If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Demonstrates very quickly the futility of using facts alone to convince people.
Comments
Do NOT tell me that we have actual birthers on this freaking forum!
That being said, I have convinced someone who was questioning whether President Obama was born in the U.S. that he was in fact born there after sending that person a link to snopes.com. Thus, I feel like it is possible to change peoples' minds on that subject. I think these links are even more convincing than the Snopes piece though.
As for the question of why President Obama has not published his "long form" birth certificate, from what I can tell here, Hawaii law does not really allow that kind of public disclosure. I could be wrong though.
Frankly, I think the charge that the president was not born in the U.S. is a pretty silly and unfounded one. I feel like there are many more legitimate reasons to criticize the Obama Administration that are not conspiracies and actually have to do with policy stuff.
I think I'm going to go murder a few people because laws against murder are stupid.
As Louie already pointed out, the proof is already there. Birthers not looking at or acknowledging the proof does not count as the proof not existing; it counts as birthers behaving like ostriches whose heads are buried in the sand.
> So... it's okay to just ignore the Constitution because you don't agree with it?
Wait, when was it ignored?
Also, don't forget that Obama's mom was from Kansas. If that isn't American I don't know what is.
@GuyInWhite: Just the proof is enough. :P
>"Your type"? Really?
Birthers, Holocaust deniers, and other such people all have similar ways of talking: defensiveness, a seeming inability to acknowledge any evidence presented, building most of their arguments on a perception that their opponents are unfairly persecuting them, dancing around the issue by claiming that their opponents are dancing around the issue, etc.
But that's for the more passive, ridiculous conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theories like 9/11, JFK, and the Illuminati, on the other hand, all speak with extreme hysteria, using capslock unironically, bandying about wild hyperbole and peppering their arguments with revelatory vocabulary like "Wake up!" and "Open your eyes!".
I wuv yew too.
Good Lord, you guys are seriously making me reconsider my stance on the removal of IJBM from TV Tropes, and I assure you, I've never done that before.
No, because of the needless personal attacks.
^^ Thus, we are presented with:
-a seeming inability to acknowledge any evidence presented
-building most of their arguments on a perception that their opponents are unfairly persecuting them
Be sure to take notes, class. Recognizing these patterns is important.
-My arguments are built on no such thing. My ceasing to argue, however, is built on my not really having any interest in being insulted.
Unless you've bothered to check your facts first. It tends to make you look like a moron.