[parsifal]

Please humor me. I was trying to leave it open for you to SHINE!

Watch: You wrote :

Obama’s birth was filed and published in an orderly fashion that makes it impossible to have a higher number on his alleged COLB than what the legitimate Nordyke birth certificates show.

That IS NOT A FACT. THAT IS AN OPINION. THAT IS YOUR CONCLUSION. That don’t work in a law suit.

Break it down into its component facts. If you can’t or it comes out reading sorta screwed up, then there is probably something wrong with your reasoning. This is where you catch it.

parsy, who says try to understand the difference between a fact and a conclusion

[edge919]

Break it down into its component facts.

It's already been broken down into component facts. I don't recall seeing where anybody sought advice nor your opinion on how you think a lawsuit should be filed. You've demonstrated no expertise and poor understanding of some of the things you've cited anyway. Your shtick won't work here.

[BP2]

That IS NOT A FACT. THAT IS AN OPINION.

OPINION, huh? What are the FACTS, Parsley?!

FACT:
You and the rest of the After-Birthers are placing your TRUST in Obama’s Eligibility
upon a CNN quote and a letter, both provided BY a PROVEN and CONSISTENT LIAR.

FACT:
You and the rest of the After-Birthers are basing your TRUST on a “birth certificate” that was
given BY partisan hacks from Obama’s Chicago Campaign office TO hand-picked partisan hacks at FactCheck.org.

FACT:
You and the rest of the After-Birthers are also basing your TRUST
on Obama’s Eligibility as verified by the CORRUPT Nancy Pelosi and the DNC.

FACT:
You and the rest of the After-Birthers are further basing your TRUST on a "birth certificate"
which has NEVER ONCE actually appeared in Court, to be accepted by a Judge as FACT.

Lots of FACTs there, Parsley. And a lot of "blind faith" by the After-Birthers.