[OldDeckHand]

"What we're looking at is a president who hasn't proved his eligibility. That's neither correct nor incorrect; it is simply unresolved. "

A president doesn't have to prove his eligibility to anyone but the people who place him on the ballot for office. That would be the 50 state Secretaries of State. The Electoral College also has a role to play, which they played.

Who doesn't have a role to play, here? The US military, that's who. It's not the role of the US military to inspect the Commander-in-Chief for constitutional infirmities.

[PA-RIVER]

Your logic is infallible. I like how you think.

Yet the fact remains we are governed by an Indonesian/British/Kenyan/Marxist/Communist/Islamic/Muslim citizen. We are his slaves. And that sucks.

[BIGLOOK]

I just love specious arguments....they're never ending!

Here we are again comparing apples and oranges or in this case apples and.....durians?

[edge919]

A president doesn't have to prove his eligibility to anyone but the people who place him on the ballot for office. That would be the 50 state Secretaries of State. The Electoral College also has a role to play, which they played.

There's no evidence that Obama proved his eligibility to any of these entities. Signing a form to get on a ballot doesn't prove eligibility. Lakin noticed the oversight and is trying to protect the Constitution. Wish we could say the same for the 50 secretraries of state (or 57 secretaries of state in Obama's mind).

Who doesn't have a role to play, here? The US military, that's who. It's not the role of the US military to inspect the Commander-in-Chief for constitutional infirmities.

How exactly do they defend the Constitution by standing down to a fraud??