Main Menu

Oral arguments requested in Kerchner appeal

In a document filed with the Third Circuit Court of Appeals on March 20, 2010, appellant Charles Kirchner (et al) has requested oral arguments.

Plaintiffs-Appellants believe that oral argument will assist the Court decide this appeal which involves issues of standing and the political question doctrine.

This cynical observer thinks that the purpose of oral arguments is to squeeze just a little more publicity out of a case that is already dead for all intents and purposes and to provide another occasion to repeat the same claims that were rejected by the district court.

It would be good theater, but don’t hold your breath waiting for it to happen.

The response to Defendants is now available. It would be interesting to compare this with what Mario Apuzzo says on his web site. Is he a little more restrained in front of a court?

, ,

238 Responses to Oral arguments requested in Kerchner appeal

  1. avatar
    G March 22, 2010 at 2:26 am #

    Of course they will do whatever they can to flog a dead horse. I don’t think any of us are surprised by this latest turn of events.

    I think most of us can easily predict that this motion will simply be denied.

  2. avatar
    Lupin March 22, 2010 at 3:38 am #

    Shorter version:

    GIMME MONEY

  3. avatar
    Scientist March 22, 2010 at 9:36 am #

    Oral arguments? Mario’s arguments come from the other end of GI tract, I’m afraid.

  4. avatar
    misha March 22, 2010 at 10:35 am #

    “Mario’s arguments come from the other end of GI tract, I’m afraid.”

    (bada-bing)

  5. avatar
    Benji Franklin March 22, 2010 at 10:49 am #

    Yes, Misha!

    Because of where Mario has positioned his head, his oral arguments are emitted netherly.

    Benji Franklin

  6. avatar
    brygenon March 22, 2010 at 2:19 pm #

    On his blog, Mario lambasted the defense brief with such invective as:

    In all my 27 years of law practice, I do not believe that I have come across a more absurd, ridiculous, and frivolous legal argument.

    Yet by moving for oral arguments, Mario says that he does *not* want the appeal decided solely on the briefs.

  7. avatar
    bob March 23, 2010 at 3:08 am #

    Apuzzo’s reply brief.

    Apuzzo cited Berg v. Obama exactly once. (And failed to cite it in his opening brief.)

    Prediction: The Third Circuit will cite Berg more than that. And then dismiss.

  8. avatar
    Expelliarmus March 23, 2010 at 4:53 am #

    Actually, I don’t think that they will need to site Berg v. Obama more than once. After all, they can simple issue a one line, per curium opinion.

  9. avatar
    DanDraper March 23, 2010 at 9:52 am #

    Here’s an idea!

    Why don’t we humiliate Mario and Commander Kerchner by presenting BHO’s II complete vital record, Form DS-11 and his Form SS-5?

    Man, I would love to see the look on Mario’s face when those papers were laid out on the table.

  10. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 23, 2010 at 10:32 am #

    Scientist,

    You said: “Oral arguments? Mario’s arguments come from the other end of GI tract, I’m afraid.”

    With you being a scientist, I know that you are well informed that the GI tract has various functions. You have identified just one. May I be so bold to ask you to what function do you dedicate yours?

  11. avatar
    mimi March 23, 2010 at 10:35 am #

    One reason is because it wouldn’t matter. They are of the ‘two parent’ birfer crowd.

    Silly birfer.

  12. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 23, 2010 at 10:37 am #

    brygenon,

    Yes, it is highly absurd and frivolous to argue that if everyone is injured due to another’s breach of some legal duty none of the injured has a cause of action.

    The Founders and Framers surely would have none of that nonsense.

  13. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 23, 2010 at 10:38 am #

    Expelliarmus,

    I see you are wishing upon a star.

  14. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 23, 2010 at 10:43 am #

    mimi,

    We are the “birfers” and you and your gang are the “barfers.”

  15. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 23, 2010 at 10:46 am #

    DanDraper,

    You said: “Here’s an idea!

    Why don’t we humiliate Mario and Commander Kerchner by presenting BHO’s II complete vital record, Form DS-11 and his Form SS-5?

    Man, I would love to see the look on Mario’s face when those papers were laid out on the table.”

    You should not repeat such heresy. I see mimi quickly came to your rescue.

  16. avatar
    Black Lion March 23, 2010 at 11:04 am #

    Sven, still living in fantasy land, huh? Can you explain to us how a US citizen that was born in the US and has always had a US passport have a DS-11 or a SS-5? Do you have one? I know I don’t and I was born here to one parent that was not a citizen at the time. But strangely enough I was able to get a US Passport and travel overseas without having to fill out any of those forms…So if those forms are unable to be produced, does that mean he is “hiding them” or that they were never issued because they are not to US citizens. So Sven, as usual you provide us with no proof to support your ridiculous statements. But you never have, so why should this time be any different. If you want to discuss imaginary documents with Mario, ask him for proof of his infamous “Pakistan Travel ban for Americans in 1981”. That is a document we would love to see.

  17. avatar
    brygenon March 23, 2010 at 11:20 am #

    DanDraper wrote:

    Why don’t we humiliate Mario and Commander Kerchner by presenting BHO’s II complete vital record, Form DS-11 and his Form SS-5?

    Suppose an infant cries for a toy, you give it to him, then he throws it down and cries for a different toy. Do you give him that one too? How long do you keep appeasing the tantrums?

    Here’s President Obama’s perfectly good, perfectly legal, and perfectly ordinary Hawaiian birth certificate: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html Don’t like it? Cry hard.

  18. avatar
    DanDraper March 23, 2010 at 11:31 am #

    Sven, still living in fantasy land, huh?Can you explain to us how a US citizen that was born in the US and has always had a US passport have a DS-11 or a SS-5?Do you have one?I know I don’t and I was born here to one parent that was not a citizen at the time.But strangely enough I was able to get a US Passport and travel overseas without having to fill out any of those forms…So if those forms are unable to be produced, does that mean he is “hiding them” or that they were never issued because they are not to US citizens.So Sven, as usual you provide us with no proof to support your ridiculous statements.But you never have, so why should this time be any different.If you want to discuss imaginary documents with Mario, ask him for proof of his infamous “Pakistan Travel ban for Americans in 1981‘.That is a document we would love to see.

    I’m part of team now, BL. DS-11 is an application for a US Passport and SS-5 is an application for a SSN.

    Just for reference, I’ll note that legal aliens can apply for a SSN is they are authorized to work in the U.S. The paperwork used to verify legal residency is something other than a birth certificate; such as, refugee status documentation.

    In the mid-60’s, BHO’s II dad was a Colonel in the Indonesian Army and recalled after a military coup. I would think a military officer and his family would have tremendous responsibilities, as well as privileges. I wonder if U.S. Commander Kerchner has any thoughts on that.

    How would it look to the dictator if one of of his officers married an American and she didn’t feel comfortable becoming an Indonesian citizen after moving to the country and enjoying the privilege of being an officer’s wife? Same question for the officer’s kid. That had to be a little bit of pressure to formalize their new lives as Indonesian citizens.

    Don’t you think?

  19. avatar
    brygenon March 23, 2010 at 11:35 am #

    Losing attorney Mario Apuzzo wrote:

    Yes, it is highly absurd and frivolous to argue that if everyone is injured due to another’s breach of some legal duty none of the injured has a cause of action.

    Mario, Judge Simandle explained the issue to you when he dismissed your case. I can understand your humiliation at losing to what you thought was a frivolous argument, but there’s really no point in throwing e-tantrums about it.

    “The Court acknowledges Plaintiffs’ frustration with what they perceive as Congress’ inaction in this area, but their remedy may be found through their vote.” — U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, Kerchner v. Obama

  20. avatar
    brygenon March 23, 2010 at 11:44 am #

    Expelliarmus had written:

    Actually, I don’t think that they will need to site Berg v. Obama more than once. After all, they can simple issue a one line, per curium opinion.

    Losing attorney Mario Apuzzo wrote:

    Expelliarmus,

    I see you are wishing upon a star.

    Mario, did you learn nothing from your defeat in the District Court? You and Kerchner were on about great your case was and how silly and weak was the defense motion to dismiss. Case dismissed.

    You do great in your imagination, on your blog, and in your paid advertisements in Reverend Moon’s paper, but that’s it for you.

  21. avatar
    DanDraper March 23, 2010 at 11:44 am #

    DanDraper wrote:
    Suppose an infant cries for a toy, you give it to him, then he throws it down and cries for a different toy. Do you give him that one too? How long do you keep appeasing the tantrums?Here’s President Obama’s perfectly good, perfectly legal, and perfectly ordinary Hawaiian birth certificate: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html Don’t like it? Cry hard.

    Here’s what I’m thinking, Brygenon.

    Barry Soetoro comes back to America after enjoying a few years as an officer’s kid ruled by a military dictator. Something happened. I don’t know what, but something happened to make Barack want to leave his mom and dad and move in with his grandparents.

    Barry’s biological father, BHO Sr., comes back to America to complain his son was adopted without his consent. The adoption is voided and Barry’s name is changed back to BHO II. The court orders a new vital record created and “filed” with the Hawai`i DoH.

    The problem is no one tells the US State Department or INS. As far as they are concerned, Barry Soetoro is still living in Hawai`i with his grandparents as a refugee. BHO II begins his life and Barry Soetoro continues his life under the radar.

    If Barack Hussein Obama II has never been Barry Soetoro, then does he keep Barry Soetoro’s records sealed?

  22. avatar
    nBC March 23, 2010 at 11:59 am #

    Yes, it is highly absurd and frivolous to argue that if everyone is injured due to another’s breach of some legal duty none of the injured has a cause of action.

    Seems Mario is finally starting to comprehend the concept of standing.
    Not only is ‘everyone injured’, the injury is highly abstract…
    Not liking the President and his actions is not an injury Mario…
    And what duty was breached? There is no duty for Obama and Congress found President Obama to have qualified.
    There is no duty to accept your novel interpretation of the Constitution…

    It’s never too late to figure out the concept of Standing.

  23. avatar
    brygenon March 23, 2010 at 12:00 pm #

    DanDraper was thinking:

    Barry’s biological father, BHO Sr., comes back to America to complain his son was adopted without his consent. The adoption is voided and Barry’s name is changed back to BHO II. The court orders a new vital record created and “filed” with the Hawai`i DoH.

    So you make up facts that would render Obama ineligible under your made-up law? Dude, reality, deal with it.

  24. avatar
    nbC March 23, 2010 at 12:22 pm #

    You can lead a horse to water but you cannot force him to drink.

  25. avatar
    Scientist March 23, 2010 at 12:25 pm #

    The problem is no one tells the US State Department or INS.

    When a US citizen who has been living overseas returns to the US, they don’t have to inform anyone. Nor are they refugees.

  26. avatar
    SFJeff March 23, 2010 at 12:32 pm #

    My personal theory is that young Barrack Obama never went to Indonesia, his mother never married Soetero, and in fact never met him.

    While the evidence suggests otherwise, I am fairly certain that all of that evidence is fabricated. Including Obama’s own biography. His opponents always are saying it was ghost written anyway, so really can we believe him when he says he went to Indoneisa as a child.

    I say, present some evidence- plane tickets, Indonesian entry records etc proving that Obama ever went to Indonesia.

  27. avatar
    BatGuano March 23, 2010 at 12:49 pm #

    We are the “birfers” and you and your gang are the “barfers.”

    soon things will get ugly and we will be thrown into the ” i know you are but what am i ? ” phase.

  28. avatar
    Greg March 23, 2010 at 1:21 pm #

    Mario, I think the court did a pretty good job of explaining the difficulty. As the number of people “injured” goes up, the concreteness of the injury also has to increase. If Obama went to everyone in the nation and gave them a paper-cut, they’d each have a concrete injury they could sue on.

    We reaffirm Levitt in holding that standing to sue may not be predicated upon an interest of the kind alleged here which is held in common by all members of the public, because of the necessarily abstract nature of the injury all citizens share. Concrete injury, whether actual or threatened, is that indispensable element of a dispute which serves in part to cast it in a form traditionally capable of judicial resolution. It adds the essential dimension of specificity to the dispute by requiring that the complaining party have suffered a particular injury caused by the action challenged as unlawful. This personal stake is what the Court has consistently held enables a complainant authoritatively to present to a court a complete perspective upon the adverse consequences flowing from the specific set of facts undergirding his grievance. Such authoritative presentations are an integral part of the judicial process, for a court must rely on the parties’ treatment of the facts and claims before it to develop its rules of law. Only concrete injury presents the factual context within which a court, aided by parties who argue within the context, is capable of making decisions.

    Your client, however, was “injured” by having his peace of mind disturbed. Oh, and apparently, they “care” more than other folks, so they’re especially “injured.”

    In return, being assured that he was a “natural born Citizen” and otherwise eligible for his office, they would trust him and therefore consent to submit to his legal authority over them.

    With such statements [Obama is aiding the enemy by trying the 9/11 plotters in New York] made by the former Vice-President, plaintiffs have very good reasons to fear Obama.

    [Note: Cheney didn’t claim that Obama was aiding the enemy because he was not eligible for the Presidency, fear Obama because of that, they would fear him regardless of whether he was eligible or not!

    Note the complete disconnect between what is causing the plaintiff fear and Obama’s eligibility.]

    These are important facts that support plaintiffs’ standing because they show the basis for their fear as to who Obama is.

    Because of their need to protect their fundamental liberty, plaintiffs want to assure themselves that the person occupying the Office of President is an Article II “natural born Citizen.”

    You can see the difference between an abstract and notional injury and a concrete, but inchoate injury when you look at Massachusetts v. EPA. There, a single landholder could point to an actual decrease in the value of his property because of the projections of rising sea-water. The injury was inchoate, in that no sea-water had damaged his property yet, but it was a concrete injury in that a value could be placed on it.

    What value can be placed on your client’s state of mind, his fear that Obama’s not eligible? Obviously not enough for him to hire a lawyer who understood standing, or who wouldn’t place easily falsified “facts” in a “verified” complaint! If your client thought he’d lost a billion dollars, would he have come to you, Mario? If he, like Bush, thought he could win the Presidency by bringing this lawsuit, would he hire Mario Apuzzo, or Ted Olsen?

    That’s what standing is about, Mario. Those with a concrete injury will present fully formed arguments and won’t waste the court’s time dealing with hypotheticals!

    There’s a saying that “bad facts make bad law.” Standing is the doctrine that protects the system from “no facts making bad law.”

  29. avatar
    misha March 23, 2010 at 1:26 pm #

    My personal theory is the Denialists are clinically insane.

  30. avatar
    SFJeff March 23, 2010 at 1:29 pm #

    I will admit that some of the birthers insults against the President’s family do make me somewhat nauseous.

    I would rather be a barfer than a birther- at least we have reasons why we are upchucking

  31. avatar
    Greg March 23, 2010 at 1:30 pm #

    I see you are wishing upon a star.

    Want to wager?

    I propose the Dr. Conspiracy pool. No money is put up, just the honor of victory.

    Please put your name down for how long you think the opinion will be and, just for giggles, whether you think Mario will win or lose.

    I vote lose and 3 lines.

    Mario, I’ll put you down for win. How long a decision do you think it will be.

  32. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 23, 2010 at 1:32 pm #

    Dan Draper is our troll mascot Sven.

  33. avatar
    Greg March 23, 2010 at 1:47 pm #

    Still no evidence that:

    1. Lolo was a colonel
    2. A child of 6 can renounce his citizenship
    3. A child of 6 has ever renounced his citizenship successfully
    4. Obama, at age 6, renounced his citizenship.

    Have you heard the word evidence? Do you know what it means? Would you like me to explain?

  34. avatar
    Greg March 23, 2010 at 1:49 pm #

    Would your lawsuit go away, Mario, if Obama gave you his complete vital record, Form DS-11 and Form SS-5?

  35. avatar
    misha March 23, 2010 at 2:09 pm #

    Mario: you gag me with two spoons.

  36. avatar
    G March 23, 2010 at 2:13 pm #

    My first comment on this post at the top can count as my vote.

    As to how many words or sentences the judge will waste to deny this, I don’t have an opinion, but I tend to think it will be fairly short and succinct.

  37. avatar
    G March 23, 2010 at 2:14 pm #

    Misha, I think your theory is quite valid!

  38. avatar
    Black Lion March 23, 2010 at 2:15 pm #

    I believe that you may be correct….

  39. avatar
    Black Lion March 23, 2010 at 2:17 pm #

    I will say 5 lines and Mario experiences a familar feeling, losing…

  40. avatar
    Greg March 23, 2010 at 2:37 pm #

    Mario – wins, length (?)
    Greg – loses, length = 3 lines
    G – loses, length = (I’ll put you at 2 pages, the caption is pretty long)
    Black Lion – loses, length = 5 lines.

  41. avatar
    Greg March 23, 2010 at 2:46 pm #

    Here’s what I’m thinking

    Who cares?

    You want to pretend to be a lawyer? Here’s your homework assignment. Read Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, and Ashcroft v. Iqbal.

    To get to court, you’re going to need to come up with a hell of a lot more than “Here’s what I’m thinking!”

  42. avatar
    misha March 23, 2010 at 3:11 pm #

    Obama’s father was Darth Vader Jor-El.

  43. avatar
    DanDraper March 23, 2010 at 3:19 pm #

    Would your lawsuit go away, Mario, if Obama gave you his complete vital record, Form DS-11 and Form SS-5?

    Don’t forget the Statement of Understanding, Oath of Renunciation and Certificate of Loss of Nationality … and the I’m gone forever.

  44. avatar
    misha March 23, 2010 at 3:32 pm #

    “Here’s what I’m thinking, Brygenon.”

    Sven, what is your degree in?

  45. avatar
    Black Lion March 23, 2010 at 3:37 pm #

    Misha, he has a degree in creative writing from the Taft Online Law school & Fantasy writing college….

  46. avatar
    Greg March 23, 2010 at 4:15 pm #

    Other than your fevered imagination, do you have anything to suggest documents exist?

    Anything?

    Bueller, Bueller?

    Is this thing on?

  47. avatar
    SFJeff March 23, 2010 at 4:19 pm #

    We really should have a contest for writing conspiracy fiction in the fashion of Sven….

    By the way- can we now call all of his posts conspiracy fiction?

    Not Mario’s- Mario’s are conspiracy obfuscations.

  48. avatar
    Bob Ross March 23, 2010 at 4:39 pm #

    I think John Candy was funny in Space Balls. I would proudly wear the Barfer label

  49. avatar
    Benji Franklin March 23, 2010 at 4:49 pm #

    Dear Greg,

    Thanks for yet another great on-point explanation, Greg! You are an excellent teacher. Mario has not missed any of your points, nor has any part of his professed “case” survived being confronted by you, IN HIS OWN mind. He knows he’s dead in the water!

    Benji Franklin

  50. avatar
    Greg March 23, 2010 at 5:07 pm #

    The single landholder, of course, was the Commonwealth of Massachusetts:

    That these climate-change risks are “widely shared” does not minimize Massachusetts’ interest in the outcome of this litigation. See Federal Election Comm’n v. Akins, 524 U. S. 11, 24 (1998) (“[W]here a harm is concrete, though widely shared, the Court has found injury in fact’ ”). According to petitioners’ unchallenged affidavits, global sea levels rose somewhere between 10 and 20 centimeters over the 20th century as a result of global warming. MacCracken Decl. 5(c), Stdg. App. 208. These rising seas have already begun to swallow Massachusetts’ coastal land. Id., at 196 (declaration of Paul H. Kirshen 5), 216 (MacCracken Decl. 23). Because the Commonwealth “owns a substantial portion of the state’s coastal property,” id., at 171 (declaration of Karst R. Hoogeboom 4),19 it has alleged a particularized injury in its capacity as a landowner. The severity of that injury will only increase over the course of the next century: If sea levels continue to rise as predicted, one Massachusetts official believes that a significant fraction of coastal property will be “either permanently lost through inundation or temporarily lost through periodic storm surge and flooding events.” Id., 6, at 172.20 Remediation costs alone, petitioners allege, could run well into the hundreds of millions of dollars. Id., 7, at 172; see also Kirshen Decl. 12, at 198.21

    Look at all those declarations. The Commonwealth employed experts to actually quantify the harm done and expected to be done.

    Kirschner feels bad. He’s unsure whether Obama is really eligible. That keeps him up at night.

    Boo, frickin’ hoo!

  51. avatar
    Expelliarmus March 23, 2010 at 5:16 pm #

    No, I simply expect to see an opinion very much like the one just issued in Hollister v. Soetero.

    Given the 3rd Circuit’s previous ruling in Berg v. Obama, there can be no doubt as to the outcome of your appeal. The only question is how much ink will be spent in disposing of it — my prediction is, not much, given the fact that you haven’t even cited relevant authority to the court on the single issue that is before it.

  52. avatar
    Kathryn N March 23, 2010 at 7:06 pm #

    That’s all very dramatic and cloak-and-dagger, but the truth is much simpler and more straightforward.
    Barack Obama moved to Indonesia with his mother at age 6 when she married an Indonesian. For convenience, she registered him for school under his step-father’s last name. His actual legal name never changed and neither did his citizenship.
    After four years, his mother decided that her exceptionally bright little boy wasn’t getting the education that he needed in Indonesia, so she sent him back home to Hawaii to live with his grandparents and attend school there.
    All this secret adoption/refugee stuff is just a birther figment of the imagination. Courts don’t accept fantasies as evidence. Sorry birthers.

  53. avatar
    BatGuano March 23, 2010 at 7:24 pm #

    That’s all very dramatic and cloak-and-dagger, but…..

    wait till you get to the part where obama overthrows the soviet military in afghanistan for the CIA or the mysterious sleeper cell in orange county california funded by the chinese government and headed by a sinister dentist/real estate agent/lawyer/politician from moldava.

    this movie rocks !

  54. avatar
    DanDraper March 23, 2010 at 7:33 pm #

    That’s all very dramatic and cloak-and-dagger, but the truth is much simpler and more straightforward.
    Barack Obama moved to Indonesia with his mother at age 6 when she married an Indonesian. For convenience, she registered him for school under his father’s last name. His actual legal name never changed and neither did his citizenship.
    After four years, his mother decided that her exceptionally bright little boy wasn’t getting the education that he needed in Indonesia, so she sent him back home to Hawaii to live with his grandparents and attend school there.
    All this secret adoption/refugee stuff is just a birther figment of the imagination. Courts don’t accept fantasies as evidence. Sorry birthers.

    You left out the part about B.O. Sr. arriving in Hawai`i in 1971 to attend parties for his 10-year college reunion.

    SAD grabs a camera and Barry and rushes off to the airport to greet him or wish him well as he leaves after he abandoned her to pursue his goals. He didn’t bother to answer the divorce papers or pay child support. Yet, she makes the time to find him at airport after he flew thousands of miles to attend his college reunion.

    That’s ridiculous. She needed BO Sr. More than child support and more than making up for lost time with Barack II, she needed him to appear before a Hawai’i District Court Judge and convince the Judge he’s outraged his son has been adopted without his consent.

    Consequently, BHO’s II Certification of Live Birth was born in 1971 and “filed.”

  55. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 23, 2010 at 7:41 pm #

    Greg,

    It’s not about my law suit. It is about the person sitting in the President’s chair being eligible for the office.

    Obama says he is a native U.S. citizen.

    Let him at least prove that.

    He has never proven it to date.

    Rather, he hides behind his political followers to scam the country.

    That’s real flim-flam.

    He might be born in Hawaii. But he just loves this little birth certificate game.

    No serious, mature individual with any integrity would carry on such a childish game.

    He has shamed the Office of the President.

    It is that simple and none of that will ever change no matter how many votes he thinks he is going to get in the next election.

  56. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 23, 2010 at 7:48 pm #

    brygenon,

    I check you link. There is no contemporaneous birth certificate there. We need to see the 1961 contemporaneous birth certificate, not some computer-generated image from 2007.

    Come on, this is not difficult.

  57. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 23, 2010 at 8:02 pm #

    Mario Apuzzo: That’s real flim-flam.

    No the real flim-flam is fake travel bans to Pakistan, fake Kenyan birth certificates, false citations of Hawaiian law, false statements about the validity of Hawaiian Certifications of Live Birth, fake forensic analyses, misrepresentations of US law, back-dated translations of a Swiss philosopher, citations out of context, contention that kindergarten records are important, misrepresentations of Indonesian law, fake analysis of birth certificate numbers, faulty data from credit reporting services, fallacious reasoning, calling federal judges traitors for following the law, filing frivolous politically-motivated lawsuits, claims of scubbing the Internet and the Supreme Court docket, false affidavits by anonymous Kenyans, false contentions about race reporting on birth registrations and private investigators reporting someone’s remembrances from 1961 of a place they never lived. That’s just what I could rattle off from the top my head.

    The whole Obama denialist movement is a scam from start to finish. Spin all you want: a lie is a lie.

  58. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 23, 2010 at 8:18 pm #

    Mario Apuzzo: There is no contemporaneous birth certificate there. We need to see the 1961 contemporaneous birth certificate, not some computer-generated image from 2007. Come on, this is not difficult.

    Certified abstract. This is not difficult. You’re a dinosaur, Mario.

    Illinois:

    Dr. Damon T. Arnold, director of the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH), is announcing the launch of the Electronic Birth Registration System within the Division of Vital Records. Earlier this year, the Department implemented a new birth registration system in all 121 birthing hospitals throughout Illinois. Instead of hospitals filing paper birth certificates with the local registrar, who then sends the paper certificate to the Division of Vital Records, birth records are now handled electronically.

    Minnesota:

    Development of electronic birth registration in Minnesota began in the early 1990’s with a dual electronic and paper system. Birth records were entered electronically by the hospitals, printed, and registered through a manual paper process. Eliminating the manual birth registration process was an intrinsic part of the Vital Statistics Redesign Project, a five-year project from July 1997 through June 2002 to develop an integrated electronic system (MN VRV2000) for the collection, processing, and reporting of birth and death information.

    Pennsylvania:

    Birth data for babies born in hospital and birthing centers must be filed by the hospital or birthing center using the Department of Health’s electronic birth registration system, called EBC for short.

    From Iowa:

    Electronic Birth Certificate: Work began on establishing an electronic birth certificate (EBC) in 1994. On January 1, 1995, 28 hospitals representing 80 percent of the state’s births began filing birth certificates electronically.

    From Oregon:

    OVERS is an online system that is modernizing and streamlining the vital records registration process–from the initial creation and registration of a vital record to making certified copies. OVERS will offer faster services and improved data quality, while meeting national standards and the requirements of the 2004 Intelligence Reform Act.

    New York City electronic system.

    Texas

    Oklahoma:

    The State of Oklahoma is issuing this Request for Proposal (RFP) to qualified vendors for the customization and installation of off-the-shelf computer software to provide the Oklahoma
    Electronic Vital Registration System (OKEVRS) as an integrated, web-based solution to register birth, death, and fetal death records, and support issuance of certified copies, accounting,
    statistical, and reporting functions.

    Kansas:

    To achieve more rapid and accurate reporting, CHES, like many states, implemented an Electronic Birth Registration (EBR) process.

    Florida:

    The Bureau of Vital Statistics wants to thank the hospitals – HIM directors, birth registrars, nursing, labor & delivery staff, & all who are involved in the birth registration process for being a part of the Electronic Birth Registration System (EBRS)

  59. avatar
    SFJeff March 23, 2010 at 8:40 pm #

    Lets not forget about the flim flam of trying to invalidate the votes of 69 million voters.

    Lets not forget about the flim flam of the amazing moving standard of proving oneself a natural born American citizen.

    Lets not forget Mario’s childish refusal to acknowledge his mistakes, which makes them outright lies.

    Lets not forget that the Flim-Flam man Mario knows better than the american voters, the electoral college, Congress, and Chief Justice Roberts.

    The Flim-Flam man who feels that the American way is to make the accused proof the accusations false, rather than the accuser prove the accusations true.

  60. avatar
    SFJeff March 23, 2010 at 8:43 pm #

    And no previous President has ever been asked to provide anything beyond what Hawaii provided Candidate Obama as proof of birth.

  61. avatar
    SFJeff March 23, 2010 at 8:46 pm #

    No Sven- it wasn’t Obama Sr. who arrived in Hawaii- it was his secret double- and he was there to meet the Russian spy master that controlled him. He never actually met with Obama or his mother. Those are all lies and I am holding the documentation in my hand. For $2,000 dollars, I will be glad to send the proof to any individuals who are true patriots.

  62. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 23, 2010 at 10:41 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy,

    Your examples prove absolutely nothing. Those electronic birth registrations are done contemporaneously within an electronic environment. Just like when “papers” are filed electronically with the Federal Court. I’m am sure that there is also a security feature to protect those electronic filings and registrations.

    Also, what you quoted mostly describes filings and registrations of births. I’m sure that if someone needs a paper print out of what is electronically filed one can obtain it.

    More importantly, you fail to see the obvious that Obama does not fall into that electronic birth registration environment. In 1961 there was no such electronic filing available. Hence, there is not such filing of which he can take advantage.

    Too bad for you and Obama that Obama has to just rely on the dinosaur way of doing things or would you just like to invent some electronic birth for him today and claim it is contemporaneous to 1961?

    Nice try.

  63. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 23, 2010 at 10:45 pm #

    SFJeff,

    No previous President’s grandmother said her grandson was born in Kenya, etc, etc, etc.

  64. avatar
    brygenon March 23, 2010 at 11:55 pm #

    Losing attorney Mario Apuzzo wrote:

    No previous President’s grandmother said her grandson was born in Kenya, etc, etc, etc.

    And neither did Barack Obama’s. Check your evidence there — the one and only person on the recording who says that Obama was born in Kenya is ‘Bishop’ Ron McRae (bishop of a sect he made up himself).

    Mario, don’t you see that your list of lies just makes your deal more obvious?

  65. avatar
    G March 23, 2010 at 11:57 pm #

    Mario lies, stating:

    SFJeff,
    No previous President’s grandmother said her grandson was born in Kenya, etc, etc, etc.

    And no current President’s grandmother said that either Mario. You must be referring to the tape…you know, the one in which, if you actually play and listen to the whole thing, the grandmother insistently corrects the caller, informing him that her grandson was born in the USA.

  66. avatar
    G March 24, 2010 at 12:00 am #

    Mario,

    Are we really to believe your not just knowingly spewing BS, or are you really that dumb?

    Quick question Mario – if you lose your birth certificate and have to request a new one…when will they print it? Will they magically go back in time and get another copy, printed on the date of your birth?

    Or gee, will they issue a new certified copy in the CURRENT format such documents are released, in current time. (Hint: that means if you request a new copy of your birth certificate this year Mario, it will be generated in 2010).

    *Duh*

  67. avatar
    Greg March 24, 2010 at 12:13 am #

    I was just curious, Mario, what the look would be like on your face if Obama released those documents.

    I wager that you would look pretty much the same, since this campaign of yours isn’t based on Obama’s eligibility, which it cannot be stressed enough, is not in question. Your campaign is based on your dislike of Obama.

    No serious adult would act like you, Mario. And no one with integrity would stick to the arguments you’ve chosen to stick with. No one with integrity and who values their bar card would swear in a “verified” complaint to the existence of a non-existent travel ban, among many other lies.

  68. avatar
    Greg March 24, 2010 at 12:17 am #

    You left out the part

    Yes, she told you she was leaving out the fantasy parts.

    She also left out the parts where the dragons came and ate the…shoot…you’re better at this fantasy stuff, what did the dragons eat, and how does that make Obama ineligible?

    Are you working on a novel, Sven? Otherwise, why do you keep repeating such unsupported, unsupportable, nonsense?

  69. avatar
    misha March 24, 2010 at 12:17 am #

    “the grandmother insistently corrects the caller, informing him that her grandson was born in the USA.”

    Why let facts get in the way of a good story.

  70. avatar
    Greg March 24, 2010 at 12:21 am #

    Mario, what do you think it means when Alvin Onaka, the Hawaii state registrar, signs a COLB saying it is a true and accurate copy or abstract of the records on file?

    You can look in Hawaii statutes. You can look in the Federal Rules of Evidence.

    You claim to have almost 3 decades of experience, but you aren’t familiar with basic evidentiary principles?

  71. avatar
    Bob March 24, 2010 at 12:29 am #

    No previous President’s grandmother said her grandson was born in Kenya

    Neither did the current president’s grandmother. And?

  72. avatar
    BatGuano March 24, 2010 at 12:47 am #

    No previous President’s grandmother said her grandson was born in Kenya, etc, etc, etc.

    wow. that truely boggles the mind. you’re a lawyer ???

  73. avatar
    SFJeff March 24, 2010 at 1:38 am #

    a) President Obama’s grandmother didn’t say he was born in Kenya again(two things wrong with your statement)
    b) And the requests for the BC predated the phony claim from Kenya.

  74. avatar
    nBC March 24, 2010 at 2:45 am #

    You claim to have almost 3 decades of experience, but you aren’t familiar with basic evidentiary principles?

    Duh…

  75. avatar
    tom March 24, 2010 at 3:49 am #

    NON-immigrants to the United States are not permitted to install their off-spring as Pres & Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces

    The first natural born citizens of the new nation are the first children born of the first pledged citizens

  76. avatar
    brygenon March 24, 2010 at 4:52 am #

    Greg wrote:

    Mario, I’ll put you down for win. How long a decision do you think it will be.

    Did Mario actually predict he’d win in the Third Circuit? I think he knows better.

    Of course Mario will lose. I have no idea how long the write-up will be, but for the fun of it I’ll guess four pages, including the titles and all.

  77. avatar
    Scientist March 24, 2010 at 5:55 am #

    NON-immigrants to the United States are not permitted to install their off-spring as Pres & Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces

    No one is permitted to install their offspring as President. Only the voters do that.

  78. avatar
    Greg March 24, 2010 at 7:35 am #

    There’s a case discussed in many contracts courses where the plaintiff claims that when he wrote “chickens” in the contract, he really meant a specific type of chicken. He might as well have told the court he meant the “first children born of the first pledged citizens” when he wrote chickens for as much weight the court gave his argument.

    We’re talking about law, Tom, not your fevered imagination. In the law, you don’t get to pull definitions out of your butt. You’re welcome to harbor your butt-definitions all you want, but don’t stink up our courts with such foul smelling inanity.

  79. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 24, 2010 at 7:49 am #

    I agree: 4 pages.

  80. avatar
    Ballantine March 24, 2010 at 8:08 am #

    brygenon, Yes, it is highly absurd and frivolous to argue that if everyone is injured due to another’s breach of some legal duty none of the injured has a cause of action. The Founders and Framers surely would have none of that nonsense.

    The bottom line is you don’t claim a legalally redressable injury. Loss of peace of mind is never been recognized as a concrete, paticularlized injury that could confer standing, much less damages. The reason for this is pretty obvious as anyone could claim loss of peace of mind, loss of tranquility, anxitety, emotional distress at pretty every action of the government. Every foreign policy decision made probably makes someone feel less secure. Our courts simple do no recognize these as concrete, tanglible injuries. The claim that the 5th amendment confers a right to feel secure is something you made up that has no support it in jurisprudence. Not sure why people think making up such claims will do anything but annoy the court. It, of course, makes no sense as such would presumably give anyone who feels less secure from any foreign policy decision has a right to a hearing. The courts do not make our foreign policy.

    Lastly, you ignore that courts cannot make advisory opinions under the Consitution you claim to love so much. You seem to admit that is what you are asking for as you claim it the court defined natural born then Obama or Congress might act. That is an advisory option as the court has no authority to remove the president or order congress to investigate the president and you offer no authority to the contrary. Simply put, if the court has no power to redress you supposed injury you have no standing and there is no case or controvercy.

    It is pretty clear by now that you have no idea what the founders and framers thought.

  81. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 24, 2010 at 8:14 am #

    Mario Apuzzo: No previous President’s grandmother said her grandson was born in Kenya, etc, etc, etc.

    Isn’t the fake travel ban enough of a continuing embarrassment for you? Why add the grandmother tape.

    Audio and written transcript: http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/03/sarah-obama-speaks/

  82. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 24, 2010 at 8:23 am #

    Mario Apuzzo: Those electronic birth registrations are done contemporaneously within an electronic environment. Just like when “papers” are filed electronically with the Federal Court.

    This is my professional area, not yours. The kind of documentation you claim is essential for validating a president’s eligibility will not exist in a few more years. Birth registrations are data, not documents. All birth registrations will just be lists of data items spinning on a computer disk, and birth certificates will all be exactly like Obama’s COLB. The only difference is that in the case of Obama, some clerk typed information from the birth certificate into a computer system. Today and in the future data will be transferred from the hospital’s electronic health record directly to the state’s computer system.

    Yes, there are security features, but there nothing like what you’re demanding.

    In essence you are really not demanding to see the Birth Certificate, you are demanding to know a few data items from the birth registration that are not on the printed COLB, like the name of the facility where he was born. The specific data items you are requesting are not relevant to eligibility; the COLB fully suffices for that. They are only relevant to a fraud investigation — and I suppose at the base of it, your contention is that every president should be presumed a fraud and investigated to that standard.

  83. avatar
    misha March 24, 2010 at 9:16 am #

    “No one is permitted to install their offspring as President.”

    Except the Kim family of N.Korea.

  84. avatar
    misha March 24, 2010 at 9:20 am #

    “you’re a lawyer ???”

    Correction: someone whose bread and butter literally is ambulance chasing, and putting alcoholics back behind the wheel so they can continue their carnage.

  85. avatar
    Scientist March 24, 2010 at 10:27 am #

    misha-There’s a delicious irony here. Mario has the chutzpah to claim that his client is in danger from Obama’s intention to hold terror trials in New York. According to Mothers Against Drunk Driving, alcohol-related crashes kill almost 12,000 in the US-4x the number killed on 9/11-not once, but every single year. 3/10 Americans will be involved in an alcohol-related crash in their lifetimes. I doubt 1/1,000 will be involved in a terrorist attack.

    Who Kerchner should fear is not Obama, but his lawyer’s DUI clients.

  86. avatar
    Bob Ross March 24, 2010 at 10:30 am #

    I’ve learned that willfully ignorant people never let the facts get in the way of their own utter stupidity Misha.

    Mario recycles arguments that have been shot down time and time again. The Sarah video is funny most of the clips on youtube cut off the parts where she says he was born in the US. People like Mario have no sense of decency

  87. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 24, 2010 at 10:35 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy,

    You said: “This is my professional area, not yours.”

    My response: I do not know what your professional area is since you along with henchmen have never identified yourselves. But as a lawyer I do know that the best evidence as proof of birth is a contemporaneous birth certificate when it is available which it is in the case of Obama.

    You said: “The kind of documentation you claim is essential for validating a president’s eligibility will not exist in a few more years.”

    My response: That is not relevant. We are not in the future. We are talking about a birth event that allegedly occured in 1961.

    You said: “Birth registrations are data, not documents. All birth registrations will just be lists of data items spinning on a computer disk, and birth certificates will all be exactly like Obama’s COLB.”

    My response: It does not matter how you want to play the words “data” and “document.” We are still talking about the same thing which is physical evidence that something did or did not happen. You can consult the legal definition of “document” as is used in our jurisprudence for further edification.

    You said: “The only difference is that in the case of Obama, some clerk typed information from the birth certificate into a computer system.”

    My response: Describing a process does not address the questions that concern that process.

    You said: “Today and in the future data will be transferred from the hospital’s electronic health record directly to the state’s computer system.”

    My response: Such a system will still create contemporaneous gathering of information at the hospital (although electronic) which will be reliable and probative for future use. Again, how we will be doing things in the future has absolutely nothing to do with the issue of where Obama was born in 1961.

    You said: “Yes, there are security features, but there nothing like what you’re demanding. In essence you are really not demanding to see the Birth Certificate, you are demanding to know a few data items from the birth registration that are not on the printed COLB, like the name of the facility where he was born. The specific data items you are requesting are not relevant to eligibility; the COLB fully suffices for that. They are only relevant to a fraud investigation — and I suppose at the base of it, your contention is that every president should be presumed a fraud and investigated to that standard.”

    My response: I cannot imagine how you can honestly argue that the hospital in which someone was born or where the doctor was physically located when he or she personally delivered a baby is not relevant as to the place in which one was born. Article II says that a would-be President needs to be a “natural born Citizen.” Hence, one of the determining issues is where was Obama born. That means that we need credible and sufficient relevant evidence of place of birth. Any evidence which has a tendency in reason to prove or disprove any fact of consequence to the determination of an action is relevant.
    If there exists evidence that someone was born in a certain hospital which is necessarily physically located in a certain place, that evidence is surely relevant as to the question of where someone was born. Hence, we want to know what the original 1961 birth certificate says about what hospital Obama was born in and what doctor delivered him. Obama and all his supporters already told us that he was born in Kapi’olani Medical Center. That is a specific place in the State of Hawaii. Proving one was born in that specific place will necessarily prove that one was born in Hawaii. What is the problem with him producing credible and sufficient evidence proving that specific fact as opposed to just saying he was born in the State of Hawaii. Remember Judge Land: saying something is so does not make it so.

    We are not conducting a fraud investigation. We are simply asking Obama to prove conclusively that he was born in Hawaii as he claims. He has to prove that because that is part of his Article II burden to show that he is a “natural born Citizen.”

    Your comment that we should treat Obama as we have treated every other president is really a red herring. We have to focus on Obama because he is the issue. We have to deal with the contradictory information that we have come to learn about his place of birth which we did not learn about any other presidents (Chester Arthur being one exception of which I am familiar). We are not treating him unfairly or illegally. We are simply applying the requirements of our Constitution and asking him to explain why there is such contradictory birth place information. Obama is not above the Constitution. His arrogance and disrespect for the Constitution which he swore to uphold is despicable and so is the extent to which you and his other flock go to make excuses for him.

  88. avatar
    misha March 24, 2010 at 11:35 am #

    Mario: please see my article; it’s the second one down on the page.

    And forward it to your henchman, Orly Taitz. You can tell her I said she is a shonde.

  89. avatar
    SFJeff March 24, 2010 at 11:47 am #

    “We are not conducting a fraud investigation. We are simply asking Obama to prove conclusively that he was born in Hawaii as he claims.”

    Which he has.

    “He has to prove that because that is part of his Article II burden to show that he is a “natural born Citizen.” ”

    Incorrect- there is no requirement that a President prove he is a natural born citizen- there is a requirement that a candidate be a natural born citizen. As President he already met the requirements of proof as required by the Secretaries of States, the Electoral College and Congress. He is under no obligation to prove anything else. It is your burden to establish- which you can’t- that he was not eligible.

    “Your comment that we should treat Obama as we have treated every other president is really a red herring.”

    No it isn’t. The fact is that you never asked these questions about any previous President- you never once asked a previous president for as much as a birth certificate let alone the holy ‘long form’

    “We have to focus on Obama because he is the issue.”

    And why is he the one that has this issue?

    “We have to deal with the contradictory information that we have come to learn about his place of birth which we did not learn about any other presidents (Chester Arthur being one exception of which I am familiar).”

    Except none of this supposed contradictory information existed when people started asking President Obama for his BC. Hence the question of motive. Why this candidate, this time?

    We are not treating him unfairly”

    You are treating him differently for no apparent reason other than fears about his color or his religion or his ethnic background.

    “His arrogance and disrespect for the Constitution which he swore to uphold is despicable”

    Birthers are the ones I see disrespecting the Constitution and the Truth. You in particular with your lies about the Pakistan Travel ban along with your laundry list of reasons why President Obama must not be eligible appear to be particularly contemptious of the truth.

    It is clear to any reasonable person that you will blindly accept any theory that could possibly make President Obama ineligible. Given those circumstances, it is clear your motivation has nothing to do with the Constitution but with removing a sitting President that you dislike.

    Mario- as has been pointed out here several times- you have no regard for the truth or the Constitution.

    And that is truely dispicable.

  90. avatar
    bob March 24, 2010 at 12:01 pm #

    But as a lawyer I do know that the best evidence as proof of birth is a contemporaneous birth certificate when it is available which it is in the case of Obama.

    Funny, a real lawyer would know that certified birth certificate is sufficient proof. The COLB is admissible and undisputed.

  91. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 24, 2010 at 12:16 pm #

    Bob,

    You said: “Funny, a real lawyer would know that certified birth certificate is sufficient proof. The COLB is admissible and undisputed.”

    A real lawyer would know what the word “contemporaneous” means.

  92. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 24, 2010 at 1:28 pm #

    Apuzzo definition–

    Valid birth certificate: whatever Obama doesn’t have.

  93. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 24, 2010 at 1:52 pm #

    Mario, let me first say that your preceding comment is probably the most sensible thing you’ve written here, but I think you are wrong if you say the COLB is not a “contemporaneous document.”

    If you went down to the courthouse and asked for a copy of some court order issued 10 years ago, and the clerk of court photocopied it for you and stamped it with a court seal saying it was a certified copy and signed it, would you then argue that the certified copy you had could not be submitted to a court and called a “contemporaneous document” as evidence of what the court had ordered 10 years ago? Of course not.

    Well let’s say that in this example you told the clerk of court that you only needed the first page. The clerk of court photocopies the first page and stamps it with a court seal, etc., etc. It is an abstract (since it is partial), but it is still contemporaneous.

    If the court photocopy machine is broken, and the clerk types a copy for you, and stamps it and seals it; it is still a certified copy of a contemporaneous document.

    Obama’s COLB is no different. It is an certified copy of part of a contemporaneous document, and as such the information on the COLB is contemporaneous.

    Even if you had the “long form” it would be nothing more than a certified copy, in this case a copy by photocopy instead of a copy by transcription. However, they are the same. I am sure you have seen the rules of evidence involving vital records data posted here. The COLB is all the evidence a court would need to throw your case out on the merits.

    We all know your “burden of proof” is just something you made up, so there’s no need to discuss it.

    You said: “If there exists evidence that someone was born in a certain hospital which is necessarily physically located in a certain place, that evidence is surely relevant as to the question of where someone was born.” I suppose it is, but the only Constitutional requirement is that the place be somewhere in the United States, and the COLB tells us that. The hospital is only relevant if you want to erect a statue.

    Hmmm, maybe I should put on a PayPal button to collect money for an Obama birthplace statue.

  94. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 24, 2010 at 2:01 pm #

    I was on a DUI jury once. Guilty.

  95. avatar
    bob March 24, 2010 at 2:08 pm #

    Hey “real lawyer” Apuzzo: Which FRE has this “contemporaneous” requirement?

  96. avatar
    ballantine March 24, 2010 at 3:16 pm #

    We are not conducting a fraud investigation. We are simply asking Obama to prove conclusively that he was born in Hawaii as he claims. He has to prove that because that is part of his Article II burden to show that he is a “natural born Citizen.” P>

    A bit of advice, other than misrepresenting case law, about the worst thing you can do to insure that the court will not take your arguments seriously is to make assertions that you cannot back with any text, precedent or legal argument. You can keep saying Obama has a duty or burden to conclusively prove his natural born status, but you are just making things up. You are asking a judge to make up who has the burden of proof, to make up the level of proof he needs to meet, to make up who Obama has to prove this to, to make up what proof he needs to supply. Apparently, you are in favor of judicial activism. In the world of reality, the plaintiff has the burden of proof in a civil law suit unless there is a law to the contrary, and there is not. Was it Judge Land or Carter that was astonished that Orly was trying to shift the burden of proof to Obama. Sorry, that is not US law. Next time your write a brief, I suggest you would do better to not include silly assertions you cannot support.

  97. avatar
    nbc March 24, 2010 at 3:42 pm #

    Ballentine observes: You can keep saying Obama has a duty or burden to conclusively prove his natural born status, but you are just making things up

    An excellent point as I have been pointing out there is no constitutional requirement or burden on any President to show that he conclusively proves his natural born status.

    Such an approach indeed will doom any hopes of being taken seriously by the Courts.

    The Constitution clearly spells out who qualifies the President, and assigns this to Congress. Once Congress has qualified the President and he has been sworn in, there is only one Constitutional manner to remove the President.
    Which is also the reason why there is no Quo Warranto to challenge the Office of the President.
    History shows how Congress when considering adding QW to the Office of the President, they rejected it as being unconstitutional.

    So even if there were an injury, there is still no way the Courts can provide for a solution as they do not have the power to do so.

    So many levels where Mario’s client faces Constitutional problems…

  98. avatar
    nbc March 24, 2010 at 4:11 pm #

    Mario, let me first say that your preceding comment is probably the most sensible thing you’ve written here, but I think you are wrong if you say the COLB is not a “contemporaneous document.”

    Unless the original filing was a delayed birth certificate, a certified copy of the original data such as provided by the COLB would reflect contemporaneous data. Such a contemporaneous document carries great weight and when corroborated by contemporaneous newspaper announcements, the case becomes even stronger.
    As the record is prima facie evidence, it is up to Mario to present contradicting legal admissible evidence that shows that the data on the document is false.

  99. avatar
    Bob Weber March 24, 2010 at 4:16 pm #

    And no previous President has ever been asked to provide anything beyond what Hawaii provided Candidate Obama as proof of birth.

    Correction: No previous president has ever been asked to provide ANY proof of birth.

  100. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 24, 2010 at 4:52 pm #

    Scientist,

    Why don’t you apply for a job with Obama’s administration. You could be the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. I’m sure Obama and you would get along just fine.

  101. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 24, 2010 at 4:54 pm #

    Dullard commentator brygenon says:

    It’s all just made up. Even what we can hear with our own ears.

  102. avatar
    misha March 24, 2010 at 4:56 pm #

    Why don’t you become a lawyer for the mob? I’m sure all of you would get along just fine.

    Kapish?

  103. avatar
    SFJeff March 24, 2010 at 5:03 pm #

    Mario, Mario, Mario

    the usual pattern.

    Make stuff up, lie, repeat lie, revise lie, try to make lie fit the truth, and then when that all fails, insult everyone who points out the lies.

  104. avatar
    misha March 24, 2010 at 5:05 pm #

    Lather, rinse, repeat.

  105. avatar
    Greg March 24, 2010 at 5:07 pm #

    Make stuff up, lie, repeat lie, revise lie, try to make lie fit the truth, and then when that all fails, insult everyone who points out the lies.

    I’m not sure about the “revise lie” part. Has he done that? And, I’d add a step:

    Wait a few weeks and repeat the lie in its unaltered form and hope nobody took notes.

  106. avatar
    Greg March 24, 2010 at 5:10 pm #

    Why don’t you become a lawyer for the mob? I’m sure all of you would get along just fine.

    I doubt it. Kerchner seems to forgive Mario’s failure.

  107. avatar
    nbc March 24, 2010 at 5:26 pm #

    Mario Why don’t you apply for a job with Obama’s administration. You could be the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. I’m sure Obama and you would get along just fine.

    Quite an honor indeed to be nominated to work for President Obama who believes in transparency and has shown a willingness to listen. Which is why he made available his COLB for all to inspect and view.

    Did you or your client do this?

    Yes we can… Change we can believe in…

  108. avatar
    nbc March 24, 2010 at 5:27 pm #

    Details details… We need no details…

  109. avatar
    Expelliarmus March 24, 2010 at 5:46 pm #

    The BEST evidence of the fact of birth are the records of vital statistics kept by the agency charged with maintaining such records. See FRE 803(9). There is no requirement that the abstracts or certifications issued by such departments be “contemporaneous” — Ronald Reagan’s birth certificate was issued about 40 years or so after his actual birth.

  110. avatar
    NoVA Skeptic March 24, 2010 at 5:59 pm #

    Uhhhhh…. Per Rule 902(4) of the Federal Rules of Evidence the data provided on the COLB is perfectly acceptable and satisfies the Requirements for authentication.

    Note the key phrase “including data compilations in any form, certified as correct by the custodian or other person authorized to make the certification”

    (4) Certified copies of public records. A copy of an official record or report or entry therein, or of a document authorized by law to be recorded or filed and actually recorded or filed in a public office, including data compilations in any form, certified as correct by the custodian or other person authorized to make the certification, by certificate complying with paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of this rule or complying with any Act of Congress or rule prescribed by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority.

  111. avatar
    SFJeff March 24, 2010 at 6:06 pm #

    I was thinking how Mario revised his ‘complete travel ban’ to Pakistan to an imaginary ‘defacto travel ban’

  112. avatar
    Scientist March 24, 2010 at 6:40 pm #

    Mario: Have any of the drunk drivers you have gotten off gone on to kill themselves or someone else in an alcohol-related crash? In the interests of transparency, you should disclose that. We don’t need the names, just the body count.

  113. avatar
    nbc March 24, 2010 at 6:42 pm #

    Mario: We are simply applying the requirements of our Constitution and asking him to explain why there is such contradictory birth place information.

    There is no Constitutional requirement that allows you to ask President Obama to explain why there is “contradictory birth place information”.
    Especially when there is not really any such ‘contradictory information’ presented to the Court in any acceptable format.

    Perhaps you may want to read the Constitution?

  114. avatar
    Rickey March 24, 2010 at 6:42 pm #

    SFJeff says:

    I was thinking how Mario revised his complete travel ban’ to Pakistan to an imaginary defacto travel ban’

    Which in MarioSpeak apparently means, “Americans were banned from traveling to Pakistan, unless they decided to actually go there.”

  115. avatar
    Bob March 24, 2010 at 6:48 pm #

    And the FRE.

  116. avatar
    G March 24, 2010 at 7:01 pm #

    Dr. C said: “This is my professional area, not yours.”

    Mario’s response: I do not know what your professional area is since you along with henchmen have never identified yourselves. But as a lawyer I do know that the best evidence as proof of birth is a contemporaneous birth certificate when it is available which it is in the case of Obama.

    Mario, first of all, many of us, including Dr. C. have answered aspects of our background when directly asked. I would think as a long-time poster here that you would realize that Dr. C’s background is in birth certificates & such, as he’s stated that on a number of occasions.

    I don’t remember ever being directly asked by you, but if you care to know, I’m an executive in a firm that provides business & technology consulting to a number of industry sectors, both public and private, as well as providing a number of direct technology solutions.

    Many of those who post here have provided info about their background, if you would just pay attention. Many of those on here are clearly laywers (I am not). If you have legitimate questions and really want to know, all you have to do is directly come out and ask a question. Simple as that.

    Second, I find it funny that you call us “henchmen”, just because most people posting here happen to usually agree with Dr. C over you. Personally, I’ve never met Dr. C and my only interactions with him have been on this blog. I definitely don’t receive any form of payment or compensation from being on here, from Dr. C or otherwise. I live in a very different part of our great country from where he is from, so I come here with a different perspective and background than what he brings to the table. Do I often find myself in agreement with his positions, particularly after reading his sourced evidence, backing up his statements? Yes. Do I often find myself reading your posts and wondering what planet you are from? Yes.

    All I can say is that, along with your other posts that demonstrate either intentional misrepresentation or an utter lack of understanding of the English language, you apparently have no idea what the word “henchmen” means. LOL!

    Finally I and others have already addressed your “contemporaneous” birth certificate argument repeatedly, both previously as well as in the others responses I already see here to your post. A certified copy from the state is all the evidence necessary. Whether that copy is requested and printed today or is someone digging out a moldy copy of that document they’ve held on to for years is irrelevant.

    In regards to everything else in your post past this point, I see the responses from others have already addressed all the points I would have covered and then some, so all I have to add is I concur with them and not you.

    The only thing I would like to add is to repeat that all credible existing evidence either directly states that he was born in Honolulu, HI or backs up that evidence.

    Your whole argument of wanting to verify this rings hollow, as in order to dispute it, the BURDEN OF PROOF is on you to first provide CREDIBLE evidence (hint: speculation & rumors don’t count) that would prove otherwise. To date, you and the rest of the Birthers have utterly failed to do so.

  117. avatar
    misha March 24, 2010 at 7:35 pm #

    “We don’t need the names, just the body count.”

    I have asked that very question of Mario, several times, and have not received any sort of answer, not even an oblique one.

  118. avatar
    Scientist March 24, 2010 at 7:59 pm #

    Mario is not very transparent, is he? I would think that one could comb court records in Mario’s part of Jersey to compile a list of DUI clients he represented and then look at which ones were subsequently charged with vehicular manslaughter or felony DWI. These are matters of public record.

  119. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 24, 2010 at 8:20 pm #

    G,

    I am not impressed with your failed effort at trying to clean up the garbage on this web site. Do you really think that I believe anything you said? I will never believe a word that is posted on this site. There is one simple reason for that. I will never have any faith or credibility in anyone who attacks a person rather than his or her arguments. You and your henchmen on here sprinkle in some law and historical references. But that does not get rid of the stink that is here. What you and all your other clown friends do on here is mostly just make jokes about and cast riducule at all those who disagree with you. So don’t try to impress me with your Mr. America resume. I’m also not impressed with your littel reference to “our great country.” The greatness of our country is surely not the product of anyone who thinks like Dr. Conspiracy’s little gang of four which includes you.

    As the old cliche goes, “have a nice day!”

  120. avatar
    misha March 24, 2010 at 8:28 pm #

    I see we touched a nerve.

    Тво‘ з´оровье, товарищ!

  121. avatar
    The Sheriff's A Ni- March 24, 2010 at 8:51 pm #

    I guess it really does sting that the checks are still made out to ‘Our Spic Lawyer’. But as long as they don’t bounce, its all good, right?

  122. avatar
    The Sheriff's A Ni- March 24, 2010 at 8:58 pm #

    Mario has already made it clear that as long as the checks clear, its all good in the hood.

  123. avatar
    SFJeff March 24, 2010 at 9:06 pm #

    It hardly seems likely that Mario actually succeeded in keeping any of his clients out of jail.

  124. avatar
    SFJeff March 24, 2010 at 9:21 pm #

    Mario “I will never believe a word that is posted on this site.”

    Well that has been pretty evident for months now. I suspect you don’t believe anything not posted on your own blog.

    “There is one simple reason for that. I will never have any faith or credibility in anyone who attacks a person rather than his or her arguments”

    Irony at all? Quote Mario “Dullard commentator brygenon says”. Mario- you routinely attack persons when you are unable to refute the argument.

    “You and your henchmen on here sprinkle in some law and historical references”

    Yeah- law and historical references- facts are really irritating when they contradict your lies.

    “What you and all your other clown friends do on here is mostly just make jokes about and cast riducule at all those who disagree with you.”

    Actually that is mostly me and Misha- Greg puts out extremely well written rebutals to your false claims, as does Ricky and others. I stoop to ridicule because as you said- you won’t listen to any of the concrete evidence of your outright lies here. Does my ridicule solve anything? Nothing but my irritation at your blatent attempt to find any reason to drag our President into your twisted world of Obama hate.

    “The greatness of our country is surely not the product of anyone who thinks like Dr. Conspiracy’s little gang of four which includes you.”

    Ah yes, we are not the true Patriots- not like Orly and Mario- those who are able to understand the Constitution better than those poor sucker voters.

    What a pathetic ramble Mario. Now that you admit you won’t accept any evidence other than what you fabricate in your own mind, there really isn’t any reason for you to come here- or for that matter for us to respond other than in scorn.

    Mario- why do you keep lieing about the Pakistan travel ban?

  125. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 24, 2010 at 10:08 pm #

    Mario Apuzzo: I will never believe a word that is posted on this site.

    I never intended anyone to believe anything because it was posted on this site, but because of the supporting material that is conveniently linked to and verifiable. I believe that people can either think for themselves, or they can’t. I don’t cater towards the latter crowd.

  126. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 24, 2010 at 10:14 pm #

    I am very reluctant to blame a defense attorney for getting a guilty person acquitted.

  127. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 24, 2010 at 10:18 pm #

    “De facto travel ban” is as much a lie as “complete travel ban.”

  128. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 24, 2010 at 10:22 pm #

    Now you might argue that my Father’s Birth certificate was not contemporaneous because it was issued when he was around 20 years old based on the affidavit of one person, his mother. It doesn’t matter what form this document takes, even if it is a copy made the day the document was filed: it is not contemporaneous. However, the information on Obama’s COLB was collected within 4 days of his birth and duly registered filed at that time with the State of Hawaii. Any copy, abstract or compilation of contemporaneous data is contemporaneous, no matter when the certified copy of the document was physically printed.

  129. avatar
    Greg March 24, 2010 at 11:16 pm #

    I will never have any faith or credibility

    You could have stopped here. You have no credibility, Mario. You spent what little you had long ago. C’mon, Mario, “de facto travel ban?” When the consul general was inviting Americans to visit in the New York Times?

    in anyone who attacks a person rather than his or her arguments.

    So, you won’t believe any argument on this website, not because of the strength of the argument, but because of the person who makes the argument.

  130. avatar
    nbc March 24, 2010 at 11:43 pm #

    Hear hear… But Mario is worse, he believes that anything on this site must therefor be wrong… At the peril of looking silly time after time it seems

  131. avatar
    Expelliarmus March 24, 2010 at 11:47 pm #

    The whole “travel ban” claim would be meaningless even if there had been a ban on travel to Pakistan — because it doesn’t matter what US policy was. There has been a ban on US travel to Cuba for decades, but Americans have traveled to Cuba during that period without obtaining different passports — they simply traveled via Canada or Mexico and entered Cuba without having their passports stamped. As long as Cuba was willing to let them in, they didn’t need any other passport — and the only time they dealt with US authorities was when they returned from whatever *other* country they had traveled through.

    As long as it was possible for an American citizen to enter Pakistan, under Pakistani practices — then there is no basis for any inference that Obama or other Americans traveling to Pakistan had any other passports.

    It’s simply one more birther fiction, entirely divorced from reality or actual practices of the governments involved.

    A passport from one country does not govern *entry* into another country, it simply governs the return of the traveler to the issuing country, and for any other purpose simply serves as ID. The document that governs entry into a foreign country is called a “visa”.

  132. avatar
    nbc March 24, 2010 at 11:48 pm #

    What you and all your other clown friends do on here is mostly just make jokes about and cast riducule at all those who disagree with you.

    Nope we ridicule those who refuse to learn from their mistakes.
    In general this site aims to educate those who are confused about the issues. But when people return with much the same arguments, even when shown to be wrong, then ridicule is well served.

    Nothing personal Mario, it’s just that you have a tendency to stick your foot in your mouth when it comes to these topics.

    And by all means, do not believe anything that’s said on this blog until verified. That’s how many of this blog have been able to expose your arguments and claims…

    All it takes is to read the original materials, apply logic and reason…

    Just reading, and a bit of comprehension could have saved you from much embarrassment.

  133. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 25, 2010 at 12:09 am #

    Greg,

    You are a real mental giant among your peers here. That is what credibiity is, my friend. You don’t believe someone because of how they have behaved.

  134. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 25, 2010 at 12:14 am #

    nbc,

    The only ones to feel embarrased are people like you and your buddies on here. You might claim the high ground and make your little speeches. You might claim victory in your own little mind. But you have no victory in the real world. You will always be just a little internet pseudo intellectual who hides behind a screen name and offers nothing but juvenile snippets and who is lacking in courage to come out of the closet in which you hide.

  135. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 25, 2010 at 12:16 am #

    Scientist,

    And for you my friend of failed experiments. You really should find a real job and do something productive for society.

  136. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 25, 2010 at 12:18 am #

    G,

    Keep dreaming. Yeh, she said twice that she was present when Obama was born in USA and then later she corrected the caller. Go and peddle your trash to one of your kool aid followers. And that is from a birther to a barfer.

  137. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 25, 2010 at 12:21 am #

    misha,

    I could I forget my commie buddy. I have known you for many months now. The only thing that you ever talked about was ambulances and DWI. I can just imagine what kind of life you lead. I picture your apartment full of dust. I really recommend that you see a good psychiatrist. It might do you some good.

  138. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 25, 2010 at 12:23 am #

    Expelliarmus,

    I was right the first time when I told you what your name reminded me of. I see you are still talking about travel bans. See, you proved me right.

  139. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 25, 2010 at 12:25 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy,

    I was just trying to read what you wrote and realized how tired you have become. I think it is time for you to find a different line of work. You have lost your persona. You have been exposed for the charlatan that you are.

  140. avatar
    nbc March 25, 2010 at 12:48 am #

    The travel ban as you called it misrepresented fact. In a certified legal complaint…

    Does that not concern you?

  141. avatar
    G March 25, 2010 at 1:04 am #

    I am very reluctant to blame a defense attorney for getting a guilty person acquitted.

    I’d prefer if they are guilty, they get what they deserve and that defense attorneys succeed at defending the innocent.

  142. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 25, 2010 at 1:41 am #

    I figured out my error. It was a travel ram not a travel ban. That, indeed, was the purpose.

  143. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 25, 2010 at 1:43 am #

    misha,

    I figured it out. It was a travel ram, not a travel ban.

  144. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 25, 2010 at 1:45 am #

    Expelliarmus,

    I finally realized it was the travel ram, not the travel ban.

  145. avatar
    G March 25, 2010 at 1:45 am #

    Mario, in his latest tantrum pout, says:

    G,
    I am not impressed with your failed effort at trying to clean up the garbage on this web site.Do you really think that I believe anything you said?I will never believe a word that is posted on this site.There is one simple reason for that.I will never have any faith or credibility in anyone who attacks a person rather than his or her arguments.You and your henchmen on here sprinkle in some law and historical references.But that does not get rid of the stink that is here.What you and all your other clown friends do on here is mostly just make jokes about and cast riducule at all those who disagree with you.So don’t try to impress me with your Mr. America resume. I’m also not impressed with your littel reference to “our great country.” The greatness of our country is surely not the product of anyone who thinks like Dr. Conspiracy’s little gang of four which includes you.As the old cliche goes, “have a nice day!”

    Mario,

    The only thing you said that is of value is that people shouldn’t just take at face value what they read or hear on any source and that things should be backed up and verified. All of us here would wholeheartedly agree.

    Of course, you didn’t say it quite that well, but then again, you never do, so there, I just did you a little favor.

    As to the rest of your pathetic, whiny little diatribe, it is just that – pathetic and telling.

    So tell me Mario, just who do you think you are that you have the right to attack any other American’s patriotism? Very telling, what a small, petty little man you are.

    Personally, I find you and your birther ilk to be as close to traitors of this country as it gets and I do feel that everything you do is nothing but wiping your *ss on our Constitution and both an assault and insult on our great Nation.

    I’ve given you quite a pass so far, as I understand and expect a defense attorney to do what they can to protect their client and defend their case. I’ll go as far as to say among what passes for lawyers amongst the birther crowd, that I’d rank you and Kreep as the “top” in talent that they have. Of course that’s like saying that of all the students that failed a class, you’re failing grade was better than the others…so its not much. And your poor, easily debunked arguments here don’t do your credibility any favors.

    All your complaints and infantile whining here comes down to one basic fact – we point out what a liar, fool and failure you are and you don’t like being called out on your crap.

    If you had any sense in you, you’d try to take the responses and legal research provided to help improve your woefully inadequate frivolous little case as much as possible.

    But no, you’d rather stick fingers in your ears and make yourself as much of a laughingstock and failure as possible.

    Oh, and I see that now these people are “my henchmen”, eh? LOL! You crack me, up! I point out that you seem to have no understanding of the word “henchmen” and you come back with finding a bigger way to prove that you don’t! Gee, well played Mario. *snark*. Sorry Dr. C. these people are *mine* now…ahahahaha!

    And Mario, spare my your little cry-baby sympathy trolling where you state, “I will never have any faith or credibility in anyone who attacks a person rather than his or her arguments”. LMAO? Boy, the only thing you’ve demonstrated that you are successful at Mario is projection. Maybe you should read your own posts sometime… you avoid about 75% of the direct questions made to you (the ones you don’t want to face) and you frequently get into these petty little mood swings where all you have to say amounts to cheap insults.

    So, based on your own words, I guess what you are really trying to admit to us that you know you don’t have any credibility and that you don’t even have faith in yourself.

    Oh, and there’s a lot more than 4 regular posters here that frequently disagree with you, so thanks for demonstrating that you can’t even handle basic math.

    Face it Mario, any mocking or ridicule you are receiving is only because that is all you have earned. Act like a sensible and civil adult and you will be treated like one. Continue to come off like a bitter, cry-baby fool and you’ll get the response you deserve.

  146. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 25, 2010 at 1:47 am #

    nbc,

    I finally realized it was the travel ram, not the travel ban.

  147. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 25, 2010 at 1:48 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy,

    No need to fret. He was involved in a travel ram, not the travel ban.

  148. avatar
    G March 25, 2010 at 1:51 am #

    Ironically, Mario says:

    nbc,
    The only ones to feel embarrased are people like you and your buddies on here.You might claim the high ground and make your little speeches.You might claim victory in your own little mind.But you have no victory in the real world.You will always be just a little internet pseudo intellectual who hides behind a screen name and offers nothing but juvenile snippets and who is lacking in courage to come out of the closet in which you hide.

    Um, tell me again how well your “birther” case is doing? Gee, how’s that entire birther lawsuit record doing? What are we at now…zero and nearing seventy? Tell me again who is still President while fools like you continue to utterly fail in the courts? Yeah, how’s that “victory” of yours, you keep describing Mario? LMAO!

    So yeah, I think we can continue to be smug as to date, all of our predictions have held up and you’ve got nothing but a string of failures.

  149. avatar
    G March 25, 2010 at 1:58 am #

    Mario, ever the failed comedian, says:

    Scientist,
    And for you my friend of failed experiments. You really should find a real job and do something productive for society.

    Yeah Scientist, because who would want a respectable, well-paying job such as being a scientist, trying to learn about and better the world, when you too could have had a career amongst the bottom feeder-end of the legal career field, as an “ambulance chaser”, nobly trying to keep drunk people behind the wheel! *snark*

    Mario’s latest little career attacks are once again telling – he’s bitterly jealous of any of us who have real, respectable day jobs.

  150. avatar
    G March 25, 2010 at 2:02 am #

    I figured out my error.It was a travel ram not a travel ban.That, indeed, was the purpose.

    Actually, I thought that was a good, humorous snarky response and worthy of a chuckle.

    As I’ve said before Mario, I have no problem giving you props when you act reasonable, funny, or provide valid discourse. You should try that more often.

  151. avatar
    G March 25, 2010 at 2:17 am #

    Mario says:

    G,
    Keep dreaming. Yeh, she said twice that she was present when Obama was born in USA and then later she corrected the caller.Go and peddle your trash to one of your kool aid followers.And that is from a birther to a barfer.

    Well Mario, birther babble does make me want to barf.

    Particularly lame, long debunked crap, such as birthers using this tape as their evidence definitely makes me want to vomit.

    So yeah, such nonsense as this paper-thin charade to use a setup tape that in full, contradicts the whole “birther” argument it tries to make…*barf*

    As to the rest of your response…”then later she corrected the caller”. *DUH* Tell me Mario, what does it mean when you correct the record? I’d think a lawyer would understand a basic concept like that.

    Try listening to the tape Mario. The guy conducting the interview does everything he can to try to put words in her mouth and trap her into backing up his biased birther agenda. When she hears how he is trying to mis-characterize her response, she gets quite vocal and adamant about correcting him and explicitly stating that Obama II (her grandson) was born in the USA.

    If you can be honest for once in your life, you’d admit that you know darn well that in her initial statements about an Obama being born in Kenya, she was referring to HER SON, Barack Obama I.

    Our current president, her grandson, who shares the same name, she quite clearly and repeatedly states was born in the US.

    If you are going to continue to try to push this tape nonsense, then you are openly admitting that you are either nothing but an unsuccessful two-bit con artist or that you truly are a severely intellectually challenged fool.

  152. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 25, 2010 at 2:19 am #

    Mario Apuzzo: I finally realized it was the travel ram, not the travel ban.

    The spell checker wouldn’t catch that one.

  153. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 25, 2010 at 2:26 am #

    Mario Apuzzo: I was just trying to read what you wrote and realized how tired you have become. I think it is time for you to find a different line of work. You have lost your persona.

    Actually, you may be on point about my work; this blog, however, is just a hobby.

  154. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 25, 2010 at 2:50 am #

    If Mario had said “trust” I could have understood it. I don’t trust anything on his site either, although there are, no doubt, some things that are true.

  155. avatar
    Lupin March 25, 2010 at 2:57 am #

    My money has always been on the “two-bit con artist”.

    And as for “unsuccessful,” I think Mario is doing very well (financially, I mean) at his scam.

  156. avatar
    Lupin March 25, 2010 at 2:59 am #

    Mario: “You have been exposed for the charlatan that you are.”

    We need a new irony meter.

  157. avatar
    RSA9999 March 25, 2010 at 3:19 am #

    I have a valid COLB which states that I am XX. However my long form birth certificate says I am YY. The reason for this is clearly stated only on my long form BC. Unless you had access to my long form BC, you would never know who I really am. I have a whole new identity on my current COLB. Maybe Mario’s on to something. Maybe I should run for POTUS, heck I have perfect precedent and your overwhelming support on not having to show my original birth certificate. Let me assure you that you folks would not like me being in the WH and commanding your military.

  158. avatar
    aarrgghh March 25, 2010 at 4:51 am #

    rsa9999, talking out of his or her arse9999:

    “I have a valid COLB which states that I am XX. However my long form birth certificate says I am YY.”

    you should run — you’d make history as our first down syndrome president, though i wouldn’t count on down voters being any more inclined to fall for birfer bs than any other constituency.

  159. avatar
    Scientist March 25, 2010 at 7:57 am #

    Failed experiments can teach us a lot. They often tell one that one’s theory is wrong. Any scientist I know would question his theory long before he hit 64 failed experiments in a row.

  160. avatar
    The Sheriff's A Ni- March 25, 2010 at 8:36 am #

    I have a valid COLB which states that I am XX.However my long form birth certificate says I am YY.

    [[citation needed]]

  161. avatar
    Black Lion March 25, 2010 at 10:07 am #

    Mario, you got part of it right. She did as you say state that Obama was born in the USA. Thanks for confirming that. However if you are again going to change your story and now state she did not say that Obama was born in the USA, in Hawaii, then you must know Kenyan. If not you only know what the translator and McRae said. So Mario, just like the infamous fantasy travel ban, you are relying on misinformation to make your argument. And then you wonder what you are not taken seriously by anyone here, your legal peers like Greg, or the courts.

  162. avatar
    SFJeff March 25, 2010 at 1:33 pm #

    I am fairly certain that XX is not a state in the Union, so you wouldn’t qualify. However, I do encourage you to file the paperwork and find out. I will trust the American voters.

  163. avatar
    RSA9999 March 25, 2010 at 2:25 pm #

    You folks are brain dead. You don’t deserve to get the answer to this but I’m feeling generous today. His or her – what a perfect statement.

    http://www.cdph.ca.gov//certlic/birthdeathmar/Documents/Gender%20Reassigment%20PAMPHLET%20(10-08)%20MERGED%20220.pdf

    Note on page 5:
    When we receive the acceptable documents (and fee), we’ll seal
    the original birth certificate and replace the sealed record with a
    new birth certificate.
    i The new birth certificate will in no way indicate that it is not the
    original birth certificate.
    i The new birth certificate will be the only birth certificate available
    to the public. (The original sealed record will only be available
    through a court order – per Health and Safety Code Section
    103440.)

  164. avatar
    Scientist March 25, 2010 at 2:32 pm #

    It’s you who are brain dead. While females are XX, males are XY, not YY. And a sex change cannot change your genetic makeup, only your external genitalia.

    Now, is it your contention that President Obama was born female and underwent a sex change?

  165. avatar
    nbc March 25, 2010 at 2:34 pm #

    Desperate times… Contradicted by the facts once again…

    The fools…. Have they no shame…

  166. avatar
    RSA9999 March 25, 2010 at 2:52 pm #

    They were simply variables for argument’s sake you idiot, now stop lollygagging and address my proof, that is if you can stay cognitive long enough to follow it. JEEZ.

    I made my case for my present COLB not proving my real identity. Unless you see my long form BC, you would never know who I really am.

    But thank you, I just won my bet that you would attack my status quo rather than acknowledging my proof.

  167. avatar
    Scientist March 25, 2010 at 2:58 pm #

    Where did you make a bet?

    The document you cited is from California; I don’t know whether Hawaii has the same rules. More importantly, the document says that in order to change your birth certificate you need a court order. There are grounds for a court to order gender to be changed. What grounds would there be for a court to order that the place of birth be changed? Has that ever happened?

  168. avatar
    Mike March 25, 2010 at 3:01 pm #

    You haven’t posted any proof, either in the mathematical or vernacular sense. Obvious FAIL troll is obvious. GTFO.

  169. avatar
    SFJeff March 25, 2010 at 3:45 pm #

    “I made my case for my present COLB not proving my real identity. Unless you see my long form BC, you would never know who I really am.”

    Your present COLB does prove your real identity. I read the instructions- in order to get a new BC, you need first of all to present a certified copy of a court order that reflects the gender change. And then you must file a certified copy of your old BC, and all the information from your old BC will be copied on, except for the gender assignment information- which reflects your new identity.

    However, since I believe the 17th Amendment, gender isn’t relevant to Presidential eligibility, so the example you cite isn’t relevant.

    And if your new BC doesn’t reflect your real identity- why did you go to the effort of filing for the new BC?

  170. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 25, 2010 at 10:14 pm #

    SFJeff: Your present COLB does prove your real identity.

    Sorry, you hit one of my pet peeves. A birth certificate is not an identity document. A drivers license or a passport is an identity document. There’s nothing on a birth certificate that says the person holding it is the person who is named on it.

  171. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 25, 2010 at 10:17 pm #

    Most all court-ordered changes in birth documents relate to legitimation, paternity and legal name changes.

  172. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 25, 2010 at 10:22 pm #

    And adoptions are similar. What’s your point? Obama was neither adopted or had his sex changed. Witness protection is also similar. How does any of that apply to Obama?

  173. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 26, 2010 at 1:58 am #

    G,

    I see being called what you are, a barfer, is making you barf. Now isn’t that just grand.

  174. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 26, 2010 at 2:01 am #

    nbc,

    I guess you read my brief. Must have you concerned since the only thing that you got to say for your sorry self is talk about a travel ban.

    How does it feel to be part of the barfer world?

  175. avatar
    Mario Apuzzo March 26, 2010 at 2:06 am #

    G,

    You are as empty as your name. You got nothing but politics that has saved your sorry self. Let me tell you that politics change but character does not. In the end you will be left empty handed. You won’t even be willing to tell the world that you were the famous nothing Mr. G on some radical blog who did nothing but barf riducule against people.

    You call that victory? I’m sure you are real proud of yourself. Don’t forget to tell your children about the great Mr. G that you were in a pseudo world of twisted politics.

  176. avatar
    nBC March 26, 2010 at 2:28 am #

    Silly Mario… Missing the point once again.

    I read your “brief” which as usual misses the point.

    Do you offer a money back guarantee?

  177. avatar
    nBC March 26, 2010 at 2:33 am #

    Mario MArio

    Get some sleep…

    You’re not doing yourself any favors right now by ranting and raving.

  178. avatar
    nBC March 26, 2010 at 2:36 am #

    So what about the claim that Sara Obama claimed that Obama was born in Kenya when she actually denied this

    Did you listen to the tape?
    If past performance is any indication then the answer is no.

    Sigh…

  179. avatar
    G March 26, 2010 at 2:38 am #

    Mario says:

    G, I see being called what you are, a barfer, is making you barf. Now isn’t that just grand.

    No Mario. It is the lameness of birther arguments that makes me want to hurl. Your childish insults are not part of that impact. They just demonstrate what a weak and infantile little man you are.

  180. avatar
    G March 26, 2010 at 2:53 am #

    Pouting Mario, in another tantrum, tries to fling his feces:

    G, You are as empty as your name. You got nothing but politics that has saved your sorry self. Let me tell you that politics change but character does not. In the end you will be left empty handed. You won’t even be willing to tell the world that you were the famous nothing Mr. G on some radical blog who did nothing but barf riducule against people.

    You call that victory? I’m sure you are real proud of yourself. Don’t forget to tell your children about the great Mr. G that you were in a pseudo world of twisted politics.

    Oh, grow up Mario. You come off like nothing but a sad, sad, little petty man.

    Nothing but politics has “saved me”? WTF? LOL! That is one of the lamest insults you’ve hurled yet.

    So, your whole whine is just to be bitter because you didn’t get the President you wanted in the last election and I did? Well, boo-hoo Mario. That’s how elections work.

    Hate to tell you but who the President is shouldn’t define your life. Being on here is just a personal hobby of mine.

    Obviously, you are just a cheap two-bit fame whore trying to con people with your lame birther tripe and your laughingly pathetic frivolous lawsuits. You are the one who has put your entire reputation on the line with this garbage.

    Me, I’m just here to shake my head and mock you. Its a personal satisfaction and hobby.

    Honestly, the whole birther nonsense is not even worthy of wasting my time discussing it beyond blog sites like these.

    Out in the real world, the birthers are such a pathetic joke, that they are not worthy of discussion. When I’m not on places like this, my time is spent talking about more important topics like work, family, sports, movies, etc. Not on silliness like birthers or moon landing deniers or other crazy conspiracy stuff which debunker hobbiests such as myself just follow and comment on for our own personal fun.

    So sorry Mario, but I won’t be boring anyone with tales of trading words over a keyboard with the one and only DUI/birther laywer Mario Apuzzo. Hate to break it to your ego, but if I did, the only reply would be “who?” probably followed by wondering why I’d waste any of my free time talking to a nut.

  181. avatar
    G March 26, 2010 at 3:06 am #

    Mario MArio
    Get some sleep…
    You’re not doing yourself any favors right now by ranting and raving.

    I know what you mean, nBC. Mario seems prone to going off on these childish tantrum fits, where he doesn’t contribute anything except trying to come up with cheap insults.

    Half the time, he’ll actually contribute semi-worthwhile dialog, such as when he’s trying to argue his case or explain himself, even though he often has to resort to taking quotes out of context to try to defend his positions.

    Sometimes he provides a bit of humorous banter. Not all of it succeeds, but at least he tries.

    Then there are other times where it seems he’s got nothing to add but lame insults and other pathetic whining.

    My advice to him is to stay off the internet when he’s having a bad day, or at least give himself a “time out”.

    He’s out of his league here and if he’s going to act like a whiny infantile twit, then he deserves that resulting slap down coming to him.

    I have no idea what actual mental, psychological and/or emotional issues he suffers from, but his weird mood swings definitely seem to indicate that something is really “off”. It seems like there is more than just a lack of sleep going on.

  182. avatar
    Expelliarmus March 26, 2010 at 3:57 am #

    It is not at all uncommon for people’s internet posting habits to coincide with drinking and/or other substance use. When I see a poster who seems unduly hostile, childish, or incoherent, I generally assume a lack of sobriety.

  183. avatar
    Black Lion March 26, 2010 at 9:13 am #

    Maybe that explains Mario’s so called filing. Since it is fully of innuendo and proven lies like the travel ban, maybe Mario wrote it when he was in one of those “lack of sobriety” moods….It could make some sense…Similarly Sven/Dick with his wild and baseless accusations that have never be supported with any kind of proof. Ex, you may be on to something….

  184. avatar
    Bob Ross March 26, 2010 at 11:19 am #

    I find it funny Mario that you’re talking about others having no victory in the real world. How many of your birther cases have you won thus far Mario?

    nbc, The only ones to feel embarrased are people like you and your buddies on here. You might claim the high ground and make your little speeches. You might claim victory in your own little mind. But you have no victory in the real world. You will always be just a little internet pseudo intellectual who hides behind a screen name and offers nothing but juvenile snippets and who is lacking in courage to come out of the closet in which you hide.

  185. avatar
    Bob Ross March 26, 2010 at 11:30 am #

    And what does it say of your character Mario that you come in here spouting debunked claims and then when corrected you repeat the same claims ad nauseum. I ask you sir, at long last, have you no sense of decency or shame?

  186. avatar
    Thor March 27, 2010 at 10:19 pm #

    Yes Obama was adopted. Soetoro divorce decree of August 28, 1980 mentions two children. If he was not adopted, he would not be a part of the order especially since no child support was involved.

  187. avatar
    Greg March 27, 2010 at 10:37 pm #

    You guys are terrible at this law thing. Go pretend to be NBA stars, you couldn’t do worse.

  188. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 27, 2010 at 11:23 pm #

    Thor: If he was not adopted, he would not be a part of the order especially since no child support was involved.

    And what law or regulation supports this fancy of yours? Do you have example of different types of Hawaiian divorce decrees that demonstrate this?

    No, I didn’t think so.

  189. avatar
    Thor March 27, 2010 at 11:33 pm #

    It applies to Obama because as RSA points out, the face of the COLB proves nothing. To truly identify someone, you need the original birth document and supporting documentation.

    I can’t get a meaningful discussion going here because the site is full of inane, foulmouthed nane nane boo boo children. I’m going to talk with the adults. You’d be more credible if you stuck with the discussion.

    Mr Apuzzo, I wish you godspeed sir, I thought I had a curiousity about Obama, instead my quest for knowledge has uncovered a bigger danger – suspicious Alinsky conversation that goes nowhere and I learn nothing.

  190. avatar
    Greg March 27, 2010 at 11:54 pm #

    You go discuss this wherever you want, Thor, but you’ll never learn anything unless you are willing to do the heavy lifting and challenge your assumptions. For example, when Dr. Conspiracy asks what Hawaiian law or regulation supports your notion, try finding some support for it in Hawaiian law. You won’t find any. Because it is birther fantasy.

    Ditto the silly notion that “[t]o truly identify someone, you need the original birth document and supporting documentation.”

    Go look at the Federal Rules of Evidence. Google “Federal Rules of Evidence.” You’ll find that a state document with a state seal is self-authenticating. A birth certificate is an exception to hearsay, and that absent some really good reason, this COLB would prove Obama’s citizenship entirely. Not anonymous pseudo-experts opining in a field they’d never practiced in before, but real, tangible evidence that could meet the burden of persuasion.

  191. avatar
    Thor March 28, 2010 at 12:16 am #

    OK, I was born in the USA of a Greek mother and US father. I am therefore eligible to become POTUS?

  192. avatar
    G March 28, 2010 at 12:39 am #

    Thor says:

    OK, I was born in the USA of a Greek mother and US father.I am therefore eligible to become POTUS?

    Answer = Yes.

  193. avatar
    G March 28, 2010 at 12:59 am #

    Thor says:

    Yes Obama was adopted.Soetoro divorce decree of August 28, 1980 mentions two children.If he was not adopted, he would not be a part of the order especially since no child support was involved.

    Thor, I suggest you re-read the divorce degree. Nowhere within it does it state that Barack Obama was adopted. You are drawing conclusions that just aren’t supported by the documentation.

    The only reference to him is that the “parties” involved in the divorce also had a child over 18, which is reference to Barack.

    As one of the “parties” involved was his mother, of course he would be listed here, regardless. There is nothing at all there in reference to him that indicates adoption whatsoever.

    To date, no evidence at all of any adoption proceedings or records have been found. Therefore, there is nothing to support such irresponsible speculation.

  194. avatar
    RSA9999 March 28, 2010 at 1:57 am #

    Jeff: my present COLB doesn’t prove my status at birth. I was born male and now I’m female. My original BC has all the paperwork attached to it. Every state in the union respects my privacy. I am bound by nothing to reveal my past; my attorney has seen to that. Now, if I’m hiding something, what is he hiding?

  195. avatar
    nbc March 28, 2010 at 2:02 am #

    Obama was born a male. Sorry dude.

  196. avatar
    nbc March 28, 2010 at 2:03 am #

    The divorce decree mentions two children but no evidence of adoption.

    Hmmm

  197. avatar
    RSA9999 March 28, 2010 at 2:08 am #

    Yah never know!! Where’s your proof?

  198. avatar
    G March 28, 2010 at 2:45 am #

    RSA9999 says:
    “Now, if I’m hiding something, what is he hiding?”

    Ah, so your whole gimmick here is projection. You’re messed up and have something to hide, so you assume everyone else does too.

    Sorry, but your problems are your own. Projecting your personal situation on the president or others is just sad and silly.

  199. avatar
    Thor March 28, 2010 at 2:50 am #

    What? Did Lolo agree to him being mentioned in the divorce because he had fond feelings for him and didn’t want to ruin his self esteem? If Stanley had decided after the divorce that she wanted child support, she would have cited her divorce decree as evidence that Lolo agreed that Barry Soetoro was his child.

    HI statute says a stepfather is expected to care for a child only during the marriage not after divorce unless an agreement has otherwise been reached; no agreements were made. Why mention him at all if he was not germane to the decree?

  200. avatar
    Thor March 28, 2010 at 3:03 am #

    His expenditure of $2M for his defence from lawsuits says he’s hiding something. Why isn’t he proud to announce he’s male and born in HI? It is because his original BC would say he is the son of an alien and therefore ineligible, just like I know that I would be ineligible for POTUS.

    If all I was allowed to see was Sun Yat-sen’s HI birth certificate, I would argue with you until forever that he was ever born in China on a different day and year.

  201. avatar
    RSA9999 March 28, 2010 at 3:16 am #

    Thor:

    Good news. His COLB says his father is an alien so you are definitely eligible to become POTUS.

  202. avatar
    G March 28, 2010 at 3:31 am #

    Thor, once again you are trying to read into and speculate on stuff beyond what is there.

    Look again. Line 3 of page 1 of the document is the only reference and all it is is just a standard form, practically doing nothing other than an “inventory” of any offspring either of them have, as per the categories listed on the form:

    “The parties have __ child(ren) below age of 18 and __ child(ren) above 18 but still dependent upon the parties for education.”

    The only reference to Barack is the 2nd blank is filled in with a “1”.

    *yawn*

  203. avatar
    Thor March 28, 2010 at 3:32 am #

    You’re right RSA, that’s my proof that I’m eligible. My first duty would be to take over the Greek Islands in return for bailing them out. What a service to the American people and if I work it just right, there’s money to be made. Only in America, I don’t think you can get away with it in Greece but I have the best of both worlds. I would have no problem getting dual citizenship especially after I bailed them out!

  204. avatar
    RSA9999 March 28, 2010 at 3:46 am #

    You’re welcome Thor. When I hear about the Greek Island bailout, I will come to see you at the WH. Then I will expect a free ticket to the Islands for a very long vacation and then a job with great benefits that are exempt from the health bill just passed. And to think I nearly walked away from this site. I leave in peace.

  205. avatar
    G March 28, 2010 at 3:50 am #

    Thor, trying to come across stupid, says:

    His expenditure of $2M for his defence from lawsuits says he’s hiding something.

    But you just made that number up, or pulled it from some random site that made it up.

    Any evidence of expenses for defense of suits, which is provided automatically by the government, not by him, is in the handful of cases where the government actually had to respond at all, which went no further than simple motions to dismiss, as is done with any frivolous lawsuit that the government has to address. Some of the attorney’s involved were on the record saying their dismissal filing work was pro-bono.

    Anyone who’s tried to come up with serious calculated guesses of a total, based on all the known cases and efforts to date, puts the grand total amount in the tens of thousands at best, which is pennies in the legal world.

    Why isn’t he proud to announce he’s male and born in HI? It is because his original BC would say he is the son of an alien and therefore ineligible, just like I know that I would be ineligible for POTUS…

    He is. That is why he is the 1st president in history to publicize his HI birth certificate to show everyone.

    That document clearly states he is MALE and lists his birthplace as HONOLULU, HI.

    Had he been born anywhere else, that form would have listed a different place for his birth location.

    Finally, as anyone with even an elementary school civics lesson knows, if you are born on US soil, you are a NBC.

    *DUH*

  206. avatar
    Thor March 28, 2010 at 3:58 am #

    “The parties have __ child(ren) below age of 18 and __ child(ren) above 18 but still dependent upon the parties for education.”

    What it say quite clearly is the parties (plural) have 1 child above 18 but still dependent upon the parties (plural) for education. Why would Soetoro be dependent on Lolo for education?

  207. avatar
    G March 28, 2010 at 4:03 am #

    RSA9999, in one of the lamest attempts at concern trolling ever, acting dumber than a box of bricks, asks how anyone can tell that Obama is male, stating “Yah never know!! Where’s your proof?”

    Uh, gee…his birth certificate clearly says “Male”, there are tons of pictures widely available of him from his early youth until now, all showing him as male, and he is still a male. *DUH*

    If you are trying to win an award for dumbest question ever asked on here, RSA9999, well, then I hereby award you the King/Queen of Stupid! There, feel better?

  208. avatar
    G March 28, 2010 at 4:12 am #

    Thor says:

    What it say quite clearly is the parties (plural) have 1 child above 18 but still dependent upon the parties (plural) for education. Why would Soetoro be dependent on Lolo for education?

    Obviously Thor, your grasp of english syntax is limited.

    There are two people involved in a divorce, hence parties (plural). If either of those parties had children, they would be listed on this standard form, regardless of if they belong to the first party, the second party or both.

    Your last sentence makes very little sense at all to this argument. The only child involved with the name Soetoro was Maya, who is listed, and of course parents would be assumed responsible for their children’s education. Maya’s status however is explicitly listed and dealt with further on page 5 of the document. Therefore, read it for yourself and the answer is right there.

    Other than that, you are just tilting at windmills and acting stupid on this. I think you know better and are nothing but a silly concern troll intentionally playing dumb.

  209. avatar
    Thor March 28, 2010 at 4:16 am #

    Why waste anybody’s money when for $20 you could clear up this whole controversy?

    John McCain coughed up his BC so congress could come up with a non-binding resolution saying he’s eligible. Since you’re all knowing, where do you get the definition of NBC? It apparently hasn’t been defined by the constitution or the supreme court, which was the reason for my initial question about my situation. I thought you had to be more than an anchor baby to be POTUS.

    No mention of Sun Yat-Sen?

  210. avatar
    RSA9999 March 28, 2010 at 4:38 am #

    My BC says I’m female and I have lots of selected pictures from baby on up to maturity says I’m a female which is why I changed over. No, I don’t think Barry is transgendered. You just refuse to accept that a COLB does not prove who you were born as, it just gives the status quo. If he was born in Kenya only the original BC would say so. Hawaii allows for registration as a HI birth even if the birth took place outside of the United States. I looked up Sun Yet Sen after reading Thor’s reply and lo and behold both of his certificates are on line – same month, different day and year of birth. Yes, I couldn’t explain that either.

    Bottom line, if you’re going to lead me, don’t think I’d follow any fool. Especially if my life is on the line. Trust but verify. If you don’t prove you’re trustworthy you don’t have a follower in me. Goes for any situation.

  211. avatar
    G March 28, 2010 at 4:54 am #

    Thor, the latest lame concern troll on here, tries to regurgitate several more of the weakest, long debunked, dead horse claims of the birther movement:

    Why waste anybody’s money when for $20 you could clear up this whole controversy?

    So, Thor, why does someone need to request a document they’ve already released, just because a few crazy losers like you are either too lazy to look it up or too in denial to realize it was released almost 2 years ago?

    Here you go, troll. You can see it for free:

    http://msgboard.snopes.com/politics/graphics/birth.jpg

    And here’s some required reading for you:

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp

    John McCain coughed up his BC so congress could come up with a non-binding resolution saying he’s eligible.

    Oh really, he provided his BC? Have you seen it? I’ve never seen John McCain’s BC and neither have you.

    The non-binding resolution was passed because, unlike Obama, who was clearly born on US soil, there were some legitimate questions about McCain’s birth taking place in Panama. Of course, that ended up not being a big deal to anyone either, so the resolution easily passed.

    Since you’re all knowing, where do you get the definition of NBC? It apparently hasn’t been defined by the constitution or the supreme court, which was the reason for my initial question about my situation. I thought you had to be more than an anchor baby to be POTUS.

    If you’d spend some time actually reading the articles on this site, you can see that this issue has been looked at and discussed in quite a bit of depth.

    Your very example of an “anchor baby” is a perfect illustration. Why do you think that term is even around and why it is such an issue to people? The whole term “anchor baby” exists because of the simple fact that even babies born of two illegal aliens on US soil automatically get US citizenship, by the simple act of their birth. In order to change that, congress would have to take up the issue and make a law restricting citizenship. Until then, they are NBC.

    Let me turn the question back on you – show me in the constitution or ANY US Law or settled Court Case that says otherwise. You can’t.

    The burden of proof for your claims is on you. Obama was elected and sworn in and nobody in any official capacity had any issues with his citizenship anywhere along the process. He’s been serving as President for well over a year now. So, there’s my proof by example. Prove me wrong.

    No mention of Sun Yat-Sen?

    Why would I mention a stupid, debunked and irrelevant person to this discussion?

    Here, do some reading and stop coming across so stupid:

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/01/hawaiian-birth-certificate-its-a-fake/

  212. avatar
    G March 28, 2010 at 5:03 am #

    RSA9999, If you are going to believe that Sun Yat-Sen crap, you just show how gullible you are:

    That has long been debunked and torn apart as well:

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/01/hawaiian-birth-certificate-its-a-fake/

    Your whole argument is based off of meaningless concern-trolling speculation, with no evidence to back it up.

    For one thing any foreign birth registered in HI would list that FOREIGN location under the PLACE OF BIRTH. Go to HI’s site or call them and they’ll explain that too you.

    Obama’s BC, which he provided and the state of HI has backed up is prima facie evidence and clearly states HONOLULU, HI as his place of birth.

    That is all evidence that any real organization that uses birth certificates for validation needs.

    The notion that somehow that you personally need more proof than any actual agency would is telling that the real issue here is you have some other sort of personal prejudices driving you.

  213. avatar
    Thor March 28, 2010 at 5:03 am #

    So let me get this straight. What you’re saying is that the sentence in the form says is that Lolo and Stanley have children but fail to mention who is related to whom – just inventory. Then it goes on to say that both are dependent on both Lolo and Stanley for education.

    Are you trying to tell me that Barry Soetoro is also a figment of my imagination? I can’t honestly believe that we both have the same dearth of information and you’re not asking more questions. Definitely not a scientific mind.

    By the way, I speak five languages fluently and English is my second language. I think I do pretty well in your language.

  214. avatar
    aarrgghh March 28, 2010 at 5:04 am #

    thor, very, very, very late to the party:

    “Why waste anybody’s money when for $20 you could clear up this whole controversy?”

    there is no controversy. that was demonstrated on nov 4 2008. if birfers want to waste their money on scam lawyers while financing the judicial system they hate and helping make robert gibbs’ press conferences a little more entertaining … please continue.

  215. avatar
    G March 28, 2010 at 5:30 am #

    Thor says:

    So let me get this straight. What you’re saying is that the sentence in the form says is that Lolo and Stanley have children but fail to mention who is related to whom – just inventory. Then it goes on to say that both are dependent on both Lolo and Stanley for education.

    You’re close. The first page is just an inventory of what might be at stake. That is the only reference to Barack, a simple “1” marked in a pre-printed form.

    Notice how there is further mention of Maya after wards, in terms of her custody & disposition, but nothing further on him. So, technically, the document makes no statement as to assigning further responsibility of his education at all.

    That is all there is too it. Again, you are trying to read into it something that is not there.

    Are you trying to tell me that Barry Soetoro is also a figment of my imagination?

    Yes.

    I can’t honestly believe that we both have the same dearth of information and you’re not asking more questions. Definitely not a scientific mind.

    Why would I have more questions?

    If you had any basic understanding of the fundamental principals of the scientific process, you would realize that a hypothesis requires testable evidence.

    I have yet to see any evidence whatsoever showing that he was adopted.

    I’ve seen a copy of a birth certificate that identifies him as Barack Hussein Obama II, which is the same name he goes by today.

    From a scientific perspective, it would be illogical for me to assume his name was anything other than that, as I’d have no evidence that could hold up under scrutiny to support such a conclusion.

    By the way, I speak five languages fluently and English is my second language. I think I do pretty well in your language.

    Five languges, eh? So, are you Orly Taitz or something? LOL!

    For a non-native speaker, you are doing better than most birthers in being able to put together a properly formed sentence. However, your responses to date lead me to seriously question the extent of you reading comprehension skills in the english language.

  216. avatar
    aarrgghh March 28, 2010 at 5:32 am #

    arse9999, playing oh so hard-to-get:

    “If you don’t prove you’re trustworthy you don’t have a follower in me.”

    i’m sure obama is heartbroken, or would be if he had any idea who you are.

  217. avatar
    G March 28, 2010 at 5:40 am #

    So Thor,

    You claim that you were born in the US, but that english is your second language (of the 5 you claim to speak). Am I to assume that at some point after your birth, you left the US and were raised and/or currently live in Greece or some other country?

    If so, the other conditions of eligibility for POTUS would be of greater concern to you – minimum age 35 and at least 14 years residing in the US. Oh, and just in case you ask, the Constitution is silent on whether those years have to be consecutive or concurrent.

    Finally, if you don’t live in this country, why do you care about our US laws?

  218. avatar
    Thor March 28, 2010 at 6:02 am #

    G, You stop just short of telling me what my agenda is – good move, don’t stoop that far. Don’t give me snopes and this site as proof of anything either. Look at Wiki, they report that the chinaman obtained a certificate of birth from Hawaii – no mention of debunking. You just want to wear me down until I blindly believe you. Not going to happen. I had hoped for a discussion of possibilities but the fact that you consider me wrong 100% of the time tells me that you have an agenda. It has nothing to do with my intellect or understanding of the English language. At this rate, you will never sell your product or get your point across.

    I leave now happy that I am eligible to be president.

  219. avatar
    Thor March 28, 2010 at 6:50 am #

    No controversy, are you serious??? There’s nothing but controversy on this site and I spent no money at all. You are entitled to your opinion as am I. The final chapter has not been written yet so maybe time will tell. I came into this discussion because of something I read on this site that I had no idea was even possible, that a COLB and original BC could be different. No disagreement there. Up until then I didn’t care one way or the other. I perked up when I discovered that it might be likely that what the birthers were saying about me not being eligible for POTUS was untrue. However I got a glimpse of what the controversy is about. This is attack city should one be so bold as to question anything. Now I will continue until I feel satisfied that I have found the real truth but I will not find it here.

  220. avatar
    Greg March 28, 2010 at 7:26 am #

    RSA and Thor,

    Unless you see my long form BC, you would never know who I really am.

    Your original birth certificate could have been forged.

    It could have been placed there by space aliens in an attempt to have your birth legitimized in the US.

    It could have been obtained by fraud. Apparently, some Chinese dissident, who you have heard of, obtained his by fraud.

    So, you can’t “really” prove anything with the long form birth certificate either.

    So, let’s interview the actual witnesses to your birth.

    But, they could have been bribed, or intimidated into testifying, so that won’t really prove anything either.

    Luckily, the law doesn’t give a fig about “could haves.” Or else we could get into this infinitely recursive nonsense.

    Right now, the COLB is, as it clearly states, prima facie evidence of all the facts that appear on its face.

    If I wanted to challenge your gender, RSA, I would present evidence that you had changed your gender, not suggestions that it was possible or that some random internet pseud had claimed to have done it.

    That evidence would have to be credible enough to overcome the fact that the State of Hawaii put their seal on the COLB and their registrar signed the COLB swearing it was a true copy or abstract of what was in the files.

    Defending against stupid claims also isn’t proof of anything. Which attorney, Leo, Mario, Orly, Berg, has said that their lawsuit would go away if Obama gave them the original birth certificate. Berg wants Obama to prove a negative – that he never lost his citizenship by swearing allegiance to another country. Mario, Leo and Orly all think that nothing Obama shows could make him eligible.

    Why don’t you ask your lawyer, RSA, to explain this to you. Or, you could read the dozens of articles Dr. Conspiracy has written on this subject.

  221. avatar
    Greg March 28, 2010 at 8:26 am #

    Look at Wiki, they report that the chinaman obtained a certificate of birth from Hawaii

    Sun Yat Sen obtaining a birth certificate fraudulently means that he’s not eligible for the Presidency. It does not suggest that Obama also obtained a BC fraudulently. Just like RSA changing his/her BC doesn’t suggest that Obama changed his.

  222. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 28, 2010 at 8:40 am #

    RSA9999/Thor: Now I will continue until I feel satisfied that I have found the real truth but I will not find it here.

    I think pretty much any view expressed on this issue has found its way onto this web site. All that is required of the reader is the ability to think critically.

    It is possible for a birth certificate to change over time. For example, if no father were listed on the birth certificate and a father acknowledges paternity within the first year, the father would be added to a subsequently issued certificate with no indication of the change. The key thing to remember, though, is that changes to the birth certificate add true information, not false information.

  223. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 28, 2010 at 8:47 am #

    RSA9999/Thor: Look at Wiki, they report that the chinaman obtained a certificate of birth from Hawaii – no mention of debunking.

    The Sun Yat-Sen birth certificate (which by the way is a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth, not a Certificate of Live Birth, and would not be under today’s rules sufficient documentation to get a US Passport) was discussed on this site some time ago.

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/01/hawaiian-birth-certificate-its-a-fake/

  224. avatar
    Greg March 28, 2010 at 8:52 am #

    There are people who argue that 9/11 was an inside job. In fact, in Berg, at least, some of these are the same people.

    Just because some crazy people have a theory does not mean there is a real controversy.

    There is no reasonable doubt that Obama is not eligible.

    Part of the reason you’re getting some hostility is that this is an old blog (in internet terms), with LOTS of posts that answered your questions a long time ago. Apparently, however, without even looking at those, you’ve decided that they cannot answer your questions and they have to be answered individually for you.

  225. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 28, 2010 at 9:02 am #

    RSA9999/Thor: Hawaii allows for registration as a HI birth even if the birth took place outside of the United States.

    Irrelevant on two counts. The Hawaiian law which allows residents of Hawaii to register their children born overseas did not exist until 1982. Also it must say where the child was really born.

    http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0017_0008.htm

  226. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 28, 2010 at 9:03 am #

    RSA9999/Thor: John McCain coughed up his BC

    Not really. See my article: http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/02/the-birth-certificate-is-a-forgery/

  227. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 28, 2010 at 9:06 am #

    I don’t really appreciate sock puppets. Thor and RSA9999 are posting from the same IP address, strongly suggesting they are one and the same writer.

    The only people ever banned from this site are trolls, and RSA9999/Thor are now on death row.

  228. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 28, 2010 at 9:09 am #

    G: Thor, trying to come across stupid

    I think “trollish” is the more accurate description in this case.

  229. avatar
    misha March 28, 2010 at 10:51 am #

    “RSA9999/Thor: Look at Wiki, they report that the chinaman obtained a certificate of birth from Hawaii – no mention of debunking.”

    RSA/Thor: My wife is from China. Chinese people DETEST “Chinaman.” Just as black people detest “negro.”

    Thank you for confirming my beliefs about the Denialists.

  230. avatar
    G March 28, 2010 at 12:22 pm #

    I don’t really appreciate sock puppets. Thor and RSA9999 are posting from the same IP address, strongly suggesting they are one and the same writer.The only people ever banned from this site are trolls, and RSA9999/Thor are now on death row.

    Just further evidence that these two are nothing but a bunch of birther troll liars, trying to pull a lame concern-trolling con.

    Not only did these sock-puppets help “fluff” each other in the comments, but they also try to claim very different yet “exotic” backgrounds as their reason for being “concerned” about this issue. It appears likely that their “background” stories are nothing but made up BS too.

    I think you should continue to monitor the IP addresses Dr. C and keep us posted when sock puppets appear. And yes, as they are nothing but small con liars with an obvious agenda, by all means, warn then BAN them, as fakes like them not contributing any honest dialog here.

    Their real agenda appears to be based on nothing more than blind hate and the intent to spread misinformation.

  231. avatar
    misha March 28, 2010 at 1:31 pm #

    “the intent to spread misinformation.”

    Wait, you mean Obama was NOT born on Krypton?

  232. avatar
    SFJeff March 28, 2010 at 2:43 pm #

    RSA- “Unless you see my long form BC, you would never know who I really am”

    Unless you lied in your request to the court, your current BC is who you are. You seem very conflicted about your identity.

  233. avatar
    Arthur March 28, 2010 at 2:47 pm #

    Say what you will about Mario, the man is indefatigable. Laura had Petrarch, the Dark Lady had Shakespeare, Mario has me. And so I present this tribute:

    When the team is down by thirty-three
    And you’re feeling dislocatio,
    To restore a sense of bel espirt
    Call on Mr. Mario.

    When you’re friends are argumentative,
    But you’re inarticulato
    Don’t look to someone tentative
    Call on Mr. Mario.

    When the judge says, “You’ve no standing”
    To your third try of quo warranto,
    Why not seek a fourth remanding,
    Call on Mr. Mario.

    When you’re standing at the Pearly Gates
    Charged with “in flagrante” and “delicto”
    You’ll need a man who loves debates
    Call on Mr. Mario.

    He won’t give up, despite the truth,
    To the facts he’ll say “Hell, no!”
    Like Boehner, he’s a bit uncouth,
    Is Mario Apuzzo.

    Keep plucking that chicken; there’s gotta be meat somewhere!

  234. avatar
    SFJeff March 28, 2010 at 2:48 pm #

    Didn’t Obama admit to being born on Krypton? I think that is clear evidence that should be further investigated…

  235. avatar
    misha March 28, 2010 at 3:01 pm #

    Yeah, I remember at the Press dinner, he said something about that. Uh, oh.

  236. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 28, 2010 at 3:38 pm #

    I don’t “monitor” IP addresses, but when something smells like a troll, I take a look.

  237. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 28, 2010 at 3:40 pm #

    I will probably have to have my political correctness realigned after I finish reading the Charlie Chan mystery novels.

  238. avatar
    misha March 28, 2010 at 4:40 pm #

    The wise Chinese man is a staple. My wife snickers at Charlie Chan. Here is something Chinese do appreciate:

    A Westerner is told about a Chinese monk who can explain life. He goes to the monk, who says “Child is born. Grandfather dies. Father dies.”

    “That’s it?!” says the Westerner. “That’s awful.”

    The Chinese man replies “Would you have it any other way?”