I am not a lawyer, but I have found something that Obama is definitely guilty of. He is guilty of LACHES!!! Now, before yesterday, I had never even heard of LACHES, but once I found it, oh does it ever seem to fit what Obama has done, or more accurately, NOT DONE over the last three years. Because what LACHES is, is like sandbagging or hustling somebody. For example in pool, somebody might play kind of bad at first when the stakes are low, and then, when the stakes are better, run the table.
The law defines LACHES as:
The legal doctrine that a legal right or claim will not be enforced or allowed if a long delay in asserting the right or claim has prejudiced the adverse party (hurt the opponent) as a sort of “legal ambush.”
Examples: knowing the correct property line, Oliver Owner fails to bring a lawsuit to establish title to a portion of real estate until Nat Neighbor has built a house which encroaches on the property in which Owner has title.
The law encourages a speedy resolution for every dispute. Cases in law are governed by statutes of limitations, which are laws that determine how long a person has to file a lawsuit before the right to sue expires. Laches is the equitable equivalent of statutes of limitations. However, unlike statutes of limitations, laches leaves it up to the court to determine, based on the unique facts of the case, whether a plaintiff has waited too long to seek relief.
Now, throughout the Birtherism Ordeal, the Obotski kept bringing up “Court” as if what happened in Court had any relationship to what was going on outside Court. Quite regularly, the Obotski would follow some obscure Birther court case, and whoop it up in the streets after winning. Winning usually consisted of having the case thrown out because of a lack of standing. While that celebration was going on, the number of people outside of court who had doubts where Obama was born kept steadily climbing higher and higher. Or, the Obotski would argue that the short form birth certificate would have been legally sufficient in some imaginary court proceeding.
Any fool, except apparently the Obotski, could see that while Obama was winning some battle inside court, imaginary or otherwise, he was losing the war outside of court. So, in my mind, any comparison between Birtherism and court is rather dubious to start off with. But, let’s turn the tables on them, anyway. Let’s pretend all of Obama and the Obotski’s whining, crying, and chest-thumping about how wrong it was for Obama to have to cough up his long form birth certificate —was in that imaginary court!
Because, when we look at equitable legal stuff, or matters of general right and wrong, we find that Obama himself may have lost the “legal” right to whine, because he waited so long to cough up the long form. Obama is no different than the person who sits back and watches somebody build a house on the wrong side of the property line, doesn’t say anything until the house is finished, and then goes to court to get the house.
That person runs the risk of the Court saying, “Sorry, Dude, but you sat back and watched this happen. You could have stopped it at any time. Your case is dismissed!!!”
So, the next time you hear Obama, or one of the Obotski, whine about having to cough up the long form, just tell them, “Well you know, Obama sat back and watched this happen. He could have stopped it at any time. In Court, Obama would be LEGALLY guilty of LACHES.”
Then tell them that “Google is their friend“, so they can go look up LACHES !!!