>>> And no, the legal meaning did not require two citizen parents. Sorry. You are wrong.
Well, we could argue about that all day long.
Does not change my point, nor the fact that Obama has not been vetted, nor the fact that he gave up NBC status (if he had it) as a student in Indonesia.
Your argument centers around WHY the senate found it necessary to hold a hearing on McCain’s status.
Regardless of the reason, both McCain’s birthplace and parental status WAS an issue. There is NO comparison between McCain and Obama because Obama’s birthplace is still unknown. That alone should be reason enough to hold a hearing, or at least require that Obama prove his claims.
I personally would be willing to ignore the fact that Obama’s father is not a citizen IF Obama would be willing to prove three things:
1. he was born in Hawaii
2. that he re-applied for and was granted citizenship upon returning to America.
3. that the SSN he has been using (from Connecticut) was issued to him.
Is it your argument that a congressional hearing or vetting of the president is not needed???
“Well, we could argue about that all day long.”
We could, but the US Supreme Court has already said you are wrong, and 535 members of Congress and 50 of 50 states agree with MY interpretation.
“... nor the fact that Obama has not been vetted, nor the fact that he gave up NBC status (if he had it) as a student in Indonesia.”
Again, the US Supreme Court has already said that is not true:
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/307/325/case.html
“Is it your argument that a congressional hearing or vetting of the president is not needed???”
I wrote the legislature of Arizona asking them to require all candidates for president to submit birth certificates, and to release their educational, tax and employment records as a condition for getting on the ballot. The state didn’t do what I asked.
And the states get to decide what is acceptable. I would cheerfully support a change to the law to require what I asked.