[Alternate post title….Wah vs Leo]
Some of you may remember my efforts to help a fellow human being stop making a fool of himself a few days ago. That post, and argument, is here.
As the Supreme Court today made it official that there is no constitutional crisis regarding the definition of a “natural born citizen.” It seems they are comfortable with the case law as it stands, born here (like Obama) or born to two “active” Americans abroad (like McCain). Chief Justice John Roberts will do his duty to swear in Barack Hussein Obama on January 20th, 2009 to the office of Presidnet of the United States.
Knowing this was going to be the case, Leo Donofrio’s mind fell to pieces and he wrote this post on Saturday…
I have archived it in the event that he follows the advice of a large number of posters who suggest he should delete it, as it makes him, and them, look crazy (he already knows he is [1], which is why he’s comfortable leaving it up…).
After he made that post, I did a bit of googling and reading and found the real motivating factor for his quest. He is pretty sure that Obama is the literal Anti-Christ. He tries to claim that the post linked above, where he hopes “That One” gets assassinated by the beast (yup, Leo, the Secret Service *will* be visiting…they don’t take that stuff lightly) is satire.
Sadly for Leo, the Internet has a long and literal memory. Once you get a couple of the search terms right, the Truth opens before one like a flower in springtime.
To wit…and this is a repost of a comment on my original thread in response to another avid follower of these shenanigans….
Actually, Leo posted the bad news yesterday in this rather stunning admission that he is totally off his rocker, as I suggested in the title of this post….
After he posted that, I was able to find out a couple of his other online aliases and a bit more about him, and read some of his other “work”.
Like his stringent defense of the golf skills of Michelle Wie….
http://www.wieblogging.com/2006/09/15/its-time-to-stop-making-excuses-michelle-wie-2/
He goes by the name “Jet Wintzer” sometimes according to this the blurb about his band, Schizo Fun Addict. His World Series of Poker bio, thoughtfully linked in the meltdown, mentions the band name. Reading the bands background leads us to “Jet Wintzer” [note: He says “Jet Schizo” in the meltdown, but the band bio says othersie.]
https://www.bluffmagazine.com/players/leo-donofrio/42071/player-profile.asp
http://onlinerock.com/musicians/suddenbliss/bioquotesgigs.shtml
All of this leads to the final nail in the coffin of crazy….
He also considers himself to be an embodiment of the “Holy Spirit” in his post under the pseudonym “the Paraclete.” [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraclete ] and is tasked with telling of the coming of the Messiah.
To wit…and this is long….and incredibly revealing….note the “failed lawyer” part…
http://iodrakon.proboards15.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=8
————————————
The following are liner notes to the film I’m submitting to Trigger Street in the next cycle. I think you’ll be into it
*********************I am the author of internet cult phenomenon “ONELOVESTORY”, written under the alias BURNWEED. In 1994 I was at a low point in my life, a failed law career led to me being a singer in a failed rock band inspired by the 89/90 Manchester Rock/Rave explosion.
In 1994 my band broke up and I was in a bad way. Angels intervened.
I was led by dream to the music, art and lyrics of my fav band, Manchester icons, The Stone Roses.I began to recognize a hidden concept within their work leading me to believe they were angels of the apocalypse and I was called to break the story, something like “Paul is Dead” by The Beatles or the Publius Enigma (Pink Floyd).
I spent 1995-1999 trying to break the story to the UK music press by using art terrorist tactis. In 1998 I realized I was The Paraclete and that my purpose was to prophecy the return of the Messiah. The angels led me to one ALLAN(Reni)WREN, reclusive drummer of The Stone Roses. Needless to say I never had a chance of getting ONELOVESTORY or my music any press as they all thought I was insane and trying to ride on the shoulders of another band’s dream as a charlatan.
So I changed my name and reincarnated myself as Jet Wintzer, leader of a fledgling New York City art noise lofi psychedelic group, SCHIZO FUN ADDICT.
Our music, not obviously tied to ONELOVESTORY because of our going under cover, finally captured media attention breaking through with rave reviews in major magazines such as UNCUT, Q, NME, and NEW YORK PRESS. Only after we released two critically accalimed CDs did I let the media know I was BURNWEED/PARACLETE, author of ONELOVESTORY. EVERET TRUE, Legendary journalist from England’s now defunct MELODY MAKER, having already sung our praises with a blistering rave of our second album “Diamond” in New York Press, finally broke ONELOVESTORY in print in the October 2001 issue of MOJO Mag, the UKs biggest rock publication.
Bizarre as this may sound, it’s all true and has been documented in Usenet newsgroup alt.music.stone-roses since 1996.
In the next Trigger Street I will present a 10 minute film we’ve made about my life and the metamorphosis I’ve gone through as a result of following the angels and trusting them. The film is called BIPOLAR PHOENIX. There are two ten second trailers for it at our site
http://www.onlinerock.com/musicians/suddenbliss
Love on you all day
THE PARACLETE
——-
Yes…the internet never forgets. Something that will most likely come back to bite *me* some day as well, but there ya go.
He’s a nut. A well-meaning nut, I think, but one who has got this weird idea that Obama is the Anti-Christ stuck very, very deep in his mind. He has been on a holy mission, which is why he’s put so much effort into his windmill tilting and why he totally frickin’ lost it when he lost that battle.
I tried to let him know that I was on to him in the thread on Saturday. He deleted my first couple attempts at congratulating him for leading so many people astray(?), so I quickly crafted a couplet that would both castigate him for deleting my previous responses, while simultaneously appearing to his other readers that it actually supported his position. He posted it, along with high praise….
RoPiNi Says:
December 14, 2008 at 3:14 pmTo be even more clear, denying the right of another to speak does not a stronger argument make.
Eh, “the Paraclete”?
[ed. If I don’t think somebody is being genuine, and is trying to confuse people for the sake of confusion just because they know how to play with words… they don’t get to speak on my blog. As to what’s posted here, I am the boss. If you don’t think I’ve been fair, leave. Word up.]
I got a hearty laugh out of that one, as MY ENTIRE PURPOSE for engaging in this argument was to keep Leo from trying to confuse people by playing with the Word. And yes, I am extremely adept at it.
C’mon Leo….you’ve had ten years….don’t you know who it is yet?
😉
[1] it takes one to know one, my friend.
Robot Pirate Ninja 
SCOTUS has now prevented itself from acknowleding the question whether Obama is or is not a “natural born citizen” (as distinguished from “citizen”) three times and counting: First before the Nov 4 general election and twice before the Dec 15 vote of the College of Electors. Other cases on the same question are at, or are heading to, SCOTUS. Whether SCOTUS ultimately decides if Obama is or is not a “natural born citizen” only after the Electors vote, only after Congress acts on the Electors’ vote, prior to Obama’s inauguration, or only after Obama’s inauguration, SCOTUS will have to decide — or the people and/or the military will. The issue no longer is Obama. The issue is SCOTUS.
Ted. I appreciate your passion, but I think you have read the signs wrong.
What the SCOTUS is actually saying is that the law, as written, is very clear.
If you and your friends want to redefine what it means, you need to contact your Congresscritters, and start the process for amending the Constitution.
Or, you can continue your silly-talk about the death of the Constitution and the coming reign of the Anti-Christ. Both of these things you can do without ever posting this silliness here again.
The SCOTUS will absolutely NOT invalidate ANOTHER election. I’m pretty sure they learned their lesson after 2000. 😉
A Pusillanimous Court will not invalidate another election. A true Court will invalidate something that Constitutionally is invalid. But the process isn’t finished. The cases are still on hold; only the stays are dismissed. Look up the dockets. Next possible action is within a few days. Stay tuned. We’ll see whether the court is a diligent guardian of the Constitution or a negligent appeaser.
As far as the link to Donofrio’s blog goes: that’s called satire. The Secret Service has better things to do.
Roy, it’s me again, Mario. I must respectfully advise that your latest response to my reply to your post was very disappointing in content. I will not condemn you for it because I am sure you are very busy keeping up with the world of blogdom and you could not spend the time needed to give me any meaningful answer.
I do not understand why you want to take the People’s focus off of what Leo Donofrio clearly said about whether Obama is a “natural born Citizen.” You are being disingenuous by trying to bring focus to Donofrio’s reaction to the Supreme Court “ruling” rather than to his arguments before that Court. Why did you not broadcast his arguments as much as you now broadcast his reaction to the Supreme Court decision which you know is only a joke anyway? His reaction does not take anything away from the legal reasoning that he presented to the Court. Also, we do not know why the Court refused to hear his case. You are just trying to stir people up by taking Donofrio “out of context.” (That seems to be a popular defense these days.) You also continue with your immature ad homenum attacks of Donofrio. Why don’t you address the factual and legal elements of his arguments?
You love to tell the world about how the Supreme Court thinks, all the conspiracies in the world, and how you know best. But you have to argue history, political philosophy, facts, law, and more when you want to delve into a matter such as the Constitutional law issue of “natural born Citizen.” You cannot just attack a person’s motive or character for arguing such an issue and self-proclaim yourself the winner. I hope that you can find peace and look at things a little more objectively. Having just started blogging after becoming interested in the “natural born Citizen” issue, I am no authority on the subject. But you might even attract more readers to your blog by being more objective. I am only giving you my sincere opinion.
I also suspect that we have not heard the end of the “natural born Citizen” issue. There are many Americans who still expect Obama to do a simple thing like show them (the voters) through credible and sufficient evidence where he was born. Credible and sufficient evidence is much more than a digital image containing limited information posted by Obama on the internet. I cannot imagine how anybody could reasonably think that this is asking Obama for too much. He is the one who wants to be President. He has the burden of proof to show us that he is Constitutionally eligible for the job. How can Obama expect well-informed and rational Americans to believe in him if he has sealed all his important papers that could shed some light on who he is and spent so much money in legal fees in keeping his past secret? What ever happened to his proclaimed transparency and openness in government? And I do not accept all the maneuvering ( evasive movement or shift of tactics; adroit and clever management of affairs often using trickery and deception) that goes on in various quarters (e.g., the people already voted, you are asking that because you are a racist, the parties should have investigated that before the people voted, he could not have gotten this far if he was not born in America, the FBI and the CIA must know whether where he was born, all the big Whigs would have know if he was not qualified to be President, why did McCain and the Republicans let him get away with such a simple thing, I cannot believe that someone running for President would try to pull off such a scam, Obama is a Harvard Law School graduate and Constitutional law scholar and he cannot be that dumb to lie about where he was born, you do not have standing to request that he show his original birth certificate, Obama has privacy rights, etc.) to avoid the issue. I try to keep my life simple as in, if you want the job then just produce the documents. If he wanted to keep his life private, then he should not have run for President. By Obama producing acceptable evidence of where he was born, he can easily put the birth place issue to rest and prevent himself and the rest of the world from spending so much time and money arguing about it (like me right now thinking and writing about it on this blog).
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
Leo – Jet – Paraclete, whatever the guy calls himself…. soure seems to have a way of wrapping the media around his finger. This all seems like some kind of conceptual art prank that was based in solid law. If the guy is so crazy, why did MSNBC have Constituional law genius Turley on to combat Leo’s case. Leo was alos on Fox News and Fox News radio for two hours,m CNN, ABC.
The guy is a star. He may be crazy, but he is a star and his band got some sick cool reviews in those magazines you mentioned. If you take anything the guy writes leiterally, you must be crazier than he is.
I know friedns who have schizo fun addict records… that band definitely has cult following. My friedns listen to some weird shit, but Iaint ever heard anything like schizo fun addict before.
olive oil
—
Leo – Jet – Paraclete, whatever the guy calls himself…. soure seems to have a way of wrapping the media around his finger.
—
That would be the “media” that is full of lies and liars, right? The one where it’s recommended not to trust a word they say? At least that’s how he describes it.
—
If the guy is so crazy, why did MSNBC have Constituional law genius Turley on to combat Leo’s case.
—
Because that’s the guy in their rolodex they call to talk about stuff like this. It wasn’t hard to see his case was bullshit. I’m just a humble Robot Pirate Ninja and I saw right through it.
—–
If you take anything the guy writes leiterally, you must be crazier than he is.
—–
Indeed, this is what I’ve been trying to tell people, if you believe that Leo Donofrio has any sort of rational argument regarding the definition of “natural born citizen” you must be crazier than he is.
And he’s a whole load of crazy.
—-
I know friedns who have schizo fun addict records… that band definitely has cult following
—–
I know friends that dress up like animals and have sex with each other, but I’m not sure of the relevance here.
One of the comments Leo deleted from his post was where I congratulated him for trolling so many people in order to hype his band. It looks like it worked very well for him.
Sadly, he got a whole bunch of people convinced of a lie in the process. Not very paraclete of him, was that?
We don’t know why the Supreme Court refused to hear Donofrio’s case or Wrotnowski’s case, because they didn’t say why.
Case law does not preempt the original meaning of the Constitution. It can only clarify
where the original meaning is unclear.
Is Donofrio’s argument rational? Certainly. He says what he believes and gives reasons why based on historical indications of what the phrase “natural born citizen” means.
Is Donofrio’s argument correct that to be natural born you must be born to two citizen parents? I believe so, but not being a Constitutional scholar, I’d be happy to leave that decision to the Supreme Court. Let’s hope that at some point they’ll accept one of the future lawsuits to be filed and either pronounce Obama eligible or ineligible. That’s the right way to do things in a Constitutional Republic.
The Supreme Court should not shy away from a decision because some decision loosely related was unpopular with the left.
Leo did not express a hope that Obama would be assassinated.
Carlos,
While we don’t know *exactly* why the SCOTUS didn’t hear the case, my contention is that is because this issue is well decided, unambiguous, and changing it now would put the citizenship rights of MILLIONS of people at risk.
That’s the kind of thing a good court shies away from.
The case law is CRYSTAL CLEAR on this issue, as I quoted in this thread here.
http://gto7.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/explanation-as-to-why-obama-is-an-illegal/
To wit…
—
it’s right here, so I can save you some time looking it up.
http://supreme.justia.com/us/307/325/case.html
it evens covers Obama going to indonesia.
–
First. On her birth in New York, the plaintiff became a citizen of the United States. Civil Rights Act of 1866,
Second. It has long been a recognized principle in this country that, if a child born here is taken during minority to the country of his parents’ origin, where his parents resume their former allegiance, he does not thereby lose his citizenship in the United States provided that, on attaining majority he elects to retain that citizenship and to return to the United States to assume its duties.
—
AND
—
Quote the law. like this part of Perkin v Elg
–
This principle was clearly stated by Attorney General Edwards Pierrepont in his letter of advice to the Secretary of State Hamilton Fish, in Steinkauler’s Case, 15 Op.Atty.Gen. 15. The facts were these: one Steinkauler, a Prussian subject by birth, emigrated to the United States in 1848, was naturalized in 1854, and in the following year had a son who was born in St. Louis. Four years later, Steinkauler returned to Germany, taking this child, and became domiciled at Weisbaden, where they continuously resided. When the son reached the age of twenty years, the German Government called upon him to report for military duty, and his father then invoked the intervention of the American Legation on the ground that his son was a native citizen of the United States. To an inquiry by our Minister, the father declined to give an assurance that the son would return to this country within a reasonable time. On reviewing the pertinent points in the case, including the Naturalization Treaty of 1868 with North Germany, 15 Stat. 615, the Attorney General reached the following conclusion:
“Young Steinkauler is a native-born American citizen. There is no law of the United States under which his father or any other person can deprive him of his birthright. He can return to America at the age of twenty-one, and in due time, if the people elect, he can become President of the United States; but the father, in accordance with the treaty and the laws, has renounced his American citizenship and his American allegiance and has acquired for himself and his son German citizenship and the rights which it carries and he must take the burdens as well as the advantages.
=—-
What Donofrio believes could hardly be considered to be called “rational.”
It is not particularly rational to think the drummer for the Stone Roses is the Messiah.
——
Is Donofrio’s argument correct that to be natural born you must be born to two citizen parents? I believe so, but not being a Constitutional scholar, I’d be happy to leave that decision to the Supreme Court.
——
It’s not correct. The SCOTUS has ALREADY made that decision, and did so over a hundred years ago.
——
Leo did not express a hope that Obama would be assassinated.
——
I would beg to differ. His hiding behind the word “satire” is weak sauce.
Leo’s whining notwithstanding….
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2008/12/19/scotus-in-wong-kim-ark-and-minor-v-happersett-rightfully-punted-on-natural-born-citizen-current-court-purposely-fumbled/
You is still wrong, and no amount of stamping of the feet is going to overturn well established and precise case law.
The case law is not crystal clear on this issue. Perkins vs. Elg is about whether Elg was born a citizen, not whether she was natural born and therefore qualified to be President.
Finding that Barack Obama is not natural born would not eliminate the citizenship of millions of Americans. It would simply identify them as not being in the pool of people qualified to be President.
You can’t demonstrate someone’s belief to be irrational simply by likening it to a false belief. Nor can you demonstrate an argument to be irrational by likening a belief that is its result to a false belief.
Donofrio did not express a hope that Obama would be assassinated.
He was prophesying (in a purposely ridiculous sounding conspiracy theory) that one of Obama twins would be assassinated, leaving the surviving Obama as the Antichrist. He is not even in this conspiracy theory hoping for the assassination of “this one”, unless you suppose Donofrio wants to see the Antichrist (“that one”) as President.
Roy, I have just started a blog so that I have more freedom in expressing myself. See the link below. Maybe you might be interested. It deals with the issue of whether Obama is constitutionally eligible to be President.
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2008/12/two-constitutional-obstacles-obama-has.html.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
Jamesburg, NJ 08831
Hi! Good job guys! robotpirateninja.com It is necessary to search correctly. By the way, who to share the helpful information? Where it is possible to find? viagra shop – ktqi – 90377 46658 – or ,
and very creative : Postmortem distribution of sildenafil in histological material.Q: Should I worry if I am trying to have a child?6 August 2004 Big Rise In Young Men Using Viagra The use of Viagra has grown more than threefold among younger men, says a study published in the International Journal of Impotence Research.Some initial data suggests that men, who have undergone radical prostatectomy (surgical removal of their prostate), using nerve-sparing procedures, are not achieving the same positive results with Viagra.Can Viagra® be combined with other treatments for erectile dysfunction?In addition to conventional therapy (i.e., supplemental oxygen and calcium channel blockers), prostacyclin or endothelin receptor antagonists have been recommended as a first-line therapy for pulmonary arterial hypertension. Good luck!
Wittgenstein said the meaning of a word is the intention of the person who utters it. The facts show that Leo Donofrio has an incredible grasp of the details of reality focusing heavily in on the constitution of the United States. Your attempts to dismiss him based on what is clearly an expression of the artistic portion of his soul is EXTREMELY revealing about your denial of the facts that he has uncovered.
So, deny everything Leo Donofrio has advanced….to your heart’s content. Grab everything he ever wrote, and strip away it’s context and make your weak case.
The truth of the matter, is Leo–using his incredible talent and creativity–noticed a significant fact that EVERYONE else had discarded and he stuck to his guns to advance it. I admire what he accomplished regardless of the political sides that were involved.
I salute Leo Donofrio. I believe I would have learne about his cause earlier had the media not made the concept of what a “birther” is heavily dependent on the unprovable concept of a missing birth certificate. B was here.
RESPONSE: “Poker Loser” is an accurate nickname. Birthers are retarded, and one of the reasons is that they started out by listening to a nutjob who had his ridiculous theories blasted out of the air within days of their origination. That the movement still exists is more a testament to ignorance and racism than any search for “truth”.