Todays Conway Daily Sun contains an article by Susan Bruce that puts birthers in unfavorable light:
Orly Taitz is a bucket full of crazy
It also has some unkind remarks about NH state representative Harry Accornero who joined Taitz in a challenge before the New Hampshire Elections Commission:
clearly a few acorns shy of an oak
It’s always great to see local coverage of birthers. If you like to see birthers made fun of, this article is for you.
Apparently birthers are receiving the brush off from New Hampshire legislators as well. Neil Turner was none too happy with an email he received from House Deputy Majority Leader Shawn Jasper (R – Hillsborough). The gist of Mr. Jasper’s message is “You birthers are a deluded bunch fighting a losing cause. GTF out of New Hampshire.”
“…clearly a few acorns shy of an oak…”
Lovely way of putting it.
If looniness came out in small bricks, Orly could build the Empire State Building.
“If you like to see birthers made fun of”
I was disappointed. Susan Bruce went way to easy on ’em. Must be a liberal.
Orly will never stop in New Hampshire. She will continue to fight before the primary and after the primary until she gets a fair hearing on the matter. Expect this battle to be waged in all 50 states.
In today’s New Hampshire Union Leader:
“Tolerating “birtherism” is intolerable, as the Republican leadership in the New Hampshire House knows.
“Last week, Orly Taitz, a California attorney who believes President Obama is not a U.S. citizen, tried to get New Hampshire’s Ballot Law Commission to take the President off next year’s presidential primary ballot. The commission, being sane, voted unanimously not to do that. Then, according to Assistant Attorney General Matt Mavrogeorge, who represented the Secretary of State’s Office in the hearing, Reps. Henry Accornero, R-Laconia, and Susan DeLemus, R-Rochester, and some non-legislator attendees shouted at him so angrily that he feared for his safety. He locked himself in a room to get away from them. This incident is rightly under investigation.
“Some of the birthers in attendance called members of the committee traitors. That prompted a sharp rebuke from House Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt. In a letter sent to Taitz and all House Republicans, he called birtherism “ridiculous,” “gobbledygook,” and a “folly.” He’s right on all three.
“There are, it seems, nine birthers in the House Republican Caucus, which runs to nearly 300 members. House leadership cannot and should not enforce absolute ideological purity, of course. But the leadership’s move to isolate and rebuke this nuttery is absolutely appropriate. New Hampshire needs no association with birtherism or 9/11 kookery or any other conspiracy fantasies.”
And the comments section is entertaining:
http://www.unionleader.com/article/20111126/OPINION01/711259989
She’s been given more than fair hearings on everything she’s wasted time with to date.
Poor delusional John. Insanity is repeating the same failure over and over again and not getting the clue.
So what if you crazies bother all 50 states with this dead horse nonsense? The results are going to be exactly the same 100% failure rate you’ve seen over the past 3 years.
Orly had a more than fair hearing. She was given an inordinate amount of time to present any credible evidence of why Obama should not remain on the NH ballot. She had none because there is none.
The NH Board of Election Law then made their decision based on NH law.
Just because one loses does not mean the hearing was not fair, just as a poor result in a medical procedure does not mean there was malpractice committed.
Wow, the Union-Leader is one of this nation’s MOST conservative newspapers and even THEY are attacking the birthers!
I hope John is correct and Orly doesn’t give up in New Hampshire. The more defeats that she suffers, the better.
What I love about Orly is that she poisons the well for competent attorneys who might take up birtherism. Once Orly’s been there, they have no where else to go.
Check out my comment.
Your cat has many layers.
I beg to differ. The commission asked no questions and summarily ruled against Orly Taitz. The commission basically said that because Obama filled out the application and paid $1000 he could be on the ballot. This is complete nonsense since New Hampshire has taken candidates off the ballot before. If what the commission said is true, then it is impossible to remove a candidate from the ballot assuming he fills out the application and pays the fee. Orly was dead on with her cross examination of the lady. Orly might want to wait for Sheriff Arpiao’s report to be released soon. Orly can then file her complaint in another state having a duly official body with a report stating that Obama has problems.
Yes, why should New Hampshire get to be the only state that makes fun of the crazy lady? Keep those dollars flowing, John! Get a third job, to support her in her quest!
The Union Leader has been in the forefront of rightwing crazy for over 40 years. They really invented the rightwing media model of reality-free reporting. When something’s too crazy for the newspaper of William Loeb, it’s howling- at- the- moon crazy.
Joe Arpaio’s authority ends at the Maricopa County border. He is a private citizen in any other county in Arizona, or the rest of the US. That’s Orly’s problem as well as yours.
There are not 50 primaries. But don’t let that get in your way.
“I beg to differ. The commission asked no questions and summarily ruled against Orly Taitz.”
This birther lie is easily disproved by the amateur attorney’s own recorded testimony and admission that she had no evidence of anything.
It’s a classic example of some desperate and deranged birthers assuming people are as stupid and gullible as them.
I left a couple as well. Much more rational and better reasoned than any of the birther stuff there. And, yes, I *DO* say so myself. 🙂
Hmm, you didn’t actually watch the video, did you?
My favorite question (paraphrased):
Brook: Do you have any actual, real-world, non-crazy, factual evidence to back up your lunatic claims?
Taitz: Umm … no.
Brooks: GTF outta New Hampshire.
You’re assuming any competent attorney *would* take up birtherism.
Apuzzo. Donofrio. Taitz.
I rest my case.
From John’s post…
:
– I beg to differ.The commission asked no questions and summarily ruled against Orly Taitz.
Wrong. Chairman Cook did as questions… specifically addressing if any court had adjudicated the matter and if she had any real, non-speculative, evidence… not inuendo, not “because I say so,” but real evidence. The answers were “no.”
-The commission basically said that because Obama filled out the application and paid $1000 he could be on the ballot.
And the fact that no evidence was presented indicating he should not be.
-This is complete nonsense since New Hampshire has taken candidates off the ballot before.If what the commission said is true, then it is impossible to remove a candidate from the ballot assuming he fills out the application and pays the fee.
Unless there’s a successful challenge, one with credible evidence or proof that the candidate is ineligible… there was none presented against Obama.
-Orly was dead on with her cross examination of the lady.
Orly’s cross-examination was pure garbage. It was not on point and did not lead to the discovery of anything not already known. Had she been in a court of law she “might” have been able to ask two of her questions… the first one and perhaps one or stretching it 2 others.
-Orly might want to wait for Sheriff Arpiao’s report to be released soon.Orly can then file her complaint in another state having a duly official body with a report stating that Obama has problems.
I think you’re anticipating way too much of what will be in Joe’s report, if he indeed produces one. I think most folks will be very surprised at his report and what it shows, if it’s an honest “investigation.” Which is completely unnecessary. If he lies, he’ll be caught. He’s up for re-election. Much like Trump, he’s only pushing this nonsense for publicity and to get the lunatic AZ vote again.
In what sense, Charlie? Er, I mean, john.
It was absolutely the worst cross examination I’ve witnessed in 27 years of practicing law. And that includes watching roughly a hundred pro se litigants conduct cross examination.
The point of cross examination is to draw out first-hand knowledge that the witness has about a relevant fact. Orly asked the Assistant Secretary of State what the Attorney General did with the ballot challenge. How the f*** would an employee of the SOS’s office have first-hand knowledge about what the employees of the Department of Justice did? She worked for an entirely different agency, The AG’s offices are located at 33 Capitol Street in Concord. The SOS offices are housed at 107 North Main Street. Do you think they meet in the coffee break room or something?
Uh, no. The Chairman asked questions. He asked if this matter had been adjudicated in any court, he asked the status of her case in the 9th, he asked if she had taken up the SSN issue with the Social Security Administration, if she had brought up the Columbia U. record with anyone at Columbia. They all traipsed out to confer, came back and read the actual law that Orly was complaining about, and THEN dismissed the case. Hardly summarily.
There’s two separate kinds of candidates in NH. One is everyone from US Senator and Rep to states offices and local offices. NH law says that the SoS is responsible for checking qualifications for all of those. They must reside in the state, be registered in the party they are running under, etc.
The other kind of candidate is in the Presidential Primary. NH law treats those candidates differently. Unless someone is blatantly ineligible (in which case they talk him/her out of it), there’s no checking. There have been 2 case mentioned in this regard. One is Sal Mohamed in 2008. He submitted his application by mail, under the 2008 rules. (There was no document swearing that the candidate was eligible in 2008.) The ASoS saw the bio that said he was born in Egypt, called him, and they decided together to withdraw the application. Subtle difference that appears to be lost on the birthers.
The second case is Abdul K. Hassan, born in Ghana. Hassan asked in July for an advisory opinion stating if he would be allowed on the ballot. As he wasn’t born in the US, and had no US citizen parents (both were needed to NOT be a nbc), the ASoS advised him his application wouldn’t be accepted. As he never officially applied, he was never actually disqualified. Subtle difference that appears to be lost on the birthers.
Oh I have no doubt about it I’m sure she’ll continue as long as there are plenty of gullible folks to scam money out of. When she fails to get one state to do her bidding I’m sure she will then go to the county level or city level.
I certainly hope so. Like Chris Matthews said, this tin-foil crackadoodle needs to be hung around the necks of Republicans. The birthers are financing this and the rest of us get to enjoy the entertainment gratis.
I guess Obama is probably going to be challenged in Hawaii once he gets on the ballot.
§11-113 Presidential ballots. (a) In presidential elections, the names of the candidates for president and vice president shall be used on the ballot in lieu of the names of the presidential electors, and the votes cast for president and vice president of each political party shall be counted for the presidential electors and alternates nominated by each political party.
(c) All candidates for president and vice president of the United States shall be qualified for inclusion on the general election ballot under either of the following procedures:
(B) A statement that each candidate is legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution;
(d) Each applicant and the candidates named, shall be notified in writing of the applicant’s or candidate’s eligibility or disqualification for placement on the ballot not later than 4:30 p.m. on the tenth business day after filing. The chief election officer may extend the notification period up to an additional five business days, if the applicants and candidates are provided with notice of the extension and the reasons therefore.
(e) If the applicant, or any other party, individual, or group with a candidate on the presidential ballot, objects to the finding of eligibility or disqualification the person may, not later than 4:30 p.m. on the fifth day after the finding, file a request in writing with the chief election officer for a hearing on the question. A hearing shall be called not later than 4:30 p.m. on the tenth day after the receipt of the request and shall be conducted in accord with chapter 91. A decision shall be issued not later than 4:30 p.m. on the fifth day after the conclusion of the hearing.
New Hampshire Harry’s hard hitting issues webpage:
http://www.harryaccornero.com/news.html
I’m getting the impression that Harry isn’t very bright.
http://www.harryaccornero.com/contact.html
This guy is a nut. Here’s part of one paragraph on this webpage: “This fall we will begin the 2012 session. I will be putting in a bill to require any school who accepts State or Federal funds to start every day by standing and saying the Pledge of Allegiance. ”
See what I mean……..because starting each school day by saying the pledge of allegiance will, oh I don’t know, promote world peace??……whatever dude……..
I refused to say it in high school, and just stood silent. There had been court rulings that schools could not retaliate against students who refused, so they couldn’t do anything except tut, tut.
When asked why I did not say it, I replied “one nation under God” was offensive because I was an atheist; and “with liberty and justice for all,” I said tell that to Dr. King’s family and those drafted and sent to Vietnam.
Its complete history is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_allegiance
Wonder how many RWNJ’s know the pledge was written by a socialist and that “one nation under God” was added during the Red scare of the 1950’s?
None.
It was also during the Red Scare that “In God We Trust,” was added to US currency.
john’s postings are rants of delusion, my question to john would be “What are you smoking and could I get some, that’s some powerful stuff”.
By a Scottish Presbyterian clergyman no less. Those sheep molesting highlanders still turn up all over the globe.
Alba gu brÃth!
With idiots like these…. *sigh*
Here’s a sweet story on Arpaio: http://gawker.com/5862834/americas-jerkiest-sheriff-to-endorse-rick-perry
“. . . Arpaio, the Arizona sheriff whose entire career seems to be based on an odd fusion of Judge Dredd and Salo*, will endorse Perry this week and campaign with him in New Hampshire.”
*LMAO ! ! BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! ! ! Disturbing but funny.
Slainthe!
Ye kin tak the loon oota Eberdeen but ye canna tak Eberdeen oota the loon.
You’re still making sense. What happened?
This is a waste of time though. We all know how the hearing will turn out. Hawaii is hardly going to reject its own official documents. However the waste of time is that after the hearing is held and Obama is certified, the birthers will shove it aside and continue their crank claims.
You butchered the statute by omitting the a significant amount of the operative provision. The language of Section 11-113(c) that is relevant to Obama’s placement on the ballot actually reads:
(c) All candidates for president and vice president of the United States shall be qualified for inclusion on the general election ballot under either of the following procedures:
(1) In the case of candidates of political parties which have been qualified to place candidates on the primary and general election ballots, the appropriate official of those parties shall file a sworn application with the chief election officer not later than 4:30 p.m. on the sixtieth day prior to the general election, which shall include:
(A) The name and address of each of the two candidates;
(B) A statement that each candidate is legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution;
(C) A statement that the candidates are the duly chosen candidates of both the state and the national party, giving the time, place, and manner of the selection.
See the part that reads “In the case of candidates of political parties ” and the part that reads “the appropriate official of those parties shall file a sworn application” and the part that reads “A statement that the candidates are the duly chosen candidates of both the state and the national party”? Those are significant.
Let’s break down what the statute states. If —
— the appropriate party official
— files a sworn application
— with the chief election officer not later than 4:30 p.m. on the sixtieth day prior to the general election
— which includes
— the name and address of each of the two candidates for president and vice president
— and includes
— a statement that each candidate is legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution
— and includes
— a statement that the candidates are the duly chosen candidates of both the state and the national party, giving the time, place, and manner of the selection
Then,
— the candidates for president and vice president of the United States SHALL BE QUALIFIED for inclusion on the general election ballot.
No he’s not. He’s being deceitful. John’s dishonesty in selectively quoting the relevant provisions makes no sense whatever.
GeorgetownJD:
Thank you for defending the truth. John’s casual use of lies and misrepresentation is offensive.
Oily will NEVER get a fair hearing because she has no standing.
Keep dreaming, that is all you have.
Sheriff’s posse?! In the 21st century?! hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Sheriff’s posse?! Hot on the trail of those cattle rustling cowboys.
‘The bank robber went that-a-way on his horse. That’s all I seen, sheriff.’
As long as we are in the 19th century, I recommend a book on Jewish people in the Wild West. You can get it at the library. The title is Frontier Accountants.
Thank you. I’ll be here all week.
“Bring Captain solo and the wookie to me they will all suffer for this outrage”
“The trouble with Scotland is that it’s full of Scots.”
Edward I
New Ballot Challenge to Obama in Georgia:
(from the birtherreport web site)
Official Challenge to Barack Obama being placed on the Georgia Primary Ballot
To: Georgia Secretary of State Brian P. Kemp
From: Carl A. Swensson
Attn: Mr. Brian Kemp
It has come to my attention your office has posted Barack Obama as the sole Democrat candidate for President on the Ga. Primary Ballot. This notice is my challenge and request he be removed from our ballot as he does not meet the minimum qualifications as set forth in Article II Section I Clause V concerning the Natural Born Citizen status.
Jurisdiction falls squarely on the shoulders of your office as head of the Georgia Board of Elections and it is your sworn duty as a man of honor and Public Servant to protect and defend the Constitution. The very U.S. Constitution that is now under attack and assault by the DNC for having failed in their responsibility to submit an eligible candidate for inclusion on our ballot.
I have voiced this concern to you many times over the past year, citing Minor V Happersett 88 U.S. 162 (1875) but it would now appear as if those words of caution are going unheeded. Supporting SCOTUS cases have been scrubbed but are now re-surfacing thanks to the work of Leo Donofrio. Esq. and I would ask you and your research staff do your homework and look closely at Ex Parte Lockwood, 154 U.S. 116 (1894) (aka In Re Lockwood at Justia), is essentially the holy grail of support for Minor v. Happersett, as it states:
“In Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162, this court held that the word citizen’ is often used to convey the idea of membership in a nation, and, in that sense, women, if born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, have always been considered citizens of the United States, as much so before the adoption of the fourteenth amendment of the constitution as since…” (Emphasis added) and also the City of Mobile v. Bolden, 446 U.S. 55 (1980)
I must bring these supporting cases for Minor V Happersett since your office has installed, as the chief arbiter, Former Central District U.S. Atty. Max Woods who has personally told me (see sworn affidavit attached) that even an “Anchor Baby” is eligible to hold the highest office in the land. I see this as an affront to the sensibilities of all Georgians and a fraud upon her citizens that only your office can now rectify.
Since we’re now talking of fraud, I must also add, to the mix, the use of a SS# from Connecticut by Mr. Obama (sworn affidavits from researchers Susan Daniels and Linda Jordan are attached) which was obtained while he was still living in Hawaii and still being used to this day. A number that, once plugged into the E-Verify database came back as not being verifiable.
The SS# discrepancy is worthy of investigation. His Naturalization, if it ever occurred, is another issue since he was officially adopted by Indonesian Lolo Soetoro (Attached research paper is from Stephen Pidgeon, Atty.). These additional two issues alone would constitute the need for further investigation and documentation from the DNC.
Admittedly, there is no Federal convening authority chartered with this responsibility which is why it falls squarely on the shoulders of this and every other State. You cannot fail us now and must uphold your Oath of Office by adhering to the Constitutional requirement that any candidate of the office of POTUS be a Natural Born Citizen. One of your main jobs is to make certain there is no election fraud. Do your Public service and be the man we elected to represent us.
The fear our Politicians feel, coming from the Media, can be a concern but, in no way, absolves the Ga. SOS’s office from doing its duty. There is no easy way around this so my request is a simple one… Man up, remove Mr. Woods from his involvement with this oversight committee and adhere to your Oath of Office by doing what every other Politician is afraid to do. Demand documentation, proving once and for all, that this man is either eligible or not. Based on what has been offered as such documentation, by the White House, he is not.
The eyes of the Nation are now upon you. Your timely response will be appreciated.
I have cc’d Sam Olens on this in the fervent hope he will initiated an investigation into Voter Fraud in the 2008 and upcoming 2012 elections. As the saying goes, “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me”.
Sincerely,
Carl A. Swensson
Ed McMahon: And now the great seer, soothsayer, sage and former financial adviser to the Greek government, Carnac the Magnificent. No one knows the question in this envelope, but you, in your divine and mystical way, will ascertain the answer.
Carnac: Stoopid and Carl Swensson.
Ed McMahon: (opening the envelope) Name two things that can’t be fixed.
Since the current GA Governor is a fellow birther and a corrupt, racist asshat and the state has its fill of racist, ignorant, knuckle dragging, mouth breathing, militia joining inbreeders, I fully expect Georgia to wholeheartedly vie for the title of most embarrassing U.S. state.
Birthers screaming “MINOR” is especially pathetic.
But putative attorneys like Taitz, Donofrio and Aputzo are worse for stoking the fires with their own brand of legal malpractice.
The legal community needs to purge itself of these infected hemorrhoids once and for all.
Hey-oh!
I believe Arpaio has placed himself in a hornet’s nest that he is only now realizing he’s in. I think his assumption, given his “It could take 5 years!” comments, was that he would accept the information, shove it off to his “posse”, tell them to STFU about it, and it would all blow over, and he gained a little good publicity with his constituents.
Little did he know he was dealing with a group of people that will never give up regardless of the facts. They hound him continually, and he’s done nothing except say very Trump-like “Hey, we’re seeing very interesting things” or “We’re investigating” for months now.
If he eventually comes out and says that there’s no case, the birthers will simply say that he’s sold out to the regime, or being threatened, etc. If there’s anything one can learn from the birthers it’s that they are hardest on those that play birther then decide otherwise (look at how they treat Rep. Allan West, who played birther throughout his entire campaign only to dismiss it as soon as he was elected).
However, if he says there is a case, the birthers will push him to act on it. Arpaio would be hard-pressed to say “But I don’t have jurisdiction”, as one can numerous examples where Arpaio has attempted to enforce other laws that he has no jurisdiction to enforce yet does anyway, as demonstrated by the millions of dollars in lawsuit settlements Maricopa County has had to pay out in recent years. They won’t accept a “Well I transmitted stuff to the Secretary of State’s office, it’s out of my hands.” They’re going to insist he arrest the SOS if nothing happens, because he’s arrested his own county commissioners when they wouldn’t vote his way before despite having no authority to do so.
I think he’s stalling, hoping somewhere there will be a definitive “YES HE’S ELIGIBLE” and he can say “Well, regardless of my investigation, that’s going to be the final say, sorry guys I did my best.”
Sheriff Joe Arpaio, talks about his Birther Posse – sixty retired law enforcers and lawyers
(excerpt) “I want to see the Microfiche,” Sheriff Joe Arpaio told a packed East Orlando Tea Party audience last week. In explaining his Birther Posse activities, he said his group of 60 retired cops and attorneys should have a report for him as early as January or February because they are searching around the clock to find out where the President was born.
Delivering a keynote speech to his rapt listeners, Arpaio said the l961 microfiche holds the key to determining if Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii or Kenya. “Twins were born before Barack Obama, and now we have to see if he was born the next day.” But Sheriff Joe said he won’t be taking any bets on his posse getting the microfilm. He expressed consternation that the regular media are just not talking about the Obama birth issue which is on people’s minds all across the country.
Arpaio, who has fifty years of law enforcement experience, said proudly, “I serve the Public; the Public is my Boss.” When a group of Arizona Tea Party members came to him to do something about the Birther issue, he agreed to look into the situation. But in a more veiled question, Arpaio asked if he and his cold case posse can not show Obama was born in Hawaii the next day after the Nordyke twins, “What will be done about it?”
SOURCE: Speech by Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, November 12, 2011, East Orlando Tea Party Conference, Orlando, Florida
Note: source or accuracy not confirmed.
I believe that the fact that he has a posse of sixty (although I recall reading that the particular group he’s sent this “case” to is a subset of those sixty consisting of five members) “working on this night and day”, yet has had no result nor revealed any findings, and says it will continue to be weeks or months before anything comes out of it, helps demonstrate my point – as frustrated birthers often point out, they provided him with hundreds of pages of “birther evidence.” It is bogus, but it exists. One often sees posts on ORYR of frustrated birthers saying “What’s taking Sheriff Joe so long, Corsi et al GAVE HIM ALL THE EVIDENCE!”
The reason it’s taking so long is, IMO, Arpaio doesn’t want it to end, because he can’t win. He’s trapped either way – either he gets the ire of his constituents by declaring there is no case, or he tries to actually state one and gets slapped down either by debunkers, or by his constituents again when he says he can’t do anything about it. It’s easy to keep giving speeches saying “We’ve found stuff, don’t you worry, oh yeah we’ve found stuff.” Donald Trump did it for weeks and even became a farcical Presidential candidate by doing so. I think Arpaio thought it would have blown over by now.
One person spending a few days scouring the Web can learn everything there is about this issue, and can find pretty much all of the available evidence there is on the issue. A quick phone call to any reasonable Constitutional authority can quickly get to the bottom of things. The fact that the posse is “Still investigating” to me means that he’s told them they need to “Keep investigating”, likely all the way to, oh, December 2012.
So Swensson is telling him not only what to investigate, but instructing him specifically as to what the verdict should be. And, by way of removing Wood, stack the committee in such a way as to guarantee the verdict. Heck, why bother with an investigation at all?
So, there’s no shortage of willing, breathless and excited chains and Ol’ Bigoty Joe LOVES yanking and yanking and yanking on them just like his BFF Ol’ Badger Head Donald.
But it gets better. Arpaio is campaigning for Rick Perry. Hilarity will ensue.
Sheriff Joe™ got that backwards. He’s not really paying attention to the investigation.
Interestingly, since the release of the Obama long form, Governor Nathan Deal has disavowed birtherism and says publically that he’s “moved on” to jobs being his primary concern.
When they held the “Pitchforks and Torches” birther rally in the steps of the Georgia state capitol, twelve birthers showed up and the expected 50,000 birthers stayed away! 😉
I lived in Maricopa county for over a decade (although not anymore). This is standard Sheriff Arpaio. People complain to him about something. “Too many brown people.” “My area has too much crime.” “The President wasn’t born here!”
His common response is to send it to a posse. They do an immigrant sweep (generally letting them all go after the news dies down). Or the posse patrols the streets for a few days. If asked he says the posse’s on the case (just like he has every time in this issue). After a few weeks, nothing has actually changed, but via a sort of placebo effect, the news showing all those “illegals” rounded up (and the news ignoring them being released), or the sight of a posse member for a day or two (while Maricop county’s list of unserved arrest warrants grows ever-larger, as Arpaio cares little for actual crime like that) making people feel better.
I think he figured this would work the same way. Assign it to a posse, make a splash on the news here and there, if pressed tell people the posse’s on the case, then drop it quietly once the populace moves on. What I don’t think he expected is that the birthers are not going to move on, no matter what, and no “facts” will convince them their position is faulty. Now he faces either continuing to stall, releasing a report the birthers don’t want, or releasing one they do and having to face the media.
(My guess? He’ll release a report that says they can’t verify the documentation but that doesn’t mean Obama was born outside of the US, but then shift the blame to Obama by saying that without his permission he can’t get any additional documentation, and he has no jurisdiction to get it from Hawaii independently…birthers will insist he file some sort of criminal charges, but he will refuse saying without actual evidence of a crime, not just suspicion, he can’).
Except that Deal is a known liar and con artist. And like his fright wing brethren, he’s done almost nothing to bring jobs to Georgia. On the contrary, ask GA farmers about their millions of dollars worth of crops rotting in the fields.
Unless of course, you count Shady Deal’s brilliant idea to offer crop picking jobs to probationers:
http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2011/06/14/nathan-deal-offer-8000-probationers-employment-opportunities’-in-georgia’s-crop-fields/
😛
In the video tape of the Tea Party Birthers & Orly confronting Sheriff Joe, I believe he told them he’d have his findings released around January. I just think he came up with a date that didn’t sound too far off because he was confronted in person. I agree with you that he doesn’t truly realize what he has gotten into and that these folks won’t just move on or be happy with whatever he comes up with.
He’s going to learn the hard way that pandering to them was his first mistake and then blowing smoke up their collective @sses isn’t going to satisfy nor distract them either.
Add to that Rick Perry’s flip-flop and eventual disavowal of birther stupidity and Arpaio’s recent backing and commitment to campaign for him. Questions from reporters to Arpaio on his “investigation” should be fun to watch.
Too bad Carl didn’t follow the law in Georgia about how to contest a candidate’s eligibility. You are in for a big disappointment, johnnie.
As a former Maricopa County resident, I agree. Of course, what the birthers don’t understand — and Arpaio does — is the sheriff does not file criminal charges, so they are counting on something that is legally impossible. Therefore, Arpaio can safely point out that he is not responsible for any follow up.
As Shrub said, “There’s an old saying in Tennessee – I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee…that says, fool me once, shame on…shame on you. Fool me…you can’t get fooled again.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ux3DKxxFoM
I’ve got some question about Minor v Happersett, which was referenced above by Carl Swensson. It is well known that in this case the Supreme Court considered a question of suffrage: if women are citizens, should they or should they not, have the right to vote. As I understand it, the court ruled that the Constitution does not confer the right of suffrage, and that states are free to enact laws that limit the right to vote.
Clearly, the Court was not deciding a question of citizenship; but as a part of their analysis of Minor’s status, they did touch on the question of who is a citizen. About this, the Chief Justice said,
“At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their
Page 88 U. S. 168
parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.”
Here are my questions:
1. Was the Court using the phrase, “children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens”, to specifically describe Virginia MInor’s situation at birth? In other words, were they seeking to point out that for Minor, there was no question that she was a citizen?
2. The court acknowledges that “some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents.” Is it accurate to conclude that the Court was referring to contemporaneous arguments about jus soli v jus sanguinis?
3. When the Supreme Court, in U.S. v Wong Kim Ark, decided in favor of jus soli, did the court refer to Minor? Also, had there been a growing demand to settle this issue of citizenship, or did this case make a surprising appearance on the docket?
Thanks in advance for your help!
Here are my answers for what they are worth:
1.) The court doesn’t appear to be referring specifically to Virginia. The preceeding paragraphs are about the history of US citizenship so so it is unlikely that they were only talking about her but all citizens with similar backgrounds.
2.) In an earlier ruling (Slaughter House Cases), this same court said that children of aliens born in the United States were not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. This statement in the Minor decision about other authorities and doubts may be an attempt to distance themselves from that earlier statement.
3) Yes, Justice Gray cites the Minor decision. He does it to indicate that the Minor court did not feel that they were commited to the statement they made in the Slaughter House Cases. As to the settlement of citizenship questions, there are a number of cases from this time period that deal with the issue of children of alien parents born in the United States. Almost all of them involve children of Chinese decent. That’s because the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 prevent Chinese immigration so there were a lot of Federal Court cases involving Chinese indiciduals and citizenship issues. Justice Gray cites more then a few of them.
gorefan:
Thanks for your timely and informative response!
It’s funny how birthers can’t even argue consistently within their own mindset. If I were a birther, I’d throw this back at Swensson by noting that the quote only talks about “citizen”, not “natural born citizen”. So Ex Parte Lockwood claims that Minor said women need to be born to two citizen parents to be mere citizens? Then how do birthers reconcile this with alleged NBC requirements?
(That quote was of course GeorgetownJD quoting Carl Swensson, not his own words.)
You want Carl to wait until Dec 1 to file?
Would this be more current? I don’t know if the law is in effect.
http://www1.legis.ga.gov/legis/2011_12/fulltext/hb454.htm
Georgia election law requires the Secretary of State to set a date for the state executive committee of each party which is to conduct a presidential preference primary to submit a list of the names of the candidates of such party to appear on the presidential preference primary ballot. On October 6, 2011, Secretary Kemp issued a notice to the chairman of each political party to notify that the deadline for submitting the list of candidate names for the 2012 Presidential Preference Primary is November 15, 2011.
Georgia election law also requires the Secretary of State’s Office to publish the lists of each party’s candidates on its website during the fourth week immediately preceding the date on which the presidential preference primary is to be held.
http://www.wctv.tv/wswg/headlines/Secretary_of_State_Kemp_Announces_Receipt_of_Presidential_Preference_Primary_Candidate_Names_from_the_Georgia_Republican_PartyNews_133646753.html
http://www.jasonpye.com/2011/09/ecretary-of-state-kemp-issues-statement-following-announcement-of-florida%E2%80%99s-presidential-primary-election-date/
****
I guess he published the lists early (for both parties), but that doesn’t seem like a bar for either party to make their challenges.
Birther Idiots Garner MORE Unfavorable Coverage in New Hampshire
Obama ballot complaint rejected
Published Nov 28, 2011 at 10:52 pm (Updated Nov 28, 2011)
http://www.unionleader.com/article/20111128/NEWS0605/711299963/-1/news
Some predictable and hilarious comments, of course.
Here is a letter written back in October by Hullaballoo Harry to all Members of Congress:
October, 14 2011
Open letter to all Members of Congress,
I am formally asking you to bring a commission of treason against Mr. Barack Husain Obama.
We have a President who allows our borders to be violated by illegals of any country while we are at war. He allows them work permits, access to our services and when apprehended by law enforcement refuses to have them jailed or deported. Barack Husain Obama has crossed the line, and under Article III section 3 of our Constitution is guilty of treason by giving aid and comfort to the enemy and attempting to over throw our government from within. Now is the time for members of Congress to finally do your Constitutional duty and hold Barack Husain Obama accountable for his crimes against America. Mr. Obama is a fraudulent president who is selling out America. Its time Mr. Obama is called accountable for his treasonous actions. I can only hope our members of Congress have the intestinal fortitude to do what needs to be done. It is time to make up your mind “Do you stand with this fraud and treasons president of with the American people and our Constitution which you swore to protect and defend”?
Thank you,
Harry Accornero (phone number redacted)
Representative, Laconia, NH
Does not matter that 70 million people voted him into office, they don’t like him and will kick and scream until he is gone.
Spoiled little children.
Pathetic and disturbing while many of whom are aging adults acting like spoiled little children.
Birther bigots are a never ending source of embarrassment to this nation.
Agreed!
In light of Orly’s question about whether Hugo Chavez could have made the NH ballot under that state’s laws, and some birthers musing about testing that theory by taking up a collection for the filing fee, and then trying to get Hugo’s name on the ballot:
Isn’t it true that to place a name on the ballot in NH or any other state, someone would have to swear to the truthfulness of the information? And wouldn’t deliberately lying in a loopy attempt to prove some point subject whoever tried this to prosecution for perjury?
JD Reed: “And wouldn’t deliberately lying in a loopy attempt to prove some point subject whoever tried this to prosecution for perjury?”
That’s good. The more birthers in jail, the better.
Some of them are certainly doing their darndest to try to end up there, aren’t they?
How, anyway? Wouldn’t Hugo have to apply himself? Or can anyone nominate a candidate?
The only alternative being, of course, forging an application by Hugo himself. Oh, what irony that would be, to have birthers ending up in jail for forging documents related to an election! 😉