Any one else hear this about Obama?

[grEnAlEins]

Good thing there are no domestic terrorists / extermist groups huh?

Nobody has denied that, at least not that I noticed. Also if you look back, nobody said that the birthright is a cure-all, but a good general rule. Voters have the responsibility to keep domestic extremism out of government.

[warbeak2099]

well its in the Constitutuion (sp) thats why its important, if you change or bend the rules for that, why not chang or bend the rest of the structure (constitution) that this country is built on, and once you start to build a house on a weak structure, how long will it stand?

We have "amended" the rules 27 times...

[Lohman446]

Nobody has denied that, at least not that I noticed. Also if you look back, nobody said that the birthright is a cure-all, but a good general rule. Voters have the responsibility to keep domestic extremism out of government.

Its an outdated general rule that serves little purpose.

Imagine if I could present you a presidential candidate with the following credentials:

Nobel Peace Laurete

National Security Advisor

Secretary of State under two different Presidents

Managed to avoid being tarnished in the biggest political scandal of his time

Military experience

From a working class family

Graduate with honors from Harvard (and obtained a PHD)

Let me add to this a personality that is very popular

Of course, such a candidate should be disqualified simply because they are not a natural born citizen right? Despite years of service to the country.

Too bad noone like that was ever around for us to have learned how bad that rule is huh?

[grEnAlEins]

Its an outdated general rule that serves little purpose.

Imagine if I could present you a presidential candidate with the following credentials:

Nobel Peace Laurete

National Security Advisor

Secretary of State under two different Presidents

Managed to avoid being tarnished in the biggest political scandal of his time

Military experience

From a working class family

Graduate with honors from Harvard (and obtained a PHD)

Let me add to this a personality that is very popular

Of course, such a candidate should be disqualified simply because they are not a natural born citizen right? Despite years of service to the country.

Too bad noone like that was ever around for us to have learned how bad that rule is huh?

Nobody said it was a perfect rule. Good candidates would be eliminated; it is true, much as bad candidates are allowed. Nobody said it was a perfect rule. It is a general rule that still serves a purpose, at least in my eyes. Until somebody formulates a better rule in objective terms, I see no reason to change the rule we have.

[Lohman446]

Its not an objective rule as it is now, its arbitrary.

It served a purpose at one point. That purpose no longer exists. How about we at least have the opportunity to elect the most qualified individual regardless of where they are born.

[beam]

Whether you agree with the rule or not is not the point.

If you don't agree with it, then you push to have it legally changed.

Circumventing it or breaking it is not an option, and that is what would pain me the most about if there really is something with Obama's citizenship.

If a person and his/her supporters are willing to violate the Constitution and put themselves above it in even the smallest way, that bothers me.

[Empyreal Rogue]

I would laugh until I cried if after all this hoopla that it turned out Obama wasn't even "legally" able to run for president.

[grEnAlEins]

Its not an objective rule as it is now, its arbitrary.

It served a purpose at one point. That purpose no longer exists. How about we at least have the opportunity to elect the most qualified individual regardless of where they are born.

It is objective. Natural-born is certainly not subjective. It is a clear and meaningful term that is universally understood due to it's being grounded in factual reality. I would tend to argue that the purpose of attempting to ensure loyalties is very valid today and certainly does exist. I think that baring the few exceptions which actually exist, it is indeed a fairly good general rule.

"Most qualified" is far more arbitrary a term than "natural born citizen" is. Look at this election and tell me that the "most qualified" man one, and I will tell you that the "most qualified" man lost. If that does not embody "Based on or subject to individual judgment or preference" (dictionary definition of arbitrary) I don't know what does.

We need a set of objective rules. I do not think that natural-born is the best rule, but it is the best one that I have seen expressed objectively. If someone were to propose a rule mandating a candidate be a citizen by birth or naturalization (note the objectivity of the two terms), in possession of mental faculties (according to the objective codified definition that is the current legal standard), a resident for X number of years (an objective standard), etc. defined in objective terms, I would be all for it. Until one is proposed in congress and enacted, the general rule that exists now, while imperfect, is the best we have. I think it does still do a fair job of serving its purpose, you may not. There has not been a better objective proposal though.

[grEnAlEins]

I would laugh until I cried if after all this hoopla that it turned out Obama wasn't even "legally" able to run for president.

Me too. I would be thrilled!! But I approach this accusation with skepticism. It is extremely unlikely. On second thought, I hope is is eligible should this be investigated. I live near Chicago and do not need a race riot happening near home

[michbich]

I look at it in a different way as usual . If he/she wasn't born in the country that he/she is living in but still want to be president, I garranty you, there is a country that that person is elligible in. After all, you're born somewhere.

It does suck for those that were born the day before they changed country though lol

Sorry for the very poor grammar, explaination and structure, my brain is in pudding until tomorrow from the midterms.

[TeamBob]

well

he can legally run for president, just not legally hold office. and if he is found NOT to be a cit. then he should deff. be taken out. And if he is NOT a cit, would u really want some1 running your country that
1. has lied to you from the begenning (yes i know they all do, so dont gimme that argument) over something so basic
2. Blatently(sp) broke the law by trying to become president while knowing he could not tech. do so.

If he is found to be a cit. then i guess we are all just screwed for the next for years (hopfully he doesnt do anything that will screw us up between now and then, or that will leave a lasting effect on the US)

[grEnAlEins]

Sorry for the very poor grammar, explaination and structure, my brain is in pudding until tomorrow from the midterms.

In the words of Wild Bill, "I feel your pain."

I am starting the real work for the 5 term papers I have to write for my three classes. Yes, 5 for three classes