[Red Steel]

However, it does mean that YOUR "opinion" as to what makes a Natural Born Citizen (born in country with a foreign national for father)is in a state of uncertainty, or DOUBT; whereas, the "opinion" of the birthers (born in country, both parents citizens)is certain, or -- as Chief Justice Waite said (paraphrase) -- "of this class there can be NO doubt!

Thus, Birthers are on solid ground where the "opinion" of anti-birthers are fraught with doubt!

Yes, your total post in 551 above is right on the money. If there is 'uncertainty' in the allegiance to a country because of birth - how can that person be a natural? The most obvious answer he is not.

[STE=Q]

Yes, your total post in 551 above is right on the money. If there is 'uncertainty' in the allegiance to a country because of birth - how can that person be a natural? The most obvious answer he is not.

Thank you!

Well, the idea is that OUR position is LOGICALLY the more solid and justifiable one -- the majority view: if one takes the easily understandable and straightforward words of Chief Justice Waite at face.

Therefore, the onus should be on the anti-berthers -- and by extension, Obama -- to prove THEIR case.

Our case is on the solid ground of certainty, whereas, their case is on the shaky ground of doubt.

They should be playing defence -- NOT us!

STE=Q