Here is his very first FR post where he admits that he is to troll eligibility threads. And from what I've seen that is all he does.
Posted on 07/08/2010 4:07:23 PM PDT by tired_old_conservative
This brief for stay was forwared to Hon. Assocate Justice of the Supreme Court Clarence Thomas
APPLICATION FOR EMERGENCY STAY AND/OR INJUNCTION AS TO THE sanctions Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ
(Excerpt) Read more at scribd.com ...
Same here.
Bump till tomorrow night when I won't have to work the next morning.
::snort:: LOL. Like putting a two year old in charge of a nuclear silo, just another technique to be mastered.
But we all have more sense in our toenail than she has in her empty blond head.
She appears to have gotten spell-check somewhere along the way.
Faint praise, thanks.
“I think it probably includes a dishwater blond wig strand taped to the certificate of authenticity...”
Yikes!
LOL
Well, that much of an admission represents progress. Congratulations. But for the record, not buying into this bizarre stuff does not make me an Obama supporter. It just makes me rational.
Just one more technique she has finally mastered in her quest to become the world's greatest quadruple threat: civil rights/constitutional/military law giant, dentist extraordinaire, perpetually confused Republican primary candidate, and all around total lunatic.
After all, spell-check is the key to mastering the law, don't you think? All that other stuff in law school is just a scam to keep out worthy dentists.
This is what I got out of that :
Orly lives/works on:
29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy
in
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Coincidentally I could really use a margarita right now
A “questionable SS#”? Are you kidding? Do you think that the man currently serving as POTUS is the only person in the United States with the given name of “Barack Obama” who has ever applied for an SS#? How many people with YOUR given name have applied for an SS#?
Anyone who has ever done any genealogical searching for an even semi-common first and last name combination know how many SS# hits each name combo gets, especially if you don’t include DOB or state. You can get dozens and dozens.
When you read the details of the way that the “investigator” demonstrated his forensic procedures, you realize why this whole “illegitimate SS#” issue is laughable.
Here is his very first FR post where he admits that he is to troll eligibility threads. And from what I've seen that is all he does.
Three cheers for Orly Taitz. Whenever an Orly Taitz post appears on FR, we are witnessing tired_old_conservative and his buddies on this thread using the Alinsky Rules for Radicals tactic of closing ranks together to target and mock anyone who is an able, smart truth seeker. When “progressives” see their opposition gaining a following and are formidable and brave opponents of power hungry freedom crushing Marxists. Orly Taitz speaks the truth and is not afraid of Marxist goons. She’s one of our greatest Americans and she’s smart as can be. These goons even go after her for her hair color. The Left use only lies and desperate attack measures, because the truth reveals they are part of the dungpile of mass murdering historical mistakes. What we can learn from the desperate mocking of Orly Taitz is that Taitz is definitely onto the truth about Obama’s being ineligible for president of the U.S.
Good for her! May she succeed in bringing to light what should have been public long ago
Non-Sequitur (RomneyBOT):"But we all have more sense in our toenail than she has in her empty blond head."
No surprise finding you RomneyBOTs, taking a moment from
supporting RomneyCARE and TARP and Obama, to attack a patriot
actually fighting for America.
How is YOUR unnatural citizen candidate, Mexican Mitt Romney, doing?
You're no brighter than she is.
You're no brighter than she is.
It's hard to baffle them with bullsh*t when half the words are misspelled.
You may be correct about the way "standing" has evolved in our law. But that doesn't make the concept itself Constitutional if it offers no remedy to protect against what would be a clear violation of the Constitution. The "standing" cases that I looked at seem to be related to whether a taxpayer, not otherwise injured, can challenge the Constitutionality of a law passed by Congress and signed by the President. This isn't quite the same thing.
I think it could be argued that the First Amendment guarantees "standing" to citizens to petition the Government for a redress of grievances (which is derived from the Magna Carta) as much as it guarantees "freedom of religion" or "freedom of speech." To argue that nothing can be done without enabling legislation about a usurper being President is to allow Congress to amend the Constitution in a manner other than than specifically laid out in the Constitution. Certainly if the Court has decided that term limits are unconstitutional because they extend the qualifications (for Congress) beyond those specifically stated, then the Amendment process must certainly be limited to those specifically stated.
ML/NJ
I like Orly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.