “common approaches to the challenges facing the international community,” including “the financial markets turmoil.”

So both Geithner and Clinton will be attempting to persuade the Chinese to sign on. In this “New World Order,” China is in the driver’s seat.

The conclusion has to be that Geithner doesn’t know how his “stability” plan will work out in practice because he’s not yet sure what China and other global payers are going to do. Our fate lies in their hands, signaling desperate times for our nation.

Obama speaks of a possible catastrophe but he isn’t telling the American people the brutal truth at his carefully orchestrated town hall meetings. His prescription is more debt and spending – the same policies that brought us to this precipice. He can only succeed, at least in the sense of getting foreign credit to pay for this spending spree, if the Communist Chinese and the rich Arabs agree.

For the most part, the media won’t tell the truth, either. They’re too busy clamoring for front row seats at presidential press conferences.

© 2009 Cliff Kincaid - All Rights Reserved
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cliff Kincaid, a veteran journalist and media critic, Cliff concentrated in journalism and communications at the University of Toledo, where he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree.

Cliff has written or co-authored nine books on media and cultural affairs and foreign policy issues.

Cliff has appeared on Hannity & Colmes, The O’Reilly Factor, Crossfire and has been published in the Washington Post, Washington Times, Chronicles, Human Events and Insight.

POTIONS AND CHARMS AND SPELLS! OH MY!

By Marsha West

February 12, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

“I will continue to proclaim that I am a Witch, and I am Wiccan, for it means the same thing. It is my religion, and it is my craft. It is my life.” –Mike Nichols, Wiccan

Witches are coming out of the broom closet. But they’re not calling themselves witches anymore. Instead those in “the Craft” prefer Wiccan, which comes from the earlier form of the word for witch. [1] Perhaps the name has been changed to take the sting out of it, but a witch by any other name is still a witch.

It’s impossible to determine the numbers of Wiccans there are worldwide because they have no formal membership. Estimates vary but there could be as many as 3 million practicing the magic arts in America. Some say Wicca is the fastest-growing religion in the country! Whether this is true or not, one thing’s for sure: many young people, especially female high school and college students, are joining covens. Because of Wicca’s reverence for the earth and nature, young environmentalists are drawn to Wicca.

What do modern day Wiccans practice and believe?

“Wicca is a faith system that has no central organization or theological belief system defined for all of its adherents. It may be best understood through its typical practices, which include performing magic and sorcery, casting spells and engaging in Witchcraft. It is a ritualistic faith based on a loose set of pagan beliefs that are generally pantheistic in nature. Those who are involved commonly go through initiation rites for membership, teaching and leadership. Contrary to a widespread assumption, however, Wicca is not synonymous with Satan worship. Wiccans most frequently worship gods and goddesses that are found in nature. Wicca generally embraces the notions of karma and reincarnation, and promotes a laissez faire form of morality.” [2]

Wicca is a neopagan, nature-based religion. Wiccans celebrate eight season-based festivals. Typically, Wiccans worship the horned god and the triple goddess. “A key belief in Wicca is that the Goddess and the God (or the goddesses and gods) are able to manifest in personal form, most importantly through the bodies of Priestesses and Priests via the rituals of Drawing down the Moon or Drawing down the Sun.”[3]

One online resource, ReligionLink, tells us that “Wiccans are smashing stereotypes as their movement matures. Throughout the country Wiccans are organizing congregations and youth groups, training clergy, pursuing charity work, sharing pagan parenting tips and fighting for their civil rights.”[4]

Wiccan’s are fighting those who follow tradition mainstream religions:

"I call out for protection of the Goddess's people from the wrath of right-wing fundamentalists and their God" --Wendy Hunter Roberts, pagan priestess.

The media, including advertisers and book and magazine publishers, are lending their support to Wicca and Witchcraft. Not surprisingly book sales on Witchcraft have jumped dramatically since the late 1980s.

The Harry Potter (HP) books, probably the best-known books on Witchcraft, have cast a spell on children. The Potter books fly off the shelves like broomsticks and have made the author, J.K. Rowling, a gazillionaire. Young and old alike read the books and flock to theaters to see the HP movies. And of course parents rush to stores to purchase all the latest HP collectables for their youngsters. Not surprisingly kids dress up like the Potter characters on Halloween. It seems everyone’s wild about Harry. Rowling is masterful at promoting the idea that Harry and his friends are “good” wizards and witches who battle the forces of evil. As a result of HP’s popularity, youngsters are enchanted by Witchcraft and all things pagan.

It’s easy for teens to learn about Witchcraft. All they have to do is surf the internet, where Wiccan sites abound. They learn about spells, incantations and magic potions that are designed to influence circumstances and/or people.

Hollywood has used its movie magic to promote Witchcraft and alter the public perception of witches for years. The 1930s classic “The Wizard of Oz” hit the silver screen to favorable reviews. The movie had a huge impact on the way people perceive witches. Today when you think of a witch, who springs to mind but Margaret Hamilton, the actress who played the Wicked Witch of the West. You remember her green face, pointy black hat, hooked nose with a wart on the end of if, and of course the broomstick she straddled and streaked through the sky. There was also a “good” witch in the movie, beautiful Glenda, the Witch of the North, who looked like a fairy princess. In the 1950s “Bell Book and Candle” staring Jimmy Stewart and Kim Novak was a big hit with audiences. In the 1960s “Rosemary’s Baby” scared the stuffing out of movie-goers. The 1980s conjured up “The Witches of Eastwick.” That same year “Bedknobs and Broomsticks” won an Oscar for its visual effects. In the 1990s Tinseltown gave us “Practical Magic,” “The Craft” and “The Blair Witch Project.” The current decade has been all about witches. Four Harry Potter movies played on the big screen. The first, “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone,” was a box-office smash. In July 2009 the “Chosen One” will once again mount his broomstick and whiz into a theatre near you in “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.”

On television, shows like “Bewitched” (which was also made into a movie starring Nicole Kidman), “Sabrina the Teenage Witch” and “Charmed” have been hugely popular, especially with teens. Last year even the Hallmark Movie Channel, which promotes good clean family-friendly programming, brought us “The Good Witch.” In this made for TV movie, Catherine Bell plays Cassie Nightingale, a mysterious woman who moves into a haunted mansion in a small town. Cassie soon has everyone in town wondering if she is a witch because of all the magical changes she brings into the lives of the townsfolk. The mayor’s busybody wife suspects Cassie’s a witch and tries to set everyone against her. For her actions she’s portrayed as irrational, mean-spirited and intolerant. In other words, the one who is against the practice of Witchcraft is bad. The witch, of course, is good. “The Good Witch” was so popular with the audience that Hallmark has produced a sequel.

What is important to know about all the supernatural hullabaloo, that’s become such a huge temptation for the younger generation, is that God strongly condemns it. Sure, it’s a bummer because casting spells is fun, so is playing with the Ouija board, but the Bible makes it clear that God condemns the magic arts. But no one seems to care what God says anymore nor do we have a healthy fear of the Lord.

“Fear ye not me? saith the LORD: will ye not tremble at my presence?” (Jer. 5:22)

What could it hurt to try to contact the dead or to have an astrologer calculate the astrological compatibility between you and another person? Well first of all, God is a real party pooper when it comes to sorcery. He forbids dabbling in the magic arts, period, end of discussion. His prohibition is for our own good. Behind the supernatural powers lurks the god of this world, namely Satan. The minute a person opens the door to the occult, Satan directs his evil forces to their doorstep. Once someone is caught in Satan’s trap, it’s hard to break free! Occult practices are addictive! And for some people, it becomes an idol.

The Apostle Paul gave Christians this sober warning:

"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places" (Ephesians 6:12).

The rulers of this dark world are not human beings, they are spirits! According to Vine’s Expository Dictionary of the New Testament, “The context (‘not against flesh and blood’) shows that not earthly potentates are indicated, but spirit powers, who, under the permissive will of God, and in consequence of human sin, exercise satanic and therefore antagonistic authority over the world in its present condition of spiritual darkness and alienation from God.”[5]

Mary Daly, ex-Roman Catholic nun, eco-feminist pagan witch, said of these powers:

"There was some primary warfare going on...an archetypal battle between principalities and powers...and I willed to go all the way in this death battle."

Luke 22:31-32 tells us that Satan is on a leash, so to speak. Therefore he cannot go beyond what our sovereign God will allow. We’re told in Job 1:9-12 that Satan had to obtain permission from God before afflicting Job. It’s reassuring to know that God is in complete control of the universe! Satan can do only what God allows him to do -- but Satan was permitted to put Job through the ringer!

When God’s people mess around in practices He expressly forbids, such as Witchcraft, He does not overlook it. Not for a millisecond! And He just might allow the devil to put those who are deliberately disobedient through the ringer!

Followers of Jesus Christ must give Him their total allegiance. Far too many Christians are leading two lives. They are following both Christ and the culture. Paul says this in 1 Cor. 10:14: Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.” In other words, flee from anything that displeases God. Paul continues in verse 21-22: “Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils?22 Do we provoke thee Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?”

Just so you’ll know some of the practices that provoke the Lord to jealousy, here’s a short list of terms and actual practices to steer clear of:

Angel (communication or worship)
Astrology/horoscopes
Automatic writing
Clairvoyance
Crystals
Dungeons and Dragons (role playing games)
Extra sensory-perception
Fortune-telling
Goddess (Gaia)
Lectio Divina (contemplative or centering prayer)
Mental telepathy
Metaphysical
Mysticism (so-called Christian or otherwise)
New Age spirituality
Numerology
Omens
Ouija board game
Palm reading
Paranormal
Parapsychology
Psychic anything
Reincarnation (belief in is unbiblical)
Séances
Spirit guides (angels, ascended masters, entities)
Spiritism
Telekinesis
Tarot cards

Lastly, God’s people must daily “Put on the full armor of God” to protect against the forces of evil! Learn how to arm yourself by clicking here.

Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not be partakers with them. For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light (for the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness, righteousness, and truth), finding out what is acceptable to the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret. But all things that are exposed are made manifest by the light, for whatever makes manifest is light. Therefore He says:

Awake, you who sleep,

Arise from the dead,
And Christ will give you light.

See then that you walk circumspectly, not as fools but as wise, redeeming the time, because the days are evil. -- Ephesians 5:6-17

Footnotes:

1- According to the Oxford English Dictionary, “Witch” comes from the Saxon word “Wicca.”
2- Survey Reveals Americans’ Feelings about Wicca—The Barna Report
3- Wicca—Wickipedia.com
4- Wicca moves into the mainstream—ReligionLink.org
5- Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words

Recommended Reading and Info:

1 - What the Bible says about Wicca—CARM website
2 - Occult info—On Solid Rock Resources
3 - New Age Movement/Spirituality—On Solid Rock Resources
4 - Spiritual Warfare—On Solid Rock Resou

Obama: Civil War Disguised as Politics?

http://loyaltoliberty.blogspot.com/2009/02/thought-for-today_09.html

When I ran for the U.S. Senate against Barack Obama I did my best to speak the truth. I knew when I accepted the invitation of the Illinois Republicans that I stood little or no chance of victory. With few exceptions, everyone I consulted advised against it. Most thought it political suicide. But the facts convinced me that Obama is a dangerous left-wing extremist. When confronted with the proven depravity of his moral views, my faith and conscience convicted me as well. After years of telling audiences that we had to stand for right and truth no matter what the cost, I felt that the Lord would hold me accountable if I refused to walk the talk. Sometimes we are not called to victory, but to witness for truth, as Jesus did, even unto death.

So when I campaigned in Illinois I let no false ambition; no kind of blandishment or intimidation; and no whispers of political gain or loss distract me from speaking the truth. I talked about Obama's extremist support for abortion (including his unconscionable willingness to tolerate infanticide in Illinois hospitals); I described him as a hard line socialist, pointing out his uncompromising commitment to central government control of health care and education; I pointed to the contradiction between his professed support for traditional marriage and his consistent promotion of the homosexual agenda. I remember talking to people, including Republican leaders, and others who have built little empires and big reputations as leaders of the so-called "Christian right", (what I call more appropriately the moral conservatives). Time and again I heard in response feckless mumblings about how moderate he seemed in his speech at the Democratic convention. Time and again I felt the implication that I was somehow exaggerating, imprudently "demonizing the opposition." They did little or nothing. And when the pro-abortion elements of the Illinois Republican Party openly went on the offensive against my refusal to back down from my stand for moral principle and real conservatism, in silence and inaction these leaders complied with their politically ruthless intention.

Meanwhile I and my family encountered from the Obama forces the ugliest indignities I have ever experienced in politics: Parades in which Obama's marshaled minions shouted curses and epithets almost every step of the way; and forums in which they rudely launched expletives with gestures just short of physical violence. At one such forum the environment they created was so ugly that my wife was visibly shaken, and my daughter in tears. Even on Election Day, when we went to the polling place to vote, a man there created a disturbance. He shouted insults. He acted in a physically threatening way. Nothing was done to stop him, and the pandering Illinois media breathed hardly a word about it in their so-called news coverage.

In all of this there was a hard edged disdain for decent civility that reminded me of the murderous invective Lenin launched against those who opposed the communist agenda. But it all took place behind a media fabricated façade of false hope and moderateness, like the propaganda screen behind which the totalitarians of the twentieth century hid their perpetration of atrocity.

Having felt the cutting edge of this reality, on election night I refused to engage in the nice ritual usually associated with the resolution of our political contests in America. Obama's people treated politics as war. But in war only gutless servility congratulates a ruthless opponent on the victory he has gained without civility. Mine was to be sure, a silent protest but loud enough to have some so-called leaders, supposedly on my side, losing no opportunity to "apologize" for my behavior.

Since 2004 I have walked in the political wilderness. This walk is not without its burdens, but I am heartened when I remember whose footsteps I find there: those of people like Reagan and Winston Churchill who in their dedication to right refused to let ambition triumph over truth. Assaulted, ridiculed, caricatured, ignored, at times reduced to a small and almost covert band of like-minded adherents, they kept their faith. They witnessed the rising power of the evils they warned against. They witnessed the policies of appeasement, retreat and surrender practiced by unprincipled leaders in the face of those evils. They witnessed the day when hard experience finally forced those who had all but forgotten their existence to turn and make a stand against wickedness triumphant over freedom.

I have an ominous feeling about the years ahead. With Obama, we have crossed the line that separates civil politics from civil war disguised as politics. Occupying the White House is a man known for his support and association with people (like leftist Kenyan politician Raila Amollo Odinga) for whom that line appears never to have existed. I predict that American politics as we have known it is gone. And unless we Americans wake up, more than civil politics will end up dead. For there are other footsteps in this wilderness, left by leaders who opposed the Communists when they took over Eastern European countries in the late 1940s, or Asian countries in the fifties, or African countries in the sixties, or South American and South African countries in the eighties, and so on. Mostly we do not know their names, nor can we mark the spot where their lives were overtaken because their compatriots did not wake up in time. But, with the Psalmist, I will fear no evil, for here, as everywhere, I see the footprints of the one who conquered death itself. Wherever they lead, there is life renewed.

http://loyaltoliberty.blogspot.com/2009/02/thought-for-today_09.html

Posted by Alan Keyes at 2:56 PM

SELLING OUR SOULS IN THE NAME OF SERVICE

By Berit Kjos

February 11, 2009

NewsWithViews.com

"Faith-Based Partnerships" BAN TRUTH & Freedom

"Barack Obama will establish a new President's Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships within the White House. The Council will work to engage faith-based organizations and help them abide by the principles that federal funds cannot be used to proselytize..."[1]

"If you get a federal grant, you can’t use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can’t discriminate against... the people you hire on the basis of their religion.”[2] Barack Obama

"...we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.” Acts 4:18-19 [The disciples' response when commanded not to share their faith.

Why is our government so hostile to the Christian message? What kinds of social and political goals are fueling this war on God's Truth?

One clue may be found in Barack Obama's "Call to Renewal" speech on June 28, 2006. He said,

"Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific values. "[3]

Obama hired Pastor Joshua DuBois to head up his Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Considering their diverse backgrounds, the two seem surprisingly compatible. Notice how Pastor DuBois echoes the words of President Obama:

"Our democracy demands that when people are religiously motivated you have to translate your concerns into universal rather than religion-specific values."[4]

Apparently, our new president wants us to trade our Biblical values for evolving illusions! We would be fools to follow such a devious demand!

This paradigm shift began decades ago! Progressive education and compromising churches have paved the way. Trying to please man rather than God, they willingly embraced the enticing "universals" that ban His guidelines.

No plan will undermine those old truths more effectively than Obama's system of "service learning." Through a top-down hierarchy of partnerships -- government, churches and community groups -- trained facilitators at every level will guide group dialogue everywhere until all participants embrace the evolving consensus. [See The Dialectic Process]

While gathering data on each participant, the leaders of this Washington-based communitarian system will--

"...launch a program to 'Train the Trainers' by empowering hundreds of intermediary nonprofits and larger faith-based organizations to train thousands of local faith-based and community-based organizations on best practices, grant-making procedures, service delivery and limitations.

"The Office will host regular training sessions for selected community training partners. These partners... would be supported to travel to Washington and learn how to train local faith-based and community organizations on... remaining in compliance, avoiding proselytizing, understanding hiring rules, and reporting outcomes. These organizations would return to their communities as certified providers of advice...."[1]

Sounds like total government control, doesn't it? Since our president calls each of us to "serve," the participation could be vast. And with next year's National Census (2010) controlled by the White House, not Congress, Obama may request whatever information his plan requires.

Obama's adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski would probably be pleased. This former National Security Advisor -- who founded the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller -- seems to support Marxist totalitarianism. In his book, Between Two Ages, he wrote:

"Marxism is simultaneously a victory of the external, active man over the inner, passive man and a victory of reason over belief."

"Marxism, disseminated on the popular level in the form of Communism, represented a major advance in man’s ability to conceptualize his relationship to his world."

"The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most important information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities."[5]

"I’ve learned an immense amount from Dr. Brzezinski," said Obama. (See video)

TWISTING THE FIRST AMENDMENT

On February 5, 2009, President Obama signed an Executive Order amending EO 13199 signed by George W. Bush and establishing the new White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. In Section 1 on Policy, it states:

"The American people are key drivers of fundamental change in our country, and few institutions are closer to the people than our faith-based and other neighborhood organizations. It is critical that the Federal Government strengthen the ability of such organizations ... to deliver services effectively in partnership with Federal, State, and local governments and with other private organizations, while ... forbidding the establishment of religion....

"Through rigorous evaluation, and by offering technical assistance, the Federal Government must ensure that organizations receiving Federal funds achieve measurable results in furtherance of valid public purposes."

Last summer, Obama gave us a specific outline of his planned "partnerships between government and faith-based and other nonprofit community groups." Much of it was based on the new interpretation of the First Amendment. To our nation's founders -- and to all who came to America seeking religious freedom -- it meant the wonderful promise of the "free exercise of religion" and "free speech."

Since that foundational promise clashed with the socialist vision of solidarity [one of Obama's "universals"], those words have been reinterpreted. Now they are used to silence Christian expressions in schools, public places and public "partnerships." Obama's section on "guiding principles" includes the following:

"Barack Obama believes that our problems require an 'all hands on deck' approach.... Obama also respects the First Amendment.... Obama’s initiative will be governed by a set of core principles for federal grant recipients. In order to receive federal funds to provide social services, faith-based organizations:

Cannot use federal funds to proselytize or provide religious sectarian instruction. Must comply with federal anti-discrimination laws. ...cannot discriminate with respect to hiring.... Can only use taxpayer dollars on secular programs and initiatives...."[1]

In other words, participating Christians who long to comfort the needy can no longer share God's encouraging truths. If their church receives government funds to help pay the cost of food for the poor, they cannot pray with a hurting child or sick mother.

Nor can their church refuse to hire leaders whose beliefs and values clash with Biblical values. For example,

"A Baptist agency in Kentucky provides shelter and love to abused and neglected children. But it has also accepted public funds. Since the government regulations tied to federal funding forbid discrimination in hiring practices, the agency has been sued by an openly gay woman who claims she was fired because of her sexual preference."[6]

When President Obama announced the new Executive Order that established this program, he included this warning. Notice how it defines "faith":

"As the priorities of this Office are carried out, it will be done in a way that upholds the Constitution.... The separation of church and state is a principle President Obama supports firmly.... There is a force for good greater than government. It is an expression of faith, this yearning to give back, this hungering for a purpose larger than our own..."[7]

In our troubled times, how many churches will resist the temptation to compromise?

GLOBAL CHANGE

Remember, the First Amendment assures us that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech..." Though intended to protect faithful believers, that assurance has been turned upside down.

No organization has done more to twist that promise into a ban on faith-based expressions than the ACLU. Small wonder, since its founder, Roger Baldwin, despised Christianity. "Communism is the goal,"[8] he wrote in 1935, aligning its ideology with Karl Marx' war on Biblical Truth.

Hilmar Von Campe, a former Hitler Youth and repentant German soldier, is now spreading the warning of totalitarianism through his book, Defeating the Totalitarian Lie. He wrote,

"The Nazis knew that a commitment to God and His absolute moral standards before government would be a great obstacle to exercising their power based on immorality and contempt for life and other people’s rights.... Just as the Nazis did, [the ACLU] strives to cut the connection of the American people to God....

"When I point out that Nazi stands for National Socialist and the ACLU has a Communist/Socialist background, it demonstrates the ideological similarities in the two groups."[9]

Obama's vision of church-and-state partnerships fits into a global government scheme that extends far beyond any visible service. His offer of federal funding to help the poor is intended to sound compassionate, but that's a PLANNED DELUSION! Instead it will speed the implementation of the massive global management system envisioned by previous administrations.

It is all part of the UN plan for worldwide transformation! Its implementation follows the guidelines of Agenda 21 -- a UN treaty ratified by nations around the world. Its strategic steps for America are detailed in its huge manual titled Sustainable America: A New Consensus. Here's just a tiny piece of the huge puzzle:

"Partnerships and collaborative decision making must be encouraged and must involve all levels of government, businesses, nongovernmental organizations, community groups and the public at large."[10]

This system has been called The Third Way, Communitarianism, Consensus Democracy, and neo-socialism -- and all the labels fit. They all point to a network of global control. Local community groups (the social sector) -- partnering with business (the private sector) -- are manipulated like puppets on strings by governments (public sector), which pull those strings through financial incentives and global standards.

According to Sustainable America, new indicators must be developed to measure:

SOCIAL CAPITAL. Increase in citizen engagement and public trust....

CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. Increase in community participation in such civic activities as professional and service organizations.... and volunteer work.

COLLABORATIONS. Increased use of successful civic collaborations such as public-private partnerships, community-based planning, goal-setting projects, and consensus-building efforts.[11]

The worth of the individuals in the community -- HUMAN CAPITAL -- must be measured as well. Obama's offer of " technical assistanc e" will help make sure every detail is included. In the facilitated group setting, a person's views would be documented, their ideas challenged, their values compromised, and their minds molded to fit group consensus. Those who refuse to conform to the new standards for cooperation and mental health would face the consequences. (See The UN Plan for your Mental Health)

The standards for 21st Century spirituality [SPIRITUAL CAPITAL] are outlined in UNESCO’s 1994 “Declaration on the role of religion in the promotion of a culture of peace.” Notice that it begins by focusing on a crisis:

1. We live in a world in which isolation is no longer possible….

2. We face a crisis which could bring about the suicide of the human species or bring us a new awakening and a new hope..

6. Religions have… led to division, hatred, and war...

“Peace entails that we understand that we are all interdependent. ...collectively responsible for the common good.”

“We will promote dialogue and harmony between and within religions…."
"We call upon the different religious and cultural traditions to join hands… and to cooperate with us….”[12] More

"Cooperate" points to consensus. To make sure everyone cooperates, the UN and its globalist partners are fast connecting links in this Communitarian system [Agenda 21] designed to force everyone into groups where they can learn to "participate" in their community -- on their rulers' terms. Obama's plan fits right in.

THE CHRISTIAN RESPONSE

Obama's "faith-based partnerships" are not based on faith in our God! The phrase is designed to deceive Americans, eradicate "offensive" truths, replace Christian ministries with secular service, and silence the gospel among those who most need it. As Hilmar Von Campe warns us, it will instead "cut the connection of the American people to God..."[9]

"We must obey God rather than man," said the apostle Peter two thousand years ago. Committed Christians cannot yield to rules that would quench our freedom to share God's Word. [See God's guidelines for Christian service]

Meanwhile, we must prepare to face the kind of hostility that would have been unthinkable in this "land of the free" six decades ago -- even when it seemed normal in totalitarian parts of Europe. The pressure to compromise is spreading fast. How can we resist?

We can learn a lesson from ancient Rome. In his book, How Should We Then Live?, Francis Schaeffer points to the heart of today's battle:

"Let us not forget why the Christians were killed. They were not killed because they worshiped Jesus.... Nobody cared who worshiped whom so long as the worshiper did not disrupt the unity of the state, centered in the formal worship of Caesar. The reason the Christians were killed was because they were rebels....

"If they had worshiped Jesus and Caesar, they would have gone unharmed, but they rejected all forms of syncretism. They worshiped the God who had revealed himself in the Old Testament, through Christ.... And they worshiped him as the only God. They allowed no mixture: All other Gods were seen as false gods....

"No totalitarian authority nor authoritarian state can tolerate those who have an absolute by which to judge that state.... Because the Christians had an absolute... standard by which to judge not only personal morals but the state, they were counted as enemies of totalitarian Rome and were thrown to the beasts."[13]

Endnotes:

1, Partnering With Communities of Faith
2, Leaders Say Obama Has Tapped Pastor for Outreach Office
3, Call to Renewal Keynote Address
4, The Megachurch Primaries
5, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages: Americas Role in the Techtronic Era, (Greenwood Press, Westport, Conn., 1982), pps. 72, 83.
6, Julia Campbell, "Faithful Giving: Will Bush Plan to Support Faith Charities Work?" www.abcNEWS.com, February 6, 2001.
7, Obama Announces White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships.
8, American Communist Lawyers Union
9, Hilmar Von Campe, Defeating the Totalitarian Lie (Crane, Missouri: HighWay, 2008), p.3.
10, Sustainable America: A New Consensus (President's Council on Sustainable Development, 1996), pps. 29, 67.
11, Ibid., p. 20.
12, “Declaration on the Role of Religion in the Promotion of a Culture of Peace”
13, Francis Schaeffer, "How Should We then Live?" (Old Tappan, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell, 1976), pps. 24, 26, 29.

© 2009 Berit Kjos - All Rights Reserved

BIPARTISAN EMBARRASSMENT IS GROWING

By Mary Starrett
February 11, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

There will be no hearts-on fire valentines for liberty-loving Americans this year.

What we feared and fought against is upon us. The evil in Washington grows with each new administration cabinet pick, each thug who makes it through confirmation hearings and emerges a ‘made’ man or woman in the Obama crime family.

Nevertheless, for those of us in the ‘never- say- die’ camp it is imperative we seek out whatever scraps of hope remain and cling to them.

To wit I offer this…

Bipartisan embarrassment is growing. It seems more people are saying “Whatever you do, don’t call me a Democrat or a Republican.”

Last month, the number of Americans who wouldn’t cop to being a member of either of the two parties rose to almost 27%.

That full percentage point increase since December would appear to mean that as an electorate, we’re losing ardor for the parties in power.

As more voters see opportunities in other parties and take the leap to join them, the Big Box parties will be forced to accommodate the voter by either wising –up (unlikely) or else joining the Whigs in the dustbin (likely).

The number of Republicans- 32.6%- is the lowest tally since this summer when party faithful were struggling to find a reason to get behind pro-amnesty, anti-gun, pro-bank heist John McCain.

Maybe one of the reasons the GOP is losing more and more ground is best seen in a snapshot of a single vote McCain and 17 of his Republican colleagues recently cast in the Senate confirmation of new U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.

McCain and his merry band of conservatives cast a “Yea” vote for the man who sold a Clinton administration pardon to a crook, oversaw the terrorizing of little Elian Gonzalez and lays claim to being former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno’s henchman.

You’ll remember Reno’s reign of terror included the incineration of 70 adults along with 17 babies and children at the Branch Davidian community in Waco, Texas 16 years ago this month. As the highest law enforcement officer in the land of the free, Holder was second in command as Reno ordered CS gas pumped into a building filled with terrified Americans. Those people died gruesome deaths at the hands of their own government. Our government.

The pictures of the dead, seen by relatively few Americans, include images of babies bent backwards in gruesome poses as their bodies writhed in agony before excruciating deaths.

In addition, Eric Holder is also so focused on wiping out the Second Amendment that he ponied up arguments to the Supreme Court arguing private gun ownership should be abolished saying “the Second Amendment (does) not protect an individual right to keep and bear arms.”

He said the Second Amendment could not be used to restrict banning guns.

Holder and McCain have long been BFF’s on the gun issue, as the former GOP presidential candidate lobbied long and hard to clamp down on gun owners’ rights.

More and More pro-gun voters who chose to plug their ears and cover their eyes through years of GOP betrayal are having an especially hard time swallowing the Holder confirmation.

Maybe that’s why the roster of Republicans continues to get smaller.

And, while the number who identify as Democrats is roughly 8% higher than the Republicans, that number dropped a full percentage point just in the last month. Life-long members of both parties are seeing their affection wane.

Change- not the “change” that’s come to mean “Socialism” in America today-but real change back to constitutional principles will not happen all at once. Perhaps the party affiliation shifts we’re seeing are pointing to that change. I’ve heard it said “Even a blind hog roots up an acorn once in awhile.” Maybe even those who have been blind are starting to see.

Take heart.

© 2009 Mary Starrett - All Rights Reserved

Daily Digest: February 11, 2009

http://www.johnmcternan.name/

Verse of The Day
Hebrews 13:4 Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.
1 Corinthians 6:18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. (19) What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
Commentary

I have not posted much in a while about abortion and homosexuality/HomoFascism. There are several articles which show how debased the nation has become. The killing of children in any manner in or out of the womb is a serious offense to God, which brings His judgment on that nation. The killing of babies is an offense against God's holy name: Leviticus 18:21 And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD. God says that children are His inheritance. Abortion kills babies which God views as His - sort of on loan to the parents: Psalm 127:3 Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.
So far, I believe that during 2008, God began the judgment process against America for homosexuality and dividing the land of Israel. The judgment for abortion has not begun yet, but with Obama's leadership, the judgment is on the way.
America legalized abortion in 1973. This event created an Ordinance of the Amorites which brings God's direct judgment on the nation. According to the Bible, when a person sheds innocent blood the only way to cleanse the land is for that person's blood to be shed. America has now killed 50 million or more babies. If God applies His word of judgment to America, the nation faces unfathomable chaos and destruction.
Numbers 35:33 So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it.
With the way the economy is heading and especially California, it is very possible that our cities will burn and millions could die. Only few in America moved to defend the babies in womb. The rest were too busy or did not care or did not believe that the holy God of Israel judges nations for sin.
Isaiah 1:5 Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint.Isa (6) From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment.Isa (7) Your country is desolate, your cities are burned with fire: your land, strangers devour it in your presence, and it is desolate, as overthrown by strangers.
If you have been following this blog, you watched with your own eyes, the correlations to national sinful acts and disasters hitting America. If you believe that I am accurate in correlating the judgments to specific acts of national disobedience, then believe me that judgment for shedding the blood of 50+ million babies is on the way. The judgment could be loosed as Obama and the reprobate Hard Left Congress move to codify abortion legislation. This will reverse all previous pro-life legislation. I will keep you posted.
This is the time to grow close to the LORD. God always warns before judgment and He has warned America. Please, understand the holiness of the LORD and walk in true fear of Him. America now is just like ancient Israel.
May God bless and protect you.
Articles
United Nations Population Fund Leader Says Family Breakdown is a Triumph for Human Rights 02/03/09 This is an example of a reprobate in action. Only a demented mind would think like this, but notice he is in a position of power.
"Speaking at a colloquium held last month at Colegio Mexico in Mexico City, UNFPA representative Arie Hoekman denounced the idea that high rates of divorce and out-of-wedlock births represent a social crisis, claiming that they represent instead the triumph of “human rights” against “patriarchy.” "In the eyes of conservative forces, these changes mean that the family is in crisis," he said. "In crisis? More than a crisis, we are in the presence of a weakening of the patriarchal structure, as a result of the disappearance of the economic base that sustains it and because of the rise of new values centered in the recognition of fundamental human rights."
Child Porn Pandemic as Police Estimate 600,000 Americans, 65,000 Canadians Trading Child Porn Online 02/06/09
Tribunal: 'Gay' rights trump Christianity 01/23/09
Planned Parenthood: Force doctors to do abortions 01/23/08
New Study Finds Father's Support Plays Key Role in Abortion 01/20/09
Driver's licenses let applicants pick gender 01/23/09 If one is really confused, how about listing both! This is pure liberal nonsense.
Judge denies lesbian custody of Christian girl 01/30/09
America Abortion Debate Reaches Into African Slums 01/31/09
Vermont Moves Closer to Legalizing Gay Marriage 02/07/09 Vermont is moving closer to the LORD's judgment. Vermont will go the way of California.
New trend: Ultrasounds before abortion 02/10/09
Gay pride flag flies at police HQ 02/02/09 This took place in England, and it looks like they surrendered to the sodomites.
Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.
John McTernan

Stimulus contains rationed medicine
'Safe, effective' treatments soon to be limited by 'cost'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: February 09, 2009
9:29 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WorldNetDaily

The former lieutenant governor of New York is warning that the $50 billion that President Obama expects to spend in the next few years on a nationwide digital health records system for every individual easily could, and probably will, result in rationed medical care.

WND recently reported on a little-discussed provision in Obama's plan that would demand every American submit to a government program for electronic medical records without a choice to opt out, raising alarms for privacy advocates.

Privacy advocates said patients might be startled to discover personal information could be shared electronically with, perhaps, millions of people, including documentation on abortions, mental health problems, patient non-compliance, lawsuits against doctors and sexual problems.

Sue A. Blevins, president of the Institute for Health Freedom, said unless people have the right to decide "if and when" their health information is shared, there is no real privacy.

Now Betsy McCaughey, former lieutenant governor of New York and an adjunct senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, has released a commentary warning about the likelihood of rationed care – or a health care system that simply provides treatment when it determines the cost-benefit ratio for the treatment and the patient meets its guidelines.

Obama plans to spend $50 billion "over five years" to create a system of electronic health records for every person who sees a doctor.

"Tragically, no one from either party is objecting to the health provisions slipped in without discussion," wrote McCaughey. "These provisions reflect the handiwork of Tom Daschle, until recently the nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department."

"If the Obama administration's economic stimulus bill passes … in its current form, seniors in the U.S. will face … rationing. Defenders of the system say that individuals benefit in younger years and sacrifice later."

Other nations that utilize such programs typically deny costly treatments to patients who are senior citizens, and McCaughey warns that would be the case in the United States, too.

"Daschle says health-care reform 'will not be pain free.' Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt," she warned.

"Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost-effectiveness standard," she said.

McCaughey noted Daschle has written of such plans, modeled after the United Kingdom, which include a national board to make necessary decisions.

"This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis," she wrote.

She cited a 2006 ruling in the U.K. that determined elderly patients with macular degeneration must go blind in one eye before getting treatment with a costly drug to save their other eye, a decision that outraged taxpayers who eventually forced a change.

"Hiding health legislation in a stimulus bill is intentional. Daschle supported the Clinton administration’s health-care overhaul in 1994, and attributed its failure to debate and delay. A year ago, Daschle wrote that the next president should act quickly before critics mount an opposition," McCaughey said.

The stimulus plan calls its board the "Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research."

"The goal, Daschle’s book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept 'hopeless diagnoses' and 'forgo experimental treatments,' and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system," she said.

She said the plan simply needs more review.

"The bill treats health care the way European governments do: as a cost problem instead of a growth industry. Imagine limiting growth and innovation in the electronics or auto industry during this downturn," McCaughey said.

She said doctors would end up with no choice about treatments.

"Hospitals and doctors that are not 'meaningful users' of the new system will face penalties," she warned.

The Institute for Health Freedom today also renewed its warning because the system is scheduled to be mandatory for everyone.

"IHF calls on Americans who care about health privacy to contact their members of Congress and President Obama to voice their own opinions about the need for opt-out and patient consent provisions, to ensure true patient privacy rights," the organization said.

Blevins' organization, one of the few raising the alarm at this point, said the stimulus plan would impose an electronic health records system on every person in the U.S. without any provision for seeking patient consent or allowing them not to participate.

"Without those protections, Americans' electronic health records could be shared – without their consent – with over 600,000 covered entities through the forthcoming nationally linked electronic health-records network," Blevins said.

"Nobody wants to stop the proper use of good technology," Blevins said, "and for some people privacy is not an issue."

But she said the bottom line is that patients "would end up losing control of his or her personal health information."

WND previously has reported on attempts in Minnesota by state lawmakers to authorize the collection and warehousing of newborns' DNA without parental consent.

Gov. Tim Pawlenty has been successful in stopping the action there so far.

The Citizens' Council on Health Care has worked to publicize the issue in Minnesota. The group raised opposition when the state Department of Health continued to warehouse DNA without parental consent in violation of the genetic privacy and DNA property rights of parents and children.

Huge Israeli Gas Find Even More Massive Than Expected
Shevat 17, 5769, 11 February 09 12:41by Malkah Fleisher(IsraelNN.com) A massive natural gas find off the coast of Haifa which was lauded as capable of fueling all of Israel for 15 years is actually more than 60 percent larger than originally estimated, according to the American partner in the drill, Noble Energy Inc.

Israeli companies Isramco Negev 2, Delek Drilling, Avner Oil Exploration, and Dor Gas Exploration had the majority of the stake on the dig – named Tamar-1 – which is estimated at a potential of 5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. That estimate is up from January, at which time the partners believed the well contained 3 trillion cubic feet of gas.

The team will keep their drilling rig in the area for two more wells they believe may be present as well. %ad%

"The implications of this discovery to Israel cannot be overstated," said Noble Energy Chief Executive Officer Charles Davidson, in a statement issued after following the revision of the estimate.

Isramco shares, which have skyrocketed 736 percent since the start of the year, were 7.2 percent higher on Wednesday morning compared with declines of over 2 percent in the broader market.

Delek Drilling is up 6.4 percent as of Wednesday morning, with Avner up 4.8 percent. Conglomerate Delek Group (DELKG.TA), the parent of Delek Drilling and Avner, is up 5.9 percent.
www.IsraelNationalNews.com© Copyright IsraelNationalNews.com

Eligibility issue: McCain checked but not Obama
Lawsuit contends Congress failed to qualify Democrat for Oval Office

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: February 10, 2009
9:09 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WorldNetDaily

A lawsuit that accuses Congress of failing to investigate President Obama's birthplace before approving the Electoral College vote giving him the presidency has been amended to include additional claims of rights violations, including unequal treatment, because Congress did such an investigation into GOP candidate Sen. John McCain.

That word comes from Mario Apuzzo, the lawyer handling the case on which WND previously has reported.

The case raises many of the same arguments as dozens of other cases that have flooded into courtrooms around the nation since the November election.

The case was brought by Apuzzo on behalf of Charles F. Kerchner Jr., Lowell T. Patterson, Darrell James Lenormand and Donald H. Nelson Jr. It names as defendants Barack Hussein Obama II, the U.S., Congress, the Senate, House of Representatives and former Vice President Dick Cheney along with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Apuzzo told WND that Congress last year raised the issue of whether McCain was a "natural born" citizen, a requirement set out in the U.S. Constitution for the president, because of his birth to U.S. citizens in the Panama Canal Zone.

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 235,000 others and sign up now!

According to a report in the Washington Post, the Senate unanimously declared McCain to be a "natural born" citizen, meeting the demand of Article 2 of the Constitution, which states, "no person except a natural born citizen … shall be eligible to the office of president."

The report, however, pointed out that such a statement was opinion only, and the constitutional question actually isn't so simple. It quoted Catholic University associate law professor Sarah Duggin saying the document is ambiguous.

"Ultimately there has never been any real resolution of this issue. Congress cannot legislatively change the meaning of the Constitution," she told the newspaper, saying a constitutional amendment or a U.S. Supreme Court ruling would be the way to reach a determination.

However, even though his clients wrote to Congress requesting a similar review of Obama's birthplace, they were refused.

"The question is: Why do you do it for McCain, but not Obama," Apuzzo told WND.

More specifically, those who doubted McCain's eligibility had an opportunity for a review but not those who doubt Obama.

That violates a liberty right for his clients, he said, because as members of a republic, they have a right to know that their president is legitimate.

"What I'm arguing is that Congress and President Obama have violated my clients' due process under the 5th Amendment [of the U.S. Constitution]," Apuzzo said.

Already; Congress held a responsibility to make certain Obama is qualified for the post, he alleges. And the public outcry, evidenced by the dozens of lawsuits over the issue, should have prompted due diligence on the part of members of Congress, he said.

Obama, meanwhile, has refused to hand over "sufficient documents" to verify his "natural born" status, Apuzzo said.

"We're not a monarchy," Apuzzo said, "People have a right to know."

He said his case in U.S. District Court in New Jersey is at the point where the court notices about the case are being distributed.

He said the fact Obama already has been inaugurated changes nothing in his case.

"Before that, everything really was premature," he said. "He has a right to run for office. But when you down to the nitty gritty, he still has to qualify for the position."

He said the Constitution specifically raises the scenario of a president who has been chosen for office but has failed to qualify.

"Even though you ran, everybody loves you, you still have got to qualify under the Constitution," Apuzzo said.

Further, the lawsuit explains, not only are there legitimate questions about Obama's birth, and therefore eligibility, he might not even be a U.S. citizen at all.

"There exists a possibility that Obama could be an illegal alien," the lawsuit said. "Obama has yet to adequately prove that he was born in the United States. [Further], Obama has publicly conceded that his father was born in Kenya and a British subject/citizen at the time of Obama's birth which precluded Obama from gaining any U.S. citizenship from his father."

The lawsuits over Obama's eligibility, in various ways, have alleged 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. Obama's 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.

Other challenges 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. The 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 and on what nation's passport he traveled to Pakistan in the '80s, as well as conflicting reports from Obama's family about his place of birth.

Apuzzo told WND the biggest reason to investigate further is the fact that Obama has refused to allow public release of a signed "vault" copy of his original birth certificate.

Several of the legal cases – including those brought by Orly Taitz, Cort Wrotnowski, Leo Donofrio and Philip Berg, already have been discussed in conference at the U.S. Supreme Court, which has failed to have a hearing on any of the merits involved.

Taitz, in fact, is requesting information from the Supreme Court about a meeting eight of its justices held with Obama, a defendant in her case, before the justices reviewed the issues of the case in a private conference.

Several of the cases still remain active at lower court levels, from which emergency requests to the high court were launched.

"I know that Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally qualified natural born citizen and is ineligible to assume the office of president of the United States," Berg said in a statement on his ObamaCrimes.com website.

"Obama knows he is not 'natural born' as he knows where he was born and he knows he was adopted in Indonesia; Obama is an attorney, Harvard Law grad who taught Constitutional law; Obama knows his candidacy is the largest 'hoax' attempted on the citizens of the United States in over 200 years; Obama places our Constitution in a 'crisis' situation; and Obama is in a situation where he can be blackmailed by leaders around the world who know Obama is not qualified," Berg's statement continued.

While Obama's campaign team called the cases garbage, here is a partial listing and status update for several of the cases:

Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania Democrat, demanded that the courts verify Obama's original birth certificate and other documents proving his American citizenship. Berg's latest appeal, requesting an injunction to stop the Electoral College from selecting the 44th president, was denied.

Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.

Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.

Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support.

Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.

Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.

In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.

In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.

In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.

California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.
In addition, other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions about Obama's eligibility include:

In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed.

In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed.

In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.

In Washington, L. Charles vs. Obama.

In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.
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 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?