Nice, you resort to insults and projection ... AND you simply can't read. The citation you quoted doesn't say anything about Obama. Second, this conclusion by the Indiana court was not supported by an actual legal precedent, It was only used as a rationale for the court to say it didn't have to accept the plaintiffs' argument. Read it and weep.
To the extent that these authorities conflict with the United States Supreme Court‟s interpretation of what it means to be a natural born citizen, we believe that the Plaintiffs‟ arguments fall under the category of “conclusory, non-factual assertions or legal conclusions” that we need not accept as true when reviewing the grant of a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.
Do you understand what that is saying?? It doesn't say Obama is a natural-born citizen. It simply says that because the court doesn't have to accept the plaintiffs' argument as true because the court THINK's their interpretation of the Supreme Court conflicts the plaintiffs' argument. It's a bait and switch. If they had an actual precedent that supported their "guidance," they could have said Obama was eligible for office, but they never said this ANYWHERE in their decision. All they said was:
Thus, we cannot say that the trial court erred when it dismissed the Plaintiffs‟ case.
“Do you understand what that is saying?”
Yes, because I am sane and you are not. You are one of the very few people stupid enough and crazy enough to think the Ankeny decision didn’t conclude that Obama was and is a NBC, eligible to hold office. Birthers may not live in the real world, but even 99% of birthers are better connected with reality than you are.