The Argument:
As far as the “birthers” go, common sense says if there wasn’t anything to hide, then nobody would be hiding anything, right?

My Answer:
There is a fundamental principle of inquiry – that is assuming one cares about the truth – that assertions should be based on evidence. The absence of evidence does not constitute evidence. So far as the courts and I can tell, nobody is hiding anything. To accept assertions on insufficient evidence risks making oneself a tool for evil hands.

By the way: The argument presented is a common fallacy.  The argument in the general form goes something like: If you haven’t done anything wrong, then you have nothing to hide. I assume everyone reading this can understand why this argument is not valid.  It always bugs me when I hear people say it, especially in this country where we have an enshrined right to privacy arising from the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The Counterpunch:
But isn’t it a duty to show the evidence if a person is running for President?

My Answer:
Yes, it is. And this was done to the satisfaction of the U.S. courts more than once.

The Non-Sequitur:
And that is enough to satify a you?  Big difference between this and McCain, and you know it.

My Answer:
Yes, there is a big difference.

McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone, a tenuous and temporary extension of the US and not a state of the union. If elected, McCain would have been the first US President to have been born outside the states. This was a serious legal matter that ultimately ended in a (nonbinding) Senate resolution and required real legal investigation by a bipartisan legal review. This is because “natural born” is not defined in the Constitution. While McCain would be very, very likely to prevail in a legal challenge, it is not assured. In short, the courts have not ruled on this matter.

Obama was born in Hawaii, our 50th state, and a state of the union. He has provided documentation of his birth adequate for all legal purposes. In addition, his original birth certificate has been examined by the director of the Hawaii State Department of Health who attested to its authenticity under oath. The Republican governor of the state, Linda Lingle, has also attested to Obama’s status. The US courts have ruled on this matter.

So, yes, there is a big difference. Obama’s status as a naturalized citizen is well established. McCain’s is not.

Barack Obama

What about Obama’s KENYAN birth certificate produced by Orly Taitz?
http://gnn.tv/threads/36212/Shocking_New_Birth_Certificate_Proof_Obama_Born_In_Kenya

I was asked about this recently. It took me less than one minute to find the following, and follow just a few of the references.

From Wikipedia (they determine our reality):

On August 2, 2009, Orly Taitz released and attached to court documents what she alleged to be an authentic Kenyan birth certificate. Legal documents submitted describe the document as an “unauthenticated color photocopy of certified copy of registration of birth”.[47][48] The document was almost immediately revealed to be a forgery. It purports to have been issued by the “Republic of Kenya”, when in fact, such a state did not yet exist at the time of Obama’s birth as indicated on the document (Kenya was a Dominion of the British Crown until 1963).[49][50] Additionally, Mombasa, the city indicated on the certificate as Obama’s birthplace, was not located in Kenya, but in Zanzibar.[50][51] Subsequently, evidence was unearthed that the alleged Kenyan birth certificate is probably a modified version of a 1959 Australian birth certificate found on an online genealogy website.[52][53] The Washington Independent cited an anonymous blogger [54] as having taken credit for the forgery and posting four photos substantiating the claim.[55] Examples of actual 1961 Kenyan birth certificates have also been revealed, which look substantially different from the document Taitz submitted to the court. [56]

I don’t think that anything will satisfy the birthers because I do not think they care what the truth is or even what the United States Constitution says. As far as I know the birthers still have no evidence. All the newspaper evidence and official documents support Obama’s birth in Hawaii; none support anything else.

If I’m missing something, let me know.