from the constitution Article II, section I

"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."

From the Naturalization Act of 1790:

"the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens".

The status of Natural Born Citizen just refers to a citizen who was not naturalized. It has nothing to do with being born on American Soil, although those born on American Soil are also natural born citizens, it is not a requirment if you have an american citizen in your direct parentage. Likewise, this continues generation to generation. So if Obama was born in Kenya, and Married a Kenyan woman, his children would still be like him Natural Born American Citizens, as would their children and their children, and their children. Some nations are not so liberal in their citizenship, but this has always been the nature of American Citizenship.

That is the law, which is why this entire discussion is meaningless.

This woman is not well.

I don't much see any merit in making a further fool of her.

It's funny that you might think that male genital mutilation gets press because it's a man's junk getting mutilated, and not a womans.

I would think others might put it up to the idea that violence against males is largely tolerated, and against women not so much.

Essentially, John Wayne Bobbit, and this superglue fellow, we can play them for laughs, firstly because they walked away somewhat none the worse for ware (that is an argument with Mr. Bobbit)and violence against men is something we can laugh at.

I can't imagine anyone laughing about what this woman went through, so although it's a tragic story, it is a local story, and isn't likely to get much press outside of the news of the weird. And it's just not funny enough to get play there.

What this women went through is tragic, and horrific, but it speaks little of our larger society, only the sick actions of an evil man. Because of this it is unlikely to get the big play that a wacky man loses his penis story.

As a similar example, although we're all aware of genitle mutilation in Africa, "Penis Theivery" is also something that gets covered quite a bit. They are covered in very differnt ways, because one is a tragedy, and one is a comical story of penis panic, but both do get covered.

When the mutilation rises to a societal issue it gets covered, when the mutilation is largely comical because people are able to go about their business it gets covered. A lone tragedy outside of the major media markets remains a lone tragedy.

I would never assign that title to any of the talking heads, and I don't think they use it much themselves.

Most will tell you they are commentators. And such commentary isn't journalism. GE basicly told it's entertainer, to stop being quite so loud when entertaing people.

It's censorship, I guess, but it's hardly corporate controll of the news. Keith Olberman, Rachel Madow, they don't report News, they comment on the News, there is a differnce. If you are getting your news from any of these sources you likely aren't getting much news.

When did Obama ever promise to:

•prosecute torturers and warrantless wiretappers

•end two illegal wars

•abandon our failed foreign policy of American exceptionalism and empire

• push for single payer universal coverage (49% of Americans want single payer)

While on the Campaing trail. I followed the campaign fairly closely and I and a lot of other Americans voted for a guy who seemed to be able to push the country in the right direction without destroying it.

I agree that single payer is a great idea, that being said, it's never been effectivly or efficiently in a country our size, note that our uninsured population is larger than the entire population of Canada.

The bottom line is, single payer for multipayer is a headache for a stomach ache, and there is little reason to push so hard when the goal isn't necessarily single payer.

The goal is universal coverage, or as close to it as politics allow. The goal is an end to preexisting condition clauses, and a tighter regulation on the cost and profits of healthcare agencies. The goal is a public option for people who can't afford private insurance. None of those things are helped by pushing for a single payer system that won't pass congress anyway.

The wars in Iraq and Afgahnistan (neither of which are illegal in any real sense of the word by the way) were never taken off the table by Obama. His statements were on the campaign trail, an exit strategy for IRaq, and a rededication to Afgahnistan. How exactly are you surprised that he has set an exit strategy for Iraq, and a rededication to Afgahnistan?

He never called for investigations of wire taps or torture, and continues to not call for them to this day. He never rejected the notion of America as the leader of the Freeworld on the campaign trail, and continues to seek to lead our allies in making a better world for all.

Exactly what promises on the campaign trail did Obama break? And did he really make that promise or did you assume he made that promsie?