Author Topic: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion  (Read 542780 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • Dungeon Sieger
  • *****
  • Posts: 24440
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« Reply #870 on: July 28, 2008, 03:14:39 pm »
Oh my God... John McCain may not qualify as a natural-born American citizen because he was born in Panama!
http://www.snopes.com/politics/mccain/citizen.asp

This throws my entire perspective into disarray!
Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.

Offline Slartibartfast

  • Ballblazer Plasmorb
  • *****
  • Posts: 3472
  • Do they speak English in What?
    • View Profile
Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« Reply #871 on: July 28, 2008, 04:02:48 pm »
Oh my God... John McCain may not qualify as a natural-born American citizen because he was born in Panama!
http://www.snopes.com/politics/mccain/citizen.asp

This throws my entire perspective into disarray!
This has been making the rounds for a while now.  It's rather sad that a commonly used term like "natural-born" isn't actually defined.
There is no doubt that a person with two Amercian parents is an American citizen, but are they natural or naturalized?  That's just legal mumbo jumbo. 

Red State Comedy break (Mild Language Warning)

Foreigners Love Obama
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJbDJlKndO0" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJbDJlKndO0</a>

Obama Won't Visit Injured Soldiers
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cY-2ejfx-U" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cY-2ejfx-U</a>

Offline Brandonazz

  • All Your Base Zero Wing
  • *****
  • Posts: 8905
  • Everything ends.
    • View Profile
    • My Internet Treasure Trove
Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« Reply #872 on: July 28, 2008, 04:54:49 pm »
Oh, brilliant. I was waiting for this.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/afghanistan.asp

FALSE

Oh this is just too good.

Also, funny videos Slarti. I haven't seen anything from those guys in some time.

Offline Legodragonxp

  • Excitebike Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 3562
  • Now for some real user power...
    • View Profile
Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« Reply #873 on: July 28, 2008, 05:29:25 pm »
Oh my God... John McCain may not qualify as a natural-born American citizen because he was born in Panama!
http://www.snopes.com/politics/mccain/citizen.asp

This throws my entire perspective into disarray!
Note that I've edited this a couple times to add daxxtails...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born_citizen

John McCain, who ran for the Republican party nomination in 2000 and is the presumptive Republican nominee in 2008, was born at the Coco Solo U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone to U.S. parents. Although the Panama Canal Zone was not considered to be part of the United States,[5] federal law states that "Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States".[6] The law that conferred this status took effect on August 4, 1937, one year after John McCain was born albeit with retrospective effect, resulting in McCain being declared a U.S. citizen from birth.[7]

Footnote 6 being: http://law.justia.com/us/codes/title8/8usc1403.html

I should mention that TITLE 8--ALIENS AND NATIONALITY does go in to a lot more detail, which only strengthens the argument that McCain is 'legal'.

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html
Who is a natural-born citizen? Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?

The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.

Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"

Anyone born inside the United States
Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

-Lego
« Last Edit: July 28, 2008, 05:47:53 pm by Legodragonxp »

Offline Brandonazz

  • All Your Base Zero Wing
  • *****
  • Posts: 8905
  • Everything ends.
    • View Profile
    • My Internet Treasure Trove
Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« Reply #874 on: July 28, 2008, 05:31:08 pm »
Someone should contact Snopes then, eh?

Offline Legodragonxp

  • Excitebike Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 3562
  • Now for some real user power...
    • View Profile
Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« Reply #875 on: July 28, 2008, 05:39:15 pm »
Someone should contact Snopes then, eh?

Probably. Snopes is a rag-mag internet collection of half-truths.
-Lego

Offline Brandonazz

  • All Your Base Zero Wing
  • *****
  • Posts: 8905
  • Everything ends.
    • View Profile
    • My Internet Treasure Trove
Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« Reply #876 on: July 28, 2008, 05:59:02 pm »
Probably. Snopes is a rag-mag internet collection of half-truths.

Can't be. Snopes debunked that myth.

I jest.

Offline Ameg

  • Crazy Climber Cuckoo
  • **
  • Posts: 130
    • View Profile
Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« Reply #877 on: July 28, 2008, 09:28:40 pm »

It depends which people you ask, really. As an economist by training myself (for what that's worth, if anything), I'd suggest that on balance he's done quite poorly. I can point to other examples of countries who have smoothed their cycles out to the point that they affect the economy significantly less. If I had to put anything down as a reason for the current decline, I would point to cutting taxes and raising spending (mostly on the military) as being the reason why the deficit ballooned, along with some underlying issues in the financial sector, as causing the current problems.

I'd be quite interested in seeing McCain's actual economic policy when he gets around to releasing some hard numbers. I just don't see how he can save nearly enough money by cutting pork barrel spending to balance the budget especially as he wants to maintain Bush's tax cuts and stay in Iraq for as long as possible (and maybe even start something with Iran). The numbers don't add up.

I agree completely. One of my major beef's with Bush was that he cut taxes like Reagan, but spent like FDR. There needs to be a major purging of frivolous spending and earmarks in the federal government.

In the long run I believe Iraq will be an investment as far as oil prices are concerned. Will it cover the costs of the war? Not nearly. Will it ease panic over gas prices in the next few years as things settle down? Perhaps.

Offline Andrew Ryan

  • Simon Belmont
  • *****
  • Posts: 5361
  • A man has a choice, I chose the impossible!
    • View Profile
Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« Reply #878 on: July 28, 2008, 09:54:06 pm »
I agree completely. One of my major beef's with Bush was that he cut taxes like Reagan, but spent like FDR. There needs to be a major purging of frivolous spending and earmarks in the federal government.

In the long run I believe Iraq will be an investment as far as oil prices are concerned. Will it cover the costs of the war? Not nearly. Will it ease panic over gas prices in the next few years as things settle down? Perhaps.

Perhaps? Ameg have you even watched the news lately? Currently I hear about a car bomb going of in Baghdad or a suicide bomber killing 50 people every couple days or so. To me this isn't a sign of "things starting to settle down". To me this shows a chaotic extremist powder keg just waiting for the right chance to explode in a mess of sectarion violence and general chaos. The only thing missing is something that would give the foreign fighters an excuse to begin the uprising. If these bombs and bombers show us anything it is that things aren't likely to settle down any time soon and will propably get worse before they get better.

As to your statement on frivolous spending I agree that pork-barrel spending should be cut and put to us on more important things (like digging us out of the huge financial whole we dug with China). However even with all the pork cut you will still have a lot of money going to "winning" the war in Iraq. To me the war my government is currently fighting seams to me like the biggest piece of pork of all, thinly disguised under the principle of of "National Security".
"Don't worry 'bout me. I wouldn't worry about me. Don't you worry about me. Don't you worry 'bout me!" - Talking Heads, Don't Worry About the Government

Offline Samog

  • Ultima III Time Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 2856
  • objectivists are dumb
    • View Profile
    • -
Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« Reply #879 on: July 28, 2008, 10:18:05 pm »
I agree completely. One of my major beef's with Bush was that he cut taxes like Reagan, but spent like FDR. There needs to be a major purging of frivolous spending and earmarks in the federal government.
Bush cut taxes like Reagan and spent like Reagan.

Quote
In the long run I believe Iraq will be an investment as far as oil prices are concerned. Will it cover the costs of the war? Not nearly. Will it ease panic over gas prices in the next few years as things settle down? Perhaps.
There's much, much more to war than a column marked "COST OF WAR" and another marked "PRICE OF OIL."
"Fine. Don't believe me. I'm not lying. all your laziness which you mistake for something funney is driving me insane, quit fooling around!  dude this is just wrong, very wrong. reality does not consist of constrained language. go lock this thread malt. I love the payment."4MOD

Offline Ameg

  • Crazy Climber Cuckoo
  • **
  • Posts: 130
    • View Profile
Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« Reply #880 on: July 28, 2008, 10:33:34 pm »
I don't want to get off subject about the war itself, but I guess that's what I'll do.  :D

Sure I've watched the news. Yes, there's still violence. Because well, this is a war. As much as the value of human life has gone up in the last century, in human life this war is not that costly in compared to say the invasion of Normandy or any major WWI battle. I believe things will settle down because the surge may have bought time for Iraqi forces to get their heads out of their collective asses.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/06/23/iraq.security/

I've also read reports by people on the ground. http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/hl1068.cfm The surge has had a definite affect. It's done its job, but the lasting impact has to be done inside Iraq. As much as people in that region can be fundamentalist psychos, socio-economics has a lot to do with it as well. The sooner they get the oil trade going smoothly and begin prospering, the less violence they'll see in the future. Other oil-rich nations in the area are thriving on those profits as is.

While the public may be too far away to get a clear picture, and a soldier might be too close to get the full one, somewhere in between is the facts. We're in Iraq for better or worse at this point. Might as well reap what benefits we can out of the situation.

Offline Ameg

  • Crazy Climber Cuckoo
  • **
  • Posts: 130
    • View Profile
Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« Reply #881 on: July 28, 2008, 10:42:05 pm »
I agree completely. One of my major beef's with Bush was that he cut taxes like Reagan, but spent like FDR. There needs to be a major purging of frivolous spending and earmarks in the federal government.
Bush cut taxes like Reagan and spent like Reagan.

Quote
In the long run I believe Iraq will be an investment as far as oil prices are concerned. Will it cover the costs of the war? Not nearly. Will it ease panic over gas prices in the next few years as things settle down? Perhaps.
There's much, much more to war than a column marked "COST OF WAR" and another marked "PRICE OF OIL."

Perhaps you should read it again.

Quote
Will it cover the costs of the war? Not nearly.

I know that there's much more to a war than just immediate monetary costs. The costs of lives, having to have a military presence in there for so many years, the damage done to our reputation on a global stage, etc.

I'm simply saying that we should reap what benefits we can from a bad situation. Making lemonade out of lemons so to speak. We're in Iraq. They have oil. We're paying a lot for oil. Our current economic situation is a complex system of levers and pullies. One of the cogs in that ****ty mess is pain at the pump. I'm merely suggesting we use whatever influence we have in Iraq to 'oil' that cog.  :P

Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • Dungeon Sieger
  • *****
  • Posts: 24440
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« Reply #882 on: July 29, 2008, 12:02:35 am »
I was only joking about that stuff about McCain possibly not being a 'natural born' American. What do I care? If I had my way people of any nationality could stand for the leadership of any country if they could get themselves elected. Yokto for Overlord, etc.
Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.

Offline Brandonazz

  • All Your Base Zero Wing
  • *****
  • Posts: 8905
  • Everything ends.
    • View Profile
    • My Internet Treasure Trove
Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« Reply #883 on: July 29, 2008, 12:11:14 am »
I can only imagine the backlash that would come from British Muslim immigrants getting elected.

Assuming, of course, that they managed to do so.

Shari'a Law FTW.

Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • Dungeon Sieger
  • *****
  • Posts: 24440
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« Reply #884 on: July 29, 2008, 12:21:45 am »
The point is, they wouldn't :P

No matter how 'bad' a country's immigrant 'problem' is they're still outnumbered by natives most of the time.
Also, most of the hardline Muslims in Britain are second generation.
Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.