• 56 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -

As stated in the United States Constitution, to become President of the United States of America you must be born in the United States of America. What are your thoughts on this mandate?

I personally believe this policy is outdated and depicts fictitious xenophobic tendencies that are not at all representative of true American values. A little known fact is that this was actually included in the Constitution at the behest of Thomas Jefferson specifically to exclude Alexander Hamilton from being eligible to run for the Presidency, as he was not a natural-born American citizen.

However, America is now a Super Power and has a direct role in global stability (or the present lackthereof.)

I am a Democrat, so do not confuse this as a petition to get Arnold Schwarzenegger in office, even though I do respect the man. However, I feel that for us to advance culturally we need to accept international cohesion to take the next step forward. This is also why I want Obama to be in office, but that is another story altogether and I don't want this to become a McCain vs. Obama topic.

What I do want is to discuss this policy and understand the thoughts of others in respect to this section of the Constitution, and whether or not this should become the next Amendment in the Bill of Rights.

Yet there is a clause to this article. The clause is that as of now this policy is in effect and it is a law, a official decree that will not sway under any circumstances except a Constitutional Amendment. With this in mind, I do believe that there are exceptions made to this mandate that are hypocritical and in direct contradiction to the law itself. The greatest example is of John McCain being born in Panama.* He was born in a military installation outside of the country. To create a clause that anyone born in a military installation is somehow an American citizen is too much of an exception to the rule that is supposed to be supreme.

Should anyone be born in any military installation anywhere in the world, it somehow invalidates this law. To be perfectly blunt and to make this message clear, if we are to have a law we must adhere to it. I do not agree with this law, but if it is currently in effect it should be upheld. Perhaps this is just me, but one of things I hate most is hypocrisy. And this is an outstanding example of a flaw that is not addressed. Those are my thoughts, what are yours?


*For the sake of clarification, this is not some hackneyed attempt at a petition to invalidate McCain as a candidate. Please do not make this about the current Presidential Race, I am just using the best example of a flaw that I can come up with.

P.S. Does anyone know if you are born in a United States territory, such as Puerto Rico or Granada whether or not you are eligible to run for President? I've always wondered this. I'd love to find that out.

Thanks for your time! :D

#2 Edited by Jonathan (658 posts) -

You don't need to be born in America, you need to be a natural born citizen. I think that means that if you are born on any American soil or with American parents you could be president. John McCain was born in Panama but on an American navel base. And ALL American soil counts. So it includes Puerto Rico , other commonwealths, and I think US navel bases and embassies. Personally, I think it's a stupid. There are many non-American born citizens capable of being president.

#3 Posted by atejas (3057 posts) -

That's a pretty stupid rule.

Then again, the probability of a non-American becoming the president of America is very low in any case.
#4 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
Jonathan said:
"You don't need to be born in America, you need to be a natural born citizen. I think that means that if you are born on any American soil or with American parents you could be president. John McCain was born in Panama but on an American navel base. And ALL American soil counts. So it includes Puerto Rico , other commonwealths, and I think US navel bases and embassies. Personally, I think it's a stupid. There are many non-American born citizens capable of being president."
...

Yes, being a natural born citizen means you have to be born in America.  If a territory counts as eligibilty than it is still in America. However, were we to remove this law there should be a length of time that you must be an American citizen before you are eligible. You also shouldn't have dual citizenship. A legitimate period would be 20 years of citizenship.
#5 Posted by Kush (8889 posts) -

This will all change when Arnold becomes The Presinator! And then he will discover life on Mars and declare only people born on Mars can be president of Mars...wait, what!?

#6 Posted by crunchUK (5963 posts) -

wtf lawl that isn't very fair let's just dotouch of editing here and there so you need to have blonde hair, blue eyes and be at least 6ft tall to be president

#7 Posted by Gamer_152 (14100 posts) -

The problem is that some Americans probably wouldn't accept a non-American president, I mean there are many who are unhappy about having a black President.

Moderator
#8 Edited by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
Gamer_152 said:
"The problem is that some Americans probably wouldn't accept a non-American president, I mean there are many who are unhappy about having a black President."

This is why I think it is important for us to have a Black, or woman, or gay, or foreign President. Society would become more accepting, even though homosexuality or foreign nationalities are not accepted in the present; however, if we take one small step forward with a Black or woman President we will be able to take "giant leaps for man kind" years later.
#9 Posted by crunchUK (5963 posts) -

this isn't a lunar landing it's an ELECTION!! seriose biznes

#10 Edited by Jonathan (658 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:
"Jonathan said:
"You don't need to be born in America, you need to be a natural born citizen. I think that means that if you are born on any American soil or with American parents you could be president. John McCain was born in Panama but on an American navel base. And ALL American soil counts. So it includes Puerto Rico , other commonwealths, and I think US navel bases and embassies. Personally, I think it's a stupid. There are many non-American born citizens capable of being president."
...

Yes, being a natural born citizen means you have to be born in America.  If a territory counts as eligibilty than it is still in America. However, were we to remove this law there should be a length of time that you must be an American citizen before you are eligible. You also shouldn't have dual citizenship. A legitimate period would be 20 years of citizenship."
Like all other constitutional laws it's up the the judicial department to interpret it. I have read articles that describe natural born citizens people born of American parents overseas. But thats debatable. I do know for a fact that it includes any person born in American soil whether it be a Commonwealth, military base, or embassy.
#11 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
crunchUK said:
"this isn't a lunar landing it's an ELECTION!! seriose biznes"

Oh believe me, I know. I am extremely active in politics. One of the saddest concepts that I have ever acknowledged is that I will not be able to vote in what is the most important election in the history of our country. I'm only 16! :O
#12 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
Jonathan said:
"BiggerBomb said:
"Jonathan said:
"You don't need to be born in America, you need to be a natural born citizen. I think that means that if you are born on any American soil or with American parents you could be president. John McCain was born in Panama but on an American navel base. And ALL American soil counts. So it includes Puerto Rico , other commonwealths, and I think US navel bases and embassies. Personally, I think it's a stupid. There are many non-American born citizens capable of being president."
...

Yes, being a natural born citizen means you have to be born in America.  If a territory counts as eligibilty than it is still in America. However, were we to remove this law there should be a length of time that you must be an American citizen before you are eligible. You also shouldn't have dual citizenship. A legitimate period would be 20 years of citizenship."
Like all other constitutional laws it's up the the judicial department to interpret it. I have read articles that describe natural born citizens people born of American parents overseas. But thats debatable. I do know for a fact that it includes any person born in American soil whether it be a Commonwealth, military base, or embassy."
Unless you are born in a military installation or common wealth you cannot be born overseas, but thank you for the clarification about the commonwealth eligibility factors.
#13 Posted by Jonathan (658 posts) -

George Romney was born in Mexico to American parents and he was eligiable. And Barry Goldwater was born in Arizona before it became a state (it was a commonwealth). So my points hold true.

#14 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
Jonathan said:
"George Romney was born in Mexico to American parents and he was eligiable. And Barry Goldwater was born in Arizona before it became a state (it was a commonwealth). So my points hold true."

Huh, didn't realize that. Thanks.
#15 Posted by EvilTwin (3324 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:
"crunchUK said:
"this isn't a lunar landing it's an ELECTION!! seriose biznes"

Oh believe me, I know. I am extremely active in politics. One of the saddest concepts that I have ever acknowledged is that I will not be able to vote in what is the most important election in the history of our country. I'm only 16! :O"
Why do you think this is the most important election in the history of our country?
#16 Posted by crunchUK (5963 posts) -
EvilTwin said:
"BiggerBomb said:
"crunchUK said:
"this isn't a lunar landing it's an ELECTION!! seriose biznes"

Oh believe me, I know. I am extremely active in politics. One of the saddest concepts that I have ever acknowledged is that I will not be able to vote in what is the most important election in the history of our country. I'm only 16! :O"
Why do you think this is the most important election in the history of our country?"
george bush is gone
#17 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
EvilTwin said:
"BiggerBomb said:
"crunchUK said:
"this isn't a lunar landing it's an ELECTION!! seriose biznes"

Oh believe me, I know. I am extremely active in politics. One of the saddest concepts that I have ever acknowledged is that I will not be able to vote in what is the most important election in the history of our country. I'm only 16! :O"
Why do you think this is the most important election in the history of our country?"

I do not think, I know.

Our country is in crisis right now. The economy is collapsing, racism is as rampant as ever, we are at war on two fronts with our military stretched so thin that some Republicans are already suggesting the possibility of a draft. The current President is the single most incompetent President in our country's history and this degree of incompetence has destroyed our global reputation and has created tension with Iran who is already threatening to destroy one of our greatest allies, Israel. There will most likely be a war between the two nations and should that happen, we will be forced to intervene.

People always see the present as finite, but no nation lasts forever and to assume that the U.S. is somehow incapable of defeat is ludicrous. If we don't get our act together and elect a President that can stabilize the deterorating principles of our country, we are seriously fucked.

That is why this is the most important election in the history of our country.
#18 Posted by EvilTwin (3324 posts) -
crunchUK said:
"EvilTwin said:
"Why do you think this is the most important election in the history of our country?"
george bush is gone"
Not a good enough answer.
#19 Posted by atejas (3057 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:

I do not think, I know.

Our country is in crisis right now. The economy is collapsing, racism is as rampant as ever, we are at war on two fronts with our military stretched so thin that some Republicans are already suggesting the possibility of a draft. The current President is the single most incompetent President in our country's history and this degree of incompetence has destroyed our global reputation and has created tension with Iran who is already threatening to destroy one of our greatest allies, Israel. There will most likely be a war between the two nations and should that happen, we will be forced to intervene.

People always see the present as finite, but no nation lasts forever and to assume that the U.S. is somehow incapable of defeat is ludicrous. If we don't get our act together and elect a President that can stabilize the deterorating principles of our country, we are seriously fucked.

That is why this is the most important election in the history of our country."
Don't forget Russia's recent military activity and the resignation of Musharraf.
#20 Posted by EvilTwin (3324 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:
I do not think, I know.

Our country is in crisis right now. The economy is collapsing, racism is as rampant as ever, we are at war on two fronts with our military stretched so thin that some Republicans are already suggesting the possibility of a draft. The current President is the single most incompetent President in our country's history and this degree of incompetence has destroyed our global reputation and has created tension with Iran who is already threatening to destroy one of our greatest allies, Israel. There will most likely be a war between the two nations and should that happen, we will be forced to intervene.

People always see the present as finite, but no nation lasts forever and to assume that the U.S. is somehow incapable of defeat is ludicrous. If we don't get our act together and elect a President that can stabilize the deterorating principles of our country, we are seriously fucked.

That is why this is the most important election in the history of our country."
Not that I don't think this is an important election, but you're really blowing it out of proportion.  This is by far not the worst off our country has ever been.  I also think your assessment of our current president has been completely bias by the age we live in. 
#21 Posted by Kaido (249 posts) -

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think we've had a foreign Prime Miniser (Well, a Prime Minister that wasn't born in the British Isles). It would be interesting to see someone not born in America attempt to lead the country with their sense of perspective.

Otherwise, we're all buggered.

#22 Posted by crunchUK (5963 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:
"EvilTwin said:
"BiggerBomb said:
"crunchUK said:
"this isn't a lunar landing it's an ELECTION!! seriose biznes"

Oh believe me, I know. I am extremely active in politics. One of the saddest concepts that I have ever acknowledged is that I will not be able to vote in what is the most important election in the history of our country. I'm only 16! :O"
Why do you think this is the most important election in the history of our country?"

I do not think, I know.

Our country is in crisis right now. The economy is collapsing, racism is as rampant as ever, we are at war on two fronts with our military stretched so thin that some Republicans are already suggesting the possibility of a draft. The current President is the single most incompetent President in our country's history and this degree of incompetence has destroyed our global reputation and has created tension with Iran who is already threatening to destroy one of our greatest allies, Israel. There will most likely be a war between the two nations and should that happen, we will be forced to intervene.

People always see the present as finite, but no nation lasts forever and to assume that the U.S. is somehow incapable of defeat is ludicrous. If we don't get our act together and elect a President that can stabilize the deterorating principles of our country, we are seriously fucked.

That is why this is the most important election in the history of our country."
the WORLD is going down the drain. all we can do is hide withtin the interenet and our xboxes :P
#23 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
EvilTwin said:
"BiggerBomb said:
I do not think, I know.

Our country is in crisis right now. The economy is collapsing, racism is as rampant as ever, we are at war on two fronts with our military stretched so thin that some Republicans are already suggesting the possibility of a draft. The current President is the single most incompetent President in our country's history and this degree of incompetence has destroyed our global reputation and has created tension with Iran who is already threatening to destroy one of our greatest allies, Israel. There will most likely be a war between the two nations and should that happen, we will be forced to intervene.

People always see the present as finite, but no nation lasts forever and to assume that the U.S. is somehow incapable of defeat is ludicrous. If we don't get our act together and elect a President that can stabilize the deterorating principles of our country, we are seriously fucked.

That is why this is the most important election in the history of our country."
Not that I don't think this is an important election, but you're really blowing it out of proportion.  This is by far not the worst off our country has ever been.  I also think your assessment of our current president has been completely bias by the age we live in. "

No, it is not. I'm swimming upstream and I never conform, I have formed my ideas based upon my own assessment of global politics. As far as the state of the country, I never said that we are currently the worst off. I am saying we are on thin ice and if we don't get our act together we are going to be worse off than we ever have been.
#24 Posted by WilliamRLBaker (4779 posts) -

Agreed its an aracahic system just like the electoral college there are many rules and laws in the US that should be removed and or updated.

#25 Edited by RobE (18 posts) -

That would be like a Russian being the most powerful person in England.

I agree that non-Americans could be capable of being president but that would send a bad message. That would be saying that Americans aren't even good enough to run their own country but some random dude who decided to come over from another country can.

#26 Posted by The_Real_LJ (170 posts) -

I agree.  You should have been born in America or of American parents serving abroad.  No need to change.  It's not like I can become King of England now can I?

#27 Posted by Clean (2356 posts) -

I think that rule is fine

#28 Posted by atejas (3057 posts) -
RobE said:
"

That would be like a Russian being the most powerful person in England.

I agree that non-Americans could be capable of being president but that would send a bad message. That would be saying that Americans aren't even good enough to run their own country but some random dude who decided to come over from another country can.

"
Well, if, at the end of the day, someone from another country can run it better, why not?
#29 Posted by Silverain (663 posts) -

I think it's perfectly fine.

#30 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
RobE said:
"

That would be like a Russian being the most powerful person in England.

I agree that non-Americans could be capable of being president but that would send a bad message. That would be saying that Americans aren't even good enough to run their own country but some random dude who decided to come over from another country can.

"
Actually, it doesn't say that at all. It is saying that Americans are trusting of other nationalities and should the individual prove him/herself they would be willing to elect them as a leader. That is a good message, not a bad one.
#31 Posted by GiantGUS (399 posts) -

I think you are getting a little confused with the terms. Natural Born American is one thing American is another. I can become and American citizen and what BiggerBomb is arguing for is that all American citizens can be eligible to be president. If the people oppose they can just NOT vote for said candidates.

#32 Posted by MattyFTM (14424 posts) -

If anyone can become president, Arnold Schwarzenegger will become president, and that is a really really bad thing. He is a terrible politician.

Moderator
#33 Edited by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -

What I am saying is that a lifelong disqualification from Presidential appointment because of foreign birth is ridiculous, this is the 20fuckingfirst century and we are far beyond this. However, to let any immigrant take the White House is another manner. I believe that after 20 years of citizenship in America a person from another country should be eligible to run for President.

#34 Posted by VilhelmNielsen (1740 posts) -

Actually I think there should be a rule, that any president should have to at least have been in a foreign country outside of business matters. It would be healthy for a president to know that there actually is a world out there, and that Europe isn't the same thing as disneyland.

#35 Edited by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
MattyFTM said:
"If anyone can become president, Arnold Schwarzenegger will become president, and that is a really really bad thing. He is a terrible politician."

Actually, he is an excellent politician. I disagree with many of his philosophies but he has greatly improved many aspects of his state. He also is a REAL supporter of bipartisan politics and works for the ideas he believes in, rather than simply adhering to the standards of his party's base. Not to mention that the majority of Californians love him as their Governor.

Where are you getting your information from? He might suck as an actor but he is extremely intelligent and is doing a great job reforming his state.
#36 Posted by SmugDarkLoser (4619 posts) -

not really.  Its a simple concept.  Do we really want someone who only lived in the states a small amount of time to lead it?  Why couldn't someone like Osama come here and run?

#37 Posted by SmugDarkLoser (4619 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:
"MattyFTM said:
"If anyone can become president, Arnold Schwarzenegger will become president, and that is a really really bad thing. He is a terrible politician."

Actually, he is an excellent politician. I disagree with many of his philosophies but he has greatly improved many aspects of his state. He also is a REAL supporter of bipartisan politics and works for the ideas he believes in, rather than simply adhering to the standards of his party's base. Not to mention that the majority of Californians love him as their Governor.

Where are you getting your information from? He might suck as an actor but he is extremely intelligent and is doing a great job reforming his state."

Terminator 2 > You
#38 Edited by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
SmugDarkLoser said:
"BiggerBomb said:
"MattyFTM said:
"If anyone can become president, Arnold Schwarzenegger will become president, and that is a really really bad thing. He is a terrible politician."

Actually, he is an excellent politician. I disagree with many of his philosophies but he has greatly improved many aspects of his state. He also is a REAL supporter of bipartisan politics and works for the ideas he believes in, rather than simply adhering to the standards of his party's base. Not to mention that the majority of Californians love him as their Governor.

Where are you getting your information from? He might suck as an actor but he is extremely intelligent and is doing a great job reforming his state."

Terminator 2 > You"



Terminator 2 is an example of possibly the worst acting in film history. The boy in that movie makes Keanu Reeves look like Dustin Hoffman, better yet Denzel Washington. It is so pathetic that I felt bad about myself for even watching the movie.


SmugDarkLoser
said:
"

not really.  Its a simple concept.  Do we really want someone who only lived in the states a small amount of time to lead it?  Why couldn't someone like Osama come here and run?

"

Did you even read any of the posts in this thread? A suggested method would be for immigrants to have established American citizenship for 20-25 years. At that point a test could be taken judging their contributions to society and should they pass, they would thus be qualified for Presidency should they ever have the want or ability to become a leader.
#39 Posted by LuffyUzumaki (453 posts) -

it's really not fair because america has horrible foreign policy because they are always in someone else's business. a non-american president would be better

#40 Edited by JustinNotJason (422 posts) -
EvilTwin said:
"BiggerBomb said:
I do not think, I know.

Our country is in crisis right now. The economy is collapsing, racism is as rampant as ever, we are at war on two fronts with our military stretched so thin that some Republicans are already suggesting the possibility of a draft. The current President is the single most incompetent President in our country's history and this degree of incompetence has destroyed our global reputation and has created tension with Iran who is already threatening to destroy one of our greatest allies, Israel. There will most likely be a war between the two nations and should that happen, we will be forced to intervene.

People always see the present as finite, but no nation lasts forever and to assume that the U.S. is somehow incapable of defeat is ludicrous. If we don't get our act together and elect a President that can stabilize the deterorating principles of our country, we are seriously fucked.

That is why this is the most important election in the history of our country."
Not that I don't think this is an important election, but you're really blowing it out of proportion.  This is by far not the worst off our country has ever been.  I also think your assessment of our current president has been completely bias by the age we live in. "
I agree, he shows a slight tilt towards liberal, which isn't bad on the surface but I dislike when people don't look at the whole picture. Our country has been worse off before, not to downplay whats going on now in the least bit. The world as a whole is going down hill. Also, I'm not defending George Bush in the least, but this would've been a hard 8 years for any president.


To answer the question at hand:
I agree with the rule. It has nothing to do with this being the 21st century or not, the rule stands firm. It asserts the thought that a person must be a natural born resident to be president. What's wrong with that? I honestly can't see a person coming over from another country and being more qualified then someone who was born and raised in the US.

The world is very different country to country (hell sometimes state to state), and to think of a person coming from another country and trying to run a country they haven't lived in is ludicrous to me.  That would be like an American trying to make decisions for Great Britain. Almost no natural born american is going to know the culture of Great Britain well enough to make political decisions for the country.

By the time your 20-25 year citizenship method would work, a person could have been born and raised and be old enough to enter politics and have enough experience to be president by the time they reach legal age to be president.
#41 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
JustinNotJason said:
"EvilTwin said:
"BiggerBomb said:
I do not think, I know.

Our country is in crisis right now. The economy is collapsing, racism is as rampant as ever, we are at war on two fronts with our military stretched so thin that some Republicans are already suggesting the possibility of a draft. The current President is the single most incompetent President in our country's history and this degree of incompetence has destroyed our global reputation and has created tension with Iran who is already threatening to destroy one of our greatest allies, Israel. There will most likely be a war between the two nations and should that happen, we will be forced to intervene.

People always see the present as finite, but no nation lasts forever and to assume that the U.S. is somehow incapable of defeat is ludicrous. If we don't get our act together and elect a President that can stabilize the deterorating principles of our country, we are seriously fucked.

That is why this is the most important election in the history of our country."
Not that I don't think this is an important election, but you're really blowing it out of proportion.  This is by far not the worst off our country has ever been.  I also think your assessment of our current president has been completely bias by the age we live in. "
I agree, he shows a slight tilt towards liberal, which isn't bad on the surface but I dislike when people don't look at the whole picture. Our country has been worse off before, not to downplay whats going on now in the least bit. The world as a whole is going down hill. Also, I'm not defending George Bush in the least, but this would've been a hard 8 years for any president.


To answer the question at hand:
I agree with the rule. It has nothing to do with this being the 21st century or not, the rule stands firm. It asserts the thought that a person must be a natural born resident to be president. What's wrong with that? I honestly can't see a person coming over from another country and being more qualified then someone who was born and raised in the US.

By the time your 20-25 year citizenship method would work, a person could have been born and raised and be old enough to enter politics and have enough experience to be president by the time they reach legal age to be president.
"

You didn't read my response and thus your agreeing to a characterization of me that is not accurate.
#42 Posted by JustinNotJason (422 posts) -

I disagree, I did read your response. You say you don't conform. Like it or not you exhibit a slight liberal bias.

#43 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -

It is a liberal bias, I am a proud Democrat. There is no such thing as objectivity so I will take my "slight liberal bias" as a complement, actually. :D

#44 Edited by JustinNotJason (422 posts) -

I say slight liberal bias only because you're not yelling at me and trying to shove your opinions down my throat. Radical liberals (atleast the thousands I come in contact with) try to do that. Then again I haven't had a long enough discussion for you to do that.

This county's downfall will be the fact that everyone seems to be a Radical Liberal or a Neo-Conservative. I wish people were my like me, dislikes everyones political views. I'd make a good president because I have nothing but the utmost contempt for people, and the way they let their beliefs get a hold of them. :D

#45 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
JustinNotJason said:
"I say slight liberal bias only because you're not yelling at me and trying to shove your opinions down my throat. Radical liberals (atleast the thousands I come in contact with) try to do that. Then again I haven't had a long enough discussion for you to do that.

This county's downfall will be the fact that everyone seems to be a Radical Liberal or a Neo-Conservative. I wish people were my like me, dislikes everyones political views. I'd make a good president because I have nothing but the utmost contempt for people, and the way they let their beliefs get a hold of them. :D"

Omg Karl Rove has a Giant Bomb account! KILL HIM!
#46 Posted by JustinNotJason (422 posts) -

ha nice. Nah I'm more of a Matt Stone in the sense that "I hate conservatives, but I really fucking hate liberals."

#47 Posted by SmugDarkLoser (4619 posts) -
JustinNotJason said:
"ha nice. Nah I'm more of a Matt Stone in the sense that "I hate conservatives, but I really fucking hate liberals.""
I dont like either, but I realize that liberals are fucking retards
#48 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
#49 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
SmugDarkLoser said:
"JustinNotJason said:
"ha nice. Nah I'm more of a Matt Stone in the sense that "I hate conservatives, but I really fucking hate liberals.""
I dont like either, but I realize that liberals are fucking retards"

I dont like either, but I realize that liberals are fucking retards

If you can't see the irony in that, then...

Wait no, you said it. You obviously cannot see the irony.
#50 Edited by SmugDarkLoser (4619 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:
"SmugDarkLoser said:
"JustinNotJason said:
"ha nice. Nah I'm more of a Matt Stone in the sense that "I hate conservatives, but I really fucking hate liberals.""
I dont like either, but I realize that liberals are fucking retards"

I dont like either, but I realize that liberals are fucking retards

If you can't see the irony in that, then...

Wait no, you said it. You obviously cannot see the irony."
?
Are you just one of the dumb liberals or am I missing something?
Both have stupid policies at times, but liberals are way more dumb. 
The paris hilton commercial thing shows it.  You know, why can't ramp up our own energy production AND use less?
DUH!

I really don't think that Obama really has a good point over McCain.