Mario Apuzzo

Post Reply
User avatar
mimi
Posts: 31119
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

Mario Apuzzo

#1

Post by mimi » Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:11 am

he posted something.Thursday, January 27, 2011The Two Issues Regarding Obama's Eligibility to be Presidentsome blurbs:I don't get him. We even have had an Indiana court in Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana, 916 N.E.2d 678 (Ind. Ct.App. 2009), declare that “persons born within the borders of the United States are ‘natural born Citizens’ for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.” But the court never even raised the issue that there was no proof before the court that Obama was "born within the borders of the United States." In fact, the Ankeny court, while dismissing the plaintiffs' case, never ruled that Obama was "born within the borders of the United States." Nor did it rule that he was a "natural born Citizen."And gearing up for the next election? But, he doesn't have a case? But apart from the place of birth issue, we also have the question of whether Obama is an Article II "natural born Citizen." Assuming that he was born in Hawaii, does Obama meet the definition of an Article II "natural born Citizen?" The Framers' constitutional scheme, historical evidence (e.g. Emer de Vattel's The Law of Nations, Section 212), and U.S. Supreme Court precedent (e.g. Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875) show that the American common law definition of an Article II "natural born Citizen" has its basis in natural law and the law of nations and not the English common law. That definition, which to this day has never been changed, is a child born in the country (or equivalent such as being born abroad to parents in the service of their nation) to a U.S. citizen father and mother.There is no factual dispute that when Obama was born in 1961, wherever that may be, he was born to a father who under the British Nationality Act of 1948 was a British subject/citizen and that Obama himself by descent from his father was born a British subject/citizen. Not only was Obama's father not a U.S. citizen when Obama was born, but his father never became a U.S. citizen nor was he even ever a domiciliary or permanent resident of the United States. These undisputed facts show that Obama is not and cannot be an Article II "natural born Citizen."So, there are two open issues: was Obama born in Hawaii and if he was, is he an Article II "natural born Citizen." Assuming that Obama runs for re-election, how will our nation address these issues in the 2012 presidential campaign and election? Will Congress, other political institutions, the media, and candidates exhibit political and moral courage and tackle these issues once and for all or will they like so many others have done just turn a blind eye to the Constitution and the rule of law and continue with business as usual?Mario Apuzzo, Esq.January 27, 2011{C}http://puzo1.blogspot.com/{C}####Why even give the link? The coward won't let you comment there.http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2011/01/two-i ... ility.html



User avatar
realist
Posts: 34493
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#2

Post by realist » Fri Jan 28, 2011 9:05 am

So, there are two open issues: was Obama born in Hawaii and if he was, is he an Article II "natural born Citizen." Assuming that Obama runs for re-election, how will our nation address these issues in the 2012 presidential campaign and election? Will Congress, other political institutions, the media, and candidates exhibit political and moral courage and tackle these issues once and for all or will they like so many others have done just turn a blind eye to the Constitution and the rule of law and continue with business as usual?Mario Apuzzo, Esq.January 27, 2011[/break1]blogspot.com/]http://puzo1.blogspot.com/####There are no open issues except for the Putz and a few other idiots who wish to make issues out of nothing, don't like our current president, and who wish to suspend the Constitution and subver the law of the land.The election in 2012 will be handled just as all others have, and if some states pass constitutional laws to provide documentation to be on the ballot Obama will provide his COLB and it will be accepted by those who believe in the Constitution and law. You and Orly and perhaps a few other nutjobs will once again file stupid, baseless lawsuits, all of which you will once again lose, and the voters will elect who they wish to elect.


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
verbalobe
Posts: 8511
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:27 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#3

Post by verbalobe » Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:18 am

Assuming that Obama runs for re-election, how will our nation address these issues in the 2012 presidential campaign and election? Will Congress, other political institutions, the media, and candidates exhibit political and moral courage and tackle these issues once and for all birthers, a handful of delusional and sub-par lawyers, and their wealthy enablers finally admit they've been beaten by the truth or will they like so many others have done just turn a blind eye to the Constitution and the rule of law and continue with business as usual?FIFH.





And I bet I know the answer.



gentrfam
Posts: 728
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 4:22 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#4

Post by gentrfam » Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:34 am

He clearly has an issue with conditional reasoning. We've argued about Ankeny on CAAFlog. He just doesn't get that the court didn't need to resolve both issues to resolve one issue. The fact that the court didn't rule that Obama was born here doesn't prevent it from ruling that IF he was born here, he is a natural born citizen. (Birthplace wasn't before the court. He thinks the court should have gone beyond the appeal and decided birthplace.)His analysis of Ankeny is offensively bad (to this lawyer).



User avatar
dunstvangeet
Posts: 484
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 11:53 am

Mario Apuzzo

#5

Post by dunstvangeet » Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:09 pm

His analysis of Ankeny is offensively bad (to this lawyer).His analysis of any court case is offensively bad to this non-lawyer as well...Like his insistance that Minor v. Happersett declared what Natural Born Citizen is (despite it never having the words Natural Born), and because the ruling in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark didn't declare Wong a Natural Born Citizen, they must have meant that he not be one.Honestly, I really don't know how Mario passed the bar.



A Legal Lohengrin
Posts: 10415
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#6

Post by A Legal Lohengrin » Fri Jan 28, 2011 9:50 pm

His analysis of Ankeny is offensively bad (to this lawyer).His analysis of any court case is offensively bad to this non-lawyer as well...Like his insistance that Minor v. Happersett declared what Natural Born Citizen is (despite it never having the words Natural Born), and because the ruling in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark didn't declare Wong a Natural Born Citizen, they must have meant that he not be one.Honestly, I really don't know how Mario passed the bar.I assume he ate a mushroom and then a flashing star.http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos ... 9442620119



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24422
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#7

Post by bob » Fri Mar 04, 2011 4:35 pm

Apuzzo's latest: [/break1]blogspot.com/2011/03/states-have-right-and-duty-to-assure.html]The States Have a Right and Duty to Assure Their Citizens That a Presidential Candidate Is an Article II “Natural Born Citizen"


...Apuzzo likes eligibility bills, provided they use the correct definition of natural-born citizen, blah blah blah.





From [/break1]blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7466841558189356289&postID=6669426116521758711]the comments:


[highlight]The primary elections may be the most appropriate time for an eligibility challenge[/highlight]. Find out the rules for a potential primary ballot/caucus candidate: when he/she must file and how long you would have to challenge his/her eligibility. The challenges would be made to the State Secretary of State.Excellent recommendation. All persons throughout the United States interested in bringing the Obama eligibility issue to justice should be looking into the exact point that you have raised so that they can prepare themselves for a challenge to Obama being placed on any State ballot.





It would be great for someone to organize a nationwide campaign to accomplish this....an eligibility challenge being raised during the elective process? What a novel concept!


#-o


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24422
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#8

Post by bob » Thu Mar 10, 2011 6:42 pm

Apuzzo [/break1]blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7466841558189356289&postID=1323579209329973302]commenter:


in order to challenge ObieOne...all that needs be done...is for one person...[highlight]to be charged under a law...(not under the UCMJ)...that ObieOne signed[/highlight]...





the perfect defense...that ObieOne is not eligible to hold office...and that the law the person is being charged with does not carry the authority of law under the Constitution of the US and cannot be enforced...





the person should not waive his/her right to a speedy trial...and should be repesented by an atty that is well informed about the research done by both leo donofrio...and mario appuzo...in order to establish a reasonable basis for this defense...not one word about ObieOnes birth certificate needs to be mentioned...his father was born in Kenya...and was a brit. citzen when ObieOne was born...preventing ObieOnes every being eligible for POTUS...factual evidence can be presented in ObieOnes books...and election web sites...that ObieOne takes credit for...that makes the case for the defense...(ObieONe's admission to those facts has already been established publicly)...





it would all happen [highlight]to fast...for any prosecutor...to mount a meaningful defense...and force discovery...on the states appeal[/highlight]...to prove that ObieOne "is" qualified...based on real world facts...and not technicalities and political inuendo...





[highlight]best place would be in a state court with overwelming odds of landing a conservative, constitutionalist Justice[/highlight]....





discussion...what laws...which state...viability for success....Obviously...the "discussion"...needs to start...with who is going to "volunteer"? Because "js"...doesn't sound like...(s)he ...is willing to put his/her...money where his/her mouth...is.





Perhaps the...discussion...can then focus on...how the federal president can...enact...a state law.





And then...maybe...we can discuss how...there's no substantial...difference between this and what happened...to Lakin and Fitzpatrick....




Sekrit Stuffs!
And it really chaps my hide that Apuzzo approves this comment, but not my semi-snarky one about Temple!


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
DaveMuckey
Posts: 4107
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 3:17 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#9

Post by DaveMuckey » Thu Mar 10, 2011 6:55 pm

Sekrit Stuffs!
And it really chaps my hide that Apuzzo approves this comment, but not my semi-snarky one about Temple!
Sekrit Stuffs!
Next time, try more Gibberish.



User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43902
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Mario Apuzzo

#10

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Mar 10, 2011 7:17 pm

bob - Apuzzo probably detected too many Jewish words in your comment.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24422
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#11

Post by bob » Thu Mar 10, 2011 7:59 pm

Apuzzo probably detected too many Jewish words in your comment.Maybe, but: "Hey, Apuzzo: Temple Nonspecific Term for House of Worship's law school wants its degree back!" doesn't have the same pizzaz.





(Maybe I should have said "pizzaz"; it is pizza with an extra z; surely Apuzzo would have appreciated that.)


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Princess foofypants
Posts: 3002
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2015 9:31 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#12

Post by Princess foofypants » Fri Mar 11, 2011 9:31 am

Apuzzo [/break1]blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7466841558189356289&postID=1323579209329973302]commenter:


in order to challenge ObieOne...all that needs be done...is for one person...[highlight]to be charged under a law...(not under the UCMJ)...that ObieOne signed[/highlight]...





the perfect defense...that ObieOne is not eligible to hold office...and that the law the person is being charged with does not carry the authority of law under the Constitution of the US and cannot be enforced...





the person should not waive his/her right to a speedy trial...and should be repesented by an atty that is well informed about the research done by both leo donofrio...and mario appuzo...in order to establish a reasonable basis for this defense...not one word about ObieOnes birth certificate needs to be mentioned...his father was born in Kenya...and was a brit. citzen when ObieOne was born...preventing ObieOnes every being eligible for POTUS...factual evidence can be presented in ObieOnes books...and election web sites...that ObieOne takes credit for...that makes the case for the defense...(ObieONe's admission to those facts has already been established publicly)...





it would all happen [highlight]to fast...for any prosecutor...to mount a meaningful defense...and force discovery...on the states appeal[/highlight]...to prove that ObieOne "is" qualified...based on real world facts...and not technicalities and political inuendo...





[highlight]best place would be in a state court with overwelming odds of landing a conservative, constitutionalist Justice[/highlight]....





discussion...what laws...which state...viability for success....Obviously...the "discussion"...needs to start...with who is going to "volunteer"? Because "js"...doesn't sound like...(s)he ...is willing to put his/her...money where his/her mouth...is.





Perhaps the...discussion...can then focus on...how the federal president can...enact...a state law.





And then...maybe...we can discuss how...there's no substantial...difference between this and what happened...to Lakin and Fitzpatrick....




Sekrit Stuffs!
And it really chaps my hide that Apuzzo approves this comment, but not my semi-snarky one about Temple!
Wonder if the S in JS stands for Shatner. He kinda writes like ol Bill "acts" and I use that term loosely.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24422
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#13

Post by bob » Thu Mar 17, 2011 1:29 pm

Kerchner [/break1]blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7466841558189356289&postID=7531482488826233328]has it all figured out!:A person asked me the other night on the radio show [highlight]why would the Daily Kos have to forge a Hawaiian Certification of Live Birth (COLB) when Obama could have easily obtained a real one[/highlight].As you recall the Daily Kos put up the first digital internet image of the Obama COLB which later was picked up by Obama's campaign site, not vice versa. I have thought about this. Knowing that imo there is an actual vital record for Obama in Hawaii due to the likely false registration of Obama being born their by his maternal grandmother, Grandma Dunham, and that falsified registration triggered the two newspaper announcements which were placed routinely by the Bureau of Health in those two newspapers every week or two as public service reporting births registered, real births or false filings such as Grandma Dunhams for Obama.We also know from research by others that Obama's vital records have been amended. Thus comes to my mind why I think Obama could not get a real COLB from Hawaii and publish that on the net. I believe now that he was falsely registered as born in Honolulu by the Grandma under the name of Barack Hussein Obama II. But at age 5 or less he was adopted by his new step-father Lolo Soetoro. Thus his birth records in Hawaii were amended to a new name, Barry Soetoro, or Soebarkah Soetoro (the name mentioned in the mother's passport file found via the FOIA request by Strunk). Barry Soetoro of course became his nickname since Soebarkah Soetoro was a mouth full to pronounce.I believe that Obama never had that record legally changed back to Barack Hussein Obama II. Thus he could not get an official COLB from Hawaii because the name would show up as Soetoro, not Obama. Thus his corrupt and criminal helpers forged a COLB as a digital image and put it on the net at Daily Kos. It was then picked up at other sites and eventually Obama put it up on his site. Obama is now stuck with that forged image and picture since he adopted it as his own. Just like he is stuck with the SSN identity theft charge because he used it for his name in the back dated Selective Service registration. Thus, imo, he could not use a real COLB from Hawaii in 2008 because it still showed the amended record with his adopted name of Soetoro. But this would explain why he had to have someone forge a COLB image for his campaign.So "Grandma Dunham" falsely registered Obama's birth (explaining why Obama's name appears in the birth index, and in the newspaper announcement), but Obama was then adopted and had his name legally changed, but never changed it back.[highlight]This is a test explanation and is not 100% proven of course[/highlight]. Comments, feedback, and criticism of this postulated theory of why a COLB had to be forged instead of getting a real one from HI in 2008 or 2007, as the case may be. Now possibly he has had his record amended a second time to put his current name back in the HI vital records system. Only when we get certified copies of the true and correct copies of the original birth registration docs and all subsequent amendments will we know the truth. [highlight]As I said, this is just a theory at this point. JMHO[/highlight].And [/break1]wikipedia.org/wiki/William_of_Ockham]William of Ockham rolls over in his grave.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
verbalobe
Posts: 8511
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:27 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#14

Post by verbalobe » Thu Mar 17, 2011 1:41 pm

Kerchner [/break1]blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7466841558189356289&postID=7531482488826233328]has it all figured out!:A person asked me the other night on the radio show [highlight]why would the Daily Kos have to forge a Hawaiian Certification of Live Birth (COLB) when Obama could have easily obtained a real one[/highlight].As you recall the Daily Kos put up the first digital internet image of the Obama COLB which later was picked up by Obama's campaign site, not vice versa. I have thought about this. Knowing that imo there is an actual vital record for Obama in Hawaii due to the likely false registration of Obama being born their by his maternal grandmother, Grandma Dunham, and that falsified registration triggered the two newspaper announcements which were placed routinely by the Bureau of Health in those two newspapers every week or two as public service reporting births registered, real births or false filings such as Grandma Dunhams for Obama.We also know from research by others that Obama's vital records have been amended. Thus comes to my mind why I think Obama could not get a real COLB from Hawaii and publish that on the net. I believe now that he was falsely registered as born in Honolulu by the Grandma under the name of Barack Hussein Obama II. But at age 5 or less he was adopted by his new step-father Lolo Soetoro. Thus his birth records in Hawaii were amended to a new name, Barry Soetoro, or Soebarkah Soetoro (the name mentioned in the mother's passport file found via the FOIA request by Strunk). Barry Soetoro of course became his nickname since Soebarkah Soetoro was a mouth full to pronounce.I believe that Obama never had that record legally changed back to Barack Hussein Obama II. Thus he could not get an official COLB from Hawaii because the name would show up as Soetoro, not Obama. Thus his corrupt and criminal helpers forged a COLB as a digital image and put it on the net at Daily Kos. It was then picked up at other sites and eventually Obama put it up on his site. Obama is now stuck with that forged image and picture since he adopted it as his own. Just like he is stuck with the SSN identity theft charge because he used it for his name in the back dated Selective Service registration. Thus, imo, he could not use a real COLB from Hawaii in 2008 because it still showed the amended record with his adopted name of Soetoro. But this would explain why he had to have someone forge a COLB image for his campaign.So "Grandma Dunham" falsely registered Obama's birth (explaining why Obama's name appears in the birth index, and in the newspaper announcement), but Obama was then adopted and had his name legally changed, but never changed it back.[highlight]This is a test explanation and is not 100% proven of course[/highlight]. Comments, feedback, and criticism of this postulated theory of why a COLB had to be forged instead of getting a real one from HI in 2008 or 2007, as the case may be. Now possibly he has had his record amended a second time to put his current name back in the HI vital records system. Only when we get certified copies of the true and correct copies of the original birth registration docs and all subsequent amendments will we know the truth. [highlight]As I said, this is just a theory at this point. JMHO[/highlight].Or maybe you're all just NUCKING FUTZ!!!!



User avatar
June bug
Posts: 6095
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:29 pm
Location: Northern San Diego County

Mario Apuzzo

#15

Post by June bug » Thu Mar 17, 2011 1:49 pm

[highlight]This is a test explanation and is not 100% proven of course.[/highlight] Comments, feedback, and criticism of this postulated theory of why a COLB had to be forged instead of getting a real one from HI in 2008 or 2007, as the case may be. Now possibly he has had his record amended a second time to put his current name back in the HI vital records system. Only when we get certified copies of the true and correct copies of the original birth registration docs and all subsequent amendments will we know the truth. [highlight]As I said, this is just a theory at this point. JMHO.[/highlight]Love the straw man logic here, don't you? Mario solicits comments and criticism, not of the whole idea that there ever was a forged COLB, but only of his "test explanation" of why there was a forged COLB.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24422
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#16

Post by bob » Mon Mar 21, 2011 1:08 pm

Apuzzo haz madz: [/break1]blogspot.com/2011/03/independentie-calls-birthers-ardent.html]The 'Independent.ie' Calls the Birthers “An Ardent Group of Radicals”.Apuzzo is not happy with this article: [/break1]independent.ie/lifestyle/independent-woman/celebrity-news-gossip/us-diary-obama-irish-trip-wont-help-him-with-birthers-2586480.html#ixzz1H9UqdfjI]US Diary: Obama Irish trip won't help him with 'birthers'The people of Moneygall can expect more than the usual madness when President Barack Obama swings by in May -- specifically lots of snooping and sniping from supporters of the "birther" movement, an ardent group of radicals who claim Obama is not a natural-born US citizen -- and thus has no legitimate claim on the Oval Office.But Apuzzo should take comfort that the Obama bit was the lede, followed by bits about Charlie Sheen, Lindsay Lohan's latest problems, and Renee Zellweger and Bradley Cooper's breakup.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
kate520
Posts: 14821
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:02 pm
Location: Dark side of the Moon
Occupation: servant of cats, chicken wrangler
Contact:

Mario Apuzzo

#17

Post by kate520 » Mon Mar 21, 2011 1:16 pm

OMG, he is a verbose mofo. How do you wade through his pages and pages of self-aggrandizing, high-dudgeon crapola?


DEFEND DEMOCRACY

xKat
Posts: 537
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 10:06 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#18

Post by xKat » Mon Mar 21, 2011 1:18 pm

Apuzzo probably detected too many Jewish words in your comment.Maybe, but: "Hey, Apuzzo: Temple Nonspecific Term for House of Worship's law school wants its degree back!" doesn't have the same pizzaz.





(Maybe I should have said "pizzaz"; it is pizza with an extra z; surely Apuzzo would have appreciated that.)

FYI - The "Temple" in Temple University actually refers to the Baptist Temple where the University got started, not a Jewish temple.





Temple University's roots were planted soon after Bostonian pastor and lawyer Russell Conwell came to Philadelphia in 1882 to lead the Grace Baptist Church. One evening, Conwell agreed to tutor a young man who didn't have the time or money to seek an education. Soon, six other inquisitive young men showed up for the evening classes and were later dubbed 'night owls.'





The number of interested students multiplied from seven to hundreds, and so a charter for The Temple College was issued in 1888. It was clear that the first president of Temple had a mission to help further the lives of those who earnestly sought advancement. In 1907, Temple College became Temple University.





Among the most notable changes over the years was the 1951 installation of the Chapel of Four Chaplains in the west end of the building's lower level. The multi-denominational chapel was constructed to honor the heroism of four World War II Army chaplains of different faiths (one of whom was the son of Grace Baptist Church pastor Reverend Daniel Poling) who gave up their life preservers to save others on the sinking U.S.S. Dorchester, which had been torpedoed off the coast of Greenland.





In the mid-20th century, The Baptist Temple became a stop for some of the country's most important intellectual and political figures. Martin Luther King, Jr. and President Franklin D. Roosevelt spoke there, as did anthropologist Margaret Mead. Anne Sullivan and her famed pupil Helen Keller spoke at the Temple as did General Eisenhower when he was president of Columbia University. Alistair Cooke and Edward R. Murrow also delivered commencement addresses at The Baptist Temple.The Baptist Temple building was purchased by the University, but it sat empty for many years. It is now renovated and the Temple Performing Arts Center.





[/break1]thebaptisttemple.org/history]http://www.thebaptisttemple.org/history





P.S. I agree that Temple should revoke his law degree, it is very embarrassing to think he is a fellow alum.


If we amplify everything,
we hear nothing.

Jon Stewart
10/30/2010

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24422
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#19

Post by bob » Mon Mar 21, 2011 1:44 pm

OMG, he is a verbose mofo. How do you wade through his pages and pages of self-aggrandizing, high-dudgeon crapola?Apuzzo has a birther stump speech. His formula of "latest insult + birther talking points = new article" is rather predictable.FYI - The "Temple" in Temple University actually refers to the Baptist Temple where the University got started, not a Jewish temple.Aware; was just making a funny.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43902
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Mario Apuzzo

#20

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Mon Mar 21, 2011 3:09 pm

OMG, he is a verbose mofo. How do you wade through his pages and pages of self-aggrandizing, high-dudgeon crapola?He's a cut and paste filibusterer. It's the same old stuff, over and over. It was wrong the first time he wrote it and it's still wrong. But Apuzzo is so in love with himself that he thinks if he posts it often enough it will miraculously become true.



User avatar
PatGund
Posts: 7763
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:41 pm
Location: Edmonds. WA
Contact:

Mario Apuzzo

#21

Post by PatGund » Mon Mar 21, 2011 3:30 pm

OMG, he is a verbose mofo. How do you wade through his pages and pages of self-aggrandizing, high-dudgeon crapola?No-Doz



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24422
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#22

Post by bob » Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:00 pm

An old friend [/break1]blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7466841558189356289&postID=7531482488826233328]comments at Apuzzo's site:


No independent members in congress.


Two parties by definition, one party by behavior.





One independent in senate, i.e. Al Franken.





He is apparently the only hope within the ranks of political representatives, who may be able to bring the Obama fraud to the table.





I suggest arranging a meeting with Al Franken, take all the evidence you can muster along with your written articles and try him out, to take up the matter of Obama's fraud.MichaelN then links to [/break1]wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Franken]Franken's wikipedia page, which lists him as a member of the [/break1]wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Democratic-Farmer-Labor_Party]Minnesota Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party, which is described as "the state affiliate of the Democratic Party."





But don't forget: MichaelN was absolutely correct about Calvin's Case, and the rest of the world was wrong.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
verbalobe
Posts: 8511
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:27 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#23

Post by verbalobe » Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:06 pm

But don't forget: MichaelN was absolutely correct about Calvin's Case, and the rest of the world was wrong.That reminds me... I was thinking about Wong Kim Ark after reading through the opinion and dissent again the other day.





To Vattelists, WKA either:


[*:25gl5x8c]Says what we all agree it says, but was wrongly decided, or


[*:25gl5x8c]Doesn't say what we all agree it says.Wake me when they make up their mind.





On second thought, don't even wake me then.



MaineSkeptic
Posts: 5298
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:48 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#24

Post by MaineSkeptic » Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:15 pm

I don't have the patience to read through all of it -- have you divined why Michael thinks that Al Franken, of all senators, would be most sympathetic to the birther cause?



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24422
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Mario Apuzzo

#25

Post by bob » Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:23 pm

I don't have the patience to read through all of it -- have you divined why Michael thinks that Al Franken, of all senators, would be most sympathetic to the birther cause?Because, according to MichaelN, Franken is not beholden to either of the two major parties.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

Post Reply

Return to “Lesser Lights”