In response to:

Obama, Rubio Birthers Should Read the Law

mlimbolimbo Wrote: May 30, 2012 1:34 PM
Byron didn't dig deep enough. I've read parts of at least 5 Supreme Court rulings that defined for other purposes the Natural Born citizen as having both parents being US citizens at the time of birth. The purpose was clearly to prevent us from having a president with split loyalties or one with parents residing outside of the United States where a threat upon them could influence policy. If Rubio doesn't qualify, he doesn't qualify. I think it much more important to stick to the Constitution than to nit pick at it to try and serve our own political purpose. As for the birthers, grow up. The birther argument is promoted by Obama's own people as a distraction. It's working. No one takes the citizen argument seriously because of it.
Louie13 Wrote: May 30, 2012 2:27 PM
You are correct Mlimbolimbo, there is a WH operation that is heading "birther" smear campaigns, and people like Bryon are falling for it hook, line, and sinker.

Tinsldr2 Wrote: May 30, 2012 2:00 PM
Name one ruling that said that. Here are TWO that say born here is good enough.

Wong Kim Ark v US

Minor V Happersett

Birtherism -- the belief that Barack Obama was born in Kenya, not in the United States -- pretty much died last year when the White House released a copy of the president's long-form birth certificate showing he was born in Honolulu on Aug. 4, 1961. After that, the number of Americans who doubted Obama's place of birth dropped dramatically.

But not to zero. In recent days, there has been a mini-resurgence of birther talk, from Arizona, where the secretary of state questioned Obama's eligibility to be on the ballot, to Iowa, where some Republicans want to require presidential candidates to prove...