I Have Not Been Fooled - (Note to Erickson, Breitbart, O'Reilly and Beck)

The Steady Drip ^ | February 16, 2010 | Michael J. Gaynor

[opentalk]

My circle of friends and professional colleagues includes many noteworthy persons; lawyers, scientists, doctors, business owners, etc. Many of them are my Mensa buddies. None of them are crazy and none of them are stupid. Some of them are smart enough to avoid politics altogether.

Those who do keep up with political issues agree that there is something really fishy about Obama’s history. So when we see the irrational “head in the sand” avoidance of the obvious lack of full disclosure we wonder what motivates people to NOT want to know the truth. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Note to Erickson, Breitbart, O'Reilly and Beck: At a minimum, Obama has not been fully candid with the American people about his birth certificate. Giving him a pass for that is wrong. The bad news is that you blinked. The good news is that Abraham Lincoln was right:

"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time."

Biography - Michael J. Gaynor

--Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member. Gaynor graduated magna cum laude, with Honors in Social Science, from Hofstra University's New College, and received his J.D. degree from St. John's Law School, where he won the American Jurisprudence Award in Evidence and served as an editor of the Law Review and the St. Thomas More Institute for Legal Research.

also from link,comments.

"Obama released his Hawaiian birth certificate and had it verified by an independent organization and the results were posted online for everyone to see." Repeating this false propaganda over and over does not make it true. No matter what you might think there is no escaping that AKA Obama is not practicing the virtue of full disclosure.

Which is most likely;
(a) AKA OBAMA is hiding documents that are innocuous?
(b) AKA OBAMA is hiding documents that are damaging?

[BP2]

So if you want to blame someone, blame the entire state legislature of Indiana

I blame YOU for bringing the utterly-flawed Ankeny et. al. v The Governor of Indiana Opinion into this serious debate.

Just because you see a legal citation on Politijab or the DailyKOS, it doesn't mean you should use it, son.

[Red Steel]

You’re entitled to your opinion.

And it is correct.

However the law of the state of Indiana isn’t “stupid and irrelevant”

This court opinion certainly is bad for the reason that have been stated. They think you are ignorant or hope or you're a leftist moonbat that accepts this tripe.

[Red Steel]

Just because you see a legal citation on Politijab or the DailyKOS, it doesn't mean you should use it, son.

The essential resources for the leftist Moonbats and Jammeeeee777.

[opentalk]

from related thread

Barack Obama's Birth Certificate: Researcher Says Issue Not Resolved Despite Media Dismissal:

--Only one person outside Obama's family has apparently ever seen his original 1961 birth certificate. The Director of the Hawai’i Department of Health (HDOH) claims to have seen the document, and to have it in safekeeping, but no one else admits to seeing the document.

--No one has seen Obama's college records at Occidental College, Columbia University or Harvard Law School either.

[jamese777]

This court opinion certainly is bad for the reason that have been stated. They think you are ignorant or hope or you’re a leftist moonbat that accepts this tripe.

---

What does that have to do with the law of the state of Indiana? Don’t try to kill the messenger.
Every court decision that’s ever been rendered has people supporting it and the losing side blasting it.
That’s why we have courts of different levels all the way up to the US Supreme Court.
The plaintiffs in this case can appeal the decision if they want to a higher appellate court, the Indiana Supreme Court and from there they can go to the US Court of Appeals and the US Supreme Court.

[Red Steel]

What does that have to do with the law of the state of Indiana? Don’t try to kill the messenger.

The messenger is a one-tune lefty moonbat.

Every court decision that’s ever been rendered has people supporting it and the losing side blasting it.

It's still a bad opinion that you want to put lipstick on it.

That’s why we have courts of different levels all the way up to the US Supreme Court.

The plaintiffs in this case can appeal the decision if they want to a higher appellate court, the Indiana Supreme Court and from there they can go to the US Court of Appeals and the US Supreme Court.

Wow, that's such a big revelation.

[jamese777]

from related thread
Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate: Researcher Says Issue Not Resolved Despite Media Dismissal:

—Only one person outside Obama’s family has apparently ever seen his original 1961 birth certificate. The Director of the Hawai’i Department of Health (HDOH) claims to have seen the document, and to have it in safekeeping, but no one else admits to seeing the document.

—No one has seen Obama’s college records at Occidental College, Columbia University or Harvard Law School either.

---

Actually its two people: Daniel T. Onaka, the Registrar of Vital Records has also seen the original document and he issued a joint statement with Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawaii Department of Health to that effect on November 1, 2008.
http://www.starbulletin.com/news/hawaiinews/20081101_officials_verify_birth_certificate_of_obama.html

[BP2]

It's (Ankeny et. al. v The Governor of Indiana) still a bad opinion
that you want to put lipstick on it.

Yep, and the pearls don't help either ...

The next easy tip-off that the Indiana Opinion is an embarrassingly-poorly decided case is another of Judge Brown's footnotes:

13) According to Westlaw, Wong Kim Ark has been cited to in over 1,000 cases.

Judge Brown's reliance on US v. Kim Wong Ark to "make her case" is laughable to those here who have TRULY researched the 1898 SCOTUS Opinion that relies SO heavily on
AV Dicey's 1896 version of "Conflict of Laws" to derive what the Lefties and After-Birthers tout as the legal definition of "natural-born citizen."

[Red Steel]

LoL Good graphic. ;-)

[jamese777]

The latest news from Indiana on Ankeny et. al v The Governor of Indiana, Mitch Daniels:
“Indiana decisions - Supreme Court denies transfer to “birther” suit [Updated April 1, 2010]
Thanks to 6News for pointing out that Steve Ankeny, et al. v. Governor of the State of Indiana was one of the cases for which the Supreme Court denied transfer on April 1, 2010.
From the story:

The Indiana Supreme Court has refused to hear a case claiming Barack Obama is ineligible to be president because he is not a natural born citizen.

The court announced Tuesday that justices unanimously voted against hearing the appeal from two Indiana residents.

In the lawsuit, the pair claimed Obama was not eligible to serve as president because, when he was born, his father was a citizen of the United Kingdom.

Both a Marion County judge and the Indiana Court of Appeals have previously rejected the claim.

Courts around the country have dismissed dozens of lawsuits claiming Obama could not serve as president because he was
born outside of the country.”
http://www.theindychannel.com/news/23068154/detail.html

[Red Steel]

The Indiana Supreme Court has refused to hear a case claiming Barack Obama is ineligible to be president because he is not a natural born citizen.

In other news beside Indiana not taking another look at bad law,

JUDGE ABBOTT WOULD ORDER TDP CHAIR BOYD RICHIE TO DECLARE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA IS INELIGIBLE FOR THE JOB