Outspoken dentist/attorney Orly Taitz has spent the past three years trying make a willfully blind country see that President Barack Obama is a foreign-born foreigner from a foreign country in some foreign land. But, for some reason, the Washington establishment refuses to take her seriously.
Looks like there's only one logical thing for a logical person like her to do: Infiltrate the U.S. Senate and take matters into her own hands…
In a lengthy interview with The Daily Caller, Taitz expressed optimism about capturing the Republican nomination and defeating incumbent California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein in 2012.
"It's time for new ideas, new blood, new energy," Taitz told TheDC. "I'm very confident that I'll be able to get the Republican nomination and I will be able to win the general election."…
The controversy surrounding Obama's birth certificate, Taitz said, will help her win a Senate seat. She expressed displeasure that the Senate Judiciary Committee hasn't investigated the matter.
I think this is a fantastic development! In this day and age of flipping and flopping, America needs legislators with her determination and conviction more than ever. Politicians who are willing to bite down on a belief and refuse to let go come hell or high water or facts. If Orly Taitz says she's going to win next year, then I believe that she believes that. And nothing you or anybody else says will change her mind. Least of all poll results.
Do you really think a little thing like "vote count" is going to dissuade a woman of her fortitude from serving in the U.S. Senate? Doubtful. Highly doubtful. There's bound to be an open window big enough for her to fit through somewhere in the Capitol building. I guarantee she's just the candidate to find it.
Photo by FiredUpMissouri/Wikimedia Commons
Tags: Barack Obama, Birthers, California, Dianne Feinstein, Orly Taitz, Senate
There are just so many reasons for people to happy about the news of U.S. military's successful raid on Osama bin Laden's suburban compound, but probably the best reason is that it gives us all a good reason to finally embrace torture as the effective piece of apple pie Americana it actually is…
The head of the House of Representative’s homeland security committee could barely contain himself when asked on Fox News to tell viewers about how the US found Osama bin Laden.
"You mentioned the fact that we obtained vital information several years ago about the courier for Osama — we obtained that information through waterboarding," said Peter King, a New York Republican. For those who say that waterboarding does not work, Mr King concluded with the answer to end all questions: the practice gave the US "vital information that directly led us to bin Laden."
Yep! That seems pretty cut and dry. Not only does torturing prisoners feel good, it's also clearly the right thing to do.
The only problem with this line of reasoning that might mitigate our excitement over adding a waterboarding device to the U.S. Seal is that torture probably didn't have anything to do with the information we received that ultimately led us to bin Laden. I know that's a very minor point, but you know…
More and more evidence suggests a key piece of intelligence — the first link in the chain of information that led U.S. intelligence officials to Osama bin Laden — wasn't tortured out of its source. And, indeed, that torture failed to produce it.
"To the best of our knowledge, based on a look, none of it came as a result of harsh interrogation practices," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee in a wide-ranging press conference.
But, hey. Baseball and quickie handjobs in the janitors' closet over by the school gymnasium also didn't lead to the capture of bin Laden. We're not planning on getting rid of those American traditions, too, are we?
(Photo via Getty Images)
Tags: Dianne Feinstein, Homeland Security, House of Representatives, Osama bin Laden, Peter King, Senate, Terrorism, Torture
The leader of the GOP and president of Real America, Rush Limbaugh, may have changed his mind about Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, if she's lucky. (Incidentally, how did this woman become a Supreme Court nominee? President Limbaugh didn't nominate her. Must've been an administrative mix-up.)
Here's your conditional pardon, "Ms." "Sotomayor"…
A week after calling Sonia Sotomayor a "racist" in reference to her 2001 "wise Latina" remarks, conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh said Wednesday he's now open to supporting President Obama's Supreme Court nominee.
"I can see a possibility of supporting this nomination if I can be convinced that she does have a sensibility toward life in a legal sense," Limbaugh said on his radio program.
The standard in these cases is usually clear and convincing evidence, but for something this important it will probably be bumped up to reasonable doubt, so I hope Sotomayor's defense team is ready to persuade Supreme Court Justice Limbaugh…
Meanwhile, Obama officials have said the president has not directly asked Sotomayor how she might rule in abortion rights cases, but California Democrat Dianne Feinstein — who met with Sotomayor Tuesday — said that the judge believes strongly in legal precedent.
"I believe she has a real respect for precedent and … if that is really true then I will agree with her, and I believe it is," said Feinstein, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Good for you, but I'm not sure if I care. Who the hell is Dianne Feinstein, anyway? Is she on Sirius?
Tags: Abortion, Dianne Feinstein, Rush Limbaugh, Sonia Sotomayor, Supreme Court