Give me a legal definition of a "natural born" and how is it differ from "citizen at birth" ?
So far you've said that you are an attorney,
you are from Orange county,
Are you also a dentist?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Birther lawyer Taitz slapped with $20,000 sanction
- Thread starter tmarket
- Start date
Give me a legal definition of a "natural born" and how is it differ from "citizen at birth" ?
So far you've said that you are an attorney,
you are from Orange county,
Are you also a dentist?
Quote from OPTIONAL777:
... and no socialist would still be in a war with Iraq or Afghanistan, and certainly a socialist would not have bailed out the corporate scum in Wall Street or Detroit...
You might want to give your statement some further thought.
Socialism/Marxism has not had a problem engaging in armed conflict, history shows this to be a factual statement.
Socialists/Marxists desire to control the means of production, Wall Street and Detroit were not bailed out, they were aquired by the government.
You might want to do some research before you open your ignorant piehole...
http://socialistparty-usa.org/campaigns/anti-war.html
"Wall Street and Detroit were not bailed out, they were aquired by the government."
How many shares of stock does the government hold of the Wall Street and Detroit corporations?
Like I said, you might want to do some research before you open you ignorant piehole...
http://socialistparty-usa.org/campaigns/anti-war.html
"Wall Street and Detroit were not bailed out, they were aquired by the government."
How many shares of stock does the government hold of the Wall Street and Detroit corporations?
Like I said, you might want to do some research before you open you ignorant piehole...
Quote from Barth Vader:
You might want to give your statement some further thought.
Socialism/Marxism has not had a problem engaging in armed conflict, history shows this to be a factual statement.
Socialists/Marxists desire to control the means of production, Wall Street and Detroit were not bailed out, they were aquired by the government.
Dude, just say no to your stalking me...Sure, your local farmer has probably put the pigs and sheep in the pen for the night, but maybe you can get a blowup sheep to keep you occupied through the long lonely night.
"What is an Internet stalker?
At its mildest, a stalker is simply a troll that has attached itself to an individual. At worst, boring, at best, flattering. Find out about trolls. But a stalker can be a serious predator, using the Internet to pursue a real or imagined vendetta, or other perverted agenda. Risk assessment is an essential first step.
How dangerous is it?
Start by thinking about who it is; is it someone you have simply upset on the Internet, someone with whom you've had a relationship? Is it someone you knew before, or have met in the real world?
Think about where you see it - newsgroups? forums? chat rooms? email?
What does it say? Is it a matter of direct insults? Is it lies and rumors? Does it reveal information not generally known that you want kept secret?
When - and how often - does it appear?
How is it threatening? Is it simply annoying, or do you fear direct contact, betrayal or what? Think about the worst it can do ... how bad is that?
Why are you being stalked - is it simply spite and boredom, is it envy or resentment? Have you done anything that you think may have set it off?
Once you can answer these questions, you will have a clearer idea of what you are dealing with, and how quickly you may need to act.
What To Do - General Advice
1. In virtually every case, the first line of defense is to do nothing; simply treat it as a troll and ignore it - most will go away fairly quickly. remember, these creatures are a form of troll; if they fail to get rapid feedback, their inclination is to move on- they usually have neither the stamina nor the intelligence for a difficult situation.
2. But - however mild this stalker appears - always save every message you receive. A good way to do this is to create a new folder in your mailbox, and move all mails or copy newsgroup postings to that folder. I'd advise keeping this folder for at least a year after the last post, possibly longer. This can be a useful store of evidence, if later required, and can help in identifying the stalker.
3. Consider your options. Retaliation will make you feel better, but can be risky; as it make inspire, provoke or enable the stalker to strike further. For example, using the stalker's guestbook to warn them is risky if you have a guestbook that is open to attack. But if it is reasonably safe, then attack - let the stalker know that you are not afraid of electrons!
4. By definition, a stalker is a coward, like all bullies, like all who attack from behind, or in the dark. Be sure to mention this in every attack.
5. Stalkers make it personal - You make it impersonal. Minimise any private response you make; maximise every public response.
6. Not invariably, but usually, stalkers are none too bright; as JR would say, "The Elevator Don't Reach the Top Floor" - few intelligent people would go down the road to stalksville. Some, of course, are severely mentally ill. If you suspect that, then do not engage the stalker in any kind of dialog - just keep careful records and make appropriate reports.
7. Be Reasonable - Your attacks should be in response to the stalker's - and their first line of defense will be to accuse you of stalking - so don't go over the top. You'll usually be amazed how easy it is to attack a stalker, but exercise restraint. If they write in your forum, and it's safe to respond - then write in theirs. But be honest, brief and to the point - even if you post in every thread.
8. Keep records of all that you do, as well as what they do - and consider writing a web diary, or opening a web page to expose them. They may well have a reputation to lose - if they deserve to lose it, help them to lose it (example - The Zeppo).
9. Share The Laughter - However unnerving a stalker may be, if you look at them coldly in the light of day, they are pretty ridiculous. Some are Nothing But Ridiculous (example - Spiro). Savor that; turn it around, let them - and the world - see how ridiculous they are. Every time you mock them, you gain, and they lose. Share The Laughter.
10. Be consistent - once you have identified their weaknesses (besides being a loopy, cowardly piece of slime!), use the information against them, in every response.
11. Be careful - one of the first defenses of a stalker is to claim that you stalked them, and any defense by you may be used against you as claimed cyberbullying.
"What is an Internet stalker?
At its mildest, a stalker is simply a troll that has attached itself to an individual. At worst, boring, at best, flattering. Find out about trolls. But a stalker can be a serious predator, using the Internet to pursue a real or imagined vendetta, or other perverted agenda. Risk assessment is an essential first step.
How dangerous is it?
Start by thinking about who it is; is it someone you have simply upset on the Internet, someone with whom you've had a relationship? Is it someone you knew before, or have met in the real world?
Think about where you see it - newsgroups? forums? chat rooms? email?
What does it say? Is it a matter of direct insults? Is it lies and rumors? Does it reveal information not generally known that you want kept secret?
When - and how often - does it appear?
How is it threatening? Is it simply annoying, or do you fear direct contact, betrayal or what? Think about the worst it can do ... how bad is that?
Why are you being stalked - is it simply spite and boredom, is it envy or resentment? Have you done anything that you think may have set it off?
Once you can answer these questions, you will have a clearer idea of what you are dealing with, and how quickly you may need to act.
What To Do - General Advice
1. In virtually every case, the first line of defense is to do nothing; simply treat it as a troll and ignore it - most will go away fairly quickly. remember, these creatures are a form of troll; if they fail to get rapid feedback, their inclination is to move on- they usually have neither the stamina nor the intelligence for a difficult situation.
2. But - however mild this stalker appears - always save every message you receive. A good way to do this is to create a new folder in your mailbox, and move all mails or copy newsgroup postings to that folder. I'd advise keeping this folder for at least a year after the last post, possibly longer. This can be a useful store of evidence, if later required, and can help in identifying the stalker.
3. Consider your options. Retaliation will make you feel better, but can be risky; as it make inspire, provoke or enable the stalker to strike further. For example, using the stalker's guestbook to warn them is risky if you have a guestbook that is open to attack. But if it is reasonably safe, then attack - let the stalker know that you are not afraid of electrons!
4. By definition, a stalker is a coward, like all bullies, like all who attack from behind, or in the dark. Be sure to mention this in every attack.
5. Stalkers make it personal - You make it impersonal. Minimise any private response you make; maximise every public response.
6. Not invariably, but usually, stalkers are none too bright; as JR would say, "The Elevator Don't Reach the Top Floor" - few intelligent people would go down the road to stalksville. Some, of course, are severely mentally ill. If you suspect that, then do not engage the stalker in any kind of dialog - just keep careful records and make appropriate reports.
7. Be Reasonable - Your attacks should be in response to the stalker's - and their first line of defense will be to accuse you of stalking - so don't go over the top. You'll usually be amazed how easy it is to attack a stalker, but exercise restraint. If they write in your forum, and it's safe to respond - then write in theirs. But be honest, brief and to the point - even if you post in every thread.
8. Keep records of all that you do, as well as what they do - and consider writing a web diary, or opening a web page to expose them. They may well have a reputation to lose - if they deserve to lose it, help them to lose it (example - The Zeppo).
9. Share The Laughter - However unnerving a stalker may be, if you look at them coldly in the light of day, they are pretty ridiculous. Some are Nothing But Ridiculous (example - Spiro). Savor that; turn it around, let them - and the world - see how ridiculous they are. Every time you mock them, you gain, and they lose. Share The Laughter.
10. Be consistent - once you have identified their weaknesses (besides being a loopy, cowardly piece of slime!), use the information against them, in every response.
11. Be careful - one of the first defenses of a stalker is to claim that you stalked them, and any defense by you may be used against you as claimed cyberbullying.
Quote from Mom0/pH0x:
Narcissistic personality disorder
A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:
1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance
2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty or ideal love (megalomania)
3. believes they are "special" and can only be understood by, or should associate with, people (or institutions) who are also "special" or of high status
4. requires excessive admiration
5. has a sense of entitlement
6. is interpersonally exploitative
7. lacks empathy
8. is often envious of others or believes others are envious of him or her
9. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
Barth: No, what happened was this: Paulson was told, by Geithner among others, back in the summer, that the way to recap the banks was through preferred shares. In fact earlier in the year, Paulson had promoted new preferreds in Fannie & Freddie to banks around the country.
Come crunch time, despite the fact that every savvy observer looking at this, including Jim Grant, hardly a paragon of socialist virtue, concluded that the gov would have to bail out the preferred holders of Fannie & Freddie in order to allow everyone else to raise the money for their recaps in that market, despite this, Paulson didn't bail out the preferred shareholders.
Why?
Because of ideological pressure from people like you.
The Monday after the weekend of Fannie & Freddie, the preferred share market tanked bigtime. At least one large fund manager swore he'd never touch bank preferreds again.
On Tuesday, Fitch downgraded Lehman, stating that they'd have a hard time raising capital. Duh!
It was after this that the Lehman death spiral began.
Next weekend was the Lehman weekend.
The week after that money market funds went into crisis because one of them held a large amount of Lehman commercial paper, and so was forced to "break the buck".
Then AIG began to unravel.
Then Paulson panicked, produced the initial TARP on one and a half pages.
TARP passes, after some time, and once it does, he uses it to - mirabile dictu - get the banks to issue preferreds which are bought by the government. Had he just bailed out the preferred holders of Fannie & Freddie, the whole house of cards might not have fallen as hard as it did. The entire time between the F&F weekend and his decision to use TARP to issue preferreds can be seen as the time he refused to admit his mistake, until finally forced to the wall.
All of this happened on the Republican, not the Democratic, watch.
Now you guys are trying to rewrite history, thinking we're all going to magically forget who caused this mess.
Come crunch time, despite the fact that every savvy observer looking at this, including Jim Grant, hardly a paragon of socialist virtue, concluded that the gov would have to bail out the preferred holders of Fannie & Freddie in order to allow everyone else to raise the money for their recaps in that market, despite this, Paulson didn't bail out the preferred shareholders.
Why?
Because of ideological pressure from people like you.
The Monday after the weekend of Fannie & Freddie, the preferred share market tanked bigtime. At least one large fund manager swore he'd never touch bank preferreds again.
On Tuesday, Fitch downgraded Lehman, stating that they'd have a hard time raising capital. Duh!
It was after this that the Lehman death spiral began.
Next weekend was the Lehman weekend.
The week after that money market funds went into crisis because one of them held a large amount of Lehman commercial paper, and so was forced to "break the buck".
Then AIG began to unravel.
Then Paulson panicked, produced the initial TARP on one and a half pages.
TARP passes, after some time, and once it does, he uses it to - mirabile dictu - get the banks to issue preferreds which are bought by the government. Had he just bailed out the preferred holders of Fannie & Freddie, the whole house of cards might not have fallen as hard as it did. The entire time between the F&F weekend and his decision to use TARP to issue preferreds can be seen as the time he refused to admit his mistake, until finally forced to the wall.
All of this happened on the Republican, not the Democratic, watch.
Now you guys are trying to rewrite history, thinking we're all going to magically forget who caused this mess.
They are not hidden. They have been seen according to the HI State Officials who deal with Birth records.Quote from jficquette:
Why do you think Obama is hiding his records?
If you think they are lying or misrepresenting the records, tell your Senator. Have them taken to Court.
A few have tried without success because they cannot make any kind of a case. In other words there is no evidence that has legs to stand in a Court of Law, to even suggest at first sight what she says is untrue.
If it were, it would surely have been made by now.
So the only "evidence" out there is misprepresentation, assumption and wild conjecture, like that inferred by your question above.
The more records and confirmation a birther gets the more records a birther wants. The more records a birther wants the more accusations a birther makes.
Imagine if you were a lawyer, a parking ticket would get someone 3 life terms by the time you'd finished representing them.Quote from jem:
The above is an example of the ignorance of the left.
This poster has so little comprehension that he claims that state official has declared Obama a natural born citizen and by implication the "birthers" should just give up.
The statement is so dumb it is comedy.
Officials have confirmed Obama is a Natural born citizens
Has to be the most ingnorant post of the year.
Really?
1. The official said they have his records. Somehow in the bizarro world of leftist fools this becomes confirmation of Obama being a Natural born citizen.
This ignorance of language could be excused by a low comprehension however fool then goes on to grant amazing powers to this official...
2. This dope believes that a records official can deem Obama a Natural born citizen. This must be a new power of the federal executive branch that goes through state legislatures and deems super supreme court powers on record keepers.
lets review - The president usurps power from the U.S. supreme court - and passes that power over to the state. The state legislature then takes that magical power and grants it to a record keeper. Now the record keep has more power than the U.S. Supreme court.
She can determine the meaning of the U.S. constitution and declare someone a Natural born citizen.
This guys has the hubris to make fun of people who do not think like he does.
Does anyone wonder - why this poster never supports any of his statements.
does anyone wonder if this poster has any credibility.
Not on the left.
Blindsided by political hate you obviously can't understand this information, all over the internet, news, tv, papers.....has been for months....
July 27: The "Birther" movement continues to ignore the facts of Obama's birth. Rachel Maddow is joined by David Weigel, reporter for the Washington Independent.
updated 12:44 a.m. ET July 28, 2009
HONOLULU - State officials in Hawaii on Monday said they have once again checked and confirmed that President Barack Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen, and therefore meets a key constitutional requirement for being president.
"I ... have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen,"
She obviously can see for herself and as an Official under legal oath, that the records conform with descriptions afforded in the Constitution for Natural Born.
There is no evidence she is wrong because any one can read the Constitution and understand why she would be justified in her conclusions.
If she is wrong, take her to Court. That's how it works.
No one however, including those far brighter than you who actually are lawyers, can make the case.
Quote from stu:
Imagine if you were a lawyer, a parking ticket would get someone 3 life terms by the time you'd finished representing them.
Blindsided by political hate you obviously can't understand this information, all over the internet, news, tv, papers.....has been for months....
July 27: The "Birther" movement continues to ignore the facts of Obama's birth. Rachel Maddow is joined by David Weigel, reporter for the Washington Independent.
updated 12:44 a.m. ET July 28, 2009
HONOLULU - State officials in Hawaii on Monday said they have once again checked and confirmed that President Barack Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen, and therefore meets a key constitutional requirement for being president.
"I ... have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen,"
She obviously can see for herself and as an Official under legal oath, that the records conform with descriptions afforded in the Constitution for Natural Born.
There is no evidence she is wrong because any one can read the Constitution and understand why she would be justified in her conclusions.
If she is wrong, take her to Court. That's how it works.
No one however, including those far brighter than you who actually are lawyers, can make the case.
3 life terms for a parking ticket is pretty stupid example.
Do you care to guess what he is hiding?? Come on, give it a try you can do it.
In terms of jem's own stupidity 3 yrs is probably an under estimate.Quote from jficquette:
3 life terms for a parking ticket is pretty stupid example.
Do you care to guess what he is hiding?? Come on, give it a try you can do it.
Did you not see my previous post in response to your "hiding" conspiracy theory?