[reasonisfaith]

The conservative movement—or the goal of portraying the conservative movement in a particular light—is not a direct focus here. We must focus on the thing itself. In this case, the eligibility issue.

That is, Dr. Taitz is not trying to make a statement about conservatism or add something to the conservative movement. She is trying to expose the Obama fraud.

I view criticism of Taitz, when presented in this context and without concrete support, ultimately as a stain on the intellect of the critic.

[nathanbedford]

We must focus on the thing itself. In this case, the eligibility issue.

I believe that I dealt fairly with the substance of the birther argument in my original post:

As for the birther movement itself, the issue of the legitimacy of Barack Obama's birth remains theoretically open. It is theoretically possible that his mother or grandmother filed an application falsely alleging a private birth at home in Honolulu which resulted in a Birth Certificate which purported a birth in Hawaii. This document in turn spawned a Certification of Live Birth and two newspaper announcements. All succeeding documents were automatically generated and all succeeding documents were as fraudulent as the initial application. All subsequent pronouncements by the officials of the state of Hawaii properly reflected that proper procedures were followed and correctly recited that the documents show a birth in Honolulu, Hawaii. Hence, garbage in, garbage out and all the garbage was turned out on automatic pilot. That, at any rate, it is the remaining scenario to show the Barack Obama is not a naturall born citizen of the United States.

I am merely stating the obvious, this woman is too unstable to be the public face of conservatism. We have no interest whatsoever in defending her. We may have a great deal of interest in the birther argument, but as I said that in my original post, it is the woman herself whom we much shake off. Every time she opens her mouth she makes herself and those associated with their look more ridiculous. This is a question of perception. Why should the conservative movement compromise its reputation? There are other wars to win in the defense of this woman is a loser.

[nathanbedford]

We must focus on the thing itself. In this case, the eligibility issue.

I believe that I dealt fairly with the substance of the birther argument in my original post:

As for the birther movement itself, the issue of the legitimacy of Barack Obama's birth remains theoretically open. It is theoretically possible that his mother or grandmother filed an application falsely alleging a private birth at home in Honolulu which resulted in a Birth Certificate which purported a birth in Hawaii. This document in turn spawned a Certification of Live Birth and two newspaper announcements. All succeeding documents were automatically generated and all succeeding documents were as fraudulent as the initial application. All subsequent pronouncements by the officials of the state of Hawaii properly reflected that proper procedures were followed and correctly recited that the documents show a birth in Honolulu, Hawaii. Hence, garbage in, garbage out and all the garbage was turned out on automatic pilot. That, at any rate, it is the remaining scenario to show the Barack Obama is not a naturall born citizen of the United States.

I am merely stating the obvious, this woman is too unstable to be the public face of conservatism. We have no interest whatsoever in defending her. We may have a great deal of interest in the birther argument, but as I said that in my original post, it is the woman herself whom we much shake off. Every time she opens her mouth she makes herself and those associated with their look more ridiculous. This is a question of perception. Why should the conservative movement compromise its reputation? There are other wars to win in the defense of this woman is a loser.