Judge Dismisses case brought by retired military officer

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | 3/7/09 | Unruth

[FreeManN]

From Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga.: "President Obama demonstrated his citizenship during his campaign by circulating copies of his birth certificate, which showed he was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961." From U.S. Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, R-Fla.: "The claim that Barack Obama is not a citizen of the U.S. is false. This rumor is simply election year politics." She referred questioners to Snopes for documentation. From U.S. Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, R-Mich.: "Rest assured, however, I will well remember your concerns regarding this issue during the 111th Congress." From Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas: "I welcome President-elect Obama's commitment to reform the federal budget process and rein in wasteful government spending. From U.S. Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas: "Now that the election is over and the campaigns have ended, I think it is important that the politicians and the citizens of our nation put the fierce partisan rhetoric aside so that we can work together to come up with real solutions to our country's challenges."

[FreeManN]

bo is an Islamo-Marxist who wants Islamic (Muslim) World Domination just like his Father, his Grandfather and his cousin Odinga in Kenya.

Google Odinga and you will see who the real bo is.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=77508

[The Brush]

So much for transparency
Rather than provide a certified copy of his birth certificate to anyone who requests a copy in a court of law, Mr Obama sends a lawyer to have the case dismissed.
The Constitution requires the president be a natural born citizen. Why hasn't ours provided a copy of the proof to the courts... rather than a website?
I'm certain the Left would understand the issue more clearly if Obama's party affiliation was an R rather than a D.

[devere]

And they say you can’t have a cover-up in America ... Oh yes you can.

[nathanbedford]

Stuart Taylor Jr. where are you when we need you?

In November 1996 an article appeared in a trade publication called the American Lawyer written by a reporter known to be a respected scholar on legal subjects and known not to be a conservative. Mainstream media reporters knew him personally and regarded him to be one of their own. They misjudged their man because Stuart Taylor Jr. was intellectually honest. He took a look at a lawsuit which had been either ignored or denigrated as bogus by his brethren in the popular media and concluded that there were genuine questions of fact and law at stake and that the case demanded respectful and legitimate public inquiry.

The case was Paula Jones vs. William Jefferson Clinton and so genuine was the case and so worthy of legitimate public inquiry was it, that it led directly to the impeachment of the president of the United States of America.

When Stuart Taylor Jr. wrote his article in the American lawyer, Bill and Hillary Clinton, working out of their war room, had, through intimidation, slander, and the cooperation of a complaisant media, virtually ignored and belittled Paula Jones to death.

Stuart Taylor Jr. stood up and said, in effect, "the emperor has no clothes." We need a breach in the house of cards. We need an honest and prominent reporter or politician to say what is obvious: the refusal to produce the original vault birth certificate is evidence of subterfuge. We need someone to say that the refusal to disclose original documents is potentially equivalent to the following:

The refusal to produce the Nixon audiotapes

the refusal to produce the blue dress

the willingness to produce the "pumpkin papers"

the production of the Zimmerman telegram

[NoobRep]

I think there are probably people in the CIA, FBI and military that know the true story of this imposter. Yet, they would rather have the economy tank than to have had a race war started from ejecting the man from the Presidential race. Why do you think the state of Hawaii sealed his birth certificate?

[The Brush]

Imagine a scenario where you're pulled over for a traffic violation and claim that you have a Hawaii drivers licence but not with you...
In court you provide the judge with a website address that will provide a copy of a form that states you have driven a car in the past.
Case dismissed?

Many people would argue that this scenario is entirely different.

[autumnraine]

I say another example is that I go into the DMV and say my name is Dolly Parton. I demand that I get a drivers license with that name on it and the burden is on them to prove I am NOT Dolly Parton.

Same thing.

[FreeManN]

“I’m certain the Left would understand the issue more clearly if Obama’s party affiliation was an R rather than a D.”

You fall for the trap that bo laid for ideologues.

After reading what Chambliss & Kyl and the rest of the dumb rinos said about supporting bo, I am amazed that you still don’t get it!

The party affliation means NOTHING! The rinos are worse than the demos!

[JohnnyP]

Jeez, it’s been up an hour and no trolls yet.

[PhiKapMom]

Thank you!

[FreeManN]

All bo victories have been pyrrhric. That is why they can no longer wage an effective battle against We the Patriots. We outnumber them by millions. Unfortunately, we have been slow to realize how superior our forces are to bo’s motley gang of thugs. Even now, dumb rinos like Chamliss & Kyl still don’t get it.

The phrase is named after King Pyrrhus of Epirus, whose army suffered irreplaceable casualties in defeating the Romans at Heraclea in 280 BC and Asculum in 279 BC during the Pyrrhic War. After the latter battle, Plutarch relates in a report by Dionysius:

The armies separated; and, it is said, Pyrrhus replied to one that gave him joy of his victory that one more such victory would utterly undo him. For he had lost a great part of the forces he brought with him, and almost all his particular friends and principal commanders; there were no others there to make recruits, and he found the confederates in Italy backward. On the other hand, as from a fountain continually flowing out of the city, the Roman camp was quickly and plentifully filled up with fresh men, not at all abating in courage for the loss they sustained, but even from their very anger gaining new force and resolution to go on with the war.[1]

In both of Pyrrhus’s victories, the Romans lost more men than Pyrrhus did. However, the Romans had a much larger supply of men from which to draw soldiers, so their losses did less damage to their war effort than Pyrrhus’s losses did to his.

The report is often quoted as “Another such victory over the Romans and we are undone,”[citation needed] or “If we are victorious in one more battle with the Romans, we shall be utterly ruined.”[2]

Although it is most closely associated with a military battle, the term is used by analogy in fields such as business, politics, law, literature, and sports to describe any similar struggle which is ruinous for the victor. For example, the theologian, Reinhold Niebuhr writing of the need for coercion in the cause of justice warned that: “Moral reason must learn how to make a coercion its ally without running the risk of a Pyrrhic victory in which the ally exploits and negates the triumph” [3]

[Las Vegas Ron]

“I’m certain the Left would understand the issue more clearly if Obama’s party affiliation was an R rather than a D.”

Actually, I agree with the posters point.

The only difference is that we Conservatives would be upholding the law rather that allow a usurper in office for idealogical reasons....most of us tend to uphold the Constitution above all else whether it be an R or a D.

[Just A Nobody]

Why not post the article? I do not think we have excerpt WND. The excerpt posted has little to do with the title.

A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit questioning Barack Obama's eligibility to be president, because the issue already has been "blogged, texted, twittered and otherwise massaged."

The judge ruled in a case brought by Gregory Hollister against "Barry Soetoro, et al," alleging a need to know Obama's legitimacy, because as a retired member of the military he could be recalled to active duty and, therefore, would have to know whether Obama's orders were legitimate.

Hollister is represented by Philadelphia lawyer Philip Berg, who has brought several motions on the eligibility dispute to the U.S. Supreme Court, only to have the evidence he wanted to present ignored.

In his ruling, Judge James Robertson said, "The plaintiff says that he is a retired Air Force colonel who continues to owe fealty to his Commander-in-Chief (because he might possibly be recalled to duty) and who is tortured by uncertainty as to whether he would have to obey orders from Barack Obama because it has not been proven – to the colonel's satisfaction – that Mr. Obama is a native-born American citizen, qualified under the Constitution to be president.

"The issue of the president's citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America's vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama's two-year-campaign for the presidency, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a court," Robertson wrote.

That is not going to happen, he ruled.

"Even in its relatively short life the case has excited the blogosphere and the conspiracy theorists. The right thing to do is to bring it to an early end," Robertson wrote.

But is Obama actually constitutionally qualified? It's been "twittered," Robertson said, while also requiring the plaintiffs attorneys to explain why they shouldn't be penalized financially for having raised the legal question. "Twitter" is a brand name for an Internet technology that allows participants to post brief reports on their daily activities and observations.

Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 300,000 others and sign up now!

The court's deflection of attention from the central issue of producing verification of Obama's citizenship mirrors the response many Congress members have given concerned constituents.

[FreeManN]

“The only difference is that we Conservatives would be upholding the law rather that allow a usurper in office for idealogical reasons....most of us tend to uphold the Constitution above all else whether it be an R or a D.”

Exactly, if bo was a Republican, the rinos like Chambliss and Kyl would support him without question like they support Bobby Jindal and Swartzeneeger and they supported juan mccain.

[Mac from Cleveland]

“I relayed your concerns about the henhouse being broken into to a Mr. Fox, who answered the phone at the henhouse. He assured me that your fears are goundless, and that everything is fine”.....

[Las Vegas Ron]

Exactly, if bo was a Republican, the rinos like Chambliss and Kyl

Yep, that's why I was careful to post "us Conservatives"

[FreeManN]

“I think there are probably people in the CIA, FBI and military that know the true story of this imposter. Yet, they would rather have the economy tank than to have had a race war started from ejecting the man from the Presidential race. Why do you think the state of Hawaii sealed his birth certificate?”

COWARDS!

bo and his motley gang of thugs can NOT wage a war. Who will command their “forces” comrade billie “the boy revolutionary” Ayers? ROFLMAO!

[Pearls Before Swine]

Hitler wasn’t a natural born German — he was Austrian. But,although he saw Germany as the tool for his vision, he was a Germano-phile. BHO may or may not be a natural-born American. But — the jury’s out on whether he loves America, or sees it only as a tool for his vision.

[Just A Nobody]

Finally someone else is beginning to see the dots lining up to form a perfect line! Thank you.

[FreeManN]

BO in NOT a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN!

Read the CONSTITUTION!