Dr. Orly Taitz, Esquire

Defend Our Freedoms Foundation
29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy, Ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita CA, 92688
Copyright 2014

Review of Politics, Economics, Constitution, Law and World Affairs by Attorney and Doctor Orly Taitz


If you love your country, please help me fight this creeping tyranny and corruption.
Donations no matter how small will help pay for airline and travel expenses.





The articles posted represent only the opinion of the writers and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Dr. Taitz, Esq., who has no means of checking the veracity of all the claims and allegations in the articles.
Mail donations to:
Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, c/o Dr. Orly Taitz
29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy, Ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688.
Contact Dr. Taitz at
orly.taitz@gmail.com.
In case of emergency, call 949-683-5411.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny.
When the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth
becomes a revolutionary act.
 -- George Orwell

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they
fight you, then you win.
 -- Mahatma Gandhi



WOW! Senator Diane Feinstein agreed to debate me. However she has 5 conditions: FOX news is not allowed to transmit the debates, we are not allowed to talk about Obama’s eligibility, my supporters will not be allowed in and so on. Should I agree to these conditions?

Posted on | May 14, 2012 | 161 Comments

Feinstein2012@aol.com

10:13 AM (5 hours ago)

to me

Dear Dr. Taitz,

It looks like you may end up being the California Republican nominee for Senate in the November general election. While I understand that you wanted to set up some debates before the June primary, this would have been inappropriate given the large field of candidates.

However if, as anticipated, you do become the Republican candidate, I would like to set up three debates to be televised by three major television stations. The debates would take place in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and San Diego.Our campaign would suggest evening debates at 18:00 in order to capture a higher percentage of viewers.

However, our campaign has five ground rules which we would like agreement upon before proceeding further:

(1) No questions shall be asked and no answers shall be given concerning the eligibility of President Obama or any related matters. The debate should focus on economic, social, and foreign policy issues.

 

(2) The format of the debates shall provide for a two minute response, followed by a one minute rebuttal, followed by a 30 second response.

 

(3) No notes, documents, or teleprompters shall be allowed.

 

(4) No debates shall be televised by Fox News or any affiliates thereof.

 

(5) None of your supporters shall be allowed to attend. Guests shall be limited to 100 voters chosen at random.

 

Please let me know if these ground rules would be satisfactory. Also, please let me know of nine potential dates in October during which you would be available.

 

Kind regards,

 

Sef Greene

Debate Coordinator

Share

Comments

161 Responses to “WOW! Senator Diane Feinstein agreed to debate me. However she has 5 conditions: FOX news is not allowed to transmit the debates, we are not allowed to talk about Obama’s eligibility, my supporters will not be allowed in and so on. Should I agree to these conditions?”

  1. Mark Smith
    May 14th, 2012 @ 2:40 pm

    It’s a trap- they already know how they will discredit you.

  2. HAHA TalkToSelf
    May 14th, 2012 @ 2:44 pm

    HAHAHAHA…. well if you do this debate then you will qualify for a straight jacket for talking to yourself.

    She has a stacked audience geared to BOO BOO her opposition… SHE IS NUTS. She needs JAIL TIME too.

  3. RJ
    May 14th, 2012 @ 2:45 pm

    NO!!!

    Under no circumstances should you allow Feinstein to unilaterally dictate terms and conditions for any debate between the two of you!!!!

    You would be admitting weakness and subservience to her if you do.

    You should go public at every opportunity to make her terms and conditions known, to whomever will listen, and let the people know how frightened she is of the issues in the campaign.

    You could, however, certainly agree to conditon #3 “No notes, documents, or teleprompters shall be allowed.”

    Go on the offensive!!!!

    Her admission that you will be the Republican nominee is significant!!!

  4. Ken B. (Fort Mill, SC)
    May 14th, 2012 @ 2:45 pm

    ABSOLUTELY NOT!!

  5. John G.
    May 14th, 2012 @ 2:48 pm

    If it were me Dr.Orly I would never agree to those terms, those are all issues that need to be debated in a public forum and no limit on who can attend!! Good Luck!!!

  6. Redd
    May 14th, 2012 @ 2:54 pm

    Do not agree and let all of california know of these commie conditions imposed. I can understand the “crowd control” but not discussing eligibility for presidency or having fox news as one of three networks is bullcommie.

  7. John Black
    May 14th, 2012 @ 2:55 pm

    Absolutely not, rather send Fienstein a message asking what she’s afraid of. You don’t suppose the truth might come out?

  8. Muttdog
    May 14th, 2012 @ 3:11 pm

    Whaddaya mean should you agree? Of course you should debate unless you’re a wet-your-pants chicken-shit coward.

  9. Maria
    May 14th, 2012 @ 3:12 pm

    Dr. Taitz,
    Absolutely not!
    What is Feinstein afriad of?
    Sounds like a trap to discredit you.

    Congratulations! She agress you’re winning.

    Get elected and put all them ALL in orange jumpsuits!

  10. hipshotpercusion
    May 14th, 2012 @ 3:12 pm

    Tell the old bat to get bent! Who in the hell does she think she is?

  11. Patrick Oh
    May 14th, 2012 @ 3:22 pm

    That is not a debate, it’s a rhetorical firing squad. I wouldn’t participate in any forum that isn’t wide open to all topics. I would use that letter as a tool in your campaign.

    God bless America, and you and yours, Orly!

  12. HAHA TalkToSelf
    May 14th, 2012 @ 3:23 pm

    HAHAHAHAHAAA OK…. then Dr. Taitz needs to DEMAND that FLUORENSTEIN can’t have any supporters either, AND also demand that WND be in attendance for this show.

    OK again… that FLUORENSTEIN has holes in her HEAD and should use FLUORENSTEIN stuff to heal the brain leaks in her head.

    The MSM has made lots of bucks by having an insider on their ticket…, so the show should have an OPEN audience… internet connection so that the constituents can SHUV tough questions down the throat of someone who IS RESPONSIBLE, in a major part, for DESTROYING American liberties UNDER American LAW.

  13. garth
    May 14th, 2012 @ 3:24 pm

    Any Debate should have the top 5, her, you and
    3 others, in a panel forum. This allows a cross section of ideas and will not allow her
    to a say you would not debate her. Also, any questions to respond to, should be the same for all concerned and the lineup for responses should rotate. No Anderson Cooper, types as moderators and have 2 moderators from different camps.

  14. garth
    May 14th, 2012 @ 3:24 pm

    Any Debate should have the top 5, her, you and
    3 others, in a panel forum. This allows a cross section of ideas and will not allow her
    to a say you would not debate her. Also, any questions to respond to, should be the same for all concerned and the lineup for responses should rotate. No Anderson Cooper, types as moderators and have 2 moderators from different camps.

  15. garth
    May 14th, 2012 @ 3:25 pm

    Any Debate should have the top 5, her, you and
    3 others, in a panel forum. This allows a cross section of ideas and will not allow her
    to a say you would not debate her. Also, any questions to respond to, should be the same for all concerned and the lineup for responses should rotate. No Anderson Cooper, types as moderators and have 2 moderators from different camps.

  16. P. R. Hank
    May 14th, 2012 @ 3:28 pm

    You should report this to WND. I am sure they would like to know. And maybe Feinstein would allow the debate to go on WND TV just as Sheriff Joe had his presser on Obama’s fraudulant BC and SSN.

  17. marshman
    May 14th, 2012 @ 3:32 pm

    Debate only with no conditions and when she makes it a issue that you will not debate her then let everyone know the reason why.

  18. Leoski
    May 14th, 2012 @ 3:37 pm

    The arrogance of the ruling elite never ceases to amaze me. By all means you should agree to debate Feinstein, but never on her terms. Suggestion: Dear Diane, I do hope that we may debate the critical issues of the day in this election season. My debate format proposals:
    1) The sponsors determine the questions. The debaters respond as they see fit.
    2) Agreed 3) Agreed 4) Usual method of determining broadcast outlets shall prevail.
    5) Half of the guests determined by you at random, if you wish. The other half will be my guests.

    Dr. Taitz, you are on fire. The public is beginning to recognize just who you are though some have been with you since ’08 and fully understand the situation.

    Should you win the G.O.P. nomination, by August or September Californians will demand Feinstein debate with you and at that time you will be able to dictate the terms of the debate, period. Never give in to these oligarchic monsters.

    We are in the DFW area and look forward to your visit on the 26th May.

    God bless!

  19. bps
    May 14th, 2012 @ 3:43 pm

    you have to come from a position of strength. This is a game of a show of power. Right now she believes that you need the debate more than she does. I would counter from a position of strength. Setup a strong position and slowly over time, start making a big deal (this has to be timed carefully) that she is afraid to debate you. THe pressure has to be on her. I probably would’ quote her letter directly (you have to be able to keep a line of communications open). Perhaps an idea is to set public expectations for a debate. The people in CA want to hear about this and hear about that, my opponent wants to have a debate of limited scope. What is she afraid of? Why doesn’t she want to be debate you on what the people want to hear? I believe the people want to hear about things that matter to them and CA.

  20. orly taitz
    May 14th, 2012 @ 3:53 pm

    you are welcome to contact WND

  21. Michael
    May 14th, 2012 @ 3:54 pm

    Dear Dr. Taitz,
    I would not debate Ms. Feinstein. What is she afraid of? Oh, it’s called the truth and the US Constitution. Why don’t you set some ground rules Dr. Taitz? What makes Ms. Feinstein so special? Nothing. Ms. Feinstein is running scared. If Ms. Feinstein was so confident in Mr. aka Obama’s legitimacy, she should have no problem speaking to that end. Hold your ground Orly!

    Lord bless, Michael

  22. Freedom First
    May 14th, 2012 @ 4:02 pm

    No, No, and No…Never let them bind your tounge like all the other politicians. You must speak up against the usurper with every breath as all American Patriots must. God Bless you, protect you and strengthen you…

  23. John
    May 14th, 2012 @ 4:07 pm

    Orly;

    As suggested by many others, you should not accept the terms dictated by Feinstein.

    Send them a polite reply, explaining why their terms are unacceptable.

    And don’t forget to cc it to Fox news!

  24. Bloodless Coup
    May 14th, 2012 @ 4:24 pm

    You should agree to debate her on two conditions that

    1. that she must debate you on Obama’s eligibility and…

    2.that ANY media outlet should be free to cover the event.

    Never allow your enemies to determine the rules of engagement.

    NEVER!

  25. ;bellarella
    May 14th, 2012 @ 4:27 pm

    do not do this debate…its a setup…

  26. Tom the Veteran
    May 14th, 2012 @ 4:27 pm

    She knows you will never agree to those terms and you shouldn’t, but it will allow her to publicly criticize you and the Democratic media will will make it look like you refused to debate. You must somehow turn the tables on her so that everybody can see that she doesn’t really want a debate, she simply wants to recite her talking points with no opposition.

  27. Redd
    May 14th, 2012 @ 4:30 pm

    Finklestein doesn’t want to discuss presidential eligibility? Remember, Sheriff Joe has more blockbuster news early June and she is running from it! After this news release, she would be telling californians to ignore fraud and forgery of the commie usurper and just talk about the spotted owl.

  28. Mark
    May 14th, 2012 @ 4:31 pm

    “Guests shall be limited to 100 voters chosen at random.” If you are polling as high as reported, aren’t the odds pretty good that some of the random voters will be your supporters anyway?

  29. steve
    May 14th, 2012 @ 4:36 pm

    Don’t sell yourself short and capitulate to HER demands, she’s the needy one.
    Counter with YOUR list of conditions- shift the power play in your favor.

  30. Veritas
    May 14th, 2012 @ 4:38 pm

    Just tell her “gei kaken ofen yam,” because that is the best she deserves as a response!

  31. Twister
    May 14th, 2012 @ 4:46 pm

    Oooh. This has to be true! HAS to be! Feinstein is scared of you, Orly. Of course she is! You go, girl. Show them who the legal genius here is!

  32. winnybar
    May 14th, 2012 @ 4:48 pm

    Tell her that the latest Obama reseach shows that Obama Senior never stepped foot on Hawaii soil and never fathered Asian Obama, a fake black imposter. The release of UK Kenya colony documents circa 1960 of Kenya students attending foreign colleges showed Barrack Obama was the correct spelling. Further DOJ immigration documents of Certificates of Eligibility required for foreign students list Barrack Obama and his real birthdate June 18,1934. Further the Certificates have the location and college altered by a different typewriter than the main body. In large font it says University of Hawaii as the alteration. Meaning Barrack Obama did not attend UH or live there. Google Annwriting1 for the certificates.

  33. 12thGenerationAMERICAN
    May 14th, 2012 @ 4:49 pm

    (1) No questions shall be asked and no answers shall be given concerning the eligibility of President Obama or any related matters. The debate should focus on economic, social, and foreign policy issues.
    Ask her to make a public statement as to why she is unwilling to debate this.

    (2) The format of the debates shall provide for a two minute response, followed by a one minute rebuttal, followed by a 30 second response.
    Acceptable

    (3) No notes, documents, or teleprompters shall be allowed.
    Acceptable and also no earphones are allowed.

    (4) No debates shall be televised by Fox News or any affiliates thereof.
    Again have her make a public statement why this unacceptable.

    (5) None of your supporters shall be allowed to attend. Guests shall be limited to 100 voters chosen at random.
    Only if you both oversee the random selection.

  34. winnybar
    May 14th, 2012 @ 5:00 pm

    Tell her the No. 1 issue to be debated is her vote for the Iraq War Killing and malming millions and wasting two trillion dollars. Tell her she has a lot of guts even running for a position of honor in the USA. She should beg forgiveness. What part of her religion allows killing millions of innocent people and destroying their country?

  35. stevem
    May 14th, 2012 @ 5:01 pm

    This corrupt old rino gal has been at this election thing quite a while and has ‘learned’ all the tricks, don’t be lured into her trap where she’ll surely stack the deck in her favor to make you look awful.
    She NEEDS your debate and it’s YOUR debate to win, and win you must!
    If you need coach help/assist just ask.

  36. JohnPUMA
    May 14th, 2012 @ 5:09 pm

    rather go on fox and make it known of her demands

  37. orly taitz
    May 14th, 2012 @ 5:10 pm

    can you call FOX and forward this e-mail to them?

  38. kelley
    May 14th, 2012 @ 5:12 pm

    I would say fine BUT since you haven’t had any input into the debate criteria then you get to pick the moderators for the three networks. Then I would say DO IT!

  39. Frank Coniff
    May 14th, 2012 @ 5:19 pm

    In other words she wants to debate you on what you can do for California, if you don’t do it, then it just shows that you’re in it to smear Obama and nothing else.

  40. OustTheOs
    May 14th, 2012 @ 5:31 pm

    Excuuuuuuuuuuuse me, but don’t the political PARTIES set up the debates??!!

    This arrogant witch doesn’t want to debate you on the aforementioned points because she doesn’t know ANYTHING ABOUT THEM!!! If you hear a giant sucking sound when SENATOR (emphasis hers) F. stands up, it’s her head pulling away from her butt…

    I wouldn’t meet this woman in the ladies room!

  41. JIm
    May 14th, 2012 @ 5:40 pm

    No Way.

    She needs you more than you need her.

    One Fox debate. One CNN debate. And one C-Span debate.

    All topics accepted.

    Your supporters and her supporters at least 100 each. Audience response limited to applause.

    They will cut you to pieces and make you look like a Martian if you let Feinstein control the process.

  42. Rene' Richard
    May 14th, 2012 @ 5:54 pm

    Id post her letter on a billboard with your response….NO…unless everything is above the table. All topics are game, no issues too small.
    Tell her a debate includes ALL of the truth. Leave the ball in her court AND in the public eye! Make this known on TV, radio, papers and the web. Post this everywhere you can…her letter…and state that you, Orly Taitz, will not leave out ANY truths! Any and All topics!

  43. Rodney
    May 14th, 2012 @ 6:03 pm

    They want to be able to say you refused to debate. Refuse, and do all you can to publicize these absurd condiions.

  44. John
    May 14th, 2012 @ 6:05 pm

    Orly:
    Send her your own ground rules, and suggest that the final rules should be discussed and agreed upon by the two debaters.

    Make sure that the formulation of your rules exposes her rules for what they are!

    You have a golden opportunity to show to the CA voters her true face.

  45. Bob Porrazzo
    May 14th, 2012 @ 6:14 pm

    Then maybe Dr. Taitz, you should look at this video from Alex Jones BEFORE you debate the eugenicist Jew on HER SO-CALLED TERMS!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdAn0r6yzrU&feature=g-u-u

  46. Muttdog
    May 14th, 2012 @ 6:30 pm

    I don’t get this Feinstein woman. Is she talking Greek? Did she go to USC? Is she riding in on her high horse expecting Orly Taitz to welcome her in and accept her demands?

    No chance. Bring that woman in and show her who’s the boss. Make of her weak offering a trophy.

  47. PrivacyPhreak
    May 14th, 2012 @ 6:42 pm

    The most important issue is why she has failed to uphold the Constitution, yet she wants it off the table. I think you should not waste your time, but promote that issue outside of her forum.

  48. Santino
    May 14th, 2012 @ 6:43 pm

    Demand equal time from Fox on Sunday. Dianne Feinstein will be on Fox News then (see the link below). I think the FCC requires major candidates to be given equal access. If they refuse, you should sue them. Dianne Feinstein should not be able to go on Fox when it suits her, but refuse to debate you in that forum.

    Maybe a strongly worded letter to the President of Fox News would get you some face to face time with Feinstein? At least it will give you credibility with those of us who believe you have been sold out by the Republican establishment! You go girl and make sure that your hair is perfectly coiffed. :)

    http://www.diannefeinstein2012.com/news/2012/05/dont-miss-dianne-on-fox-news-sunday-this-weekend/

  49. Anonymous
    May 14th, 2012 @ 7:03 pm

    If you don’t she will call you chicken…
    is it commonplace for one person to call the shots? she is trying to control the situation.

    It sounds like what she really wants for you to not debate her

    negotiate the terms and include your own. make it unfavorable for her.let her be the one to say “no”.
    maybe even simply that she has to abide by the same terms that no media and no supporters allowed…it would be pointless for her to agree to the same conditions she imposed on you…

  50. Robert
    May 14th, 2012 @ 7:03 pm

    Feinstein seems determined to
    1) Suppress the truth and facilitate lies
    2) Inhibit freedom of the press
    3) Inhibit freedom of speech and assembly
    Never let the enemy choose the battlefield.
    I find her conditions disgusting.

  51. Alexander Gofen
    May 14th, 2012 @ 7:05 pm

    Dear Orly,

    NEVER EVER AGREE FOR THESE DESPICABLE FORMAT AND TERMS.

    Put forward the following non-negotiable conditions.

    1) You, not the moderator, must ask Feinsteint any questions of like. She can ask you too.

    2) Your first question to F. shall concern the civic: What is the meaning of the Natural Born Citizen? I, her constituent, have her official reply when she deceived me.

    3) Your 2nd question to F. shell be why she ignores the criminal aspects of Obama, such as his fake SS#, military registration, and production of the forged BC.

    4) You shall display whichever you find fit.

    5) You shall invite whoever you find fit up to half of the capacity of the hall.

    6) You shall invite media outlets that you find fit.

    Again: ALL THE TERMS ABOVE ARE NON NEGOTIABLE. If she disagrees, she may well go to hell. The terms she offered discredit her, not you. NEVER EVER AGREE FOR THEM.

  52. taino21
    May 14th, 2012 @ 7:05 pm

    Muttdog, you must be a low life. Typical democrat. That’s the difference between you socialists and those who want the Constitution enforced, you want everyone to respect your views but don’t want to respect others. If you want to be a communist or a socialist, more power to you, but, don’t try to force everyone to be one. Most likely you are coward like those communist and socialists in the democratic party that are afraid to come out and say it in the open because they know that they would never get elected. See, I don’t want you to be like me, but, you have the freedom right now to move to Russia, China, Cuba or any other country of your choosing if you so desire. Those in these countries can’t make that choice.
    Ms. Taitz, I feel for you, because I know how repulsive you must feel to be in the same room with some of these people. No, do not accept.

  53. itchik
    May 14th, 2012 @ 7:12 pm

    No, you do not debate this idiot under these conditions.

    You DO make certain to make sure as many people as possible know these are the stacked and slanted conditions she requires to engage in a debate.

    It is proof that she is weak and incapable of actual leadership. She’s already handed you the victory by admitting what a loser she is.

  54. itchik
    May 14th, 2012 @ 7:12 pm

    No, you do not debate this idiot under these conditions.

    You DO make certain to make sure as many people as possible know these are the stacked and slanted conditions she requires to engage in a debate.

    It is proof that she is weak and incapable of actual leadership. She’s already handed you the victory by admitting what a loser she is.

  55. ken
    May 14th, 2012 @ 7:19 pm

    she doesn’t want to debate you..she wants you to say no so she can call you chicken..
    make her be the one to say no..
    she must abide by the same terms she imposed on you..it would be pointless for her to agree if no media or her supporters were not allowed also..
    put the ball in her court

  56. orly taitz
    May 14th, 2012 @ 7:20 pm

    can someone call those networks and ask for equal time for me?

  57. Yoel
    May 14th, 2012 @ 7:26 pm

    Did I miss Feinstein’s coronation as “Queen of California”, or is the old totally out of touch with reality narcissist actually THAT crazy?! Feinstein and Obama are the worst treasonous political criminals, pathological liars, and shameless professional thieves in D.C.. Debate on YOUR terms, do not EVER allow that old hag to dictate the rules!

  58. Tommy Conlon
    May 14th, 2012 @ 7:53 pm

    Absolutely not Orly, the eligibility question is why it is imperative that you win. She’s going to have to debate you if you’re the nominee, please don’t give in to something like this.

  59. Patriot
    May 14th, 2012 @ 7:57 pm

    Who the hell is Sef Green ???? co-ordinator ???

    It appears that Sef green is actually one of those HEADLESS BODIES found on the MEXICAN Highway !!!

    How else could someone that BRAIN-LESS come up with such stupid demands……….

    Careful Dr. Taitz Sef Green is that’s his real name probably doesn’t work for Finkensteins campaign. lol !!!

    God Bless you Orly THEY ARE SCARED !!!

  60. The Phoenix
    May 14th, 2012 @ 8:23 pm

    Well, Geez-us! Guess how I vote, Orly? Yup! I’d tell that post menopausal, lard-ass to either put up or shut up!!! She doesn’t want to debate you, cause she knows that she can’t debate you on real issues, in a fair fight!

    ALL issues should be on the table, and fair game! And has she or anyone told you WHO is going to be the monderator? And you just know that the crowd will be a “stacked deck” against you! Remember, they’re all liars!

    And I’d also tell her that she needs to stop acting like a spoiled brat, just trying to get her own way! She needs to see just how scared she is in laying out all these conditions. If she had a REAL RECORD of achievement, she wouldn’t need all these “advantages!”

    Tell her that unless the whole debate is: Tepper-free, Creep-oid-free, berg-free, liberal-free, treasonous-free, foggy-free, and any other type of (-free) that I haven’t mentioned, just send her the well-known sign of “kiss-off” with the “Rockefeller Salute!”

    And…where would this take place? Who cares? Orly…just don’t accomodate them!!!! When this conniver takes the time to want to appear that she’s looking honest, DON’T BELIEVE IT! I think they can’t wait to get you in this “set-up!!!”

    That’s how I see this! Cause ask youself why would they try to debate (now), since they didn’t want to before? They have a plan, so don’t become their goal!! And I haven’t read hardly any of the above posts to come to this conclusion! Never trust any (liberal) to be as honest as you are!!! Cause Funstein will have the upper-hand with this debate!

    Make everything you do here serve “your” advantages!! Not the other way around! They think you want to do this so bad, that they can b.s. you in any way possible! Make Funstein do things YOUR WAY!

  61. Tina Connor
    May 14th, 2012 @ 8:40 pm

    My take on this is a bit different. I think these conditions benefit you, Dr. Taitz.

    Independents often decide elections. Your message has been well-heard by conservatives. Debates reach ALL voters, not just conservatives. I suspect that many independents aren’t attending conservative or liberal events, so debates are the best way to reach them.

    Regarding FOX. Some here seem to think that the debate would be aired on FOX News cable channel. It wouldn’t. It would air on the Fox-affiliated FOX channel, that runs shows like The Simpsons and that vile Family Guy. That is no loss.

    Your debate would likely air on ABC/NBC/CBS/Calif PBS. Non-conservatives don’t spend as much time on FOX as they do on the other stations. Debates on other channels allow you to show that you can hold your own and kick bottom in any venue!

    While I find the condition on Obama’s eligibility egregious, you do need to show ALL Californians your ENTIRE platform. You are known nationally as the leader of the eligibility movement; you get regular national media coverage on the eligibility issues. These debates would allow voters to see how strong you are on other policy issues. Your access to voters would greatly expand.

    Debates always have their pluses and minuses. I think that it is necessary for Senate candidates to debate. You can make these conditions work in your favor; you have a gift for turning events in your favor.

    Also, I didn’t see Feinstein saying that you couldn’t mention the eligibility issues in your answers on policy.

    “No questions shall be asked and no answers shall be given concerning the eligibility of President Obama or any related matters.”

    I think Feinstein is saying that formal questions regarding the issue won’t be asked by a moderator and that Feinstein won’t answer questions you pose to her regarding the eligibility movement. She can’t keep you from throwing in info about Obama’s eligibility as you talk about other policy issues.

    After all, Obama’s eligibly is related to ALL national policy!

  62. wendell sorensen
    May 14th, 2012 @ 8:59 pm

    Orly, I’ve got full confidence in you to do the right thing. BEST WISHES!!

  63. No preconditions!
    May 14th, 2012 @ 9:00 pm

    Dr. you are damed if you do and damned if you don’t unless there are absolutely no preconditions. Her preconditions are an admission of defeat on the issue of Obama’s fraud and ineligibility. In that sense you have already won! No need to debate. Just point out her preconditions every chance you get and you will be advancing your own honesty, openness, and loyalty to the constitution and intent to properly inform the voters, while conversely showing her failure and fear to do so.

    Under no circumstances should you debate her under ANY preconditions. Her offer is a desperate ploy that should only be countered by exposing her limitations to address the truth, inform the voters and keep her oath to honor the Constitution.

  64. Ed O.
    May 14th, 2012 @ 9:07 pm

    Orly
    You have a good chance now to make her look foolish. Why don’t you send her your list of conditions that you want to debate. Make her say NO

  65. MarieCA
    May 14th, 2012 @ 9:14 pm

    Fox news is the ONLY network that will give you any positive coverage from the debates! If it’s not on Fox, then all that anybody will hear are sound bites taken out of context to make you look bad, and make her look good. I find that to be her most offensive stipulation for the dabtes.
    Feinstein is trying to set up an ambush.
    Also, you should hand pick half of the attendees, or they will all be libs.
    In addition, you should be able to talk about whatever you want! Period!

  66. Muttdog
    May 14th, 2012 @ 9:40 pm

    You don’t think Feinstein wants to debate Orly, Ken? Don’t you realize that Diane is afraid of losing to Orly and NEEDS to debate her and NEEDS to get her to agree to that now because otherwise Orly might beat her in November?

    *Chuckle* It’s so obvious!

  67. JAK
    May 14th, 2012 @ 9:58 pm

    I wouldn’t know if Feinstein is setting you up for a political ambush by limiting your prerogatives and the ares of a debate but I would guess such to be the intention(s). However, I see Feinstein as clever politician who would take the debate to some nebulous areas and events which she knows from her years of political office and you would be very likely be like a person in a lifeboat away from the mother ship of all concerns past and present. There have been many suggestions offered that need to be considered to make or set your own conditions. Make a slight turn in your approach of seeming to beg for a debate to the direction of publicizing that a debate of any and all relative issues are needed at this time to clear the political air towards what the Founders gave us as to Constitutional law.

  68. Doris Grosvner
    May 14th, 2012 @ 10:15 pm

    Orly,

    Ronnie Raygun got rid of the equal time doctrine a long time ago.

    GOP candidates buy time me.

  69. Doris Grosvner
    May 14th, 2012 @ 10:15 pm

    Orly,

    Ronnie Raygun got rid of the equal time doctrine a long time ago.

    GOP candidates buy time now.

  70. FOX IS PHONY
    May 14th, 2012 @ 11:18 pm

    Just forget FOX… all of the FLOX eight balls have NOT aided Orly at any time since all this EVIL person’s forgery deeds were uncovered. In fact the BIG SEX OFFENDER (goto “Thesmokinggun”) “O’Reilly has VALIDATED the birth of the USURPER by reading ads in two newspapers, that’s the extend of O’Reilly’s proof that the IDIOT in White House was born in Hawaii.

    Now why would ANYONE want to expose themselves to a group that has made a MOCKERY of Orly’s efforts to have the USURPER prove who he is?

  71. Lisa
    May 14th, 2012 @ 11:29 pm

    Absolutely not! Why on earth should she get to pick all the terms and conditions, which of course would be in her favor?

    You have most assuredly gotten as far as you have because you are the only one with the guts to stand for the little people against the massive corruption that is obama. That is why she wants him taken off the talks…because she, like the rest of the obama regime, wants to cover up the truth and to force you into silence. She, being corrupt too, could not speak against obama, which would look bad for her in front of the voters. That is precisely your edge, and the people are standing with you. Do Not let obama be taken off the debate…its the most important issue out there! And please, you stipulate CNN cannot be there as they are clearly biased in obamas favor, along with other corruption. And that albino looking reporter of theirs is the worst when it comes to trying to stir up racial tensions.

  72. Antonio
    May 14th, 2012 @ 11:36 pm

    You should respond that the reason why she puts conditions is because she is not a free person and cannot withstand a conversation with you on matters that concern democracy, freedom, civil rights etc. A senator that has no ability, for whatever reason, to debate on certain issues, should not be a senator.

  73. Mark
    May 14th, 2012 @ 11:43 pm

    Diane Frankenstein’s terms are not acceptable. That woman is a disease.
    I would not consider a recommendation to debate her based on her lack of any credibility. She will look at you like fresh meat and rip your campaign apart to unravel every last bit of hard work you’ve done to this point in gaining ground against her.

  74. Antonio
    May 14th, 2012 @ 11:43 pm

    No, Orly. My suggestion is that you do not take part to the debate under those conditions. She will say that she gave you the possibility and you refused so be prepared to answer that. If you cannot talk freely about issues that are at the base of your entire work and efforts, why debate at all? Feinstein is afraid of facing certain issues and would like to have a debate preventing you from talking about those issues that might not be relevant for some people but are vital for you and a lot of people that still believe in freedom. So, be prepared to give an answer that will defend your position.

  75. West Coast Carl
    May 14th, 2012 @ 11:50 pm

    Orly, if it were me I would answer those preconditions point-by-point with a reply like this:

    1. Why don’t you want the people of California to hear where we both stand on ALL the issues? I insist there be NO censorship in our debates. This is not communist Russia!

    2. OK, but only if you agree to #1.

    3. Teleprompters, no. Documents, YES.

    4. Fox News has the largest viewership of all media, and I want as many Americans as possible to see our debates. Why don’t you?

    5. That is an outrageous request. Exclude my supporters, you don’t get me either.

    Awaiting your kind reply.
    Cordially,

  76. leo derosia
    May 15th, 2012 @ 1:20 am

    Not on her terms…no questions are off limits…good luck orly, we need more like you in usa. Leo,NH

  77. scott
    May 15th, 2012 @ 1:28 am

    NO WAY ! Who does she think she is to dictate the terms.

    I want to see a Lincoln – Douglas style debate. Same as Newt did in the Reb. primary.
    The two of you at a desk with NO questions from the moderator, just the two of you debating whatever you want.

    I would demand that it be hosted by FOX because they are the #1 Network and are the least biased of them all. Does Feinstein want MSNBC to host and cut you off whenever they don’t like what you have to say, or ask questions only to make you look foolish.

    Good luck “Senator” Taitz

  78. Bruce Goldwell
    May 15th, 2012 @ 1:38 am

    Sounds one sided to me… Absolutely not! You need to be making demands that level these debates.. she is trying to stack the deck… don’t let her get away with this.

  79. Patty
    May 15th, 2012 @ 2:36 am

    I guess it depends how seriously you want to be perceived as a candidate. Do you want a “stacked” audience of supporters or do you want to reach voters?

  80. BJP
    May 15th, 2012 @ 3:10 am

    No….it’s a stacked deck. You should point this out in the news media, especially Fox, that those are her requirements for debate. She is a coward.

  81. Norm Glover
    May 15th, 2012 @ 3:18 am

    Absolutely not! It is a trap. I would broadcast her “conditions” for debate far and wide so California voters can see how afraid she is to debate ALL of the issues. I believe this may force Feinstein to reconsider hew stance. IF you do decide to debate her, at least demand that you pick the moderator.

  82. Larry
    May 15th, 2012 @ 3:59 am

    Orly….The terms are totally unacceptable…The other thing I fear is if you turn her down…she will hollar that you won’t debate her on the issues.

  83. thomas
    May 15th, 2012 @ 4:24 am

    Print up and publish a list of questions about 10 minimum for you and her to answer and restrict it to 30 words or less. and give her 30 days to answer and let it be known you have submitted your answers already to a court or whatever. The rags (news media) will love it, of course send them the questions too. they cannot resist to publish them and make fun but none the less she will be questioned why she could not answer them, a catch 22.

  84. Kerry Hodgkinson
    May 15th, 2012 @ 4:42 am

    NO DEBATE, PLEASE!

    I sincerely think it is a mistake for any Conservative to debate a Liberal.
    Why? To have a mutual exchange or presentation of ideas both parties must abide by the same rules of conduct, namely cordiality and honesty.

    Liberals cannot do this, because they view every opportunity as WAR cloaked in words (For them anything goes, lies, misrepresentations, personal attacks.)

    While you will gain valuable television advertising (as will your opponent), you will not have television time to address her false accusations and misrepresentations. You can be assured the debate format will not allow adequate rebuttal time if it were even possible. You will always be on the defensive trying to point out and correct her untrue statements. Liberals count on this tactic; in fact it has a name when it occurs just prior to the election: “The October Surprise”.

    What should you do? Hold a press conference and tell all of California that you do not debate unethical politicians. Point out that all Senators have the Constitutional duty and responsibility to vet the eligibility and criminal actions of the President and
    Ms. Feinstein has failed to do this.
    Tell California she is an accomplice to Treason and you will have nothing to do with her.

    PS- And tell California that Feinstein wants to censor the (eligibility) TRUTH in the debate and Americans do not support Censorship.

  85. fdavis
    May 15th, 2012 @ 4:52 am

    Hi Orly. I agree with the majority of the commentors. You should not agree to Feinstein’s terms. It’s a trap. She doesn’t want to discuss the things that matter which is the economy and her complacent roll in causing things to be as they are.

    Personally I’ve watched Fox news for the last 5 years. I use to think that they were about telling the truth and informing the public on the issues. I no longer believe that.

    Though Fox is much more fair than other media outlets. they too continue to shield Obama and his forgeries, school records and the like. Fox is not doing their job. I use to really like Orielly and still do as compared to other network commentors but this guy acts as if she doesn’t have an investigative bone in his body concerning issues dealing with Obama’s past.

    Say yes to a debate but no to any preconditions

  86. far left lib nut job
    May 15th, 2012 @ 5:03 am

    typ lib controlling BS

    just say no, and hit her with your own conditions:

    1- constitution dictates free speech, if you really believe in constitution then feinstein what are you afraid of?

    2- any and all social mediums are allowed, what’s wrong with FOX ?

    3- all supporters are allowed.

    Do you believe in freedom and liberty? What is Feinstein afraid of? The truth ?

    4- have micheal savage be the moderator.

  87. Aviva T. Briceni
    May 15th, 2012 @ 5:38 am

    Why not agree to do it?

    All the stipulations are simple, easy to adhere to, and Obama’s eligibility isn’t an issue this election.

  88. Aviva T. Briceni
    May 15th, 2012 @ 5:45 am

    Like it or not, you need to demonstrate that you can participate in a MAINSTREAM environment and are a well-rounded candidate. It’s just reality.

    You need to have dozens and dozens of appearances where you DO NOT MENTION the eligibility issue before you will be taken seriously. You will continue to be labelled “fringe” and “kooky” until you at least pretend to drop the issue. After establishing some credibility in the eyes of the mainstream press and public you can then bring it up.

    Adhering to these rules would only help you, your credibility, your campaign and your supporters.

    I will be disappointed in you if you don’t participate but then again I’ve been disappointed by many politicians.

  89. orly taitz
    May 15th, 2012 @ 5:49 am

    why don’t you contact Savage and see if he agrees

  90. orly taitz
    May 15th, 2012 @ 5:51 am

    can you contact them?

  91. orly taitz
    May 15th, 2012 @ 5:52 am

    please, contact the media

  92. orly taitz
    May 15th, 2012 @ 5:54 am

    good points

  93. orly taitz
    May 15th, 2012 @ 5:56 am

    these are good points, keep in mind, she wants to debate after primary. I hope my supporters will help me win the primary

  94. queenofshina
    May 15th, 2012 @ 7:11 am

    She is a perfect example of how and why we are losing our rights of free speech, freedom of the press and soon freedom of religion. What morons we have as elected “representatives”! They should all be tarred and feathered and sent home in disgrace. And she is supposed to represent the people and protect their rights? LOL…Except it isn’t funny! It’s disgraceful!

  95. queenofshina
    May 15th, 2012 @ 7:11 am

    She is a perfect example of how and why we are losing our rights of free speech, freedom of the press and soon freedom of religion. What morons we have as elected “representatives”! They should all be tarred and feathered and sent home in disgrace. And she is supposed to represent the people and protect their rights? LOL…Except it isn’t funny! It’s disgraceful!

  96. SUN TZU
    May 15th, 2012 @ 7:31 am

    Dr. Taitz,
    You made the debate OFFER, so according to Sun Tzu you have the power in your hands to RIDICULE that critter Stinkenstein using her reply. And! not only Sun Tzu, but Saul Alinsky would probably advise YOU to MAKE FUN of her offer, because after all your offer didn’t have any HOOKS in it.

    Your debate offer was for an open discussion of ants, termites and like kind in the FED government.

    SO… do not let Stinkerstein off of the hook…use your unrestricted offer to RIDICULE her and her WORTHLESS service provided to Americans for MANY years.

    In fact … she can be RIDICULED for screwing UP the country’s progress in the world. BTW! Dr. Deming says that DATA wins all battles.

    GO AFTER STINKERSTEIN’S VOTING RECORD THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THE ALMOST TOTAL DECLINE OF AMERICA’S WORLD LEADERSHIP.

  97. Heinrich S. Dudekofsky
    May 15th, 2012 @ 8:00 am

    Does she really want to debate you. Have you tried looking at who really sent it?

  98. RacerJim
    May 15th, 2012 @ 8:06 am

    Dear Orly,

    I submit you should publically respond to Senator Feinstein’s demands in as brief and pointed manner as possible…just like General MacArthur responded to his Japanese counterpart…”NUTS” :-)

  99. SUN TZU
    May 15th, 2012 @ 9:15 am

    Dr. Taitz,
    Tell Stinkerstein that a DEBATE was offered and that for you to become involved with a Stinkerstein CHOIR is not a debate…it’s a Stinkerstein PREACHER spitting at the CHOIR.

  100. SUN TZU
    May 15th, 2012 @ 9:17 am

    GO AFTER THE VOTING RECORD…ITS “FACTS” THAT CAN’T BE DISPUTED… SLAM IT TO HER.. SHE NEEDS IT BAD.

  101. Paul Jackson
    May 15th, 2012 @ 9:27 am

    “just like General MacArthur responded to his Japanese counterpart…”NUTS” :-)”

    Kinda like when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor there, RacerJim?

  102. Marvin L. Stewart
    May 15th, 2012 @ 9:29 am

    Dr. Taitz,

    It has been your character, integrity and the principles that you have fought for that has you leading all other candidates in this senatorial election.

    Because of the criminal conspiracy to cover up the many constitutional, federal statutes, and state statutes surrounding Barak and his criminal enterprise you would be complicit in the criminal conspiracy if you were to agree to the terms and conditions of the Feinstein Debate Agreement. Diane Feinstein is complicit in the cover-up of the criminal enterprise of Barak and she does not want to have her deeds of darkness exposed.

    Stand your ground as the Patriot that you are because the victory is yours.

    May the Blessings of God Almighty continue to Bless you and your family and may He Bless you with the 2012 senatorial victory.

  103. far left lib nut job
    May 15th, 2012 @ 9:48 am

    Racer
    just like General MacArthur responded to his Japanese counterpart…”NUTS

    ….it wasn’t MacArthur who said this, and the General who said it, said it to the Germans when his infantry division was surrounded during the Battle of Bulge, at Bastogne which in/near Luxumborg.

    Just a correction on history.

  104. RobL
    May 15th, 2012 @ 10:13 am

    In two words:

    HELL NO.

  105. Extirpates
    May 15th, 2012 @ 10:23 am

    The final request that your mouth be duct taped shut for the debate so everything can be controlled just like in DC.

  106. 1st American
    May 15th, 2012 @ 10:49 am

    Orly,

    Absolutely not! You know full well that under those conditions you wouldn’t stand a chance. It would be like a one armed boxer in a title fight. Find out why she won’t have a fair debate with no conditions. Then you know you got a shot at the title. Keep up the good work!

  107. Thomas F. Babson
    May 15th, 2012 @ 11:11 am

    You clearly have some leverage here. If indeed it comes down to a two-person race between you and her, she will pay a heavy price once the voters see how unfairly she is treating you.

    You need to stand firm. Maybe you can compromise on a point or two, but you have to make sure she treats you as an equal.

  108. WALLYinWV
    May 15th, 2012 @ 11:24 am

    Hahahahahahahaha……..she is getting worried! Debate her only if the debate is completely open with all cards on the table.

  109. Frank Coniff
    May 15th, 2012 @ 11:58 am

    I hope so, RacerJim.
    That will tell the voters that all Orly cares about is getting Obama, and nothing else. Then they’ll know that she is not the right person for the job.

  110. Kurt Knabke
    May 15th, 2012 @ 12:02 pm

    Orly,

    Think obut this. Go ahead and agree to her terms. Then demand a second debate according to your exact terms. Just make sure you have the “First Debate”. She will never agree to this. So then you can attack her obviously disingenuous position of fairness and statemanship.

    Kurt

  111. XVLFAF
    May 15th, 2012 @ 1:11 pm

    Why not? You have nothing to lose and everything to gain.
    I would ask for the list of questions in advance.

  112. JL
    May 15th, 2012 @ 1:20 pm

    NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

    Don’t let her dictate the terms.

  113. RMinNC
    May 15th, 2012 @ 2:32 pm

    NO way should you debate with Feinstein setting the agenda and imposing restrictions on what she will debate and what she will not debate….

    That will make you the automatic LOSER.

  114. RMinNC
    May 15th, 2012 @ 2:35 pm

    P>S>

    You should publicly and OFTEN put before the public Feinstein’s conditions for debating you…let the public know theres rats in the wood pile….make her debate UNCONDITIONALLY or no debate.

  115. Ken
    May 15th, 2012 @ 2:40 pm

    Absolutely Not! Never agree to rules by libs. They are covering and protecting obumer, who should be in jail. I hope we can get this traitor, even if he does loose this election to Romney, but especially if he wins reelection. We are pulling for you!!

  116. david
    May 15th, 2012 @ 2:41 pm

    Orly. No way. Let her know your terms. Open honest and all issues on the table. Let the public know her demands. You got her!

  117. Bill Fitzpatrick
    May 15th, 2012 @ 2:52 pm

    A simple no thank you; not under any circumstance; this is still a free country and we do not limit free speech; especially about politics by professional politicians.

  118. Sovereign Soul
    May 15th, 2012 @ 3:18 pm

    Dear Dr. Taitz,

    It’s MY opinion that the ONLY place to “debate” Diane Feinstgein is in a Court of Law. SHE would be delighte to “debate” you on the ISSUES because THAT would be YOUR acknowledgement that she is absolved from the fraudulent, treasonous actions she initiated when Speaker of the House AND leader of the National Democrat Party.

    For you to debate her in any conventional “forum” is her obvious attempt to obscure ALL the charges that can, and should, be brought against her. DON”T fall for this trap!

    Bring a CRIMINAL SUIT against her AND the Democrat Party for their treasonous participation in the usurpation of our government by someone who has yet to prove his eligibility due to the FACT that he is NOT a NATURAL born citizen because his (purported) father was a British subject/citizen. This FACT was KNOWN TO DIANE FEINSTEIN at the time that SHE APPROVED HIS ELIGIBILITY to be the Democrat’s nominee!

    Do NOT — under ANY conditions, agree to a public, media controlledm “debate” — for the above reasons, at the very least; but, DO bring a law suit against her and PUT YOUR MOST VALID ALLEGATIIONS INTO THE RECORD OF A COURT OF LAW … and the minds of California citizens whom you are hoping will vote in your favor.

    I pray for your continued good health, stamina and dedication to freedom and for your and your family’s safety.

  119. Pat
    May 15th, 2012 @ 3:35 pm

    I haven’t read through all the comments, so it’s likely someone has already said this. You need to make her demands and your response public.

    (1) No questions shall be asked and no answers shall be given concerning the eligibility of President Obama or any related matters. The debate should focus on economic, social, and foreign policy issues.

    Agree to this.

    (2) The format of the debates shall provide for a two minute response, followed by a one minute rebuttal, followed by a 30 second response.

    Agree to this. Study any past debates she’s done to know her tactics.

    (3) No notes, documents, or teleprompters shall be allowed.

    Okay on this.

    (4) No debates shall be televised by Fox News or any affiliates thereof.

    Absolutely don’t agree to the free press covering the debate. If she’s got a problem with Fox, then she’s depending on having a reporter or network in the tank for her. Demand free news coverage.

    (5) None of your supporters shall be allowed to attend. Guests shall be limited to 100 voters chosen at random.

    Allow no supporters or guests in the room. I’m pretty sure I’ve read where these randomly chosen people aren’t random at all. She should have nothing that you don’t have, and it would be a better debate, however it turns out, if there aren’t hecklers, supporters, etc in the room.

  120. Terence Brennan
    May 15th, 2012 @ 5:02 pm

    Never, ever, agree to excluding Obama’s eligibility!

    Never, ever, agree to prohibiting free press from reporting!

    THIS IS ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION. Feinstein is proposing rules appropriate in a dictatorship. DO NOT BE A PARTY TO SUCH CORRUPT RULES. She is manipulating you to agree to take the first step to be a Washington Insider!

    Yes, AGREE to debate, making it absolutely clear:

    (1) All topics are open to debate.

    (2) All free press shall be allowed access.

    Rules about notes, the number of attendees, available time — those are all negotiable … But the above items are not.

    Don’t refuse to debate — that will be reported as negative and fearful. Be positive! AGREE to debate and clearly state the rules must embrace FREEDOM and the CONSTITUTION.

    Bottom line —————

    YOU ARE A CANDIDATE FOR THE UNITED STATES SENATE! You cannot start out by agreeing to limit free speech and limiting the press!

    —————————

  121. Henry Tisdale
    May 15th, 2012 @ 5:29 pm

    HELL NO! But for Pete’s sake, make sure you post her debate offer so as many Californians as possible can see it.

    1. Orly, it shows Diane is afraid of you.
    2. She is also afraid of your work on Obama. This should be thrown at her every chance you get.
    3. Does this mean Diane is afraid of the truth?
    4. Diane i truly scared this time. Stay with her, Orly, and remember, you are by far the best.

  122. JUDITH BAILEY
    May 15th, 2012 @ 5:38 pm

    I WOULD NEVER AGREE TO HER DEMANDS. WHAT IS SHE AFRAID OF, FOX NEWS. GET REAL. I DO NOT THINK THAT YOU NEED TO DEBATE HER UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES. YOUR VICTORY WILL NOT DEPEND ON A DEBATE WITH HER.

  123. The Phoenix
    May 15th, 2012 @ 7:59 pm

    Boy, the die seems to be cast. And I agree again: No way, Jos’e! Why? Think of this, Orly: how many times have the (D)’s, libs, and other Obama supporters…

    1) pranked you off with “silence when you spoke, when found later on tape?”
    2) lost part of the info from a vid?
    3) tried to make you look like you didn’t belong there, to question anything?
    4) added lots of noise on the tape, when you were speaking?
    5) done some stunts, just to bring ridicule to you?
    6) any and all (D)’s have done nothing but show that they CAN’T be trusted!!!

    And…some of the posters here have it right: You may have to get hard-core and show that you are NOT going to be pranked off! You ARE the one in-charge here! You’re the one in control. And anyone who really wants to debate would’ve made the first move–which was you! She knows that you are the one that can cause her term in office to come to an end. And she fully understands that you CANNOT be bought off! So (IMO), she is going to try every trick in the book!

    Also, I think she may have done this, to try to get you to say No! And this could go back and forth several times and turn into a “Mexican Stand-off!”

    One of the posters discussed this: Don’t be tricked into accepting her conditions, which she may try to show later that you would be complicit about not discussing the eligibility of Obama!

    (See how clever she is?) And always remember, Orly, evil cannot be made to “see reason!” One cannot use “normal” efforts when dealing with them! So watch EVERY MOVE! This is a personal chess match!

    They are possessed…and they only know how to use others for their gain!!! And…I think that there are so many ways they could do a “hatchet job” on you, since I think she’s desparate…just look at the conditions she proposed right off the bat!! We are still praying for you and America!

  124. Drew
    May 15th, 2012 @ 8:05 pm

    You should do it and see what the out come is…

  125. ch
    May 15th, 2012 @ 8:10 pm

    You can agree to debate her, but the only topics you are willing to discuss publicly are her 5 debate rules.

    1. Why in America land of Free Press and Free Speech is she afraid FOX news? Why does she believe in taking away these freedoms? Why is she hiding and what is she so ashamed of that sshe cannot stand up to opponents and hold her oown, yet wants to be in the United States Congress. Is she participating in things that she does not want the FOX viewing audience to know? It would seem that way.
    2. WHy is she afraid to talk about Obama’s eligibility? What could be more relevant to social, economic, and foreign policy than somebody forging documents such as selective service. Business is built on trust, so who would trust any contracts with America? Why does she want to deprive the voters of a legitimate President, and why is she taking oaths to defend the Constitution, yet refusing to uphold her oath?
    3. Why would she limit the audience to 100, when the California voters number _____, and why is she afraid of your supporters? Why is she afraid of her voting public. Who is she representing then, if not the people. What corporations and lobbyists would she rather have in the audience than the voting public.
    4. Why is she afraid of notes, documents and teleprompters? This demonstrates a fear of facts and truth and inability to counter debate with facts to refute. Why would she want to limit a debate to vague ideas rather than truth, facts and details that can withstand scrutiny?
    5. Yes to the debate time and rebuttal times, if that is standard college debate practice. If she wants to use debate timing, why is she afraid of debate practices, such as notes, etc.

    If she is willing to talk publicly and defend her 5 rules, then you would be delighted to meet her and debate. If she is afraid or cannot defend her rules publicly, then you would be happy to have somebody stand in for her to present her views as determined by her past voting record, writings and statements, at any school or public forum and try to explain her reasons for these rules.

    Yes, on these condition, you would be happy to debate.

  126. Frank Coniff
    May 15th, 2012 @ 9:48 pm

    @Henry Tisdale
    WRONG!
    It shows that;
    1. Orly is too focused on Obama to care about what Californians want or need.
    2. She will use public funds for her witch hunt, if elected.
    3. She will drag the entire state’s economy down the toilet, before admitting she is wrong.

  127. Marvin B
    May 15th, 2012 @ 10:19 pm

    Obama”s eligibility is something Feinstein cannot defend. Tell her no deal.

  128. Cindy
    May 16th, 2012 @ 12:05 am

    It should be a freestyle debate.

  129. anthony murrey
    May 16th, 2012 @ 12:14 am

    NO. I would insist on open debates and please, make this letter public!!

  130. orly taitz
    May 16th, 2012 @ 1:58 am

    Ususally I would ignore obots, but this is just too laughable. Obama dragged our economy into the toilet by adding 5.6 trillion of debt. He bankrupted us, that is why it is so important to throw him out of office. an honest judge can do it in one day, by forcing him to appear in court and show his papers.

  131. Jordan
    May 16th, 2012 @ 5:03 am

    Not just “No”, but he** no, with those conditions, it’s got’ta be a trap.

  132. Rob
    May 16th, 2012 @ 6:51 am

    Orly,

    I am sure that by now you have responded to the Debate Coordinator. Could you post your letter regarding your response to the conditions?

  133. How Much Does This Senator Hate The Constitution
    May 16th, 2012 @ 10:32 am

    [...] on | May 14, 2012 | 97 Comments [...]

  134. robert
    May 16th, 2012 @ 11:26 am

    dr taitz,tell the treasonous trader,that this is a debate,and you are allowed to ask any pertinent question to do with,ovomit,holder,reid,napalitano,and all ovomits treasonous trader band,tell her you don,t dictate conditions,its a trick to set you up,don,t do it unless she meets your terms.don,t let them set there ground rules.you set the rules,if the treasonous trader doesn,t like it,tell we the people,the reason,she doesn,t like it.god bless dr taitz

  135. How Much Does This Senator Hate The Constitution? | Expose Obama
    May 16th, 2012 @ 11:52 am

    [...] http://www.orlytaitzesq.com.GA_googleFillSlot("EO_336x280_Inside_Post"); Posted on | May 14,2012 | 97 CommentsFeinstein2012@aol.com10:13 AM (5 hours ago)to meDear Dr. Taitz,It looks like you may end up being [...]

  136. Starla
    May 16th, 2012 @ 12:39 pm

    “HOW MUCH DOES THIS SENATOR HATE THE CONSTITUTION?”

    May 16, 2012
    By Tim Powers

    Excerpt:

    “It seems very strange to me that Ms. Feinstein could demand the violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution on three separate occasions in one e-mail. The right to free speech, the right to free press, and the right to peaceably assemble. Senator Feinstein should sit down and read the very document that she swore to uphold, defend, and protect. Senator Feinstein gives new meaning to Nancy Pelosi’s term of “draining the swamp”.

    I urge all Tea Party Patriots to do what you can to help Dr. Taitz take out the trash. From Obama, right on down. Stay safe, and be aware of your surroundings.”

    Read The Entire Article Here:

    http://www.westernjournalism.com/how-much-does-this-senator-hate-the-constitution/

    From: http://www.westernjournalism.com

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

  137. turnright
    May 16th, 2012 @ 1:01 pm

    Winnybar…

    The handwriting samples of Obie’s mother and father when Googleing are more easily found at “HoaxoftheCentury.com” instead of “Annwriting1″

    And Orly…

    Feinstein is counting on you being a shallow, anti-taxes candidate. She’s had decades to know the ins and outs of California. Obama’s birth is what got you where you are. Why throw away your trump cards?

  138. Frank Coniff
    May 16th, 2012 @ 1:34 pm

    They are fair conditions people. She wants Orly to focus on the actual issues that matter, and not this fairy tale about Obama.

  139. Martha Benton
    May 16th, 2012 @ 1:47 pm

    I quite frankly would tell her to kiss my royal arse. (Nicely, of course.) Blooming idiot must think you are an idiot. Don’t fall in her trap with her crap.

  140. cHARLES F PINE Sr
    May 16th, 2012 @ 2:20 pm

    dO NOT ENTERTAIN THE IDEA OF ,BECOMING A PART OF THIS DEBATE .IT IS SET UP TO SEE YOU FALL .yOU CAN SEE THE HANDIWORK OF OBAMA AND THE EX SPEAKER IN THIS SETUP.IT IS LIKE HITLER AND HIS GOONS SETTING UP NEVILLE CHAMBERLIN .TO GIVE AWAY EUROPE ,EVERY ANSWER YOU GIVE WILL BE EDITIED TO THEIR SATISFACTION AND YOU WILL BE SHOWN AS THE TWIT THAT YOU CERTAINLY ARE NOT .

  141. John Perram
    May 16th, 2012 @ 3:03 pm

    Absolutely not.

    I would actually suggest you use the proposed debate rules to discredit her.

    Apparently she is to afraid for a fair and honest debate.

  142. Bon McElreath
    May 16th, 2012 @ 3:06 pm

    Feinstein is an idiot. You should issue your requirements for a debate. Simply an evenly moderated debate. Make Feinstein look like the fool that she is.

  143. Pamelia Cataldi
    May 16th, 2012 @ 3:51 pm

    Dr. Taitz
    YOU SHOULD SET THE RULES For the Debate. Not She.

  144. cj
    May 16th, 2012 @ 4:54 pm

    This lady is a liberal moron traitor to this country…….of course all the fags and lesbo’s vote for her and Pelosi out in fruit andnut land!!! They all need to go…….

  145. How Much Does This Senator Hate The Constitution?
    May 17th, 2012 @ 1:39 pm

    [...] Posted on | May 14, 2012 | 97 Comments [...]

  146. turnright
    May 17th, 2012 @ 2:07 pm

    Orly…

    If I were you I’d jump up and down about the public nothing that Feinstein has done about what’s precariously perched on the fourth floor of the blown out Reactor Building Number 4 at Fukushima. Some protector of the people of California she’s turned out to be!

    See the sickening evidence at “IMVA.info” Click on “World Affairs”.

  147. Dean Brassfield
    May 17th, 2012 @ 8:51 pm

    They’re afraid of you, Dr. Taitz. No terms, no preconditions, NO HOLDS BARRED!

    Go get her Orly!!! You’re a bulldog! You’re going to win!

  148. ken
    May 17th, 2012 @ 9:00 pm

    accept her terms if she agrees to a paintball challenge on the way to the debate

  149. Lee
    May 18th, 2012 @ 11:01 am

    NO! you should not agree to Sen Feinstein’s terms for surrender.

  150. ROGER
    May 18th, 2012 @ 12:17 pm

    Yes! But you should have some conditions yourself.
    First make sure you can beat her ass good which you should be able to do easily! Then make sure you have someone front and center of the audience to video the whole thing to disc and/or the INTERNET. Then tell her you want a list of a few conditions yourself.
    1.) Every question to be debated.
    2.)Also you pick the place so your on comfortable grounds.

    Then do it! Why? Because if you don’t she has already made it look like your afraid to face her or the issues. Its a WIN, WIN for her then!

    AGAIN LIKE I SAID, MAKE SURE YOU GET IT ALL ON HIDDEN CAMERA! BY ANY MEANS POSSIBLE!

    To win this battle of wits you must stoop to their level …almost. And you must be as sly about it as they are.
    Good luck on whatever you decide.

  151. Marvin Foster
    May 18th, 2012 @ 5:07 pm

    Dr. Taitz, I would not agree to any of her restricted terms for the debate. I wish I had the resources to help you defeat her. I appreciate what you’re trying to accomplish with the Obummer “natual born citizen” issue. I think that our current congressmen/woman are afraid to do their jobs in forcing him to prove beyond all reasonable doubt, where, why and when he was hatched. I believe that he is illegal centrist/communist/muslim and that he should be impeached and deported to his country of choice.

  152. Marvin Foster
    May 18th, 2012 @ 5:10 pm

    Dr. Taitz, America needs more patriots like you to stand up to the useless people in Washington.

  153. Jim
    May 19th, 2012 @ 11:55 am

    Howdy.
    there should be NO PRESET rules on these debates and both women running should have ANY AND ALL SUPPORTERS there to listen to those debates.
    Semper Fi.
    Jim.

  154. Malcolm
    May 20th, 2012 @ 9:14 pm

    Take the debate, definitely. The challenger always has to take the fight to the incumbent. The debate is your best chance to show the voters you’re a viable candidate. It gives you credibility and name recognition.

  155. Kat
    May 21st, 2012 @ 1:06 pm

    I would say refuse, the only thing she wants is to make you look bad. This woman doesn’t understand how a proper debate is conducted and she has no morals and no code of conduct. If she did she would not have set such underhanded and deceitful conditions for the debate. If the debate needs to be had, refuse until she is forced to give you your ground on the terms and conditions. She could not legally or morally come up with something like this if she had any respect whatsoever for the American people or our constitution.

  156. rich reamer
    May 22nd, 2012 @ 10:25 am

    wow – that ridiculous those 5 suppositions.
    its pre-loaded for “our” failure
    tying your hands around your back.
    id say — forget it!!

  157. Len
    May 22nd, 2012 @ 1:39 pm

    Tell them you don’t want the debates to be broadcast on MSNBC and no Feinstein supporters in the audience. Restricting the topics is the most disconcerting and undemocratic condition. I would not agree to this condition and make sure the public is told repeatedly that you refused to debate based on the restriction of eligibility. We don’t have to beat it like a dead horse but it’s too important (mainly because he’s a usurper and traitor) no to be mentioned. Many in the public still don’t even recognize that there is an eligibility issue. This may be the opportunity to inform them

  158. timothy irish
    May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:15 pm

    In a word, NO.
    They will smear you,discredit you, and fail to fairly hear your opinions.

    First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you,
    then you win. — Mahatma Gandhi

    You will eventually win, Orly.
    Don’t stop searching for the truth.

  159. Tired of republican's love for controversy
    August 29th, 2012 @ 9:39 am

    You are lucky she is offering you a chance.
    I find your motives and campaign appalling.
    Stop trying to disrespect and discredit your President.

  160. dr_taitz@yahoo.com
    August 29th, 2012 @ 10:28 am

    he is not a President, he is a criminal with forged IDs

  161. Pozycjonowanie
    May 15th, 2013 @ 5:16 am

    When someone writes an article he/she maintains the image of a
    user in his/her brain that how a user can know it.
    Therefore that’s why this piece of writing is amazing. Thanks!

Leave a Reply





*