The problem is the Constitution provides no mechanism requiring a candidate to document his eligibility.
When it was written it was expected that am Electoral College would de facto as well as de jure elect the President. They assumed this small, elite group of less than 100 men would decide on their own whether a candidate met the criteria.
In actual fact the EC never worked as intended and is now a mere formality.
We need a mechanism by which eligibility is certified before a candidate goes onto the ballot.
The problem is the Constitution provides no mechanism requiring a candidate to document his eligibility.
Ahhh..., you must have "lifted that" straight from my own comments from months back... LOL...
No, I don't believe you did, just kidding. But, I know that you see the same problem that I see, too -- which is why I suggested that state law to fix the problem.
And yes, it is a problem. I do see that it is. But, even so..., with me saying "just that" (about the nature of the problem as you just said) -- you should have seen me getting jumped all over.
And some of the "same suspects" are here, right now on this thread -- doing that very same thing. They just don't recognize the nature of the problem that Obama just "drove a Mack truck through" -- with no problem.
They think that just to identify the problem, as you say, and say that we need to fix it (by way of those state laws that I was talking about) -- is enough to make anyone (who suggests that) a "supporter of Obama"...
And so it goes -- just like you can see it happening right now on this very thread...
We need a mechanism by which eligibility is certified before a candidate goes onto the ballot.
And I absolutely agree 100%... thanks for saying it... It's not a solution that "belongs to me" or belongs to a "liberal poster" or an "Obot" (as many want to say) -- but it's a solution that makes sense for the average and normal person...