Sayan Gliss: I appreciate your very well articulated and logical reply.
When you refer to your preference of acquiring your sources of information from people of 'stature', I can understand and acknowledge you stance. Yet in the world we live in, where much information is censored and not fully investigated (often for political spin and gain) one begins to question these people of 'stature' which are often associated with mainstream media and press. This often leads to the uncovering of information which seems outlandish and indeed for seeking attention. But on the other hand, information is uncovered for which there is a strong grounding to warrant speculation and questioning of the reported 'facts'.
I agree that the politicians approach to issues and policies is very important, moreover I think that this aspect is even more important than the legalities of eligibility and birth certificates. I am aware that I cannot convince anyone, nor do I intend to, I am just putting the information out there because I feel it is important that people have access to information they may not be aware of.
In regards to the people opposing certain aspects of Obama's eligibility being a minority; you are correct. The reason that they are a minority is largely attributed to the fact that a 'majority' of people have adopted the 'change' doctrine and dogma to the extent that they view Mr. Obama as a saviour, and compare him to the likes of Kennedy and M. L. King. I believe that if this where to happen to someone like Bush which people hate people would be in the majority as to doubting Mr. Bush.
I agree that some commercial media may have ignored the issue because it may have seemed trivial. But I also believe that the reason why it was so lightly reported upon was because of media bias and self-interest within the media. Yet again this is just a chance.
On a lighter note:
What do you think about Obama's cabinet?
What do you think about Obama?