Amendment: The President Elect will provide records of eligibility prior to taking office.

[The Dude 206]

The Constitutional language re "natural born" is indeed vague. Also, Obama is not the first to have his status questioned. The rest were White men.

How is it vague?

Clause 5: No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Seems quite clear to me.

This might be an interesting moment to share a resource I came across from my recent past:

Political Paranoia: The Psychopolitics of Hatred. By Robert S. Robins and Jerrold M. Post. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1997.

(trust me, it talks a lot more than just hate)

An excellent book by two very well known political psychiatrists and their characterization of how people that are frankly crazy, say, do, and believe crazy things when it comes to politics.

The book looks good. I'll have to write this down for my trip to the library!

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Indeed it is, lets hope the stupidity doesn't spread beyond a few.

I'm afraid it has, since there is a lot of defensiveness and hostility among the trusting.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

How is it vague?

Seems quite clear to me.

If this was a nation of one, your clarity would settle the question for good. However, there's more to it than that. Look up the history of the controversies surrounding the clause. You'll see the issue is not new nor all about Obama.

[Zero Sum 305]

How is it vague?

Seems quite clear to me.

The book looks good. I'll have to write this down for my trip to the library!

The book really places some perspective some of the political ambient we witness in the nation- including what we see posted here by some 'experts.'

[The Dude 206]

If this was a nation of one, your clarity would settle the question for good. However, there's more to it than that. Look up the history of the controversies surrounding the clause. You'll see the issue is not new nor all about Obama.

I think I'll pass on the tangent. The text is clear, but you continue to be a pedant.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

The book really places some perspective some of the political ambient we witness in the nation- including what we see posted here by some 'experts.'

I'm sure the same debates occurred around whether we should revolt against Great Britain, free the slaves, enter WWII, or end segregation. It's good for the country that the passive and upholders of the status quo didn't win those debates. It was the skeptics that prevailed over the appeasets, and moved the country forward.

I think I'll pass on the tangent. The text is clear, but you continue to be a pedant.

The record of the debate proves that is not true.

[The Dude 206]

The record of the debate proves that is not true.

Whatever you want to think Sofiyya. It's your world, we're all just breathing your air.

[Zero Sum 305]

I'm sure the same debates occurred around whether we should revolt against Great Britain, free the slaves, enter WWII, or end segregation. It's good for the country that the passive and upholders of the status quo didn't win those debates. It was the skeptics that prevailed over the appeasets, and moved the country forward.

The record of the debate proves that is not true.

One thing I'd label as skeptic... altogether different from what we see from time to time in history. Check out the book... interesting stuff. A healthy debate is good for the country; falling into paranoia is not so good.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

This is more akin to denialism.

[mawilson 2,133]

If this was a nation of one, your clarity would settle the question for good. However, there's more to it than that. Look up the history of the controversies surrounding the clause. You'll see the issue is not new nor all about Obama.

Obama should appoint a Constitution Czar to solve this pesky issue once and for all.

I think I'll pass on the tangent. The text is clear, but you continue to be a pedant.

The text is less clear on what "natural born" means.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

We just need an amendment to strip birthers of voting and public office rights and if they still won't shut up then loss of free speech rights on the topic. Problem solved!

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Whatever you want to think Sofiyya. It's your world, we're all just breathing your air.

It's not about what I think or what you think. You want to pretend this is all new and all about your guy, but, there's a historical record of debatethat rational people don't deny.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

One thing I'd label as skeptic... altogether different from what we see from time to time in history. Check out the book... interesting stuff. A healthy debate is good for the country; falling into paranoia is not so good.

The paranoia comes from the side that wants to stem any questioning and limit first amendment rights for those who do.

[mawilson 2,133]

It's not about what I think or what you think. You want to pretend this is all new and all about your guy, but, there's a historical record of debate that rational people don't deny.

Interesting how the anti-war movement has all but vanished since this guy was elected. I guess it was more about the other guy than the actual wars.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Obama should appoint a Constitution Czar to solve this pesky issue once and for all.

He expects to get by on charm.

The text is less clear on what "natural born" means.

VJ Constitutional experts say not true.