Egged on by the  NY Times that now has a hate (in the love/hate cycle) relationship with John McCain, the left blogosphere is questioning McCain's eligibility to be president.  It seems there is this little clause in the constitution about being a "natural-born citizen".  And no further explanation is forthcoming from the constitution.  However, there is that law, passed by the founders (which they love to run back to for "intent") in 1790 that citizens: “born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States to be natural born.”

But intent is only valid when trying to add liberal causes to the constitution apparently, and not when it concerns people places or things conservative (or I should say Republican since McCain is anything but conservative).

It really is humorous.  Despite the fact they have 2 great candidates (Damn!  Even live writer does not have sarcasm tags), they are still full of fear that the new messiah will not be coming from Illinois.

Let's see, McCain has not been nominated yet, but we have a faux sex scandal, now a faux birth scandal.  And this was after endorsing him.  With endorsement like these, who needs mud from the democrats?  just get an endorsement from the NY Times for all the mud that is [not] fit to print by the bloated old lady - the NY Crimes.

Anyone want to speculate on what is next for McCain?  Maybe some cheating on an exam in flight school?  No suggestion is too outrageous as I am sure the NY Times will make it seem tame.