Tag Archives: Vattel

With 2020 Foresight – The Once And Future Apuzzo!!!


Hmmm, I see Mario Apuzzo, An Old Hat, And A Huge Stack Of . . . Bird Cage Liners???

Well, I have been working my tail off on this one! I got to asking myself what would happen if Sen. Ted Cruz, or some other person who was born outside the country, ran for the presidency.  Surely if the parents weren’t both American citizens, the whole silly two citizen parents stuff would rear its goofy head again.

But exactly how would the Birthers frame the argument? And how would the Defendants respond? Reading the law review articles would help with spotting the issues, but there is nothing like getting your hands dirty to get a good handle on things. The standard responses to date would not apply across the board in this case.  For example, the Wong Kim Ark decision was based on a person who was born inside the United States. This was Obama’s situation, also.

Sooo, I pretended it was the year 2020, and Sen. Ted Cruz was running for office.  Cruz was born in Canada and became a citizen of the United States at birth. It is easy to imagine a Birther(s) signing up to run for President, as some did this last year, in an effort to pass the standing hurdle. It is also reasonable that an Emergency Petition for Injunctive Relief would be filed in an attempt to remove Cruz from the ballot.  As a method to present the scenario, I chose to write a decision as a United States District Judge denying this Injunctive Relief to the Birther. This method would present the main points of both sides, and a possible result.

For purposes of illustration,  I chose Mario Apuzzo, Esq. as the Imaginary Birther, representing himself pro se. This is because he is sooo predictable, and sooo old hat. The old hat idiom means, “seen or done many times and no longer interesting. Trite. Stale. Predictable.”  There is another meaning for those who have vulgar tongues, but I will skip that because this is mostly a G rated place.

Below is a pdf of my decision. I left out some of the things you normally find in a decision such as the procedural stuff. This was done to keep it shorter and simpler to read. I hope from the decision the reader can get a feel for how the Birther argument would be structured, and how a Defendant would respond.

This is strictly my opinion, and there are certainly other legal strategies that could be utilized by the Birthers or Defendants. I invite my readers, Obot, Anti-Birther, and Birther to submit their own thoughts via email attachment.  I will be glad to update this article with their work along with proper attribution.

While this may not seem like the height of fun,  it has to be better than a surprise visit from the Secret Service such as experienced by the readers of  other websites. Enjoy!

Apuzzo Order

UPDATE 1:  June 26, 2013.,

Well, that was quick. Mario Apuzzo, Esq. burned the Midnight Oil and made a Motion for Reconsideration. Here is the link to his website. Go to comments #168-#170:


And here is the pdf:

Apuzzo Motion For Reconsideration

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Translation By Anonymous!!! (Or, Does “S & M” Stand For “Sade & Mario”???” )


After A Wild Night Of Researching The Origins Of Natural Born Citizens, Mario’s Mind And Body Both Were A Little Unsound

OMG!!! I just read this over at the Fogbow:

FogBow Mario Quote

(Click On Image To Make It Larger.)


As I will demonstrate in my up-coming essay, the anonymous English translator inserting the “natural-born citizen” clause into Vattel’s Section 212 of The Law of Nations in 1797, which he did only eight years after the Constitution was ratified in 1789, convincingly proves that the Founders’, Framers’, and Ratifiers’ source of the definition of the “natural-born citizen” clause was Emer de Vattel and the law of nations and not William Blackstone and the English common law.

I hate to play SPOILERS for  Mario Apuzzo, Esq., but I am afraid I already know who that anonymous translator is, and why Apuzzo is careful not to disclose his name – – – It is the Marquis de Sade!!!  His non-royal name was Donatien Alphonse Francois, or Don.  Now, you may ask how I know this. Well, I am not going to say exactly how I got the following document, because there may be some kind of silly law about Interstate Transmission  Of Anonymous Letters, or some kind of NSA problem with stuff written in Klingon, but you can read it for yourself:

Anonymous Patriot Letter

(Click On Image To Make It Larger.)

Also, here is a pdf of it, in case you have problems reading the Image:

Anonymous Patriot Letter to Mario Apuzzo, Esq

You can see from this Wiki blurb that the Marquis de Sade often went under the pen name, Anonymous!

During Sade’s time of freedom, beginning in 1790, he published several of his books anonymously.

In 1801 Napoleon Bonaparte ordered the arrest of the anonymous author of Justine and Juliette. Sade was arrested at his publisher’s office and imprisoned without trial; first in the Sainte-Pélagie prison and, following allegations that he had tried to seduce young fellow prisoners there, in the harsh fortress of Bicêtre.


Now, if The Law of Nations was anonymously translated in 1797, that falls squarely within De Sade’s Anonymous Period.  Plus, it is well known that Apuzzo just luuuvvvvveees the French! He thinks they are the inspiration for our Constitution. Add that to the letter above from the anonymous Patriot, and it is clear that Apuzzo is going to try to sneak a Marquis de Sade translation of the Law of Nations past everybody.

Some people may think that this is just Fantasy, and that I am just making all this up, and that Mario Apuzzo, Esq. has a real, live legitimate source for what he is going to write. Well, I think that would be the real Fantasy!

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. Anonymous Authors.  Apparently, the Marquis de Sade started something by using Anonymous to publish his type of writing. Note that 12 out of 30 naughty books in the Victorian Period style are written by Anonymous or Unknown Writer. Plus, some of the names there look fake to me! Like Victoria Vane???


Plus, here is a fun website, which has mostly nice books:


The Sap Rises Early In Vermont (Or, Turn The Paige)

Having A Very Thick Skull, The Birther Had No Problems Head-Butting The Tree To Make The Sap Drip Faster

Well, here are some interesting details about the Vermont Birther, H. Brooke Paige, and his attempt to find a lawyer for his eligibility challenge. This is from William Boardman, from OpEdNews.com and here are a few excerpts, with much more at the link below:

Early last summer, Paige was looking for a lawyer to represent him in the “natural born citizen” lawsuit now known as Paige v. Vermont. His personal attorney, Wendell Rose of Barre, whose specialty is real estate, warned him that most Vermont attorneys would probably turn down his case “because of the high profile and controversial nature of my action,” Paige wrote in his court motion to be allowed to represent himself.

After numerous rejections, Paige wrote a three-page, single-spaced letter dated July 4 to J. Paul Giuliani, a well-established Montpelier attorney. Paige wrote, in part, “While what I am hoping to achieve” is very modest, I am thoroughly aware of the profound ramifications my actions could have”. As you reminded me, our judiciary here in Vermont will probably look unfavorably upon my effort to encourage the State of Vermont to do the right thing”.”

Giuliani wrote, and recommended that Paige seek help from the legal clinic at the Vermont Law School.

Considering the Law School an unlikely prospect, Paige turned to retired Superior Court Judge Paul F. Hudson, “who said he found the issues I raised were “fascinating’ and completely consistent with Vermont law.” Hudson agreed with Giuliani that there was no practicing attorney in Vermont with sufficient expertise to handle the case, Paige wrote.

Paige then tried a different approach, seeking to have Mario Apuzzo, a New Jersey attorney who had handled a similar case there, sponsored by a Vermont attorney so that Apuzzo could practice in Vermont temporarily. When communications with Giuliani broke down, Paige turned to attorney Rose, who flatly refused, telling Paige: “when all of this is over, I still need to have clients — this is my livelihood and I just can’t put that at risk.”

There is more at this link:


In my opinion, there isn’t a lawyer in the Universe who has enough expertise to put the two-citizen parents nonsense over on court.   If you refer to the actual complain, you can see that Paige goes wrong at the same point where the first Birthers in Ankeny went wrong- – -assuming that there is some difference between a natural born citizen and someone citizenized by being born in the United States through the 14th Amendment. Paige also falls down the silly Birther Minor v. Happersett rabbit hole. Here are pages  5  and 6 of his complaint:

(Click on Image to enlarge.)

(Click on Image to enlarge.)

This ridiculous claim completely ignores the fact that the 14th Amendment was simply affirming the previous common law concept of natural born citizenship, as is clearly stated in Wong Kim Ark (1898) decision near the bottom of Section V:

The foregoing considerations and authorities irresistibly lead us to these conclusions: the Fourteenth Amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens, with the exceptions or qualifications (as old as the rule itself) of children of foreign sovereigns or their ministers, or born on foreign public ships, or of enemies within and during a hostile occupation of part of our territory [wild Indian exception omitted.].

The Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States. Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory, is yet, in the words of Lord Coke in Calvin’s Case, 7 Rep. 6a, “strong enough to make a natural subject, for if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural-born subject;”

Far from being some mysterious law beamed in from the Planet Gliese 581g, the 14th Amendment simply affirms this statement, cited with approval in Wong Kim Ark:

In United States v. Rhodes (1866), Mr. Justice Swayne, sitting in the Circuit Court, said:

All persons born in the allegiance of the King are natural-born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country, as well as of England. . . . We find no warrant for the opinion [p663] that this great principle of the common law has ever been changed in the United States. It has always obtained here with the same vigor, and subject only to the same exceptions, since as before the Revolution.

1 Abbott (U.S.) 28, 40, 41.

Perhaps these simple statements are over the head of the esteemed H. Brooke Paige, so he proceeds to go hopping down the Minor v. Happersett (MvH) Birfer Bunny Trail with Mario “The Mangler” Apuzzo, Esq., as can been seen on page 9 of his Complaint:

(Click on Image to enlarge.)

Never mind the fact that the MvH Court clearly left open the issue of whether or not a child born here of non-citizen parents was a natural born citizen or not, it sure sounds good to pretend like MvH was precedent. Except to real judges, that is. They have a bad tendency to actually read the stuff, think for themselves, and then say things like the Ankeny Court did in 2009:

In Minor, written only six years after the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified, the Court observed that:

The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts.

Id. at 167-168. Thus, the Court left open the issue of whether a person who is born within the United States of alien parents is considered a natural born citizen.12

Reading through the Complaint (see Note 1 below for the whole thing.), it is nothing but a rehash of previous idiotic Birther legal arguments, all of which have lost. This one will lose, too. My only question is whether Paige will blame the judge(s) or just admit that his legal case is a bunch of baloney. It won’t be long before we can turn the page on this one.

What a sap.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. Here is a pdf of Paige’s Complaint and attachments in case you want to read the whole thing:

Vermont Complaint

Vermont Attachments-to-Cplt

Note 2. Gliese 581g. An exo-planet about which Wiki says, in part:

Gliese 581 g ( /ˈɡliːzə/), also Gl 581 g or GJ 581 g, is an unconfirmed extrasolar planet of the red dwarf star Gliese 581,[2] 22 light-years[3] from Earth in the constellation of Libra.[4] It is the sixth planet discovered in the Gliese 581 planetary system and the fourth in order of increasing distance from the star. The discovery was announced by the Lick-Carnegie Exoplanet Survey in late September 2010, after a decade of observation. However, the ESO/HARPS survey team was not able to confirm that the planet exists.[5][6]

Gliese 581 g has attracted attention because it is near the middle of the habitable zone of its parent star. That means it could sustain liquid water on its surface and could potentially host life similar to that on Earth. (The planet is expected to have temperatures around -37 to -12°C, however). If it is a rocky planet, favorable atmospheric conditions could permit the presence of liquid water, a necessity for all known life, on its surface. With a mass 3.1 to 4.3 times Earth’s, Gliese 581 g is considered a super-Earth and is the planet closest in size to Earth known in a habitable zone. This makes it the most Earth-like Goldilocks planet found outside the Solar System and the exoplanet with the greatest recognized potential for harboring life.[7]

The detection of Gliese 581 g after such a short period of searching and at such close proximity has led some astronomers to hypothesize that the proportion of stars with habitable planets may be greater than ten percent.[1]


Fifty Shades Of Stupid!!! (Or, Spanking Another Freeper Birther)

By The 89th Shade, They Were Really Having To Strain For Material

OMG!!! I stumbled across this little bit of SHEER TOTAL STUPIDITY while browsing the Free Republic Birther threads. There is sooo much Birther idiocy there that I could churn out 10 Internet Articles per day easily just by pointing out their legal mistakes, absurdities, and logical fallacies. It would be the equivalent of shooting very stupid fish in a very tiny barrel. Sooo, usually I just giggle and move on to something else. But this piece of nuttiness by Freeper Diogeneslamp was just too dumb to pass up.

Down below in the notes you can find links, and a screen capture of the idiocy.  Now, on with the story. The Freeper Birthers are all babbling and drooling and stuff, and Freeper Diogeneslamp pops out his little copy of John Adam’s personal Law book of English Common law, published in 1736. Which says:

All those are natural born Subjects whose Parents, at the Time of their Birth, were under the actual Obedience of our King, and whose Place of Birth was within his Dominions.

and to the side of that the margin note says:

In Calvins Case those which were born in Normandy, Gascon, while under actual Obedience to the Kings of England, were Subjects born. And this by the Statute is declared to have been the Common Law; but those born there now are Aliens, those places not being in the actual Possession of our King.

Now, I debated Diogeneslamp on numerous occasisons before the Freeper Birthers got tired of me kicking their butts and got me banned. He knows about Wong Kim Ark, and argues mightily that it doesn’t provide precedent on natural born citizenship passing to those born inside the United States regardless of the citizenship of the parents. And he knows, from that same case, that natural born citizenship passes to those born outside the country to American parent(s) by statutory law.

In short, Diogeneslamp is fully aware of this excerpt from Wong Kim Ark via the Ankeny Court:

The Wong Kim Ark Court explained:

The fundamental principle of the common law with regard to English nationality was birth within the allegiance-also called „ligealty,‟ „obedience,‟ „faith,‟ or „power‟-of the king. The principle embraced all persons born within the king‟s allegiance, and subject to his protection. Such allegiance and protection were mutual,-as expressed in the maxim, „Protectio trahit subjectionem, et subjectio protectionem,‟-and were not restricted to natural-born subjects and naturalized subjects, or to those who had taken an oath of allegiance; but were predicable of aliens in amity, so long as they were within the kingdom. Children, born in England, of such aliens, were therefore natural-born subjects. But the children, born within the realm, of foreign ambassadors, or the children of alien enemies, born during and within their hostile occupation of part of the king‟s dominions, were not natural-born subjects, because not born within the allegiance, the obedience, or the power, or, as would be said at this day, within the jurisdiction, of the king.

Lookie!!! The Courts say the same thing as the book. “Within the Obedience” doesn’t mean “citizen.”  It means within the physical jurisdiction of the King.  Clearly, it is the place of birth which controls natural born citizenship for those born inside the country. But, to actually read from John Adams’ book and recognize that fact means you have to quit being a two citizen-parent Birther. Because you to have to face the fact that the citizenship of the parents has NOTHING to do with those born INSIDE the country. Criminy, if the country’s possession reverts, there goes the citizenship, parents notwithstanding. What, does your parentage change if the country changes hands??? This is not just my opinion.

Here it is again, in Ankeny, citing Wong Kim Ark:

It thus clearly appears that by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country, and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the crown of England, were within the allegiance, the OBEDIENCE, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, and the jurisdiction of the English sovereign; and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject, unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign state, or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.

III. The same rule was in force in all the English colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the constitution as originally established.

Diogeneslamp has been exposed to all this before. Numerous times. There is no excuse for him not recognizing it.  So, how does he handle this clear conflict between his own evidence and his own beliefs??? Simple. He ignores it and tries to pass it off as the same as Vattel’s definition. Like this:

A. English Common law says if you are born here, you’re NBC, and your PARENTS’ citizenship is irrelevant.


B. Vattel says NBC only occurs when both PARENTS are citizens.


C. They must be the same thing as what Vattel says, because they both mention the word PARENTS.

I don’t think stupid is too harsh a word  to use. Here it is in his own words:

Hmm… It mentions that a person’s Parents must be in Actual Obedience to the King, and it mentions this BEFORE it says anything about where such a subject should be born, establishing the first requirement as the more important of the two, in my opinion.

Wow. This definition of “Natural-born Subject” sounds very much like the Vattel definition of “natural born citizen”! The first thing both definitions mention is “parents.” Loyal Parents. If “parents” aren’t important, why would they be mentioned? This law book was also subsequently owned by John Adam’s son, John Quincy Adams. (Who also became President.)

But, being the legal whiz that he is, Diogeneslamp must realize that the link to Vattel is a little weak. Sooo, how are we supposed to know that John Adams ascribes to the Vattel definition???  Simple. Because Adams stayed with Vattel’s published in France during the Revolutionary War.

Sooo, that is pretty stupid. Ignoring the Wong Kim Ark and the Ankeny Court saying the same thing as is found in John Adams’ book is pretty stupid. Trying to cobble Vattel onto the book in spite of the clearly opposite meaning is pretty stupid. Ignoring your own evidence is pretty stupid. Trying to convince us that Adam’s staying with the publisher is proof of anything is pretty stupid. But you know what is the stupidest thing of all that Diogeneslamp does???

He forgets to check the publishing date of Adams’ personal book on English Common Law – – – which proves to be 1736, or 22 years BEFORE the first publication of Vattel’s Law Of Nations in 1758.  Yes, Diogeneslamp believes, and expects us to believe, that Adams’ book is parroting a definition of citizenship that won’t be written for another 22 years. I could go on.

If somebody made a career of studying Diogeneslamp’s stupidity, I am pretty sure they would need a title like 1000 Shades of Stupid.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. Screen Capture: Here is a screen capture of Diogeneslamp’s dribble. You can click on it to make it larger:

Note 2: Here is a link to it. Just scroll down to comment #224:


Note 3. Here’s a link to the 1736 book:


Note 4. the Free Republic ban. Here is a link, with photos, of when the Free Republic Birthers wussied out and ran in panic stricken terror from me:


Note 5: The Image.  This is a 1947 photo of Salvador Dali using a model as a desk.   Photograph by Bob Sandberg, Museum of the City of New York, The LOOK Collection.”  It is rumored that IKEA is working on reproductions.

The Herculean Labors (Or, Wrassling The Cretin Bull, And Cleaning Up Behind Him)

The Birthers Got Carried Away By The Cretin Bull

Well, the software is telling me that this is the 200th post at The Birther Think Tank. So perhaps is time to step back and reflect on the Big Picture nature of the Anti-Birther vs. Birther Struggle.  There are analogies to be found in two of the mythological Labors of Hercules, specifically the 5th and 7th Labors.

The Fifth Labor of Hercules was to clean the Augean Stables. Thousands of cows lived in these stables belonging to King Augeus. They had not been cleaned in 30 years, but Hercules was told to clean them completely in a single day. To do so he made two rivers bend so that they flowed into the stables, sweeping out the filth. ( from Infoplease)

The Seventh Labor of Hercules was to capture the Cretan Bull. This savage bull, kept by King Minos of Crete, was said to be insane and breathe fire. Hercules wrestled the mad beast to the ground and brought it back to King Eurystheus. Unfortunately, the king set it free, and it roamed Greece, causing terror wherever it went. (from Infoplease)

There Was Money To Be Made From Manure

Those two myths pretty much cover the life of the Anti-Birther. Our battle is defined by the other side. The Birthers create the bullsh*t, and  we must clean it up. It is a never-ending task because the bull-sh*tters are constantly pumping out new product on a regular basis. Unike Hercules, we can not divert any rivers (due to the lack of a Corps of Engineers’ permit) to short cut the job. No, we must shovel it up the old fashioned way, one scoop at a time into the Wheelbarrel of Truth, and roll it out to the Compost Pile of Birther Dreams.

Making the job more difficult is the fact that some people make money off the bullsh*t. Television provides a most appropriate illustration of  this fact. The Image directly above is from the TV series, Hercules, The Legendary Journeys, the Reign of Terror episode. In that episode Salmoneus, the somewhat shady promoter character, travelled with Hercules to visit the Augean Stables. He concocted a plan to sell manure from the stables with Hercules’ celebrity endorsement. (“Reign of Terror“).

Here you should be thinking Jerome “Jerry” CorsiWorld Net Daily, Cold Case Posse Deputy Michael Zullo, and a host of other Birthers who profit, one way or another, from promoting the nonsense. It is my opinion that many Birthers are also in it for the attention, such as CDR Kerchner, Mario “The Mangler” Apuzzo, and the late “Leo Donofrio, Esq.” These people are not so stupid that they could seriously believe the two-citizen parents Imaginary Law. But, some people are.

Hercules Could Just Swear He Had Encountered This Bull Before

Daily, we Anti-Birthers wrassle with the insane Cretin Bull and no matter how many times we pin its shoulders to the ground, it just gets loose to cause more terror and distress. Old, discredited rumors persistently find resurrection in the Birther Blogosphere and resurface.  Most recently, Postman Allen Hulton has resurrected the Obama As A Foreign Student myth, based on 20+ year old hearsay conversations.  This Who Was He??? identity trope is also mirrored in the Hercules myth. There was uncertainty as to the identity of the Cretan Bull.

The Cretan bull, was said to be the father of the Minotaur by Pasiphae, wife of the Cretan king Minos. By one account, the Cretan bull was the beast that had carried Europa from Phoenicia to Crete for Zeus. In other myths, the bull was sent by Poseidon to Minos,to be sacrificed following the king’s promise that he would sacrifice to the god anything that rose from the sea. But Minos, struck by the animal’s beauty, sacrificed in its place another bull, thus provoking the god’s rage. The sea god then in revenge drove the animal wild, ravaging the crops and orchards of Crete.

Hercules captured the beast after a lengthy struggle. He brought it all the way back across the sea to Tiryns, to present it to Eurystheus. He then set the beast free. It then roamed around Laconia and Arcadia, crossed the Corinth Isthmus and ended up in Marathon, to be later captured and killed by Theseus.


In fact, the first image here is Europa Carried Away By The Cretan Bull by Noël-Nicolas Coypel, 1726-1727In a way, America has been carried away by the Birthers’ Cretin Bull.  A Cretan is, of course, someone from the island of Crete. A cretin, on the other hand is a person of subnormal intelligence. In the past that term, and others, were associated with specific I.Q. levels. There is some disagreement about the levels, but this seems representative:

Cretin…. IQ 70-85
Moron ….IQ 55-70
Imbecile..IQ 40-55
Idiot…….IQ under 40

What we must deal with daily are cretinous, moronic, imbecilic and idiotic arguments. Even Birther Mensa members like Sam Sewell of The Steady Drip blog sally forth into the two citizen parents argument despite repeated court losses on that point. Ex-military officers like CDR Kerchner and Walter “Citizen’s Arrest” Fitzpatrick spew forth Vattel like gargoyles on the Notre Dame Cathredal during a cloudburst. Jerome “Jerry” Corsi, who has a Ph.D from Harvard, carries on like a madman biting on every piece of worthless evidence like a Great White Shark chomping down on a surfboard – swallowing it now, and letting the other end worry about the consequences.

So why do we do it??? I can’t answer for other people. Personally, I don’t even think we are winning the battle.  Birther Blogs seem to be springing up everywhere, and the stupidity knows no shame. Or limits. The courts throw the Birther Junk out, but they would do that whether we were here or not. Obama is still on the ballot in every state, but I am not even an Obama supporter. I’ll probably vote for the Republican, or if he is too nutty, just stay home.  And it is not like any ex-Birthers have ever told me, ‘Thank you, Squeeky! You have convinced me I was wrong about this Birther stuff.” That has never happened.

I think that me, and probably the other Anti-Birthers and Obots, too, just can’t stand to let these idiotic lies go unchallenged. Like that other Hercules, the French one, Hercule-Savinien-De Cyrano de Bergerac said:

What say you? It is useless? Ay, I know
But who fights ever hoping for success?
I fought for lost cause, and for fruitless quest!
You there, who are you!–You are thousands!
I know you now, old enemies of mine!

(He strikes in air with his sword):

Have at you! Ha! and Compromise!
Prejudice, Treachery!. . .

(He strikes):

Surrender, I?
Parley? No, never! You too, Folly,–you?
I know that you will lay me low at last;
Let be! Yet I fall fighting, fighting still!

(He makes passes in the air, and stops, breathless):

You strip from me the laurel and the rose!
Take all! Despite you there is yet one thing
I hold against you all, and when, to-night,
I enter Christ’s fair courts, and, lowly bowed,
Sweep with doffed casque the heavens’ threshold blue,
One thing is left, that, void of stain or smutch,
I bear away despite you.

(He springs forward, his sword raised; it falls from his hand; he staggers,
falls back into the arms of Le Bret and Ragueneau.)

ROXANE (bending and kissing his forehead):
‘Tis?. . .

CYRANO (opening his eyes, recognizing her, and smiling):



Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

The Apuzzo Brief – The Speeder’s Digest Condensed Version

Well, Somebody Had To Clean Up All The Water The Brief Didn't Hold

Mario “The Mangler” Apuzzo, Esq.  just filed a 199 page single-spaced brief in the Pennsylvania eligibility suit, Kerchner/Laudenslager v. Obama.  Well, for your entertainment, amusement, and overall mental health, I prepared this Speeder’s Digest Condensed Version. I call it that because you can speed right on through this and not spend all those mind-numbing hours.  Plus,  I call it Speeder’s Digest because Reader’s Digest would have probably pulled some SOPA Stuff on me if I had borrowed their name.

Anyway, there is a whole lot of water in this Brief and the biggest criticism I offer is the excessive lengthI do some legal typing for my BFF Fabia Sheen, Esq., a lawyer, and this brief could benefit from some heavy duty editing and re-organization for easier reading and comprehension.  As far as the content, those of us who follow this issue have seen all of these arguments, or some incarnation thereof, numerous times.  However, Apuzzo has managed to gather them all into one big document. I suspect this Brief will be re-titled The Birther Manifesto at some point in the future. Here are the main arguments and points:

1. The Founders were really, really scairt of FOREIGN INFLUENCE.

2. Natural born citizens are NOT the same as citizens at birth or citizens by operation of the 14th Amendment.

3. Sooo, therefore a natural born citizen is what the Founders thought it was.

4. Which to them, would have meant somebody born of two citizen parents.

5. They would have gotten this concept from Natural Law, Vattel,  The Bible,  lions, Indian tribes, Whigs, Ancient Greeks and Romans, and some guy named Quintilianus;

6. And also by translating terms and phrases back and forth between French, Latin and Greek a few times for good measure.

7. Plus, the Minor v. Happersett Court said there were doubts whether kids born here of foreigners were citizens, so there should certainly  be doubts about them being natural born citizens.

8. The Founders did not look to English Common Law to define natural born citizenship.

9.  And anyway, natural born citizens are not the same as natural born subjects.

10. Plus, there was the  James McClure Case,  and since he was born around the time of The American Revolution, this shows how the Founders viewed this issue.

Aside: Apuzzo Shouts out to Freeper Rxsid and Leo Donofrio!!!

11. Just ignore the Wong Kim Ark stuff because that court had it all wrong.

12. Vattel’s The Law of Nations was a very important book, and it was used as a reference  a lot back in those days.

Aside: YEAH!!! On page 68, Apuzzo uses my “Swiss guy” language!!! Plus, I see Apuzzo shadowboxing some other arguments from my Internet Article here, “A Place To Get The REALLY Right Answers About Natural Born Citizenship.”

13. Indigenes means “natural born” in French.

14.  Vattel and his book were very popular with the Founders.

15. Some Saint, named George Tucker, thought you should be able to quit being a citizen if you wanted to.

16. The Ankeny Court  was wrong in 2009 , and so was the Lynch v. Clarke Court back in 1844.

17. There are some cases which back up the Natural Law Definition, including Venus Case (1814) , The Inglis v. Sailor’s Snug Harbor Case (1830), the Shanks Dupont Case (1830) and Dred Scott (1847) (which earns an extra Rictal Scale point!)

18.  Some speeches by Congressmen, legal articles, legal dictionaries, and Jefferson’s Citizenship Statutes back up the two citizen parent theory.

19.  Naturalization Statutes and The James McClure case (again) back up the two citizen parent/natural law theory.

20. The 14th Amendment didn’t do nothing, vis a vis natural born citizenship, and several SCOTUS cases proved it.

21. Minor v. Happersett.  Minor v. Happersett. Minor v. Happersett. Minor v. Happersett. Minor v. Happersett.

Aside:  An extraneous discourse on lactation and coconuts??? With something cut and pasted from the comments section of his blog??? (Who is the  “Your” he is referring to???) (Page 138-139)

22. Contrary to popular belief, the Wong Kim Ark case affirmed Minor’s two citizen parent theory, and distinguished between a 14th Amendment born citizen and an Article II natural born citizen.

23. Being European, Emer Vattel realized it took both a man and a woman to make a baby.

24. There are a couple of cases that the Obama Enablers cite to show Obama is a natural born citizen, including Calvin’s CaseLynch v. Clarke (1844), Kwock v. White (1920), and Ankeny v. Governor (2009).

25. Obama still has to prove he was born in the United States, but even if he does, he can’t prove he was born to two citizen parents, plus he is British, to boot.

Well, that is pretty much a run down of The Apuzzo Brief.  Even in this condensed version the repetition is obvious. All in all, the Brief is well written as far as grammar and syntax. It far surpasses wussy Leo Donofrio’s recent 209 page Brief, of which 3/4 are photocopied attachments.  Apuzzo did not stoop to photocopy filler. Or even double-spacing. Say what you will, Apuzzo manned up.

Parts of the Brief are actually interesting.  As far as legal ooomph, there isn’t much. Apuzzo just can’t twist Minor v. Happersett into positively saying what he wants it to say, although he does make a Herculean effort. Conclusions and rationalizations about what the Founders meant by natural born citizen do not negate the precedental value of Wong Kim Ark.  But, unlike the Ankeny Birthers, Apuzzo does meet the issue head on and he doesn’t try to ignore the case altogether.

I do not believe the Apuzzo Brief was written for lawyers, judges and courts. It is far too long, and there is way too much irrelevancy and conclusory reasoning.  For example, Apuzzo knows that Quintilianus doesn’t trump Coke or English Common Law. All that stuff,  and all the multi-lingual translational quips are meant for the Birther Hordes, who hunger for copy and paste material with which to clobber the smart-alecky Obots and Anti-Birthers out there on the Intertubz. Apuzzo has given them their money’s worth, with 199 pages of single-spaced legal jargon cum Birther sound bites.

For Apuzzo, this may very well prove to be a wise move and if he can continue to push the Constitutional Article II Expert appellation, I predict this will serve to repair some of his damaged legal credibility. This is not because of any brilliant legal insight, but because of his move from practical reality-based law toward the realm of ersatz academic law. Think about it. A law professor who writes a paper on why we should not enslave killer whales is considered trendy, if eccentric.  He will be invited to give speeches. The working lawyer who actually sues Sea World on behalf of Shamu just gets 12(b)6’ed while his friends snicker and make the crazy horizontal rotating finger sign behind his back.

Like I said above, prepare to see this Brief come out in book form with the title, The Birther Manifesto.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Image.  This is from Disney’s Fantasia, The Sorcerer’s Apprentice vignette. Disney’s tale is based on Goethe’s Zauberlehrling, about which Wiki says:

The poem begins as an old sorcerer departs his workshop, leaving his apprentice with chores to perform. Tired of fetching water by pail, the apprentice enchants a broom to do the work for him — using magic in which he is not yet fully trained. The floor is soon awash with water, and the apprentice realizes that he cannot stop the broom because he does not know how.

Not knowing how to control the enchanted broom, the apprentice splits it in two with an axe, but each of the pieces becomes a new broom and takes up a pail and continues fetching water, now at twice the speed. When all seems lost, the old sorcerer returns, quickly breaks the spell and saves the day. The poem finishes with the old sorcerer’s statement that powerful spirits should only be called by the master himself.

It is generally presumed that the story embodies some maxim or moral, and that it is something along the lines of “don’t meddle with things you don’t understand.

If you are interested in the original poem, see here:


Note 2. Not Hold Water.  The idiom means not standing up to critical examination,  or not being sound and valid, as in “This argument just won’t hold water“, or “Her reasons for quitting don’t hold water.” This negative form of the metaphoric expression alludes to a container that can not hold water without leaking. [c. 1600]

Yukon Jerk Says “Mush!!!” (or, The Best Dang Birther Lawsuit EVAH!!!)

Luckily For Gordon, The Odor From Inside His Igloo Knocked The Mighty Ursus Maritimus Out Cold

While some are calling him a racist, I believe that Birther Gordon Epperly, aka The Sage of Swampy Acres, has filed the Best Dang Birther Lawsuit EVAH!!! Here is a pdf of it, right straight from the Silly Sovereign Sitizen website – USA The Republic. (I call them Sitizens because of their propensity to sit at their keyboards and burn them up writing  silly legal treatises, penning letters of outrage to editors,  and filing numerous silly lawsuits. Plus, they so often seem to lack standing.):

Pure Alaskan Mush

No doubt part of his success is due to his rare ability among Birthers to actually learn from his past judicial failures. For Epperly once (1991) believed that the 14th Amendment was never properly ratified, and therefore he and his family were not U.S. Citizens. And therefore not liable to pay income taxes??? See here:


But, for this new lawsuit Epperly has realized that he was wrong. Obama, as a Negro or Mulatto, is definitely covered by the 14th Amendment. I am still a little confused, The USA – The Republic Website still hawks the “14th Amendment never ratified” silliness. Oh, maybe the 14th Amendment only applies to negroes and mulattos???  Hmmm, could be. I have encountered that argument before when debating Birthers. Oh, and there is this little tidbit from The Atlantic:

But to hear many of 21stCentury’s far-right “constitutionalists” tell the American story, the Fourteenth Amendment doesn’t exist. Or, at least, not as something that affects the way we live today.

These people are what I call “Fourteenth Amendment deniers.” Their radical right-wing agenda is much more attainable if the values of human equality, and basic civil and political rights, are read out of the document.  So, like Sgt. Schutz in Hogan’s Heroes, they look at the text and see “nothing — nothing!”

The most radical of them simply proclaim that the Fourteenth Amendment doesn’t count; it wasn’t validly adopted. Southern Senators and Representatives weren’t seated in the Congress that proposed it at the end of the Civil War, they argue, so that body was illegitimate.  In 1957, with the prospect of school desegregation staring it in its all-white face, the Georgia State Legislature went so far as to pass a resolution  declaring that “the so-called 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States are null and void and of no effect.”

This old white-supremacist myth lives on, but only in the remote hills and hollers where militiamen mingle with men in sheets.


Maybe that is it.  We will probably have to wait for Epperly’s Brief Opposing Motion For Summary Judgment to see how he handles that.  But I digress. From the above copy of the Complaint, you will see this Birther lawsuit has almost everything it it.  Some Minor v. Happersett stuff,  some two citizen parent stuff, some 14th Amendment stuff, AND Epperly even addresses the Ankeny case, to try to head off the response that he knows is coming. Yes, Epperly is a step ahead of the other Birthers who just keeping filing the same old losing case over and over.

There is even a little hint of SEX in his Complaint. Epperly keeps reminding us that it takes more than one person to make a baby by underlining  “s” in citizens and adding the word plural in red. Because you know, a beast with one back just ain’t gonna cut it. Plus, we get the negro and mulatto stuff in this suit.  The other Birthers have kept that belief kind of sub rosa, which I think is Mexican for “under the sheets.”   Probably white ones.  However, Epperly boldly addresses that issue head on and even gets a Rictal Scale point for citing the Dred Scott decision in the process.

But Epperly may have unwittingly laid a snare for future Birthers, because what about Mark Rubio and Bobby Jindal??? They are neither negro nor mulatto. Does the 14th Amendment apply to them???  Maybe Epperly will cite Wong Kim Ark for the propsition that Indians were not natural born??? That will take care of Jindal.  But Rubio??? Hmmm. Maybe Epperly will find a Spanish Armada exception to Calvin’s Case or maybe the 1856 Paris Declaration which forbids Letters Mark???

Because if he can’t use those letters, M, A, R,and K, then Mark Rubio can’t get on the ballot.  Hmmm, maybe he could be, ubio, or  John Doe ubio, or maybe  XXXX  Xubio ???  That is even mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, and would pull in The Law of Nations and oh. . .  Let me stop.  This is over my head.  These are deep and profound Birther questions. I am sure Apuzzo and Donofrio will explain this all to us.

I will have to check in on The Sage of Swampy Acres from time to time and see how he handles this. If you want to read some of the goofiness at what I am guessing is his website:


Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1: Yukon Jerk. A wordplay on one of my favorite drinks, Yukon Jack. Wiki says( And I can vouch for this!):

Yukon Jack is a honey-based Canadian whiskey advertised as the “Black sheep of Canadian Liquors”. It is a 100 proof (in USA) or 80 proof (in Canada) drink.Yukon Jack is produced by Heublein Inc. In 1987 Heublein Inc. was bought out by Diageo. Yukon Jack is made in Valleyfield, Quebec. Bottles available for sale in the US are imported and then bottled in Hartford, Connecticut.

The taste is sweeter than comparable American whiskeys drawing from the honey it is brewed with but then has a rougher bite than say Jack Daniels. It also has the distinctive taste of horehound.

“Yukon Jack is a taste born of hoary nights, when lonely men struggled to keep their fires lit and cabins warm. Boldly flavorful yet surprisingly smooth, there is no spirit like Yukon Jack”

Which the tagline on the label also explains the Easter Egg in the Image. This is a really good drink, but you have to be careful because a few straight shots and your lips get all wobbly. But it is a lot easier to drink than Jack Daniels, and for some reason, you don’t get as belligerent if you overdo it. Or so I am told. . .

Note 2. Mush.

1. A soft, wet, pulpy mass.
2. A journey across snow with a dogsled.

1. Reduce (a substance) to a soft, wet, pulpy mass.
2. Go on a journey across snow with a dogsled.

A command urging on dogs during such a journey.

mash – gruel – pulp

Note 3. Letters Mark. Oh, just a wordplay on Letters Marque about which Wiki says:

In the days of fighting sail, a Letter of Marque and Reprisal was a government licence authorizing a person (known as a privateer) to attack and capture enemy vessels and bring them before admiralty courts for condemnation and sale. Cruising for prizes with a Letter of Marque was considered an honorable calling combining patriotism and profit, in contrast to unlicensed piracy, which was universally reviled. The French used the term lettre de course for their letters of marque, giving rise to the term corsair.

CDR Kerchner Caught Pontificating In A Public Place!!!

Gig In Hand, Kerchner Was Sure To Lose On Demerits

Well, CDR Kerchner,  late of the USS Gardyloo,  held a press conference in Pennsylvania and just let it all hang out.

You got your whole Natural Law thingy, dating back “10,000 years” to the very dawn of Human Civilization!!! You got Emerich de Vattel in spades, including old Ben Franklin and others having read the book, The Law of Nations.  And why to hear Kerchner tell, that was about the dang most important book that was ever written! Dog my cats! They even went and stuck that book smack dab into the U.S. Constitution so we could punish Pirates!!!

You got your Minor v. Happersett mis-interpretation where Kerchner reads from the Law with all the swagger of Elmer Gantry visiting a cat house, while nonchalantly avoiding the not necessary to resolve these doubts verse. Wait, what was that Kerchner just read???  Something about common law nomenclature??? Oh, I must have mis-underheard it.

You even got some Constitutional law thrown in. Some stuff about needing amendments and such to change it up. But I didn’t hear nothing about the 14th Amendment and its Wong Kim Ark interpretation.  But all in all, it is a fun video.  I think I shall call it, Lions, and Tigers, and Bores. Oh My! You’ll see why:

I can’t wait to hear the press conference after Kerchner gets keelhauled by the Courts.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Image.  This is Prince Ruprecht from the movie Dirty Rotten Scoundrels.  He is holding a trident, a symbol of sea power. Tridents are also known as “gigs.” And “gigs” are also a military term for demerits. Which is what this case will be tossed out of court for – – -on de merits.  A lack thereof.

For what it is worth, here is Prince Ruprecht pontificating in public:

Leo Donofrio, The Naked Emperor of the Birthers

Donofrio Couldn't Wait To Show Off His Custom Made Sartoria de Pazzo' Threads

Everybody is familiar with the story of The Emperor’s New Clothes, originally written by Hans Christian Andersen.  Wiki says:

A vain Emperor who cares for nothing but his appearance and attire hires two tailors who are really swindlers that promise him the finest, best suit of clothes from a fabric invisible to anyone who is unfit for his position or “just hopelessly stupid”. The Emperor cannot see the cloth himself, but pretends that he can for fear of appearing unfit for his position; his ministers do the same. When the swindlers report that the suit is finished, they mime dressing him and the Emperor then marches in procession before his subjects, who play along with the pretense.

Suddenly, a child in the crowd, too young to understand the desirability of keeping up the pretense, blurts out that the Emperor is wearing nothing at all and the cry is taken up by others. The Emperor cringes, suspecting the assertion is true, but holds himself up proudly and continues the procession, deciding never to be so vain again and to take his position more seriously.

There are many similarities to Leo Donofrio’s position in the Birther community. Some might protest that he comes closer to being one of the swindling tailors than the pompous emperor. But the tailors weren’t the ones prissing down the street in their Birthday Suit, like the Emperor and Donofrio. And, the adoring crowd probably would have had no problem jeering and pointing out that the tailors were nekkid. Except perhaps in San Francisco where such things are supposedly rather commonplace.

No, I think Donofrio is in the same fix as the Emperor. He has gone out there in front of the crowd, naked as a jay bird, and figures the best approach now is to try to bluff it out.  Just like a poker player with the 2,3,4, and 5 of hearts and the 7 of clubs.  Damn that ace or 6 of hearts for not being there!!!  Like the Emperor above, Donofrio also knows that he is holding a hand full of crap, but he is just in too deep to fold.

Donofrio’s fancy threads, the ones that only the stupid and incompetent can’t appreciate; the threads that are supposed to separate the elite from those unfit for his position or “just hopelessly stupid; and the threads that will plop Donofrio I down into the history books as a Great Emperor,  are his recent 209 page Amicus Curiae Brief, tendered to the Georgia Court.  Here is a link to the Brief:


Sooo, we get the 200 page Amicus Curiae brief, full of unintelligible drivel.  The legal equivalent of psycho-babble. Do you know why it is 200 pages??? So that you WILL NOT read it.  You are supposed to be impressed by the weight of the paper alone.  Plus, 3/4 of it consists of photocopies of old books and old law cases. There is only about 50 pages of actual Donofrio Drivel.

Donofrio’s forte is pain and his opus is the equivalent of the old peine forte et dure where the recalcitrant were pressed to plead, or die. By page 17, most of the frail will convert to Birtherism rather read anymore of this crap.  It  has been reported, but not yet confirmed,  that several readers gagged to death as early as page 6, after reading this:

Natural Allegiance – Via Jus Soli – Was A Uniquely Christian Point Of Law
Repugnant To The First Amendment Of The United States Constitution.

The common law rule of jus soli subjection is a complex spiritual concept, which does not simply relate to birth on British soil. Despite popular belief, the common law meaning of “natural-born” is not synonymous with “native-born”. The true nomenclature of “natural-born subject” is rooted in “natural subjection” to the spiritual body of Christ, and therefore our Constitution forbids any construction of the “natural-born citizen”clause that alleges the term to be synonymous with “natural-born subject”.

OK,  that was bad. A religious and First Amendment objection to the current legal interpretations of natural born citizenship???  Funny, but I don’t recall the judges in the Wong Kim Ark case citing the Bible. Nor the judge in Lynch v. Clarke. Or the judges in Ankeny, or in Georgia, or Illinois, or Virginia. This is how we know Donofrio perceives his own nudity.  He is a lawyer, and he has crafted a theory that only the legally ignorant could swallow.

He just wants the Birthers to play along and pretend that he is wearing clothes. Maybe those people who died after reading that, might have made it, except that their system had already been immuno-compromised even earlier back on page 2, where Leo I, Emperor Magnus, Protector Of Parakeets, and The Defender of Ultima Thule solemnly pronounces:

A. According To Precedents of Statutory Construction, The 14th Amendment Has
Not Repealed Or Modified The Natural Born Citizen Clause.

One wants to Cry DUH!!!, and let slip the dogs of the Insane Asylum to track Donofrio down, and tree him until the men with the butterfly nets arrive.  Perhaps while they are waiting,  Donofrio and the dogs can all howl at the moon together, for entertainment. Didn’t the judges in Wong Kim Ark state that the 14th Amendment actually  AFFIRMED the law of natural born citizenship and enshrined it in the U.S. Constitution. Well, unless I miss my guess, the Birthers will pretend those words aren’t there.

Of course we also get the good old Leo Donofrio Minor v. Happersett argument where the words “For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts” (about whether or not children born in the United States to aliens were citizens) transmogrify through the Arcane Art of Grammatical Misconstruction into the polar opposite and magically solve the doubts.  There about 52 pages of exposition on these 3 main themes, and then a ton of exhibits to finish off.  Much of it consists of photocopies of old books. Some is in Latin, like this, on page 67 of 209:

Rex universis et singulis admirall’, castellan’, custodibus 7 Coke ;/Report 9 a, 77 ER p387 castrorum,

I don’t speak Latin, but I think it means somebody named Rex plans to jail either Walter Fitzpatrick or CDR Kerchner in Spain, ply them with cocaine, and then castrate them at 9:00 AM in the Emergency Room.  If I am totally wrong in my translation, then I  still bet I am no worse than Donofrio trying to translate from English.

And sooo, this is how Leo Donofrio, Naked Emperor of the Birthers, struts his stuff. Unfortunately for him, his Brief is made of the same stuff as the Emperor’s New Clothes – – – Imaginary Threads. And thus his Briefs are showing, and he is exposed.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Emperor’s New Clothes by Hans Christian Andersen. Wiki has more to say, incuding this interesting side note:

Andersen dread the tale in a German translation titled “So ist der Lauf der Welt”. In the source tale, a king is hoodwinked by weavers who claim to make a suit of clothes invisible to any man not the son of his presumed father. Andersen avoided anything risqué in his work and altered the source tale to direct the focus on courtly pride and intellectual vanity rather than adulterous paternity.

Andersen’s manuscript was at the printer’s when he was suddenly inspired to change the original climax of the tale from the emperor’s subjects admiring his invisible clothes to that of the child’s cry. Andersen’s decision to change the ending may have had its source in a childhood incident similar to that in the tale. In 1872, he recalled standing in a crowd with his mother waiting to see King Frederick VI. When the king made his appearance, Andersen cried out, “Oh, he’s nothing more than a human being!” His mother tried to silence him by crying, “Have you gone mad, child?”

The Rictal Scale of Birther Lawsuits

Poor Rocky, The Gargoyle, Had The Misfortune To Live On The World Net Daily Building

Apparently, the Deluge of Birther lawsuits will continue for quote a while. I suspect appeal after appeal will be filed as these stinkers get drop kicked out of the courthouses. Some of these will be pro se lawsuits filed by individual Birthers untrained in the law. Others will be filed by attorneys. Their level of absurdity will vary greatly. There needs to be some way to rate these lawsuits, much like the Richter Scale and Fujita scale are used to rate earthquakes and tornadoes.

But there is a problem. Part of rating earthquakes and tornadoes relates to the amount of damage done, and Birther lawsuits don’t do any damage outside of wasting the Court’s time. Paraphrasing Shakespeare, these are lawsuits filed by idiots,  full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.  However, if we can’t rate Birther lawsuits by the output, maybe we can rate them by the input!

To that end, I propose The Rictal Scale!!! Rictal is the adjective form of Rictus which is defined as:

ric·tus [ˈrɪktəs]
n. pl. rictus or ric·tus·es
1. The expanse of an open mouth, a bird’s beak, or similar structure.
2. A gaping grimace: “his mouth gaping in a kind of rictus of startled alarm” (Richard Adams).
3. a fixed or unnatural grin or grimace, as in horror or death.

rictal adj.

In other words, the more we groan at the lawsuit, and make faces, the higher on the scale it is. All we have to do is identify the elements which make us groan and assign them a numerical value.  Here are  my thoughts.  A Birther Lawsuit gets a point for each of these elements of absurdity:

1 Point for citing Minor v. Happersett as a precedent.

1 Point for stating there is a legal requirement for two citizen parents.

1 Point for simultaneously raising fraudulent birth certificate issues.

1 Point for citing the Dred Scott decision in support.

1 Chutzpah points for introducing Obama’s birth certificate as evidence  Obama’s father was a non-citizen while also claiming the birth certificate is fraudulent and false.

1 Point for claiming there is a difference between a 14th Amendment Citizen born in the United States and an Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 natural born citizen.

1 Point for more than 10 spelling errors in the Complaint.

1 Point for suing the wrong party, with 1 Point for each additional mistake in service.

1 Point for mentioning Emerich de Vattel.

1 Point if the Complaint states The Law of Nations book is included in the U.S. Constitution.

1 Point for filing on a  pro se basis.

1 Point for filing in forma pauperis.

1 Point for requesting no empty chairs be allowed in the courtroom.

1 Point for filing after inauguration should Obama win in November 2012.

1 Point if the Plaintiff describes himself as a “patriot.”

1 Point if the Complaint mentions Leo Donofrio or Mario Apuzzo.

1 Point for each time a judge is asked to recuse himself.

1 Point if the Plaintiff accuses Obama of being a British citizen.

1 Points if the attorney is Orly Taitz.

1 Point if the Plaintiff prepares and files his own Amicus Curiae brief.

1 Point if the Plaintiff fails to mention Wong Kim Ark in the Complaint, or any Brief.

1 Point for each Amended Complaint.

1 Point for each Motion for Reconsideration.

1 Point for missing the Appeals deadline.

1 Point if any of the following words or terms are found in the Complaint or any Briefs: Usurper, frog march, Kenya, Muslim, Admiralty Court, New World Order, or gold fringe.

1 Point if the Plaintiff types his name in all lower case letters.

1 Point if the Plaintiff files as John Doe, or Anonymous.

1 Point for each and every other Absurd claim found in the Complaint or any Briefs as long as such absurdity is clearly listed.

Now this list could go on and on, but the beauty of the Rictal Scale, is that there is no upper limit like is found in the Fujita Tornado Scale or even in the Richter Earthquake Scale where as a practical matter, 9.5 seems to be tops. This is a good thing, for who could ever hope to predict the upper limits of Birther Absurdity.

Please consider the Rictal Scale, as a work in progress, and any and all contributions to further refining this tool will be appreciated.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1:  Thanks to G, at Obama Conspiracy Theories, for suggsting a point be added for Birther Plaintiffs citing the Dred Scott Decision!!!

Note 2: After initial publication of this Internet Article, the scale was renamed The Rictal Scale, the adjective form of the noun rictus being deemed more grammatically correct as descriptive of the noun scale. Like I said, this is a work in progress.