I'm unaware of any Constitutional requirement that says my curiosity has to be satisfied before someone can be president. If I have my doubts about a candidate then I don't vote for him, but that's about the extent of what I'm entitled to.
” I’m unaware of any Constitutional requirement that says my curiosity has to be satisfied before someone can be president.”
That’s the problem..do you believe the czars, acorn, sieu et al have your best interests at heart? Do you believe anyone who vouches for this corrupt socialist/marxist promoting administration whose leader has commies as mentor? What a terrible thing to know that we are just now realizing that the secretary of states do not have to prove they vetted him? It never dawned on me to not trust the vetting process until now. Shame on this out of control state and federal govts.. Like I said on the other thread. The sec of states should be the defendants in this case.
Of course you’re not entitled to know and that answer is side stepping. You did not answer his question and it is a good one because if you don’t care it can only mean that you are an Obama supporter. You don’t care where he came from, what he has done, who he really is or how those facts might influence what he does in the future. Why you have that point of view - you are a lefty, a paid Obot or both - is your business and doesn’t change the bottom line. The bottom line is your disinterest puts you in the same camp with the people who are destroying America. You are not here to contribute anything worthwhile.