Lord Monckton’s Mathematical Folly (Or, Odds Botchkins!!!)

Lord Monckton Unsuccessfully Tried To Blow Some Smoke

Well, math is certainly not my strong suit so I am probably going to regret this one, but nobody has tackled Lord Monckton of Brenchley’s Eligibility Odds analysis yet. Except that I found after doing this Internet Article, that Dr. Conspiracy had just finished one, too. So here is the link to his, too:

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/09/miscalculating-the-odds/

Anyway, here is the relevant excerpt from the World Net Daily Internet Article, and the link to the whole article follows the excerpt:

OBAMA ELIGIBILITY ODDS: 1 IN 62.5 QUINTILLION

Lord Monckton crunches the numbers

He cites:

1.   The fact that the registrar’s signature-stamp on the electronic form can be moved about: 100:1 against.
2.   Registrar’s date-stamp ditto: 100:1 against.
3.   Multiple 1-bit monochrome layers and one 8-bit color layer: 60:1. (Experts twice found no such pattern in 600 file-optimization programs: I allow for 10 anomalous programs to exist.)
4.   “Lavishly funded bureaucracy uses wonky typewriter:” 10:1
5.   Human error: Certificate number out of sequence: 25:1
6.   Incorrect birth date of father: 40:1
7.   Use of “African” contrary to written form-filling rules and 20 years before the term came into common use: 25:1
8.   Miscoded statistical data: 25:1 (official government estimate).
9.   White halo around letters: 10:1
10. Chromatic aberration absent: 100:1
11.  Other identity documents: Anomalously worded abstract on short-form birth certificate: 100:1
12.  Two-digit year on selective service stamp against DoD written rules: 100:1 (actually impossible: no two-digit example other than that of Kenya’s “son of the soil” is known)
13.  Non-citizen of Connecticut holds Connecticut social security number: 100:1.

“There are many other errors, but these suffice. Defenders of Mr. Community Organizer say each error could have just happened by accident. I mean, it’s government form-filling, right?,” he wrote. “But here’s where the math comes in. If each error is a genuine accident,  the errors are independent events, so the probabilities of each error are multiplied together to determine the probability that all occurred in one document.

“Thus the odds against all of these errors occurring in a single document except by design are 1 in 100 x 100 x 10 x 10 x 25 x 40 x 25 x 25 x 10 x 100 x 100 x 100 x 100. Accordingly, the probability that Mr. Obama’s birth narrative is in substance true is no better than 1 in 62,500,000,000,000,000,000, or 0.0000000000000000000016.”

He wrote, “Don’t be misled by the simplicity of the method. It’s simple but sound.”

http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/obama-eligibility-odds-1-in-62-5-quintillion/

First, let’s look at the method of determining the odds, from this website:

http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/beyond/articles/gambling/odds.html

Independent vs Dependent Events

People often misunderstand the notion of independent events.  This is a probability term meaning that past events have no influence on future outcomes.  For example, when flipping a coin four consecutive times, the probability of getting four heads is:

This is because the probability of flipping a head if you flip a coin once is ½.  Flipping a coin is an example of an independent event.  When flipping a coin, the probability of getting a head does not change no matter how many times you flip the coin.  When the coin is flipped and the first three flips are heads, the fourth flip still has the probability of ½   However, many people misunderstand that the first three flips somehow influence the fourth flip, but they do not.  The probability is still the same, as if the first three flips had never occurred.

This is simple so far. You put the chance of something happening in the form of a fraction for each event, and then multiply the numerators and denominators. So let’s try it! Pull out 5 cards. Make 3 of them face cards. Turn them over, and pick one. What are the odds it will be a face card? 3 chances in 5. Pick out a second set of 5 cards with 3 of them being face cards. Now turn each set over and pick one card from each set. What is the chance both of them will be face cards??? 3/5  x  3/5 = 9/25.

Now we have the basic math down. Plus we learn something interesting. The more events you have with a fraction less than 1, the more the odds go up. With one set of 5 cards you had a 60% (3/5) chance of drawing a face card.  With 2 sets you have a 36% (9/25) chance of drawing 2 face cards. Monckton has a 13 series of events above, so his game is rigged from the outset to result in lower odds.

Let’s move on to some more concepts. Take the 5 card set and a penny.  The cards have a 3/5 chance of a being a face card, and the penny has a 1/2 chance of being flipped  ”heads.” Multiply those fractions and you get 3/5  x  1/2 = 3/10.  But what does the 3/10 represent??? It can’t stand on its own as just a number without describing in more detail what it represents. Which in this example is the chance of drawing a face card AND getting “heads” on the flip.

Now, let me add a third item to these two, with some dice. What are the odds of me rolling box cars, or double sixes??? Those odds are 1 in 36, or 1/36. What are the odds of drawing a face card from the five card set, flipping “heads” on the penny, and rolling a double six???  Here’s the math: 3/5  x  1/2  x  1/36 or 3/360 or 1/120.  But the question arises, “What am I really measuring???”

Let’s make it more interesting still. What are the odds that I will break a nail while picking a card, flipping a coin, and rolling the dice??? I put those odds at 1 in 100,000. Now what am I up to in the odds? Here’s the math:  1/120  x  1/100,000 =  1/12,000,000 or 1 in 12 million. But the question arises once more, “What am I really measuring???” These are unconnected things.  I am picking the card, flipping the coin, rolling the dice, and breaking a nail all on the same desk top. What are the odds of that happening on the same desk top??? The answer is 1 in 12 million, but as you can see this is a basically meaningless number.

But I am still NOT happy with this number. I want it to be higher. Sooo, I am going to find a non-event, assign odds to it, and put it into the math mix. What I need for my non-event is something that either doesn’t happen at all, or if it does happen, it is not really what we normally think of as a measurable event, such as flipping a coin.  How about how many times does McDonalds fail to give me ketchup with my drive thru order.  That’s about 1 time in 4, or 1/4.  That makes the odds for everything (pick face card, flip “heads”, roll box cars, break a nail, and fail to receive ketchup)  about 1 in 48 million. See how easy it is to work your way up?

But, the McDonalds non-event needs more explanation. Simply not getting ketchup may not be an event at all because it is possible that I only ordered coffee at the window, and that typically does not require ketchup. Or, it could be that I ordered a dinner meal and no fries. Or, I just wasn’t feeling like ketchup on that trip, and so did not request any. Or, that I had some extra ketchup in the car.  Trying to pin a set of odds on a situation like that is very problematic. It is possible it wasn’t a failure at all.

Monckton slyly engages in this same practice. He mixes facts and conjectures about an electronic image and tries to make the nexus the fact that they all occur about the same document. He goes further, because he also picks some events which are not agreed to constitute events by the non-Birther side. This is like saying “heads” were flipped, when one party to the action does not believe the coin was flipped at all. But Monckton makes the leap, and then assigns those contested facts odds as if they were not contested. This is great if you trying to run the number up, but pretty much meaningless for any other purpose. It will take a while, but let’s examine Monckton’s 13 so-called independent events in more detail.

1.   The fact that the registrar’s signature-stamp on the electronic form can be moved about: 100:1 against. 

I am going to call this one a non-event.  This is more like saying the coin exists, but it has not been flipped. The signature stamp on the paper document can not be moved about. If it can on the electronic image, it is not necessarily indicative of anything wrong.

2.   Registrar’s date-stamp ditto: 100:1 against.

I am going to call this one a non-event, also.  The date stamp on the paper document can not be moved about. If it can on the electronic image, it is not necessarily indicative of anything wrong.

3.   Multiple 1-bit monochrome layers and one 8-bit color layer: 60:1. (Experts twice found no such pattern in 600 file-optimization programs: I allow for 10 anomalous programs to exist.)

Three time’s the charm, I guess. I am going to call this one a non-event, too.  There are no layers on the paper document. If  there are  on the electronic image, it is not necessarily indicative of anything wrong.

4.   “Lavishly funded bureaucracy uses wonky typewriter:” 10:1 

I’m sorry. Has the Hawaii DOH been shown to have been lavishly funded in 1961? Did I miss that?  And what is a “wonky” typewriter as compared to a non-wonky one? If we are going to go all mathy on this, can we at least get some discrete measurable independent events???

5.   Human error: Certificate number out of sequence: 25:1

I am beginning to see a pattern here. Monckton is choosing things which are NOT events at all. There is NO proof that the certificate number is out of sequence. In fact, Alvin Onaka. Ph.D, Hawaii State Registrar has thrice verified the number as correct.

6.   Incorrect birth date of father: 40:1 

This is not a measurable event to which you can assign odds. No one knows what caused it.  Was it a typo, or did somebody lie, or did somebody just mess up by accident???

7.   Use of “African” contrary to written form-filling rules and 20 years before the term came into common use: 25:1

Again, a non-event. This isn’t contrary to anything. The Cold Case Posse used the wrong coding book. I am becoming disappointed in Lord Monckton. We are halfway through this stuff, and there has not been one single discrete measurable independent event.

8.   Miscoded statistical data: 25:1 (official government estimate).

What miscoded statistical data??? The penciled in “9″ is the correct number. Zullo and Corsi were using the wrong coding manual.

9.   White halo around letters: 10:1

Are we back to non-events again??? This is on the electronic image. There are no white halos on  the paper document.

10. Chromatic aberration absent: 100:1

Damn non-event again.

11.  Other identity documents: Anomalously worded abstract on short-form birth certificate: 100:1

Nope, he’s gone to a different document to multiply against the long form birth certificate. This is just for the purpose of making the number larger, like me adding broken fingernails to the discrete measurable events.

12.  Two-digit year on selective service stamp against DoD written rules: 100:1 (actually impossible: no two-digit example other than that of Kenya’s “son of the soil” is known)

Nope, again. Different document. Same reasoning as 11 above. Plus, there is no evidence that the stamp wasn’t broken. How many 1981 documents from that post office have been analyzed???

13.  Non-citizen of Connecticut holds Connecticut social security number: 100:1.

This one might be a keeper, although it doesn’t relate to the birth certificate. There probably is a way to measure how often the SSA assigned group numbers to non-residents of the state. But that doesn’t prove anything was wrong. It could have been a typo.

Now I am kind of irritated here. I went and studied up on some math, and practiced multiplying fractions and Lord Monckton didn’t have but one marginally measurable event out of 13 alleged independent events. Everything else was an alleged incongruity of some sort, but mostly on the electronic pdf image. In other words, because Corsi and the Cold case Posse couldn’t figure out how the paper document was scanned and uploaded, they came up with a bunch of ALLEGED errors, which His Majesty, or whatever you call him, tried to shoehorn into a phony probability analysis.

What is the chance that was an accident on Monckton’s part??? Let’s see, if we assume there is a 1 in 2 chance it was an honest boo-boo on his part, and we have 13 boo-boos, then 1/2 to the 13th power equals 1/8192 or 1 chance in 8,192 that it was an honest mistake.

For shame Lord Monckton of Brenchley!!!

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Image. This is from the 1931 film, Dr. Jekyll and Mister Hyde.

Note 2. Links. Here is the previous article about Lord Monckton:

http://birtherthinktank.wordpress.com/2012/08/29/the-british-hysterical-society-presents-lord-monckton-or-a-flashman-in-the-pan/

Note 3. Odds Botchkins.  This is a word play on the epithet, Odd Bodkins:

Odd’s bodkins is a mild profane oath, which literally means ‘God’s dear body!’ It’s now archaic, but was used as an exclamation like God damn! or a host of others.

The usual form of the second word is bodikin, which is a diminutive of body (the diminutive suffix -kin is found in such other words as lambkin). The expression occurs in Shakespeare (Hamlet: “Odds bodikins, man,” with a variant reading from the Quarto of “bodkin”), Fielding, and Smollet, among others. Expressions like this were very common in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; some other examples are ‘sblood (God’s blood), ‘snails (God’s nails), zounds (God’s wounds), and gadzooks (God’s hooks).

The word is unrelated to bodkin ’a small dagger or pointed instrument’, which itself occurs in Hamlet, in the “to be or not to be” speech (“He himself might his quietus make with a bare bodkin”). This word dates back to the fourteenth century, and is of uncertain origin.

http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/?date=19960925

Botch means to mess something up.

Blowing Smoke means bragging or boasting. (Blowing smoke is similar to “hot air;” it has little substance, and dissipates rapidly.)

Israeli Birth Certificate Article Disappears!!! (Or, The Invisible Hanukoglu???)

Though A Little Lax Scientifically, Hanukoglu Prepares To Apply Phenolphthalein To The Computer Screen

Hmmm. Remember the BIG STORY yesterday about that Israeli scientist, a Mr. Israel Hanukoglu, who claimed Obama’s long form birth certificate was a phony??? Well,  guess what happens today when you hit the World Net Daily link for the Israeli Scientist’s article:

(Click on Image to enlarge.)

Here is the WND link again, so you can try it for yourself:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/israeli-science-website-obama-birth-certificate-forged/

I played around the website a little, and the 404 still shows up, even if you try to link from the site index page. Oh, I wonder what happened??? I hope the swift response from The Birther Think Tank played a part in this. Plus, Dr. Conspiracy discovered the article was an inaccurate retread from May 2011. (See links below in Note 2.) Did we spook Mr. Hanukoglu, or make him look silly???  Is he hiding out, ala:

Israel Hanukoglu??? Uh, No. My Name Is Smith. Uh, Fred Smith.

Perhaps Mr. Hanukoglu just couldn’t fix the problems with his article by putting band-aids on it.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Images. These are from the 1933 film, The Invisible Man.

Note 2. Links. Here is a link to yesterday’s Internet Article about this:

http://birtherthinktank.wordpress.com/2012/09/11/the-weird-science-of-the-israeli-birther-or-another-corsi-puff-piece/

Here is the link to Dr. Conspiracy’s article:

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/09/israeli-web-site-goes-birther/

Note 3. Put A Band-Aid On It:  Word playing on the Invisible Man’s bandage disguise. This is an American idiom which means:

A temporary solution to a problem, or something that seems to be a solution but has no real effect.

Usage notes: Band-Aid is a trademark for a thin piece of sticky material used to cover small cuts on the body.

A few food and medical supplies were delivered to the region but it was little more than a Band-Aid.

Note 4. The Image Caption And Easter Egg.  WTF, Phenolphthalein??? Well, it lends that scientific air to this Internet Article. And according to Wiki, phenolphthalein is:

A white or pale yellow crystalline powder, C20H14O4, used as an acid-base indicator, in making dyes, and formerly in medicine as a laxative. Because of its toxicity, it is no longer used in over-the-counter laxatives.

Sooo, get the word plays??? Bring out the base. A little lax.

The Weird Science Of The Israeli Birther (Or, Another Corsi Puff Piece)

I Will Name Him Puff, And I Will Hug Him And Pet Him And Squeeze Him…

One of the latest stories floating around Birferdom is that Israeli scientists have declared Obama’s long form birth certificate to be a phony. The story started with Jerome Corsi and World Net Daily(WND). This is just another one of his vain attempts to make himself, and the Birther cause, look respectable. Instead of the old “Look, a real live sheriff said it’s fake!“, now it’s “Look, a real live scientist said it’s fake!“

First WND gives you this teaser, where it looks like the whole dang nation of Israel is telling us something:

ISRAELIS: OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE IS PHONY

Then when you click on that link, you get this, where the eight million Israelis quickly devolves down to one website and one individual:

ISRAELI SCIENCE WEBSITE: OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE FORGED
Award-winning, former Netanyahu adviser behind assessment

Maybe Corsi could sell this Israeli Reduction technique to Iran for a few extra bucks?  Anyway, here are a few excerpts, and the link follows:

Israel Science and Technology, the national database and directory of science and technology-related websites in Israel, has published an article asserting the long-form birth certificate released by the White House is a forged document.

The website was created by a former science adviser to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel Hanukoglu, Ph.D.

Hanukoglu, an award-winning researcher, is a professor of biochemistry and molecular biology in the Department of Molecular Biology at Ariel University Center of Samaria in Ariel, Israel.

The professor established the first version of his website during his tenure as Netanyahu’s science adviser. The site has evolved into “the premier science and technology portal for Israel.”

The website says that the White House’s release of the Obama document in April 2011, after years of controversy, “raised in our minds the possibility that there could be something suspicious about the information available on this document.”

The website conducted an independent analysis and cites others who came to the same conclusion.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/israeli-science-website-obama-birth-certificate-forged/

Well,  this means you have to surf off to Israel to check this out:

http://www.science.co.il/

and when you type “Obama birth certificate” into the site search, you get this, which I screen saved:

(Click on Image to enlarge.)

Rather than going straight to the “phony birth certificate”  story, I hit the second link, which takes you to an October 27, 2008 article at rhe site.  You know, to kind of check out Hanukoglu’s street cred a little. This anti-Obama screed pops up with a list of 27 reasons why you shouldn’t vote for Obama:

Imagine for a few moments that you are the Human Resources Director of a major multi-billion dollar corporation. You are sitting in your office when you receive a phone call from the Chairman of the Board of Directors. He tells you that the board is considering a candidate for a high-level executive position. He advises you to complete a thorough background investigation and have it to him within 10 days.

You immediately call the Private Detective Agency you have used for years and give them the name and address of the prospective candidate, along with the deadline for a high level security clearance. Your next move is to call your assistant to your office, giving him/her the candidate’s personal information along with instructions to ‘do your standard beginning background checks.’

Preliminary findings begin landing in your fax machine on the third day.

1. Your candidate has used more than one name.

5. On day four, you receive in the mail from the security agency two books the candidate has written. You read both books, highlighting the anti-American, anti-white racist passages. You note the admissions of drug use.

8. The fifth day brings to your special delivery mail: The complete background on Bill Ayers; his association with your candidate, his FBI criminal record, and a copy of the book ‘Rules for Radicals’ written by communist Saul Alinsky.

9. You are advised your candidate used tactics from ‘Rules for Radicals’ at his previous employment.

15. You receive printed transcripts of his pastor’s anti-White, anti-American ‘sermons’ and are advised your candidate has been close personal friends with this ‘pastor’ for two decades.

24. The candidate has surrounded himself with anti-American grievance mongers, and appears to manipulate ‘typical white people’ by appealing to their guilt about slavery. He is a socialist, and totally disenfranchised from the history of ‘root America .’

http://www.science.co.il/arab-israeli-conflict/articles/Anonymous-2008-10-27.asp

Hmmm,  that doesn’t sound very much like science to me. It’s a fun read, and you need to read the whole thing, but it ain’t science. Science is supposed to be non-biased, and rational, and fair to both sides of an issue. But this stuff reads like a Jerome Corsiesque smear job.

By putting that on his website,  Mr. Hanukoglu  made his personal opinion of Obama very clear. Which there is nothing wrong with having an opinion, but how in the world can someone plaster over their opinions with a SCIENCE label, and not feel pretty cheesy about it???

Moving forward to what I am sure is going to be a fair and independent analysis of the birth certificate [NOT!!!], we find that Mr. Hanukoglu  realizes this shticks out like a sore thumb on what is supposed to be a science website. So, he tries to fool us into believing there is a noble and scientific reason for it to be here:

Since this is a site of Science and technology, there is a need to explain why this site dedicates a page to expose forgery about a document related to Mr. Barack Hussein Obama. Mr. Obama is the President of the USA that is currently the leader of the Free World, and the most powerful country in the Western hemisphere. In his position as the President, the policies pursued by Mr. Obama affects the whole world and not just the USA.

Yeah. Sure.  Then he does a little more editorializing, and plays around a little with opening the birth certificate pdf in a program, and wiggling it around some,  and then passes the reader off to some links with a series of experts like Mara Zebest and the Cold Case Posse to tie up any loose ends.  And this is supposed to be SCIENCE??? There is nothing new here that hasn’t been addressed and debunked before. This is just recycling old garbage. Here is the link so you can see for yourself:

http://www.science.co.il/Obama-Birth-Certificate.htm

This is just another smear job, this time with the aura of SCIENCE to cover up all the bullsh*t. Hanukoglu, aka Mr. Science, doesn’t explain to us which information on the long form image is false or how one would go about proving a document is forged by analyzing its image. It could be done, but so far none of the Birther experts, including him, have even come close. And Mr. Science provided no parameters for his research, and what he intended to prove, and how his findings proved anything. He didn’t even define what forgery is.

Which is also why the Cold Case Posse isn’t going anywhere. None of this wonderful group of so-called experts has laid out the basic elements of a forgery charge, because to do so would show how pitiful their efforts have been. Forgery is either creating false documents, or materially altering real ones with the purpose of defrauding someone of some benefit. All these Birther “experts” have proven is that they can’t figure out how a document was scanned and uploaded.

Another thing that I found interesting  is where these articles are listed on his website. It is NOT in the science section of the website, but under the  Arab-Israeli Conflict section under U.S. Policy.  Definitely not the stuff of science. More like an editorial section. Here is the link:

http://www.science.co.il/Arab-Israeli-conflict/Articles/US-Policy.asp

You can find other fun stuff here, like:

Is Barack Obama Really A Saudi / Muslim “Plant” in the White House?

To sum it all up, this piece is typical Jerome Corsi-ish World Net Daily-ish histrionic yellow-journalism CRAP.   With a SCIENCE label slapped on it to fool the idiots.  I am surprised that Israel Hanukoglu is stooping to this level and playing along. Meanwhile, Birthers are already holding hands and dancing horas to Hava Nagila. Rudy1776 is probably trying to sign up as a double naught spy for the Mossad.

What a bunch of meshuganas.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

UPDATE!!! By using the Wayback Machine, Dr. Conspiracy has determined the analysis by Hanukoglu was originally put out nearly a year and a half ago in May 2011, and his method of analysis was so lame that it was even debunked by one of the BIRTHER experts, Garrett Papit:

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/09/israeli-web-site-goes-birther/

Note 1. Links. For people who are interested in all the imaging aspects of the birth certificate question, Mr. John Woodman has written a book which debunks all that Birther nonsense. Here is a link to his website:

http://www.obamabirthbook.com/

Note 2. The Caption. This is a word play on the dragon Image ( Puff, the Magic Dragon?) and a quote from the 1961 film, The Abominable Snow Rabbit starring Bugs Bunny, and Hugo The Abominable Snowman.  A “Puff Piece” is:

A newspaper article or item on a television show using exaggerated praise to advertise or promote a celebrity, book, or event.

Note 3. Horas and Hava Nagila. Here is a groovy way to do it:

Here is a different version:

 

An Open Letter To Larry Klayman, Esq.!!! (Or, Patriotic Girl Reporter Per Missive)

After Delivering The Letter, The Postman And Klayman Chatted A While

It seems the Birthers are constantly doing these goofy open letters, where the Birther is usually indignant that somebody somewhere isn’t doing something. Then all the Birther blogs print the letter as if it is big news. The headlines are a hoot. You see stuff like:

Ex-Cop Writes Letter To Congress Demanding Impeachment!!!

Patriotic Ex-Marine Demands Prosecutor Arrest President!!!

Grandmother of Six Calls For Obama To Be Frogmarched Back To Kenya!!!

They always seem to characterize the writer in some American Hero Jungian Archetype, fashion, where either the job occupation or some other fact about the writer is supposed to elevate the nature of the piece away from the “some clown wrote a letter” category.  I suppose if Sammy The Stumblebum  hits them up for some Thunderbird money, the headline would be:

Small Businessman Demands Justice Department Do Something About Obama!!!

So anyway, why should they have all the fun??? Here is my first attempt at an Open Letter. I will get better with practice. Just click on the image to enlarge:

Plus, here is a pdf of the letter in case any blogs want to run a story on this:

Squeeky’s Open Letter To Larry Klayman

I think a good headline would be something like:

Very Smart And Intrepid Girl Reporter Demands Answers!!!

Sexy Daughter of Retired Air Force Officer Targets Birthers!!!

Well-dressed Girl Reporter Clobbers Birther Lawyer WITH LOGIC!!!

But I’m not trying to influence anybody or anything like that. Oh no. Not me.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Image. This is from the 1997 film, The Postman. Kevin Costner is playing the postman. I am not sure who the mule is playing Larry Klayman.

Note 2. Here is the World Net Daily Internet Article which inspired this piece:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/scalia-flummoxed-about-natural-born-citizenship/

Justice Scalia Accosted By Mad Man!!!

Justice Scalia Points Out The Scary White Man To His Attorney

Being on the United States Supreme Court is a lot more dangerous job than you might suppose! First, it was Chief Justice Roberts who got a hernia lifting all the Birther paperwork that Orly Taitz sprung on him at a University of Idaho lecture in 2009. Now, Justice Antonin Scalia gets accosted by Birther Attorney Larry Klayman. Here is what happened according to Klayman:

Last week, I had the occasion to cross paths with “revered” Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Scalia has been for many years the darling of conservatives, a judge who they believed had the guts to enforce the Rule of Law and the Constitution in the face of corrosive influences, foreign and domestic. I took the occasion to ask him a simple question, one he would be able to answer. I asked the “constitutionalist” Scalia what he believed to be the definition of “natural born citizen,” without asking him to render an opinion on whether Obama was eligible to be president, given that Obama’s father was not a citizen of the United States at the time he claims falsely that he was born here.

Looking like a deer in the headlights and stuttering sheepishly, Justice Scalia responded, “I don’t know. Isn’t a natural born citizen a person born in this country?” I pressed on, asking “then why are there separate references to ‘citizen’ and ‘natural born citizen’ in the Constitution?” Again, Justice Scalia, pulling back out of apparent fright at having to give a straight answer, responded in the same fashion, “I don’t know.”

Here is a link to the whole World Net Daily Internet Article by Klayman:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/scalia-flummoxed-about-natural-born-citizenship/

I wasn’t there, but my GUESS is that Scalia was taken aback by the gross impropriety of Klayman trying to pump a legal opinion out of him.  Justice Scalia is not supposed to pre-decide cases. He may have an opinion, but simple judicial professionalism requires him to not go around blabbing about it in any kind of detail.  Were Klayman or some other Birther lawyer to actually get a Birther case to the U.S. Supreme Court, would they prefer that Scalia already had his mind made up??? Would any attorney wish for such a thing? Of course not.

Further, as I have been told by my BFF Fabia Sheen, Esq., a lawyer, the ONLY time an attorney is supposed to answer a specific legal question or give advice without looking up the law first, is on the bar exam.  The point is, that Scalia would need to read Wong Kim Ark (1898) and other cases before rendering an answer.

And one should not forget all those Senate confirmation hearings where the Supreme Court appointees get grilled for hours under hot lights without spilling their opinions out in any specific detail.  If they can survive, without squealing, they usually get confirmed. That being said, it is helpful to reconstruct the conversation from what we know of Klayman’s side of things:

Larry Klayman:  What do you believe to be the definition of “natural born citizen. And, I am not  asking you to render an opinion on whether Obama was eligible to be president, given that Obama’s father was not a citizen of the United States at the time he claims falsely that he was born here.

Justice Scalia:  I don’t know. Isn’t a natural born citizen a person born in this country?”

Larry Klayman:  Then why are there separate references to ‘citizen’ and ‘natural born citizen’ in the Constitution?”

Justice Scalia: I don’t know.

Being blind-sided like that, it is obvious that Scalia was not comfortable going any further for no good reason, and without additional research. I am someone who stays on top of this stuff, and if Klayman asked me that question, I would be reluctant to answer without knowing which particular use of the word “citizen” Klayman was referring to. And whether he was talking about the Constitution or the Amendments or both.

That being said, I did not see Scalia messing up in major way. Most natural born citizens are people who are born in this country, so he passed the legal knowledge test without getting too chatty about it.

Plus, Scalia was probably not in the mood to be interrogated on some minor point of the law by a delusional and paranoid person with an obvious axe to grind. I mean if I was a judge, and some clown came up to me and said, out of the clear blue sky, “given that Obama’s father was not a citizen of the United States at the time he claims falsely that he was born here” little bells and whistles would start going off in my mind.

Oooo-kaaay. I would start noting where the doors were, and what kind of stuff I could lay my hands on in case I had to clobber this person. Apparently, Scalia had a little fright thing going on, too. And I don’t think it was about having to give a straight answer. Notwithstanding these points which should be sort of obvious, Klayman angrily starts banging the gong of judicial cowardice and the drums of revolution. From the link above:

Lower court judges, in myriad cases where the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama has been challenged, have abdicated – for apparent political reasons to save their own standing in and among the establishment – their responsibility to rule that Obama is not a natural born citizen qualified to be president. Now, with the exit stage left of the one Supreme Court justice conservatives thought had the guts to enforce the will of the framers, and to protect We the People, it is clearer than ever that revolution can no longer be avoided.

Americans no longer have a government run by people with the ethics and courage to protect the nation, and we must now do it for ourselves, hopefully peacefully and legally and with minimal collateral damage to ourselves and our families. But, as the framers experienced in 1776 with a king who did not and would not take into account their grievances, we again have no choice.

Were Klayman in court, I think he would draw a swift Irrelevant, Immaterial, and Incompetent objection for this and other conduct.  And maybe a few days in the Contempt Hoosegow for stirring up sedition. Additionally,  the title of Klayman’s article is misleading. It isn’t Scalia who is flummoxed. . . it’s Klayman. He’s done been told what a natural born citizen is when he got spanked in Florida a few days ago:(Click on Image to enlarge.)

Maybe instead of a Revolution, and all that collateral damage, we just need some good old-fashioned Remedial Reading classes for Birthers.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. the Image. This is scene from the long running TV show, Perry Mason. The image, before my alterations, is from the 1962 episode, The Case of the Dodging Domino. The show is currently running on METV, which is on cable and free antenna TV across the country.

Note 2. Irrelevant, Immaterial, and Incompetent.  Part of the Perry Mason theme.  This was a repeated objection by Hamilton Burger. Wiki says:

Hamilton Burger is the fictional Los Angeles district attorney who is the nemesis of Perry Mason in the long-running series of novels, films, and radio and televisionprograms featuring the fictional defense attorney created by Erle Stanley Gardner. The name is a pun; shortening “Hamilton” to the popular nickname “Ham” would produce “ham-burger”.

Critics have suggested that Burger must have been the most incompetent lawyer in history (see Mad Magazine’s parody, “The Day Perry Mason Lost a Case”), as his cases inevitably involved prosecuting the wrong, innocent person who was defended by Mason, who always in the end revealed the true criminal through a series of inadmissible courtroom tricks. Burger’s bag of tricks was comparatively empty, chiefly comprising indignant exclamations of, “Incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial!” Once Mason had outed the true perpetrator, Burger always joined in Mason’s motion to the judge to dismiss the charges against Mason’s client so that Burger could then charge the actual wrongdoer. A scene from the TV series in which Mason consoles Burger after such a dismissal inspired a young Sonia Sotomayor to become a prosecutor.

Wow, this article sure needs updating!

Note 3. The Image Easter Egg.  Well, to overkill the heck out of this note, the words, “Like Some Ghoul In A Late-Night Horror Movie That Repeatedly Sits Up In Its Grave And Shuffles Abroad”  is as Wiki notes, from Scalia’s concurring decision in :

Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District”’, 508 U.S. 384 (1993), [a] decision by the Supreme Court of the United States concerning whether Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment was offended by a school district that refused to allow a church access to school premises to show films dealing with family and child-rearing issues faced by parents. In a unanimous decision,the court concluded that it was.

Three justices concurred in the judgment. The court had, in passing, invoked Lemon v. Kurtzman, and the concurring justices wrote to express concern. Justice Scalia, in one of his best-known opinions, wrote:

Like some ghoul in a late-night horror movie that repeatedly sits up in its grave and shuffles abroad, after being repeatedly killed and buried, Lemon stalks our Establishment Clause jurisprudence once again, frightening the little children and school attorneys of Center Moriches Union Free School District. Its most recent burial, only last Term, was, to be sure, not fully six feet under: Our decision in Lee v. Weisman conspicuously avoided using the supposed “test” but also declined the invitation to repudiate it. Over the years, however, no fewer than five of the currently sitting Justices have, in their own opinions, personally driven pencils through the creature’s heart (the author of today’s opinion repeatedly), and a sixth has joined an opinion doing so.

The secret of the Lemon test’s survival, I think, is that it is so easy to kill. It is there to scare us (and our audience) when we wish it to do so, but we can command it to return to the tomb at will. When we wish to strike down a practice it forbids, we invoke it; when we wish to uphold a practice it forbids, we ignore it entirely. Sometimes, we take a middle course, calling its three prongs ‘no more than helpful signposts.’ Such a docile and useful monster is worth keeping around, at least in a somnolent state; one never knows when one might need him. (Citations omitted.)

Here  is the Court’s “Lemon test”, which details the requirements for legislation concerning religion. It consists of three prongs:

1.  The government’s action must have a secular legislative purpose;
2.  The government’s action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
3.  The government’s action must not result in an “excessive government entanglement” with religion.

If any of these 3 prongs are violated, the government’s action is deemed unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Geesh, talk about a detour! Glad that’s over.

Jerome Corsi And The Frank Marshall Davis “Corruption of Blood” Smear

Corrupted Blood Wasn’t The Only Reason Corsi Stayed In The Booby Hatch

Jerome “Deputy Jerry” Corsi, Ph.D is not just sinking to personal lows in his latest attacks on Obama, but is now violating the very spirit of the  U.S. Constitution he proclaims so much to love.  And common decency to boot. Corsi is busily playing the Frank Marshall Davis (FMD) card over to the World Net Daily Gossip Magazine:

New research by Joel Gilbert into Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis’ seedy history in Hawaii has bolstered the filmmaker’s theory that Davis was the biological father of Barack Obama.

In a compilation of Davis poems published in the book “Black Moods,” compiled by his biographer, University of Kansas English Professor John Edgar Tidwell, are 37 “portraits” grouped in a section subtitled “Horizontal Cameos.” Each poem is dedicated to a different woman identified by her first name only. The second of these is dedicated to “Anne,” reading as follows:

Anne

In the gangling hours Thin, adolescent hours Before night runs softly Away into the west Anne rises wearily From her tired bed And sleeps Sitting in a chair.

“If ‘Flo’ was based on Margaret Burroughs,” Gilbert argues, “then I consider it very possible the character of ‘Anne’ is based on Ann Dunham.”

Here is a link to the garbage, and the above excerpt is relatively mild compared to some of the other smears there:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/letters-point-to-obamas-real-father/?cat_orig=politics

It isn’t just the logical stretches you have to perform to get from those few lines to the conclusion that FMD is Obama’s father. It’s the whole rationale for why anyone would care outside of some gossipy old women.  Legally, whoever or whatever Frank Marshall Davis may have been, our Constitution specifically forbids holding the sins of a father against the children.  Our Founding Fathers thought it wrong to punish children for the acts of their parents. Here it is in Article 3, Section 3, Clause 2:

Article III – The Judicial Branch
Section 3

Clause 2:

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Now, what is Corruption of Blood???  As a legal matter, Wiki explains it simply:

In English criminal law, attainder or attinctura is the metaphorical “stain” or “corruption of blood” which arises from being condemned for a serious capital crime ( felony or treason). It entails losing not only one’s property and hereditary titles, but typically also the right to pass them on to one’s heirs.  Both men and women condemned of capital crimes could be attainted.

Section 9 of Article One of the United States Constitution provides that no bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed by Congress. Article One, Section 10 forbids states from passing them.

Now this covers the legal aspects of corruption of blood, and Jerome Corsi as an individual has no power to breach any of this. But what about the moral aspects.  Here, Corsi violates  the spirit of the law by implying Obama is in some way tainted by the acts of his ancestors. You can be sure that this is his intent, because if the Frank Marshall Davis gossip/smear is true, then the  Birthers are kaput.

IF, Davis is Obama’s father, then he has two citizen parents, and the Vattel Birthers can go pound sand. Even if Obama was born in Kenya, he would still be a natural born citizen by statute, so the Birth Certificate Birthers can hit the unemployment line. So, there is no eligibility angle here, except to pop a double-tap into  Birtherism.

This only leaves Corsi two non-monetary excuses for printing this sort of crap.

1.  The prurient interest of the gossipy;

2.  The desire to smear Obama in any vile way possible.

Neither of those are decent excuses. Either one would send a normal person off to take a good hot shower with plenty of anti-bacterial soap. But Corsi doesn’t care. He is simply trying to imply that because Obama’s father was a communist, that somehow makes Obama a communist, too. And, to make it worse, Corsi is doing this without any real evidence of parentage.   I guess because Ronald Reagan’s father was a drunk, Corsi would find that a relevant story to run during election season. NOT.

But even it were true that Davis was Obama’s father, most human beings nowadays no longer impute the sins of the father to the children. As a species, we grew out of this nonsense centuries ago.  Why is Corsi trying to bring this horrible belief system back to life??? What’s next, slavery? Public hangings?

When you look at it that way, isn’t Jerome Corsi , and the whole bunch who are engaged in this smear, pretty gross and disgusting???

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. the Image. This is from the 1922 German film, Nosferatu. The vampire is played by Max Shreck, which explains the Easter Egg.  Meanwhile, Shrek is the Ogre from the animated 2001 film, and sequels.

The Poop Nazis!!!

Oh, You Are Questioning My Story??? Then NO SOUP For you!!!

My goodness, talk about a bunch of Poop Nazis!!! Here is what happened. The Western Center for Journalism ran another one of those stupid open letters from some stupid irate Birther bitching to Congressman Jon Kyl about ignoring the Cold Case Posse. Nowadays, just about anything get picked up as newsworthy on the Birther websites – irate letters to the editor, rumors, scuttlebutt, open letters to whoever, and visions and dreams about Obama being frog-marched out of the White House.

Somebody posted the article and and put a link to it at Lucianne.com. The people at Lucianne.com, having a much better idea of what actually constitutes real news, deleted the post. The Western Center for Journalism (WCJ) had a hissy fit, which was contagious, and the World Net Daily (WND) crew caught the fever.

Here are a few excerpts about this so-called news story from WND:

WND EXCLUSIVE

Eligibility vanishes from conservative website

What was real reason for disappearance?

“Like Horatio on the bridge, conservative pundits that early on dismissed the eligibility issue continue [to] do everything they can to keep a vast army of activists from even discussing the fraudulent documents released by Barack Obama,” he wrote. “In this case Lucianne or someone working for her hit the big delete button and removed a post about ForgeryGate, after nearly 500 of her readers eager to learn the truth followed the link.”

The conservative news forum website Lucianne.com says its decision to remove a link to a report that challenges a U.S. senator regarding Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president was based on procedural rules not content.

The original item by Tom Ballantyne Jr. was an open letter to Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.

It took the senator to task for responding to a constituent that the Hawaii Department of Health “has attested” to the validity of records showing Obama was born in Hawaii.

Here is a link to the WND Internet Article:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/eligibility-vanishes-from-conservative-website/?cat_orig=politics

But what is really funny here is the little question in the headline, What was the real reason for disappearance?

What that screams to me is that WND and parent WCJ are feeling a little paranoid and defensive about their idiotic Birther nonsense not being acceptable to mainstream conservatives and Republicans.  Hence, the comment: its decision to remove a link to a report . . . was based on procedural rules not content. Wiki points out in its article about the Soup Nazi from Seinfeld, that:

The term “Nazi” is used as an exaggeration of the excessively strict regimentation he constantly demands of his patrons.

That seems applicable to the WND/WCJ crowd.  It is like you have to buy into their stupid fantasies, and not ask inconvenient questions,  and just swallow whatever poop they put on paper. And if you don’t, then your motives get questioned. And how about that title:

Eligibility vanishes from conservative website

Did eligibility vanish or was it just some stupid open letter from a stupid, indignant Birther???  It seems like the  Floyd Brown-Joseph Farah claque is just a little too thin skinned. Which is probably because the whole underlying Cold Case Posse rigged-investigation thing won’t withstand too much close scrutiny. They just want us to swallow the soup, and taste it later.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note . The Easter Egg. This is a word play on a quote by Moliere, “I live on good soup, not fine words.“

What Happens In Phoenix. . . (Or, Zullo in Limbo???)

World Net Daily Staffers Bent Over Backwards To Not Call Attention To Zullo

World Net Daily seems to be of the opinion that some things that happen in Phoenix, should stay in Phoenix.  One of the secondary definitions of limbo, is a state of neglect. From the image below, one has to wonder if Special Deputy Mike Zullo, co-author of A Question of Eligibility might be in World Net Daily (WND) limbo, hidden away like a red-headed stepchild. Notice this language:

The e-book is co-authored by Jerome Corsi, the two-time No. 1 New York Times bestselling author, who wrote “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” and the e-book sequel, “Where’s the Real Birth Certificate?”

(Click on Image to make it larger.)

Here is the link where you can see this for yourself.

http://superstore.wnd.com/digital/A-Question-of-Eligibility-e-book

Mike Zullo is listed as the co-author on the cover of the book,  to the left of the blurb, but it is smaller and difficult to read. Presumably, Zullo gets some air-time inside  the book.  But isn’t it interesting that he is just glossed-over in the sales blurb??? One would think that having a real, live Maricopa County Cold Case Posse (CCP) investigator as the co-author of your book would be a great selling point.

Hmmm. Maybe it is that whole before and after thing. When an investigator signs a deal and writes a book AFTER an investigation, then it adds to the credibility of the book. But, when the book deal comes BEFORE the investigation, then it makes you feel sort of queasy, and the pecuniary interest shatters any credibility. As is pretty evident in this Internet Article which appeared 2 days after the original March 1, 2012 Cold Case Posse press conference:

PHOENIX – The lead investigator in Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s investigation into President Obama’s birth certificate is profiting from the case.

Mike Zullo, a retired detective and volunteer Maricopa County Sheriff Posse member, is listed as the co-author of “A Question of Eligibility,” an e-book for sale on Amazon and Barnes and Noble. The book is a copy of the investigation findings presented to the press on Thursday.

Corsi said he informed Arpaio of his plans to sell the investigation’s findings six months ago, at the start of the investigation.

Still, the sale of the investigation is raising eyebrows and ethical questions from Arpaio critics.

“I’m shocked to learn about this book,” said Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox.

The entire article may be found here:

http://www.azfamily.com/outbound-feeds/yahoo-news/MCSO-investigator-selling-birther-investigation-online-141270873.html

Returning to the WND sales blurb, it would not have taken up much space for them to list Zullo.  Just one sentence. I think the conclusion is obvious that World Net Daily feels sheepish about the sleazy conduct and does not wish to call extra attention to it.

As well they should.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Image is of Gene Kelly and Vera Ellen performing the Slaughter on 10th Avenue ballet from the film Words and Music (1948). Here is a youtube video of the scene. The part that matches the Image is around the 4:55 minute mark.

Here is also some music to surf the net by:

Note 2. Limbo.

lim·bo

noun /ˈlimbō/

(in some Christian beliefs) The supposed abode of the souls of unbaptized infants, and of the just who died before Christ’s coming

An uncertain period of awaiting a decision or resolution; an intermediate state or condition
- the fate of the Contras is now in limbo

A state of neglect or oblivion
- children left in an emotional limbo

oblivion: the state of being disregarded or forgotten

an imaginary place for lost or neglected things

A West Indian dance in which the dancer bends backward to pass under a horizontal bar that is progressively lowered to a position just above the ground

Orly Taitz Woodsheds Joseph Farah!!!

Although Little Joseph Begged For Mercy, Taitz Was Determined To Feenish This!!!

Today, Orly Taitz. Esq. bent Joseph Farah, Editor of Word Net Daily (WND), over her proverbial knee and gave him forty hard whacks with a hickory stick. Here is how it went down. First, Orly Taitz has been complaining because she can’t get either Sheriff Arpaio or Deputy Mike Zullo of the Cold Case Posse (CCP) to appear at any of her hearings and testify.

But as she notes, both of them seem quite able to find the time to do press conferences and promote the sale of the book co-authored by Zullo and Jerome Corsi.  Here is an Internet Article I did a few days ago on this:

http://birtherthinktank.wordpress.com/2012/04/03/the-quantum-orly-taitz-or-schodingers-elephant/

Well, apparently Farah got a little perturbed by this, and wrote Taitz an email asking her basically to STFU about the financial link between WND and the CCP.  Here is an excerpt:

(Click on Image to make it larger.)

I am not sure what else Farah may have said. Taitz gave a link to the email, but it doesn’t seem to go anywhere.  But Taitz gives Farah a good answer, with me separating it into more paragraphs to make it easier to read:

Here is my response: Arpaio is getting paid by the tax payers. There was no reason in the world for him to run this investigation off the books through his posse instead of doing a proper police investigation within the sheriff’s department. 250 citizens served him with a criminal complaint and a petition  and provided evidence of the biggest crime ever committed against 4 million citizens of the Maricopa county, AZ. Arpaio had a duty to open a proper police investigation and file the report with the DA.

Let me remind you that in IN a sheriff did just that, when he got evidence of 4 executives of the Democratic party submitting forged nominations to the elected officials. He investigated, filed the report, DA filed a criminal complaint, parties were arraigned and a judge is presiding over the criminal trial. End of story.

That is exactly what Arpaio was supposed to do. It is illegal for a sheriff or a deputy to profiteer from the result of the police investigation they are conducting. From what I was told by sources in the department, (correct me, if I am wrong), but Arpaio deputized not only Zullo, but also Corsi. This means that they cannot profiteer from their work as sheriff’s deputies. That is why we are paying a salary to Arpaio and his staff, so that they will do the work without any personal incentives.

I have a grave concern that as long as you are donating to Arpaio through the WND and as long as you are giving money to Zullo and Corsi by buying their book, you are giving them an incentive not to file a report with the authorities. The point is that the moment the report is filed and Arpaio testifies in court and the evidence is in court records, he loses his importance, as at that time the ball will be in the court of the District Attorney and the judge to take an action.

I was asked, why are you asking for donations, how are you different from Arpaio. The answer is simple. Arpaio is paid a salary by the tax payers, a big salary, plus all the benefits and has a whole staff to do this work. I am not paid by the tax payers, so if I have to go to court in MS or IN or GA or HI, I have to pay out of my own pocket. This is the difference

First, it is interesting to see that Arpaio deputized Corsi. I have called him Special Deputy Jerry Corsi here several times and I guess I was right. Taitz also picks up on something that Farah doesn’t seem to understand:

It is illegal for a sheriff or a deputy to profiteer from the result of the police investigation they are conducting.

At the very least, that is Conduct Unbecoming An Officer (CUBO), something else that I have written about here.  Taitz also picks up on the fact that WND and CCP’s  financial interests and publicity interests mitigate against bringing this a speedy close:

. . . as long as you are giving money to Zullo and Corsi by buying their book, you are giving them an incentive not to file a report with the authorities.

What I wonder is why Taitz does not pick up on the fact that Corsi and the CCP’s pecuniary interest tainted the investigation from the very get go. If the CCP had not had negative findings against Obama, would the book have sold any copies at all???  Therefore, how can she or anybody else have any confidence in the findings???

The other big question I have is how does she ever put Arpaio, Zullo or any CCP member on the stand and expect them to have any credibility in court??? I also addressed this question in the above linked article, and this latest post only makes her problem more acute.  In effect, she has destroyed her own witnesses’ ability to provide believable testimony.

Here is the link to the full story at her website:

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=34264

The flip side of her response to Farah is Farah’s seeming cluelessness regarding the difference between law enforcement officers working for a paycheck, and working on commission.  A paycheck is the same whether a suspect is arrested or not. A commission on the other hand, which is what the pecuniary interest acts like, means that the more dirt they can dish on Obama, the higher the salary. Whether the dirt is true or not.  Or, as Taitz said:

That is why we are paying a salary to Arpaio and his staff, so that they will do the work without any personal incentives.

Farah again displays his ignorance when he tackles the idea of volunteer work. Farah asks:

By the way, what’s wrong with Zullo getting some remuneration for his six months of previously unpaid public service work?

Uh, Joseph, the whole point of the Cold Case Posse, and the other Posses is that they are voluntary. People do it to help, not to make extra money. If Deputy Zullo wanted to work part-time and make some extra money, perhaps he should have looked into becoming an Amway distributor, or maybe getting a part-time job down to the 7-11.

Bizarre. I would love to see Farah’s full email, if there is more.  That moustache must be slowing down the blood flow to his brain.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. Woodsheds. Urban Dictionary defines this as:

An allusion to being corporally punished, where the victim would be sent to the woodshed to await his punisher. The woodshed was a popular location, because it was remote from the rest of the family, and there was abundant material there for fashioning a paddle or a switch.

Get to the woodshed boy – your pa is gonna tan your hide when he gets home from the mill.

To beat an opponent comfortably. In soccer terms, its equivalent to a goal difference of 4 between teams.

An Easter Song: Here Comes Sheriff Rotten-Tale!!!

After Adopting New Uniforms For The Posse, Sheriff Joe Shrewdly Calculated Jerry Corsi Would No Longer Stick Out Like A Sore Thumb

Here Comes Sheriff Rotten-Tale!!!

By Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Here comes Sheriff Rotten-Tale
Tumblin’ down the Birfer Trail,
Rickety, crotchety
Geezer’s on his way.

Has a Cold Case Posse, too.
Doing all that they can do
To make the Sheriff’s problems go away.

He’s got Deputy Mike Zullo
And Jerry Corsi, too.
And if things get too dull, Oh
World Net Daily will come through!

Oh! Here comes Sheriff Rotten-Tale
Stumblin’ down the Birfer Trail,
Rickety, crotchety
Geezer’s on his way.

Here comes Sheriff Rotten-Tale
Fumblin’ down the Birfer Trail,
He’s doing a press conference every day:

“The Image is a forgery!!!”
“The M-S-M ignores me!!!”
Obama’s turned loose the F-T-C!!!”.

We don’t need an Easter morning
To wake up and find his eggs.
They’re always running down his face,
‘Cause his stories have no legs.

Oh! Here comes Sheriff Rotten-Tale
Bumblin’ down the Birfer trail,
Rickety, crotchety
Geezer’s on his way.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1.  Here Comes Peter Cottontail. If you don’t know the tune, here is a youtube video. The song was made famous  by Cowboy Gene Autry:

Note 2. The Easter Egg. A reference to the last lines of the song, White Rabbit – Feed your head.

Note 3. The Image. I found this very interesting image here:

http://weheartit.com/entry/11559918

Note 4. Having Legs. This is an idiom meaning:

“to continue to be of interest.”

Example:  This latest scandal has legs – you’ll probably still be reading about it in a year’s time.

While the Sheriff’s various tales do have interest to the Birther Community, these are just reincarnations of earlier rumors and half-truths that have no legs outside Birferdom. Which is the real reason why the Main Stream Press (MSM) ignores them. Not intimidation or fear as alleged by various Birthers.