Texas Darlin‘ and the bevy of sites who contest the authenticity of Barack Obama’s birth certificate need to come up for air once in a while. When astrologers start using better science, logic and reason than those obsessed with Obama’s birth certificate, it’s time for those so obsessed to change their ways, don’t you think?
See also the six ways the arguments against Obama’s birth certificate fail.
This entry was posted on Sunday, November 30th, 2008 at 5:27 am and is filed under Barack Obama, Campaigns, Cargo Cults, Citizenship, History, Hoaxes, Jurisprudence, Justice, Law, Natural Born, Obama 2008, Politics, Presidential Eligibility, Rampant stupidity, Reason, Scams, Scandals, Technology. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
(The Life of Reason, vol. 1: Reason in Common Sense)
Ed Darrell on Texas's Colorado River
Come on in, the water's fine. Come often: Cleanliness is next to godliness.
 | Ed Darrell on Something broke in America thi… |
 | David Xavier on Something broke in America thi… |
| Ed Darrell on Something broke in America thi… |
| david xavier on Something broke in America thi… |
| Ed Darrell on Something broke in America thi… |
| David xavier on Something broke in America thi… |
| Ed Darrell on Quote of the moment: What John… |
| Ed Darrell on Quote of the moment: What John… |
| Ed Darrell on Day lilies |
 | Ellie on Day lilies |
 | The Coastal Crone on Day lilies |
 | Political Animal on ‘Greatest mission NASA e… |
 | J.D. on Quote of the moment: What John… |
| Maybe James Watson a… on Long, long quote of the moment… | |
 | Joe Jones on “Only the dead have seen… |
[…] Obama’s birth certificate: Astrologers bring sound reason (!) […]
LikeLike
I think the issue has been over-blown, esp. given the likely results. I have just posted one what is being lost as these webs are spun. See: http://soozah.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/consolidation-what-the-fight-is-really-about/
LikeLike
Sheesh, are the 9/11 Truthers having a slow year?
LikeLike
Ted,
I can’t find any indication that there is a conference scheduled on December 5 on this issue — it’s not on the Supreme Court’s docket or calendar in any way. You should be aware that this method of getting around usual court procedures rarely succeeds. The court most often takes cases this way in order to shut down needless or nuisance litigation — like the many nuisance suits that have been springing up around the nation on this issue, none with any evidence that might possibly overcome the presumptions of the official documents already available.
That’s not to say the issue won’t be discussed. Clarence Thomas has always been a champion of orphan issues, but as often to shut them down as to let them win. Don’t hire Snoopy to do the victory dance yet.
This case is far from being momentous. It’s an issue of first impression, which suggests that there should be significant evidence gathering in lower courts first in order to get to the Supreme Court. None of that has happened, frankly because the Obama critics have not bothered to do basic level law stuff — the claim about Obama’s Kenyan grandmother is wholly unsupported by any kind of affidavit, for example. It is third-hand hearsay, inadmissible for anything at any trial. (If Joe Corsi really got something, why didn’t he bother to get an affidavit? Is he brain damaged, or did he recognize that he didn’t really get that information?) There is no showing from any agency of any problem with the documents from the State of Hawaii already in evidence. The prima facie case against Obama hasn’t been made.
If the Supreme Court were to rule on it, I smell a summary judgment, for Obama, or a dismissal with prejudice in order to end the nuisance suits.
That video is the acme of crank lawyering. The fellow absolutely dismisses all the evidence already available, and banks on evidence that is nowhere to be found, claiming it to be accurate.
Courts don’t work that way. On evidence rules alone, there isn’t much of a case to be made against Obama. And it would take extraordinary evidence in order to overcome the presumption that the official documents are somehow in error. There is not a legal document expert in the nation who has sided with the anti-Obama folks.
Here’s what has to be overcome, Ted — got evidence? Real evidence?
https://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2008/11/27/6-ways-challenges-to-obamas-citizenship-fail/
The silence of major news media supports the conclusion that the Court is unlikely to do anything — no alerts from the Court, no schedule of consideration, no orders to the lower courts . . . If there’s no story, no reporter will champion it, no news editor will assign somebody to cover it. There are real issues in the transition, real issues in the wars, real issues in the economy — too much real stuff to assign a reporter to crackpot ravings on the internet.
LikeLike
On Dec 5 the Supreme Court will either allow or disallow the usurpation of both the Constitution and the Government of the United States — easily the most pivotal decision since our nation’s founding — and the silence of the news media is deafening (if not downright scary).
LikeLike