'Birther' case brought by Orly Taitz thrown out of court as frivolous

Remove all ads!

My understanding, and I may not remember correctly, is that hospitals do not give out orginals, but only copies (at least when they gave them out at all, since they no longer give them), and that anyone who cares enough, has to make the trip to the hospital of origin to view it in person. I'm not 100 percent sure on this though. Since we just had baby Nathan, I know for a fact that hospitals no longer give them out. We had to order one from the state of Texas (for a charge, of course), or we would not have gotten one at all.

That is exactly right, Ragusa. These people are not that stupid to believe their own nonsense, despite what their followers are willing to believe.

 

True, but the date on baby Nathan's is 2009, not 2049 when he is running for office.

 

That's how it works in Maryland as well. We applied for a birth certificate in the hospital, but we did not receive it until about a month later, and they don't mail it to you - I had to go to the courthouse to pick it up and show 43 different forms of ID to prove I was actually the father and we actually had a baby.

 

After the birth of our newest daughter, they approach you in the hospital about the birth certificate. We filled out all of the pertinient info that was needed and then they call you when it's ready. We p/u at the Secretary of State buildings, the same building you get your driver's license at. I would think it folly to mail it, as being a former postal worker, I wouldn't entrust them to deliver it intact. That org is a gigantic mess.

 

Many hospitals give out a "Certificate of Birth" -- which is not the same as a birth certificate. The hospital version typically has the baby's foot print on it and is a keepsake. The state issues birth certificates -- not copies of birth certificates. Every certificate you receive from the state is an original.

FYI, about 20 years ago most states changed their birth certificates to be less susceptible to tampering. You cannot use one of the old certificates for ID purposes to get a passport -- you must get a new one (once again, a new birth certificate is not a copy).

 

We rec'd the Certificate with the prints before we left the hospital. But we did start the process to get the Birth Certificate through a Hospital Rep. What her exact position or title was, I don't remember. Probably a courtesy they provide at Rockford Mem. But we are awaiting a letter/call about picking it up. We frequently buy savings bonds for our 1stborn and want to start doing the same, but we need the SS card to do so, which we are still waiting on. Also need the BC to open up a bank account for her as well. My 1st born has more cash in her savings then we do currently. Daddy is going to have to hit her up for a loan!

 

And the show goes on ...

Judge: ‘Birther’ lawyer may have urged witnesses to lie on the stand

If that turns out to be accurate she's toast.

 

I am just curious, BoV, but is there a return on SA these days? I haven't used a SA in years. I either invest, or buy bonds. For my kids, I buy treasury bonds only. But a SA would be nice if there is a decent return.

 

SA give crap returns. Typically slightly better than a checking account, but not by much. Generally, you're looking in the 2% range, which doesn't even keep up with inflation.

 

The SA returns are minimal at best. But it keeps the money available if needed in an emergency. So we buy some bonds and dump some money into SAs. I like having options when in a pinch.

 

One hasn't heard much of Orly Taitz recently, and so it was about time, on such a lazy day that I have to spend at home sick, to at least seek some comic relief.

Last thing to be heard from Orly Taitz was that on December 28, 2009 on her blog she appeared to have called to arms against Obama's tyranny. There is no information available on whether she has made good on her promise to not pay the $ 20.000,00 fine imposed on her by Judge Land.

Interesting article yesterday about the legal costs Birther activism inflicts of Obama ... which is strikingly enough minimal, as most of their legal challenges are so short of substance that there is little effort needed to react to them.

 

You misunderstand what she wants, Rags. From your link:

Bolding mine.

All she wants to do is to wear short sleeves (and perhaps play some RTS games), apparently as provided under one of the rules of the psychiatric ward where she lives.

 

The psych ward encourages it. It makes mandatory injections much easier.

 

Regarding the "birther" issue, let me put it this way.

Whenever a person is considered for a job that has some prerequisites, the person has to prove that they meet those pre-reqs. For example, if you're going to be a truck driver, you have to prove that you have the appropriate type of drivers license. If you're going to be a doctor, you have to prove that you have the appropriate type of education, experience, and licensing.

What are the pre-reqs for being president? They're actually quite simple.

1. You have to be a natural born citizen of the US.
2. You have to be 35 yrs old or older.
3. You cannot have already served 2 terms as president.

All in all, pretty simple. Clearly, Obama would be ok for item #3. However, he hasn't proven ... PROVEN that he fulfilled items #1 and #2. And frankly, when a person refuses to show such proof, it tells me that they have something to hide.

This isn't a case of a person being presumed innocent until proven guilty. Obama isn't being charged with a crime. He was requesting that he be hired for a job that has 3 strict requirements, and he refused to prove that he was qualified. In the real world, if you refused to prove that you met the minimum requirements for a job, you wouldn't be hired. And if it's proven that you lied on your resume, you're often fired.

I don't know if Obama was born in the US or not. But there was enough uncertainty that it should have been absolutely required that he prove that he was qualified.

I believe that Congress and the states should pass laws that require any candidate for president to PROVE that they meet the legal requirements for president before they are allowed on the ballot. And in the case of running for president, proving that really comes down to producing your birth certificate... which shouldn't be difficult at all.

 

Crucis, Obama's ****ing birth certificate has been available online in digital form since before he was even nominated. (If you care to take a look, yourself, the images are to the left of the article). It was also presented to and validated by all the appropriate sources when he filled out his application for federal employment -- which, if you weren't aware, every presidential candidate must do prior to nomination. Moreover, his mother is American. Even if he were born in Kenya -- which he quite clearly was not -- he is still a natural born citizen of the US because of his mother. As surely as gullible is listed in the dictionary, Barack Obama is an American citizen. Deal with it.

 

That's NOT the real world I know and love, at least not the corporate world. A lot people do lie on their resumes, and never get fired. However, lying on the internal paperwork, "official stuff" will get you fired. I still remember being hired by a fortune 500 company that told me: "this is the company internal information, not a resume, so make sure you don't lie on it." I didn't lie on my resume, or the paperwork, but I still thought it was funny.

And yes, "unqualified" people, who don't even come close to the minimum standards for employment get hired all the time, and everyone who works in business painfully knows it.

As far as I know, Obama has never refused this information, as much as the Birthers would LOVE to believe he did.

 

Plenty of people ARE fired for lying on their resumes. Maybe not all, but plenty. I know that if I caught someone lying on a resume, I'd fire'em.

As far as refusing this information... I'd say that fighting lawsuits that seek to get the birth certificate released constitutes refusing to release the info.

I'm sure that there are plenty of circumstances where some "un" (or "under") qualified people get hired for jobs. But I think that those situations are most likely for jobs where the minimum standards are rather soft. I have a hard time believing that you'll ever find hospitals knowingly hiring doctors who aren't properly licensed, for example.

As for a president, the Constitutional requirements are NOT "soft". They are "hard" must-be-met REQUIREMENTS. One MUST be 35 yo or older. One MUST be a natural born citizen of the US. If we're going to start treating them as soft guidelines, what's to stop a 2 term prez from running for a 3rd term by simply claiming that the Constitution is only a list of soft guidelines, not hard laws that MUST be followed? Or what's to stop a prez from ignoring any other clear Constitutional right? Either they're hard requirements or they're not. And if they're not, then the entire Constitution is meaningless.

 

Crucis, as I understand it, the case wasn't 'fought'. It was thrown out by the judge for lack of cause. Meaning, the birth certificate had already been produced, so there was no case to pursue.

 

Not so.

It may be true that the requirements were met for Obama. I don't know this for a fact.



However, there is a larger point that I was making.... that any person wishing to be on a presidential election primary ballot should first have to prove that they meet these requirements. Obviously, meeting the number of terms requirement tends to take care of itself. But the primary two requirements (35+ yo, and natural born citizen of the US) should need to be positively proven before being allowed on any ballot. And frankly it's not that hard to prove, or a particularly onerous requirement. For god sakes, last I knew, anyone wanting a passport had to present their birth certificate. Should being allowed to be on a presidential election ballot be treated less seriously than getting a passport?