It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Their confirmation bias is off the charts...
Tell me...how many Birther cases have been tossed out of courts around the nation???
You are being played...and you don't even realize it...it's actually very sad to watch.
Did you watch the press conference? I did, they presented no evidence.
Hey...feel free to educate me.
Please, go and do this, and I will be eagerly waiting to point all your logical errors and faulty reasoning.
Obama's mother, Obama's grandmother, two newspapers in Hawaii...
Sorry...I'm not into Birther games...
And shouldn't you follow your own standards and demand the original hard copies of both documents instead of a scanned computer image that can be easily forged?
Originally posted by XeroOne
Funny, I don't remember anyone checking George Bush's birth certificate.
Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
reply to post by PurpleChiten
You seem a little overzealous in your lampooning of this issue. I can't decide whether you're just collecting stars, or seriously trying to make us ignore any evidence which is contrary to the official position...
Originally posted by superman2012
Originally posted by XeroOne
Funny, I don't remember anyone checking George Bush's birth certificate.
Funny, I don't remember anyone even questioning if he was a US citizen or not. They sure asked McCain. Was this your first attempt at trying to play the 'race card'? If it was, good try, if not, well, try harder.
However, I find it very difficult, especially in light of the fact that an elected state official has gone on record stating that he, in fact, believes what numerous experts have said since this supposed long form birth certificate was released.
It's a fake.
In fact, Obama's own lawyer admitted in a court of law that the internet copy of the birth certificate is not sufficient to admit as evidence, and instead of simply providing the original birth certificate, his lawyer used this defense as a tap dance to win his eligibility case.
I challenge YOU to prove that he is eligible.
Thus the point of this post. Pay attention.
Your smug arrogance betrays your lack of substance.
The only argument that you have is the fact that every piece of evidence that exists concerning his birth is questionably dubious.
And yet you seem perfectly fine with the fact that a sitting president appears to be hiding something, very obviously.
But we can't know this for sure because he won't go on record under oath; however, his people seem to want to convince the masses with evidence that has obviously been manipulated.
Originally posted by Deetermined
I have no doubt that Obama's "Truth Team" has been out in full force during this election trying to counter all of the negative attention that Obama continually gets.
Little thing called "innocent until proven guilty"...yeah...that is why Obama doesn't have to PROVE he is innocent. It is up to Birthers to come up with a shred of factual evidence to prove he is guilty...which they have failed at doing so over and over and over.
I don't have to...the United States government and every one of the 50 States have already proven that for me.
The term “natural born” citizen is not defined in the Constitution, and there is no discussion of the term evident in the notes of the Federal Convention of 1787. The use of the phrase in the Constitution may have derived from a suggestion in a letter from John Jay to George Washington during the Convention expressing concern about having the office of Commander-in-Chief “devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen,” as there were fears at that time about wealthy European aristocracy or royalty coming to America, gaining citizenship, and then buying and scheming their way to the presidency without long-standing loyalty to the nation. At the time of independence, and at the time of the framing of the Constitution, the term “natural born” with respect to citizenship was in use for many years in the American colonies, and then in the states, from British common law and legal usage. Under the common law principle of jus soli (law of the soil), persons born on English soil, even of two alien parents, were “natural born” subjects and, as noted by the Supreme Court, this “same rule” was applicable in the American colonies and “in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution ...” with respect to citizens. In textual constitutional analysis, it is understood that terms used but not defined in the document must, as explained by the Supreme Court, “be read in light of British common law” since the Constitution is “framed in the language of the English common law.”