Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
I belong to no organized political party. I am a Democrat--Will Rogers
Check these out
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(389)
-
▼
February
(45)
- Most important news story of the decade?
- Are you working for free today?
- Obama gets the question
- Cat Blogging
- Spring will be a little late this year
- Increasingly desperate, the Clinton campaign sugge...
- A new kind of Democrat
- Change they can believe in
- No country for old men
- Tolling the knell
- A new issue
- Dusted Up
- 17 points
- Fidel Castro resigns
- Is this all there is?
- Ready on day one?
- W's congressman endorses Obama
- Courting Edwards
- We don't do stuff like that
- Further thoughts
- Endgame?
- In memoriam
- It's gonna get nasty
- Land of the Free
- Straight talk?
- The non-denial denial
- Our august judges
- Sauve qui peut!
- What November 4th is all about
- Watch this
- Another sad story
- Sad Story
- Virgins back Obama
- Duh
- Let me get this straight
- DARN!
- How the mighty are fallen
- A small sample
- Working for change
- Marching on
- Power of the people
- She's done it again
- The McCain question
- Thoughts far, far away
- A note to our readers
-
▼
February
(45)
5 comments:
Hawaii became a state in August, 1959 and BO was born in 1961, but of course you know that.
Just curious, do US territories count as being native born?
I believe they do. When Mitt Romney's father, George (the guy who did NOT march with MLK) was running for President, there was some question about whether he was eligible, because he was born in Mexico, I believe when his parents were on a Mormon mission. But it was decided that the child of American parents who intend to return to the States (and do return, so that the child takes up residence before the age of majority) is native-born.
I think I saw that McCain was born in the Canal Zone, while his father, a Navy officer, was on duty there.
You present positive, albeit anecdotal evidence, perhaps inconclusive, unless the examples you cite are sufficiently and convincingly accepted as precedents
to become established law.
An interesting topic.
But the real and poignant point of the story, as revealed in the video, is the desparation exhibited by Hillary and her staff. Hillary must be feeling driven to drink as things are turning out for her. She was so sure that she was the shoe-in nominee not too long ago. I feel for her a bit, but at the same time, I'm feeling a little relieved that the public seems to be getting it about Bill and Hillary. Why else would there be so much talk about the Clintons being willing to do whatever it takes to get what they want. These are two Boomers who should fade into the sunset and years to lick their wounds, inflicted, not by a far right conspiracy, but by the combined will of a people who know deceit and indecency when they see it.
I meant to place my tongue firmly in cheek with my headline. I think Rep. Tubbs-Jones was simply speaking without thinking, something, I gather that she has done before.
As to that comment about the Clintons fading into the sunset, watch it, buddy! Being a little older than they, I don't like such talk.
And I think I am older than thee.
It's not physical decrepitude that should send someone into the sunset, but moral decrepitude.
I use the sunset metaphor as the result of being given the hook to get one off the stage.
See my post, Take a flying leap, at leesvoicecryinginthewilderness.blogspot.com
Post a Comment