• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supremes facing eligibility challenge to Obama, again

MaggieD said:
A free people has every right, actually a duty, to ask questions. If there is a formal vetting process in place for members of Congress, the President, Vice President, and other government officials to assure the country that these people satisfy the qualifications of office, it is reasonable to expect that that information would be made instantly public. Fact is, we don't have a formal vetting process. And how ridiculous is that???

BTW, I believe he is a citizen. I argue the point only because the system is flawed.
Click to expand...

And I argue that anyone who questions the eligibility of a US President is stupid. This is because of the security clearance which is required to actually be President.
 
TurtleDude said:
Do you believe those of us who thought Obama was a joke of a candidate are "stupid"?
Click to expand...

No. I know people who question Obama's citizenship status are stupid.
 
Hatuey said:
And I argue that anyone who questions the eligibility of a US President is stupid. This is because of the security clearance which is required to actually be President.
Click to expand...

And I argue that this vetting process should be public knowledge. It's that simple. And not the least unreasonable.

Why would anyone disagree?
 
MaggieD said:
And I argue that this vetting process should be public knowledge. It's that simple. And not the least unreasonable.

Why would anyone disagree?
Click to expand...

Because there are certain things that they look into when doing the vetting process that should not be public knowledge. Like school records for example should not be public knowledge, but you have some that say they should be simply because they believe that the President isn't an American when all the agencies that have looked at the birth certificate have said it to be legit.
 
Hatuey said:
No. I know people who question Obama's citizenship status are stupid.
Click to expand...

really-so you have reviewed the IQ scores of every such person? or you are just talking out your ass?
 
SheWolf said:
Why is Turtledude's kid in the conversation?

3377488092_f8d4d8a258.jpg
Click to expand...

I am on retainer for the three little pigs. I am here to serve you with a summons for wanton destruction of propery, intentional infliction of emotional distress and depriving said clients of their common law and constitutional rights to be free of carnivorous attacks!



wolfie.jpg
 
soccerboy22 said:
Because there are certain things that they look into when doing the vetting process that should not be public knowledge. Like school records for example should not be public knowledge, but you have some that say they should be simply because they believe that the President isn't an American when all the agencies that have looked at the birth certificate have said it to be legit.
Click to expand...

I don't even know why school records would be part of the vetting process.

Here are the only requirements to be President of the United States.

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.

Term limit amendment - US Constitution, Amendment XXII, Section 1 – ratified February 27, 1951

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.
Click to expand...

Presidential Nominee Checklist:

Natural Born Citizen? Check.
At least 35 years of age? Check.
Resided in the U.S. for 14 years? Check.
Hasn't been elected to the Presidency twice? Check.

Okay, he's good to go.

My questions are, "Who vets the candidates to make sure they are qualified to run?" And...."Why isn't that vetting process public knowledge?"
 
TurtleDude said:
really-so you have reviewed the IQ scores of every such person? or you are just talking out your ass?
Click to expand...

IQ is not a real measure of intelligence. A person can smoke 3 packs a day. That's stupid as they know they are harming their health. However they could probably sit down and solve equations. Likewise people who compose music are said to be 'intelligent' and yet, a large percentage of them end up penniless because they are too stupid to properly handle their money. A person who likes guns can talk about how much technical knowledge they have of guns and yet be completely ignorant about sociological processes which may seem obvious to others.
 
Hatuey said:
IQ is not a real measure of intelligence. A person can smoke 3 packs a day. That's stupid as they know they are harming their health. However they could probably sit down and solve equations. Likewise people who compose music are said to be 'intelligent' and yet, a large percentage of them end up penniless because they are too stupid to properly handle their money.
Click to expand...

there are many reasons why someone could publicly question Obama's citizenship. SOme of them are perhaps stupid, some of them are just the cuttthroat political gotcha games that both sides play. SOme might have been doing it to try to keep a president they despise for policy reasons off balance. It happens all the time and while you might not like that claiming these machiavellian types are stupid is indeed stupid.

I know a woman who is a major player in the GOP. I won't mention her name but she is an agnostic Jew. Yet, when she worked for the Bush administrations, she was a strategist who often was involved in the abortion debate. So I asked her at some point why an agnostic Jewish woman was pushing to limit abortions. she noted that doing that kept the feminist democrats off balance and defending turf they had already "captured" versus engaging in more offensive (vs defensive) actions. she really didn't care one way or another about the ISSUE. She cared alot about her side WINNING. Hardly stupid, she was summa cum Laude at Yale and top of her class at a major league law school
 
MaggieD said:
I don't even know why school records would be part of the vetting process.

Here are the only requirements to be President of the United States.



Presidential Nominee Checklist:

Natural Born Citizen? Check.
At least 35 years of age? Check.
Resided in the U.S. for 14 years? Check.
Hasn't been elected to the Presidency twice? Check.

Okay, he's good to go.

My questions are, "Who vets the candidates to make sure they are qualified to run?" And...."Why isn't that vetting process public knowledge?"
Click to expand...

Well, Maggie it isn't like the Obama Administration never published a form of his birth certificate. Then that lead to oh since it isn't the real one it must be a fake! Then when all the agencies said they have seen the real one it was something else. So, I think there is a point where enough is enough. And after showing a form of his birth certificate and the various agencies saying they have seen the real one, I don't know what else could be public knowledge.

And the reason people want to know his school records to say he used a scholarship that is for exchange students.

And for the second part of your question I do believe the DoD and FBI do all the vetting.
 
soccerboy22 said:
Well, Maggie it isn't like the Obama Administration never published a form of his birth certificate. Then that lead to oh since it isn't the real one it must be a fake! Then when all the agencies said they have seen the real one it was something else. So, I think there is a point where enough is enough. And after showing a form of his birth certificate and the various agencies saying they have seen the real one, I don't know what else could be public knowledge.

And the reason people want to know his school records to say he used a scholarship that is for exchange students.
Click to expand...

I didn't know about the exchange student thingie. Thanks.

As I said, I'm not arguing he's not a citizen, because I think he is. I'm just reiterating my firm belief that there should be a formal vetting procedure that every single candidate is run through -- and that an agency of the Federal government sign off on a candidate before her/his name is put on the ballot. It's kind of silly that we don't, imo.
 
MaggieD said:
I didn't know about the exchange student thingie. Thanks.

As I said, I'm not arguing he's not a citizen, because I think he is. I'm just reiterating my firm belief that there should be a formal vetting procedure that every single candidate is run through -- and that an agency of the Federal government sign off on a candidate before her/his name is put on the ballot. It's kind of silly that we don't, imo.
Click to expand...

There are RUMORS that Obama used a scholarship for FOREIGN students to go to OCCIDENTAL college. There are RUMORS that OBAMA was able to transfer to COlumbia with a student record that would have been rather difficult if possessed by a white male. It is KNOWN that Obama did not even make HONORS at Columbia (ie his cumulative GPA was below a B+ average and it is KNOWN that such a GPA would make it almost impossible for a white male to have gained acceptance into Harvard law where the 75 percentile (ie 75 percent of the students were above this number) GPA was in the 3.7 range
 
MaggieD said:
And I argue that this vetting process should be public knowledge. It's that simple. And not the least unreasonable.

Why would anyone disagree?
Click to expand...

Couldn't it just be an issue of learning about the process, not making the process public?
 
TurtleDude said:
I am on retainer for the three little pigs. I am here to serve you with a summons for wanton destruction of propery, intentional infliction of emotional distress and depriving said clients of their common law and constitutional rights to be free of carnivorous attacks!



View attachment 67113263
Click to expand...

Oook.. :thinking... nice to meet you
 
SheWolf said:
Couldn't it just be an issue of learning about the process, not making the process public?
Click to expand...

Oh, I absolutely agree. I don't care about seeing any of it. I just want to know that it's a formal process, who does it, and know that an agency has signed off on every candidate. I'd be happy then. And, probably, this birther nonsense wouldn't have seen first base.
 
MaggieD said:
Oh, I absolutely agree. I don't care about seeing any of it. I just want to know that it's a formal process, who does it, and know that an agency has signed off on every candidate. I'd be happy then. And, probably, this birther nonsense wouldn't have seen first base.
Click to expand...

I think the birther thing might still be an issue.. They might just go.. well, so and so with the FBI and CIA a socialists who hate America just like Obama, or that Obama duped them.. just like he did everybody else in America. The process is flawed and needs overhauled, etc. etc.

Somebody will find something else to nit pick..
 
TurtleDude said:
really-so you have reviewed the IQ scores of every such person? or you are just talking out your ass?
Click to expand...


Anyone remember this?:giggle1:


Do you agree w/ Pres historian Michael Beschloss that Obama is the "most intelligent" President in history ? ?
Historian Michael Beschloss was on Don Imus’ radio show this AM. He repeatedly referred to Obama's IQ level and his intelligence, and on at least two occasions declared that Obama was “the most intelligent president in the history of the US, and that his IQ is off the charts.”

Imus asked him what his IQ was.
Beschloss: “I actually don’t know, but it’s probably really high, don’t you think?”

Do you agree w/ Pres historian Michael Beschloss that Obama is the "most intelligent" President in history ? ? - Yahoo! Answers
 
Barbbtx said:
Anyone remember this?:giggle1:


Do you agree w/ Pres historian Michael Beschloss that Obama is the "most intelligent" President in history ? ?
Historian Michael Beschloss was on Don Imus’ radio show this AM. He repeatedly referred to Obama's IQ level and his intelligence, and on at least two occasions declared that Obama was “the most intelligent president in the history of the US, and that his IQ is off the charts.”

Imus asked him what his IQ was.
Beschloss: “I actually don’t know, but it’s probably really high, don’t you think?”

Do you agree w/ Pres historian Michael Beschloss that Obama is the "most intelligent" President in history ? ? - Yahoo! Answers
Click to expand...



Yeah that was Cyber slurpage at its worst. Bush I, Clinton and Nixon are generally regarded as the brightest presidents in the last century. Bush was phi beta kappa at Yale and summa Cum laude, Clinton had top grades at Gtown and got a Rhodes (Bush I was not eligible because he was married before he graduated Yale (in three years) and Nixon was one of the top students in his class at Duke Law and whittier. Obama didn't even graduate Cum Laude from Columbia so its hard to justify the claims of his brilliance when the three I mentioned were all top of t heir classes.
 
TurtleDude said:
Yeah that was Cyber slurpage at its worst. Bush I, Clinton and Nixon are generally regarded as the brightest presidents in the last century. Bush was phi beta kappa at Yale and summa Cum laude, Clinton had top grades at Gtown and got a Rhodes (Bush I was not eligible because he was married before he graduated Yale (in three years) and Nixon was one of the top students in his class at Duke Law and whittier. Obama didn't even graduate Cum Laude from Columbia so its hard to justify the claims of his brilliance when the three I mentioned were all top of t heir classes.
Click to expand...

which is of course the only criteria worth mentioning.
 
haymarket said:
which is of course the only criteria worth mentioning.
Click to expand...

sort of hard to claim a guy is the most brilliant ever when he was mediocre in a well regarded measure of intellect. But dems called Bush a moron because of the way he spoke ignoring the fact that people who knew him well -such as Clinton white house counsel-Lanny Davis noted that in some important areas-such as understanding people and knowing what motivated them-Bush is a genius.
 
TurtleDude said:
sort of hard to claim a guy is the most brilliant ever when he was mediocre in a well regarded measure of intellect. But dems called Bush a moron because of the way he spoke ignoring the fact that people who knew him well -such as Clinton white house counsel-Lanny Davis noted that in some important areas-such as understanding people and knowing what motivated them-Bush is a genius.
Click to expand...

Keep holding to that line of argument. Its a real winner.
 
haymarket said:
Keep holding to that line of argument. Its a real winner.
Click to expand...

Let me know when there is a prize on this board to be won. I tend to believe it when a partisan lawyer for the Dems stated that Bush was really bright when he was facing another election. In court we call that an admission against interest. Its rather reliable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom