Advertisement

Archive for Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Lousiana senator supports birther lawsuits

July 13, 2010

Advertisement

— Republican Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana says he supports conservative organizations challenging President Barack Obama’s citizenship in court.

Vitter, who is running for re-election, made the comments at a town hall-style event in Metairie, La., on Sunday when a constituent asked what he would do about what the questioner said was Obama’s “refusal to produce a valid birth certificate.”

Such claims about Obama’s birth certificate have been discredited. But with the crowd applauding the question, Vitter responded that although he doesn’t personally have legal standing to bring litigation, he supports “conservative legal organizations and others who would bring that to court,” according to a video of the event.

Comments

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 5 months ago

Well of course he does! He graduated from Beck University!

BrianR 4 years, 5 months ago

They should seriously force him to get a psych. eval.

grammaddy 4 years, 5 months ago

The closer we get to the mid-terms, the more the nuts come out.

geekyhost 4 years, 5 months ago

Exactly. For a fiscal conservative, he sure likes to waste our taxpayer money.

Richard Heckler 4 years, 5 months ago

So where in the world does Sen Brownback stand on this issue? The republican party has been quite aggressive on this matter when they realized they were losing the elections.

I believe the party has become completely irresponsible and cannot manage our fiscal resources any better than they manage their behavior upon losing elections.

Richard Heckler 4 years, 5 months ago

At a Saturday barbecue for the Leavenworth County, Kans., Republican Party, former Bush administration lawyer and current secretary of state candidate Kris Kobach made the case for stricter voter ID laws by questioning the citizenship of President Obama.

A professor of law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kobach kept the mood light with a political joke. He asked what President Obama and God had in common, with the punchline being neither has a birth certificate.

Other Kansas politicians spoke at the event, including Sen. Sam Brownback, Rep. Lynn Jenkins, and Rep. Todd Tiahrt. Kobach, a Marshall scholar and Yale Law grad who was chairman of the state GOP until earlier this year, is considered a front runner for the job with jurisdiction over elections in Kansas.

sciencegeek 4 years, 5 months ago

I'm a life-long Kansan, but I'm thinking of leaving. I just can't stand being associated with the wild-eyed, illogicial, nutcase, ultraconservative judgmental people that get elected by this state. Kobach is dangerous, Jenkins is a puppet of the GOP, and Brownback is a modern-day Pharisee. Fred Phelps has nothing on this crowd.

When voters don't put in the effort to research the candidates and do a knee-jerk vote based on party or who shouts the loudest, democracy is forfeit. God help Kansas, and the USA.

oldvet 4 years, 5 months ago

Don't let the screen door hit you on the way out...

Richard Heckler 4 years, 5 months ago

The house on C Street By Patrick Kelley Tuesday, July 14, 2009

SEN. SAM BROWNBACK will be leaving Washington next year to come back to Kansas to run for governor. He’s picked a good time to get out of town.

Scandals have drawn unwelcome attention to the senator’s home in the nation’s capital — the house at 133 C St. SE. Brownback lives there with five other members of Congress, including Sen. John Ensign of Nevada. Ensign has admitted an affair with a member of his staff and news reports have alleged questionable payments made to that staff member.

Other residents of the house apparently counseled Ensign about the affair and at one point supervised his writing of a letter breaking off the relationship. Ensign apparently called his lover soon after the letter was sent and told her to ignore it.

Ensign is not the only politician who has sought advice at C Street. South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, a former member of Congress, recently told a reporter that he went to the house for advice about his affair with a woman in Argentina.

So the house on C Street and its residents, like it or not, are now in the spotlight — connected, at least peripherally, with two current sex scandals in U.S. politics.

The resulting scrutiny has extended to the house itself and its role in politics.

U.S. News & World Report reported that the house is owned by a “secretive religious organization” alternately known as the “Fellowship” or the “Foundation.” The bottom two floors of the building are registered in tax records as a church. The members of Congress live on the third floor. Each pays $600 a month rent, an extremely low rate for housing within walking distance of the Capitol.

Commentators have begun to ask what role the group that owns the house plays in the careers of its tenants and what influence it may wield in matters of government.

Brownback has not been connected to the Ensign or Sanford scandals beyond mention that he is a resident of the house. But the scandals have directed attention to the house, its owners and the people who live there.

That is the sort of attention that a candidate for Kansas governor can do without. Perhaps it is time for the senator to find more expensive quarters for the rest of his time in Washington.

Patrick S. Kelley

Editorial Page Editor Emporia Gazette

c_doc77 4 years, 5 months ago

Several problems with this article.

First of all, this trend of introducing terms to pigeonhole and abbreviate political ideas that are effectively slurs. You think the president should provide a birth certificate proving he is a natural born citizen, you are a "birther". You protest the unconstitutional practice of taxing labor to pay the interest on the fiat currency debt issued by the Federal Reserve, that makes you a "teabagger", which also has a negative sexual connotation for those of you who don't know.

Secondly, this quote:

"Republican Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana says he supports conservative organizations challenging President Barack Obama’s citizenship in court."

This suggests that only "conservative organizations" are challenging Obama's presidential eligibility based on his country of origin. This is just not true. Phil Berg, a lifelong Democrat, is heading up one of these lawsuits. In fact, I believe he was the first one to do so. The AP doesn't get it wrong here, but they, like Vitter himself, are playing up the whole left/right angle rather than making this an issue of constitutionality.

Then this quote:

"...on Sunday when a constituent asked what he would do about what the questioner said was Obama’s “refusal to produce a valid birth certificate. Such claims about Obama’s birth certificate have been discredited."

Discredited by whom? Since when is the media supposed to tell us that a matter is settled when it is still being litigated? Merely saying something is settled doesn't make it so. Contrary to popular [media] belief, there has been no birth certificate provided by the president. If there was, this would indeed be an open and shut case. A Certificate of Live Birth and a birth certificate, although they sound very much alike, are not the same thing.

I personally don't know where Obama was born, but when Kenya's Minister of Lands, James Orengo says Obama was born in Kenya, and when a Hawaii elections clerk Tim Adams says that a birth certificate does not exist, it definitely raises what I believe to be legitimate questions. I'm not saying this as a Republican or an Democrat because I am neither. And I didn't support McCain, who is not a natural-born citizen himself. So when the media tries to insult my intelligence by dumbing down the issue and making it a partisan question, of course I'm going to cry foul.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 5 months ago

"Discredited by whom?"

The state of Hawaii-- where he was born.

Grundoon Luna 4 years, 5 months ago

In addition to the State of Hawaii providing this docuementation 2 - I repeat 2! - separate newpapers in Honolulu came forward and provided the birth announcements they publish at the time of the President's birth. I swear, only morons still buy in to the Birther philosophy because they can't over over their Sore Loserism. Take a pill!!!

mom_of_three 4 years, 5 months ago

Who is still litigating this matter? Where and by whom?

Kirk Larson 4 years, 5 months ago

"A Certificate of Live Birth and a birth certificate, although they sound very much alike, are not the same thing. " I can not produce my Birth Certificate and neither can you. It is kept in a State office building. I can obtain a certified copy with which to get a passport, drivers' license, etc.

geekyhost 4 years, 5 months ago

Actually both Obama and McCain are "natural born" US citizens, no matter which country they were born in. That's because both had at least one parent who was a US citizen, meaning they were citizens from birth and did not need to be naturalized.

Boy, don't the Obamas feel silly knowing that NOW, what with the time machine they had to use to go put those birth announcements in the Hawaiian newspapers.

But on the other point, you are correct. We shouldn't say that only conservatives are challenging Obama's birth. Only racists, xenophobes, and the willfully ignorant are challenging it. There. I fixed it for you.

tomatogrower 4 years, 5 months ago

LOL, LOL, LOL. That poor dead horse. Why do they keep beating it? Too, too funny.

Richard Heckler 4 years, 5 months ago

After so many years as an elected official how is it that the Obama citizenship became an issue suddenly?

Maybe Phil Berg became unhappy when the demo party chose Obama over Clinton?

None of this crap can be substantiated for any reason. This is BS.

BTW I did not vote Obama however it still remains BS BS BS!

Berg was successfully sued for legal malpractice by former clients on whose behalf Berg had neglected to file a response to a complaint in an ERISA lawsuit, resulting in a default judgment being entered against the former clients.

Berg responded by bringing into the malpractice suit the plaintiffs in the ERISA action on a claim of fraud upon the court. The ERISA plaintiffs moved for summary judgment—which was granted after Berg failed to respond to the motion—and then moved for sanctions against Berg. Berg again failed to file a response.

On June 2, 2005, U.S. District Judge J. Curtis Joyner granted the motion for sanctions, finding that the fraud claim was "was inadequately pled, not grounded in fact, time-barred, and utterly irrelevant to the pending malpractice action against him." Observing that an attorney's signature on a complaint constitutes, among other things, a certification that the signer has conducted a reasonable inquiry into the grounds for the claim asserted, the court further found that "even the most limited investigation would have revealed that [Berg] had no standing to raise such a claim."

The court also found that Berg's claim was motivated by a "desire to harass" and "delay litigation." The court fined Berg $10,000 and ordered him to attend six hours of ethics training.

Richard Heckler 4 years, 5 months ago

After so many years as an elected official how is it that the Obama citizenship became an issue suddenly?

Maybe Phil Berg became unhappy when the demo party chose Obama over Clinton?

None of this crap can be substantiated for any reason. This is BS.

BTW I did not vote Obama however it still remains BS BS BS!

Berg was successfully sued for legal malpractice by former clients on whose behalf Berg had neglected to file a response to a complaint in an ERISA lawsuit, resulting in a default judgment being entered against the former clients.

Berg responded by bringing into the malpractice suit the plaintiffs in the ERISA action on a claim of fraud upon the court. The ERISA plaintiffs moved for summary judgment—which was granted after Berg failed to respond to the motion—and then moved for sanctions against Berg. Berg again failed to file a response.

On June 2, 2005, U.S. District Judge J. Curtis Joyner granted the motion for sanctions, finding that the fraud claim was "was inadequately pled, not grounded in fact, time-barred, and utterly irrelevant to the pending malpractice action against him." Observing that an attorney's signature on a complaint constitutes, among other things, a certification that the signer has conducted a reasonable inquiry into the grounds for the claim asserted, the court further found that "even the most limited investigation would have revealed that [Berg] had no standing to raise such a claim."

The court also found that Berg's claim was motivated by a "desire to harass" and "delay litigation." The court fined Berg $10,000 and ordered him to attend six hours of ethics training.

Richard Heckler 4 years, 5 months ago

Berg filed a complaint in federal district court on August 21, 2008, against Democratic Party presidential nominee Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic National Committee and the Federal Election Commission, alleging that Obama was born actually in Mombasa, Kenya and that the "Certification of Live Birth" on Obama's website is a forgery.

The court dismissed the complaint as "frivolous and not worthy of discussion."[11][12] The judge also found that the harm Berg alleged did "not constitute an injury in fact" and that Berg's arguments to the contrary "ventured into the unreasonable."[11][12]

Berg filed a petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court and also sought an injunction to suspend the election. The injunction was denied by Justice David Souter on November 3, 2008.

Berg also sought an application for injunction pending the disposition of the petition for writ of certiorari; Justice Souter denied it, Berg refiled and submitted it to Justice Anthony Kennedy (who denied it), then refiled and submitted it to Justice Antonin Scalia, who referred it to the Court.

On January 12, 2009, the Supreme Court denied Berg's petition for writ of certiorari,[13] and on January 21 the Court denied the application for injunction.[14] [edit] References

frank mcguinness 4 years, 5 months ago

I'm pretty sure David Vitter supports prostitution too.

staff04 4 years, 5 months ago

Senator Diapers? Shared values with birthers? For shame....

mom_of_three 4 years, 5 months ago

you mean philip berg, the activist who has filed frivilous suits again Bush and others stating they planned 9/11, and lawsuits against supreme court justices for the 2001 Bush/Gore election decision. Yeah, he is someone i would want to mention for credibility.....(read sarcasm)

c_doc77 4 years, 5 months ago

merrill, I know a little about the problems Berg has encountered. None of that means anything to me. In my opinion, this is something best tried in the court of public opinion. No judge wants to touch this, and no judge will until and unless they absolutely have to. Bottom line is whether the claims are without merit remains to be seen. There is no Hawaiian birth certificate and the Obama campaign digitally altered the Certificate of Live Birth posted on their web site; and Obama's first act as president was to seal his records by executive order.

People can call me a "birther", a "right-wing nut" or whatever, but I think this is far from being settled. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never intimidate me. I'm not saying Obama is definitely not a natural-born citizen, but I am saying I remain unconvinced by the actual evidence, and there are multiple things that I find unsettling about how the administration has handled this. And I have yet to read a single mainstream article about this where half of the facts of the legal arguments were discussed. All of them have a dismissive tone.

I know some of these people have an agenda that I don't go along with, but for me, the question simply is whether Obama was born in the United States and whether that can be proven. And I don't think its too much to ask that the president prove his constitutional eligibility for the nation's highest office.

mom_of_three 4 years, 5 months ago

The obama campaign digitally altered his certificate of live birth? Where did you hear/read that, and can that be proven?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 5 months ago

And we know for a fact that the Obama regime time-travelled back 47 years and planted that fake story in the local newspaper announcing his birth, too.

The real facts can't be concealed forever.

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 5 months ago

Y'know I believe there's a hole in the Earth at the North Pole, Aggie. Go through that hole and you'll find an entirely new species of intelligent beings who inhabit the center of the Earth. That's where flying saucers come from. I know it's for real! This guy down in Joplin showed me and my dad an honest to god copy of a real signed affidavit by a guy who had been there! And a couple of months later they published it in the Fortean Times! It HAS to be real, dontcha think?

Graczyk 4 years, 5 months ago

Isn't this guy's brother the provost at KU now? I wonder if they are cut from the same cloth.

Flap Doodle 4 years, 5 months ago

The issue of hundreds of felons illegally voting in MN in 2008 should be a hotter potato.

somedude20 4 years, 5 months ago

well if we are going back into history, I think what happened with GWB's fisrt election would be a baked potato. One thing to steal a candy bar another to steal an election

jaywalker 4 years, 5 months ago

Ding ding ding! It took a while, but the card gets played. That talking point is as ridiculous as the birther nonsense. Bravo!

jaywalker 4 years, 5 months ago

Ding ding ding! It took a while, but the card gets played. That talking point is as ridiculous as the birther nonsense. Bravo!

jaywalker 4 years, 5 months ago

Ding ding ding! It took a while, but the card gets played. That talking point is as ridiculous as the birther nonsense. Bravo!

Amy Heeter 4 years, 5 months ago

I don't know why this keeps coming up. I do know there are countless websites that spend a great deal of time talking about it though. I consider the case closed.

boltzmann 4 years, 5 months ago

Let's just hope his brother Jeff Vitter, the new provost at KU, doesn't share David Vitter's gene for anti-intellectual pandering.

Richard Payton 4 years, 5 months ago

Why would a President seal his records seems strange doesn't it? Has any other United States President sealed his records? I quess that those that don't know why this keeps coming up is because they want to shout racism. They must also support sealed records from being brought to the public's attention. Another hot topic is voter intimidation by the New Black Panthers in Philadelpia that scared some white voters. Historically, whites have intimidated blacks in greater numbers at the voting poll places. The case in Philadelpia is being thrown out of court by the Dept. of Justice according to O'Reilly last night. If intimidation is allowed by any race, we have failed as a nation to preserve one of our most important freedoms. That is an individuals right to vote as he or she deems best.

ebyrdstarr 4 years, 5 months ago

Obama didn't seal his records. I responded below with the full explanation. This seal order thing seems to be the wingnut meme of the week, so debunking it wasn't hard at all. Took about 2 minutes on google to lean that the executive order at issue replaced one issued by George W. Bush which in turn replaced one issued by Reagan. The order addresses implementation of the Presidential Records Act of 1978. The order, which applies to all presidents past and present, deals with presidential records, meaning the work product from the man's time as president. Some of those records need to be sealed for national security reasons, for example. These orders lay out the procedure for the national archivist to contact the relevant president, former or present, when a record is requested. Per the orders, that president then has 30 days to invoke executive privilege if he thinks the record is one that should be sealed.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the man's private, personal records at all. Funny what just a few minutes of research and reading can yield: the facts.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 5 months ago

"Why would a President seal his records seems strange doesn't it?"

Are you talking about the Bushes? If so, given all the skeletons in their closets, it's not strange at all.

c_doc77 4 years, 5 months ago

Funny how merely questioning something, without even making a final judgment on it, gets you branded as something on the order of a "Holocaust denier". But despite the rhetoric of the resident thought police, I think there are a number of legitimate questions about the legitimacy of Obama's presidential eligibility. And despite my omission of this in my previous posts, I have actually entertained the other side too, and am aware of the birth announcement, etc. But while that evidence is strong, it is not compelling enough to decide the question for me. So for the time being, I am not willing to give the president the benefit of the doubt.

I will pose a few questions for your consideration. And once again, please don't make the mistake of assuming, as have some, that this is constitutes some kind of indictment that should be met with vehement [internet] hostility. When I say the jury is still out on this, I count myself as a member of that jury.

  1. Why have so many Kenyans, including government officials and the president's own step-grandmother, claimed that Obama was born in Kenya if he was not?

  2. Why do neither of the Hawaii hospitals in which Obama was supposedly born have no records that he or his mother were ever there at the time of his birth?

  3. Why have the media and Obama supporters consistently conflated the issue by insisting that the Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth is the same as a copy of the original birth certificate, when they are entirely different documents and the document in question does not even certify the place of birth?

4.Why has Obama refused to disclose the vault copy of his Hawaiian birth certificate?

  1. Why was sealing his records the first order of business for the new president?

These are merely questions - questions that I think deserve answers. And as long as they remain unanswered, despite the fact that a whole segment of the population will dismiss them as "fringe", they are still legitimate. Because as a candidate for President of the United States, the burden of proof is on the one who would assume the office. A candidate must prove his eligibility. And if you can't prove you are at least 35 and were born here, you are not eligible (that goes for you too, Schwarzenegger).

Agnostick, I'm sure you're a good guy, but I'm sort of wondering if you could tone down on the logical fallacies just a bit. You make some valid points, but they get lost in your name-calling and whatnot. That might make you popular with some folks, but sooner or later you might want to be known as a person of integrity.

jonas_opines 4 years, 5 months ago

"But despite the rhetoric of the resident thought police, I think there are a number of legitimate questions about the legitimacy of Obama's presidential eligibility."

Except that there really aren't. The mother was a US citizen, born in 1940, and lived in the US for the requisite time required by the 14th Amdendment, which is listed below, so even if he Was born in Kenya, he would still be eligible.

(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person

(A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or (B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001401----000-.html

His mother fits the qualifications. So even if you suggest that it's a giant conspiracy to hide that he wasn't born in Hawaii, it's pointless in terms of his eligibility. If you're going to suggest that there are questions, and you don't want to be dismissed as a birther, then attack these facts. Which do you disagree with?

mom_of_three 4 years, 5 months ago

According to the fact checking organizations, none of hawaii's certificates have places of birth.

I am still waiting to hear why you think the certificate of live birth is false.

mom_of_three 4 years, 5 months ago

I didn't mean to respond to Jonas, but to cdoc77

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 5 months ago

"5. Why was sealing his records the first order of business for the new president?"

Which records are you talking about? Under what authority did he seal these records? Is there any precedent for sealing any records he did seal?

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 5 months ago

I can answer all of them. 1-4 are moot. He was born to a US citizen. #5. His records are no more "sealed" than yours are. All records; birth certificates, school records, medical records, etc. are subject to either state privacy laws, the Federal Privacy Act of 1974, HIPPA or many other government privacy laws. There was no "sealing" his records to it. Somebody tried to get a copy of his HI birth certificate and got butt hurt when they were turned down, just as you would be turned down if you tried to get a copy of mine.

ebyrdstarr 4 years, 5 months ago

The "seal" order c_doc referred to is an order Obama signed on Jan 21, 2009. Executive Order 13489. It is virtually identical to Executive Order 13233 issued by George W. Bush early in his presidency. Which in turn was the same as Executive Order 12667 issued by Reagan.

The orders all deal with implementation of the Presidential Records Act of 1978. All of this relates to the preservation and classification of presidential records. Not the private, personal records of the man, but the work product records of the office of the president. The executive orders are about asserting executive privilege to seal certain records that are sensitive, like that have a bearing on national security. The orders apply not just to the incumbent president, but to all former presidents. The orders require that the national archivist notify the relevant president before disclosing any records and that the relevant president then has 30 days to inform the archivist whether he will invoke executive privilege to block public release of the document.

Boy howdy, how anyone ever read this executive order and came to the conclusion that Obama was up to anything shady is beyond me. I think it is safe to assume that c_doc did not actually read the order, but simply read some wingnut blog.

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 5 months ago

When you have right wing historical revisionists who try everything they can to change history the way they have, nothing surprises me anymore.

tomatogrower 4 years, 5 months ago

So this conspiracy would involve the following people: Secret Service - Presidents have to be investigated for their security clearance; Hawaiian state government - they issued the certificate of live birth from the document that remains in their possession; Hawaiian newspapers - they falsified the announcement; probably the FBI. Hmmm, somewhere along the way that conspiracy would have fallen apart. You are calling a lot of people liars.

cdoc77, could we see your documents? How do we know you are a US citizen are even qualified to vote, and that this isn't really any of your business? How do we know you aren't an illegal? How do we know you aren't a BP exec, who wants a more oil friendly president? Maybe you are really a part of an underground group of radical Christians who are trying to overthrow the government and start a radical Christian theocracy? Maybe you work for the Pope and the vatican wants to take over the US? Sounds like a conspiracy to me.

Mike Ford 4 years, 5 months ago

THE LEVEL OF STUPID NEVER SUPRISES ME. WHERE'S SHEWMON AND THE REST OF THE GANG.. THE CRAZY TRAIN IS CALLING.. I GREW UP IN LOUISIANA AS A TRANSPLANTED NORTHERNER THE WHOLE REGION IS A DENIALISTS PARADISE.

feeble 4 years, 5 months ago

Sounds like Vitter isn't familiar with Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution. Hawaii says he was born there? Louisana has to accept it, or act against Constitution.

Of course, Vitter's got a top aide who was recently implicated in some serious wrong doing, and an extremely popular, right-of-center retired judge with deep business ties who just entered the race for Vitter's Senate seat. The birther business is red-meat for the conservative sheeple down south and a smoke screen for everyone else.

RogueThrill 4 years, 5 months ago

Sounds like someone just blew a dog whistle.

Bob_Keeshan 4 years, 5 months ago

Bob Dole ran for President, and he can't produce a birth certificate.

Sam Brownback ran for President, and he can't produce a birth certificate.

Sounds like something fishy is going on in the Kansas GOP.

ebyrdstarr 4 years, 5 months ago

It seems to me that we shouldn't wait for responses from those who spew allegations that Obama sealed his records. They obviously weren't interested in learning the facts before accusing him of some wrong-doing. It certainly didn't take me long to find the answer and the actual text of the executive orders. Facts aren't important to people who are only interested in assuming everything Obama does is bad, evil, nefarious, ruinous to society as we know it, etc.

I didn't respond expecting payton or doc to recognize they were wrong; I posted my comment simply so the rational people reading these comment thread would be armed with the truth the next time a fact-averse wingnut hurls that accusation.

jonas_opines 4 years, 5 months ago

Yeah, it looks like we can keep on waiting, I guess.

Doc, every minute that ticks by just confirms for us that you're a birther, and that you deserve to be called as such. I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt for a while, but only for so long.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.