According to TPM her motion included this bit of insanity:
At the end it might be a stroke of providence that this unconstitutional bill was signed into law by an ineligible President, and that these responsive pleadings were submitted for consideration only a few days before the day of the ancient holiday of Passover, which celebrates freedom from bondage and usurpation.Yes Orly, but in the story of Passover your motion would be considered the 11th plague, "loony-tunes." Thankfully the judge threw the motion in the garbage saying in part:
Furthermore, with respect to Taitz’s motion in particular, I believe the parties to this case and the court should remain focused solely on the legal issues raised by the named plaintiffs, and not concern themselves with collateral issues (such as, for example, whether President Obama has provided sufficient proof of a valid birth certificate)....which is legalese for "disappear moonbat."
And to be honest at this point, fifteen months into the Obama Presidency, the vast majority of conservatives hope that Dr Taitz and all of the other birther moonbats just disappear or at least keep their crazy notions to themselves.
I should admit that I am a "reformed birther," When I first started seeing the evidence during the early part of the 2008 campaign it made sense to me. That was until I saw the Barack Obama birth announcements that ran in local Hawaiian newspapers. For those to be fake, Obama's mom would have to have seen into the future, known he was going to run for president, and planted those announcements in 1961.
Last July, Hawaii's Dept. of Health Director reiterated the statement she made just before the election.
"I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawai'i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai'i State Department of Health verifying Barrack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai'i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago...Here's the point, not only has Obama been proven to be American born many times over, the only person helped by the whole business is Barack Obama.
If I were President Obama and there were no birther movement, I would invent one. It destroys the credibility of anyone who talks about it. To moderates and liberals, the birther movement is the right-wing equivalent of those drooling liberals who were calling the 2000 election stolen, years after the election was over.
Worse than the fact the birther argument has been wrong many times over, it takes attention from the real arguments,in this case proving that Obamacare is unconstitutional.
For those of you who don't believe that Obama is American born, look at it a different way, as Andrew Brietbart, told Joseph Farrah during the Tea Party Convention, it is not a winning issue. Just like the lugnuts who are still counting chads a decade after George Bush defeated Al Gore, you are not going to win. Besides if the birther thing was true, Joe Biden, the SCHMOTUS would have let is slip it out months ago.
The only one served by the Birther movement is Barack Hussein Obama, because it gives him and his cronies the opportunity to dismiss the entire lot of us. Birthers like Orly Taitz need to wake up, the time for you to have let it go passed a year and a half ago. Barack Obama may not be our kind of American, but he is an American never-the-less. Lets fight against his policies, those are the arguments that we have a chance of winning.
There is a second issue about Obama's birth. There are those who believe that he is born in the United States but unlike most democrats, do not believe that he was a "Virgin Birth," that argument about Obama's birth is perfectly legitimate.
If you would like to read the Judges ruling against Dr. Taitz it is embedded below.
29620582 STATE of FLORIDA Et Al v U S DHHS Et Al 18 ORDER Denying Dr Orly Taitz s in Pro Se 17 RECAP Motion...
4 comments:
SCHMOTUS !!! Hahahaha. I can't think of any better word (invented though it may be) that so precisely pegs Joe Biden. BRAVO Sammy!!!
are you saying it was not in Obama's mother's interest to have a citizen son in 1961? This is no argument Sammy. She had as much of a reason in the 60's to lie about her child's status as Obama does now.
It might not be in the right wings interest to claim something as outlandish as Obama isn't a citizen, but you have not provided evidence contrary at all.
Obama has kept this information hidden. no irrelevant correlative can hide this.
While I completely agree with you that Orly's attempt to join the AG suit should be thrown out, you took the opportunity to go from there to an argument against the birthers in general, and on that I'd like to respectfully disagree.
The Hawaii newspaper announcements are generated from the recordings of births at the Registrar's office. Nobody disputes that someone recorded Obama's birth at the Registrar's Office. The question is whether they recorded a birth that took place somewhere else or one that took place in Hawaii. Yes, it's completely possible that a birth that took place somewhere else could've been recorded in Hawaii, and it was done regularly for the obvious reason: to establish citizenship. The easy way to do it was to just allege a home birth in Hawaii -- then fairly common. One relative attesting to such was all that was required.
If he was born in a hospital in Hawaii as is now claimed, the original, contemporaneous birth certificate would establish beyond a shadow of a doubt that Obama was born there: it would state the hospital, and bear a doctor's original signature. The certification that the campaign posted was a 2007 printout of the birth records then contained in the database; again, even if the birth occurred elsewhere but was registered as a Hawaiian birth, this is the exact certification that one would receive. This is why the original birth certificate remains key to settling this question.
You also cite Fukino's statement made just before the election. Her statement invalidates itself by making a claim that she's not qualified to make, i.e. that he's a "natural born American citizen". That is a conclusion of law, not of fact. Some of the active cases, for example, argue that one cannot be a dual citizen and a natural born citizen, and that even if Obama was born in Hawaii, he was unquestionably a dual citizen at birth (even Factcheck.org acknowledges as much). The fact that she purports to make such a conclusion as a medical doctor just raises further questions.
And again, if there is a (fraudulent) registration of a home birth in the file, she would be correct in saying that the "original vital records" verify his birth in Hawaii, albeit fraudulently.
But the more important point to you (and to me) is your next one: that it's not "a winning issue". Since when does a true patriot dismiss a constitutional question as "not a winning issue"? There is nothing more important than our Constitution and few things in the Constitution are more important than the eligibility of the sole authority in one of the three branches of government. If we fail to fight for constitutional principles because they're not convenient to us politically, we might as well pack up and go home now. Whatever short-term battles we win will be rendered irrelevant by the loss of the war for the preservation of our constitutional republic.
I would also say that the jury's still out as to whether it's a winning issue. If it turns out that Obama is not constitutionally eligible, it would be devastating to the Democratic Party, to the liberal/progressive movement and people like Nancy Pelosi would go to jail. It would be a monumental victory for those who would "defend our Constitution from enemies foreign and domestic" at whatever cost to themselves personally -- that is to say, true American patriots.
Finally, Orly Taitz is a kook who does not know the first thing about the practice of law, but she's right.
The writer is correct.Orly should not attempt to highjack the states suit but has no deep understanding of the legal issue at all and that article II was misunderstood and ignored was the platform for the biblical sufferings America will undergo as a result.Deep understanding of the Original Intent is so important so that it never happens again and americans will fully understand from which pool of citizens the Framers reserved the executive branch,this,apart from concerns of image and whther libs will attack. They attack anyway and if given no fodder simply make stuff up anyway.
Citizenship can be granted and legislated through STATUTORY LAW.This is the focus of many commenters but they do not discern that statutory granted citizenship as in the best case scenario for Obama STILL is not CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. Article ii cannot be an override for the 14th amendment Wong Kim Ark case. NATURAL BORN CITIZEN is exclusive to the Executive branch and restricts foreign links via family. This was achieved through the requirement of two citizen parents AT BIRTH on US SOIL.
original sources keep popping up to explain the definition of NBC.recently a framer, David Ramsey laid out the two citizen parent definition. there is more also.Obama already has admitted his father was not American. We do not have to search out his docs to bring forth a very serious and righteous legal concern for America's posterity.
Post a Comment