Orly Taitz actually found four Army soldiers who decided that they could avoid deploying to Iraq by claiming that the man occupying the Oval Office wasn't a legitimate president. Fortunately, the federal judge didn't just throw out the last case (CPT Connie Rhodes), he told Taitz to wise the fuck up.
The judge specifically addresses Rhodes’ “birther” arguments, including allegations that Obama might have used 149 addresses and 39 Social Security numbers before becoming president and the existence of what Taitz claims is Obama’s Kenyan birth certificate.
“Finally, in a remarkable shifting of the traditional legal burden of proof, plaintiff unashamedly alleges that defendant has the burden to prove his ‘natural born’ status,” Land states. “Any middle school civics student would readily recognize the irony of abandoning fundamental principles upon which our country was founded in order to purportedly ‘protect and preserve’ those very principles.
“Unlike in ‘Alice in Wonderland,’ simply saying something is so does not make it so,” Land says.
The federal judge's report is here. Rhodes got the Army to pay for two years of medical school, internship, and residency, and had been in the active Army for about a year before she was told that she would deploy to Iraq. And here's the funny part - she doesn't mind staying in the Army - under President Obama - as long as she isn't deploying to Iraq.
Hey, any military troops out there - and especially you officers who have college degrees - if you are even thinking along this line of thought, please, just get the hell out of my Army. You're polluting the fine institution with your ignorance.
UPDATE: TPM has this story that CPT Rhodes states she only wanted to verify the lawfulness of the deployment order and did not authorize Orly Taitz to represent her in court. CPT Rhodes is in fact on her way to Iraq, as ordered. Interesting... Shame on me for pre-judging Rhodes. Shame on Taitz for being a wack-job.



CPT Rhodes' letter reeks of BS and fear. Maybe she didn't authorize the motion for reconsideration, but she was most certainly on board with the original lawsuit -- a lawsuit which was based on nothing more than frivolous assertions of paranoid fantasy. CPT Rhodes either:
a) feels entitled to challenge orders in federal court because she doesn't like how the election turned out, or
b) is willing to use any available method to try to avoid a deployment she doesn't like.
Either way, you judged her right the first time.
Posted by: Karate Bearfighter | 21 September 2009 at 02:25 PM
The birthers, the tea baggers, the screamers, and the deathers continued extreme minority presence will become tiresome to mainstream America, if it has not already done so. To all the birthers in La, La Land, it is on you to prove to all of us that your assertion is true, if there are people who were there and support your position then show us the video (everyone has a price), either put up or frankly shut-up. I heard Orly Taitz, is selling a tape (I think it’s called “Money, Lies and Video tape”). She is from Orange County, CA, now I know what the mean when they say “behind the Orange Curtain”, when they talk about Orange County, the captial of Conspiracy Theories. You know Obama has a passport, he travel abroad before he was a Senator, but I guess they were in on it. In my opinion the Republican Party has been taken over the most extreme religious right (people who love to push their beliefs on others while trying to take away the rights of those they just hate) and that’s who they need to extract from their party if they real want to win. Good Luck, because as they said in WACO, “We Ain’t Coming Out”. I heard that she now wants to investigate the “Republican 2009 Summer of Love” list: Assemblyman, Michael D. Duvall (CA), Senator John Ensign (NV), Senator Paul Stanley (TN), Governor Mark Stanford (SC), Board of Ed Chair, and Kristin Maguire AKA Bridget Keeney (SC).
Posted by: Paul | 21 September 2009 at 05:26 PM
I wouldn't let this captain off the hook. She's obviously unhinged and unfit for duty. How many active duty officers seek legal counsel to determine if a deployment order is legal?
You called it right the first time.
Posted by: Publius | 21 September 2009 at 07:46 PM
There is a very positive side to this. Just thank your lucky stars you have a brand of democracy that allows this sort of thing to be aired.
What does it matter, really. Nobody thinks that the US Army will suffer unduly because of one tiny hiccup in the system. It is just one of those things that add to the colourful tapestry of life. How many of you have watched "M.A.S.H" ?
This was just the thing for an episode.
Posted by: Ray | 22 September 2009 at 05:08 AM
Of course, you're right, Ray. I might expect that anyone joining the Army should understand things like the roles and responsibilities of its commander-in-chief, but there are always the fringe elements. The Army will not dwell on this blip on its reputation. Just a half-hour episode in the ongoing series.
Posted by: J. | 22 September 2009 at 05:59 AM
Make sure it was a lawful order? Hmmm. She just needs to check out the infamous "N" designation which is at the top of the orders. At least that is the way we determine a "lawful order" in the Navy.
Then, she can check all the "from", "to" and "via" in the subject line.
Naturally look for words and phrases like "Report", "PERSUPPDET", "Quarters are Available" and "Use of Government Mess Facilities."
Maybe Capt. Rhodes was looking for the set of orders that said she was on a mob platform to Hawaii, staying in a penthouse suite and receiving a huge daily per diem?
Tammy
Posted by: tammy swofford | 22 September 2009 at 08:20 AM
[PVT] Judy Benjamin: I think they sent me to the wrong place.
Capt. Lewis: Uh-huh.
Judy Benjamin: See, I did join the army, but I joined a *different* army. I joined the one with the condos and the private rooms.
Posted by: J. | 22 September 2009 at 08:45 AM
It's 2009. Everyone wearing the uniform today either enlisted or reenlisted since 2001 and so I find it hard to imagine anyone could claim they're surprised by a deployment order to Iraq/Afghanistan, OR question its lawfulness.
Just goofy. I can't imagine this incident will reflect well on her next OER.
Posted by: Belphagor1527 | 22 September 2009 at 09:18 AM
We are all adults here, and as adults we know there are consequences for are actions, so if you do not agree with his policies, you can a) do nothing, b) support him, c) not support him, d) protest and picket, its your choice, live the dream! As for Orly Taitz, to this point she has not been successful because she does not have any proof, documentation supporting her claims except her wild rants. I would not bet the farm on this one. She has a mail-order-degree get someone with real credentials (Harvard, Yale Law School) not a Russian immigrant with dual US/ Israel citizenship (where are her allegiances?). Have you even thought of who is paying for all her travel, or are you telling me she independently wealthy? Sorry she has no juice because she does not have any proof, documentation supporting her claims except her wild rants. That might work in “Fake News” but not in a Court of the United States.
Posted by: Paul | 22 September 2009 at 03:13 PM
She took the oath. That is the bottom line. Early on co-workers asked me what I thought of entrance into Iraq. Doesn't matter. The oath is an apolitical act. I have guarded this oath under three presidents now. The oath is what binds to duty, not the administration in office.
Tammy
Posted by: tammy swofford | 22 September 2009 at 04:56 PM
To all the Birthers. Where is the beef "Proof that is"? or "Got Proof" But of course you have as much proof as you do common sense, none. Live the dream!
Posted by: Paul | 01 October 2009 at 02:43 PM