Now, clearly, you are getting frustrated that I keep posting this:
Now, that bit of further smokescreen cleared yet again, back to my primary point so I can click the "Avoidance Counter" one more time: The FACT remains that Hawaii verifying Obama's Hawaiian birth moots your entire line of inquiry as to who did or who didn't see Stanley Ann pregnant. And it moots your inquiry into what home or homes Stanley Ann resided before or after the delivery. Because the FACT remains (despite your utter silence on this point) that in this country we prove the facts of birth by getting the relevant state to certify those fact, NOT by chasing down pregnancy witnesses or grabbing photos of "birth homes."
At some point, even you will have to contend with these FACTS.
And this:
"(See how easy it is to document having said something when one has ACTUALLY said it? So why is it you can't identify by number the post you claim provided your answer to my points about the Hawaii verifications and the FF&C clause? It's because you NEVER ANSWERED and lied claiming you had.)"
I've found in past discussion when a person is badly floundering in a discussion, they will elevate some side bit in the discussion and move it stage center so as to create a pretext for ceasing further discussion. I suspect that's why you keep harping on a statement that I said no longer applies in light of you making it clear you weren't denying S.A.'s maternity of O. I see the "you're just a bad, bad person and I refuse to engage is further dialogue." (Which of course would be completely disingenuous since you've called me an "Obot shill" over and over in past discussions. Yet you gleefully jumped onto my post to Ray.)
But now the discussion isn't going well for you and yuou're completely stumped about how to respond to my points outlined above. Do you want to try that exit strategy? Or is it simpler to just admit you can't answer to the points I've put in blockquotes above and just move on?
Here’s the part you dodged/refused yet again to address.
“Some persons did remember. Like Stanley Ann herself, who acknowledged Obama as her son throughout her life. Like the Dunhams, who acknowledged Obama as their daughter’s child. Like Dr. Sinclair, who signed the birth certificate. Like Obama, Sr, who told the INS he had a son born in Hawaii.
But, you’re a Birther, and you can’t accept this under any circumstance, so you have to keep asking for more and more corroboration by other persons (persons who wouldn’t be as close to the scene as these others). You have to subscribe to the BIZARRE theory that Stanley Ann and the Dunhams, despite having no connection to Obama, Sr. or Obama, Jr., nonetheless took this child into their care and continued with that relationship through their lifetimes. (While making it happen that Obama, Jr., ended up”
The part about what I believe is STILL stated as FACT and it is STILL a LIE.