rss‘Birther Queen’ Orly Taitz Still Racking Up Facebook Friends, Like Michele Bachmann
Friday, July 31, 2009 at 11:56 am
- 11 Comments
Orly Taitz, the “birther” attorney who gained a sort of official movement leadership status with this week’s appearence on “The Colbert Report,” is bragging that Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.), and seven other members of Congress have accepted her friend requests on Facebook. Other new digital friends: radio host Michael Savage and Heritage Foundation policy analyst James Jay Carafano.
I’m not comfortable reading a lot into this. When Taitz friended Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele this week, spokespeople from their offices laughed it off, explaining that their Facebook friends supported Cantor and Steele, and not the other way around. At the same time, Taitz is becoming a sort of national spokeswoman for a fringe movement. It’s strange that these politicians aren’t scrubbing her friend requests.
Follow David Weigel on Twitter
11 Comments
Comment posted July 31, 2009 @ 12:54 pm
I could see just not wanting to open up that can of worms. If Cantor blocks Taitz and then, say, William Ayers friends him, then somehow he’s let Ayers past the filter that blocked Taitz. So Cantor’s palling around with domestic terrorists now. It’s just easier to have a uniform policy: If you let everybody friend you, then it doesn’t mean anything that a specific individual friended you.
Comment posted July 31, 2009 @ 1:09 pm
Orly Taitz is the gift that keeps on giving.
She’s comedic gold for those of us who never bought any of the birthers’ racist conspiracy theories.
She’s just desserts for mainstream Republicans who tried to benefit from the birther nonsense without directly addressing their own opinions on the subject for the national press. People like Cantor, Bachmann, et al have constituents who believe the birther nonsense and constituents who don’t, and they were able to keep both groups happy before. But now, they either have to accept her friend request or deny it, and either action has negative consequences for them with one group of constituents.
And, of course, she’s a poke in the eye to birthers who would like to have a legal expert championing their cause. At every turn, she has demonstrated the reason why “traditional” law schools require you to show up in a classroom where the professor uses the Socratic method and its obvious potential to embarrass the unprepared in front of their peers. That way, see, you learn something about the law.
Online, you learn how much it costs to get an online degree. You pay that fee and you get an online degree. You didn’t learn anything except that money can buy stuff. And most of us knew that since pre-school.
Comment posted July 31, 2009 @ 11:00 pm
That's not saying much, I'll friend anybody.
Comment posted August 1, 2009 @ 8:22 am
The greatest benefit of Facebook is that it has many groups on the site that you can join. So if you are interested in Chicago Cubs you can research Chicago Cubs in the groups section and you will be able to find friends on there that like the Cubs. This is just one example, I know that you can join groups of your favorite football team, television show, or whatever you want for the most part! If you can't find a group for your interest, you can simply create one!
Comment posted August 3, 2009 @ 8:23 pm
OLY TAITZ YOU ARE “NUTS”!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. YOU SHOULD BE JAILED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Comment posted August 3, 2009 @ 11:35 pm
Dr. Taitz is not an American citizen. Her documents are forgeries. Therefore, she has no right to inject herself in American politics.
Comment posted August 4, 2009 @ 12:25 am
seriously, I hope the founding fathers are rolling around in their graves when they hear political figures talking about their facebook and twitter accounts.
Comment posted August 6, 2009 @ 5:41 am
Phil Berg (obamacrimes.com) is no nut. He is a life-long Democrat, former assistant Attorney General of Pennsylvania who is also leading lawsuits charging Obama with electoral fraud.
This issue is mushrooming. It's only a matter of time before the truth is known and Obama will be exposed.
Obama is hiding all his past records unlike other presidents. Something smells.
Comment posted August 6, 2009 @ 11:27 am
Well, it's getting out in the drive-by media now.
From David Hahn, “Publisher StatePaper.com ” August 5, 2009.
Publisher: Obama Should Produce Original Birth Certificate
At StatePaper.com, we know by making this statement we will be instantly tagged as “racist,” “birther,” or other pejorative terms by those who defend the President of the United States. We often defend the President and the job he is doing and are regularly lambasted for being “too liberal” or an “Obama lover” by some of our most prolific critics.
But, here is the issue:
The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of our country. Article II of the Constitution requires the President to be a natural born citizen. Without reciting them here, there appears to be some serious questions raised about whether President Obama was born in the United States or Kenya. We have not checked sources, but there are reports that some witnessed his birth in Kenya.
The President's campaign staff and then his administration have released and placed on the internet a “Certificate of Live Birth.” We do not dispute the validity or correctness of that document as others have tried to do, suggesting the use of computers to alter seals and names. By releasing this document the President agrees that the claims about his status as a natural born citizen is an open, important, public issue.
But, this “Certificate of Live Birth” is simply not the best evidence that the President and his administration could offer to lay to rest any doubt about his status as a natural born citizen.
Barack Obama is a lawyer and a graduate of Harvard Law School. All law students study the body of law we call “Evidence.” One of the core tenets of American law is the “best evidence rule” which requires the production of original, or certified copies, of original document to prove a fact. Abstracts and summaries are not original documents.
The President has offered an abstract (Certificate) of his birth, but not an original birth certificate which would be the best evidence of his birth. We need the best evidence so that it can do what the best evidence is meant to do; dispel the doubts about a fact. We need to see the Birth Certificate. That's the one that is often handwritten and signed by the doctor.
Lawyers and legal thinkers will, obviously, argue the finer points of the “Best Evidence Rule” and its applicability to this matter. But, that misses the point. The notion of “Best Evidence” is solidly-grounded in law. This is an important public matter and it seems now that the President has started down the path of offering some evidence (Certificate of Live Birth), he should offer the “best evidence” (Original Birth Certificate) which is the source document for his birth. The document behind the document which has been released. This is what is needed now in the court of public knowledge.
The fact in question here is the constitutional qualification of the President of the United States to hold office. With a simple nod, the President could offer the American people the best evidence, the source document(s), as he learned about at Harvard, and dispel those who question his birth as a natural born citizen. His failure to provide this best evidence, when it could be so easily done, raises only more questions, which fuels an ugly public debate.
I guess there are some things that not even a journalism school graduate can stomach.
Comment posted August 17, 2009 @ 7:00 pm
During the 2008 election, then Senator Obama published a statement at his website which said that his birth status was ‘governed’ by the British Nationality Act of 1948. Can you please tell me, and the American people, how a person governed – at birth – by British law, can be a natural born citizen of the United States and thus constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States?”
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
