What's the turn about? Has anybody called Obama's citizenship and technical qualification to be president into question?


Personally, on this issue (which came up in 2000 as well), my view is that the only reasonable way to read "natural born citizen" is anybody who was legally entitled to their citizenship simply be being born. Yeah, it is ambiguous but I agree with the sentiment at the end of the article that no court is ever going to come within a mile of overturning an election on such subtle grounds (insert Bush v. Gore jokes here).

Plus, I'd point out that the citizenship qualification is natural born citizen or citizen at time the constitution was adopted. McCain clearly meets the second qualification.

But I've also long been in favor of removing all of the qualifications listed in the constitution altogether. If a 12 year old German who has never visited the United States can successfully convince the American public to elect her president then so be it.

Awhile ago, some conservative blogs were questioning Obama's qualifications for reasons that were even more ridiculous.

See here.

How much of Exxon's $11.68 billion profit is going to its shareholders and employees?

By definition, all of it.

Well, by definition, all of it is going to shareholders. Employee compensation is an expense and diminishes profit.

People on both sides didn't support Romney because of the Mormonism. I don't care what religion someone is, so long as they don't try to start the apocalypse in the Middle East so that they can force Jesus to come back early; I also don't appreciate someone using their personal religion to tell me what and whom I can do stuff with in my personal life, and my body.

And that last sentence just made my former English teacher's head kerplode.

"Waiting for Bigot."

har har har.

Okay, I admit it. I lol'ed.
:D