What falsehood? This has been my major point on eligibility: --
But, come now, Hawaii's verification of Obama's birth facts is HIGHLY RELEVANT to the question of Obama's birth; so relevant, in fact, that it moots your inquiry into things like "photos of the birth home" or "persons who witnessed Stanley Ann pregnant" (though Dr. Sinclair obviously was one such person). --
And you've never addressed it. So the charge you lack the intellectual capacity and/or forthrightness to do so is quite true.
I'm not excitd, I'm bored.
As to the rest, you're just repeating stuff I answered multiple times on the prior thread.
Congratulations! You just won the award!
The award for being the most irrationally pro-Oboama Obot on the site.
The competition looked stiff there for a while. But then you exerted yourself and proved just how deep into silliness one person can go in an effort to make a pathological liar look honest.
Bad news: Obama still looks like a pathological liar.
Good news: he has no finer defender on this site than you.
Again, congratulations. You...you’ve earn it.