Replies

You've made it clear that you are convinced that you have proved that Obama is not a natural born citizen, not eligible to be President. And there's no doubt in your mind. You have proved it multiple times -- to your own satisfaction. You are completely certain of your correctness, and if you're the judge of your own case, you win. On the other hand, not a single judicial or legislative decision-maker has come to the same conclusion in a case relating to Obama. You can pick and choose isolated phrases and pretend that they signal a minor point of agreement, but you can't deny the fact that none have reached the same conclusion as you. Not a single one. Nada. Zip.

Sorry, but this excessive babbling is nothing more than a baseless denial. I just showed where Ankeny admitted the points I've brought up, and all you have are character attacks.

In your mind, your case is proved. In their minds, it is not. It is therefore undeniable that you have proven your case only in your own mind.

Until you can show where it's wrong, my points stand. That's how a debate works. And as you probably already know, the points I've brought up were taken before a panel that was unable to refute the points of law.

"nothing more than a baseless denial"
__

Nothing more than a baseless denial? No one agrees with you, Joe, and that's an indisputable fact, even though you'd like to think of it as baseless.
__

" I just showed where Ankeny admitted the points I've brought up"
__

And yet Ankeny says:

'Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.'

If you think that Ankeny supports your conclusion concerning Obama's eligibility, you have an odd notion of what the word "support" means.
__

"Until you can show where it's wrong, my points stand."
__

Your points stand where they've always stood -- in your own mind.

And until you can demonstrate that someone in authority has agreed that Obama is not eligible to be President, your points stand only in your own mind. Explaining over and over again how you're convinced of your own correctness doesn't make a dent in the fact that you can't cite a single decision whose conclusion concerning Obama's eligibility agrees with yours.

A single decision whose conclusion concerning Obama's eligibility agrees with yours. Do you understand that? Can you cite one?