It’s funny and sad. Afer I posted the “fork” comment, Stacy emailed me a note saying he thought she’d be back as the darling of the tea party. Turns out he was right… she *is* back and spoke at their convention.

This is all to reminiscent of the time Stacy warned me taht Bush was sure to be re-elected. I thought he was crazy then,too. So the point is, don’t count him out… we’re suckers for idiots. Of course Stacy also thought Howard Dean would get the nomination…

Since everybody wants to quote something here, I’ll remind you of the quotation “The price of apathy toward public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.” Or women. Or by idiots of either gender. Sometimes if you dismiss your enemy because you’re sooooo much smarter then them, you’re setting yourself up for a nasty surprise. I know Stacy;he thinks these people are idiots, too. That doesn’t mean they aren’t a threat.

[Editor's Note: A chapter of La vie de Gargantua et de Pantagruel inserted here has been deleted. Everyone who reads this blog can be assumed to be quite familiar with the works of François Rabelais in the original French. There is no need to post translations here.]

In 1862, Attorney General Edward Bates wrote an opinion that the United States Constitution “recognizes and reaffirms the universal principle, common to all nations, and as old as political society, that the people born in a country do constitute the nation, and, as individuals, are natural members of the body politic.” Obama fits that test, but McCain is again excluded since he was born in a hospital under Panamanian jurisdiction.

In modern times, we have the following.
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86755.pdf
Please see section 7.c.1 in that document, and then 7.d. Of course, neither was born on a military base; I just find that particular clause interesting.

In any case, if Hawaii says he is a naturalized citizen of the state, then he is a de facto naturalized citizen of the United States, as best I can tell. Hawaii says he is.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32180625/ns/politics-white_house

Dennis: You’re flatly wrong about the document. He provided a state record suitable for obtaining a United States passport, driver’s license, or – if necessary – to play high school sports. And putting “certification of birth” in quotation marks doesn’t make it *not* a birth certificate. That’s the form Hawaii provides in all cases (they don’t have a “long form” and “short form” like some states do). Most *original* birth certificates read “certification of birth” or “certification of live birth.” The term “birth certificate” is just our colloquial lingo for the documents.

As for the courts, Alan Keyes *did* have standing since he was a candidate. Court rulings include orders of dismissal, and orders of dismissal arise from motions to dismiss and may include legal opinions of the courts, which can be used in further arguments. That is, it is a ruling of the court.

One side has a valid legal document attested to under penalty of perjury by the duly sworn representatives of the State of Hawaii. The other side has some (occasionally inconsistent) hearsay. How do you expect the courts to rule on this matter? The side with the evidence brings a motion to dismiss for lack of either standing or evidence. The court decides the motion and orders the case dismissed.

How do you overcome this? Produce some evidence.

jsMath definitely works on my server: http://arielbalter.com/mathtest.html

An html copy of this page is in the blog, and none of it renders.

I’d love any advice or suggestions. Thanks, Ariel