Light Vanity, Insatiate Cormorant: Consuming means, soon preys upon itself!


I do not think for two nano-seconds that what has happened between Orly and me is merely a “falling out.” Her treachery to me and the mortgage litigation which could have saved thousands of people their homes and showed the flaws in “Obamanomic” Socialism (which is, honestly, just a logical and even incrementally predictable outgrowth of Bush’s Grand Old Party Socialism) is not merely personal but leads me to question her willingness and commitment to fairness, honesty, justice, openness, and transparency, all the qualities for which we are allegedly fighting against Obama. You see, I happen to believe that Obama is a secretive, lying, thief who stole the Presidency based on fraud and trickery. He is also a socialist. However, I will also tell you that I have known many righteous and honest men and women who were socialists from all around the world (I can think of dozens of specific examples from Colombia, Denmark, Egypt, France, Greece, Honduras, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Korea, Lesotho, Lithuania….need I go on?).  I happen to disagree with their politics and deplore their lack of good sense when it comes to economics, but I cannot deny their honest character or sincerity because of our disagreement, no matter how appalled I am by their ideas sometimes.

And furthermore, we all know that righteous and honest men and women (be they socialists or conservatives) can be born in the U.S. or Canada, Uganda or Kenya, but the Barack Obama is not one of them.

Likewise, honest and righteous people can, from time-to-time, fall in love across “normative” boundaries of marriage and family.  It was my belief that Orly and I were such people and I begged her to “come clean” and openly admit what had happened. My feelings for her were always entirely honorable.  My intentions were always honorable.  I was committed to her.  She said she was committed to me.  Perhaps we should have ended up like (ironically) that famed French Socialist President Mitterand, mourned at his funeral by his wife and mistress crying on each other’s shoulders.  I don’t know.  I would have rather Orly left her husband because it would have been a clean break, and it would have accurately reflected how much we had in common and how much work we had to do on the mortgage front as well as the political front—fighting socialism’s highest ranking symbol (the President) and its highest ranking cause and engine (irresponsible credit economics as exemplified in the mortgage finance and foreclosure crisis facing America today).  Orly promised to aim her passion and dramatics against the Banks, which would have been a fantastic use of her talents. So the way I see it,

Orly has not only betrayed me, however, she has betrayed the principles of truth, honesty, candor, and transparency.   Orly has betrayed her commitment to a parallel and related cause, also: the cause of economic reform.

Moreover, and quite appallingly, horrifyingly, in fact, despicably, Orly has falsely accused me of forging her signature on a document which she had approved (by signing it at least ONCE, according to her own admissions).  Orly has falsely accused me of deceiving or defrauding a court in Florida, and asking a Judge to Dismiss a case in which she had not merely offered but promised and committed to appear and represent me and my co-Plaintiffs.

This was only one of several cases in which she not merely offered but promised and committed to appear but then refused to do.   Plus there is the whole business of drafting an affidavit carefully enough as to be so vague as to avoid actual perjury in falsely accusing me but so precise as to make the insinuation and suggestion very clear to any reader. No, Orly has proven herself no devotee of the truth, or justice or of righteousness, nor of any kind of honor. My love for her was totally honorable, as was my commitment to her cause.   I would have confronted her husband and told him to set her free had she ever allowed me to do so.  I would have challenged anyone in the world to question my devotion to her.

Let me make one thing clear: as much as I despised Obama’s politics and his proposals for more and more credit banks, including his July 2008 campaign promise for an Urban Development Bank, until I met Orly I never gave a second thought to the constitutional dimensions of his citizenship until I realized of what a vast pattern of compulsive lies they comprised but a tiny proportion. Orly convinced me that she was right, that this was a realistic crusade, and she enlisted my help.   But from the very beginning she refused to listen to any concept of caution or hesitation.

Because I fell in love with her, I followed her orders blindly, and now see that she simply used me as generating machine to produce semi-coherent texts. She never wanted thought or analysis (certainly she did not want to participate in any).  Furthermore, in addition to our romantic involvement, Orly offered to represent me in my nationwide crusade for sound financial practices and a restoration of private property, respect for the integrity of the mortgage finance system, and in general a return to a productive rather than credit-based welfare economy based on conformity to lies.  Orly promised, she committed, she showed signs of willingness actually to move forward with great plans.  She even seemed genuinely enthusiastic and to make an effort at learning what appeared to be a whole new field of law and economics to her.

And so we became more and more deeply involved.  By mid-October, when we were in New York together and Lucas Smith published his “declaration”, I had wrapped my life around Orly’s and I guess I honestly believed she had wrapped hers around mine and she said over and over again how much she was committed to me and how she never wanted us to separate.  Three weeks later she had abandoned me, and yet some people have the nerve to call ME mentally unstable!  I am honest about where I come from.  Orly is not.  Orly used her words and promises to induce me as long as she wanted and then she dumped me with no regard to her promises whatsoever.

And all the while I see now that Orly, while constantly flattering me about my “intelligence,” and “scholarship” and “intellectual capacity”, avoided as much as possible any use of my brains which might have cautioned hesitancy or restraint of any kind. This is how she has gotten herself into so much trouble. Her modus operandi is speeding, in cars and in courts. Her constant counter-plea, whenever I asked for time to sift through the legal or factual material, was that to wait even a moment to engage in reflective thought or analysis would be to lose her followers, her supporters, and it was for their sake that I had to write without thinking, without adequate research or time, without allowing thoughts to sink in or mature.

This is why we lost (no, it was not because of Carter’s conceivably but unlikely compromised Law Clerks….)—like the proverbial fools we rushed in where Angels might fear to tread. Orly then, embarrassed by her setbacks, embarrassed by Lucas Smith’s incomprehensibly malicious initial disclosures (Orly knew he was staying in my house in September and could not help but notice that she was there and coming out of the shower before anyone else was up….day-after-day—so don’t accuse ME of incaution here!) But despite her rashness and impetuousity and lack of caution or care, Orly and now her supporters blame ME for the explosion of all this. I suspect it would have been a mild and trivial sideline if Orly had merely, appropriately and honestly, separated from her husband during this time period, but she chose to try officially to keep the lid on something she lacked the care to keep secret in reality. We wandered around every city in the country together—I very proud to be with this wonderful, passionate, and yes quite beautiful woman.

Orly’s lack of judgment in the handling of our relationship exactly paralleled her lack of judgment in handling the constitutional eligibility litigation. She needed me and probably still needs me in every possible way, but I don’t have her husband’s money and so she chose to DUMP me, to DUMP real love, for the illusion of piles of federal reserve notes and other credits, and she goes on with her reckless rage and fire. So let me be like John of Gaunt her, and say of Orly that her “rash fierce blaze of riot cannot last, For violent fires soon burn out themselves; Small showers last long, but sudden storms are short; He tires betimes that spurs too fast betimes; With eager feeding food doth choke the feeder: Light vanity, insatiate cormorant, Consuming means, soon preys upon itself. ” (Richard II, Act II).

This is my “Gaunt” prophecy which I foretell to Orly’s followers. In betraying me she has betrayed all the values you might wish her to stand for.  She has failed dismally in her constitutional challenges to Obama in part because of her rash impetuosity, in part because she could not be bothered to listen to my advice (or anyone else’s so far as I can tell).  She is now in the process of betraying me in every last case in which we were involved together, all the mortgage cases she is actively trying to sabotage.

I fear I have to say she is a disloyal and treacherous person all around: personally, professionally, and ideologically her commitments to “higher values” must therefore be considered perhaps opportunistic at best.  A woman who makes and disregards her personal commitments as lightly and honestly as Orly Taitz can hardly be trusted to lead a national movement.  Anyone who betrays her professional duty to think to impress her followers, betrays quite possibly the best friend she ever had for the purpose of impressing her followers, and who will betray the essence of words like “love” and “forever”, cannot lead a movement dedicated to honor and integrity in government.  I am sorry, but the personal is a microcosm of the public, and while I think we all know that human emotions are fickle, the way we handle them is reflective of our character.  So Judge for yourself: if I had had my choice, Orly and I would have admitted our affair and she would have separated from her husband.

Orly’s choice is, once the cat was out of the bag—“I hate cats, I am allergic to cats, he was just a stray and mangy cat, I am a dog person not a cat person, that wasn’t even my bag, how did that cat get in my bag.”

13 responses to “Light Vanity, Insatiate Cormorant: Consuming means, soon preys upon itself!

  1. Well I’m sorry to read your story and compelled to comment. I’ll assert the premise that everyone wants to love and be loved. But the thing is, two people must consciously and honestly agree on the PURPOSE(S) of their relationship. And that is the beginning of what could be a healthy start – but there are no guarantees! So its my understanding that consequences are the great real supreme court in life. This for you is a call to the acceptance of the consequences and how are you going to take them?

    • There are two kinds of consequences: personal and professional. I can take the personal “emotional” setback, but the degree to which I relied on Orly and our mutual agreement underlying this relationship, that has affected a lot of other people and the consequences relating to my commitments to other people and their property are pretty much NON-waivable.

  2. I accept this critical question as valid, and answer it as follows: first, unless Orly is a much worse liar than I even now can imagine or suspect, Orly was and remains in a very, very bad relationship with a very abusive husband who holds her as a de facto slave; second, “time makes you bolder and children get older” and I think that when I met her, Orly was ready to be liberated from her prison cell, until it became obvious that it would cost her all her material security. And yes, in my eyes, Orly is quite beautiful—in fact I was more fiercely attracted to her than I have been in a very long time. She was formerly a swimsuit model and she is in amazing shape. I loved the sound her voice and the light in her eyes (the name “Orly”, as she explained it to me, means “light”—equivalent to Greek “Helen” or “Elena”).

  3. Pingback: Orly Taitz: It Might Be Time To “Bare” Arms? Really? « WOK3

  4. Orly was on a mission to gain followers andexposed herself as an AIPAC puppet.

  5. You keep calling Obama a socialist, but you never cite concrete examples of which of his policies and actions are actually socialist. You lose credibility when you keep mouthing such terms, particularly when people see Obama following the exact same policies as Bush, handing over the working people’s wealth to the fat cats on Wall Street and sending our kids in to endless wars we should never be involved in in the first place–playing the world’s policeman. Socialism is a re-distribution of wealth from the ultra rich and the government using the funding to provide human services to benefit the non-wealthy. If Obama is a Socialist, where is all of that benefit for us common working stiffs!?

    • You may be surprised to learn that I largely agree with you. The point in our disagreement would be where you say I lose credibility, as if I were not aware of the parallelism between Bush and Obama—I am, and I consider them both Socialists, and I consider the substitution of one for the other to be a “World Government” plot to repackage the same programs wrapped in a different “skin” so that certain weakminded numbskulls will think that Obama is different when in fact the ONLY difference is his skin-color….. If you will study the content of this blog and its companion-site, charleslincoln.spiritualpatriot.com, you will see that I criticize Obama and Bush as two peas in a pod, and I recognized the similarity long before the election. I despised Bush long before most people realized just how evil he was. I can claim the distinct honor of having been targeted by George W. Bush when he was still a first term Governor of Texas…. I went to the College of Arts & Sciences at Tulane with one of his brothers….. it’s like these people have been haunting me my whole life….. In my opinion it is the “fat cats on Wall Street” who are promoting socialism to maximize their own wealth and power. Socialism is, in fact (as opposed to mythology), NOT “a re-distribution of wealth from the ultra rich and the government using the funding to provide human services to benefit the non-wealthy.” SOCIALISM, in hard 21st century fact, as opposed to 19th-20th century dreams, is the obliteration of the individual, the maximization of power in the Corporate-Government cartel which monopolizes all kinds of wealth and power, and the accumulation of ownership in corporate or governmental entities between which elite individuals move back and forth, like Larry Summers for instance (Harvard-Wall Street-Washington). Obama is the same kind of Socialist as Bush, the Corporate-Governmental Monopolizing kind, and that is the most dangerous and evil kind of socialist known to man, in my not so humble opinion. Obama has accelerated the process of nationalizing the banking industry, corrupting and debasing the (already fake) currency with credit, and maximizing governmental control over every other general class and specific kind of industry (automotive, insurance, medical). But I certainly agree with you that there is NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN! Only the increasing violence against the American tradition of freedom and constitutional government, and the increasing severity of the punishments against all those who stand up against the Government. We have not had an even potentially non-socialist government since 1937 when Franklin D. Roosevelt started his second term. Harry S. Truman went a little to far for a still-confused nation and Supreme Court when he tried to nationalize the Steel Industry under the pretext of the Korean War (the Supreme Court at that point in time still thought it was obligated to follow the Constitution). Dwight D. Eisenhower recognized the problem when he talked about the “Military-Industrial Complex” that controls the government, but he appointed Earl Warren to the Supreme Court for the purpose of wiping out constitutional resistance to “big government” at the same time as giving us the only remaining “hopes for freedom” and adherence to the constitution in regard to individual liberty. John F. Kennedy apparently recognized the problem and started to stand up against the world government and was promptly snuffed out by Lyndon B. Johnson who expanded the reach of socialism in America beyond imagination. Nixon-Kissinger saw to the integration of America into the Communist world by and through Detente with China. Carter was just a good hearted-highly intelligent overly academic fool. In 1980, I and millions of other Americans voted for Ronald Reagan in the hopes that he would turn around the treachery inherent in the Socialist Agenda (he had been such a great Governor in California, and he talked such a good line in his scripted speeches), but by the time Reagan handed over the Whitehouse to GHW Bush in 1989, the die was cast, and socialism was fixed in place forever. Reagan not only didn’t put the breaks on our national catastrophe, he ignored most of his own campaign promises and vastly increased the size of government without reforming the credit-based monetary policy OR anything else. The national debt increased exponentially. The economic imbalances of the United States all went awry under Reagan. It was either a tragically missed opportunity or the final fraud necessary to “perfect” socialism in America: pick a man with stronger Anti-Communist credentials than anyone (including Nixon) and a great personality, who supported Barry Goldwater in 1964, and have him let Social Security, Welfare, Medicare, and Medicaid stand fast, and then no one will ever be able to dislodge the Federal Reserve-IRS-Social Security triangular chokehold on American society. I have no doubt that Barry Goldwater, had he been elected in 1964, would have rolled back Roosevelt’s New Deal and never allowed Johnson’s Great Society, but either Reagan himself was coopted or just deceived by his advisors. I do not know; perhaps the problem was the Vice-President 1981-1989—who was a “moderate” and a World-Government Globalist from day one. Yeah, Reagan’s Vice-President and successor GHW Bush had a resume proving his qualifications as the consummate Pro-China, Pro-CIA, Pro-UN/World Government/Freedom Hating Globalist.
      Clinton towed the Globalist line in International relations, while he presided over the first significant post-Iron Curtain (probably staged) terrorist attacks in the United States.
      Note: After announcing the plan to shift the focus of foreign policy and defense from the “Evil Empire” to non-governmental terrorism, GHW Bush fired the first warning shots at Ruby Ridge against the Weavers under GHW in 1992. This was followed in rapid succession by 1993 New York, 1993 Waco, 1995 Oklahoma City) and then Clinton signed the Republican Congress’ horrific 1996 AEDPA (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act) into law. This was the greatest achievement of the 1994 elections which swept Newt Gingerich’s “Contract on America” coalition into power.
      AEDPA was plainly unconstitutional ab-initio in that it all but abolished Habeas Corpus and otherwise curtailed both privacy and freedom, laying the foundation for the 2001 amendments known as “The Patriot Act”, which mysteriously appeared as a fait accompli after GWB ordered the false flag attacks on New York and Washington in September, following the equally staged attacks on U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.
      This is the world whose vile deception and corruption Barack Obama has merely inherited, which he intends to solidify and set in stone. I hate him because he is a fraud, a liar and preacher of change when in fact he is just the latest chapter in a monstrous and epic tale of national suicide and reinvention as a socialist dictatorship. But I agree with you, the problem did NOT start with Obama….he is JUST continuing Bush’s policies….close to 100%, except where he’s accelerating the destructive impact of those policies….

  6. Pingback: BIRTHER LOVE TRIANGLE « The Sports Pig’s Blog

  7. Pingback: Light Vanity, Insatiate Cormorant: Consuming means, soon preys … Life just to Me

  8. Pingback: Birther lawyer Taitz calls for followers to ‘bare arms’ | We Are Change Utah

  9. Have you considered the possibility that, in choosing to have an affair with a woman you knew was married, you lost any claim to the higher moral ground? You write that you hate the American Pres. Obama “because he is a fraud, a liar,”, but you yourself boast of being an adulterer. Whether he is a fraud and a liar remains, at this point, speculation; and while I don’t know why you were disbarred, your being an adulterer is something you boast of. I find it difficult to see that your credibility has shown to be greater than his.

  10. I have not only considered the possibility, I have reflected deeply upon it. “Adultery” is a sin against society, in my opinion, only when it destroys or interferes with a happy marriage. “Adultery” means “pollution” or “sullying” something which is pure, and something which is already impure cannot be “adultered.” I do not believe that Orly’s marriage to Yosef was a real loving marriage which served the purposes of good society. I have heard too much about how he treats her and how her children treat her. In my mind’s eye, Yosef Taitz is a monster and I offered Orly something of an escape from that. Actually, I offered her a permanent escape but she chose not to take it. I did not destroy a good marriage. I walked into a situation where a women lived in the middle of the burnt or “Charn” Ruins of a marriage—a dead place”, from whence the life had long departed, if it was ever there at all. “Adultery” is a very different matter—it can even be “heroic”, when it involves helping a woman escape from a fake, abusive, or involuntary marriage, even if her escape is only temporary. That is what I believe. That is what I feel. I could well be wrong or mistaken, but I think that the “sin” here was the marriage itself—a fake, abusive, and possibly involuntary marriage which was maintained by force of threats of illegal harm or injury to Orly. Perhaps Orly is a victim of Stockholm syndrome where she loves her captor, after a fashion, but it does not render the marriage any less phony. From what I have recently learned, the possibility of the entire marriage being a fake facade is growing stronger. Orly and Yosef may not be what they appear to be, at all, in that they may be united only as a matter of convenience for some other purpose. I did not have the feeling that I was leading Orly astray in any way, or that I was helping her “cheat” on a worthy man. It has been suggested to me by certain people who knew Orly before I did, who have studied her background much more thoroughly than I did, and who were not in love with Orly, that Yosef Taitz may be a spy or enemy agent of some kind, and that his marital relationship with Orly is nothing but a cover for his “sleeper” activities, which may have actually involved keeping Obama in power by making a hash and laughingstock of the Constitutional Eligibility Movement, which Orly has most assuredly done. I think it is possibly true. If Orly had cared about deposing the usurping President, she would not have ignored 99% of the legal research I did for her. She would have proceeded much more thoughtfully and cautiously. She would have acted MUCH more like a real lawyer and less like a bad actress playing a Keystone Cop/Pink Panther Inspector Clouseau type. I cared about Orly as a person and I care about the truth as a matter of principle, so yes, I can and do accept the ambiguities in my own relationship with her, and I have concluded that I was morally in the right, given the information I possessed, which came from her (even if it turns out all to be lies, which it may well do).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s