Comments on: Conflict Exists Over Where Obama Was Born

By: hotoffthepress2

hotoffthepress2 — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 03:47:12 +0000

Andrew — No offense, but I’d rather elect someone born IN the United States. Someone born outside of the U.S. might have conflicting loyalties — something we can’t risk, especially in higher offices such as the Oval Office.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 03:43:15 +0000

It was actually put in there to stop foreign born royalty from getting rid of the republic and becoming a monarchy. Some would say, that has instead turned into Empire, depending on your point of view.

Most people in the world are to the left of the American political system, so it would be nigh on impossible to gain any sort of power here.

Anyway, the Governor of California is foreign born and was not last time I looked trying to hand over the powers into the constitution to some foreign power. In fact, some have touted his name as a possible Presidential contender, should the rule regarding American born be changed.

The question is this. Do you want to elect someone just because he or she was born in the United States? Or someone that has chosen to live in the United States? Should the argument be place of birth first, or more about what they have to offer in terms of skills and talent. I would much rather elect an Andrew Carnegie, Alexander Graham Bell and Albert Einstein, than someone just because they happened to be born in the United States.

Fighting with one hand tied behind your back, can be very difficult.

By: DAVID

DAVID — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 22:46:30 +0000

SHOWS WHAT MONEY CAN BUY

By: dawn

dawn — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 03:43:43 +0000

This is not an obscure rule, it is there for a reason. For instance, preventing a foreign born leftist from working to ruin the constitution and hand over the powers found in the constitution to overseas powers. Sounds like a good time to follow up on this.

By: AH

AH — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 05:14:16 +0000

Frivilous or not I applaud this guy for fulling exercising his American rights to shake a stick at the government.

By: Denis Ables

Denis Ables — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 00:28:16 +0000

apart from “ablesfamily.com” I don’t know what you need …?

By: Denis Ables

Denis Ables — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 00:25:38 +0000

Since Obama didn’t respond to Berg’s complaint within the 30 day period, doesn’t lack of that response indicate that Berg’s complaint is accepted as fact? If so, under what authority can the ruling judge then subsequently dismiss by claiming that Berg doesn’t have “standing”? Is not the judge acting outside his authority? If so, can’t he be sued? The media is still in “the emperor is wearing clothes” mode on this issue. They’re afraid to touch it. If they thought it was frivilous, they’d have been writing about the lawsuit!

By: zebra9er

zebra9er — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 02:44:03 +0000

I think it is incumbant on the Supreme Court to determine beyond ANY doubt whether this individual is a US citizen or not. If he is truly a US citizen he can dispell all doubts by producing an original birth certificate instead of having ALL of his records SEALED. This merley tells me that he haS much TO HIDE.

By: diamond jack

diamond jack — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 15:46:42 +0000

that doesnt leave much time for investigating someone new on the political scene.

By: hotoffthepress2

hotoffthepress2 — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 15:41:49 +0000

diamond jack — It should have been checked by the FEC at the time a candidate filed to run. As I understand things, anyone opposing the legality of a candidate must file a complaint within five days of the candidate’s filing to run for office. Now that it’s made it all the way to the Supreme Court without any action, I hold little hope for change.