NYT At It Again

Headline:  “McCain’s birthplace prompts queries about whether that rules him out”

Yet in the article, they quote no one who believes it’s a problem.

Sarah Duggin, law professor, perhaps comes the closest: ““There are powerful arguments that Senator McCain or anyone else in this position is constitutionally qualified, but there is certainly no precedent,” and “It is not a slam-dunk situation.”

Ted Olson:  “I don’t have much doubt about it,”

Senator Lindsay Graham:  “Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and one of McCain’s closest allies, said it would be incomprehensible to him if the son of a military member born in a military station could not run for president.”

Says he:

“He was posted there on orders from the United States government,” Graham said of McCain’s father. “If that becomes a problem, we need to tell every military family that your kid can’t be president if they take an overseas assignment.”

Dan Nickles:  “They ought to have the same rights,” and, “I don’t think he has any problem whatsoever,” said Nickles, a McCain supporter. “But I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if somebody is going to try to make an issue out of it. If it goes to court, I think he will win.”

Attorney Jill Pryor:  “If I were on the Supreme Court, I would decide for John McCain,” Pryor said in a recent interview. “But it is certainly not a frivolous issue.”

So they can’t find one person to come out and say, “John McCain should not be president because he was born in the Canal Zone where his father was serving in the military.”  Good one, NYT.

 

 

Posted by Wendy at 0814 hrs
Politics + Politics - General