When I talked with Orly Taitz over the phone a couple of weeks ago, she used an analogy to help me understand her feelings about the Obama eligibility controversy and why she so strenuously works to get Obama out of the White House. Following is my remembrance of what she said, except that she went into more detail and expressed it more passionately than I will:
Let’s say that you took an extended vacation out of the country. While you were gone, someone broke into your house. They had access to all of your personal papers and used them obtain a fraudulent deed for your house. They changed the locks on the doors and began living there.
When you returned, you found your house stolen. You went to the police, but the thieves had a deed. You went to the courts, but they would not listen to you. Imagine how you would feel! The White House is the people’s house, and someone has faked documents and is living in a place where they are not entitled.
I can certainly sympathize with a story of someone whose identity has been stolen (my credit card was skimmed at a restaurant once, and thousands of dollars were charged on my account). I think the story of police inaction and courts not listening is rather implausible, but where the analogy breaks down is that whatever one might say about President Obama’s eligibility, Orly Taitz is not the one entitled to live in the White House. She is not the representative of the “people” and this is the essence of the issue of standing that has thwarted over 100 birther lawsuits. The White House might be the people’s house, but it is not her house. Orly Taitz has appointed herself the person who is responsible for seeing that an eligible President serves, when in fact that responsibility rests with the voters (most of whom said explicitly that Obama should be in the White House), the Electoral College, and the Congress.
Now, let me give an analogy of my own:
Let’s say that you are a Muslim and that your family has purchased a house in a neighborhood. Unbeknownst to you, there is significant anti-Muslim sentiment in the neighborhood. The neighbors started making up rumors about you, that you molest your children, or that you contributed financially to terrorist organizations. The neighbors hired detectives to search your personal records and interpreted every typographical and clerical error as proof that your identity is fake and that you are really a terrorist hiding under a fake identity. They write letters to the local newspaper saying you should be driven out of town. They say on the Internet that you should be dragged out of your house and hung. They posted videos on the Internet defaming your parents. They even file lawsuits against you (over a hundred of them!) to take your house away, supported by affidavits of neighborhood volunteers who have found themselves instant experts on documents and terrorist methods. Local talk radio shows say that you are a clear and present danger to the community. Imagine how would you feel?
I think my analogy is a much more accurate portrayal of the birther controversy than that from Orly Taitz.