> Wild Flower Soul wrote:

> I know of this rule. But if the larger part of the population votes for Obama anyway, what does it matter? You're always going on about giving the freedom to the people to decide. They have, and they didn't care!
Besides, it's a stupid rule, get rid of it..

If that was the case, why would the law still exist?  There was plenty of movement, especially on the Republican side, to remove that rule (thanks to Schwarzenegger).

Plus you undermine the very rule of law under that system... "oh, the law exists, unless someone we like violates the law... then it's null!"

not sure YF, I never thought that was the main problem with Obama at any point and I was more angry with McCain to personally remember

snopes.com says mid 2008

except as these laws are pointing out, there's not really a legal authority to go to

and it's hell to strike a candidate off the ballot, there was a case in New Jersey where the current senator was running.  The democrat incumbent quit a few months before the election becuase he was a crook, and the Democrats subbed in an old fart.  The Republicans sued because NJ law said a candidate has to be on the ballot a set # of months before the election. And the judge threw the law out because he said it was unfair to Dems not to have a Dem on the ballot (so I guess Dems can run noncitizens too :s ) .  That's cited as precedent to REFUSE to handle this crap before the voting.  an off year is about the only time election changes get done over here.

Oh come on, like anybody really wanted Hillary

"Wait.... NOW you want to know if Obama is legal? Left it a little late haven't you?
Just out of idle curiosity, if Obama is illegal just what the smeg can you do about it?"
X(

lol funny how when the republicans get a president in you don't see as much whining in here.

but if the democrats get a president in. a black one even( everybody's thinking it I'm just saying it) then it's whining in the politics.

grow up. obama's president. live with it. either he does a good job or a bad job. he can't get much worse then your last president.

they could've elected a 10 year old and he would have been a better president then bush so give the black democrat a chance in stead of seeking every possible way to not have to accept that he is your president now.

> Zarf BeebleBrix wrote:

> @tommie

How about trying to debate the merits of the issue, rather than trying to sidestep the issue altogether?

I have no problem debating the issue. I just wanted to point out that these reasons are getting more and more rediculous.

talking about sidestepping isues. how is me pointing something out sidestepping and these various topics full of reasons and excuses not to accept obama as a president (if he's a capable one or not will have to be evaluated after his presidency) not sidestepping an entire debate.

but you wanted me to get on this topic only. fine

so his birthcertificate isn't public. and yes there's a law that you have to be a natural american to become president( thoug I don't see many native american presidents either so if any one could explain to me the specifics of the law. who is considered a natural american( just born or have to be a few generations? etc)

either way. that law has been circumvained before I don't see why this should now be applied. and it doesn't matter really; you don't choose a leader based on his birht certificate I hope. you choose on based on what he stands for.

if you really think that obama's bithcertificate public would have prevented him from becoming president due to lack of votes then america is truly doomed. cause that would imply that with a simple paper and a bit of mediacircus more then half your population can be blinded from the truth so easily.

and if obama were a "illegal" president because he's no "natural" american that would not be considered all bad. for the past few years america is getting a negative picture out in the rest of the world. the image is that america thinks it's the entire world. europe and asia aren't on you guys radar so to speak.

a american president that wasn't alway in america would have a much easier time trying to reconnect some lines that your previous goverments cut loose or let go.
some americans may think they don't need anybody else in the world but I can assure you america would not be what it is today without the rest of the world and you still need us wether you want to accept that or not.

this long text short: if a simple birthcertificate has this much influence you ppl seriously made a wrong turn somewhere and I pity you. I do think it might be a good idea for next elections to have the certificate public. sure but I know a lot of americans are fools and would be influenced by that which is why it might be better to cancel that law already. and that certificate that's not public should not be a valuable argument to "cancel" a presidency that's been elected by the majority of the population. if this debate had come up before his election it could be used to ask him to make it public but using this argument now is more an excuse to bend laws then to enforce this one.

chris all I'm saying is

if this had come up when he was still running for president I would have agreed: make the certificate public.

but not now.

now you are using this law: someone running for president must be a natural american
and it's just an uncertainty not even proven that obama isn't

to ben around this law: someone elected by the majority of the population becomes the president.

so you choose which law you'd rather have standing firm and which should be ignored for this presidency because the opposition only brings it up now( and not when they should have)

and about the ww3 joke: it's not that you lost it. it's that the image of america that the rest of the world sees now is that america with it's recent aggression and stuff is nr1 candidate for starting that war.

Tommie there is a reason the founder of the crips was executed, even if lots thought he should not at the end.

It is the law.

A shoplifter gewts caught, should they be punished or no?

A murderer gets caught, punish or no?

A company builds shoddy cars, punished or no?

Fait accompli (sp?) is a poor alternative to equal protections, equal rights, and equal punishments.

Unless you can show that Hillary Clinton also brought this matter up and all attempts by her (or her team) to discover the truth were stonewalled and avoided, and that there was a greater desire inside the democrat party for Obama over Hillary then I call this conspiracy bullshit.<<

I think whether its conspiracy bullshit really hinges on whether Obama was born in Hawaii and how anybody proves they were born in Hawaii in the 1960s and whether Obama has done what anybody would do to prove that.  I could say that Richard Branson is the rightful heir to the Throne and you don't need to get into what Prince Andrew thinks about it, do you?

Bullshit, it's Little Richard

quite possibly so.

I think maybe we oughta set rules for the future though.  And when we amended the consitution to have 2 term limits for Presidents they wrote it to exclude Truman, so maybe that's smart.  Not that Truman was gonna win, becuase he refused to nuke the Commies and he sent the Army against unions