Posted on 12/05/2011 9:18:29 AM PST by GregNH
Herbert W. Titus is of counsel to the law firm of William J. Olson, P.C. Prior to his association with this firm, Mr. Titus taught constitutional law, common law, and other subjects for nearly 30 years at five different American Bar Association approved law schools. From 1986 to 1993, he served as the founding Dean of the College of Law and Government in Regent University, Virginia Beach, Virginia. Prior to his academic career, he served as a Trial Attorney and a Special Assistant United States Attorney with the United States Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. and Kansas City, Missouri. Today he is engaged in a general practice with a concentration in constitutional strategy, litigation, and appeals.
Mr. Titus holds the J.D. degree (cum laude) from Harvard and the B.S. degree in Political Science from the University of Oregon from which he graduated Phi Beta Kappa. He is an active member of the bar of Virginia and an inactive member of the bar of Oregon. He is admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, the United States Court of Claims, and the United States Courts of Appeals for the Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth, District of Columbia and Federal Circuits. His constitutional practice has taken him into federal district courts in Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Montana, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Wyoming, and the District of Columbia and the state courts of Idaho, Texas and North Dakota.
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
Well, you should have no problem then.
Nope. You don’t get it. You don’t want to get it. You are wrong and can’t admit it.
It’s not done because those few who try it are ostracized.
If you wish to pretend that the existence of those few ostracized fools means you are right, then that’s a personal problem.
I can’t edify you if you are too proud to be edified.
Call me Dr. bvw. In fact, add an ESQUIRE. No, make that a POPULAR SCIENCE. Better magazine.
Or, others referring to him as "Dr."?
It appears that, elsewhere, he's referred to as "Mr." or "Esq."
Herbert W. Titus is of counsel to the law firm of William J. Olson, P.C. Prior to his association with this firm, Mr. Titus taught constitutional law, common law, and other subjects for nearly 30 years at five different American Bar Association approved law schools. From 1986 to 1993, he served as the founding Dean of the College of Law and Government in Regent University, Virginia Beach, Virginia. Prior to his academic career, he served as a Trial Attorney and a Special Assistant United States Attorney with the United States Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. and Kansas City, Missouri. Today he is engaged in a general practice with a concentration in constitutional strategy, litigation, and appeals.William J. Olson, P.C. - Attorneys At LawMr. Titus holds the J.D. degree (cum laude) from Harvard and the B.S. degree in Political Science from the University of Oregon from which he graduated Phi Beta Kappa.
...
Furthermore, it appears that a book authored by him, doesn't use the title. [1][2]
Additionally, some terminology on the various law degrees, in particular:
The term "Doctor of Law" refers to the degree of Juris Doctor (JD), which in the U.S. is the only first professional law degree,[20][21][22][23] and to the S.J.D. (Scientiae Juridicae Doctor or J.S.D., the degree name in English or Doctor of Juridical Science).[22][24] The S.J.D. is the research doctorate in law, and as such it is generally accepted as comparable to the more commonly awarded research doctorate, the Ph.D.[25] The S.J.D. is described as the "highest degree in law" by the University of Virginia,[26] the "terminal degree in law" by Indiana University[27] and Harvard Law School [28] and as the "most advanced law degree" by Yale Law School,[29] Georgetown Law,[30] New York University [31] and Stanford University.[32] The National Association of Legal Professionals states that the J.S.D./S.J.D. is "typically the most advanced (or terminal) law degree that would follow the earning of the LL.M. and J.D. degrees."[33] However, while the degree may be the highest research doctorate in law, the J.D. is also a doctorate (the highest professional doctorate in law),[34] as evinced by universities' description of the S.J.D. as a a "postdoctoral degree."[32][35] The American Bar Association has issued a Council Statement[36] stating that the J.D. be considered as being equivalent to the Ph.D. for employment and educational purposes.[37] The S.J.D. typically requires three to five years to complete, and requires an advanced study in law as a scientific discipline and a dissertation, which serves as an original contribution to the scholarly field of law.[38]
While it may be "socially unacceptable" in some circles, for a JD (Juris Doctorate) to refer to themselves with the "Dr." title, technically...they would be correct.
"2. J.D. Degree - Ph.D. Degree Equivalency
WHEREAS, the acquisition of a Doctor of Jurisprudence degree requires from 84 to 90 semester hours of post baccalaureate study and the Doctor of Philosophy degree usually requires 60 semester hours of post baccalaureate study along with the writing of a dissertation, the two degrees shall be considered as equivalent degrees for educational employment purposes;"
http://apps.americanbar.org/legaled/accreditation/Council%20Statements.pdf
Agreed _doc, Blacks Law Dictionary defines Esquire as follows:
In English law, a title of dignity next above a gentleman, and below a knight. Also a title of office given to sheriffs, sergeants, and barristers at law, justices of the peace, and others. In the United States, title commonly appended after name of an attorney.
It’s not just about social unacceptability. There are rules of Ethical Conduct.
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/lawyers_are_doctors_too/
He does use the title Dr.
I guess Virginia says it is acceptable.Other states say it is not acceptable.
Originally published in The Forecast, Vol.4, N. 10 July 1997
By
Dr. Herbert W. Titus, J.D.
President of The Forecast Foundation
2400 Carolina Rd.
Chesapeake, Va. 23322
Reprinted by Permission
That was what I got when I googled for possible explanations. It may not be the right explanation, but somebody asked what possible other explanation there could be, and the zip code mix-up idea was quite easy to find.
Now Jerome Corsi and WND, who fueled a lot of this speculation are saying Obama's Social Security Number "failed" a government e-verify test.
They're making out that it's yet another layer of conspiracy on top of the others, but really, what makes you think you can easily get Obama's actual SSN on the Internet?
What makes you so sure that there aren't fake SSNs for Obama circulating out there just to throw you off?
Do you really think he'd still be using a number that had been leaked to the public?
Which are mixed from state to state, as well as within the ABA itself. From your source:
"The ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, which superseded the Model Code in 1983, don’t directly address a lawyer’s use of doctor, nor do most legal ethics codes at the state level. As a result, guidance on the issue continues to come primarily from state ethics opinions.These opinions generally turn on the question of whether using doctor or any other title constitutes a false or mis leading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer’s services. Such communications are prohibited under ABA Model Rule 7.1.
In 1986, a North Carolina ethics opinion advised that referring to an attorney holding a juris doctor degree as doctor “without explanation could be misleading and is therefore inappropriate.”
But in 2004, the ethics committee of the State Bar of Texas abandoned its long-standing position that lawyers may not refer to themselves as doctor in either social or professional settings. In Opinion 550, the committee concluded that the title is not inherently false or misleading. The committee found no reason to prohibit lawyers from indicating their advanced level of education in the same way as such professionals as educators and social scientists.
The committee also concluded that prohibiting the use of the term to avoid “self-laudation” no longer is necessary “in light of state-bar-approved legal specialization and lawyer advertising.”
The committee advised, however, that it may be misleading for a lawyer to use doctor in certain contexts, such as advertising legal services relating to medical malpractice, because of the possibility of misleading prospective clients about a lawyer’s qualifications and the results he or she might achieve. "
I can see how some in society might be "confused" by a lawyer calling themselves a doctor of law...but if a Chemist with a Doctorate in Philosophy can refer to themselves as a doctor, I see no reason why a Lawyer with a Doctorate in Jurisprudence couldn't call themselves one as well. They are both, after all, holders of a "doctorate" degree.
Probably only a matter of time, since it appears the JD degree is only a few decades old, whereas the others are centuries old.
And?
This has all already been covered.
The man is a JD and JDs are never called “doctor” (except pompous lawyers who embarrass the profession by doing so) and kind people who don’t understand the universal custom of the profession to eschew that honorific title despite the ABA’s unbinding editorial opinion. The profession in practice has resoundingly rejected the ABA’s view.
>> 1) Is there a legal documentation in Hawaii or elsewhere stating what Obama’s ‘legal’ name is? <<
Hawaii DoH holds a Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) with the name Barack Hussein Obama II on it, the name of his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, the name of his father, Barack Hussein Obama and the “date filed” Aug 8, 1961.
Obama’s original Long Form Birth Certificate, the document with a “date accepted” of Aug 8, 1961 and with the signatures of his mother, delivery doctor and hospital administrator, has been sealed and archived in a vault separate from long form birth certificates kept by Hawaii DoH.
The original long form BC was sealed when the Soetoro Adoptions was finalized in Hawaii, circa 1967. Obama’s legal name was changed to Barry Soetoro and a new COLB was created and filed. The new COLB listed Lolo Soetoro as Barry Soetoro’s father and S. Ann Soetoro as his mother. It has a “date filed” of Aug 8, 1961.
In late 1971 or early 1972, the Soetoro adoption was annulled and the Soetoro COLB was sealed and archived in Hawaii by court order. A new COLB was created and filed in Hawaii. The new COLB created in 1971,72 listed Barack Hussein Obama II as a child born on Aug 4, 1961 to parents Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Hussein Obama.
Understand? 3 legal documents concerning Obama’s birth record in Hawaii DoH. 2 are sealed and archived. The 3rd one is the short form or COLB.
>> Through E-verify and other sources, why do they say that this Connecticut Social Security number was never issued to Barack Obama? <<
Obots are scared to death someone will ask to see Barry Soetoro’s COLB in Hawaii or Barry Soetoro’s custody order obtained by Catholic Social Services of Connecticut. A false negative on the SSN is a nice distraction.
Man, you are one seriously brazen liar.
Individuals key-entering data back in the beginning of computerization would NOT use the “qwerty” keyboard. The 9 is nowhere near the 0 on the keyboard that would have been used back then. Nowhere at all near it.
More: In those days, before personal computers and especially when dealing with important databases like Social Security, every keystroke would be “VERIFIED” by a second individual.
The verifier actually re-entered every item and if there was a mismatch between what the verifier typed and the original key-entry person typed, then the verifier would be notified by the verifying machine and action would be taken to correct any mistake, such as a “typo” OR a misreading of the zip code.
It was next to impossible for such a “typo” to get through, but if it did, then there was another test: The computer program that processed the data to meld it into the computer file would have additional checks built in to find “exceptions”. An “exception report” would list the potential errors and mismatches and that data record would NOT go into the database or the file until the error was corrected.
With exception report in hand, a human being would work to get to the bottom of the mismatch.
An example of an exception, in this case, would be the alphabetic state code (HI) (keyed in for the person’s address) NOT being consistent with the key-entered zip code (a CT number). Computer programs contained tables of items like zip codes, just like what you linked to in your comment. The tables would be used within the program to compare the keyed data to what would be expected based upon data entered in other fields, such as ensuring that a Hawaiian address had a Hawaiian zip code.
In the case of SS#s, it’s very likely that a zip code table was used in the program, specifically because SS#s were prefixed by state. This grouping was also characteristic of early computerized files. It made sorting easier.
Two-operator keystroke verification and computer program exception reporting was standard operating procedure in computer rooms back then, in the same way that CPAs have standard operating procedures for keeping books. In fact, back then, CPAs who acted as auditors also audited the procedures and file-keeping in the computer department, as well as in other departments of a company, such as accounts receivable and payable, inventory control, cost accounting, payroll, etc.
All this makes the scenario you suggest even MORE unlikely.
Diogenes, I believe you because it was ALSO standard operating procedure back then for a new birth certificate to be issued, with the adoptive parents on it AS IF they were the birth parents. Remember that this was in the day when illegitimacy was frowned upon and so the states, when a child was adopted, did as much as they could to prevent that stigma from following the child through life. It’s a fact, though, that vital records offices retained the first birth certificate. It was SEALED. There was a way for the office to access the original, based upon some kind of algorithm that the office knew. If he was adopted, his first birth certificate and every permutation afterwards is still there. On file. In accordance with their policies and procedures.
That’s very possible and I think provides a rational counter argument.
“Individuals key-entering data back in the beginning of computerization would NOT use the “qwerty” keyboard. The 9 is nowhere near the 0 on the keyboard that would have been used back then. Nowhere at all near it.”
Except we’re not talking about the early days of computerization. Obama’s SSN was issued in the late 1970s. And there were keyboards in the late ‘70s (like the Apple II) that definitely had the 9 next to the 0.
Without a clear understanding of the process used at the time, I don't think a solid conclusion can be drawn.
That is exactly what I think, and those silly B@stards at the State of Hawaii have been intentionally hiding the truth from the American People because that is in accordance with their "procedures" and state laws. That no law can trump the Constitution and that they have a DUTY to the nation to not let such games be played, is simply beyond their feeble understanding.
That Democrats would lie, cheat and steal is to be expected. That our side would let them get away with it is not. I am more angry at our side for tolerating it (and in some cases aiding and abetting it) than I am at the lying Democrats for being lying Democrats.
As for myself, my adoption was never a secret. I remember going before the judge who asked me if I wanted my name changed to that of my new Daddy. I said "sure!" (I think I was 5 years old at the time.) Being so young, I really hadn't got accustomed to using a last name, so I wasn't attached to it anyway.
Without a clear understanding of the process used at the time, I don't think a solid conclusion can be drawn.
And yet SvenMagnussen's explanation seems to tie everything together neatly. Occam's razor dude. I'm going to accept his theory as the best explanation till I hear a better one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.