Those are same odds of someone falling for that ****. Dusty, you're a real odds beater!
Originally Posted by dustymars
They should just go with the "Hawai'i isn't a part of the US in the first place" line and then they could throw out our pesky electoral votes for Obama at the same time.
Originally Posted by It is Fake
I think they'd rather go with "Well, he's only counts as 3/5th president".
Originally Posted by ChenPengFi
Absolutely none of the allegations in that article have been proven, so REAL probability of his figure being accurate is effectively zero.
Originally Posted by dustymars
No, statistics and probabilities don't apply to conspiracy theories, which is what Birthers believe in.
Otherwise I can claim the chances of Nessie being fake are 1 in 65 quintillion....the chances of the US actually landing on the moon are such-and-such, and so forth.
You could have used simple Boolean logic to prove the President is eligible, by stating actual facts and working it out in your head, and comparing it to what the Constitution says.
- Barack Obama's Mother was a White Girl from the Midwest: TRUE
- Because one of his parents was a natural born citizen, and gave birth to him in the United States, Barack is a natural born citizen: TRUE
- Thus Barack Obama is eligible to be President. TRUE
- This was all figured out a long time ago by people with much better critical analysis skills than Birthers: TRUE
But you don't like facts and logic. You like blogs and websites.
So here you go, dusty:
Last edited by W. Rabbit; 9/26/2012 3:27pm at .
Oh by the way, John McCain was born in Panama.
George Romney, Mitt's father, was born in Chihuahua, Mexico because his family fled the United States BEFORE Utah became a state of the union in 1896.
So the real question is....how can you prove Mitt isn't really a Mexican citizen?
Prove it dusty! The chances are astronomical he's not really Mexican.
When did he say he was in favor of Romney for president?
Originally Posted by W. Rabbit
Okay, let me try again, on slightly more sleep and less coffee.
Originally Posted by Omega Supreme
By "Domino Effect" we mean that if GM falls, it takes company A with it, and Company brings down Company B and Company C, and so, until we're begging Greece to loan us some euros. So we have to keep these corporations that are "too big to fail" in business, and if that means free buckets of money hand delivered by the government, so be it. Are we on the same page so far?
The following should not be taken as anything close to the opinion of an actual economist:
Are we certain that GM et al going bankrupt will be "bad" for the car companies that remain? I mean, when PRIDE went out of business it turned out to be a good thing for the UFC and all the smaller orgs that popped up later, they were able to acquire fighters who were already popular with the fans (Equivalent to picking up brands that GM has already spent millions burning into the public subconscious) at a steal, and keep putting out a product, because there were still people willing to pay for what they had to sell.
Same thing happened with the WWF/E when WCW went kerblooie.
Won't those companies going broke just mean that rivals are going to swoop in and pick up their assets and market share? Admittedly it sucks for GM because the factories they spent who knows what building get re-sold for pennies on the dollar, but that's the free market for you.
No. That is not it.
Originally Posted by Vince Tortelli
Where in that post is anything related to who dustbunny wants for president?
Originally Posted by RurikGreenwulf