Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
So the whole point of ensuring the president was born in America is to avoid having him being loyal to another country, right?

Let's say Obama is Kenyan: how are earth is that going to help Kenya? Is he going to designate half the budget to the country? Is he going to send them shiploads of gold? What exactly would he do?

Obama has already given {the word is GIVEN} more American taxpayer money
to MUSLIM businesses than the American farmers.

He has increased the budgets of all immigration offices in preparation
for amnesty of illegals and increased immigration of muslims.

Accepting Obama without demanding proof of birth in the US is to soften you up for the acceptance of Arnold as next prez,
I fail to understand those who would just let this slide.

And to the one who said something like, 'we elected him to "Rule Over US".'
"Rule over us", indeed!?
Exactly why do we need anyone to "Rule over US"?
Someone there seems to have self esteem issure.

Originally posted by OldDragger
Birthers are so irrelevant is amazing!

Yeah I suppose if the birth issue is "irrelevant" then the small matter of Obama committing Treason must also be "irrelevant". Amazing!

So if Congress was shown proof of Obama's US birth, why weren't we the people shown the same?

And why are there so many secrets about this guy?

Originally posted by OhZone
So if Congress was shown proof of Obama's US birth, why weren't we the people shown the same?

The people have been shown.... something no previous President has done!

And why are there so many secrets about this guy?

Such as what exactly?

Originally posted by cupocoffee
Hey, if you choose to believe this is "internet BS", that's your choice.

You are the one believing "internet bs" that link you posted was full of bs and made up stories with nothing at all to back them up, also full of religous claptrap!

so I posted some evidence.

You call something like "• When ‘President’ Barack Hussein Obama touched down on the White House Lawn at 5:30pm on 9th July, he was ‘spoken to’. Enquiries by this service confirm that those doing the ‘speaking’ were not Secret Service operatives. On the contrary they were men with guns."

That is not evidence, just the ranting of someone delusional!

Originally posted by OldDragger
Debate? Sure, I always enjoy arguing with the delusinal. It's so productive!

Resorting to insults and ad hominem attacks are the tactics of someone who can't properly debate.

Originally posted by dereks

You call something like "• When ‘President’ Barack Hussein Obama touched down on the White House Lawn at 5:30pm on 9th July, he was ‘spoken to’. Enquiries by this service confirm that those doing the ‘speaking’ were not Secret Service operatives. On the contrary they were men with guns."

That is not evidence, just the ranting of someone delusional!

Same thing with you. Seems like all you are able to do is call him crazy, you cannot disprove anything he says.

You know why? Because he's given a lot of real information. Names and phone numbers. Al Hodges, Michael C. Cottrell, Lindell H. Bonney etc. People who have been busy documenting all these events and who can corroborate all this information.....