Wayne Allyn Root: Why I decided NOT to Testify at the “Obama Trial”

By Wayne Allyn Root, 2008 Libertarian Vice Presidential Nominee

I am a patriot. I love my country with all my heart. I am not a fan of President Obama. I have legitimate concerns about his agenda, as all Americans should. I also have legitimate questions about his past, because studying where he came from might shed light on where he’ll be taking America in the future. We all have a right…even an obligation…to question, debate and investigate the man who has his finger on the nuclear button, who controls the U.S. economy, and in many cases the fate of the free world in his hands. When Pastor Manning called to make a personal plea for me to testify at a mock “Obama Trial” to find the truth about President Obama, after much thought (3 months worth) I agreed to testify if it would help to shed some light on President Obama’s past (and therefore the decisions he might make in the future). I felt that simply telling the truth about what I know could be helpful to this country.

But I explained to Pastor Manning the circumstances of any testimony I would provide: I am NOT a “birther.” I am not a fan of conspiracy theories. I actually think that wild conspiracy theories detract and discredit any serious attempt to ask legitimate questions about the background of our President. I explained that I do NOT believe there is any cover-up by Columbia University administration. I explained that I am a supporter of my alma mater and proud to be a graduate of one of the great Ivy League education institutions in America. All I can testify to is that I was a member of the Class of ’83- just like Obama. And that I was Pre Law and a political science major- just like Obama. It was a small class- about 700 students. Political science majors would be an even smaller group. Therefore it struck me…and many others…as strange that I never met Obama at college, never saw him, never even heard of him in my time at Columbia. And that more importantly, I don’t know any classmate to this day who ever met or heard of a classmate named Barack Obama or Barry Obama or Barry Sotero. Even stranger still, the Wall Street Journal reported in its editorial pages back in 2008 that Fox News called 400 of my classmates and they could not find one student who had ever met Obama at Columbia. Adding to the mystery is the fact that President Obama has sealed all of his college records at Occidental and Columbia. All of this should be troubling to every American, no matter what your political beliefs.

I told Pastor Manning however that none of this is factual proof that Obama did not attend Columbia. Nor do I believe my university would ever participate in a cover-up. I have simply been asked by many in the media for several years now if I knew my famous classmate and I’ve always answered honestly. I’ve always stated publicly that my assumption is that he went to Columbia, but probably rarely (or never) attended classes. Perhaps he was too busy pursuing a radical political agenda. Perhaps he was too busy hanging out with his radical friends plotting the destruction of capitalism or the overthrow of America. I assume he spent most of his time at Columbia off campus and took what is often called at Ivy League colleges a “Gentleman’s C” for simply showing up for final exams. I thought perhaps that my testimony would help to fill in the blanks and create a clearer picture of the man sitting in the White House.

Unfortunately I had a chance today for the first time to read about the highlights of the first day of the “Obama trial.” I found myself uncomfortable being involved or associated in any way with the wild charges, claims and conspiracy theories that have been publicly aired by this mock trial. I believe these wild charges and claims actually damage any future legitimate opportunity to question President Obama’s background. This forum has an agenda and I have come to the conclusion it is not my agenda. I called Pastor Manning personally this morning to explain why I’ve decided not to participate. He understood completely. We wished each other well.

I believe any association with this trial would discredit the opportunity to have a fair, open and balanced discussion or debate in the future. I want to be part of any such future opportunity. I have much to say about President Obama, and many questions about his past and present actions, but I’m more comfortable airing them in a mainstream media forum. More importantly, I’d rather spend my time discussing, debating and questioning Mr. Obama’s current policies that I believe are toxic to America, the U.S. economy and capitalism, than spending my time debating his past. I’d rather spend my valuable time in the media on educating voters about the dramatic expansion of government under Obama; the nonstop violations of the Constitution; the deadly expansion of deficit and national debt; the political payoffs disguised as stimulus and bailouts; the lack of transparency of this administration; Obama’s pro union agenda at all costs- no matter what damage is done to the economy. All of these are far more important to America’s future than Obama’s past. We cannot change the past, but we can change the future direction of this country away from Obama’s dangerous agenda- if we are not distracted by wild claims and conspiracy theories.

I intend to be Obama’s biggest critic on a national stage for years to come. Being associated with the extreme agenda and wild charges of a mock “Obama trial” can only detract from my goals. I do want however to make it clear that all of us have a right, duty and obligation to question our President, as well as all politicians on their past. The moment a politician decides to run for office they have given up a right to “seal records.” They are now a public figure, and the voting public has every right to question and investigate anything and everything that shines light on who will be representing the American people.

Wayne Allyn Root


For background, see our previous post on the subject of the Obama ‘trial’.

102 thoughts on “Wayne Allyn Root: Why I decided NOT to Testify at the “Obama Trial”

  1. Brian Holtz

    Root made a wise decision.

    It doesn’t help our cause much to attack the character or secret past or secret intentions of the nanny staters — they will just be replaced with nanny staters who seem less menacing.

    To roll back the nanny state, we need to make the case that it is wrong and will continue to fail, even if you grant the best of intentions to those who advocate and implement it.

  2. Nicholas Sarwark

    It is my preference to have a Chair who vets his appearances before he gets called out as “bonkers” by Radley Balko and most of the rest of the libertarian blogosphere.

  3. paulie Post author

    Nick,

    Mine too. But I also like the ability to back down and change course when warranted.

    There are too many people who will stick to a bad position or course of action just because they have started down that course, and redouble their attempts to defend an untenable position/course as they are attacked for it. I speak from experience.

    One thing I like about Wayne is that he is willing to respond to criticism and make adjustments.
    That gives me hope that he would not be nearly so bad as many on my side of the party fear.

  4. Erik G.

    This is a wise move, but there’s still some bonkers shit in there. WAR’s unhealthy fixation on Obama could use a serious ratcheting down (the system is far, far larger than one man). Moreover, I giggle everytime someone refers to Obama as “pursuing a radical political agenda,” as he’s more or less pursuing the same policies as his predecessors. That’s not to say there isn’t room to criticize, as there most certainly is, but “radical” is near the bottom of the list for words for a regimist.

  5. Robert Capozzi

    ns4, the easiest thing to do is to say No to every speaking opportunity. That’s the ultimate vet, but I’d suggest that politics is not for the risk averse. We need to take chances, to speak and communicate with those with whom we may only agree with some of the time. Yet, we also need to be aware of the optics of a situation, and make adjustments…to walk it back, as they say.

    Alternatively, we can argue among ourselves as to whether fetuses should be characterized as “parasites.”

  6. Nicholas Sarwark

    Robert,
    I would say that a “subpoena” to a “citizen grand jury trial of Obama for treason” should call out for some serious vetting to even the most minimally politically savvy person. It’s not a close call, like speaking to a tea party rally or cooperating with the Greens on ballot access.

    It’s more like appearing on the Alex Jones show.

  7. LP Pragmatist

    I must say I am impressed with this “course adjustment” by Mr. Root. I agree with Nic # 4, but we are all human beings, are we not?
    So overall “kudos” to Mr. Root for doing the right thing. The last thing I want is for more gasoline to be put on the fire, which displays the sign that the “LP is full of kooks”. I am so tired of hearing that crap. There are a lot of good people in the LP and third parties in general– not enough of them is the issue.

  8. Steven R Linnabary

    Well, it’s a far cry from Root’s brazen, boasting “I will be testifying tomorrow (Sunday) at Obama Trial in New York. I accepted my subpoena and agreed to testify about what I know. I speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. The truth will set America free!

    While it can be fun to discuss birther, truther or even man made global warming conspiracy theories, we should be careful to do these in private conversations.

    I just wish that when Wayne backed off his commitment to “speak the truth” he had said something to the effect “I intend to be Obama’s and his republican co-conspirator’s biggest critic on a national stage for years to come.

    At least we know that Root has his “finger in the air”!

    PEACE

  9. Nicholas Sarwark

    Therefore it struck me…and many others…as strange that I never met Obama at college, never saw him, never even heard of him in my time at Columbia. And that more importantly, I don’t know any classmate to this day who ever met or heard of a classmate named Barack Obama or Barry Obama or Barry Sotero. Even stranger still, the Wall Street Journal reported in its editorial pages back in 2008 that Fox News called 400 of my classmates and they could not find one student who had ever met Obama at Columbia.

    Jim Davidson calls bullshit on the above claim. See also this Snopes debunking of the innuendo that Obama did not attend Columbia (in which Mr. Root features prominently).

  10. Brian Holtz

    What one says can more than compensate for any poor choice in who one says it to. I would love to hear a Libertarian tell the Alex Jones audience that they are providing political cover to the regime they claim to oppose by marginalizing its critics, and to ask them if the regime’s reaction to 9/11 would have been magically justified if it were a sincere terrorist attack.

    It takes no courage to stand up against imaginary nefarious conspiracies like the Bilderberg Group and the New World Order. What takes real courage is to stand up against real-world populism like JFK and his Camelot veneer for the nanny state.

    What cracks me up is how Alex Jones and the current generation of right-wing conspiracy nuts romanticize JFK. The right-wing nuts of JFK’s time thought that JFK was clearly a tool of the Catholic Church and international communism. JFK in fact was a cold warrior who invaded Cuba after campaigning against an imaginary “missile gap”. Oswald tried to strike a blow for the Left by assassinating the leader of the capitalist world, and would be tickled pink at how he’s been mythologized as an agent of the system he tried to attack.

  11. Nicholas N Burdohan

    Kudos to Wayne on the about face, as many here have stated.

    I saw some of these Manning videos a while ago on youtube, and was really shocked to see Mr. Root associating with them. Manning can be, admittedly, entertaining, but I would not want our party associated with that sort of thing. And it is not just the birther stuff either.

    Perhaps it might do you well to temper your criticisms by being a little more attentive to the elephant in the room, so to speak. It may help some of us, myself included, to be a little more comfortable/less leery of the idea that you may the figurehead of the party someday.

  12. Pingback: Jim Davidson: I met Obama at Columbia and told Wayne Root about it | Independent Political Report

  13. Robert Capozzi

    ns9, I don’t disagree. I’m making a broader point. Many Ls are IMO highly risk averse…vouchers, nope, too risky; spending freeze, nope, too statist; medical marijuana, nope, too wimpy; etc., etc.

    Root’s a media hound and seems predisposed to overstate wildly when it comes to Obama. I’m not surprised he didn’t use his best judgment to agree to the event. Thankfully, his better judgment prevailed.

  14. Laundromat Owner

    Wow, spin that belongs in my laundromat. Note that he backpedaled on this when it was apparent that he was making himself a laughingstock and crapping his LP chair run at the same time. He shows up all the time on the TVs over the washign machines and everyone asks, “who is that lunatic?” (of course they do that all the time at the Fox News trolls anyway, so it may be a coincidence)

    Pass the fabric softener so Root’s hanky won’t chafe when he wipes the egg off his face.

  15. Rev. Preston N. Tolliver, Jr.

    Exactly when to you plan to be able to share your story with the mainsteream media concerning anything as negative about the president as you have already shared. The CIA sent me recruitment letters upon my in 1982 return from civilian work for 4 years in Suadi Arabia. Further, I knew about the aid to Afganistan, that involved Bin Laden, while in Saudia Arabia as early as 1979. You do not have a clue.

  16. Tom Blanton

    ns9, I don’t disagree. I’m making a broader point. Many Ls are IMO highly risk averse…vouchers, nope, too risky; spending freeze, nope, too statist; medical marijuana, nope, too wimpy; etc., etc.

    You have it exactly backwards, Capozzi. The issues you mention are “compromise” positions taken by moderate libertarians to avoid being seen as radical and risking rejection. Regular libertarians reject those issues in favor of more radical measures such as a separation of school and state, a spending cut, or legalizing all drugs or recreational marijuana – with no concern of risk.

    If any libertarians are too risk averse, it is those who are too timid to stand behind principles they profess to agree with, fearing rejection by their statist acquaintances.

    The only risk one takes by asking for less than what they want is the risk of never getting what they want.

    Back asswards, Capozzi. Must be a massive brain fart.

  17. Brian Holtz

    The radical argument against school vouchers is explicitly based on risk — risk that state mandates will creep back in through the funding channel and re-create some or all of the control that the state now enjoys by owning the schools and choosing the teachers.

    The other kind of risk Bob is talking about is to the self-image of libertarians who measure their purity by the number of people who agree with them.

    The way to get to where you want to go is to start going there, instead of demanding that Scotty beam you up.

  18. Carol P

    The moment a politician decides to run for office they have given up a right to “seal records.” They are now a public figure, and the voting public has every right to question and investigate anything and everything that shines light on who will be representing the American people.
    I totally agree. If there is a plethora of conspiracy theories that abound then it is the fault of the Obama administration itself.
    Anyone can vet a nanny applying to care for our children better than anyone in authority can vet the person elected as our President. The DNC has a responsibility to disclose this information to the American people and answer respectfully to the questions that the American people have.

    Personally, I don’t understand why students at Columbia do not have an annual (year book) with photos, names, etc. To me that is weird. Even off campus students are usually listed in year books.

    As far as the “birther” lunacy claim is concerned it concerns me that they submit a COLB and newspaper announcements as “proof” and claim anyone who questions that as an idiot. It is absolutely an insult to the intelligence of people and even liberal pro-Obama people should be outraged at the idiocy of such inane “proof”.
    They have to know that if a child is born at home, in a cab, on foreign soil, etc. that as long as a “permanent” address is listed by an American citizen of Hawaii then a grandmother or other relative could fill out the birth certificate, send it into the Hawaiian Vital Statistics and a COLB just like that would be sent out and birth announcements in the newspaper could then be released. Do they not know that we are not crazy to know that fact.

    All that does not prove that Obama meets the eligibility requirement as a “natural born citizen”. So you can believe he was or not but you cannot prove it. Also, if debated in a court of law the fact that he is a dual citizen in itself makes him ineligible. All you have to do is read the letters and debates that George Washington had with foreigners having authority over citizens of America to understand that Obama is exactly an example of what that “natural born” status clause was put into the Constitution as a requirement for POTUS.
    Obama has a conflict of allegiance to our Constitution and finds it as he said in his book “fundamentally” flawed….and as stated in speeches he was going to “fundamentally change America”.
    So if this requirement is continually being ridiculed and dismissed as unimportant then it has ultimately set a precedence whereby no one has to be anything but a “citizen” and bring to the office of President a desire to mold our laws into a European style and who knows since Obama says he is a “citizen of the world”….as such is he trying to redistribute the wealth of America to make us lower and yet more level with other nations?
    I am for anyone getting any tidbit of information in the open other than what is being spoon fed to us as if we are stupid.

  19. Robert Capozzi

    tb20, charming commentary. If one advocates a change that stands no chance of passage, I’d call that risk averse and timid. If, OTOH, one advocates change that stands some chance of passage, even if it’s highly unpopular with a subset of the population, I’d call that taking a chance.

    It might feel good in a sanctimonious sort of way to hold high quixotic notions, but it’s not risk-taking in any meaningful sense. Indeed, quixotic posturing increases the likelihood that an advocate will remain in the weeds, obscure, and on the fringes. There’s nothing per se wrong with such positioning, it’s just not risk taking.

  20. Thomas L. Knapp

    “The moment a politician decides to run for office they have given up a right to ‘seal records.’”

    Nope. If a record is private for you, it can be just as private for a politician.

    Yes, you are well within your rights to “question and investigate anything and everything,” but you don’t get a special right to private records just because the person to whom those records are relevant is running for political office.

    What you do have is the right to assume that if a politician won’t show you this or that record, he has a reason for not wanting to do so, and to take that into account.

    And yes, if you don’t consider the publicly released birth certificate and contemporaneous newspaper birth announcements to be at least provisional proof of time and location of someone’s birth, you are an idiot.

  21. Michael Seebeck

    Tom @24,

    when both of my sons were born (and one died), I sent announcements to papers 1000 miles away, and they never asked for any verification.

    So, no, I don’t consider contemporaneous newspaper birth announcements to be at least provisional proof of time and location of someone’s birth, as they can say anything the parents want them to say.

    For the other end of life, see Abe Vigoda (again, and again, and again…)

  22. Thomas L. Knapp

    Michael,

    You write:

    “So, no, I don’t consider contemporaneous newspaper birth announcements to be at least provisional proof of time and location of someone’s birth”

    Neither do I, which is why I didn’t say any such thing. What I said (this time with emphasis added) was:

    “the publicly released birth certificate and contemporaneous newspaper birth announcements”

    That’s provisional proof. By “provisional” I mean that the claim is facially true and that the burden of proof is on those who dispute it to disprove it, not on those who’ve already presented substantial evidence in its favor to shit additional evidence on demand.

  23. Tom Blanton

    The radical argument against school vouchers is explicitly based on risk — risk that state mandates will creep back in through the funding channel and re-create some or all of the control that the state now enjoys by owning the schools and choosing the teachers.

    Wrong Master Brian. The radical argument against school vouchers is explicitly based on the CERTAINTY that state mandates will creep back in through the funding channel and re-create some or all of the control that the state now enjoys by owning the schools and choosing the teachers.

  24. Tom Blanton

    By the way, it’s not such a “radical” argument. To a neolibertarian, everyone who disagrees with them is a “radical”. Similar to a neocon like Wayne Root – anyone who disagrees with that bunk is a “leftist”.

  25. Robert Capozzi

    tb 27, my point precisely. Somehow, in your mind, you can foresee exactly how a series of events could — I’m sorry, WOULD — unfold in which a step in the direction of liberty could — I’m sorry, WOULD — ultimately fail so this is not an experiment worth pursuing, advancing, or even supporting.

    That’s risk aversion if ever I saw it.

  26. Spin, spin, spin, spin .......... Lake

    Ah certainty, such an uncertainty! Reminds me of the California Proposition 8 anti gay movement. When they fell behind in the polls all of the sudden mythological and subjective situations became daily topics. Court cases that were probably never planned became more than possible realities!

    Politics, smoke and mirrors! ……….. and it this hand ………

  27. Brian Holtz

    Libertarian scholars at Cato, Reason Foundation, Independent Institute, PRI, Heartland Institute, Friedman Foundation, and Institute for Justice — and even an anarchist like Prof. David Friedman — all consider tuition vouchers to be a step in the right direction, but the LP can’t endorse them because some of its anarchists (and ex-members like Blanton) seem to fear small government more than they fear big government. So they smear those who disagree with them, with pejoratives like “neolibertarian” and “neocon”.

  28. Andy

    “It takes no courage to stand up against imaginary nefarious conspiracies like the Bilderberg Group and the New World Order.”

    LOL! So Holtz doesn’t think that the Bilderberg Group exsists. WOW, that’s one of the most naive and stupid comments that I’ve ever seen anyone post here in the history of IPR, and that says something.

  29. paulie Post author

    Andy, I think his point was not that the BG does not exist, but that it is better to challenge the policies they publicly support rather than waste time trying to talk about what they may or may not be saying behind closed doors.

  30. Brian Holtz

    Your comment — that the Bilderberg Group must not exist if it is not a nefarious conspiracy — is actually not “one of the most naive and stupid comments” in the history of IPR.

    But it’s close.

  31. LMK

    “I believe any association with this trial would discredit the opportunity to have a fair, open and balanced discussion or debate in the future.”

    Translation: Associating with birthers and extremists to this extent would be political suicide.

    Why is it that Root waited until the very last minute to pull out of the “trial”? Perhaps he got a good look of the last 2 days worth of “trial” crap and decided that this was too much, even for him? My, is your word any good, Mr. Root??

    While Root choose not to testify, his comments were still used in the trial as “evidence” today. Above, Mr. Root states: “I told Pastor Manning however that none of this is factual proof that Obama did not attend Columbia.” (see http://www.conservativemonster.com)

    Mr. Root, I think you need to contact Manning and have him correct your comments to include your assertion that you have no factual proof that Obama attended Columbia. It would be the honorable thing to do. It would also behoove you to be a bit more selective with the nutters you hang out with. Your political opponents will bring your relationship with Manning to the attention of voters for the rest of your political history.

    I think you should also be honorable enough to correct your comment that you don’t know of anyone who knew Obama at Columbia. Either that, or call out Jim Davidson as a liar. Which is it Mr. Root???

    After all, aren’t you trying to clean up politics?

  32. Bob Weber

    Michael Seebeck @ #25,

    “……when both of my sons were born (and one died), I sent announcements to papers 1000 miles away, and they never asked for any verification.”

    Mike, the Obama birth announcements are not the paid vanity announcements which one commonly finds in newspapers. They are Hawaii Health Dept. vital statistics listings generated from hospital reports.

    Carol P @ #22,

    “They have to know that if a child is born at home, in a cab, on foreign soil, etc. that as long as a “permanent” address is listed by an American citizen of Hawaii then a grandmother or other relative could fill out the birth certificate, send it into the Hawaiian Vital Statistics and a COLB just like that would be sent out and birth announcements in the newspaper could then be released. Do they not know that we are not crazy to know that fact. ”

    Hawaii did not issue courtesy Certificates of Foreign Birth until 1982. In any case, they show the actual place of birth, not Hawaii.

    Parents could register unattended home births in 1961, as every state allows. But others, such as a grandparent, could not, unless the parents were disabled and unable to do it themselves. Hawaii’s statistical breakdown of 1961 Honolulu births shows the vast majority occurring in hospitals or clinics, a small number occurring outside of hospitals but attended by physician or midwife, but none at all born outside a hospital and unattended. Only a tiny number of unattended births out in the boondocks, as on farms and plantations.

  33. Tom Blanton

    tb 27, my point precisely. Somehow, in your mind, you can foresee exactly how a series of events could — I’m sorry, WOULD — unfold in which a step in the direction of liberty could — I’m sorry, WOULD — ultimately fail so this is not an experiment worth pursuing, advancing, or even supporting.

    That’s risk aversion if ever I saw it.

    Capozzi, you don’t need crystal balls to predict that the government will attach strings to every penny they disburse. Much like I don’t need to be psychic to predict the sun will come up tomorrow morning. The modern state is not unpredictable. To believe that government may not do what government always does is not taking a risk, it is merely foolish.

  34. LMK

    According to the American Grand Jury coverage of today’s “trial” http://americangrandjury.org/we-the-people-the-columbia-trial-starts-today#comments,

    “Wayne Alllen (sic) Root testified in the form of a written statement made personally to Dr. Manning and the Court.. we did find out that many people contacted Wayne trying to discourage him.. however, his testimony statement was submitted to the jury.. here is what Mr. Root stated:

    “He was the speaker at the 20-year Columbia University reunion. During his 4 years at Columbia as a Political Science major he never once heard the name of Barack Obama or Barry Soetoro. He was adamant that Obama never attended Columbia. Mr. Root graduated from Columbia on the same year and class that Obama was alledged (sic) to have attended. Obama was not at the reunion nor did he appear in any Columbia school rosters or yearbooks.”‘

    Mr. Root, the NYTimes was able to find “The 1982-83 student directory”: http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/20/recollections-of-obamas-ex-roommate/. Obama was listed as a student. Such directories are routinely distributed to students at most colleges and universities so that students can contact each other easily.

    The directory entry can be viewed at the link.

    Interesting. Perhaps someone can get ahold of Root and get to the bottom of this. Either Root is lying or Manning lied to the “court”. I wonder which it is?

  35. Tom Blanton

    Is Heartland Institute libertarian?

    Oh sure it is. Glenn Beck is a libertarian, too.

    It’s just that vouchers are just so risky, and radical, too. My gosh, I’ll bet extremists like Sarah Palin are for vouchers. It wouldn’t surprise me if Tim McVeigh was for them. I’ll leave it to the hard core radicals like Holtz to take all the risks of advocating vouchers. Goodness gracious, even the scholars can’t agree on this way out voucher thing because it is just so controversial. What if it resulted in too much change too quickly and the society fell apart? Highly risky!!

  36. Charles Nadolski

    Am I being told here that the LP does not support school vouchers as an official policy? If I have difficulty convincing left-of-center liberals on the issue school vouchers, with the support of data, philosophy and morality, do you think I’ll have more success arguing for the total dissolution of the public school system? I would be like teaching cavemen assemble a car without teaching them first the concept of the wheel. I look forward to attending the St. Louis convention.

  37. Michael Seebeck

    Charles, in general, the libertarian POV on public education is as follows, in order of preferred solution to fuggahedaboutit:

    1. abolish public education
    2. pure non-subsidized competition between public and private education
    3. tax credits for private education
    4. tax deductions for private education
    5. vouchers
    6. statist quo ante

    Note as the numbers increase, so does the level of state control.

    Many libertarians will argue about the virtues or lack thereof on points 2-5, but are in general agreeement on 1 and 6.

  38. Charles Nadolski

    I’d love to live long enough to see us get to (1). The problem is getting even 50% of the population agree to (5). Since the LP is a political party seeking elections, and not a coffee klatch, I would assume getting a majority vote would be a priority.

  39. LMK

    Why is http://www.theconservativemonster.com stating this:

    “Pastor Manning stated that he had spoken on the phone with both Dr. Keyes and Wayne Allyn Root about their possible assistance with this trial. …… Wayne Allyn Root, was supposed to testify on Sunday, but there was a mix up and he did not. Mr. Root was willing to testify, but Pastor Manning felt that it was not necessary due to the testimony from Sunday by witnesses.”

    Mr. Root, would you care to comment?

  40. Reality Check

    I too await Mr. Root’s comments on his apparent testimony at the Manning trial. I would also like Mr. Root to provide documentation for his claim that “Even stranger still, the Wall Street Journal reported in its editorial pages back in 2008 that Fox News called 400 of my classmates and they could not find one student who had ever met Obama at Columbia. ”

    The only source for that claim seems to be an editorial in the Wall Street Journal on September 11, 2008. We all know the editorial position of the WSJ is not favorable to the President and it may be that your own quote on this alleged Fox News story is the basis for the WSJ claim. Meanwhile, your intimation and Dr. Manning’s assertion that Obama never attended Columbia is directly refuted by this first hand knowledge from Dr. Cathy M. Curie. http://www.factcheck.org/2010/02/factcheck-mailbag-week-of-feb-16-feb-22/ and others.

    I think you should give up the charade that Obama never attended Columbia. It is intellectually dishonest to say “I was there and I never saw him or knew anyone who saw him” when other evidence clearly shows he attended Columbia University. I attended a university that was comparable in size to Columbia for 4 years and I dare say the vast majority of the students there would say they never heard of me.

    Since we are all speculating here might we speculate that Mr. Root’s pursuit of this issue is “rooted” in jealousy of an apparently little known fellow classmate at Columbia University seems to have greatly surpassed his accomplishments in the long term?

  41. Lav

    Wayne Allen Root may have missed his opportunity for true greatness. His excuses for not testifying have huge holes in them. Grow up!

    Reality C: Factcheck.org? Really? Come on.

  42. Michael Seebeck

    Charles @50:

    You’d think that, but a large chunk of the population has never even heard of K-12 private education tax credits or deductions. Sad but true.

    My own opinion, coming from a mix of public and private education, is that vouchers are bad because the middlemen of the state are still involved. Tax credits and deductions have the same problem, but if applied such that people with no kids in school get the tax credit as well, it moves the whole thing towards a competition system and we’re on our way to #1. Even better would be a deduction or credit for helping others pay for their education, almost a tax-deductible scholarship without the middleman–you give your neighbor’s kid $10K to go to private school, and you get the $10K deduction or credit on the 1040. The beauty of that system is that it doesn’t abandon the “it takes a village” populist argument, and in fact incentivizes it in a libertarian fashion.

  43. Bob Weber

    Michael Seebeck @48,

    “Bob, the image I saw of it was a typical newspaper birth announcement. See http://theobamafile.com/_images/ObamaBirthAnnouncement.jpg.

    Vital Records are a different matter.”

    Mike, didn’t you notice the “Health Bureau Statistics” heading at the top of the column? This is a typical vital statistics listing which still runs today in many small-town newspapers. In fact, when I was growing up, the Los Angeles Times published similar listings and only stopped, IIRC, in the 1980′s. They have the status of secondary legal documents.

  44. rhcrest

    Shame on you Mr. Root. As someone mentioned you had a chance for greatness and you blew it. I can’t believe all the posters on here who have been duped into believing that the evidence presented in this trial and what the trial is trying to prove is nonsense. The main stream media sure does a heck of a job brainwashing people who think they are so educated and smart. The superiority you think you have is laughable. “I’m brainwashed and I’m proud of it!”

  45. rhcrest

    Thomas Knapp wrote: And yes, if you don’t consider the publicly released birth certificate and contemporaneous newspaper birth announcements to be at least provisional proof of time and location of someone’s birth, you are an idiot.

    Try registering your child for kindergarten or soccer with those documents and see how far you get. The person behind the desk will look at you as though you are a little off kilter and tell you to come back with the proper LONG form birth certificate showing the actual details of your child’s birth. Not some computer generated thing that has no signatures. You sir are the idiot here. You are one of the brainwashed masses I referred to above. You need deprogramming as do many of the posters here. You are unable to think independently of what the main stream media feeds you. You along with millions of others.

  46. Steven R Linnabary

    Try registering your child for kindergarten or soccer with those documents and see how far you get. The person behind the desk will look at you as though you are a little off kilter and tell you to come back with the proper LONG form birth certificate showing the actual details of your child’s birth.

    Try registering your child for kindergarten with a handwritten birth certificate, and they’ll do the same. I delivered my living children at home, and filled out their birth certificates myself.

    I told the lady behind the desk that if I’d known it would have been a problem I would have typed it out…she was freakin’ clueless, claimed I couldn’t do it myself.

    PEACE

  47. Robert Capozzi

    tb46, you make a great point. Not all Ls agree that vouchers are the way to go on rolling the State back on the education front. This is going to be true on specific policy positions on all matters. And if Ls ever start to get elected in a significant way, some of those policy positions could backfire.

    The abolition of Glass-Steagall financial regulation comes to mind…most free marketeers were for repeal. Now some in the public square are suggesting that THAT was what led to the current turmoil in the financial markets and TARP.

    I don’t happen to agree with that analysis of Glass-Steagall, but the surface argument against allowing commercial banks to operate as investment banks has some validity and therefore traction.

    Was it unL to’ve been in favor of GS repeal? I’d say no. Rather, tweaks to the current configuration could lead to unintended consequences, esp. if additional tweaks are not made at the same time.

    Does that imply that Ls should only support root-and-branch reforms? I’d again say no, not necessarily, since a) resistance to extreme reform makes such reform highly implausible to enact and b) root-and-branch reforms could lead to even larger dislocations than moderate steps in the direction of liberty.

    For ex., if tomorrow the State got out of education entirely and, say, one-third of children went entirely uneducated, I don’t think most of the population would say that reform was working too well.

    Change is risky. The status quo is risky, too. We Ls should be mature enough to recognize that any change we suggest will not be done precisely to our druthers and will likely not lead to Libertopia. There will be turbulence along the way, no matter what is done.

  48. It has been caught

    Mr. Mannings does not always say things in the correct manner, I know this myself. I don’t think it is intentional. But some of the things he says is not always accurate.

  49. Eric Sundwall

    A show host recently asked me whether or not the LP was the party that wanted to legalize heroin . . . while mentioning the principle involved, I also said it wasn’t our signature issue and that people ply on fear more than anything when they make this statement. This avoids an entire libertarian meltdown or lengthy counter screed and let’s you get back to business about politics rather efficiently in my estimation. This in response to the RC/TB back and forth. Judge for your self at:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAvEafqa2DY

    I guess my only point is that not compromising principle and appearing sane is possible.

  50. Thomas L. Knapp

    Rhchrest,

    You write:

    “Try registering your child for kindergarten or soccer with those documents and see how far you get. The person behind the desk will look at you as though you are a little off kilter and tell you to come back with the proper LONG form birth certificate showing the actual details of your child’s birth.”

    I’ve registered two children for kindergarten in the last ten years without being asked to show a birth certificate of any kind for either of them.

    And, let’s be clear here: Obama publicly released his birth certificate in June of 2008. If he released a “long form” birth certificate tomorrow, the next day you’d be whining that what you actually wanted to see was his “double secret probation super-duper ultra-flash birth certificate.”

    You’re convinced that Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii not because the evidence for his having been born there is lacking, but because you very much want him to have been born elsewhere.

  51. Brian Holtz

    Defending a competent adult’s right to ingest anything, including heroin, is indeed easy to do without seeming loopy to the average voter who wants more economic and personal liberty.

    Defending a child’s right to do so, or to engage in sexual commerce — not so much.

    Defending personal secession, open borders, and immediate non-enforcement of tax laws — ditto.

    Just because core libertarian principles are defensible doesn’t mean that all things someone might call “libertarian principles” are equally defensible.

    I don’t think the LP should officially discourage Libertarian candidates who want to run on open borders, or personal secession, or legalizing childhood sexual commerce. (There’s no need, because the Libertarians who like to macho-flash these positions tend to save their flashing for other libertarians.) I just don’t want the LP to officially hang these positions around the necks of Libertarian candidates who don’t wish to defend them.

  52. Pingback: Below The Beltway » Blog Archive » Wayne Allyn Root Backtracks On Participating In Birther “Trial” Of President Obama

  53. Richardson

    This situation is very sad indeed. All of it.

    You said you’d be there…and you said it with strong words. For you to change your mind and then act like you’re on the moral high road in the same breath – it is just shameful. There is no truth left here, no honor.

    To all of you who are pleased by his refusal to live up to his word – shame on you. You have no honor!

    I don’t care if you said you were going to a kindergarten cupcake rally. If you decide to put yourself in the public light and then say you’ll do something, you’d better do it. As soon as you backpedal, I could really care less for your reasons and the rest of it. And then when you do backpedal and try to pass the blame onto someone else, it just makes you look even more shameful.

    People who are willing to give ANY politician the benefit of the doubt at this time have been thoroughly brainwashed. All you brainwashed people have to do is shut up and perhaps things could get better. EVERY politician needs to go under the microscope. ALL OF THEM. The more reluctant they are to be probed, the more we should demand answers. The higher up they are, the more answers they should provide.

    But no, the once brave citizens of America have entirely yielded their brains to their televisions and other forms of propaganda. Get in line behind your leader, no one should question him! If someone wants to investigate, shut them up with mocking! We are in an age now where facts and evidence are meaningless and one can simply mock their way towards their goal. Foolish sheeple!

    To the mockers – People like yourselves are responsible for the mess that we’re in at this point. You hate evidence, investigation, and questions so much..you feel so smugly superior when your only line of defense is mocking. Maybe you’ll be on trial one day at a Court that you have built with your own foolishness..and when you want evidence in your defense, perhaps they’ll just say no and give you some mocking instead.

  54. Justin

    So let me get this straight, you”do NOT believe there is any cover-up by Columbia University administration. ” You “believe these wild charges and claims actually damage any future legitimate opportunity to question President Obama’s background.” – of which we have seen no signs of ever having. You are aware that the very first Executive Order Sotoero released ON HIS INAUGURATION DAY was a suppression of all private records including his school records…

    And yet you’re perfectly comfortable with”Perhaps he was too busy pursuing a radical political agenda. Perhaps he was too busy hanging out with his radical friends plotting the destruction of capitalism or the overthrow of America.”

    You my friend are the conspiracy theorist and also a complete coward.

  55. wolfefan

    Justin – do you have a cite for that first executive order thing? I think you’re mistaken, but would like to see what you have in case I’m the one who’s wrong. Not a cite to WND, or Orly Taitz, or Jerome Corsi, but a cite to the source material. Thanks!

  56. Pingback: Jason Pye, Doug Mataconis react Wayne Root pulling out of Rev. Manning’s Obama Birther ‘trial’ | Independent Political Report

  57. Pingback: The Liberty Papers »Blog Archive » Wayne Allyn Root Backtracks On Participating In Birther “Trial” Of President Obama

  58. Bob Weber

    RHCrest@ 57:

    “Try registering your child for kindergarten or soccer with those documents and see how far you get. The person behind the desk will look at you as though you are a little off kilter and tell you to come back with the proper LONG form birth certificate showing the actual details of your child’s birth.”

    Hawaii only issues “short forms” now. They are fully accepted for I.D. purposes, including passport applications. The State Dept. doesn’t give a damn whether or not your delivery was a Caesarian or not, or whether or not the physician gave you a drop of 1% silver nitrate in each eye. Try doing a little research before you spout off.

  59. tom

    classic double talk
    what the hell is this jerk saying?
    if you believe there are legitimate questions re this Usurper’s past then you should be doing everything within your power to expose the truth PERIOD

  60. Andy

    “tom // May 18, 2010 at 11:22 pm

    classic double talk
    what the hell is this jerk saying?
    if you believe there are legitimate questions re this Usurper’s past then you should be doing everything within your power to expose the truth PERIOD.”

    I agree. I think what really happened here is that some of Wayne’s supporters were afraid that he’d look to “kooky” by testifying at this trial so they convinced him to not go through with it.

    The presentation of the trial probably was not the best, but I like the concept and I don’t think that it would have been a problem had Wayne gone.

  61. wolfefan

    Everyone connected with this trial looks “kooky” – and that is putting it mildly. That Root would consider taking part shows very, very poor judgment on his part. That he would agree to participate without first checking out who Manning is shows very, very poor judgment. That he derides this trial while claiming that there is some sort of “legitimate opportunity” to raise issues about Obama’s background is disingenuous, at the very best.

    If Root believes there are legitimate questions about Obama’s background, let him be honest and raise them directly, not rely on innuendo and implication as he has thus far. Integrity demands it. Failing that, Root should move on with his damaged credibility to issues that are germane to what he claims to want to do – advance the cause of liberty.

    Root has been trying to portray himself as the “grown-up” as over against Hancock. After this fiasco, that’s an impossible argument for him to make.

  62. Robert Capozzi

    es 61, I think you handled that pretty well. Of course, that was a long-form interview, not a gotcha soundbite and you are not a candidate.

    We each play our roles. A candidate may not deem your answer the appropriate one.

    What’s interesting to me is that the reporter had covered earlier LP conventions, and she said there was much talk of legalizing heroin. What’s up with that? Were the rank and file LPNYers braying with pitchforks for opiates with reporters in the room?

  63. paulie Post author

    Everyone connected with this trial looks “kooky” – and that is putting it mildly.

    That is putting it very mildly indeed.

  64. mk

    This site is jampacked with kooks, and they are of course the Obama-defenders. I have in my possession a transcript from the Kenyan parliament where they clearly say Obama is born in Kenya.

    The original link was taken down a few days later. By that time all my subscribers had already checked it out.

    Amusing, really, to see all the brainwashed idiots commenting. You don’t know jack-shit about what’s going on, all you are doing is spouting off politically correct B.S.

    I love it, in a sick way. Can’t wait for the full scale detonation on this subject to occur in the future.

    In the meantime, why don’t you f**kers head off to the Kenyan Parliament download section, or rather what’s left of it. Here was the original link to the session where it was revealed:
    http://www.bunge.go.ke/parliament/downloads/tenth_forth_sess/Hansard/RDRAFT25.03P.pdf

    Here what you get now:
    http://www.bunge.go.ke/parliament/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=107&Itemid=92

    Yeah. They went in to panic mode and deleted the files. All of them. Too bad an entire large internet forum (not affiliated with little me) as well as all my financial clients got to take a look at it first. (And still can.)

    That’s the most fun part. I just laugh at all of you who defend BO. The truth always comes out and you who chose to side with cowardice and evil will be punished, ridiculed and scorned by those of us on the right side of history.

  65. rlf

    In other words Wayne, you are a coward. You’ve decided to hide behind your own personal goals in life rather than fight for your country and it’s survival by ridding it of the rubbish we currently have as an ‘alleged’ president.

    Mega kudos to James David Manning for taking the time to bring the trial against Obama this far… America shall not forget him.

  66. Thomas L. Knapp

    “I have in my possession a transcript from the Kenyan parliament where they clearly say Obama is born in Kenya.”

    And I have in my possession transcripts of the US Congress clearly saying that the North Vietnamese attacked a US ship in the Gulf of Tonkin, that Social Security is solvent, that Saddam Hussein was stockpiling weapons of mass destruction as of 2003, and that it’s constitutional to force people to purchase medical insurance.

    Is there some particular reason why I should regard Kenya’s parliament as more trustworthy than its US counterpart?

  67. Robert Milnes

    Kennedy was shot from the 6th floor Schoolbook Depository by someone using Oswald’s rifle. Badge man probably a Dallas PD fired a shot from the grassy knoll.Third or 4th.
    Rhetorical question: Why did the first shot miss? That was closest. Plenty of time to aim. Element of surprise.
    Hint: the scope was off adjustment.
    Answer: Someone who was handed Oswald’s rifle a little before firing did it. Quickly realizing it was slightly off, compensated & got the second shot-a hit.The back of the lower neck-upper back.
    Timing of the third & 4th shot close.

  68. mk

    Smart one, aye? Laughable. I’ve seen countless of your sort go down in flames during the last years as much that was thought to be tin foil-stuff is now admitted and accepted.

    You should not trust anyone. But now we have a parliament session in Kenya where the statement that Obama is Kenyan-born was mentioned in relation to another subject. We have Michelle admitting it, caught on video during at least two separate occasions. We have records sealed by executive order. A fake so called “certification”.

    The burden of proof rests solely on the alledged president, given all these statements by so many different people and the lack of records on him.

    Any other argument is just plain ridiculous. Now go ahead and shoot your mouths off, kids.

  69. Pingback: Guilty verdict in Obama trial: more questions than answers - Old Hippie's Forums

  70. Pingback: New York Constitution Party nominee for Governor, Jan Johnson, presides at Obama Birther ‘trial’ | Independent Political Report

  71. Frank Smith

    Having heard Mr. Root spout off on Bill Cunningham and G. Gordon Liddy regarding this, I find his refusal to testify illustrative of the genderless politicians inhabiting the current political landscape these days.

    Wayne Allen Root, you, Sir, are a disgrace; to your Party, to your Country, and to the People of this great Nation.

    Our Forefathers put their lives, fortunes and sacred Honor on the line. You apparently have nothing but the hope you can ingratiate yourself with the Ruling Elites.

    You, Sir, are Disgusting. Go back to your groveling in Private and seek not the public forum again.

    You make me sick as all do the toadies who agree with your weaseling. You are a Disgrace to this country.
    Frank Smith,
    Cheyenne Wyoming

  72. Bob Weber

    MK@77:

    “This site is jampacked with kooks, and they are of course the Obama-defenders. I have in my possession a transcript from the Kenyan parliament where they clearly say Obama is born in Kenya.”

    “They” did not declare anything of the sort. The Obama birth comment came as a passing remark in an impassioned and moving speech denouncing the tribal politics which plagues Kenya and most of post-colonial Africa. There’s no reason to believe the speaker was any better informed than the millions of Australians and Americans who believe that Nichole Kidman and Mel Gibson were born in Australia. (They were both born in the U.S.)

  73. AbuBakerSmith

    Nice shifting, I hope the short term payoff is worth it because I assure you they know you’ll sell out now and can’t be depended on nor trusted. I trust you’ll come to regret your sidestepping as they won’t remember that you didn’t testify but that you were going to testify.

  74. Paul

    Turns out Edwin Starr’s hit song was more prescient and keen than we thought;

    WAR, what is he good for?
    Absolutely nothing.

  75. jack

    Get over yourself, Root. You’re just milking your 15 minutes of fame. You wouldn’t want to join a club that would have you as a member, Ivy League Egotist.

  76. shipley130

    Mr. Root,
    How do you feel about the “birther” movement now that Governor Ambercrombie can’t find the so call orginial birth document for Obama? The story from Tim Adams, the election worker from 2008 is very revealing, in that something fishy was going on with Obama’s birth documents. Why is it so difficult to believe that there is a cover up going on? It happens ALL the time with these political smucks.

  77. NotOneOfYou

    I looked at several comments at the top of this section, and wow. Such a large collection of dumb in the same place… :o.

  78. LibertarianGirl

    Not one of us— i went back and read the comments and i think they were some of our smarter ones, basically saying Birtherism is for fucktards , which it is:)

  79. Allen B Woodside

    “I am a patriot. I love my country with all my heart. I am not a fan of President Obama.” – Wayne Allyn Root

    “Patriotism is the last refuge of the Scoundrel.” – Samual Johnson

    “Whenever you hear a man speak of his love for his country, it is a sign that he expects to get paid for it.” – H.L. Mencken

    “A sense of humor aways withers in the presence of the messianic delusion, like justice and truth in front of patriotic passion” – H.L. Mencken

    “I would ask: Wayne Allyn Root, have you no shame?” – Allen B. Woodside

    ABW

  80. John Dickerson

    Barack Hussein Obama IIl was, in fact, born in Kenea South Africa. His name was changed to Berry Soetoro when his mother remaried Lolo Soetoro. They, Berry, his mother, his stepbrother, and his stepfather moved to Jakarta, Indonesia where he was made a citizen thereof in order to attend school.
    Barack Hussein Obama, alias Barry Seotoro, completed schooling through highschool and when his stepfather transfered to the United States Indonesian Deplomatic Corps, he was located in Chicago, Illinois. When Berry Seotoro found out that his parental father had studied at Harvard University and was a graduate student in Sociology he abopted his parental farthers name. and waw sent back to Africa in 1964. Because his fathers visa and cash had expired he was sent home to write his thesis. He never did. Obama, his son, later wrote it for him as he knew his father had expired due to an accident years before. Never once did Barack Hussien Obama the first or Barack Hussein Obama ii ever apply for American citizenship. Neather did Berry Seotoro who left the picture when the young Obama took on his fathers name.

    Barack Hussein Obama II did in fact enroll in Columbia University. But he did not graduate from Columbia nore did he partake in any combined study groupa. He is not in the year book and the class valivictorian has no memory of him ever attending Columbia University. Wayne Alyn Root may have been the only classmate that ever saw or had the oppertunity to converse with Barack Obama during the class of 1983.

    Obama used his fradulant fathers law degree from Harvard University untill it was decovered a fraud while he was working for a Law Firm in Chicago. When he was found out he immediatly gave up his license to pratice Law.

  81. Jill Pyeatt

    This is interesting information if it’s true, John. Can you please post some links as your sources.

  82. Kevin Davidson

    I am always very uncomfortable with people who have their own set of facts. In this story Root is quoted: “Wall Street Journal reported in its editorial pages back in 2008 that Fox News called 400 of my classmates and they could not find one student who had ever met Obama at Columbia.”

    I searched wsj.com for Obama Fox “Columbia College” and didn’t find such a story. I also searched FoxNews.com for Obama 400 “Columbia College” and found one reference, a comment left on their blog. Based on this, I would conclude that there was never any such Wall Street Journal editorial (unless it was a letter to the editor) saying such a thing. If this is right then it demonstrates that Mr. Root is credulous, and that he is qualified to be a birther, whether he is one or not.

  83. Pingback: Root retracts on participating in the “Obama Trial”

  84. Pingback: The Obama Administrations Plan For You « Jolene West's Weblog

Leave a Reply