Activist judges!

A judge used the word "blogosphere"?

The Birthers brought down the Twin Towers. Pass it on.

There's a reason why the Rove-machine was encouraging the base to harass judges ... the whole federal system is a grand conspiracy designed to destroy their right to be crackpots and lunatics.

You'd think Obama had been properly vetted on that particular score. But would they ever accept that? Think not - it's really very painful for them to acknowledge that there's a black person (well, as white as he is black) behind the desk in the Oval Office - and that's why they're desperate to end this administration.

"We can probably assume that the right will now explain why the district court judge is in on the elaborate conspiracy. "

That's almost a guarantee, IMO. It's a classic symptom of conspiracy theorism that anyone who denies the conspiracy must be a part of it - see: The Salem Witch Trials.

We can probably assume that the right will now explain why the district court judge is in on the elaborate conspiracy.

Let's hope it involves extraterrestrials, the new world order, a secret radio in Michael Steele's grill and Jack Bauer.

"In an argument popular on the Internet and taken seriously practically nowhere else. . . ." Ouch.

Seriously, where was McCain born?

I'm still trying to prove that Clinton visited Moscow in 1969 to become a Soviet agent. I won't have time to get to this Obama birth issue until 2020 at the soonest.

And speaking of which, I happened to find this link while looking for the right year to cite, in which they're still discussing this issue in 2007. Wow. These people NEVER give up.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1884984/posts

Seriously, where was McCain born?

The Canal Zone, my friend. Of two American parents.

A judge used the word "blogosphere"?

He actually uses "twitter" in the opinion, too.

i am working on a project that -- if my theory will hold up in a court -- will prevent anyone from kansas ever becoming president of the united states again... my assistant, toto, assures that ike isn't really all that pissed about it, over yonder in the hereafter...

The lawsuit was crackheaded on more than one level -- not only did they seek to challenge Obama's citizenship, but they brought it as an action for interpleader (!) under a theory that could only have been arrived at after some serious suckin' of the pipe. And the lawyers who were really behind the whole thing didn't even bother trying to get permission to appear -- so it's the idiot who agreed to serve as local counsel who's been hit with the order to show cause why the heck he shouldn't have to pay defense costs.

The Freepers are already pointing out that the Judge issuing the decision is a Clinton appointee (who is probably taking money under the table from Soros).

What lazy reporting from Nedra Pickler (AP). She doesn't even say who filed the suit.

He actually uses "twitter" in the opinion, too.

I am starting to really hate Twitter. Its practical uses for journalism and activism are being overshadowed by Rethug exploitation to push lies and propaganda.

the birth announcements in 19961 near BO's birthday
were published in 2 local papers
Enough Already.

The Birthers brought down the Twin Towers. Pass it on.

They bombed Pearl Harbor, then blamed it on the Japanese for racist profit, the damned un-American bastards. Charge 'em under RICO and take everything they own!!! :

Oh stuff and nonsense! Eveyone knows that it w Maya Sotero who was born in Hawaii; Barack Obama was born in a madrassa, in Indonesia.

I have been thinking about the connection between twitter and Republicans. It makes sense that thier attempt to make inroads on the interent would run through twitter because most of the remaining base is probably incapable of understanding anything more than a short phrase.

Besides, Republican officeholders have been perfecting the art of the sound bite for so long that they themselves are losing the ability to say anything that takes longer than fifteen seconds to vebalize.

And nuance....fugetaboutit

"in on the elaborate conspiracy."

Ahem
Want some proof?

"James Robertson (born 1938) is a judge for the United States District CourtUnited States district court for the District of Columbia. James Robertson was appointed a United States District Judge by President Bill Clinton."

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/James_Robertson_(judge)

When the article describing how your case turned out uses the word "lambasting," things probably didn't go well!

The judge shouldn't be mocking the plaintiffs. He should be ordering plaintiff's attorneys to show cause why disbarment is not the appropriate remedy for wasting the court's time.

"agents provocateurs" - that's pretty harsh!

Mr. DeBakey: OMG! OMG! This conspiracy is more diabolocal than I could ever have imagined! Over 8 years ago, Clinton presciently foresaw that a black politician from Chicago whom no one had heard of yet would be elected President in 2008. So he packed the court with judges who had secret orders to conceal any information about the fact that Obama was secretly an alien from the Planet Zort, who was not born but hatched out of a pod and sent to earth to destroy civilization. Obviously, Hillary's Presidential campaign must have been an elaborate ruse to divert us from this long-range plan. Why would Clinton do it? Well, why not? It's evil, and we all know that libruls like to do evil stuff just for fun.

I'll jump on the birth certificate conspiracy as soon as the Michelle Obama whitey tape materializes.

this is all so funny.

or rather, this would be funny if it wasn't so sad

The plaintiff's attorneys should be disbarred, but the Bar does not police its ranks.

plaintiff's argument defending against this being a frivolous lawsuit will be some pretty high comedy.

These cases all suffer from the same problem; none of the plaintifs have "standing" to bring the cases in the first place.

To be seen as having "standing", they have to convince the judge that 1) they have suffered, or are likely to suffer "injury-in-fact" due to an ineligible Obama serving as President, and 2) that Obama is directly responsible for that injury. It isn't enough to say (as one guy did in him case) that he and other voters were dis-enfranchized by having an invalid candidate on the ballot. That "injury" isn't specific enough to the individual plaintif for it to qualify as "injury-in-fact".

About the only people who could actually be able to show injury-in-fact would be McCain (or Hillary, Edwards, et al.), and I don't think any of them will be bringing that case any time soon.

These other guys have zero chance of even getting their cases heard.

What lazy reporting from Nedra Pickler (AP).

You don't say.

I think the argument they are pushing is that if you make all your income as capital gains, and you exceed $250k, all of your income would be now be taxed at 20% instead of 15%, and therefore you would have less money after tax making $250k than if you made $236k.

wrong thread, sorry

Hoo boy.

There are two conspiracy theories with numerous variations. One is that Obama was born in Kenya. Quite apart from the Hawaian Birth Certificate did any of these people think about the time and cost it would have been to fly two people, one a heavily pregnant woman to Kenya and three back? In 1961? It is not like you had non-stop flights from Honolulu to Nairobi back then. And to what fricking point! Kenya at this point is just coming off the Mau Mau Rebellion and it the midst of final struggles for Independence. Under British Colonial Law Obama was eligible for a British Colonial passport no matter where he was born and after Independence could have claimed Kenyan citizenship anytime until he achieved his majority. So what would Obama's Harvard educated father's motive being to take the huge human risk and financial cost of transporting his wife to Kenya and his wife and child home? To deliberately deny the kid an American Passport on the grounds 'No child of mine will EVER grow up to be leader of the free world! Not if I have anything to say about it!!"

That part was always just nutty. In the face of all kinds of positive evidence (birth certificate, birth acknowledgement in the Honolulu Advertisor) these clowns are demanding that Obama prove a negative. And in context of the case 51 times (because certifications come at the state level).

Now the other conspiracy case was more interesting because it actually had something behind it. This was the case that Obama's step-father had somehow abrogated Obama's citizenship when they moved to Indonesia. They had a school card listing Obama's nationality as 'Indonesian' and religion as 'Muslim', which to some might be some sensible precautions in the Indonesia of the early sixties (lots of political violence). But to the Moonbats this was proof of something and they even had an old statute to back it up.

Oops too bad this reading relied on a misreading of the Nationality Act of 1940 (which applied to certain marriages BEFORE 1922) and furthermore was made moot by passage of the Nationality Act of 1952. Nothing Obama's parents could have done would have permanently abrogated Obama's US citizenship as long as he reestablished permanent residence in the US prior to his 25th birthday. And nobody argues that point.

All of this was established in court back last fall in Donofrio v. Wells and Berg v. Obama and discussed widely in the blogosphere at the time. For example in my piece at Angry Bear
http://angrybear.blogspot.com/2008/12/nationality-act-of-1940-nipping-wingnut.html

Well I guess I didn't get all the wingnuttia nipped in the bud. But that lawyer deserves every bit of financial penalty he gets. It is not just that the case is frivolous, its very filing means that some wingnut sectors will be convinced of its claims to the end of times.

The judge shouldn't be mocking the plaintiffs. He should be ordering plaintiff's attorneys to show cause why disbarment is not the appropriate remedy for wasting the court's time.

Seriously, people should read the opinion. Click on the link under "Robertson added," and it's right there. The judge didn't pick on the named plaintiff, whom he clearly understood was just a stooge for the attorneys. He goes straight after the attorneys. Really.

Go read the opinion.

@royalblue_tom

Um, not sure what that has to do with Obama's birth certificate, but in any case, the tax rate is marginal, meaning that only income above the $250k threshold is taxed at the higher rate. So you would have the same amount of money at $250k after taxes even if the marginal tax rate were 100%. Only dollars above $250k are taxed at 20%.

There is one very good thing about this whole Birth Certificate brouhaha. Anyone who seriously suggests that Obama is not a natural born citizen is instantly identifiable as a nut, and all further comments may safely be dismissed.

the judge also blames Berg for this whole mess, but basically says that going after him would be a waste of time and only serve to give him another forum.

That's funny. They wasted their time and money. These idiots must have a circle drawn on their wall that says 'bang head here'.

[Nonsense deleted]

James, are you an idiot or a liar? Or are you just repeating something an idiot or liar said somewhere else without checking on it yourself?

From Minor v. Happersett, the section you cited reads:

"The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [88 U.S. 162, 168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens. "

You are claiming that the final sentence of the quoted section limits natural-born citizens to only those born in the U.S. to two citizen parents. However, the sentence immediately before that clearly states that the court is not ruling on the question of whether the more inclusive definition of anyone born within the U.S. is a natural born citizen irrespective of the status of their parents.

Furthermore, in the next paragraph, the section I have bolded seems to show the Court acknowledging the power of Congress to define or extend the term natural born citizen:

"Under the power to adopt a uniform system of naturalization Congress, as early as 1790, provided 'that any alien, being a free white person,' might be admitted as a citizen of the United States, and that the children of such persons so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under twenty-one years of age at the time of such naturalization, should also be considered citizens of the United States, and that the children of citizens of the United States that might be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, should be considered as natural-born citizens."

"Mr.(sic) Barack H. Obama...is a usurper." posted by James @ 7:11 PM.
Mind providing a few details re Minor vs Happersett (1874)? Or, perchance do the details of that decision really have little (if anything) to do with the present circumstance?
Oh, and give my regards to President Biden!

It's worth noting that by the restrictive definition James tried to promote, John McCain would also have been ineligible to be President.

Interestingly, President Chester Arthur was born to a citizen mother and to immigrant father who did not become naturalized until Chester was 14. He also faced allegations (almost universally discounted) that he had been born in Canada.

The Obama birther conspiracists are aware of this and have spent considerable time in the last year attacking the legitimacy of Chester Arthur's Presidency or otherwise seeking to deny that this provided a precedent.

Arthur was born in Fairfield, Vermont in 1829. Arthur's birthplace is identified and is a recognized historical site.

Judge also gave attorney of record 11 days to show why sanctions shouldn't be applied. hehehe.
Think Berg is gonna pay 'em?