Here’s the article I think you’re talking about. Note the bolded (by me) stuff:

“The errant Obama biography in the Acton & Dystel booklet does not contradict the authenticity of Obama's birth certificate. Moreover, several contemporaneous accounts of Obama’s background describe Obama as having been born in Hawaii.The biography does, however, fit a pattern in which Obama--or the people representing and supporting him--manipulate his public persona.

David Maraniss's forthcoming biography of Obama has reportedly confirmed, for example, that a girlfriend Obama described in Dreams from My Father was, in fact, an amalgam of several separate individuals.

In addition, Obama and his handlers have a history of redefining his identity when expedient. In March 2008, for example, he famously declared: "I can no more disown [Jeremiah Wright] than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother."

Several weeks later, Obama left Wright's church--and, according to Edward Klein's new biography, The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House, allegedly attempted to persuade Wright not to "do any more public speaking until after the November [2008] election" (51).

Obama has been known frequently to fictionalize aspects of his own life. During his 2008 campaign, for instance, Obama claimed that his dying mother had fought with insurance companies over coverage for her cancer treatments.

That turned out to be untrue, but Obama has repeated the story--which even the Washington Post called "misleading"--in a campaign video for the 2012 election.

The Acton & Dystel biography could also reflect how Obama was seen by his associates, or transitions in his own identity. He is said, for instance, to have cultivated an "international" identity until well into his adulthood, according to Maraniss.”

It seems that Brother Obama made a big deal of his ‘international’ background and bull-shitted his bio to make him look better. So one of the reasons people might think he’s a foreigner is because he inadvertently helped them by trying to make himself look cool. Guess he never thought his lie would come back to bite him on the ass.

To quote Robert Burns: “O what a tangled web we weave / When first we practice to deceive.”

...The more specialized the position the more in depth the information required of the applicant. Security clearance requires exceptional amounts of information that needs to be provided and the higher the security clearance the more info required.

What happens to that employee if it's later proved that his documentation was fraudulent?

Like it or not Obama submitted a resume for a job when he put his hat in the ring for the presidential elections. The burden of proof rests upon him as far as providing the documentation required to prove that he qualifies for that job not on the potential employer.

Angry Red Man  Wrote:

...The more specialized the position the more in depth the information required of the applicant. Security clearance requires exceptional amounts of information that needs to be provided and the higher the security clearance the more info required.

What happens to that employee if it's later proved that his documentation was fraudulent?

Like it or not Obama submitted a resume for a job when he put his hat in the ring for the presidential elections. The burden of proof rests upon him as far as providing the documentation required to prove that he qualifies for that job not on the potential employer.

Any Presidential candidate does NOT go through a background check to be on the ballot. Proof of that? Check out the prison inmate that is running against Obama and got votes in (was it) WV(?)

It is up to the media and to the other candidates (as well as the particular party) to verify that their candidate and vet the candidate. That inmate could win the popular vote for Dem nomination if people voted for him. The gov't will NOT stop "sentenced" criminals running for office as we are entitled to choose whom we want for any particular political office. (LOL...we willingly and knowingly elect "unsentenced" criminals repeatedly back into office. >>> Congress)

Flountastic  Wrote:

At least we have some evidence as to why we question Obama's past.

While you have none to back up your claims, and no logical defense to what has been discovered.

Well, whether it concerns Obama, Elenin, Reptoids, Rapture, Doom
or whatever ... Fringer "evidence" is always pathetically flimsy ... and
belies their inability to accept reality as it is ... so the looney Fringe
makes up cool stories bro ... which further their endless delusions ...
re: various congregations, rationalizations, and doomsterbations.


P.S.

And this has been explained to Fringers repeatedly, but they can
never understand it ... because their entire fantasy belief system
crumbles under its weight:

The burden of proof rests with s/he that asserts the positive,
so those of us who know that all the endless rationalized
Fringe beliefs are crap ... don't have to prove a thing ... while
y'all endlessly FAIL .. over and over for the past 2000+ years

Prove us "loonies" wrong. You can't! So you use the excuse that it's up to us? We've done more than our share of laying out the evidence, while you can't refute one item!

his birth was put in the paper, idiot.

CooterBrown  Wrote:

Flountastic  Wrote:

At least we have some evidence as to why we question Obama's past.

While you have none to back up your claims, and no logical defense to what has been discovered.

Well, whether it concerns Obama, Elenin, Reptoids, Rapture, Doom
or whatever ... Fringer "evidence" is always pathetically flimsy ... and
belies their inability to accept reality as it is ... so the looney Fringe
makes up cool stories bro ... which further their endless delusions ...
re: various congregations, rationalizations, and doomsterbations.


P.S.

And this has been explained to Fringers repeatedly, but they can
never understand it ... because their entire fantasy belief system
crumbles under its weight:

The burden of proof rests with s/he that asserts the positive,
so those of us who know that all the endless rationalized
Fringe beliefs are crap ... don't have to prove a thing ... while
y'all endlessly FAIL .. over and over for the past 2000+ years


link to image: http://imgupld.lunaticoutpost.com/graphi...B67760.jpg

Our evidence is Flimsy? At least we have "something" besides a forged computer document, that took four years to produce.

The fact that you all have nothing but the race card to play, speaks loudly to the fact you have nothing to counter with.

And the fact that this thread was unpinned, when so few here actually believe the bullshit excuse given for this typo, speaks even louder.

A guy who cant defend his views without playing the race card, request an unpin and it happens?

You cooter, seem to have an issue with many conspiracies? So do the rest of this Forum agree?

We've been told we shouldnt talk about Religion. Shouldn't talk about politics, and now I guess that we shouldnt talk about a possible infiltration of the White House?

Really??? Why dont you guys just go ahead and change the header up there to just say "Fun", and let's get it over with! Because I am getting so tired of being a part of a Conspiracy forum where anyone without a mainstream view, is discouraged from speaking out.

I guess like this constant defense of Obama, without any openess to debate, it totally confuses me.

~ AH. Therein lies the motivation behind such 'people', Sister... they don't do what they do to serve _THE_TRUTH_, and CERTAINLY they do not do what they do to serve their Fellow Man... made clear by the public record of every single post and thread they create for all to see, they exist to create DIVISION among people ('divide and conquer' the oldest trick in the book, neck.n.neck with demonization/ridicule/humiliation of one's enemies, which of course stems from fear, xenophobia, the fear of the unknown, and the fear of the other, i.e., racism), and they do what they do to OBSCURE the _THE_TRUTH_, sometimes more obviously and more desperately the closer others come to finding out that TRUTH.

~ With some of these individuals, as evidenced by their public record of postings here on LOP, it becomes very clear very quickly by their constant and continual systematic harassment of other forum members (including defamation of character and defamation of reputation, as well as encouraging gang-stalking by their routine actions), they don't care about EDUCATION of those believing (what they believe to be) 'mis-information' (because that's not what they believe, or, as well, that's not what the sources that they believe would have them believe). Some have even made a quasi-religion out of doing such things to their fellow forum members.

~ Their derogatory and disrespectful interactions with others by the use of labeling anyone here who has opinions/beliefs/belief systems/world views and/or FACTS that are contrary to their OWN opinions/beliefs/belief systems/world views and/or facts as 'mentally ill', or members of a segment of society suffering from 'mental illnesses' (and thus, attempting thereby to substantiate their claims to being more 'sane' than others), is in itself, a 'mental illness'. To create a system of such unqualified diagnoses of other individuals, and to claim their actions are legitimate due to that system of their own creation existing, is a self-referential form of mania that only gets worse over time if untreated, and thus, HELPS NO-ONE in the end, least of all the forum 'detractor/distractor' themselves. Throughout history, people of ill repute often side with forces opposed to Mankind's evolution and enlightenment, some merely for profit, some for the nefarious purposes of propping up the 'official stories' of tyrannical governments, but some simply because they are anti-social individuals with little to no other Human contact and various emotional distresses that they have no other processes to work out their psychosis in more positive or constructive ways. Some of these persons _ARE_ the enemies of Humanity and deserving of the full penalty of the law, when the time comes. Others, are merely to be pitied as examples of poor upbringing or mal-adjusted ethical values that allow them to function acceptable in civil society.

~ What exactly these 'people' are doing on a forum that has as one of it's precepts the collective un-covering of TRUTH concerning various topics of discussion/debate, can only be conjectured-at.

~ If they DID care about arriving at _THE_TRUTH_ on ANY given matter (INCLUDING this issue), they wouldn't run from the FACTS; if they TRULY DID care anything about the education of their fellow TRUTH SEEKERS as to the veracity or incorrectness of any supposed/alleged 'conspiracy', they would comprehend and/or correct the understandable anger/frustration that their condescension (from a position without even a pretense to the authority/expertise they believe themselves to possess that allows them to unquestioningly assume such arrogant ignorance towards others, and in the most passive-aggressive of manners) creates in the people around them that they attack, and if they were decent Human Beings, they wouldn't employ such childish tactics (as 'Anger Is The Enemy Of Instruction', after all)...

~ But, sadly, after awhile it becomes clear that they -do- serve an agenda not suited to THE _TRUTH_ of any given issue, nor do they have society's better interests in mind and at Heart when they do such things, and in fact, they _ARE_ indeed having 'fun', because they enjoy the temporary high that assaulting other people and getting away with it gives their ego, which often times suffers from an inferiority complex if they find themselves among people who are -more- than their equals, and they find themselves unable to discuss and debate issues more maturely and level-headed than the others around them, whether this is due to their level of education or their ethics.

~ Such people often verbally assault others in their veiled tones, and exemplify the lowest common denominator of acceptable behavior among other people, but after awhile, one learns to 'tolerate' their nearly-insignificant presence, and see them clearly for what and who they are... One of the hazards of coming to such a website as this is that one begins to become aware of and to realize that there ARE, in fact, such people who do come here to do nothing other than to engage in negative speech and actions towards other Human Beings, simply wandering from topic to topic, thread to thread, doing so. It is left up to one (and ALL) to decide what to do with such disruptive forum malcontents and miscreants.

~ HERE: This is a thread dedicated to discerning them by their behavior when you are afflicted/accosted by it, and it also teaches one how to avoiding stooping to their level, which only serves the forces of ignorance and eventual apathy (i.e., 'darkness', also known as the lack of awareness/understanding): http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-PREPPING...STORM-2012

~ Feel free to bookmark it, and refer to it often, as it is updated frequently, if not by the author (myself) then by others concerned with this ongoing issue.

~ HANG IN THERE, Flouncey, and do not get discouraged; THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE. ESPECIALLY about this topic...!! And, as well...

~ TRUTH WINS. <3



~ P.S. Feel free to copy/paste what I've said with this post to help you and to remind yourself to have patience and perseverance when dealing with such individuals. Bear in mind that this post may disappear at any time, whether today or in the distant future, as such individuals (as one of their many tactics) frequently use the 'report abuse' button to get a post that details their methodology removed from the public record, so as to not alert others to their presence and/or their processes/protocols. Sadly, here on LOP, this occurs all-too often, leaving others who are not privy to this level of awareness or knowledge as hapless victims of their unwarranted and unlawful behavior.

~ KNOWLEDGE IS POWER. <3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knVOAr4U8...re=related

Dr. Taitz appears to have had her day(s) in court ... many in fact ...
which is a perfect example of a venue where one must meet the burden
of proof by amply defending their ridiculous claims ... and just like the
2000+ year-old Fringe ... she has FAILED miserably and repeatedly ...
per all of the following ...

Legal actions
Keyes v. Bowen

In November 2008, Taitz filed a lawsuit on behalf of independent presidential candidate Alan Keyes, suing California's secretary of state for allegedly failing to ascertain Obama's eligibility for president before placing him on the ballot.[1] The case was dismissed on May 4, 2009.[23] A California Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal on October 25, 2010;[24] the Supreme Court of California declined, without comment, to review the case on February 2, 2011;[25] and the U.S. Supreme Court declined, without comment, to review the case on October 3, 2011.[26] Taitz was not counsel of record for the appeals.
Lightfoot v. Bowen

Taitz filed an emergency petition in the California Supreme Court in 2008 on behalf of Libertarian vice presidential candidate Gail Lightfoot to stop the certification of California's 2008 election results because of the challenge to Obama's eligibility.[27] The California Supreme Court denied the petition, and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case.[1]
Barnett v. Obama

Taitz filed a lawsuit on behalf of Pamela Barnett, Alan Keyes, other candidates in the 2008 federal elections, several military personnel, and some legislators from various states alleging that Obama is ineligible to be president. On October 29, 2009, U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter dismissed the lawsuit.[28][29] The dismissal criticized Taitz's legal abilities, stated her behavior was "unethical", and suggested that Taitz "may have suborned perjury".[29][30][31] On December 22, 2011, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal.[32][33]
Cook v. Good

Taitz represented Stefan F. Cook, a major in the United States Army Reserve, who challenged orders implementing his voluntary deployment to Afghanistan because of his claim that Obama is not a legitimate president. The case was dismissed when the Army Reserve revoked his order to deploy.[34] Taitz filed an appeal in the Eleventh Circuit, which was dismissed on November 24, 2009, due to a failure to prosecute the appeal.[35]
Rhodes v. MacDonald

In September 2009, Taitz was retained by Captain Connie Rhodes, a U.S. Army physician. Rhodes sought a restraining order to prevent her forthcoming deployment to Iraq. In the request for a restraining order, Taitz argued the deployment order was illegal since Obama was illegally serving as President. On September 16, federal judge Clay D. Land rejected the motion and denounced it as frivolous. In his opinion, the judge noted that Rhodes had not previously raised any objections to orders she had received from Obama since he had been sworn in. He noted that while she seemed to have "conscientious objections" to taking orders from Obama, she did not seem to object to serving under him "as long as she is permitted to remain on American soil". Land then upbraided Taitz for using military officers as pawns to further her claims that Obama was not qualified to be President. He also expressed astonishment at Taitz's apparent misunderstanding of American judicial fundamentals, saying that she was trying to make Obama "'prove his innocence' to 'charges' that are based upon conjecture and speculation".[36]

Within hours of Land's decision, Taitz told the news site Talking Points Memo that she felt Land's refusal to hear her case was an act of treason.[37] Two days later, she filed a motion to stay Rhodes' deployment pending rehearing of the dismissal order. She repeated her treason allegations against Land and made several other intemperate statements, including claims that Land was aiding and abetting purported aspirations of "dictatorship" by Obama.[38] Land rejected the motion as frivolous and ordered her to show cause why she should not be fined $10,000 for abuse of judicial process.[39]
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Order Denying Orly Taitz's Recusal

A few hours later, a letter bearing Rhodes's signature arrived, stating that Taitz filed the motion without her knowledge or consent, asking Land to remove Taitz as her attorney of record in the case, and stating that it was her "plan to file a complaint with the California State Bar due to [Taitz's] reprehensible and unprofessional actions".[40] On September 26, 2009, Taitz filed a motion with the court seeking to withdraw as counsel for Rhodes, so she could divulge in court "privileged attorney-client communications" since the dismissed Rhodes case "is now a quasi-criminal prosecution of the undersigned attorney, for the purpose of punishment".[41]
Attorney misconduct

On October 13, 2009, Judge Clay Land ordered "Counsel Orly Taitz ... to pay $20,000 to the United States, through the Middle District of Georgia Clerk's Office, within thirty days of the date of this Order as a sanction for her misconduct in violation of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure." Land's decision stated:

The Court finds that counsel's conduct was willful and not merely negligent. It demonstrates bad faith on her part. As an attorney, she is deemed to have known better. She owed a duty to follow the rules and to respect the Court. Counsel's pattern of conduct conclusively establishes that she did not mistakenly violate a provision of law. She knowingly violated Rule 11. Her response to the Court's show cause order is breathtaking in its arrogance and borders on delusional. She expresses no contrition or regret regarding her misconduct. To the contrary, she continues her baseless attacks on the Court.[42]

Upon learning of Land's ruling, Taitz said she would appeal the sanction, declaring that Judge Land was "scared to go against the regime" of the "oppressive" Obama administration, and that the sanction was an attempt to "intimidate" her.[43] On March 15, 2010, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the sanctions against Taitz, ordering her to pay the $20,000 fine.[44]

In July 2010, Taitz applied to the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the enforcement of sanctions, arguing that "allowing sanctions by judge Land to stand, will signify beginning of tyranny in the United States of America and end to the Constitutional Republic which is the foundation of this nation".[45] On July 8, the application was submitted to Associate Justice Clarence Thomas; on July 15, he denied it.[46][47] Doubting that Justice Thomas signed the denial order, Taitz claimed to have requested of Chief Justice John Roberts that Thomas's signature be presented to her for verification.[48]

In the meantime, on August 9, the federal government filed an abstract of judgment, a document placing a lien in the amount of $20,000 plus interest on all her real property,[49] prompting Taitz to say, "I will pay the money, and I will continue fighting," should it happen that her application for stay is ultimately denied and that the Supreme Court consents to her request to authenticate Justice Thomas's signature.[50] On August 16, after being resubmitted to Associate Justice Samuel Alito, who in turn referred it to the full court, the application for stay was again denied.[47][51] On January 10, 2011, the Court declined, without comment, to hear the case.[52]
Taitz v. Obama

On January 27, 2010, Taitz, in propria persona, filed a petition for writ of quo warranto. On April 14, 2010, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth dismissed the petition; and, alluding to the novel Don Quixote, he wrote, "The Court is not willing to go tilting at windmills with her."[53]
Taitz v. Astrue

In February 2011, Taitz filed, in propria persona, a Freedom of Information Act suit against the commissioner of the Social Security Administration, alleging the agency improperly refused to disclose to her information about Obama's social security number. After Taitz repeatedly failed to follow the court rule regarding the redaction of social security numbers in court filings, Chief Judge Lamberth wrote that Taitz "is either toying with the Court or displaying her own stupidity… There is no logical explanation she can provide as to why she is now wasting the Court’s time, as well as the staff’s time, with these improper redactions."[54][55] On August 30, 2011, the court granted summary judgment in favor of the government, writing "As her numerous filings with the Court demonstrate, plaintiff will stop at nothing to get to the bottom of this alleged conspiracy. Unfortunately for plaintiff, today is not her lucky day."[56][57]
Taitz v. Fuddy

In August 2011, Taitz filed, in propria persona, a suit against the director of the Hawaii Department of Health, seeking to review Obama's "long form" birth certificate.[58] On October 12, 2011, the Hawaii Circuit Court dismissed Taitz's suit.[59]
Taitz v. Ruemmler

Taitz sought to compel White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler under FOIA to grant access to Obama's "long form" birth certificate.[60][61] On October 17, 2011, Chief Judge Lamberth noted Taitz's "Sisyphean quest" and dismissed the suit.[62]
2012 New Hampshire primary challenge

In November 2011, Taitz, backed by four New Hampshire state legislators, filed a complaint with the state's Ballot Law Commission challenging Obama's eligibility to compete in the primary election.[63] As Obama had paid the filing fee and his declaration of candidacy conformed to state law, the Commission unanimously voted to keep Obama on the ballot.[64] The Commission then denied a request for reconsideration.[65]

In response, Taitz wrote to William L. O'Brien, the Speaker of the House of the New Hampshire House of Representatives, and demanded the removal of Bill Gardner, New Hampshire's Secretary of State, for "egregious elections fraud, aiding and abetting fraud, forgery and possibly treason." D.J. Bettencourt, House Majority Leader of the New Hampshire House of Representatives, wrote to Taitz and called her actions "unbecoming of any legitimate political dialogue, nevermind one as ridiculous as the continued obsession over President Obama's birth place." Bettencourt added, "I have spoken to the Representatives who were present and expressed to them my strong desire that they immediately disassociate themselves from you and this folly."[66]
2012 Georgia primary challenge

Five Georgians, including one represented by Taitz, filed challenges with the Georgia Secretary of State, Brian Kemp, regarding Obama's inclusion on the March primary ballot.[67] Kemp referred the challenges to Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi, an administrative law judge, who denied Obama's motion to dismiss them and scheduled a hearing for January 26.[68]

On January 23, Malihi denied Obama's motion to quash a subpoena issued by Taitz to compel Obama to appear, saying that Obama did not show why he should not be at the hearing or how his testimony would not be helpful.[69] On January 25, Obama's attorney requested that Kemp halt the proceedings, and indicated that Obama would no longer participate in the litigation pending Kemp's decision.[70] Kemp denied their request and warned that their non-participation would be "at your own peril".[71]

Neither Obama nor his attorney appeared at the January 26 hearing. This normally would result in a default order, but the challengers requested Malihi to allow them to go ahead with the hearing and rule on "the merits of their arguments and evidence".[72][73] Taitz called eight witnesses (including herself), and presented seven exhibits in support of her claims that Obama was not a natural-born citizen, has used multiple names, has multiple Social Security numbers, and used a fake birth certificate. Taitz asked Malihi to find Obama in contempt for failing to appear.[74][75][76]

On February 3, Malihi recommended that Obama remain on the ballot. Concerning Taitz's case Malihi wrote: "The Court finds the testimony of the witnesses, as well as the exhibits tendered, to be of little, if any, probative value, and thus wholly insufficient to support plaintiffs’ allegations".[73][77] The Drudge Retort described the hearing as, "Empty Table 1, Orly Taitz 0".[78]

On February 6, Kemp accepted Malihi's recommendation.[79]

On February 13, Taitz filed for review,[80][81] but on February 15 her application to appear pro hac vice was denied "at this time".[82]
2012 Alabama primary challenge

A lawsuit filed by an Alabama citizen, Albert Hendershot, in December 2011 alleged Obama's birth certificate was forged and that he was ineligible to be on the Alabama primary ballot.[83] Taitz agreed to represent Hendershot and sought to enter the case, but it was dismissed before she could make an appearance.[84][85]
2012 Indiana primary challenge

On February 24, Taitz appeared as a witness on the behalf of two residents of Indiana who had filed with the Indiana Election Commission a challenge to Obama's eligibility. The challengers demanded a default judgment against Obama, as neither he nor a representative appeared at the hearing; this motion was unanimously denied by the commission.

Taitz argued that the President's surname was not Obama, that he was not a natural-born citizen, and that he was using a stolen Social Security number. "When Taitz accused the commission of a cover-up, Dan Dumezich, the Merrillville Republican who is chairman of the commission, told her that if she was disrespectful one more time, 'your butt is going to be gone.'"[86] The challenge was denied.
Political campaigns
California Secretary of State, 2010 Republican primary

In March 2010, Taitz successfully qualified to run for the office of California Secretary of State. At the same time, she unsuccessfully challenged the eligibility of her Republican Party primary opponent, former NFL player Damon Dunn, claiming that he is pretending to be a Republican.[87] Dunn had registered as a Democrat in the state of Florida in 1999, but that registration had lapsed before he filed for the Republican primary.[88][89]

On May 12, 2010, Pamela Barnett (named plaintiff from Taitz's lawsuit Barnett v. Obama) filed a lawsuit in the Sacramento County Superior Court alleging that Dunn is not eligible to run for Secretary of State.[90]

Taitz was defeated by Dunn in the June 8 primary by a margin of about three to one,[91] losing by over 900,000 votes.[92]

On June 17, 2010, Taitz filed a lawsuit in the Orange County Superior Court contesting the election results, again alleging Dunn's ineligibility.[93] On March 17, 2011, the judge ruled against Taitz.[94] On May 1, 2012, a California Court of Appeal affirmed the superior court's ruling.[95][96]
U.S. Senator from California, 2012 nonpartisan blanket primary
Main article: United States Senate election in California, 2012

Taitz is challenging U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein in 2012, stating, "I think I do have a chance specifically because I do speak Spanish and I speak Hebrew."[97] In November 2011, Taitz trailed Feinstein by a nearly 2-1 margin.[98] A Feinstein advisor stated, "If this race plays out as a bunch of unknowns who have no serious funding, Orly Taitz will probably win the primary [along with Feinstein]."[99] (In 2012, California has a blanket primary campaign system for offices other than U.S. President, so that the top two finishers in the primary regardless of party affiliation go on to the ballot in the fall general election.) [100]

A March 2012 poll by another Republican candidate had Taitz leading the Republican field; 38% of those polled had not decided whom to vote for. On March 11, the California Republican Party endorsed another candidate, Elizabeth Emken, over Taitz.[101] Citing fears the election might be "rigged", Taitz announced her intention to work with Sharron Angle to ensure "a fair and honest election".[102]
Activities in Israel

Taitz has also actively promoted her theories in Israel, where she claims that "the vast majority" of the population supports her views.[14] She has appeared on the Channel 10 nightly news show London and Kirschenbaum, was the subject of a feature on Channel 1 TV, and filmed a video for the website Arutz 7. Israel's Russian language media, such as Channel 9 and Vesti, the country's largest Russian-language newspaper, have also covered Taitz.[14]
In the media

Taitz received media attention in connection with Obama eligibility questions in late 2008.[103] She was interviewed by co-hosts David Shuster and Tamron Hall on MSNBC on August 3, 2009.[1] Various media outlets described her appearance on the network as an "implosion",[1][104] while Taitz asserted that Shuster, who is Jewish, was a "brownshirt", a charge she would repeat in a phone interview the following week.[19]

Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly called Taitz a "nut". In response, she and pastor James David Manning organized a protest outside Fox News headquarters in New York City in November, 2009, which drew an estimated 15 to 20 attendees.[105] In 2010, artist Dan Lacey produced a widely discussed painting of a nude Orly Taitz after giving birth to an object resembling a pancake; Taitz herself expressed outrage at the painting, and urged Lacey to reveal the identity of his sponsor. Lacey subsequently jokingly "revealed" that he had been funded by George Soros.[106][107]

In April 2011, Lawrence O'Donnell invited Taitz on MSNBC so that she could address Obama's long form birth certificate, which had been released the day before. When Taitz only wanted to talk about Obama's alleged Selective Service papers and refused to comment on his birth certificate, O'Donnell kicked her off the show, stating: "Look, she's crazy. I invited a crazy person on this show to see if the crazy person...could say something responsive, something human, to the document that was released today...and she wants to play with all of her other kid's toys."[108]

I will never watch television or vain stream media ever again. I'm thinking of gutting my television and turning it into an aquarium.