Giving my US vote to Malaysians has stirred quite a lot of interest - and controversy. While it is a pleasure to receive support, I take special pleasure in rebutting my detractors.

Let's start with Mark of Discriminatory US constitution arcane but correct . He said that '... Eric Ossemig said that he is barred from running from his nation's highest office by virtue of his birthplace. Actually, it matters not where the person is born. If they are born of American citizens then they will never have to be naturalised and can run for president of the United States.'

He has a point, but in it, he misses another. In the US Constitution, Article II, Section.1, Clause 5, it states that: 'No person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States ... shall be eligible to the Office of President ... and been for fourteen years a resident within the United States.'

So, yes, as a US citizen, I can become president of the US even if I'm foreign-born; but, no I can't, because I've only lived in the US for seven of the required 14 years. It seems that being an expatriated American makes me somehow less of a citizen with a constitutionally prescribed

curtailment of my rights.

Mark goes on to say: 'I think he has misinterpreted his civic duty, especially with the rationale he has presented - 'America influences other countries, so other countries should have an influence.''.

That is exactly my point.

And finally, Mark sniffs: 'I hope he has fun with that. It is a gimmick that will interest some people.'

Fun? Gimmick? Fun might be getting drunk at a friend's wedding, while a gimmick might be singing '99 Luft Baloons' while juggling chainsaws.

There is nothing fun or gimmicky in doing what one patriot can to protect America from further global alienation because she doesn't want to - or have to listen - to her grumbling neighbours.

So listen carefully: I'm doing my bit to protect America's role and reputation in the world by involving the global citizenry in electing their next global leader. Only this will give the US president the legitimacy and accountability he needs to garner respect from the world community.

When you cast your vote Mark (I assume you are American) for the next global leader on Nov 2, are you going to do the undemocratic thing and keep that vote all to yourself?

I would also like too to respond to Dzirhan Mahadzir's Offering of vote mocks electoral process . He speaks of '... individual's right to vote and to choose his/her own preference on his own accord without any undue external influence.'

This is an invitation for Malaysians to vote with me - I am asking for the 'external influence' factor. Otherwise, do you see any point to this exercise?

He goes on to profess that: 'The plain fact is that any nation's elections are solely for that nation's own citizens to participate in.'

I am changing that fact. We need to evolve the electoral process and start to think outside the box. The closest Dzirhan Mahadzir comes to making a valid point is this: 'At stake in the US elections are not just the international policies of the United States but also domestic internal policies such as education, economics, taxation etc. which Malaysians do not have a stake in or a

right to decide on anymore than a US citizen has in regard to Malaysia's.'

People vote out of self-interest. I won't fault an Iowa pig farmer for voting for the candidate that best represents his interests. As a long-term expatriated American, my interests are on the other end of the spectrum. I have no interest in domestic politics - only international ones because these are the only politics that affect me/us.

Would he be more approving if there were a two-tier electoral process - one for domestic and one for international politics, and I invited Malaysians to vote with me on the latter? No such thing.