This is the second part of the Birther Feud Trilogy and deals with the schism between Dean Haskins of The Birther Summit, along with his supporters, and Orly Taitz, Esq., the most well-known Birther attorney. The numbers in parentheses refer to Note 1 below, which identifies the source Internet Article. The first part of this Trilogy, may be found here:
First, let us examine the basis for Haskins’ negative assessments. He states:
At issue are two dynamics concerning Orly Taitz I believe need to be addressed—namely, a lack of understanding of the law, and a megalomaniacal persona. (6)
Haskins provides numerous examples, including this one:
Orly released a list of 22 witnesses that she has supposedly “served,” even though she never actually went to the trouble of doing what one must do to obtain proper service, so, any of those 22 who don’t actually reside in the State of Georgia have not actually been served, and have no legal reason to respond or appear. Any of them may choose to ask the judge to quash a subpoena, but that would be out of respect for the court and the legal process, and not because there is any validity to the subpoena itself. In fact, any such motion to quash would likely include the fact that the subpoena is legally invalid as a reason for it to be quashed.
Interestingly, one of the “witnesses” Orly lists is “Custodian of records Assissi [sic] school Jakarta, Indonesia;” so, not only does Orly believe that Georgia somehow has jurisdiction over Hawaii and other states (which, it doesn’t), she seems to believe that it has jurisdiction over Jakarta, Indonesia as well. Are you beginning to see the problem here? (6)
Haskins follows up in his next article with the Taitz personality issues:
This is one of the issues I have already discussed—that everything from Orly seems to come with her own flavor of spin. And then, once the spin has been made, it is blindly believed by people (who just want so badly for it to be true), and it starts getting posted around the internet. Problem is, when it turns out that it wasn’t entirely true, the only recourse Orly has is to scream “corruption!” (5)
As we have all come to expect, Orly continues to show the most debased levels of egomania, and still tries to attack others who have worked on this team as long as she has. She still has all the graciousness of a cactus loofah, and the attitude of a spoiled brat child (who is the only one who deserves your donations, and if you don’t donate, you’re an Obama operative).
So, again, when we’re on the other side of this HEARING, and it turns out I am wrong, I’ll freely admit it. However, and unfortunately for our side, I’m not wrong—so get ready to hear endless wails of “corruption.” And, I do want to make a side note here before signing off: Orly’s incompetence is, by no means, to be construed as an indictment against the other two hearings that will take place. Both of those cases have real attorneys involved, so I am hopeful that they will be able to produce positive results. It’s funny . . . I haven’t heard those other lawyers publicly proclaim ME, ME, ME even once. That alone gives me some hope about their cases.(5)
He says worse:
Believe me, I understand the principle of flinging enough poo against the wall in the belief that, eventually, something will stick; and generally, I know that, in the right situation, that can be an effective approach. Unfortunately, in this instance, it has not been; and my gut feeling is that both the Hawaii and Georgia courts have intercepted the proverbial poo before it has hit the wall, and very soon, will be tossing it at a fan. (6)
And, continuing the scatological comparison, he states:
Well, it has come to a point that some of us have stopped and tasted what is being tossed into the community trough, and realized that it doesn’t taste like meat at all. In fact, it tastes like something that the cattle have previously eaten. And, while I choose not to partake of that, I had also held my tongue “for the sake of unity,” even though most of the leaders in the movement, with whom I would converse often, would complain about the constant assaults on their palates as well. So, who was I to say anything?
Once that substance formerly known as cattle feed was viciously used as a weapon against folks who are friends of mine, and have worked very hard in this cause, I was no longer able to remain quiet, and I merely started exposing one of the main sources of that which one takes great care not to step in on the farm. (3)
Sharon, I do not write this as a personal indictment against you, but to continue exposing the single biggest problem that exists in our movement. You (and others) might wish that I would just keep my mouth shut and go away; however, I have personally invested much in this movement, so I have every right to sit at this table. The problem is, I will not sit quietly while someone slaps poop on a plate and calls it prime rib.
And, lest anyone try to use the quasi-pragmatic argument about your friend’s tenaciousness, tireless pursuit of justice, and super-human resolve, it might be useful to understand that one can expend unbelievable amounts of energy, and through sheer determination, move a mountain of manure from one spot to another, but actually do nothing beneficial for the field.
It is doubtful that anyone but the dullest among us would ever argue that there is not a vast level of incompetence involved in what we’ve witnessed in all of the dentist’s cases. While we have a contingency who strongly believes that the ineptitude is merely feigned as a brilliant ploy to keep us from ever advancing to a stage of serious discussion of the matter, I will stipulate to the pitiful legal shenanigans (which have doomed us at every step) being the result of honest incompetence, rather than a conspiratorial facade. (3)
Ouch!!! Now, with that in mind, it is my opinion that Haskins has laid a more than sufficient basis for his dual diagnosis of incompetence, a lack of understanding of the law, and a megalo-maniacal persona. But, in a larger sense, is he correct? Is it time for Taitz to, “understand the damage she continues to inflict on our efforts . . .and stand down.”(2)
I don’t think so. First, let me state that I have always considered Orly Taitz to be the perfect Birther attorney. Her overall intelligence is beyond question. She is licensed to practice both Dentistry and Law. While some mock her for that, I am impressed that she holds two professional licenses. I am more impressed by how she accomplished those feats. English is not her first language, yet she took and passed the California Bar with not much more than a legal correspondence course. She did this while working full time and raising three children.
Now, that being said, Haskins has a valid point about a string of losses in court, and the questionable legal tactics and maneuvers. But there is a concept in law called proximate cause:
Proximate cause is the primary cause of an injury. It is also known as legal cause.
To help determine the proximate cause of an injury in Negligence or other tort cases, courts have devised the “but for” or “sine qua non” rule, which considers whether the injury would not have occurred but for the defendant’s negligent act. A finding that an injury would not have occurred but for a defendant’s act establishes that the particular act or omission is the proximate cause of the harm, but it does not necessarily establish liability since a variety of other factors can come into play in tort actions.
One can not, in good faith, accuse Orly Taitz of legal incompetence without considering this issue. Is there anything that Orly Taitz could have done differently that would have resulted in a legal victory??? The only thing I can think of is that maybe she and the other two attorneys in Georgia should have opted for the Default Judgment. but outside of that, no. There is nothing she could have done that would result in victory.
Consider that not a single Birther attorney has ever won a single victory in Court. Not a single one. Not Apuzzo. Not Donofrio. Not Hemenway. Not Kreep. Not Hatfield. Not Van Irion. Not any of the others. None. And, they are not any more to blame than Orly Taitz on a legal basis. Ethically and morally, I suspect many of these attorneys will spend a lot of time in Purgatory shoveling that stuff that came out of the cows, as Haskins describes it.
But legally, are they culpable for anything outside of filing frivolous lawsuits? No. First, the two citizen parent theory is pure nonsense. No Court will ever recognize that lunacy as valid. Second, as Haskins himself points out, Hawaiian law does not permit access to birth records to strangers. There is no substantial evidence that Obama was born outside of Hawaii. All there has ever been are suspicions. In reality, there isn’t a Birther case. Frankly, the Birthers could resurrect Clarence Darrow and Perry Mason, and put them on the case and the results would be the same. Except, Hamilton Burger would finally get to remove the goose egg from the score board.
Sooo, does Haskins have a valid point about Orly Taitz embarrassing the Birthers with her antics? How do you measure that in light of the fact that the Birthers lack of any factual or legal basis for their suits. Isn’t that embarrassing enough all by itself??? But, on the other hand, Americans do love celebrities. Even train wrecks like Charlie Sheen get attention. As Brendan Behan said, “There is no such thing as bad publicity except your own obituary.”
Haskins is a musician, and perhaps a musical analogy will help. Do people attend Lady Gaga concerts for her wonderful musical talents, or for the show? The pyrotechnics and the dancing strippers in S&M regalia??? Rightly or wrongly, smartly or dumbly, and morally or immorally, Orly Taitz is Birtherism’s version of Lady GaGa.
Thousands of Obots stare transfixed at her every mis-step, dissecting her latest miscue with the same thoroughness as the National Transportation Safety Board investigating a train wreck. Meanwhile, millions of Birthers flock to her banner. Do you think many of those people understand anything at all about Georgia courts and Indonesian citizens and Silly Subpoenas??? Taitz is the soap opera and the melodrama, whether you view her as Snidely Whiplash, or Nell Fenwick. She is the Face of Birtherism, even though Haskins and more than any other person has kept the Birther case alive in The Court of Public Opinion. Would any of us recognize Hatfield or Van Irion if we met them on the street???
Haskins made this observation:
This was also demonstrated in Taitz’s involvement in the Georgia Ballot Challenge hearings. The basis of the first two hearings had been underway long before she ever injected herself into the proceedings; and, once she did, the other two lawyers did everything they could to separate their cases from hers—and even symbolically left the courtroom before her “case” was heard.(2)
But isn’t this like Moe and Larry trying to disassociate themselves from Curly??? Sorry, but the three are a team. The other lawyers are just Orly, without the panache. Perhaps Haskins is right that Taitz has brought some Jerry Springer Show vibes to the Birther Movement. Or maybe those vibes were already there and she just tapped into them. But ask the proximate cause question in reverse. Would there be as many Birthers but for Taitz? I don’t think so. She packs them in, and that says more about the Birthers than it does Orly Taitz. What is really scary, to continue the Jerry Springer analogy, is considering that even people who cheat on their lovers with Transvestite Midget Wrestlers get to vote.
Sooo, my advice to those who either recognize, or are coming to recognize, Birtherism as a delusional farce, is to keep on blogging, keep on commenting, and keep on trying to tell the truth as best you can. Fight the good fight. And sometimes . . . just grab a bowl of popcorn, sit back, and enjoy the show.
Note 1. Reference Table for Dean Haskin Quotes:
|1||BREAKING! SURGEON KILLS MULTIPLE PATIENTS. BLAMES HOSPITAL.||2/14/2012|
|2||HAS THE COLD CASE POSSE’S INVESTIGATION BEEN DELAYED?||2/08/2012|
|3||AN OPEN LETTER TO THE POST & EMAIL’S SHARON RONDEAU||1/23/2012|
|4||HAS DEAN HASKINS LOST HIS MIND?||1/21/2012|
|5||HAS ORLY ACTUALLY WON!!! WON!!! WON???||1/20/2012|
|6||OF SUBPOENAS, TRIALS, AND A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT||1/19/2012|
Note 2: Screwball: Found in the first Image above. This word has several meanings.
1. Baseball. A pitched ball (also known as the screwgie) that curves in the direction opposite to that of a normal curve ball. Depending on the pitcher’s arm angle, the ball may also have a sinking action.
2. Slang. An eccentric, impulsively whimsical, or irrational person.
Impulsively whimsical; eccentric: That screwball proposal won’t work.
Screwball also refers to a comedy genre. As Wiki says:
The screwball comedy is a principally American genre of comedy film that became popular during the Great Depression, originating in the early 1930s and thriving until the early 1940s. It is characterized by fast-paced repartee, farcical situations, escapist themes, and plot lines involving courtship and marriage. Screwball comedies often depict social classes in conflict, as in It Happened One Night (1934) and My Man Godfrey (1936). Some comic plays are also described as screwball comedies.
It has proven to be one of the most popular and enduring film genres. It first gained prominence in 1934 with It Happened One Night, which is often cited as being the first true screwball. Although many film scholars would agree that its classic period had effectively ended by 1942, elements of the genre have persisted, or have been paid homage, in contemporary film.
During the Great Depression, there was a general demand for films with a strong social class critique and hopeful, escapist-oriented themes. The screwball format arose largely as a result of the major film studios’ desire to avoid censorship by the increasingly enforced Hays Code. As such, they were routinely able to incorporate adult, risqué elements, such as pre-marital sex and adultery, into their plots.
The screwball comedy has close links with the theatrical genre of farce, and some comic plays are also described as screwball comedies. Many elements of the screwball genre can be traced back to such stage plays as Shakespeare’s Much Ado About Nothing, As You Like It and A Midsummer Night’s Dream and Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest. Other genres with which screwball comedy is associated include slapstick, situation comedy, and romantic comedy.
Note 3. The Tao of Poo. This is a wordplay on The Tao of Pooh, as in Winnie The, which may be found here:
The reference herein is to the way that BeeEss occurs in Life, and moves in its own Way.
Note 4. Conundrum.
1. A confusing and difficult problem or question.
2. A question asked for amusement, typically one with a pun in its answer; a riddle.
Here, the answer to the question of Whether Taitz is Competent?, may be found in the caption of the Image: Sometimes A Screwball Is Exactly What Is Called For
Note 5. The Image above is from the 1936 Oswald Rabbit film Soft Ball Game.