Orly Taitz

Birther Queen to win GOP nomination for California Secretary of State?

by: Chris Bowers

Mon Jun 07, 2010 at 20:00

Orly Taitz, head of the birther movement, might win tomorrow's Republican primary for Secretary of State in California.  Politico:

Orly Taitz is an Israeli émigré who has spent the past two years filing lawsuits challenging President Barack Obama's right to be president on the grounds that he was born in Kenya. In the process, she has earned herself $20,000 in court fines.

Now she's running for the GOP nomination for secretary of state, and with her establishment-backed primary opponent mounting a less-than-stellar campaign against her, operatives say there's a chance she could win.(...)

"For professional Republicans right now, the main tactic in regards to Orly Taitz is prayer," said Jack Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College and a longtime observer of California politics.

Taitz may well win, simply because the birther movement is so rife within the Republican Party.  In 2009, Research 2000 found a plurality of Republicans thought Obama was not born in America (42-28%), while PPP found Republians closely divided on the issue (38%--44%, PDF, page 18)  This election is thus a major referendum about the acceptability of loud and out birthirsm in the Republican Party.  If she wins, other Republican candidats might become more willing to go public with their own, likely watered down, brand of birtherism.

Amid ongoing voter disenfranchisement in Arkansas, the Taitz campaign is also an election integrity issue story worth noting.  While many Open Lefters are not too thrilled with Obama's presidency, Taitz overtly stating her desire to bend the law in any way means necessary to help defeat Democrats, but during and after elections, should send a chill down your spine:

"Barack Obama is a terrible president, and we have to get him out of office by any weird loophole we can make up," she said on an appearance last summer on the Colbert Report.

This is a starkly anti-democratic statement.  Tomorrow, we will find out if it is the majority opinion of the Republican Party.

Discuss :: (0 Comments)

Weekly Pulse: Obama Signs Health Reform Bill, Backlash Begins

by: The Media Consortium

Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 12:07

By Lindsay Beyerstein, Media Consortium blogger

Yesterday, President Obama signed health care reform into law. As Mike Lillis explains in the Washington Independent, the bill now proceeds to the Senate for reconciliation. The whole process could be complete by the end of the week. Republicans and their allies have already moved to challenge reform in court.

Legal challenges

The fight is far from over, however. Steve Benen of the Washington Monthly notes that Republicans have already filed papers to challenge health care reform in court. The Justice Department has pledged to vigorously defend health care reform, according to Zach Roth of TPM Muckraker.

The legal arguments against health care reform center around the constitutionality of an individual mandate, i.e., the requirement that everyone must carry health insurance. This argument is specious. The bill characterizes the mandatory payments as a tax, and imposes a fine for those who don't pay their insurance tax. There is no question that Congress has the authority to levy taxes in support of the general welfare and providing health insurance to the people easily meets that legal criterion.

Dave Weigel of the Washington Independent reviews some of the other formidable legal barriers to challenging health care reform in court. But take heart, teabaggers! Birther-dentist-lawyer Orly Taitz is on the case.

Violent outbursts from reform opponents

Some anti-reform activists have resorted to intimidation.  Five Democratic offices were vandalized in the days surrounding the House vote, as Justin Elliott reports for TPM Muckraker. Someone hurled a brick through the window of the Niagara office of Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), the chair of the powerful House Rules Committee.

Slaughter is notorious on the right for drawing up the controversial "deem and pass" strategy for moving the bill forward. Her plan was never put into action, but she has become a target anyway. Another Democratic office in Slaughter's district was damaged by a brick bearing a quote from conservative icon Barry Goldwater: "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice."

Elliott notes that a conservative blogger in Alabama is doing his best to incite similar attacks, though it's not clear whether he instigated any of the original five:

...Blogger Mike Vanderboegh has been tracking the  breaking of windows at Dem offices after issuing a call  Friday: "To all modern Sons of Liberty: THIS is your time. Break their  windows. Break them NOW."

Reproductive rights take a hit

Anti-abortion extremist Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) failed to get his ultra-restrictive abortion language inserted into the health care bill, but the final bill does impede health insurance coverage for abortion.

For example, those who choose abortion coverage will have to write two checks: One for their regular premium and one for a dollar to go into a separate abortion coverage fund. Many analysts fear that the extra hassles will discourage private insurers from covering abortion at all.  Pro-choice activists were in a weaker negotiating position because, unlike Stupak and his allies, they weren't prepared to kill health reform if their demands weren't met.

The greater good?

Now that health care reform is safely signed into law, the pro-choice movement is stepping back and asking itself some tough questions.

In The Nation, Katha Pollitt argues that the pro-choice movement deserves to be rewarded for sacrificing its own agenda for the greater good. She suggests that the Democrats could reward the reproductive rights movement by fully funding the Violence Against Women Act, addressing maternal mortality and other policy changes to advance women's health and freedom.

Jos of Feministing counters that with their go along to get along attitude pro-choice groups have only demonstrated that they can be ignored with impunity: "You don't get rewarded for demonstrating a lack of political  power, you get further marginalized."

At RH Reality Check, Megan Carpentier argues that national pro-choice organization like NARAL and Planned Parenthood ceded their leverage too easily. While anti-choicers were beefing up their lobbying presence in Washington, major pro-choice groups were scaling back. Pro-choice groups compromised early and easily, perhaps because they were overly confident that their service to the Democratic cause would be rewarded in the end.

 

This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about health care by members  of The Media Consortium. It is free to reprint. Visit the Pulse  for a complete list of articles on health care reform, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, environment, health care and immigration issues, check out The Audit, The Mulch, and The Diaspora. This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of leading independent media outlets.

Discuss :: (0 Comments)

The Orly Taitz of Climate Change? 'Lord' Monckton in Copenhagen

by: Nick Berning

Sat Dec 12, 2009 at 15:00

A big U.S. congressional delegation is arriving here at the climate summit in Copenhagen next week, and it includes notorious climate science deniers Sen. James Inhofe (R-Big Oil/Oklahoma) and Rep. Joe Barton (R-Big Oil/Texas).

But one of the world's most prominent science deniers -- "Nobel Laureate" "Lord" Christopher Monckton, who provides the "scientific" analysis upon which Barton, Inhofe, and other members of the anti-science crowd depend -- is already here and he's already generating embarrassing headlines for their movement.

Before getting into how Monckton is exposing the anti-science movement's truly fringe character in Copenhagen, I should explain my use of quotes in the previous sentence. Monckton did campaign to become a member of the British House of Lords, but he lost and is not and has never been one. He has no formal scientific training (more on that here). And his "Nobel Peace Prize" was awarded to him not by the Nobel Prize Committee but by "the Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of Rochester, New York" (presumably Robert Sproull, a member of the board of the anti-science Marshall Institute), who presented Monckton with a fake Nobel pin made of gold. Monckton now calls himself a "Nobel Laureate" on his organization's website, because he "contributed" to an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report sounding the alarm about global warming (even though Monckton claims there is no alarm to be sounded).

There's More... :: (3 Comments, 973 words in story)

The Inner Crazy of The Birther Lawsuit

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sat Nov 07, 2009 at 10:30

Birtherism wears its crazy on its sleeve.  For one thing, the demand that Barack Obama produce his birth certificate did not reach anything close to its crescendo until months after Obama had already posted his birth certificate to the internet.  And, of course, there's the crazy incarnate of Orly Taitz.  So you can be forgiven for not knowing of the craziness embodied in the actual lawsuit that was thrown of of court in Orange County at the end of October.  Fortunately, that craziness is captured in the 30-page decision (pdf) itself, perhaps the calmest document you might ever chance to read that is written in response to batshit insanity.  

But you don't have to read the entire 30-page document.  Just a few paragraphs from the very end should suffice quite nicely.  The sad fact is (sad for comedians, at least), the judge threw the case out on procedural grounds, so there was no full bore circus with phony birth certificates and the like.  And in the end the judge addresses the plaintiff's impatience with him for actually following the law and respecting constitutional separation of powers-as opposed tobuying into their free-flowing interpretation of the law as always serving their immediate needs.

But if you do skip to the end (as you can by jumping to the section "The Grand Finale"), then you'll miss half the fun (yeah, I'm a non-lawyer who thinks reading judicial decisions can be fun), such as when the Judge, David O. Carter, explains that the plaintiffs "seek a complete shutdown of the government by enjoining it from acting while holding a new presidential election," that "Plaintiffs have inappropriately requested that this Court interfere with internal military affairs," that they seek "to emasculate the military." Hmmm.  Trying to make the country ungovernable and bring it to the point of total collapse, leaving it utterly defenseless.  Sound like any political party you know?

There's More... :: (9 Comments, 2178 words in story)
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox