Assuming you're being serious (and maybe I shouldn't), there's really no need to attack you or your "bona fides."

You're saying that a presidential candidate risked his candidacy on the gamble that no one would ever check the original copy of a scanned image. You're also saying that no one has ever actually checked the original -- or, more likely, that each and every person who has checked the original subsequently lied about its contents. You're further alleging that at the time of Obama's birth, the Honolulu newspaper that printed his birth announcement was deceived...obviously, the conspiracy started early. You're saying that you have "questions" that all the evidence available to you cannot answer.

So, like I said, no one needs to attack you. Your "argument" speaks for itself, and I think we're comfortable letting it stand for...well, for whatever it's worth.

Yeah, but can you really prove that Obama's "mother" was his mother?

Look, I know I'm going to get attacked for this, and get called names like "ostrich-headed asshat"...but I know a lot of mixed-race people. And Obama's skin tone just doesn't match up with the skin tone for a man with a white mother.

I know there are lots of pictures of him with his mother -- but none of those answers the question. No one has yet surfaced with a picture of his mother pregnant, or in the delivery room. Don't you find that odd, that there'd be such a significant gap in the evidence?

And, look, it's pretty easy to resolve this question that I, and millions of other Americans, have. All Obama needs to do is take a simple DNA test to compare his DNA against that of his alleged "mother." Don't you find it at least a little suspicious that he won't even do that? All it takes is a quick rub of a swab on his cheek -- but he's refused our repeated requests.

That Obama won't put this issue to rest...well, I think that's very telling, don't you?

Who, me? Naaaaah.

I'm buying Alkaline's Elvis theory, though. I'm pretty sure I got abducted by those little green bastards once -- I'm not surprised to hear that Obama had a hand in it.

As I said before a number of times, even if he is a natural born citizen, he ignores the public opinion. Is this a president you want to have and trust?

What happened to accountability? What happened to transparency? You still don’t care, do you? Well, some people do.

Do I want a president who jumps every time a group of wingnut conspiratologists comes up with a new theory that they want him to "disprove?" Why, no. No I don't.

He's answered any questions that he could reasonably be asked to answer, and quite a few that were unreasonable. Now you suggest that we should want a president who'll waste time on wildly unreasonable questions and batshit-crazy conspiracies. Well, I don't want a president who can be so easily distracted from his job.

I want a president who goes about the business of the people -- not a president who chases his tail every time people who hate him come up with a new reason. I want a president who works, not one who engages in ridiculous games of "disprove my theory" or "meet my ever-moving standard of evidence." In fact, I'd consider a president who wasted more than ten seconds on this crap to be an utter fool.

As a conservative, I'd like to trust that when a Republican says that he lacks important papers...he really lacks papers and they really are important. I'd like to trust that it's not gamesmanship, playing around with the idea of "completeness," or looking for an excuse to delay, damage, and disrupt our political processes. I'd like to trust that our leaders have real, heart-felt concerns, and are not just playing at politics like a schoolgirl plays at popularity.

I'd like to.

You know, it was as true with the "9/11 Truthers" as it is with the "Birthers" and as it will be with every new group that thinks the X-Files was a documentary -- the evidence is irrelevant.

Barack Obama's mother was living in Hawaii at the time of his birth. She got all chubby, and then one day there was a baby around. Witnesses abound.

All of them are lying.

The state of Hawaii has stated without reservation that Barack Obama was born there.

The state of Hawaii is lying.

The local paper recorded the birth.

It was lying (presciently).

Barack Obama produced a birth certificate.

It's a forgery. He's lying.

But here's the thing about truthers and birthers and every other conspiratologist -- you'll notice that shortly into the debate, all facts become irrelevant.

Instead, it's always a game of meta-questions. Not whether we should really believe this crazy theory (George Bush blew up the WTC, Obama was born in...Kenya? Outer space?)...but whether we should have done X, Y, and Z in the investigation. Whether we should have deposed Bush. What Cheney knew. Whether Obama should produce a different copy of his birth certificate, so that the conspiratologists can come up with some other complaint about it. (The seal is a millimeter off-center! It's a fake!) Whether he's "fully disclosed" everything (a standard that is, oddly, never satisfied...go figure).

It's not about whether there is sufficient evidence (at least for anyone whose personal ads don't read like the DSM-IV). There's overwhelming evidence. Calling for more evidence when the evidence before you is overwhelming is nothing but sophistry and time-wasting.

But by coming up with a meta-question you can keep the charade alive. You can continue the sophistry, maintain the belief in some crazy idea long after everyone else had heard the dulcet tones of reality.

And I think it just goes to show that sometimes you can (for political or other reasons) want to believe something so badly that you just...do.

And it's...a little sad, really.