In a ruling yesterday in the case of Allen v. Arizona Democratic Party, Judge Richard E. Gordon dismissed the action for a variety of reasons:
Most importantly, Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent, and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. See United States v. Wong Kim Ark (addressing U. S. Const. amend. XIV) ; Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana (addressing the precise issue). Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett does not hold otherwise.
[some internal citations omitted]
It’s no surprise that the case was dismissed, nor is it a surprise that a birther’s reading of Minor v. Happersett is wrong. It is an unhappy observation that even though judge after judge has rejected the birther interpretation of case law, they seem no closer to the realization of their error.
About Dr. Conspiracy
I'm not a real doctor, but I have a master's degree.
Judge Richard E. Gordon was appointed by Governor Brewer
http://www.supreme.state.az.us/media/archive/2009/061609GordonPimaCountySuperiorCourt.pdf
blah blah blah corrupt judges blah blah blah
When I consider the hundreds of posts that birthers have arrogantly submitted claiming that WKA is meaningless to the issue of who is natural-born, and that Minor v Happersett settled an issue of citizenship while establishing a two citizen parent requirement for natural-born citizenhip, it’s very satisfying to have a judge rule that they wrong.
With the spectuacular Birther flame outs culminating over the last few weeks, I feel we have really reached a tipping point in which Birtherism as even a propaganda strategy is truly now DOA.
In the Courts, they have only succeeded in expanding the precedent of Ankeny to a number of other states and solidifying the body of case law against them. They now have numerous courts openly declaring Obama as NBC.
WND’s “hail mary” attempt to get the media to bite has failed miserably for them. The only take away is that their silly act can no longer penetrate beyond their own tiny fevered swamps.
The BIrther Summit is now a defunct idea that will never materialize.
The Primary contests continue unabated, with no credible threat to Obama being on the ballot anywhere.
Other than continuing to be obnoxiously “threaty”, BIrtherism has nowhere left to go…
Not that any of that will stop the Walking Dead from continuing to shamble around, repeating the same long-debunked lies and whining ad nauseum… but their shrill voices have no resonance outside of the safe hidey-holes of their own delusional echo chambers.
Did they just get a “ruling on the merits?”
That is a great photo of the dome of the very beautiful Pima County Courthouse.
Was this hearing in Tucson?
Unfortunately, ‘our’ predictions for the arrival of such a ‘tipping point’ are almost as accurate as the birther’s predictions for the arrival of their ‘OMG’ moments.
Nevermind.
I see that, indeed, it was in Pima County according to the ruling published on scribd that you linked.
We may be indeed approaching the Birther “event horizon” in the legal arena; however, as the almost inevitable prospect of an Obama victory in November looms, I fear that the Birthers are really going to lose whatever little sanity they have and resort to more drastic actions.
You know that I’m not a huge proponent of your First Amendment, and I certainly hope your Secret Service is going to be extra super vigilant in the coming months to suppress or at least contain what (to me) is clearly seditious talk (or actions).
I disagree. There has been very little prognostication that has declared Birtherism as a conspiracy group to be “dead”. Nor have I declared such. Doc C. might have famously said a few times that he didn’t think it would have gone on as long as it did and he did write a blog in the fall speculating about a lull in activity…but I don’t recall anyone seriously thinking that the Birthers have just gone home.
No, saying that their Court activities and their stunts no longer can get much traction isn’t the same as thinking that Birtherism itself is dead at all. The consensus opinion remains that the hard-core Birthers will be squawking for a long time to come…and that they will likely squawk with increased seething intensity as the 2012 election approaches…and perhaps even more so after the results.
The tipping point I’m talking about is simply that their window of broader media attention (which the propaganda Birthers need) is now DOA. I think that is a different type of prediction and one that is actually borne out by the observable evidence of how their recent attempts have been covered and addressed.
Agreed. Maybe my initial post was not worded well enough to convey what I meant properly. Anyone whose read here for a long time knows that I’ve always been concerned about the vigilance and the uptick of inciteful language coming from ODS sufferers and particularly the Birthers. For years I’ve been voicing this concern and very recently, I’ve chimed in several times with how I expect the rhetoric to only heat up and become more dangerous as the actual threat of his re-election gets closer and closer and closer…
So yeah, what I meant is that the Court avenues and the ability to spread Birtherism through mass media propaganda attempts have pretty much reached their limits.
But in saying that, I do not dispel that Birtherism is dead, gone or not dangerous. I actually suspect elements of it will shift to turning more and more violent. But that is a whole different type of issue and media coverage than their ability to spread their message broadly or to influence law. They’ve really got nowhere left to go on those latter fronts.
We knew that it was only a matter of time until the Courts — everywhere — shut them down.
Until now “standing” had prevented some of their “issues” to be heard, but with the eligibility factor being now on the table, more and more Courts will use WKA and whatever else to refuse their ridiculous arguments. We all know that the “two citizens parents” will not stand scrutiny as your Congressional Report person so competently demonstrated.
I suppose we should welcome these challenges as they bring us closer to the Event Horizon.
To continue with my analogy, it’s what happens beyond that point, the “black hole”, that remains scary.
Yes, I agree. I like how you’ve phrased your analogy, by the way. You’ve done a much better job expressing what I’ve been trying to get across. Thanks.
because they have no interest in the outcome. Their goal is the buiding a community of the resentful and Internet is a powerful tool in terms of archiving and databasing. Any future political action these fascists have in mind can count on a hard core network of dedicated activists.
To borrow from an outdated physical view, “nothing will ever come out of it”. 😉
To use a more contemporary image from string theory, their fuzzball won’t be very fuzzy, but still the result of a massive collapse of egos and shattered hopes.
Besides, they wouldn’t want to be a BLACK hole — rather a WHITE hole. 🙂
If the past is any indication, judging from the number of Confederate Flags still flying, I don’t think they’re going to disappear.
Hoping for extinction might be wishful thinking; containment may be a more realistic expectation.
Another traitorous a**h*le is heard from in Arizona:
http://news.yahoo.com/marines-facebook-page-tests-military-rules-234113159.html
Well it certainly has taken the courts long enough to get to even this point. The birfers ‘legal strategy’ has always hinged on the hopes of finding a jurist like Judge Cebull.
The part I take comfort from is that the article has (as of this moment) almost 31,000 comments and 99% (a substantial number being from self identified active and ex service members ) abhor this muppet and his views.
Arizona does have some really cool buildings. I grew up there and fondly remember the domes and the like on buildings – the copper dome of the Capitol building…sometimes I think I should go back there, then I realize they keep reelecting people like Arpaio 🙂
While I don’t think birthers will ever really go away, the string of court decisions also makes it much easier for the press to report on it and discard it. There was a time, for example the Trump era, when press would talk about birthers an say they were wrong but without really having the column inches to dedicate to explaining why. It’s far easier for them when they can say “…and last year courts in Arizona, Virginia, Indiana, Georgia, etc discarded their arguments and ruled the President to be eligible”.
That’s why I’m gla so many of these are getting not just dismissed, but dismissed emphatically with a “And by the way YOU ARE WRoNG ON THE MERITS”.
Not enough critical mass to collapse. 😉
For me personally, the question is when they will stop being entertaining to me. To be honest, I would’ve lost interest already if I wasn’t so curious as to how they will react right before and right after the elections.
The only things that were entertaining at all were the GA hearing and Arpaio’s press conference (at least something to *watch*), everything else was just the expected results in court.
In fact, with every birther OMG moment, I thought “I know this isn’t going anywhere, but *please* make it entertaining at least”. So far, I’ve been disappointed – I expected their other lawyers to be better game than Orly.
I guess I’ll stick around until, say February 2013 (if Obama loses, I’ll drop out right after Election Day), because the real meltdown is likely not when the results are in but when Obama is sworn into office (again).
Because so many birther lawsuits that were filed after January 20th, 2009, were dismissed with the comments by judges that thu needed to file them between the election and the inauguration, I think we will see a HUGE, last ditch birther parade in December of this year should Obama be reelected.
Indeed. Sanity prevails.
When it comes the NBC issue you people are wong, totally and completely wong.
Well we have good company-all federal and state judges, all the members of Congress, 69 million voters (probably more in 2012). You have the 3 stooges-Taitz, Donofrio and Appuzo.
This is another example of the stellar professionals working for Joe Arpaio.
MCSO Deputy Torrey McRae Arrested for Stealing Department Cash
One of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s boys in beige was booked into jail on five felony charges today.
According to the sheriff’s office, now-former Deputy Torrey McRae skimmed $5,000 out of the sheriff’s office that was meant for drug investigations.
The internal investigation into McRae started in January, when one of his supervisors caught the “discrepancies” in McRae’s money transfers.
The sheriff’s office says McRae was working as a detective in the “special investigations unit” at the time, and resigned from the sheriff’s office just before the arrest was made.
McRae had attempted to repay the $5,000 he allegedly pocketed from the sheriff’s office, which didn’t really matter anyway.
McRae was booked on two felonies related to violations as a custodian of public money, two felony counts of forgery, and one felony count of theft. (No mugshot yet.)
McRae’s been with the MCSO since 2007, and is a former Chicago cop.
Of course, Arpaio has something to say in a statement from his office.
“It is always difficult to accept the fact that a very small number of law enforcement officers sometimes engage in this type of activity,” he says. “I am proud of the job that my office has done in detecting this situation and taking immediate action.”
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2012/03/mcso_deputy_torrey_mcrae_arres.php
When you say “you people” I take it you mean all the lawyers, judges, and legal scholars who have examined the issue and think you’re completely off your rocker (which I’m sure makes up around 99.99 of the legal community)?
Since you know so much more about the law than every judge in the US, why aren’t you on the Supreme Court, or teaching at Yale law school. I’m guessing you must have graduated at the top of your class at Harvard or Yale since you clearly know more than every judge, lawyer, and legal scholar out there.
Worth repeating: “Well we have good company-all federal and state judges, all the members of Congress, 69 million voters (probably more in 2012). You have the 3 stooges-Taitz, Donofrio and Appuzo.”
Has anyone been keeping a list of how many court’s have directly address the birthers’ misreading of Minor?
I hope so, but fear otherwise. Those I have seen around the interweb are angrier and more frustrated. They express exasperation and disgust at the courts, law enforcement and congress, that none of them are doing their job now that the fraud and forgeries have been “proven” by Arpaio. It is as though they are in overheating in a pressure cooker, ready to blow.
I would like to repeat a comment I made yesterday. If the definition of NBC were not based on common law from the beginning the U.S. could not have had a President between the time that all the grandfather-clause citizens had died off and the ratification of the 14th Amendment because there was no Constitutional definition of how to become a citizen other than by naturalization. We know that naturalization is not NBC, so it MUST have been understood some other way. WKA and the 14th only restated what everyone (except the Dred Scott Court) already knew.
My alternate history has The Confederacy opening the Civil War by first freeing the slaves. Then all the other issues that led to secession and war become more obvious, no longer in the shadow of what so many people can comfortably assume was the principal concern. Unfortunately, since slavery remained a divisive issue, all the other causes that led to war vanish to insignificance.
This is unfortunate, because in the lens of history, slavery can be regarded as the sole root cause of the Civil War, and sadly, so many of the other issues were not settled and to some degree continue to divide the nation.
So my scenario includes one of the first acts of war as forcibly freeing the slaves and deporting them to the union.
My main concern is that somebody in the Birther movement is going to have a “going postal” moment if the current flood of reversals continues into the Summer.
One thing I am learning is that a lot of the Birthers are also aligned with or part of the Sovereign Citizen movement. Their modus operandi is to engage in what is termed “paper terrorism”, the filing of hundreds to thousands of pages of legal gobbledegook in an event to cripple the justice system. They also believe that the US was illegally reconstituted as a corporation after the US stopped using the Gold Standard, that the 14th Amendment is null and void, that they do not have to pay taxes or abide by a whole host of laws…the list goes on. They also believe that they have a right to invent their own Alice-In-Wonderland parallel universe legal system (see Posse, Cold Case). To add to this further, a number of SovCits are doing time for threatening (and in some cases, killing) law enforcement personnel.
A number of these people are genuinely unhinged. I worry that one or more of them, unable to handle the cognitive dissonance of multiple instances of “No, go away” from the legal system, will decide to try something spectacular to “make a statement”.
Well, Orly’s debacle in the IN hearing was quite entertaining too. Her earlier antics in NH were also quite a show…but the actions of the Birther state legislatures there were quite reprehensible, so it was certainly an event to watch, but probably not something I’d characterize as “entertaining”…
I agree completely. The whole two parent argument, Minor rules, never made sense to me. For that to be rule, all Democratic and independent law students, lawyers, judges, etc., would have had to be complicit or ignorant, while their Republican counterparts did what? Had mass amnesia?
I have no doubt if that argument was remotely plausible, Bill and Hillary, both Yale Law grads, would have had an inkling.
Linda, I actually think that is the true next thing we need to be vigilent about in monitoring this group of deranged malcontents – they *are* ready to blow…and I fully expect some of them to do so in a potentially dangerous way.
My point was that for many of them, Birtherism was always a willing sham propaganda attempt – where the goal was to smear and embarass the President by sowing doubt and attempting to poison the broader populace with their myths and lies. For these propaganda folks, it has always been really a goal of thinking that they could merely manipulate perception in order to change reality.
My point is that the Arpaio flame-out really seems to be the final nail in the coffin to that type of Swift Boat Birtherism strategy. It shows that the real media can no longer be goaded into being sucked into this nonsense story, other than to make a short mocking derisive mention of it.
Therefore, the chances of Birtherism spreading beyond its existing base of support is demonstrably extremely slim. The remaining malcontents will surely be loud and dangerous and bear close watching over the coming months, but their movement has nowhere to grow anymore and they are simply only preaching to their own existing Cult choir.
So why does every Judge, Court, and Elections Board agree with us and not you?
AZ, GA, IN, MS, VA
That is the list I’ve come up with. I encourage others to point out any I’ve missed.
Well, that is because so many of those issues – from economics, to “states rights”, to various reglious justifications, to the very plantation caste culture structure of the South were very directly intertwined, connected and inseparable from the slavery issue.
I can see that happening. Of course, with the ever mounting examples of case law against them, such a fury of effort will also probably get dismissed much quicker than last time as well.
So, I fully expect the Birthers to put forth one last gasp desperate flurry of frivolous filings. However, at the same time, I expect the courts to be much less tolerant to revisiting these same issues as last time around.
I strongly share those concerns and have been voicing them for quite some time. There is definitely quite an increasing overlap between Birtherism, the Sovereign Citizen idiots…and their Militia components.
I’ve always suspected it is not a matter of “if” but “when”. To me, that has always been one of the MAIN reasons to keep a watchful eye on this band of delusional malcontents. It is not just the incensed “lone wolf”, but also small groups that we need to be watchful for.
Vigilence through monitoring and proper reporting to law enforcement is the best way to ensure that the stories that emerge are ones of plots being foiled instead of people being harmed.
I have always assumed that our coverage of the activities of Birtherism will eventually end up with more of that focus as their other avenues and attempts sputter and fizzle out. In a way, all their other failed avenues have served to passify them and buy time. As it increasingly dawns on even them that neither the Courts nor the public will buy into their nonsense, their desperation will unfortunately increase as well.
So yeah, expect things to continue to heat up, especially come summer and through (and after) the fall election…and even for a number of months past inaugeration.
So, I simply think we are heading towards the end of one long phase of this phenomenon and moving into a much darker one…
I can tell you that when it comes to interpreting Vattel, both Apuzzo and Donofrio are wrong, totally and completely wrong.
“When it comes the NBC issue you people are wong (sic) . . .”
Oh, the irony. Yes, it’s not a minor issue.
I’m not entirely sure that forcibly deporting free citizens is compatible with, well, the rights of free men. We call it ethnic cleansing.
So are you saying the Confederacy should have engaged in ethnic cleansing?
Aww, you has a funny.
“Today, we are all Wong Kim Ark.”
I agree. I think anyone either prone to those arguments or at least hopeful of a resulting impeachment by whatever means necessary, have already been converted, or at least any newcomers will not exceed the attrition of those who have become enlightened or just resigned that nothing will happen. It is most successful preaching to the choir and rabble rousing. Thinking, rational individuals, even if hoping it were true, look into it for themselves.
edge19 over at free republic is going to go postal when he hears this.
His stock talking point over and over and over and over and over is that the Supreme Court has determined that NBC is two parents (TWO PARENTS!!!!!!!) and born here AND the parents have to be citizens AND it’s right there in Minor v. Happerstett!!!! that President Obama is a usurper!!!
So I’m going over there later and watch the fun…..I mean, fireworks……..
They are building quite body of precedent. I like to show them this:
Ankeny v. Daniels, 916 N.E.2d 678 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (“based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents”) transfer denied 929 N.E.2d 789 (Ind. 2010);
Tisdale v. Obama, No. 3: 12-cv-00036-JAG (E.D. Va. Jan. 23, 2012) (order dismissing complaint) (dismissing in forma pauperis complaint pursuant to 28 USC 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and holding that “It is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens” and that plaintiff’s contentions otherwise are “without merit”);
Allen v. Arizona Democratic Party, Arizona Superior Court (March 7, 2012) (order dismissing complaint)(“[A]nd this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. See United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 702-03 (1898) (addressing U. S. Const. amend. XIV); Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana, 916 N.E.2d 678, 684-88 (Ind. App. 2010) (addressing the precise issue). Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise.”)
Farrar et al v. Obama, OSAH-SECSTATE-CE-1215136-60-MALIHI (Feb. 3, 2012) (Ga. Office of State Admin. Hearings) (relying on Wong Kim Ark and Ankeny v. Daniels to hold that Obama is natural born citizen by virtue of his birth in the United States);
Jackson v. Obama, 12 SOEB GP 104 (Jan. 27, 2012) (hearing officer recommendation) (Obama’s birth certificate “clearly establishes” his eligibility for office as a “Natural Born Citizen”), objection overruled (Ill. State Bd. of Elections, Feb. 3, 2012);
Freeman v. Obama, 12 SOEB GP 103 (Jan. 27, 2012) (hearing officer recommendation) (Obama’s birth certificate “clearly establishes” his eligibility for office as a “Natural Born Citizen”), objection overruled (Ill. State Board of Elections, Feb. 3, 2012);
Hollander v. McCain, 566 F.Supp.2d 63, 66 (“Those born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof’ have been considered American citizens under American law in effect since the time of the founding and thus eligible for the presidency.”) (internal citations omitted).
I guess that’s why you keep winning court cases all of the time? So many wins for you, proving your assertions! Oh wait – not a SINGLE ONE.
The good thing that is coming out of this avalanche of losses is that it is building up precedents for the cases still to come, making it even easier to dismiss them out of hand.
Thanks to Orly, Dean, Van and the rest for that! 😀
Which is pretty much what I was trying to construct….thanks (why am I not surprised another attorney already did what I was thinking of).
I got it from NBC’s site and added the Allen case. Also came across some quotes from current Senators for those birthers who think Congress is going to help them:
Sen. Lindsey Graham, “Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.”
Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, “What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.”
Sen. Jeff Sessions, “In the 1898 United States Supreme Court case UNITED STATES V.WONG KIM ARK, the court held that an individual born on Americam [sic] is a natural born citizen as required by the constitution to be elected president. President Obama’s birth in Hawaii satisfies that requirement.
Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio: “President Obama has provided several news organizations with a copy of his birth certificate, showing he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961. Hawaii became a state in 1959, and all individuals born in Hawaii after its admission are considered natural-born United States citizens.”
Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pa.: “The birth certificate demonstrates that he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii in 1961, thereby making him a natural-born citizen eligible to be president.”
Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, “The Constitution and federal law require that, among other things, only native-born U.S. citizens (or those born abroad, but only to parents who were both American citizens) may be President of the United States.”
Sen. Mark. R. Warner, “The facts have consistently shown that President Obama was born in the United States. As a natural-born American citizen, he is fully eligible to serve as president of our country.”
Sen. Diane Feinstein, “President Obama meets these constitutional requirements. If you were not already aware, on April 27, 2011 the White House released a copy of President Obama’s long form birth certificate. He was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, on August 4, 1961. According to the Fourteenth Amendment, all persons born in the United States are considered citizens of the United States. Under these criteria, President Obama, a 47-year old U.S. citizen, who has resided in the United States for longer than fourteen years, is eligible to be President.”
Which is disappointing, because if it was going to be anywhere near Washington DC, I would attend.
I entered the Navy in January 1967 and served two years during the Johnson administration and two years during the Nixon administration. We sailors talked about politics some and freely expressed who we supported (the voting age was 21 then so I couldn’t vote in 1968 election), but it would never occurred to any of us to talk about disobeying orders because of not liking either LBJ or Nixon. So it doesn’t surprise me that most of the comments about that Marine are negative.
As an aside, in my opinion the Marines Corps is the branch of service where you are most likely to find political ideologues within the enlisted ranks.
Wait. I think I see your problem.
We’re in the United States, so we’re using the United States Constitution and United States court cases as a basis for the interpretation of what a “natural born citizen” is. You seem to be reading case law and a constitution from some parallel universe.
I doubt that. Barack Obama was like a rock star in 2008. 4 years of actually being president have chipped away at that. Even if he wins, I’ll bet it’s gonna be by a smaller margin. I seem to remember that 2008 had unusually high voter turnout, which I strongly doubt is gonna happen again this time.
My wife’s brother was a Marine, and we’ve met a lot of them, and you’re right. Many are also racists and homophobes.
But they get so much credit for doing the job they do keeping America safe from her enemies that whatever extreme political and social opinions they may have pale in comparison. When it comes down to respect, those attributes mean about as much to me as whether or not they are left-handed or chew tobacco.
And none of the Marines I’ve met, anyway, would refuse to do their job out of political disgruntlement. That would be less than honorable.
Semper Fi.
I’ll take that bet. I think he will win by a similar, or larger margin than 2008. Rmoney has MUCH higher unfavorables than McCain did.
In Bizarro United States, the flag always flies upside down.
Which appears to be correct to the Bizarro locals.
There’s isn’t an article on this in the NBC section of Freep. Actually one thing I’ve noticed more often during the recent string of birther fails is the lack of reporting about them by the birthers. It used to be you’d see two or three articles about a new case or hearing on Freep. Now, there’s one lightly commented article about Dean’s failure (with all the comments being something like “CORRUPTION!”). Nothing on Arizona. There was little on Tisdale, etc. oRYR is even more empty on the subject.
Everything is about the Cold Case Posse and how they’re being ignored…the actual cases that were once their hopes, they ignore when they lose.
Wong??? But once you wing a bell, it can’t be un-wung.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
More and more courts come to accept that we are indeed Wong, dead Wong… Wong Kim Ark that is… The proper precedent, unlike Minor.
Even the dissenting judge in US v WKA lamented that it was unfair that WKA was natural born… And the government brief… Well, they raised the issue as a natural born one as well.
But the birthers cannot accept the ‘veritas’ of the matter. They’d rather prefer to drink their sorrows in ignorance.
I probably haven’t covered this as much as the topic deserves.
Wong!
There are also the law school professors
Professor of Law Bruce Ledewitz, Duquesne University School of Law,
“It has nothing to do with Obama you understand. If you were born here, you’re a natural-born citizen.”
Professor Jesse Choper, Earl Warren Professor of Public Law at UC Berkeley
“natural born” simply meant “not naturalized.”
Hawaii was a state in 1961, when Obama was born. Any person born in the U.S. automatically is a “natural born citizen,” said University of California Los Angeles law professor Eugene Volokh
I like this from Tribe:
“Asked about Farah’s contention, Harvard Law School Professor Laurence Tribe said by email that this is “a totally wacky argument, without any conceivable merit. … The 14th amendment unambiguously and expressly confers U.S. citizenship on everyone born . . . in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’ This means that Barack Obama was a U.S. citizen at birth. independent of the citizenship or age of either or both of his biological or adoptive parents. … This birther thing is a moving target, rather like the creatures in the “Night of the Living Dead.” Driving a stake through its heart seems incapable of killing it.”)”
Sadly, I feel that you will have plenty of time in the upcoming months to devote to it then…
I noticed a trend on the local morning talk radio show is they’ll bring up the subject then get away as fast as possible without taking calls. I got to the point that I had to email a response:
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 7:54 AM
Subject: RE: Obama’s Birth Certificate
Dear ******:
This is in regard to your starting segment this morning about the Joe Arpaio press conference over his claims on the Obama Birth Certificate. I have to ask about Mr. Arpaio’s premise: did he start with a real birth certificate?
As I understand it, rather than using anybody’s real birth certificate as a “control document” they used a computer-printed document they themselves made as a “control.” Arpaio’s cold case posse took a image file that they admit is a scan of a computer-generated birth certificate that they created and compared it to what the White House says is an scan of an original birth certificate, observed optimization differences, and then concluded that their fake is authentic and that the White House certificate is fake. So they started off with a fundamentally different kind of document (computer-printed versus original) using software that differs from what the White House used and then concluded that the end-product differences were significant. That is either a mark of idiocy or fraud.
So far, only one member of the press has actually seen and felt the raised seal of the actual long form document, and that is Savannah Guthrie back in May of 2011. Ms. Guthrie has photographed the document and they are here: http://lockerz.com/s/96540937 and http://lockerz.com/s/96540721 . Is Ms. Guthrie lying?
Lastly, about your statements to the effect that there are three types of citizenship in the United States: The courts has read the 14th Amendment and Article II (natural born citizen provision) in tandem and held that “new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.” There is no third type of citizen based on parentage. The courts has also concluded that “persons born within the borders of the United States are ‘natural born citizens’ for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person ‘born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject’ at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those ‘born in the allegiance of the United States [] natural-born citizens.'” (Arkeny v. Governor, 916 N.E.2d 678 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009)).
President Barack Obama was born in the United States. He became a citizen at birth and is a natural born citizen, thus eligible to be president. But he is still a “red-diaper” baby.
Sincerely,
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 11:30 AM
Subject: Re: Obama’s Birth Certificate
Why do you think the press has actaully seen the real long form original birth certificate? I can’t speak to the process Arpaio used but his team did include forensic scientists, lawyers and law enforcement professionals. as to the control document, you may have a point but it would be easy to mobtain one as I recall that there were a pair of twin born withing the same week whose certificates seem different than Obama’s. As to the citizen ship status, there are seveal ways to become a citizen, at birth or naturalized but there is only ONE way to become President as two previous Supreme Court cases havwe ruled:
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 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.” Minor v. Happersett (1874) 21 Wall. 162, 166-168.
This test was affirmed in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U. S. 649, 18 S.Ct. 456, 42 L.Ed. 890 (1898).
Article II of the Constitution provides that “[n]o 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 . . . .” From the Minor decision, we learn who the Framers placed in the second category as being eligible to be President. These were the “original citizens,” those who were members of and who gave their allegiance to the revolutionary cause that produced the new nation. The Framers grandfathered these individuals to be eligible to be President. There cannot be any doubt that even children who were born on U.S. soil fell into this category simply because they were the first generation of citizens. It is interesting to note that Jane Randolph Jefferson (1720-1776), President Thomas Jefferson’s mother, was born in the Tower Hamlets of Shadwell, a maritime neighborhood of London, England, and came to Virginia when she was young. With the passing of time, no one would be able to benefit from the grandfather clause and then would have to be “natural born Citizens” to be eligible to be President. We learn that “all children born in the country of parents who were its citizens. . . ” make up the “natural born Citizen” category. The Court says that there have never been any doubts as to the status of these children. As to children born in the U.S. to parents who were not U.S. citizens at the time of their birth, there have been doubts. In other words, “natural born Citizen” under this formulation requires two generations of U.S. citizens, one generation in the parents and the other in the child himself/herself who also must be born on U.S. soil. It is important to understand that we are focusing on what is a “natural born Citizen” under Article II which specifies the requirements to be President and not on what a “Citizen” is under the 14th Amendment or under some Congressional Act which does not relate to Article II natural born Citizenship.
Obama, while having his mother’s U.S. citizenship generation, is missing that of his father’s, for his father was a British subject/citizen at the time of his birth. He therefore cannot be a “natural born Citizen,” even if he was born in Hawaii.
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2012 1:40 PM
Subject: RE: Obama’s Birth Certificate
Dear ******:
I like to take the opportunity to thank you for your reply. Your remarks provided some insight behind the statements you and Frank had made on this matter during the past several months.
First of all, like all controversial subjects, a certain degree of vetting must take place. If one does not have access to first-hand accounts and documents, then the vetting must be obtained through examining those that do. I have not noticed through television viewing, nor through searches in Google, that indicates Savannah Guthrie is a partisan hack in the manner of Chris “thrill up my leg” Matthews. So at this time I have no cause to doubt Ms. Guthrie stating in her evening reporting on April 27, 2011 that she physically felt the raised seal on the certified copy from Hawaii (An error on my part as I miscounted the months back to May). Furthermore, one can examine the photograph she took with her cell phone camera that I referenced to you before ( http://lockerz.com/s/96540937 ). The photograph is low-resolution but critical information can be gleamed, as at the time (April 2011) the argument was the birth certificate was a forgery as no one can find an image of the raised seal on The White House supplied .pdf copy. Looking at the photograph one can see elements of a circular disturbance near the lower left area of blocked fields and one can see the “Sig” in the word “Signature” in block 21 cut by the rim of the seal and you can follow the outline of the seal from there. I’ve taken the liberty and enclosed a copy of the photograph copied from Ms. Guthrie’s site and added a marker (using Windows Paint) showing where to look:
You’ll have to copy the photograph from Ms. Guthrie’s site to your computer and enlarge it (I used Windows Photo Gallery) to see the effect a little more clearly but only to the point that hints the paper was disturbed, as raised seals don’t photograph well as seen in the Nordyke photograph ( http://media.photobucket.com/image/nordyke%20twins%20birth%20certificate%20hawaii/hercuroc/090728birthcert.gif ) that you mentioned indirectly and in the Edith Coats photograph ( http://passportsusa.com/wp-content/gallery/passportusa/edith_front.jpg ) . All three photographs (Guthrie, Nordyke, Coats) show the documents are of the same ’61 – ’62 time frame and appear consistent in data and structure with each other.
Speaking of vetting, you stated the Arpaio team did include forensic scientists, lawyers and law enforcement professionals – who? What are the names and credentials of the “computer graphics experts” and “forensic document examiners” who validated the Cold Case Posse’s (CCP) methodology? Have any of them ever testified in court about the authenticity of a document? Why were these not disclosed at the press conference for reporters to interview? Did all Arpaio’s team members agree to the findings? Why were none of the others introduced at the Press Conference?
Lastly, on the last four paragraphs of your reply, the crux of the argument appears that your concept of a “natural born citizen” requires two generations of U.S. citizens to be so established: father and child. You also left out the opening sentences of the quote from Minor: “The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that.” Furthermore, the ruling in Minor was that the Privilege Clause of the 14th Amendment didn’t confer the right to vote to women even if women were citizens; the 19th amendment rectified that in 1920. Minor wasn’t about defining what a “natural-born” citizen is.
As Minor suggests, we look elsewhere for a definition. From my copy of “The Heritage Guide to the Constitution” (2005 ed.), page 190 (referring to Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5) states: “Under the longstanding English common law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are ‘natural born citizens’ and eligible to be President.” Or more recently in Ankeny v. Daniels: “Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents” (emphasis added). (Note: since the original Article II, Section 1, Clause 3 was superseded by the 12th Amendment, Indiana shifted remaining Constitutional clauses in that section down by one in their copy. So the Heritage Guide’s Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 is Indiana’s Article II, Section 1, Clause 4)
Have a good weekend,
Never got a response.
Yep. I went over there and they are in full fledged “Shurriff/Savior/Jesus on a Horse/PLEASE PLEASE GOD Joe is gonna get him” mode.
I swear it’s been a long time since I’ve seen anything so pathetic………tee hee!!
Excellent!!
Dr. Conspiracy,
Is there any way you can number your posts so that I can remember where I left off reading? I see the total number at the top, but if I respond to someone or something, my post is at the end, which if fine, but then I have to scroll up to find out where I was reading. If the posts were numbered, I would just go back up to that number. As it is, I have to scroll and find the last post.
Basically, I’m a spoiled brat and I want you to make my life as easy as possible. It’s not enough that you do this blog. I want you to read it to me (and the comments), as well!!! (snark)
Why not send them to Liberia? That is what it was created for, after all.
Using WordPress language, I assume you are speaking about comments rather than posts (posts are the articles I write).
You can get the comment number by hovering your mouse cursor over the small “#” in the heading of the comment. You’ll get the same result hovering over the hyperlink under Recent Comments (right sidebar).
These are absolute comment numbers, not comments relative to the current article (post).
Comments are actually in an ordered list, so under the covers, there is a relative number. It might be possible to expose it.
Is this something of general interest?
If you quote part of what you are commenting on then the system automagically inserts a link back to that post. After you post and the screen has refreshed and positioned you at your new post, just click on the screen name of the quoted poster and you will return to that post and can continue reading from there.
Not perfect for every possible scenario, but quite useful.
I think you’re wrong. Folks who voted for President Obama are not now going to vote for Romney, Sanitorium or Newt or even “other.” I think voter turnout will be at or near last time.
We shall see, but the birther blather has not lost President Obama one single vote and folks who voted for him are not saying that he hasn’t done enough so let’s try the other guy, cause the other guys is pretty darn scary.
Well, that’s interesting… I did not know that. So, if you want to “mark” the last comment you read, you could click on the #, which puts the comment number into your URL address, then bookmark that comment. Next time you bookmark for that topic, it would replace the old bookmark. You would have to “clean up” bookmarks for older topics, though.
Hmm.. I think I have doubts…. Now, if I said there are those who have doubts about it working, but, I don’t need to discuss it here, does it mean that the system will not work at all, never has and never will?
Yes. This is a test. I first clicked on the # sign and got the “Leave a reply” dialogue box and then highlighted your question and hit (Quote).
Now I’m going to submit it and see how it works.
Hmm. Doesn’t look, or seem to function, any different than when I just used Quote and then post.
How does it link to the original message?
Yes, I did mean comments.
When I hoover my mouse over the # I get the words “direct link to comment,” I don’t get a number.
Anyhow, never mind. I’ll just continue what I was doing – placing a post it on the side of my computer in the approximate place where the scroll bar is where I left off reading the comments. I feel bad asking anything, since I only contribute to this blog by reading and bashing stupid birthers like John…..
Thanks!
Exactly the same here.
and yes I would love such a feature but assume it would be a swine to set up and run all the time? So,Doc, unless you want to spend even more time on this site (which I doubt) I will carry on as I am, sometimes rereading.
Is this a bad thing? No, I missed les chats ninjas last time and now they have been discovered – thanks Lupin!!!
More birther nonsense? It’s just a giant troll on the process, aimed at getting attention for these crackpots. The courts know this. Sooner or later, pretty everyone but the crackpots will get it. Meanwhile, hardly worth the time to even discuss it. While these boneheads are wasting their time working on Obama’s reelection, which he will win by a larger margin that he won the first time. Mark this post and come back on Nov 8 and let’s see what the crackpots are saying then. This case is closed.