Lots of people in leadership positions are a credible source, but it still does not address direct evidence. The source from snopes displayed direct evidence which included the type of source and dates involved. If you asked me to take a leap of faith of a politician's word -regardless of party- or to examine evidence, there would be no question on where I would feel more comfortable leaning towards. . .
If I agreed with everythng you believe, I'd be ... Rashmon.:grin: But, fear not, Shroopy2 and amaru will get their wish, probably sooner than later. Where the darkness of ignorance and the brightness of intelligence merge, each person must decide ... but I am content with my position in the twilight of the two.
I agree with you. For instance, that dark guy in the car ahead of me...he's probably not a drug dealer, but there's a 30% chance he could be. I think we should stop him and search him none-the-less. I'm glad I found someone who thinks like me. (Now that's pulling a New Yorker. Get it right people!)
Why do you feel there is a 30% chance, and what do you base that on?...just because he is dark...That is so wrong!..Based only on being dark?..I am so, very, very flabergasted....I mean it's not like there was widespread confusion from several sources, in combination of where he was raised, and a report of his grandmother making conflicting statements concerning birth places....then you might have validity to be unsure....about the, uh..drugdealer, of course. . .
"How do you respond to/confront a birther?" You don't. You tell them they are idiots and move on. You're not going to convince them of anything - just like 9/11 Truthers or the "we really didn't land on the moon" crowd or any other conspiracy crowd, they are convinced of their own nonsense version of reality and will ignore any evidence you present to the contrary. Simply put, you're wasting your time.
I suppose, based on its own, but with widespread confusion from several sources which all cite a different hospital, it makes one wonder why. . . ..or something huh?. . .
How do you feel about the fact that there was a birth announcement in the newspaper back then? Did they make it up?
widespread like CNN reporting one and FOX reporting another one? is a director of a state's health department a politician? http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/15/debunking-the-birther-claim/
That is good advice but I do find it interesting the people like Roxran and Thumbs here who while claiming not to be birthers, that this isn't a big issue and even acknowledge the evidence supporting Obama's HI birth still have such a high level of skepticism, or in Thumbs case agnosticism, about it. I take them at their word that they don't consider this a major issue but at the same time I think it says something that they continue to maintain such a high level of skepticism even with a large amount of evidence to the contrary.
