“Unfortunately”
A reader noticed something interesting while exploring Barack Obama’s voter registration website, Vote for Change. If you answer “no” to a question about U.S. citizenship, you get this screen:

Says reader Chad: “I just thought it was interesting that the Obama campaign thought that it was ‘unfortunate’ that only US citizens could vote for him in our election. Maybe if he gets in he will rectify that wrong as well.”
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Obama’s Site: Unfortunatly, Only Americans Can Vote | The American Pundit
- Unfortunately, only US citizens are eligible to register to vote? : Domestic Divapalooza
- Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
- The Write Side of My Brain » Obama thinks it’s “unfortunate” non-citizens can’t vote
- "UNFORTUNATELY" - Obama's Website
- Unfortunately, Only US Citizens Are Eligible To Register To Vote « Waste Of My Oxygen
- It’s just un-American « hopperbach
- It’s Unfortunate You’re Here Illegally « Debunking Stupidity
- The Colossus of Rhodey
- Unfortunate - The Political Hotwire
- "Unfortunately, only American citizens can register to vote". - Ford Mustang Forums
- Nightly Ramble:Bailout Mania and minutiae; Take the gloves off, Senator; more | BitsBlog
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Barack Obama, Immigration, Voter fraud
Right Wing Nut House
» IS ALL THE ECONOMIC DOOM AND GLOOM JUSTIFIED?
Right Wing Nut House
» NOT EVEN A BONE FOR THE NETNUTS
Gateway Pundit
» Eric Holder Defended the FALN Terrorist Pardons (Video)
Redstate
» Thus Begins The Terror

Redstate
» The Brutal Truth
Power Line
» Obama to Delay Tax Increase?

Stop The ACLU
» Left Already Disappointed With Choosing Obama
Belmont Club
» Bad manners

NewsBusters.org
» Kate Calling For Coup?









Right, “If the glove doesn’t fit you must acquit”, is a tantamount example of this.
She is and G-town is a bit better than so-so, at least so says every major law firm that comes knocking on our doors for summer associates every fall. Actually as an aside, I am sure that none of you watch MSNBC, but if you happen to accidentally be exposed to it, they have a reporter there, Savannah Guthrie, who was a pretty good friend of mine back in the day. We were in the same small section Torts Class.
It often is, but in any case, I did not realize this board constituted a criminal trial.
And come on…common sense tells you that someone who says this:
…did those things.
Yeh my cousin goes to University of Chicago the law firm he’s interning at offered him $180,000 to start before he graduated but he turned it down to work at the White House.
As for “movie star types”, they’d hang at our killer frat parties on campus. …Sometimes a few politicians (that made the papers).
And for what its worth, I find Bush’s reason as to why he did not want to admit or discuss such use, i.e., for the children imminently believable. I am not sure he is right about the effect such an admission would have, but its not an unreasonable position.
I hope he’s independently wealthy because its no fun once those student loans come due.
First, note the ellipses. Context is everything.
I’m not saying he didn’t. I don’t know that any more than you know he did.
You’re seeing his lack of denial as proof that he did. If that’s true, then doesn’t that make him an honest man? Otherwise, he simply would have lied about it. In either case, I’d rather have someone who represents integrity than someone who openly admits that their other career path was as a junkie.
U of C gave him a free ride or close to one.
Obama admitted to spending almost two years of his life in a perpetual drug and alcohol induced stupor while he was “finding himself” as an adolescent. By that strain of logic it should make him worse than Bush.
I never said he lied about it. And in the political realm, when if you did not actually do something that could be deemed scandalous, you have everything to gain and nothing to lose with denying it, non-denials and evasions are evidence.
He very carefully avoided answering the questions directly. For example when he said that he would have qualified in 1989 for being an employee of his father’s White House, which asked only that you affirm you haven’t used drugs in the past 15 years. I mean why answer the question is such a strange, contorted, not-really-on-point way?
And the ellipses I put in the quote was only to get rid of the break up of the quote provided in the original article. Not sure if those sentences were said absolutely concurrently or not, but I really don’t see how it makes a difference.
As far as whether or not the lack of admission shows integrity as opposed to one who just admits it, I believe Bush’s reasons for doing so are at least partly sincere, if not misguided. But I find it hard to believe that you believe that a politician airing out any sort of his own dirty laundry shows a lack of integrity.
He must be very smart.
Once things like that get legitimized by politicians, tv, and the MSM, kids think their parents are just old fogies that “don’t get it.” Taking parenting away from parents is just another problem with creeping Socialism.
He’s pretty smart. He wanted Yale but it was too expensive. He went to Tulane for free too.
On September 26th, 2008 at 11:32 am, Goldwater Knight said:
Well said, GK! I guess BHO was preparing for his “community organizing” work by disorganing a few of his brain cells first.
A wasteful job and a wasted mind, I guess.