Comments on: Berg vs Obama: Response to Supreme Court due December 1

By: Robert

Robert — Sat, 08 Sep 2012 22:18:06 +0000

Wow. You just CANNOT find a birther these days. Sad times.

By: Robert

Robert — Mon, 07 May 2012 23:45:48 +0000

FINALLY, it appears that a judge might finally be showing some spine as far as Birtherism is concerned… a New York state judge has dimissed a birther lawsuit AND has asked the birther plaintiff to show cause why he should not need to pay the legal costs of the defendants. As the birther named about a dozen co defendants in the case, the tab he will be stuck with is bound to be substantial. From the judge’s order:
“…STRUNK’s instant action is frivolous. … STRUNK [pictured right] alleges baseless claims about defendants which are fanciful, fantastic, delusional and irrational. It is a waste of judicial resources for the Court to spend time on the instant action. Moreover the Court will conduct a hearing to give plaintiff STRUNK a reasonable opportunity to be heard … as to whether or not the Court should award costs and/or impose sanctions upon plaintiff STRUNK for his frivolous conduct. At the hearing, an opportunity will be given to counsel for defendants to present detailed records of costs incurred by their clients in the instant action.”
Actually making these folks pay the bills for their game should end things pretty quickly.

By: Robert

Robert — Sat, 10 Mar 2012 00:17:18 +0000

Another court chimes in, this time in Arizona. Obama is a Natural Born Citizen, per Wong Ark Kim:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/84531299/AZ-2012-03-07-Allen-v-Obama-C20121317-ORDER-Dismissing-Complaint

By: Robert

Robert — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 02:34:26 +0000

Wow. Just bizarre. Your girl Orly is off the deep end, kids… as everyone realized, now that the judge in Georgia ruled against this nitwit and her empty case, she is now attacking the judge’s honor. See Page 8 of the appeal she has filed, noting that Judge Mahili is in cahoots with Iran!!!
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/02/zombie-files-in-georgia-court/#more-16257
Yeah. You might not want to put to much money and that appeal, WB.
Where DO you guys find these crackpots???

By: Wild Bill

Wild Bill — Sat, 18 Feb 2012 00:49:41 +0000

Sorry guys, but I was not getting notification from Warren about posts here. I hope Warren will fix that.
Regarding whether Obama will be on the Georgia ballot, that is still in dispute since the whole matter is going to a higher court.
And then…

By: Robert

Robert — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 00:11:34 +0000

Another one for you, Hugh. A lawsuit was filed claiming Obama, Paul, and Romney are not qualified because the don’t have citizen parents…
Tisdale v. Obama, the federal district court stated that it is “well settled that those born in the United States are natural born citizens” and calls the claim that Obama (and Paul and Romeny) are ineligible “without merit.”
http://www.scribd.com/doc/80563782/Tisdale-v-Obama-et-al
Case dismissed WITH prejudice.

By: Robert

Robert — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 23:55:28 +0000

Ouch!
The judge in Georgia really threw some (more) water on the birthers today…
1. Their is no credible evidence of birth records being forged;
AND
2. The US Constitution does NOT require two US Citizen parents to be a “Natural Born Citizen.:
Read all about it!
http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-elections/judge-obama-eligible-to-1330300.html

By: Robert

Robert — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 14:14:49 +0000

I understand your opinion Hugh.
I disagree with you, and I have Justice Fuller’s words in the very same case to back me up.

By: Hugh

Hugh — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 05:33:27 +0000

Robert:
I would agree with you completely concerning Justice Gray declaring Wong a natural born Citizen if Justice Gray had written the words “natural born Citizen” into the majority opinion.
But you are saying that there are two types of citizens: naturalized and natural born.
Certainly, Supreme Court Justices would understand the nomenclature of citizenship. Others in the Appellate and District Courts would understand the terms. Those in the State Court systems would understand also. Court opinions have been broadcast into the public area through newspapers from the founding of the Republic to the 1800’s, 1900’s, down to this present time, extending the outreach into our homes via the radio and TV.
Certainly all the listeners that have ever read a Supreme Court opinion, read newspaper reports or have heard results on radio or TV do not have the necessary legal training to discern the legal nuances in Supreme Court opinions or most probably any other court opinion.
So, it is incumbent upon the Republic’s judges to write clearly, in unambiguous language so that even the most ill-informed can understand their opinions, to prevent any misunderstanding, since the judges are declaring the law of the land, even to future generations.
Since the most of us do not have this specialized knowledge the Republic’s judges have the full burden to correctly state the law and to publish it through the appropriate media.
So I can only conclude that Justice Gray thought Wong Kim Ark was a citizen and not a “natural born Citizen” since he did have the oath-centered obligation to fulfill his duties as a Justice. It is the words of Justice Gray that declared his intention, and he wrote that Wong Kim Ark was a citizen.
If Wong Kim Ark was a natural born Citizen, then it was incumbent upon Justice Gray to write the words “natural born Citizen” in the ruling section of the opinion. Under these circumstances, to only declare Wong a citizen is deceitful.

By: Hugh

Hugh — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 02:28:49 +0000

Robert:
You have every right to have the opinion that you hold. But the opinion that you hold in this matter does not agree with the Constitution.