I am not implying if someone is underage their children are not citizens. I was just making the point that Pres. Obama's mother was a full adult. Eighteen is considered and adult. That is merely one factual problem with his inane argument. Which makes me laugh when I think about it! I wouldn't be a citizen myself using Murgatroyds standards since my mom was only 19 when she got married and 20 when she had me!

sorry for the confusion--my comments were actually in agreement with you by addressing the nonsense that Murgatroyd wrote.

You and are I coming from this from the same position. I apologize for not being clearer in my post--it does appear as if I was challenging something you wrote, which wasn't the case.

Infantile and hysterical name-calling

only covers up the fact that you DON'T know all of the facts. Quoting Snopes.com and Factcheck.org doesn't solidify your position one iota.

To "paulpsd7" who asked "all what?"

I'm of course referring to all of the nebulous invective surrounding this issue of citizenship. I am a longtime registered Democrat -- and it is an issue with many questions swirling around it; moreso than any person who has ever run for, let alone been elected to this highest office.

To those who ask how could he get elected without vetting?

The answer is that there is no authority or governmental agency charged with such a duty -- this is why there is a bill making its way through the House of Representatives to ensure that this kind of debate never happens again.

When confronted with actual facts and laws and evidence, MurgaTroll lashes out. How about addressing the actual laws of the United States of America, as posted on the previous page, rather than your conspiracy theories?

I'm of course referring to all of the nebulous invective surrounding this issue of citizenship.

As I suggested, there is all sorts of nebulous invective regarding a whole range of issues, which stupid people choose to focus on. If we grant one type of nebulous invective as valid, why stop there? Let's have a congressional committee look into whether or not the earth is flat, or whether Santa Claus exists.

I do agree with one thing, although it's an utterly minor detail: just to remove this nonsense from future dialogue in this country, I believe written requirements for proving citizenship should be established. It's apparently not enough to validate citizenship the same way every other American validates it, particularly if you've got a name like Barack Hussein Obama. I don't imagine such a step would make any difference, however. This birth certificate routine is not apt to be repeated in any case. And besides, there is a pile of evidence showing that Obama was a natural born citizen, which the birthers apparently had no problem ignoring. It's not like objective reality has any sway with these folks. However, this should be done purely as house-keeping.

No Worries!

You say, "just to remove this nonsense from future dialogue in this country, I believe written requirements for proving citizenship should be established."

What "requirements" would you establish?

Obama has already proven his citizenship with his birth certificate. The state of Hawaii has verified the authenticity of that birth certificate.

Yet here we are, arguing with a small, very paranoid, and very loud sliver of the electorate who refuses to accept that reality.

“This is all hysteria, stupid at that, whooped up by the Right's idiots (like Limburger) because they can't think of any other way to go after Obama.

But let 'em carry on! The longer they do the more they are all marginalized.

Into the pro-Southern, pro-Confederate, pro -slavery (anti-union), gun totin', bible punchin' yahoo party they are.”

In case you didn’t know, here is some information for you:

“From 1828 to 1856 the Democrats won all but two presidential elections (1840 and 1848). During the 1840s and ’50s, however, the Democratic Party, as it officially named itself in 1844, suffered serious internal strains over the issue of extending slavery to the Western territories. Southern Democrats, led by Jefferson Davis, wanted to allow slavery in all the territories, while Northern Democrats, led by Stephen A. Douglas, proposed that each territory should decide the question for itself through referendum. The issue split the Democrats at their 1860 presidential convention, where Southern Democrats nominated John C. Breckinridge and Northern Democrats nominated Douglas. The 1860 election also included John Bell, the nominee of the Constitutional Union Party, and Abraham Lincoln, the candidate of the newly established (1854) antislavery Republican Party (which was unrelated to Jefferson’s Republican Party of decades earlier).”

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/157244/Democratic-Party

What "requirements" would you establish?

Obama has already proven his citizenship with his birth certificate. The state of Hawaii has verified the authenticity of that birth certificate.

Yes, and that works for everybody. What I suggest is that those requirements get written down. However, as you point out...

Yet here we are, arguing with a small, very paranoid, and very loud sliver of the electorate who refuses to accept that reality.

Yes, and that's why I put my "requirements" as a very low priority. End of the day, you show these imbeciles some incontrovertible reality, and they'll find another fantasy to latch onto.

Hey Mike, I was wondering if you had any thoughts about Glenn's recent post, which does a lot to refute your desperate belief that "we only poured a bit of water down KSM's nose." Since you were so confident of that assertion, I would have expected you to join a discussion that refutes that assertion, since we all know how devoted you are to finding the truth.

Here, in case you weren't able to find it.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/06/30/accountability/index.html

This is a wrong subject for this particular thread.

If you want to discuss the comments that a made a few minutes ago, please do it.

"they'll find another fantasy to latch onto."

And how. A new one every week, it seems, like that guy's paper that purports to prove that it was William Ayres who wrote Obama's Dreams of My Father.

Fantasy is ever so much simpler and more fun than reality.