Why Obama Does Not Have A Birth Certificate

reply to post by Phage


I could have asked you to prove your birth certificate but I didn't.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

I told you I wouldn't before you had a chance to.
But I'm not the topic, am I?

reply to post by Phage


I realize. I'm just saying..You would probably ask for proof if I said that the sun was 400x farther away than the moon, while the moon is 400x smaller than the sun, and that it was made this way to allow for perfect eclipses.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

Nope. I would say you were wrong. Most of the time.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Phage


Troll harder. It's called an example for illustration of point purposes. There are plenty of thread on ATS; but I don't see any of you screaming at them to prove all of their claims.

I mean let's just be honest; it won't matter if I find the quote from the reference manual..All you are going to do is demand proof for something else then or say it doesn't matter. So please tell me why I should waste my time looking for you. Will it even matter?

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

Troll harder. It's called an example for illustration of point purposes.

How can it be trolling if you brought it up? Illustration of what? Your example was erroneous (again).

I mean let's just be honest; it won't matter if I find the quote from the reference manual..All you are going to do is demand proof for something else then or say it doesn't matter.

I would be very surprised if such a quote actually existed but if you could really source it I would accept it. However you are correct, even if it did appear in an English language reference there is no reason to think it has anything to do with any rule of law.

reply to post by Phage


It does when you take into account that the government's own documents state a proper persons name is spelled in upper and lower case letters; just like grammar. So therefore if a grammar manual states that a fictitious persons name is spelled in all caps; obviously they would be referencing a fictitious person by registering their name in such a way; especially after their own documents state so.

The example was an example and was not meant to be construed as true or factual. It was the first thing that popped into my head. Yes I call you a troll for taking an example and construing it as true to get some kind of asinine expression through.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

It does when you take into account that the government's own documents state a proper persons name is spelled in upper and lower case letters

Which government? Which documents?

reply to post by Phage


So if it doesn't matter to you then why are you wasting my time asking for me to prove it; if it won't even matter.

Troll harder.

reply to post by Phage


Already been posted. Go back and find on your own. Not being rude, I'm just not going to go back and find it for you, because inevitably you will find something to nit-pick about it.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

Are you talking about that Texas rule? The one that says this?

(b) No distinction as to type face or font in the presentation of an entity name will be recognized. Subscript or superscript characters cannot be entered into the computer records of the secretary of state; consequently, such characters will not appear above or below the other characters in the entity name. Example: H2 O will appear as H2O. The secretary of state, however, will recognize the use of either upper or lower case letters in the presentation of the entity name.

source< br />
I don't live in Texas so their rules don't concern me. But so what?

reply to post by Phage


No.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

Oh. I couldn't what you meant in this thread so I thought you might have mistakenly been talking about something from another thread.

reply to post by Phage

The United States Government Printing Office in their "Style Manual," March 1984 edition (the most recent edition published as of March 2000), provides comprehensive grammar, style and usage for all government publications, including court and legal writing. Chapter 3, "Capitalization," at ' 3.2, prescribes rules for proper names: "Proper names are capitalized. [Examples given are] Rome, Brussels, John Macadam, Macadam family, Italy, Anglo-Saxon."

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

Ah, I thought you had a written law. The GPO style manual. For reference for submittals to the Government Printing Office.
The one that says this:

Users of the GPO Style Manual should consider it as a general guide. Its rules cannot be regarded as rigid, for the printed word assumes many shapes and variations in type presentation. An effort has been made to provide complete coverage of those elements that enter into the translation of manuscript into type.

Any rule of law to it? Nope. But if you don't follow their suggestions it might cost something extra if you want them to print it.

Essentially, the GPO Style Manual is a standardization device designed to achieve uniform word and type treatment, and it aims for economy of word use. Such rules as are laid down for the submission of copy to GPO point to the most economical manner for the preparation and typesetting of manuscript. Following such rules eliminates additional chargeable processing by GPO.

www.gpo.gov...

reply to post by Phage


Do they really need laws to enforce rules or guidelines of grammar?

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

Do they really need laws to enforce rules or guidelines of grammar?

I haven't seen any. You haven't shown me any laws regarding grammar.

reply to post by Phage


That's because some stuff is just common sense and other stuff doesn't need to be made a law in order for them to use it; being If Nom de Guerre is represented as all caps name in that manual, they wouldn't need a law to put your name in all caps and state so.

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by Phage

 

You haven't disputed anything.

I observe that you didn't care to read what your interlocutor said. You have nothing concrete, just a disgusting pile of insinuations. As if a claim that capitalization of one's name is significant in determining their true citizenship was not nutty enough... I'm actually not sure how to spell "nutty". Maybe the right form is "nuts". Help anybody?

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

That's because some stuff is just common sense and other stuff doesn't need to be made a law in order for them to use it; being If Nom de Guerre is represented as all caps name in that manual, they wouldn't need a law to put your name in all caps and state so.

Forget common sense. That makes no sense.

There is nothing in the manual about all caps or what it would mean if a name is written (or typed) in all caps.