An Army private doesn't have to win a national election either. Sorry, but the people have spoken. I don't agree, and they don't care.
Amazing how most foreigners get it but Americans don’t.
It’s more accurate to say that he cannot be refused one - so no background check is done. The political outcome trumps the procedural outcome by design and definition.
WalMart applicants are probably scrutinized more than this poser was.
It's not "perplexing" in the least. The President is the Commander in Chief - who is above him that would make a decision on a security clearance? And how could the country function if the President wasn't allowed to see classified material? The whole notion is silly.
My merriment with a rueful chuckle is of the main stream Canadian media. This especially CBC television. They as tight as the proverbial drum on this issue! If Canadians were to get any inkling of this matter, if not having a computer, they can still observe the tabloids at the local grocery store.
The only fly in the ointment as far as I can see, seems to be the swearing in of any President. Sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Apart from that, what is possibly being witnessed is rule by fiat. Fiat roughly being that a government or authority stands on what they do and want to do. That then is the law (according to them).
Puzzling times.
I thought that Monica L. had a higher security clearance than Hillary!
I wonder if Obummer has a sufficient clearance to be briefed on UFO’s. If I were prez I’d want to know the truth about Roswell.
This is stupid.
Obama was vetted by voters, by the electoral college, and a dually elected Congress who certified the election. Being elected gives him (and those who came before and will come after) the right to not need further vetting or security clearances of the type the author envisions.
The alternative would be to have a small body of elected or appointed individuals in some government agency (CIA, FBI, etc) to second-guess and decide for us.
The author may be American, but the sentiment is clearly Canadian. Why is it that so much that comes out of Canada seems to reflect a dire need to be told what to do? Are they entirely incapable of independent thought up there?
Just imagine, silly trivial tabloid gossip from the CBC icon. Tax payers in Canada paying for it. We can presume the birth issue too trivial for CBC. Now supposing Stanley Ann Dunham nipped over to Vancouver BC for her son's delivery. As they say in the Ontario Govt commercials for lottery ticket purchases winning millions.
Wouldn't it be nice?
For whom I would not say though- LOL.
A precedent was set when a certain draft dodging, lying, cheating POS named Bill Clinton became president.