Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: DiogenesLamp

That’s because (assuming you’re sincere in your beliefs, which you may be) you’re not a terribly logical person.

Just because you and a bunch of other people really want Obama to be ineligible, doesn’t make it so.

Just because it’s possible for you to twist facts, the Constitution, and history to make them seem to say what you want them to say, doesn’t mean they actually say that.

And just because your fellow FReepers disagree with your beliefs doesn’t mean they are trolls, closet liberals, or agents of Obama.

If you and the rest of the birthers had been right, I’m sure that pretty much everyone you’ve come into conflict with here would have supported you wholeheartedly.

You use a handle here that implies you are “looking for an honest man.” And then, when you find honest men, what do you do? You portray them as “trolls,” agents of Obama or useless fools, and in general do everything you possibly can to assassinate their character.


283 posted on 11/21/2012 7:13:59 AM PST by Jeff Winston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies ]


To: Jeff Winston
That’s because (assuming you’re sincere in your beliefs, which you may be) you’re not a terribly logical person.

Oh, i'm extremely logical. I do electronic engineering and computer programing. If my logic doesn't work, neither does my projects.

And just because your fellow FReepers disagree with your beliefs doesn’t mean they are trolls, closet liberals, or agents of Obama.

And this is the part that I find hard to understand. I take it for granted that it is true, because I see so many people who are arguing on behalf of Obama's legitimacy that in commentary on other issues display a solid conservative position. Why they chose to defend him is simply bizarre to me.

If you and the rest of the birthers had been right, I’m sure that pretty much everyone you’ve come into conflict with here would have supported you wholeheartedly.

Not at all. People had been taught wrong for so many years, that they simply can't conceive of it being any other way. People simply overlook the fact that their definition is silly and serves no purpose, allowing such absurdities as "Anchor Babies", non-citizen Indians, Non-Citizen slaves, and Ignoring thousands of British Loyalists born after the Revolution yet considered British Subjects by both the Americans and the British.

Further information on the subject.

285 posted on 11/21/2012 9:09:17 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson