Comments on: Orly Taitz Still Pursues Legal Fight Over Obama Qualifications

By: Lamont Cranston

Lamont Cranston — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 13:31:20 +0000

Orly Taitz is a joke. Got her law degree at a correspondence school. Came here from Russia but no record of citizenship. Has numerous malpractice suits vs. her dental practice — she got her license to practice in Israel. This lady is a nut. Her legal paperwork looks like it was prepared by a 6th grader.

By: Vaughn

Vaughn — Sat, 16 May 2009 18:53:52 +0000

O RLY?

Wasn’t putting up a copy of his birth certificate enough?

By: Jerry Baker

Jerry Baker — Tue, 12 May 2009 20:46:22 +0000

Mike: Simply untrue. First Obama hasn’t hired “several high-priced law firms”. He is not even the defendant in most of the suits-various Secretaries of State are and the costs to defend these junk lawsuits are unfortunately borne by the taxpayers of those states. In the few where he is a defendant they have simply declined to answer. The suits are so worthless that they have been dismissed anyway.

As far as the birth certificate, he has displayed the only one Hawaii provides, namely the famous COLB. Those who claim that people born abroad can get one may have been correct at one time in the distant past when Hawaii first became a US territory. Regardless, it would not say place of Birth: Honolulu, which is what Obama’s does.

As far as the so called “vault copy”, records are in the vault under the control of the State Dept of Health. They don’t let people have access to them. Just call the DOH in your state and see if they will release those records. You will get a big, fat “no”.

This entire “case” is junk law writ large. But you don’t have to take my word for it. You can read the decisions of the numerous state and federal judges who have dismissed these “cases”.

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 12 May 2009 20:19:17 +0000

I only have one question. Why would anyone hire several high priced law firms to keep their birth certificate sealed and under wraps if they had nothing to hide?????

All things being equal, the simplest explanation is probably the correct one…i.e, he is hiding something.

By: ETJB

ETJB — Tue, 12 May 2009 19:46:23 +0000

M&M (or whomever that may be). These lawsuits could have had a, clearly small, shred of cred to them if taken a few simple steps.

Yes, most of the lawsuits are dishonest — morally, legally and intellectually.

By: Ted

Ted — Tue, 12 May 2009 01:56:32 +0000

Interesting that this article has more than 18 posts, but the article about the long-fought victory to get the state of West Virginia to ease signature requirements has only one post. Interesting.

By: Jerry Baker

Jerry Baker — Mon, 11 May 2009 23:05:50 +0000

I don’t care what their motives are. If I decided to sue you over something, whether I was right or wrong, I could go to court and if I lost I could appeal to the highest court. Fine. But what would you say if after I lost I came back and sued you again and again and again in courts all over the country? Whatever my motives that would be harassment and abuse of the court system. And that’s what these 2 clowns have done. they’ve been rejected by at leasr 20 or 30 judges, in a bunch of state and federal courts, up to the Supreme Court on multiple occasions. Whether their motives are noble, self-serving or they are simply delusional, they need to stop. Yesterday.

By: Michael Morrison

Michael Morrison — Mon, 11 May 2009 21:42:11 +0000

Jer Bak: Yes, of course, there are many different motives, but you cannot ever know what is any other individual’s motive.
My point was, simply, do not make judgments about another person’s motives.
Sure, judge the action, if you know what you’re talking about and, alas, an awful lot of people don’t, but do not try to guess their motives.
And certainly do not disparage them for motives that you might — most likely — not know or understand.
And, as I said, though you might be disagreeing with them, they still could be right.

By: train111

train111 — Mon, 11 May 2009 17:49:26 +0000

Whatever happenned to that full briefcase of ‘evidence’ that Taitz reportedly gave to John Roberts at some conference or another a few months back. It was reported in one of these exchanges here. I guess the whole briefcase of evidence must have not been too convincing.

train111

By: Jerry Baker

Jerry Baker — Mon, 11 May 2009 17:15:13 +0000

The COLB says the place of birth was Honolulu, which last I checked was in Hawaii. The issue is settled in the eyes of those whose opinion counts-all the judges who have heard every one of the cases, all 538 members of Congress and the majority of voters. With all due respect your opinion doesn’t trump those parties anywhere but in your own mind.

There’s a larger point IMO, which is that there should be a time limit to court resolutions of election matters. I look at the travesty of the Minnesota Senate race, for example. Winners need to be declared and allowed to take office, even at the risk that an error will be made from time to time. Nowhere is it promised that elections, trials or anything else are perfect; all that any verdict, electoral or legal represents is the best determination that fallible humans can make at a moment in time. Peeple need to move on; there will always be another election and you can choose to rehash the past at that time 9though that is likely a losing strategy).