I’m not talking about the end of the world predicted by the Mayan Calendar; that’s a different fringe belief. I’m talking about some plausible political scenarios that could play out in the 2012 election:

  1. A Democratic presidential candidate could arise in the primary season and sue (in state court) to keep Obama off the ballot due to ineligibility.
  2. Arizona or some other state could pass a “proof of eligibility” law that would end up certifying candidates that did appear on the presidential ballot. Obama qualifies and someone sues in state court to overturn the decision (standing rules are different in state court).
  3. A birther congressman and a birther senator could file a written objection to the count of the votes of the Electoral College and the Congress would hold hearings on Obama’s eligibility culminating in a vote.

I could see a quick appeal to the Supreme Court on the first two.

Let’s say the Supreme Court did rule Obama eligible in scenarios 1 and 2, and an overwhelming number of congressmen affirmed the election in scenario 3. Would this spell the end of the birther movement!?!? Naaah.

About Dr. Conspiracy

I'm not a real doctor, but I have a master's degree.
This entry was posted in 2012 Presidential Election, Birther Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

95 Responses to 2012

  1. John says:

    Col Terry Lakin makes a personal and passionate appeal to Barack Obama: http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/news/terry-lakins-letter-to-potus.html

    Since Obama is the Commander In Chief of the Military, the most honorable thing for Obama to do is to give Col. Terry Lakin consent on behalf of himself (Obama) publiic inspection of his vital records in the Hawaii DOH so that Terry can see for himself that Obama is indeed eligible to serve as the POTUS. If Terry Lakin is a “Doubting Thomas” then seeing is believing.

  2. John says:

    HRS 338-18 makes is very easy and possible for Obama to ausage any doubt Terry Lakin has about his eligiblity:

    §338-18 Disclosure of records. (a) To protect the integrity of vital statistics records, to ensure their proper use, and to ensure the efficient and proper administration of the vital statistics system, it shall be unlawful for any person to permit inspection of, or to disclose information contained in vital statistics records, or to copy or issue a copy of all or part of any such record, except as authorized by this part or by rules adopted by the department of health.

    b) The department shall not permit inspection of public health statistics records, or issue a certified copy of any such record or part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant has a direct and tangible interest in the record. The following persons shall be considered to have a direct and tangible interest in a public health statistics record:

    (7) A person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant;

    Obama could easily authorize that Terry Lakin and only Terry Lakin act on behalf of Barack Obama to seek public inspection of his Obama’s vital records. In order words, Obama could authorize that public inspection of his vital records by for Terry Lakin Eyes Only.

    Terry Lakin could then be flown to Hawaii with a directive from Obama himself and be brought to the Hawaii DOH. In a sealed environment, Terry lakin could then be authorized to publically inspect the vital records of Barack Obama.

  3. John says:

    Col. Terry Lain has thrown down the gauntlet. let’s see if Obama picks it up.

  4. Black Lion says:

    Why would that be the honorable thing? If LtC. Larkin had any honor, he would not be questioning his President but follow his orders like every other soldier. The President has provided more information about himself than any other President, yet that is not enough? So under your theory if someone requests some private information about you, it should be released so that anyone that doubts you san be satisfied. It is amazing how you twist normal American values into a situation where someone that is accused of something has to prove the accusation to be false rather than the accuser having to prove his accusation. The President of the United States doesn’t have to do anything for LtC. Larkin. Larkin has to follow orders. I hope that he is smart enough to do that. If not he will be court martialed and found guilty and sitting around wondering where everything went wrong.

  5. Black Lion says:

    §338-18 is irrelevant in the case of Larkin. Congress was satisfied that the President was eligible. The SCOTUS was satisfied that he was eligible. The State of HI stated that the President was born there. His COLB has the stamp and signature of the relevant HI official. Everything that had to be done was done. The President was born in HI and more importantly, the rightful President of the US. Larkin has to have some ulterior motive. Maybe Larkin is a coward and doesn’t want to serve his country. Maybe he is fool and is allowing himself to be used in a fools errand of questioning the eligibility of the 44th President of the US. Either way his career is over if he refuses his orders to deploy.

  6. Black Lion says:

    John, I hate to burst your bubble but there is no gauntlet. Larkin has put a noose over his own neck. Lets see if he is dumb enough to kick the chair away. Let us see if he has the guts to refuse his orders and end his military career. Especially when he is facing confinement at Levanworth. Let us see how much guts and honor your so called “hero” really has.

  7. Greg says:

    And does he have to do this for every military person who claims to not believe Obama’s eligibility?

    Sounds like a GREAT way to get a free ticket to Hawaii.

    What happens if Obama is busy governing the country, or if we’re fighting a war or two, say in Afghanistan and Iraq, and we need Lakin to serve?

    If Lakin got a personal copy of Obama’s COLB, and could inspect the seal and security paper, would that satisfy him? How does knowing what doctor delivered Obama change his citizenship status?

    By the way, I love how Lakin’s “personal and passionate appeal” is filled with long-debunked assertions.

    You can find these issues debunked on this website:

    1. Until the summer of 2009, the Hawaiian Department of Homelands would not accept this Certification of Live Birth to determine native Hawaiian identity–the Department insisted upon also reviewing an original birth certificate.

    2. Many do not understand that the online document was from 2007, generated by computer, laser-printed, and merely a certification that there is an original birth certificate on file which may or may not be sufficiently probative.

    3. In 2008, after pressure from the news media, Senator McCain produced an original birth certificate from the Panama Canal Zone

    4. a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing examined and affirmed his “natural born” status and Constitutional eligibility to serve as President.

    5. statements from Kenyan citizens that you were born in Mombasa, including your paternal grandmother and the Ambassador from Kenya to the U.S. during a radio interview.

    All lies.

    Also, it is quite telling that you conspiracists will believe a random statement from an unknown Kenyan ambassador and an instantly recanted misstatement from Obama’s mom over two direct and considered statements from the head of the Department of Health of Hawaii, who was appointed by a Republican.

    Lakin should be court-martialed. If he fails to deploy, he will be court-martialed.

  8. Greg says:

    Here is what the courts have said about honor, John:

    The first duty of a soldier is obedience, and without this there can be neither discipline nor efficiency in an army. If every subordinate officer and soldier were at liberty to question the legality of the orders of the commander, and obey them or not as they may consider them valid or invalid, the camp would be turned into a debating school, where the precious moment for action would be wasted in wordy conflicts between the advocates of conflicting opinions.

    Lakin has violated the first duty of a soldier. If he wants honor, he should act honorably.

    He should be court-martialed.

    That would be the honorable thing to do!

  9. Scott Brown says:

    Yes – a court martial is the only way to go!

    Because this is America – damnit!

    Where we no longer have a right to question anything!

    Court martial him!!!!

  10. nBC says:

    Calm down Scott, you are obviously unaware of the rules of the Military…
    As to America proper, you have of course the right to question anything, but not the right to expect an answer to anything.

  11. nBC says:

    HRS 338-18 makes is very easy and possible for Obama to ausage any doubt Terry Lakin has about his eligiblity:

    Why should Obama release another COLB? And why the special treatment for Lakin? He either obeys orders or faces a court martial. He chose to join the military, now he has to obey by its rules.

  12. John says:

    It’s too bad Greg wasn’t there to save the Nazis at Nuremburg.

  13. John says:

    There are some pretty suck-ass people on this board.

  14. John says:

    I appoint Greg and NBC to be lawyers for the Nazis at Numremburg.

  15. John says:

    The letter is a good idea. If Lakin is court martialed, Lakin can use the letter as evidence. Lakin made a direct and passionate appeal to his Commander in Chief’s eligiblity and received no response. I suppose Obama will say he was too busy to respond. But, Obama does read letters that are sent to him. Obama did comment on a letter sent to him by some lady on health care reform.

  16. Since Lakin has shown hiself to be a liar, how does he deserve anything from the president?

  17. John says:

    I ask all Obots to bow to the Fecal Lord Obama.

  18. Black Lion says:

    So we are now equating the President and supporters of the rule of law to Nazi’s? Don’t you guys ever get tired of being wrong. Anyone that was in the military would tell you that you don’t have a right to question orders. The hypocrisy is that under Bush if there had been someone quesioning the legality of attacking Iraq, you would be the same idiots clamoring for him to be punished, court martial be damned…

  19. Dave says:

    As best I can piece together, Lakin has only stated an intention to disobey an order. He has not yet actually disobeyed one. So your “has violated” should be “says he will violate.”

  20. Black Lion says:

    John, don’t be so hard on Scott and yourself….You don’t really suck…You are just sheeple that would rather believe what FOX and the GOP idiots are feeding you rather than research things on your own. Don’t come here and support a traitor like Larkin, who is using lies and distortions to support his cowardice, and be upset when you are refuted with factual evidence.

  21. Dave says:

    Is it your opinion, then, that if Lakin disobeys an order he should not be court martialled? What do you think would be an appropriate respond from the military?

  22. Black Lion says:

    And when Larkin is court martialed by 12 officers for disobeying a direct officer, and not of the Obama BC nonsense is admitted because it is irrlevant, are you going to help him do his time in Levanworth? I doubt it. His orders did not come from the President. So when it was explained to him that he could not question the President, and choose to ignore it, then he made his own fatal mistake. You are right. It will be evidence. And it will speed up his verdict of guilty.

  23. Black Lion says:

    You mean the President of the United States? We don’t bow to him like you did to Bush. But we know that he is the legitimate President and hopefully will be elected again in 2012. So go back to your Mom’s basement and turn on Rush Limpballs and continue to allow yourself to be misinformed and mislead.

  24. Rickey says:

    Of all the stupid things you have said, that is one of the stupidest.

    The letter is evidence of nothing. There is nothing in the law which requires Obama to even acknowledge receipt of the letter, much less respond to it.

    And the president reads very little of the mail which is sent to him. All mail to the president is opened and read by people who work at the White House, and only letters which would be of great interest to him are actually passed along to him. You are sadly mistaken if you think that Obama cares at all about what Lt. Col. Lakin wants.

  25. richCares says:

    Everybody is good at something, john is really good at being stupid and he is proud of it!

  26. Dave says:

    With your option 3, I would have difficulty understanding how any GOP Senator or Rep would justify raising this issue in 2012, when they didn’t call for an investigation of it at any time in the previous 4 years.

    And we know how the other two scenarios will play out. The courts will look at the same COLB we’ve all seen, ask what the other side has, which is nothing, and rule for Obama. Then everyone can blame the result on the judges, like they always do.

    It’s always possible that Obama will lose in 2012, but I just don’t see how the birthers could play any noticeable role.

  27. BatGuano says:

    I suppose Obama will say he was too busy to respond.But, Obama does read letters that are sent to him.Obama did comment on a letter sent to him by some lady on health care reform.

    “Mike Kelleher, director of the Office of Presidential Correspondence, said the president receives about 65,000 paper letters every week and about 100,000 e-mails, 1,000 faxes and 2,500 to 3,500 phone calls per day.”

  28. Rickey says:

    John says:

    Obama could easily authorize that Terry Lakin and only Terry Lakin act on behalf of Barack Obama to seek public inspection of his Obama’s vital records. In order words, Obama could authorize that public inspection of his vital records by for Terry Lakin Eyes Only.

    Terry Lakin could then be flown to Hawaii with a directive from Obama himself and be brought to the Hawaii DOH. In a sealed environment, Terry lakin could then be authorized to publically inspect the vital records of Barack Obama.

    And then when another member of the military asks the same questions as Lakin, wouldn’t that person also have the right to fly to Hawaii and personally inspect Obama’s vital records?

    And how does one publicly (learn how to spell, John) inspect records in a sealed environment? Wouldn’t that by definition be a private inspection?

  29. Greg says:

    Facially valid, facially invalid.

    Ordering someone to deploy = facially valid
    Ordering someone to murder jews = facially invalid.

    There’s a difference. No one can be charged for doing the first, regardless of the ultimate status of the person doing the ordering. An officer is required to disobey the latter.

    I apologize that you are too stupid to understand this.

  30. John says:

    Lakin does not lie. He speaks the truth but nobody wants to hear it. Sarah Obama’s statement stands. Her apparant changing of her story was coached and contrived. The Kenyan Ambassador remarks stands firm. Addition, it has been verified that Kenyan government officials possess Obama’s Birth records but are classfied as top secret. As far Hawaii is concerned. Obama has released nothing except an online forgery. Dr. Fukino’s public statments have been shown to have no credibility. And we still don’t what hospital Obama was born at and the doc who delivered him.

  31. Greg says:

    More lies. You can find them all debunked by using the search feature at the top of this blog.

    Is there a hospital in Honolulu that Obama could be born at that would make him not a citizen? Which doctor has the magic citizenship-denying fingers?

    You guys are pathetic!

  32. John says:

    So Greg if Obama issues an order to kill jews down the chain of command and Lakin is ordered to follow it by his superiors then he should follow it? According to your court citation in your previous post, Lakin can’t question the order and must follow the order to kill jews.

  33. Greg says:

    You give up certain rights when you join the military, Scott. You agree to be judged by the Uniform Code of Military Justice, for one.

    The UCMJ has certain limits on speech, including a prohibition on using…

    contemptuous words against the president, the vice president, Congress, the secretary of defense, the secretary of a military department, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, or the governor or legislature of any state, territory, commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present

    Why do you hate the military, Scott?

  34. Greg says:

    It’s too bad John is too stupid to tie his own shoes. I’ll bet his mother is getting tired of doing it for him.

    A soldier cannot disobey a facially valid order and cannot obey a facially invalid order.

    Why don’t you learn something about the law before you start spouting off. You look like an especially jackalope when you compare someone to Nazis with your bassackwards “legal” reasoning!

  35. BatGuano says:

    Sarah Obama’s statement stands.Her apparant changing of her story was coached and contrived.

    this coaching, that took place in the span of less than a second, was it with hand gestures, telepathically, semaphore flags or ????

  36. Greg says:

    Ordering someone to deploy = facially valid
    Ordering someone to murder jews = facially invalid.

    How did you misunderstand this?

    It would not matter who ordered the murdering of jews – it is facially invalid and MUST BE DISOBEYED!

    An order to deploy, however, is FACIALLY VALID and MUST BE OBEYED!

    Do you get it now?

    Facially valid = must be obeyed
    Facially invalid = must be disobeyed

    Obama ordering Lakin to deploy = facially valid = must be obeyed
    Clinton ordering Lakin to deploy = facially valid = must be obeyed
    Bush ordering Lakin to deploy = facially valid = must be obeyed

    Obama ordering Laking to murder jews = facially invalid = must be disobeyed.

    His superiors ordering Laking to murder jews = facially invalid = must be disobeyed.

    Do you get it yet?

    Facially valid = obey
    Invalid = disobey

    How about now? Do you get it?

    If you don’t get it, and you’re in the military, I sense a court-martial in your future!

  37. Rickey says:

    Scott Brown says:

    Where we no longer have a right to question anything!

    Lakin has the right to ask any questions he wants. However…

    1. He does not have the right to an answer.

    2. He does not have the right to disobey a direct order.

    You and John apparently have never served in the military, or you would know how the orders thing works. When I was in the Navy I occasionally was given an order with which I disagreed. There are procedures in place for resolving such situations. If the order must be carried out immediately, a soldier obeys the order and then makes his or her misgivings known through the chain of command. If the order is something which is to be carried out later, the soldier can immediately appeal the order through the chain of command. But when the appeal is ruled upon, that’s the end of it.

    In fact, this is pretty much what Lakin has done. Reportedly he made his concerns known to his superiors, and he was told that he has no right to see Obama’s vital records. So his options are:

    1. Obey his orders


    2. Resign his commission.


    3. Face a court-martial (or some other disciplinary measure) for willfully disobeying his orders.

    It’s a simple as that.

  38. John says:

    If jews are the enemy, not necessarally facial invalid.

  39. Greg says:

    Lakin has the right to ask any questions he wants.

    If Lakin were a civilian, this would be true. As a member of the military, he doesn’t have the right to ask any question.

    Article 88 and Article 134 limit the types of questions that a member of the military (even retired, if drawing pay) can ask.

  40. Rickey says:

    Greg says:

    Is there a hospital in Honolulu that Obama could be born at that would make him not a citizen? Which doctor has the magic citizenship-denying fingers?

    Next they’ll be arguing that to be a natural born citizen, you have to be delivered by a doctor who is a citizen.

  41. Greg says:

    And if the order was to murder jews, it would not matter if they were the enemy. Facially invalid.

    If the order were to kill the enemy on the battlefield and the enemy happened to be jews, that would not be a crime.

    No soldiers were charged at Nuremberg for following orders to kill the enemy on the battlefield.

  42. Bovril says:

    Johhny Boy

    This “Sealed environment” of which you talk.

    Would he be “Sealed” in from his to home to Hawai’i or would there be little air holes so he could breath?

    H’mm but now it’s not sealed, so we have to plug all the airholes and provide him with oxygen for the trip.

    Now he’s arrived in Hawai’i in his “Sealed environment”, hopefully with enough oxygen for the return trip. I trust the “Sealed environment” can be eased into the building where he will be looking at a computer screen….you do remember all the records are computerized..?

    Now, how to access the screen……still in the “Sealed environment”….aha, remote manipulators on the outside of the “Sealed environment, that’ll do it.

    It’s beginning to look like this now….


    I begin to be worried by the logistics Johhny boy, I think you need another plan.

  43. train111 says:

    If one looks back in the Illinois Blue Books which profile legislators, then one gets a biography of Barack Obama back to 1997. It states clearly that he was born August 4, 1961 in Hawaii.
    Why would he lie about his birthplace in 1997 some 10 years before running for President? Someone born in Kenya could serve as Il State Senator from district 13, so why make up a birthplace?
    Of course, some would have us believe that he is a Manchurian Candidate who was being groomed for the Presidency back then, but I doubt it. Or perhaps ala 1984 all the old books have been scrubbed and a new entry put in there to reflect a ‘correct’ birthplace, but you they must have changed every one–even those in private hands!!
    Sorry, but the birther dog just doesn’t hunt. This may be a small piece of evidence, but to me it shows that BHO was consistent with his birthplace 10 plus years before running for President–more than I can say for the birthers whose theories change with the winds and become more and more comical as time goes by.


  44. Bob Ross says:

    Rickey there’s also the point that Larkin disregarded the Chain of Command in writing his letter. Larkin should have went to his superior officer.

  45. Black Lion says:

    Can you show us where the President’s step-grandmother says that he was born in Kenya? Have you actually listened to the tape? No. And the Kenyan ambassador? He never said Obama was born in Kenya. The radio hosts say that to try and get him to agree with them. And this fantasy about the Kenyan government possessing the President’s birth records, you have proof of this? Or is this another rumor or story you have heard? And how exactly did the President’s mother get to Kenya to have this mysterous baby? I am sure you have that information also. And how exactly does Dr. Fukino, releasing a statement on the state of HI letterhead, have “no credibility”? In other words you would rather believe a fictional Bishop, rumors about a Kenyan BC, and some so called statement from a Kenyan official that doesn’t even say what you think he says rather than a statement from a state of the United States which says that the President was born in Honolulu, HI. Amazing. Your ignorance and hatred is amazing.

  46. nbc says:

    You have no argument John…

    It shows

    Fool (Romans 1:22)

  47. SFJeff says:


    My opinion- if a soldier believes that he has been given an illegal order, then he does have an obligation to disobey that order- in the correct manner as described earlier.

    But the soldier must be prepared to accept the consequences if he is found to have disobeyed a legal order. Just like civil disobediance- if you have faith in your convictions, proceed but be prepared to face jail time or brig time when the law disagrees with you.

    If you can’t tell the difference between a soldier who refuses an order from the President because he has doubts about whether he is the President, and a soldier who refuses an order from his direct superior to shoot or gas unarmed civilians, then there really is no hope in your understanding anything about this topic.

  48. Rickey says:

    Bob Ross says:

    Rickey there’s also the point that Larkin disregarded the Chain of Command in writing his letter. Larkin should have went to his superior officer.

    I’d have to double-check, but I believe that he went to his superior officer last year and was told that he isn’t entitled to the information.

    Of course, his letter to Obama is inappropriate even if not quite insubordinate.

  49. G says:

    Keep dreaming your little fantasies John. All you are doing is setting yourself up for obvious disappointment.

    This situation is pretty straightforward and obvious to anyone with a functioning brain.

    Either Lakin will back down before his deployment or he will be brought up for court martial. No “mystical discovery” of Obama’s records will result from any court martial actions either. Keep dreaming, but its not going to happen.

  50. Zixi of Ix says:

    So, it is your opinion that if someone pitches a fit and make demands on the President of the United States, their demands should be met as long as they’re military?

    Is there any limit to these demands, or is the sky the limit? How long, under this scenario, will it be before we’re living under a complete and total military dictatorship?

    One of my closest relatives is a Colonel. He has served with humble dignity and honor, regardless of who the Commander in Chief has been, or whether he agreed with their politics.

    Anything less is dishonorable and should be met with scorn. No true patriot would encourage this sort of destructive behavior from a commissioned officer.

  51. John says:

    Scott Brown.
    You see well. It is very important that people support Terry Lakin because it is so easy for Obama to end this here and now. If Obama is indeed eligible in Terry Lakin’s Eyes (I have doubts that he is.) then the energy, time and cost for Obama to prove his eligiblity is so minor when so much is at stake for Terry Lakin. Obama could end the contraversy with a simple phone allowing Terry Lakin on behalf of Obama to see his vital records in the Hawaii DOH. The fact that Obama has so far done NOTHING to address this issue except for evasion, is very very very troubling. Terry Lakin can easily see this and so can millions of others.

    It appears that Terry Lakin is mainly focused on the question of Obama’s birth in Hawaii. I don’t know if Lakin believes in the NBC theory or the Indonesian Citizenship theory, but those theories are merely legal arguments that are really for the courts to decide if they ever do. Obama’s birth in Hawaii is factual question and if Obama was indeed born in Kenya, the Obama’s eligiblity is self-evident. Because a NBC has to be born in this country (I’m siding with obots for the sake of argumen), if Obama was born in Kenya, there is no possible way for Obama to eligible for the POTUS and Obama would ineligible; period. End of story. Even the most hardened liberals and Obots agree that you at least have to be born in the country to be eligible. However, if Obama was born in Kenya to 2 US citizens on a military base, he would eligible per the resolution passed for Senator McCain. The likelyhood of this is a virtual impossibility given the facts we know.

  52. John says:

    Lakin’s speech is getting alot of support. Regarding the Michael New case that Obots continue to cite, it is important to note that Michael New was enlisted and not an officer. This of some significance because the oath an enlisted person takes is different from the oath an officer takes. Enlisted swear and oath to follow orders of the POTUS and their superiors. Officer swear an oath to defend the Constitution. This may prove to be of some significance if Lakin is indeed court martialed.

  53. Zixi of Ix says:

    Actually, the proof goes back much further than that.
    Birthers like to point to Obama’s childhood school records in Indonesia when his mother was married to Mr. Soetero. The records say that Obama’s religion is “Muslim”, and birthers have used it as “proof” that Obama is a secret Muslim.

    What the birthers don’t want you to notice is that the form also clearly says that Obama was born in Hawaii. Obama was there from the ages of 6-10, which would have been from 1967-1971 or so.

    So, to swallow what the birthers are selling, you have to believe that Obama’s family started fabricating this story by the time he was six, if not earlier.

    One thing birthers never quite get to is “why”, though. Some say it was so his mother could get welfare benefits, but

    1). They didn’t exist as they do now in 1961. Where they existed, benefits were small.
    2). Obama wouldn’t have had to be a nature-born citizen for benefits to apply; a naturalized citizen of a citizen mother would have been just fine.

    And then there is this:
    The Civil Rights Act of 1964, giving black people the same rights as everyone else, was 3 years in the future when Obama was born.

    When Obama was born, the Voting Rights Act giving black people the right to vote, was still 4 years away.

    Martin Luther King would give his “I Have A Dream” speech in 1963, when Obama was 2. King would be murdered in 1968 when Obama was 7 or so, because he dared demand equal treatment for black people.

    The high school I would attend decades after his birth wouldn’t integrate until the early 1970’s, and not without protests, riots and violence.

    With all that as background, who in their right mind would think that Obama’s mother could be so prescient that she would have conspired with others to make sure that her son’s birth certificate indicated that he was natural born?

    Why would she have gone to all that trouble when people his color weren’t guaranteed the right to vote or even attend local schools when he was born?

  54. John says:

    It is interesting that both the enlisted oath and officer oath require the person to defend US Constitution. The enlisted oath requires the person to follow the orders of POTUS and his superiors. However, the officer oath has one key difference. Officers only swear an oath to defend the US Constitution. As part of their oath, they are not required to follows the orders of the POTUS and his or her superiors. This is why Michael New might have had weaker defense than Lakin has. Michael New could not question orders. He was required by his oath to follow them. Lakin on the other hand, did not take that oath and therefore Lakin has more flexibility in questioning orders.

  55. JoZeppy says:

    Did you bother looking at the oaths? Both officers and enlisted swear “I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.” While enlisted solders swear to obey the orders of the superiors, officers swear to “faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which [they are] about to enter.”

    Not much significance there…but keep dreaming. He refuses to deploy, he will get the court marshall he deserves.

  56. JoZeppy says:

    You’ve never been in the military, have you? Officers don’t have much “flexibility in questioning orders.” Refusing to follow a lawful order is punishable under the UCMJ. That applies to enlisted and officers. Article 92(2) of the UCMJ states it is a violation to not obey a lawful order which it is their duty to obey, and is punishable by court marshall. This applies to all members of the armed forces, from the lowest buck private all the way up to joint chiefs of staff.

  57. nbc says:

    No difference. Read the darn ruling

  58. Mary Brown says:

    I am a military wife in a family of many who have served and are serving. The obligations of a military member are differenct than those in civilian life. They must be to maintain order and discipline. The Lt. Colonel has been given a choice. If he wants to he can choose to disobey and demand a court martial. There are many reasons to question orders. But once you have been told your reasons are not valid you must either obey or take the consequences.

  59. Mary Brown says:

    What? And then what is next? You are crazy. Then any soldier, sailor or airman could question anything and everything about anyone in command and be given personal rights to inspect everything. Get a life.

  60. Mary Brown says:

    Absolutely. Congress has declared the election valid. The Lt. Colonel has sealed his own fate.

  61. Benji Franklin says:

    Dear John,

    Before officers are sworn to defend the Constitution, the meaning of that oath is explained to them.

    It is an oath which obligates them to follow facially valid orders issued by their superiors; it is not an oath which is conditional on their own personal approval of the legitimacy of their chain of command BASED ON THEIR OWN PERSONAL LEGAL interpretation of what a particular clause in the Constitution means.

    Lakin’s actions make both his oath AND the Constitution meaningless, awaiting any officer’s personal assertion of what some clause in the Constitution “really means” to find out from minute to minute, what the Constitution means at that moment to THAT officer. Military discipline would dissolve and the military forces would be helpless. It’s another bottomless birther absurdity.

    The Constitution officers swear to defend is CONSTITUTED in the persons and actions of the current United States government in place. That is the mechanism which maintains and preserves the political and civil freedom which guarantees Americans the continuing opportunities to pursue happiness, which the framers wanted us all to perpetually share. The lawful legitimacy of that government and its officers, along with that of the military organizations it controls, is only subject to challenge by the courts, based on THEIR EXPERT INTERPRETATION of the basis of the challenge, including THEIR interpretation of the Constitution.

    A military officer violates his/her oath to defend the Constitution in major part, when that officer usurps the right of the judiciary to interpret the Constitution, and then turns around and declares that their own resulting refusal to follow an order is “defending the Constitution”!

    The next time you find yourself stranded on top of a burning building, urge the firemen who show up to first go over the Constitution before they rescue you, and see if they can find a way to interpret some clause of the Constitution, to make the Declaration of Independence’s goal of guaranteeing us all a chance to pursue happiness, require them to let your dumb ass burn to a crisp, John.

    Benji Franklin

  62. G says:

    Keep living in your delusional fantasy world John.

    Back in the real world, Lakin will have to back down or face court martial. And sorry, no band of misguided nuts “rallying” to his cause will make a difference. Nor will any “mythical discovery” nor “standing” result.

    This guy will back down or face the consequences based solely on his own actions. Obama won’t have anything to do with it.

  63. Rickey says:


    You birthers are wrong about so many things that it is difficult to comprehend how ignorant you are.

    This the oath which all commissioned officers have been required to take since 1962 {emphasis added}:

    I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God. (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).


    Orly tried the same lame argument as you with Cook and Rhodes, and you saw how far that got her.

  64. John says:

    Terry Lakin is highly decorated and put in 18 years of service. If Terry Lakin is court martialed, I am sure this will have heavy consideration into Lakin’s defense of his actions.

  65. John says:

    This is the oath for enlisted. Lakin is an officer. Lakin’s oath does mandate him to unquestionably and blindly follow orders of the POTUS or his superiors. Enlisted have to but Officers don’t.

  66. Rickey says:

    John says:

    Terry Lakin is highly decorated and put in 18 years of service. If Terry Lakin is court martialed, I am sure this will have heavy consideration into Lakin’s defense of his actions.

    You’re sure? Based upon what? Your personal experience with the military justice system?

    His service record does not excuse the willful disobedience of orders. If he refuses to obey his orders (which he hasn’;t done yet), his service record may help to mitigate his punishment, but it will not be considered a defense of his actions. In fact, he will have a difficult time finding a lawyer who will be able to make a credible defense for disobeying a direct order.

  67. Rickey says:

    Yes, my mistake.

    However, an officer does swear to “faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter,” and one of those duties is to obey the orders of his or her superiors. It’s spelled out in the UCMJ.

  68. JoZeppy says:

    His oath requires him to faithfully discharge his duties, and the UCMJ requires him to obey all lawful orders. Everyone in the military is required to follow all lawful orders. There’s no wiggle room here. If he doesn’t show up, he’s AWOL, and he has disobeyed a lawful order, and will be court marshalled. Officers aren’t exempt from following orders.

  69. SFJeff says:

    Do you Birthers even understand what you are advocating?

    You are stating that every officer has the right to question every order given to him by superior officer. And every action ordered by any President.

    For instance- I- and many people questioned whether the United States should have invaded Iraq. Would you have supported every officer who refused to go to Iraq because he claimed that there had not been any declaration of war by Congress, as required in the Constitution?

    Personally, I think the Constitution does require a formal declaration of war, but I also recognize that allowing officers to decide what orders to follow because they just feel aren’t ‘constitutional’ would mean chaos within the armed forces.

    I really think this shows again that Birthers will support anyone, committing any action, that they wouldn’t otherwise support- so long as the intent is to remove President Obama from office.

    Let me put this another way- Conservatives- Carl Rove in particular- make it very clear that they feel that American Soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are defending the United States by their actions there. By that reasoning, Colonal Lakin is refusing to defend the United States.

    Apparently Colonal Lakin is more concerned about the President’s BC than he is about the safety of the United States, which I think pretty much sums up the birther point of view.

  70. misha says:

    “So we are now equating the President and supporters of the rule of law to Nazis?”

    You have insulted me. I was raised by survivors, and such comparisons cheapen and devalue their victims.

    Let me tell you two stories: my best friend’s mother in college survived Auschwitz; they are Ukrainian Catholic. The Nazis considered Slavic people sub-human. At 15, her parents and sister were shot in front of her, and she went in one of those boxcars, for three days, standing up like sardines. You can imagine the mess they were.

    My grandmother was saved by being hidden in a trunk in the attic.

    I was a civilian volunteer with the IDF. I did not have the right to question any order. I did whatever was assigned. My cousin was drafted into the IDF, and she did not lose her US citizenship.

    That’s life, and that’s what Lakin and the rest signed up for, like Cook. I hope he is court martialed, and I hope they throw him in the brig.

    “Soldier, I order you.”
    “I want proof Obama is NBC before I obey your order.”


  71. misha says:

    John and Scott Brown: I have thorough debunked the born in Kenya scenario.

    I suggest you read it. And get a life.

  72. Greg says:

    Instead of speculating about what Michael New’s case means for Lakin, why don’t you read the case. There is no distinction in the case between officers and soldiers. The only distinction is between facially valid and facially invalid orders. If Lakin disobeys a facially valid order, he should be court martialed.

    You can also read New’s court-martial to see why Lakin won’t get the opportunity to challenge Obama’s eligibility in his court-martial.

  73. Greg says:

    Can all officers delay their deployment by demanding to see Obama’s birth certificate?

    What if we’re fighting two wars and we need the service of those officers?

  74. Greg says:

    if a soldier believes that he has been given an illegal order, then he does have an obligation to disobey that order

    The courts have described a heavy burden to prove that the orders are actually illegal.

    The first step is to take a hard look at the orders and determine whether a reasonable person would look at the order and find that it was obviously illegal.

    Is there debate about whether the order is illegal? Then it’s not obviously illegal!

  75. Greg says:

    He has questioned his orders publicly. By this act, he runs the risk of violating Article 88 or Article 134. Here’s an article about Article 88:

    During the Clinton administration, a number of military
    officers have been disciplined for making disrespectful comments about President Clinton. Early in the Clinton presidency an Air Force General was fined, reprimanded, and forced into early retirement for referring to the President as “‘gay-loving,’ womanizing,’ draft-dodging,’ and pot-smoking,’” during an Air Force banquet speech. Three years later, another Air Force general was reprimanded for telling an inappropriate joke about President Clinton during a speech at an Air Force base in Texas. More recently, two Marine Corps officers were administratively punished for published letters to newspapers that were disrespectful to the President,3 and military officials warned the remainder of the Armed Forces against engaging in similar misconduct.

    Members of the military have been prosecuted for criticizing Lincoln, Wilson, Coolidge, Roosevelt, Truman and Johnson. Charges were considered against an officer who had an impeach Nixon bumper-sticker.

    Lakin was warned in the counseling form that his actions could violate Article 88 – contempt towards officials.

  76. I really don’t appreciate John’s off-topic comment hijacking the thread and preventing legitimate discussion of the main article. There is another article on Lakin where such comments are appreciate.

    John, don’t pull a stunt like this again, and do not make demeaning remarks directed at members of this online community, or you will be banned.

    Your views are welcome, but your disruption and trash talk are not.

  77. Dave says:

    I’d like to make a comment about that “resolution passed for Senator McCain.” One might ask, what difference does a resolution make — a resolution is not a law. But in this particular case, it might as well be a law — because the only body in a position to enforce the eligibility requirement is the Senate. They could object when the electoral vote was counted in the Senate. So they were declaring that they weren’t going to object, which for all practical purposes made it the law of the land that McCain is eligible.

    Note that when Obama won, nobody objected. To clarify, not one GOP Senator saw fit to bring up Obama’s eligibility. That is why he is now President.

    Of course, it’s not too late — Congress can still impeach him. But not one GOP Senator or Representative has called for impeachment — or even for an investigation into this issue.

    So you see how things stand. Obama is the President, because he was elected and nobody in the Senate objected. Congress has the power to remove him, but not one single Congressman is even trying. So he will be President at least through 2012.

    And since you bring up Lakin, I hope you read his counseling form which explains that his theories about the President are irrelevant. This means that, if he’s court martialled, the judge will not permit the subject to be discussed. So exactly how is Lakin’s court martial going to help the birthers?

  78. G says:

    All that will result if he pursues this John is that Terry Lakin will be willfully throwing away his entire military career, pension and anything he earned as a result. All he will be left with is likely a dishonorable discharge, which is quite shameful and possibly military prison time or some other such punishment.

  79. nBC says:

    And end up an angry old man blaming everyone but himself.

    History does repeat itself…

    But yes, given the precedent in US v New, Lakin will be charged with disobeying a legal order and will be prohibited from arguing that the order was illegal since the President is illegal.

    History does repeat itself…

    But some never learn

  80. nBC says:

    And since you bring up Lakin, I hope you read his counseling form which explains that his theories about the President are irrelevant. This means that, if he’s court martialled, the judge will not permit the subject to be discussed. So exactly how is Lakin’s court martial going to help the birthers?

    One step closer to 0-70?

  81. G says:

    Exactly right, NBC. These folks will never learn, sadly.

    But then again, if these people were capable of learning from their mistakes (or even learning at all), birtherism would have ended a long time ago.

  82. Black Lion says:

    More from the seditious traitor LtC. Larkin…


    It seems like Larkin is supposed to report to Fort Campbell on April 12 to deploy to Afganistan. If not he will be court martialed. I hope the Army goes after him hard. WND and other misguided non-legal experts seem to think that somehow this will lead to the Obama BC being eligible for discovery. Amazing.

  83. Black Lion says:

    Of course WND is still pimping this case to generate more idiots to donate and buy stuff so that Joey Farah can make more money….Suckers…

    From the WND article…

    “Obama’s actual response to those who question his eligibility to be president under the Constitution’s requirement that the U.S. president be a “natural born citizen” has been to dispatch both private and tax-funded attorneys to prevent anyone from gaining access to his documentation.

    Besides Obama’s actual birth documentation, the still-concealed documentation for him includes kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.

    WND has reported on a multitude of cases that have been brought over the issue of Obama’s eligibility. Some are by critics who have doubts about whether he was born in Hawaii in 1961 as he has written, and others are from those who question whether the framers of the Constitution specifically excluded dual citizens – Obama’s father was a subject of the British crown at Obama’s birth – from being eligible for the office.

    The issue has prompted a number of state legislatures to work on proposals that would require presidential candidates to submit proof of their eligibility. And a similar proposal has been introduced in Congress by Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla.

    The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

    However, none of the cases filed to date has been successful in reaching the plateau of legal discovery, so that information about Obama’s birth could be obtained.”

    I love how somehow WND has made the fake adoption records, school records, and other irrelevant documents germane to the eligibility issue. There has to be a special place in Dede’s hell for WND….(snark)

  84. WND said:

    Now, the Army has issued a “counseling form” warning Lakin his deployment orders are valid. The document has been posted on the Safeguard Our Constitution website, which is assembling support for the officer.

    It would seem to me that the Safeguard Out Constitution web site is not “supporting” Lakin, but digging him deeper into the ground.

  85. Black Lion says:

    From Military.com regarding LtC. Larkin….


    “Lakin is not the first servicemember to use the so-called “birther” argument to fight deployment orders. Last July, the Army yanked Afghanistan deployment orders for Maj. Stefan Cook when he challenged President Obama’s legitimacy in court. Army Capt. Connie Rhodes, another doctor, went to federal court to stop her Iraq deployment for the same reason. Her case was tossed out in September.”

    “It’s also possible that the officer with 18 years of service could be let go with either a general but honorable discharge or a discharge under “other than honorable” conditions, according to the letter. Additionally, Lakin could lose his military retirement and veterans’ benefits, and the letter advised him to seek legal counsel “before embarking on a course of conduct which you may quickly regret.”

    Phil Cave, a retired Navy judge advocate general who now practices military law as a civilian, said that even if Lakin does decide to deploy as scheduled, the Army still may be able to prosecute him. Under Article 88, Cave said, a servicemember can be charged for making disrespectful comments or remarks about the president.

    Cave believes that Lakin’s supporters in the birther movement hope that a court-martial will give defense attorneys the authority to seek, through discovery, other documents to help make their case.

    “They think that by using [servicemembers in a court-martial] they can get discovery like you could in any criminal prosecution,” he said. “That ain’t gonna happen. They’re not going to have discovery where they’re going to get the president to produce a birth certificate because, I’m reasonably certain, no military judge, no appellate court and no federal court, and no U.S. Supreme Court is going to say they have a right to get that as a matter of discovery.”

    Interesting article. But more interesting is the commentary by the posters. As you can see the damage by site like WND and the Post and Fail are extensive. People believe such mininformation like the Law of Nations was extensively used by the founders, Obama was an “anchor baby”, that the HI COLB is not legally binding, or that Obama’s stepgrandmother and Kenyan ambassador confirmed that Obama was born in Kenya, but the government is hiding the documentation. Also you have posters like the infamous Butterdezillion perpetuating her misinformation on all of these sites. This is why the issue will probably never die…

  86. Rickey says:

    It will be interesting to see if he reports to Fort Campbell today. I haven’t seen anything one way or the other about it yet.

  87. Black Lion says:

    I am also waiting to see if he is willing to be Court Martialed by not showing up also…

  88. nbC says:

    Oh Goodness… John appears to be lost for arguments again

    What a fool

  89. nbC says:

    More ignorant drivel. Patently illegal orders like to murder innocent people can be disobeyed. However, as these rulings all point out, orders that are disobeyed are disobeyed at one’s own risk. The alternative would be disastrous to the functioning of the military.

  90. JoZeppy says:

    ‘Birther’ Doc a No-Show at Campbell
    April 12, 2010
    Military.com|by Bryant Jordan

    An Army flight surgeon apparently is sticking to his vow not to deploy until he is satisfied that President Barack Obama is a “natural born” citizen.

    Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin did not report for duty at Fort Campbell, Ky. as ordered today, and a spokesman for the post said it’s not likely he will.

  91. Black Lion says:

    It may be early but it looks like LtC. Larkin did not show up to Ft. Campbell….So the ball is now in the lap of the Army to court martial this seditious officer….


    “Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin did not report for duty at Fort Campbell, Ky. as ordered today, and a spokesman for the post said it’s not likely he will.

    “The last report I got as of Friday is that he is not going to report to Fort Campbell,” spokesman Maj. Patrick Seiber said. “That’s from our division surgeon.”

    Lakin’s failure to report essentially dares the Army to bring charges against him for being an unauthorized absence.”

  92. G says:

    I hope they come down hard on him.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.