Yep -- the paid schills are here just as they've been all along.
The Obama troll's loyalty is not to the Truth.
Posted on 10/13/2009 7:45:31 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
Sorry mlo, but that simply is not a good read of the Judge’s text. He is clearly telling her the case is, in his opinion, frivolous because she should have known nobody would take it seriously and any reasonable judge would escape via abstention. This has everything to do with his clearly biased and shallow understanding of the “so-called birther movement,” as he so derisively puts it.
As for Orly’s basis for wanting the judge to recuse himself, he claims her sole motive was unhappiness with the judgment, but he spent considerable time dismissing her arguments and actions as politically rather than legally motivated. In other words, he was seeing all her actions through the lens of a strong political bias. That gets right down to why recusal is available in the first place. There comes a time when you know the other person is not really hearing anything you are saying. There needs to be a way around that. If Judge Land’s factual observations are correct concerning section 144 criteria for recusal, then Orly did make a number of technical errors, but those in themselves would not be sufficient to warrant such a strong punitive act. Lawyers make mistakes all the time. If the case is amicable, all is forgiven. Seriously. But a 20K stinger comes from another place.
And Judge Land’s observations concerning expedited decision-making is such good spin. “Decision-making is better when there’s less time and more pressure, so I’m right to be giving you the bum’s rush.” Huh? Why? Because some other judge made a nice quote out of it. Not because this or any other court has actually done a scientific analysis of the relationship between perceived urgency and the quality of decision-making. I used to work for a nuke outfit. Those guys did the homework. The Judge, with all due respect, is flat wrong on this one. Urgency is a key factor in Degrading the quality of decisions, with rare exception, because it bites to be human. Would we were all machines, but it isn’t so.
Finally, I do not get how the judge can make the assertion that even if Obama is not rightfully the Commander in Chief, a soldier’s constitutional rights are not infringed by compulsory obedience to a potential imposter. That is just insane. Sorry. That’s how I see it. There is no constitutionally explicit “right to disobey” the person immediately above you in the chain of command, other than your oath of faithfulness to uphold and defend the US Constitution! If you believe the person giving the command is illegitimate under the terms of the Constitution, of course you have, not only the right, but the duty under that oath to challenge those orders. Otherwise we get right back to Nuremburg, “I was just following orders.” American freedom works because individual citizens bring their own mind and resources to the table and pool them for the good of the nation without surrendering the right to think for themselves. That’s where all the creativity, the power for self-correction comes from. It’s a good thing. The judge is simply wrong here.
Then there's the second sentence, with its particular sneering tone: She seeks to use the Court's power to compel discovery in her efforts to force the President to produce a "birth certificate" that is satisfactory to herself and her followers.
Let me re-articulate this in a way that would have been fair: "She seeks to establish whether the President of the United States was qualified to run for the office and whether he is qualified to hold it. I ruled her suit was without merit because...."
Even if I did believe her, I wouldn’t donate because I hate hate HATE pretentious, insecure lawyers who style themselves “esquire.”
Thank you for your informational post, and for
backing it up by revealing you are an attorney,
with therefore some educational and experiential
knowledge of the judicial process.
None of those candidates have had a NBC problem. Our Founding Fathers could never vision an illegal alien and an usurper with foreign allegiance would try to fool the American people. That is why they created the grandfather clause. They would NOT have anyone with British ties to be the United States’ President under any circumstances!!!
About as 'genuine' as a shined turd called a work of art.
Well he hasn't proven it to the leader of your ping list faction either:
Yes, correct. Obama is not a natural born citizen for that very reason, IMO.... 79 posted on Tuesday, October 13, 2009 9:37:51 AM by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Character, Leadership, and Loyalty matter - Be an example, no matter the cost.)
You need to learn by example -- or get off that list quickly.
I appreciate your intellectual honesty. You probably shouldn’t defend me though - it’ll get you in trouble with your group.
It surprises me that you haven’t heard me say that before. It’s been my position for a year or more. Most in my “new group” disagree with me about the NBC definition. So don’t expect any converts. :)
So to reiterate, the evidence you present that Obama was born in Kenya is:
- A Swahili-translated telephone conversation from October 2008 with Obama's step-grandmother, where she said that she was "present" for Obama's birth, before stating in her next comment (and several minutes of subsequent comments) that he was born in Hawaii, not Kenya.
- A morning-show radio call from November 2008 to a Kenyan official who may have never met Obama and has no reason to know where Obama was born.
- Some ambiguous parliament floor comments from November 2008 made by Kenyan legislators who have never met Obama and have no reason to know where Obama was born.
In other words, after a year and a half of people suggesting that Obama was born in Kenya, and searching for evidence to support that suggestion that he was born in Kenya, that's what you have? A couple of comments from unknowledgeable third parties and a mistake from his grandma? One set of ambiguous comments and two statements from non-native English speakers who were asked leading questions over the phone? And nothing that could have actually instigated the rumors in the first place, or carried them for the first six months of their circulation?
The fact that that's ALL there is after a year and a half of talk is only further evidence that the rumors are, and always were, unsubstantiated.
Oh, really?? Then it's way past time to challenge Nader on his citizenship status.
The point of mentioning Nader is this: if no one, anywhere, accused Nader of not being a natural born citizen in 1996, or 2000, or 2004 because of his parents' citizenship, then it rather strongly suggests that there is not and never has been a parental citizenship requirement to be an American natural born citizen for the purpose of the Presidency. The 'two citizen parent'/'no dual citizenship at birth' definitions (which aren't synonymous, even though people tend to talk like they are) were practically created in summer 2008 to advance the theory that Obama was ineligible.
I'm better with "stick".
I'm pretty good at "stick".
They never had to, the Press was more than happy to dig up these items, sadly no one seems to do that anymore, unless they are trying to discredit a Republican.
I was going to say supporting and defending the constitution by oath of office, but nufsed beat me to it.
Yep -- the paid schills are here just as they've been all along.
The Obama troll's loyalty is not to the Truth.
I guess one could call that judicial temperament ... ;)
No one here could have said it better --
Yeah, and I’m scrounging aspirins out of the couch cushions. Well, it looks like the deficit is going down by $20,000 at least. If Orly keeps it up, we may have a balanced budget. BTW, did you read the decision?
parsy, who read all 43 pages
I still have my daughter’s troll collection packed away somewhere. Now it’s taken on a whole new meaning. LOL I prefer to call them “the nonvetters”.. :) therefore, the troll dolls won’t be tainted.
Just start with the word “certificate” and go from there.
Don't you know it. I'm also not sure I can prove where my mom lived for the months before I was born, or if I could figure out the names of the nurses who delivered me.
I do have my baptismal certificate, some kindergarten records, and probably my parents' marriage license and some childhood vaccination records, but I can't say it's anybody's business to see any of those if I'm running for office.
And I say that, incidentally, as pretty much the only person in this thread who's posting under his real name and not an online handle. I'm plenty big on transparency, but some stuff is nobody's business, even if you are running for office.
Not yet, the issue has never come up before, so why would be expect there to have been one. However, we will never get one if we take the tact that we shouldn't try.
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.