Replies

"Some of the Orly-bashers date back to the first year of this website, 1998. I think they really are conservatives, but they have some weird psychological aversion to supporting what they believe is a “lost cause”."

As one of those long-standing freepers, I'll answer this. It's not a psychological aversion, except maybe an aversion to falsehoods. You seem to think it's a matter of what one *wants to be* rather than *what is*. You're wrong. It doesn't matter of one hates Obama or loves him. Whether he is eligible is a question of fact.

If fact is true one shouldn't say it is false or vice versa, no matter where one falls politically. That's the number one mistake the Birthers are making. They think their facts must be true because they want to be rid of Obama.

Those of us who dispute the Birthers and criticize Orly, do so because we believe they are wrong about the facts. It's no deeper than that.

“Those of us who dispute the Birthers and criticize Orly, do so because we believe they are wrong about the facts. It’s no deeper than that.”

I have trouble understanding how any rational person can believe that someone like Soetoro/Obama who spends $millions suppressing his birth and school records isn’t hiding something very material. The first principal of winning legal disputes is if the truth is in your favor make it public quickly and repeatedly. Even if the truth is embarrassing but not legally damning you make it public and get past it.

That’s why I search for psychological explanations for those conservatives who pretend to believe that the facts are actually in Obama’s favor. You folks make me rub my eyes and shake my head in amazement.

" do so because ( we believe they are wrong ) about the facts "
So it all comes down your " Believe " faith that we are wrong ? ... that's just your oppion.
Ok, prove that your side is right.
where is the evidence ?
How so are the bithers are wrong ?
because of 2 Hawaii news papers announced his birth ?
Because he has shown his supposed COLB ?
Have you ever read the article from a ex C.I.A. agent who hired a investigator in the article on Western Journalism's web sight ( Clearing the smoke on Obama's eligibility ) ?
Go to Miss Ticky's web sight, there is examples of Obama's supposed COLB, and other examples.
Look at the 2 examples she has put up,
one was supposed obama's COLB,
With a stamp on it stating :
( Date Filed by Registrar )

and the another example COLBs that the DoH from Hawaii looked at and verified ,
and a stamp stating:

( Date ACCEPTED by Registrar )

What Miss Tickly's point is ?
If the DoH didn't think that was something " FISHY " or wrong with Obama's record, they would have ( ACCEPTED IT ) there would have been a ( Date Accepted by Registrar ) stamp on it.

So ? where is your proof that the birthers are wrong ?