|
demosnipe1589 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
no it does not. re-think this without any bias. go fact for fact. It makes sense, is that not reasonable?
EdyKelDev (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
But the evidence support Obama's natural born status more than it would for Arnold. That's the difference. I don't think you even know what the term Natural born means vs naturalization. None, at all.
macindrew (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Arnold wasn't born in the US, certainly you aren't that dumb!
EdyKelDev (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
You do realize that individuals have no right to challenge the qualification of a presidential candidate, it's up to congressThe problem here, people like you are fighting on technicalities of why you don't think he's qualified as a natural born citizen. You're not fighting for the constitution, because the constitution doesn't define what natural born is - congress does. I've seen enough post from you people to know why you support this case against Obama, and it's not for the constitution.
DebbieforGod2012 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Its a question that is all it is. If Arnold announced the was running in 2012 which he very well can do if Obama can do it. Do you think he should be able to do so. Hes been governor of Calif and has done a great job, so do you think he should be allowed to run for President? It is not a hypothetical question because that is just what he is going to do, so do you think he should be allowed to run?
EdyKelDev (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Congress has that power, not the supreme court. As Far as I am concerned, Obama is natural born because he was born here, and his mother was a U.S citizen. He has as much ties to Kenya as JFK has to Ireland. But Arnold, on the other hand, was not born here, or had U.S parents - though I don't mind him becoming president because he has no ties to his former country. And that's basically, what this is about, and why a person, according to our founding forefathers, needed to be natural born.
DebbieforGod2012 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
EdyKelDev The direct question is below. Will you answer those questions. I am not the judge or the attorney, so I leave that to the people who do that the best. MY questions stand..
EdyKelDev (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
''''Why wont you answer the direct question. I want to know what YOU would do. That cant be that hard to answer. Should Arnold be allowed to be President? Would you fight for Your Consititution. I dont care about anything but your option and answer'''Because you don't understand what your asking... I can't give you a direct answer, because it's a hypothetical question that has no basis, just your interpretation. Like I said, the constitution never defines what natural born is. cont'.
EdyKelDev (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Also, the constitution never defines what natural born status is. Ultimately, it is up to congress to decide what is and isn't a natural born statusAs for your hypothetical question of what I would do if there was even the remote possibility that the Supreme court somehow voted in favor of the Plaintiff... Nothing, because they don't really have the power too determine what a ntaural born citezen is, Congress does, given to them by our founding for fathers..and I'm white, not black, so don't
DebbieforGod2012 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Why wont you answer the direct question. I want to know what YOU would do. That cant be that hard to answer. Should Arnold be allowed to be President? Would you fight for Your Consititution. I dont care about anything but your option and answer | 
