So I presume you returned with your snorkel intact?
If David Axelrod directed the news coverage of President Obama’s announcement on same sex marriage it wouldn’t look much different than what we’ve seen these past 24 hours. They’ve just uncritically repeated the White House line at every turn.
For good or bad the country is split roughly 50/50 on this issue. And Obama’s view is every bit as much a flip flop as Romney’s views on matters. Heck, it’s a double flip flop: for, against, for.
But you wouldn’t know it from the coverage.
Absurd just absurd.
And I say this as someone who supports legalizing SSM.
We are getting into crunch time, so news coverage that is prone to favor Obama will be all the less critical of him.
This will explain things, Erich:
Come on, erich… it was a very bold statement that he made. He now re-evolved into supporting SSM, but isn’t currently prepared to do anything about it! He believes in state’s right… except for healthcare, and taxes, and you know… other stuff.
He took a big step forward, and has boldly proposed to change nothing.
Wow. What a leader.
No, Al said the other day that Obama not being born in the USA would have not been a critical factor because his mom was a citizen and that made him one.
BUT, Only native-born U.S. citizens (or those born abroad, but only to parents who were both citizens of the U.S.) may be president of the United States, per our Constitution.
“He took a big step forward, and has boldly proposed to change nothing.”
Really, the story is that our constitutional scholar president, the man who taught Con Law, the man who spent years studying the document, believes that SSM is not constitutionally protected. That states can ban it or approve it.
That’s a big fat zero.
But I don’t think anyone really believes he believes that either. I don’t. If he’s reelected he will come out and argue that SSM is guaranteed by the Equal Protection Clause.
And the press will celebrate this further “evolution”.
Well, as Obama has said, he will have more flexibility after the election. So he must be stopped before we find out what he really wants to do.
A 50/50 split is a very simplistic reading of the issue. Younger people of all political persuasions have a hard time seeing what all the fuss is about: “You’re telling me I’m supposed to be upset about Ellen marrying her girlfriend?” This is a dead issue in 10 years, and the not-stupid-rightwing media knows it.
Only native-born U.S. citizens (or those born abroad, but only to parents who were both citizens of the U.S.) may be president of the United States, per our Constitution.
That is incorrect.
“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…”
Neither has the Congress nor the SCOTUS further defined “natural born citizen” to mean anything beyond any person who becomes a citizen of the Untied States by a means other than through the naturalisation process. Any person born in the United States or its territories, as well as any person born abroad with at least one parent who is a US citizen becomes an American citizen by birthright and without need to go through the naturalisation process.
There is an argument to be made that such a person born abroad with only one parent a citizen is not natural born, but that argument would need to be adjudicated in federal court. For a hypothetical person who has already won election as POTUS, disqualification would start as an objection raised during the counting of the electoral votes while in joint session of Congress. Absent that objection and subsequent vote, the issue would be moot for purposes of federal court – which is why all of the court challenges are summarily dismissed.
in any invent the issue is at least up for debate and your “Mr.Doctor of the Universe” simplistic initial pooh pooh was junk.
If we were to find out Obama was born in Kenya and rushed to the grandparents to obtain benefits (I know it’s crap), we would have a constitutional crisis on our hands. A BIG DEAL!
LK 0 :-)
You go Fritz!
Didn’t know you had it in you :-)
As the worm*, er, world turns:
‘The shout from the crowd was clear. As President Barack Obama gave the first official campaign speech of his re-election bid at a sports arena in Ohio last weekend the first mention of his Republican opponent Mitt Romney prompted a male voice in the throng to yell: “Traitor!”’
The President didn’t respond.
In his defense, there’s no evidence he heard the shout. But according to this account, it was clearly heard.
If he did hear it, it was pretty cheap for him not to denounce it. More so than Romney since, y’know, he’s the president.
Here in Ohio we will be ready to kill both Obama and Romney by election time. Begining this month, we are being flooded with Presidential campaign ads. Over and over again and it’s only May. Swing state status has its pros and cons.
Uh-oh. There goes that talking point.
The nearest town to my cabin has 80 residents give and take a few. It has its own post office. With Mrs. Highman’s General Store closing two years ago after her passing, that and the volunteer fire department is about all it has. The postmaster and her blind husband are who we all visit to find out town happenings and gossip.
Yep, I know… but we would sure miss it.
A myriad of shouts from a crowd is not the same as a direct question to the candidate. Every crowd has somebody shouting something stupid; if a politician addressed it, the shouts would get worse from people showing up for attention. Nice try.
How does this: “The shout from the crowd was clear.”
become this: “A myriad of shouts from a crowd”?
Joe should be editing transcripts for NBC.
Are you trying to tell me exactly one person made a noise in that crowd? I find that difficult to believe, but even if it’s true, you can’t elevate hecklers..it brings more hecklers. Once you have an audience member with a microphone, they’ve already been elevated. At that point you have to confront them if they say The Crazy.
^I’m only going by what the story described.
It may or may not be accurate; but based on it you can’t say there was a bunch of shouts being made.
It said one shout was clearly heard. Not that one was heard above a wealth of other shouts.
More seriously, we can’t expect these candidates to respond to every yokel who shouts out nonsense or even asks nonsense. It’d be nice it this was a League of Women Voter’s debate but it’s not.
If it’s extreme and repeated gibberish, respond; otherwise, they can just overlook it.
As I said earlier, I wished Romney would have responded to that women before. It would have been a good opportunity for a mini-Sister Souljah moment. But the fact that he didn’t isn’t a big deal.
Very funny moment on The Factor tonight when Bill O’Reilly thought the woman and child on the Time Magazine cover were models. :P
His guests informed him it was a mother and son.
To his credit Bill said he was an idiot for not doing the research.
If the Left thinks that turning ‘bullying’ into a political weapon will help kids, they’re wrong.
Sorry, I don’t want a homophobic Greg Marmalard as my president. And to those who say it isn’t relevant, it shows the entitlement rich kid Mitt has felt all his life and still feels. I grew up when Mitt’s father was governor of Michigan, and I can tell you Mitt can only wish he was half the man George Romney was. Of course, the Republicans of today would call George a RINO.