Lt. Scott Easterling has entered a novel fight while serving in Iraq: he is suing President Barack Obama. Easterling is calling the President an “impostor” and challenging his right to issue commands while his birth status is in question. It is one of a series of lawsuit challenging the right of the President to serve on the basis of his birth status. It appears that he could be joined by Senator Richard Shelby in the litigation. Shelby has refused to accept Obama citizenship until he sees a birth certificate.
Easterling is supporting challenges filed by California attorney Orly Taitz and her Defend Our Freedom Foundation. He issued a statement: “As an active-duty officer in the United States Army, I have grave concerns about the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to hold the office of president of the United States,” wrote Scott Easterling in a “to-whom-it-may-concern” letter.
The statement will raise an interesting question for an active soldier. It appears that Lt. Easterling is still following orders and he does have a right to file a lawsuit. However, calling the Commander-in-Chief an “impostor” in an out-of-court statement could be the grounds for discipline under the military code. Here is the statement that he released to the public:
To Any and All Interested Parties,
As an active-duty Officer in the United States Army, I have grave concerns about the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to hold the Office of President of The United States. He has absolutely refused to provide to the American public his original birth certificate, as well as other documents which may prove or disprove his eligibility. In fact, he has fought every attempt made by concerned citizens in their effort to force him to do so.
Until Mr. Obama releases a “vault copy” of his original birth certificate for public review, I will consider him neither my Commander in Chief nor my President, but rather, a usurper to the Office – an impostor.
My conviction is such that I am compelled to join Dr. Orly Taitz’s lawsuit, as a plaintiff, against Mr. Obama. As a citizen, it pains me to do this, but as an Offficer, my sworn oath to support and defend our Constitution requires this action.
I joined the Army at age 40, after working in Iraq as a contractor with KBR in ‘05/’06. I chose to work with KBR to support my troops and then left that lucrative position when the Army raised it’s maximum enlistment age to 40. Upon completion of Basic Training, I entered Officer Candidate School and commissioned as a 2LT in August 2007. After completing the subsequent Basic Officer Leadership courses, I was assigned to Ft. Knox and shortly therafter deployed to Balad, Iraq. I was promoted to 1LT on Feb. 2, 2009 and I have approximately five months remaining of our fifteen month deployment.
I implore all Service-members and citizens to contact their Senators and Representatives and demand that they require Mr. Obama prove his eligibility. Our Constitution and our great nation must not be allowed to be disgraced.
Very Respectfull,
Scott R. Easterling
1LT OD/LG
United States Army
[Update: Now a second soldier has reportedly joined Easterling in his challenge to the President’s legitimacy.
The case may follow the same course as the court martial of Lt. Ehren Watada for his public comments against the Iraq war. His case led to some novel appeals and a mistrial. 
No, Shady, I talked about your method and left the details of the issues largely to Vince. I made that clear, but then again, you and clarity? Oil and water. Obfuscation is the propagandist tool of first resort.
Mespo and Bron,
If I may play FFLEO for a moment:
I knew a man, his brain was so small,
He couldn’t think of nothing at all.
Hes not the same as you and me.
He doesn’t dig poetry. hes so unhip that
When you say Dylan,
he thinks you’ re talking about Dylan Thomas,
Whoever he was.
The man ain’t got no culture,
But its alright, ma,
Everybody must get stoned.
Bron,
Are you saying I ever referred to Thomas Sowell? Then I know you definitely haven’t been reading my posts.
I’m a liberal — I appreciate it LEO if you would tell as much to BIL. It was I who brought up the ad hominem concept at the very beginning of my debating. Go check — because all BIL did was NOT talk about issues.
If you are too lazy to check the posts, please cease with your insults and false attributions to me.
FFLEO,
Well said! However may I point out this . . .
“Former Federal LEO 1, March 2, 2009 at 12:03 am
Mespo,
I have a profound respect for the law and I respect many lawyers; however, I most often do not comprehend either.”
That last post shows that you comprehend just fine. 😀 You are too modest.
Shadow:
Ditto what FFLEO wrote.
I am a staunch conservative and I think your arguments have no merit. Although I wish he would just release it so this foolishness can be put to rest once and for all. But if he dosent that is his business and personally I am satisfied that he has met all constitutional requirements for the office.
And using someone with the integrity of Thomas Sowell is criminal in my mind.
William Butler Yeats (1865-1939)
THE SECOND COMING
[first verse]
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Mespo:
on the politeness issue I was joking, you are ever/always the gentleman.
thank you for the info on Omar K. I did not know that it had been translated 5 times. I did get that he was a bit skittesh in his verse and as you mentioned I chalked it up to the religous climate of the day.
I have a microscopic knowledge of Dylan Thomas, I like Kipling and some of Byron’s works.
I am pretty limited on the poetry side. Engineers usually dont have enough time to read the classics but I have tried and do enjoy that type of thing. I took latin in high school and 2 years in college and I would like to take it up again. I still have my first year latin book from freshman year.
I have bought De Officiis (in english) and have started to read it. I hope you wont mind a few questions.
Shadow,
The best method—outside of obvious lying—of losing an argument is to employ the most common emotive mistake of ‘argumentum ad hominem’. Although a prevalently exhibited fallacy of logic, ad hominem attacks have no legitimacy whatsoever during the course of the scientific method or in logical debate. As fallible humans, we all—at one time or another—will sometimes succumb to this ineffective method, although as Vince Treacy stated, such methods will quickly and permanently sink your *own* ship of foolish illogic with all fools aboard through your *own* words and without assistance by those of others. I have erroneously employed ad hominem fallacies and suffered the consequences.
Questioning a person’s standing and professional credentials is acceptable; however, name calling only demonstrates the purveyor’s ignorance or his complete loss of logical influence and clarity. As frustrating as arguments often become, emotional appeals will destroy any credibility of whatever logical underpinnings your stance may have had at the outset of the debate.
When dealing with Mr. Treacy et al., I suggest that you state your questions in a numbered sequence and request his response to each one. Through that method, we can all follow what he and others reply. If you receive no reply, then repeat the question *once* and then concede with a response such as “for whatever reason you chose or preferred not to directly respond to question #3,” etc. That will illustrate to others and me that he does not know the answer or simply wants to evade a response, assuming that he has the time and a need to correspond. Remember though, he has no obligation to reply other than his desire to educate and assist. I appreciate the time attorneys take out of their busy lives to post within this blawg and I have learned a lot from such efforts.
Your post has sparked debate that has been informative. At some point, you must concede. If you continue using ad hominem arguments, others and I will simply ignore your quest for an answer. Remember also that even the most patient of debaters will tire of repetitious rebuttals to the same arguments, especially if opinions they encounter fall within one of the categories of logical fallacy that often permeate debates.
awwwww boo hoo
roflmao
And you’re a sore loser too. How endearing.
Any honest man respects what I have done. I will return to this thread when we find out what Obama is hiding. At that time, you’ll hide behind a different argument, but the result will be the same:
Buddha is Crying
Propagandist get the respect they deserve. And in case you missed the important part, which it is obvious that you have an issue with salience, Shady, what I said about you the propagandist was less vital than what I was saying about your methods, Mr. Thin Skin. Propaganda is as propaganda does, sport. Some days I’m the teacher and some days I’m the hammer, but like all the regulars here, I’m capable of and have demonstrated the ability to be either. We often take turns here and show deference to the work of others. And why should I rehash work that Vince had already done and done so well when I can ridicule your method and irritate you all at the same time?
But you keep flailing about. Your every post only digs you deeper and paints you more the propagandist than ever.
You’re not smart enough to walk away from an intractable position.
I find that entertaining.
While you parade Buddha is laughing, who has ONLY called out names the whole time.
Your words can’t sink me because I’ve done my research and everything I have stated is a fact. Leave it up to the people to decide … which is why this issue won’t go away.
It is unreasonable in any sane man’s mind (political non partisan) to let the so called President get by without showing a real birth certificate that we know he has.
Shadow, name calling by an anonymous poster does not help a case. If I do not respond in kind, it is because I prefer to let your own words sink you.
Come on, fight some more! Show that desperation!
I love to see a propaganda troll squirm when pinned like a butterfly on display.
Independent. (snicker)
Yeah, riiighhht.
So come on, show some more of that sound and fury signifying nothing except your own ignorance and arrogance that YOU are the sole interpreter of what is and is not valid evidence.
You’re a marginally better writer than the usual trolls we get here, but your logic, “facts” and methodology is still sub-par. When you can’t win, you smear. You smear then claim to have been wronged. How very Rovian. pssst . . . even your methods betray your true loyalty.
Enjoy reporting back to your bosses that you were a complete failure at this task, hack.
Come on, whine and cry some more. It makes me giggle.
Since you have only tried to malign me once again, and unsuccessfully I might add, I will set Vince straight again.
What is my purpose? It has always been to show that it is possible that Mr. Obama was not born in the US. In fact, I have shown that it is more than likely. Why is it more likely?
The only one I thank for posts here is LEO. Why? He has an astute mind he showed me something useful, unlike Vince or the other hobgoblins. What did he show me? Law is not science, it does not desire to make a truly accurate picture. Well, for better or worse, I approach things as a scientist and follow the facts, human motivations, etc. Let me loop it together for you all too stupid to get it. At this point, yes, legally, he has done enough — AT THIS POINT — because there is no law to check candidates NOR a commission to do such things. Again, if there is one, I would think everyone would know about it. But guess what? No one can tell me what it is, where it is, who heads it. Many Americans are surprised that this is in fact the case.
Whether he has done enough legally [to this point] has nothing to do with whether it is reasonable to assume that he may not be born in Hawaii. I think it’s reasonable to assume he was not there because
a) people can get birth certificates in Hawaii not being born there
b) He won’t show his original
This is the easiest reasoning in the entire world! If you are an Obama supporter and you don’t care that he’s hiding things, fine. Don’t argue! Why shouldn’t you?
Because you can’t explain for the life of you why he won’t show! I’m glad this is not going away because that means people who are reasonable still care about a man who parades honesty, trust, and transparency — yet won’t show his real birth certificate. Sheesh, he won’t show anything personal of his. I wonder why?
Also, Vince, read the immigration law. I’m astounded you still don’t get it. IT IS IMMIGRATION LAW –> did you read that? IMMIGRATION LAW. Go read it. You can’t transmit automatic (natural born status) to progeny in 1961 as a single parent whose father is not also American — UNLESS you have lived 5 years in the US after age 14. Clear cut. Definitive.
I’m talking about the law, ignoramus, read it again. Why is this so hard? Read the immigration law. I gave you a link.
If you don’t want to believe it, don’t argue … because you aren’t bringin anything to the table but political baggage. It’s laughable! You guys actually believe that I would want Biden or Pelosi as President OVER Obama? You’re nuts! I’m independent, you polarized buffoons. That’s why I see this whole case as sketchball city.
Found it. It is an intentional internet hoax falsely attributed to Thomas Sowell.
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-birth.htm
I see blood on the floor and it’s not Vince’s. Good work Vince, again. The only way for the stupid to prevail is for the intelligent to say nothing.
Vince,
As Mike said, “The only quibble that one could have for your marvelous work on this thread was that you took the guy to be open to logic.” Indeed, pearls before swine, but that in no way degrades the value of the pearls. Shady’s hope that “At least some are lurking and see the validity of my points. It is true that until I have undeniable proof, people won’t be persuaded” is simply that – a hope. A hope in vain for that matter. Thanks to you, any lurkers with the ability to string the simplest logics will see why cert was rightfully denied and the President’s citizenship is beyond reasonable questioning. The answer to ignorance is education. You throughly educated anyone without a pre-set agenda who stumbled across this thread. Shady made no gains and your logic and proof dominated the floor. That is victory. Victory like the Jayhawks just inflicted on Mizzou. (go hawks!)
You really have done yeoman’s service here Vince!
Shadow, you are giving me a bad name.