Regan was born to two parents who were citizens, inside the mainland United States.
Obama has a British father who was never a citizen, and there is no legal proof he was born in the United States.
With Reagan, there is no question about his citizenship status. With Obama there IS.
Only when there is real question as to a persons heritage and birthplace is there REASON to demand such proof.
When such reason exists, then proofs should be offered.
Reagan was unquestionably a Natural Born Citizen, his papers, his history and the details of his life were all in the public eye long before he became Governor of California.
With Obama, NO ONE KNOWS ANYTHING.
The only way one can equate the two men is to point out the start differences between the two, and to recognize that THIS is the reason the Founders put in the qualifications regarding Natural Born Citizenship. To prevent cretins like Barry from usurping power.
Regan was born to two parents who were citizens, inside the mainland United States.
Obama has a British father who was never a citizen, and there is no legal proof he was born in the United States.
With Reagan, there is no question about his citizenship status. With Obama there IS.
Only when there is real question as to a persons heritage and birthplace is there REASON to demand such proof.
When such reason exists, then proofs should be offered.
Reagan was unquestionably a Natural Born Citizen, his papers, his history and the details of his life were all in the public eye long before he became Governor of California.
The only way one can equate the two men is to point out the start differences between the two, and to recognize that THIS is the reason the Founders put in the qualifications regarding Natural Born Citizenship. To prevent cretins like Barry from usurping power.
What you said!
The Founders would have no problem with Ronald Reagan as POTUS; he met the Constitutional qualifications. Not so with BO!