David Fubar backed himself into a corner when he signed on to be a stooge for Orly. He said that if a judge decided Obama was eligible he would accept that ruling. Ever since Judge Malihi ruled in favor of the Empty Chair he has been trying to weasel out of his promise.

Ah, so fubar is down to the always persuasive what if? argument. The magical thinking Checkmate!

Let the frogmarching commence.

Farrar is stating (correctly) there is an inconsistency on the long form: Obama's father's listed age is different from the age listed in his INS files.

From there he interpolates, "If there is one error, how do we know there aren't more errors?" And is therefore trying to create doubt and shift the burden of proof.


But good to know he's accepted the results of his challenge.

How likely is it that Obama Sr. knew for sure when he was born? Did the white colonists care that a black baby was born back in 1936-1938? Do Muslims write family data in their Korans?

It is only very recently that Kenya has been requiring birth certificates and people have been waiting in long lines to get them. I read that when kids in Africa (or was it India) started school their teachers would just put their birthday down as the first day of school.

I think Obama Sr. just had a vague idea of how old he was and miffed the math in figuring his birth year. I often can't remember how old I am.

FIFY.

Before he became Taitz's stooge he had someone else help him. I suspect he made a promise to that ghost writer that he would accept the results in order to get free legal work. Now that he's gotten the benefit of that original work, what does he has to lose? And he's not "trying to weasel out of his promise." He has completely reneged on it. He's just another liar and without principle.

There is indeed that. However, he forget the question of "How do we know that is in error?", the answer being "Because there is evidence that one could consider authentic that shows the Obama Sr.'s birth date is something else than that which is on the form."

In the case of President Barack Obama, Farrar has no evidence that said data is incorrect, and offers no evidence of birth someplace other than is stated on the form, particularly given that that data, rather than being self-reported, is reported by the hospital itself. Could it be mistaken? Sure, anything is possible. But of it is, it's up to the one challenging it to provide evidence of that, not Obama to prove something that in all honestly he could only prove via the form they claim is wrong.

IIRC, there were inconsistencies in the INS files. Sometimes, BHO, Sr.'s birth year was one way and on other papers, it was the other. Didn't the variations show up in his papers after he left Hawai'i? Not that it really matters. Birfers latch onto any innocent mistake or inconsistency as fraud. They do not understand that fraud requires an intent to deceive. The irony is that they are so good at deceiving themselves.

David found himself boxed into that corner over a month ago. He saw (to his credit, if I may say so) that there was no plausible way to deny that the President's publicly disclosed birth data tally with what''s in Hawaii's official records.

His first line of defense was to say that it didn't matter, because for various technical reasons there was no way for ALJ Malihi to consider those facts to have been introduced at "his" hearing.

I think that several of us over at Squeeky's managed to persuade him that that was a dead-end argument -- even if he was right (which he wasn't), his victory would be at best fleeting: since the Hawaiian records constitute conclusive proof of the data, it would be a matter of a short time before the technical difficulties were overcome, the evidence were formally admitted, and his case would be dead.

So he's stuck with the completely nonsensical argument that the Obama presidency is fraudulent because of the possibility of error in the original documents, even though he hasn't even suggested when and where he thinks the President really was born or how he would prove it.

What the brifers like to think is that the original document sent to HI by the hospital is a forgery

ex-amoeba comments over at Squeeky's blog. (i don't have link handy, but squeeky is linked at the Spectragator. I don't have that link handy either. ) Idunno where else, but you could try to get an answer there.

He doesn't make any sense.

idunno if this goes here.


From the description box:



http://www.scribd.com/doc/89130109/Apri ... Certiorari

He don't write 2 good, does he?

idunno where to post this?

Revised Petition for Writ of Certiorari Judy v. Obama U.S. Supreme Crt

http://www.scribd.com/doc/92320605/Revi ... upreme-Crt


ETA: I pasted it over at Cody Judy's thread. Here:

viewtopic.php?f=53&t=7099&p=373067#p373067

D9D

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=58192

Yeah, what a lucky break. Cuz, ya know, all Orly needs is the chance to strut her stuff and POOF! Obama's gonna lose the State of Georgia's electoral votes fer shure.

No idea who this GA moron attorney may be, but he/she obviously does not care one whit about his reputation or license (or perhaps his pocketbook) if he/she is willing so sign off on anything Orly files/does.

Will the Judge Land sanctions in Georgia impede this, regardless of a local yokel being willing to front her? Especially in light of her smears and harassment of Judge Land after? Didn't she publish his supposed SS# all around, as well?

And wait ... she's going to file the general elections challenge after the general election? Haven't we been there before?

Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't it require a bit more than to just have a sponsoring local attorney for one the gain PHV? Second, I like the idea of Lena acting^* as a Real Lawyer. It makes her look so much less competent. No real lawyer would file the garbage she files and do it in the way she does it.

* Having said "acting", I very much doubt she would be qualified to join the Actor's Guild.

Given the next sentence, I believe she meant "before" but miswrote.