It’s been an interesting couple of weeks — first the anticipation of the “hearing of the century” in Atlanta, the battle of the titans Orly Taitz and Barack Obama. Then there was the chance to meet some of my fellow anti-birthers who are without exception, exceptional. The hearing itself was draining as I listened with just a tiny bit of anxiety as nonsense was entered into the record without challenge, Obama and his attorney having chosen not to show up. Then there was the wait to see what the court would say, as birthers commented here while visions of inevitable victory danced in their heads.
It was around 5 PM today that I checked Google News to search for “Malihi” and saw the headline at the Atlanta Journal Constitution, Judge: Obama eligible to be Georgia Candidate. I raced to get something up on the blog and then took time to actually read the ruling from Judge Malihi.
What struck me was the wholly unremarkable nature of the ruling: it was all so anti-climactic. In fact, it is just like all those other unremarkable court decisions I’ve read, going back to the 18th century. They all make perfect sense (well, except Dred Scott).
What the judge in Atlanta said was that he uses the same rules of evidence as other courts. Expert testimony has to come from experts, and the qualifications of experts must be established — and they weren’t. The judge said that a methodology must be validated, and Susan Daniels didn’t show why her searches of error-filled public databases constituted a valid methodology. I’ve said over and over again that nothing the birthers think is “evidence” would be admissible in court. Today I’m proven right.
Today’s ruling reminds me of a joke from my youth (and I apologize in advance to those who take offense at animal cruelty). The story goes that a man was unable to get his mule to turn in the direction he wanted. A passerby said that you just had to know how to talk to a mule. The fellow took a two-by-four and hit the mule upside the head and yelled “gee” and the mule turned. The mule’s owner said, “I thought you said you could just talk to the mule” and the reply was, “yes, but first you have to get their attention.”
Birthers aren’t very good at paying attention, and in particular to the Indiana Court’s ruling in Ankeny v Daniels. Birthers have simply blown off this case: some say the Court got it wrong, some say it was dicta. I said that Ankeny shows how any court will look at claims that US Presidents must have citizen parents — they will take one look at US v Wong and say “not so.” I was right as Judge Malihi found the Court’s argument in Ankeny persuasive. Birthers get their hopes up so high when there’s no justification whatever for their optimism. I hope (and it’s a small hope) that this new ruling from Georgia will be the two-by-four upside the mulish heads of the birthers. They’ve lost 100 court cases and they should stop making excuses and read the handwriting on the wall: “YOU ARE WRONG.”
So I challenge birthers, and in particular Dean Haskins, to stop and think a minute. The Indiana Court of Appeals says that you’re wrong about what defines a “natural born citizen.” The hearing officer and counsel for the Illinois State Board of Elections just said that you’re wrong. Judge Malihi in Atlanta said today that you’re wrong. No court has ever agreed with you. Did it ever occur to you that the Congress unanimously certified the 2008 election without objection because you’re wrong? Why don’t you change the name of The Birther Summit to Oops!