Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Non-Sequitur
You really need to do some research and stop making up facts.

Here's a few examples of what was done in Cal.

In 1968 the Peace and Freedom Party submitted the name of Eldridge Cleaver as a qualified candidate for president, and then-Secretary of State Frank Jordan "found that, according to Mr. Cleaver's birth certificate, he was only 34 years old, one year shy of the 35 years of age needed to be on the ballot as a candidate for president."

USJF explained that "using his administrative powers, Mr. Jordan removed Mr. Cleaver from the ballot. Mr. Cleaver unsuccessfully challenged this decision to the Supreme Court of the State of California, and, later, to the Supreme Court of the United States."

The USJF said similarly, in 1984, Peace and Freedom Party candidate Larry Holmes was removed from the ballot.

Even in the 2008 campaign, foreign-born third-party candidate Roger Calero was removed from ballots in some states, according to elections reports.

Obama, meanwhile, has refused to document his U.S. citizenship and, therefore, his eligibility to be president under the Constitution's requirement for a "natural born" citizen, his challengers say.

It is my observation coupled with what you said on this thread that you are now juts having fun. You're having fun is disengenuous and tiresome when many of of us are seeking the truth. On this issue you are just flat out wrong, as the examples indicate. The secretaries of state have the reposibility to ensure that the candidates on the ballot are qualified. The fact that they let the parties fill out a form and have the candidate's sign it does not mean they don't have the authority to do more; again as the examples illustrate. Also, they have done this with numerous state candidates. You continue to confusde current practice with the responsib9lity and power to enforce the constitution; an oath taken by the congress, the USSC, and the secretaries of state in each state. The only way to do that on this issue is to require the birth certificate and supporting documents. The fact that they didn't just indicates that they possibly allowed someone to commit the biggest fraud in the history of the country. A crime you don't seem to care about.

Class is over again. I won't waste any more time on you tonight.

238 posted on 09/14/2009 7:48:33 PM PDT by nufsed (Release the birth certificate, passport, and school records.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies ]


To: nufsed
You really need to do some research and stop making up facts.

I will if you will.

Here's a few examples of what was done in Cal.

I've read the California election laws. Can you point to the one that details just what the Secretary of State is supposed to do to check candidates qualifications? Because when you look at Section 6901 it doesn't sound like they're supposed to do anything:

" Whenever a political party, in accordance with Section 7100, 7300, 7578, or 7843, submits to the Secretary of State its certified list of nominees for electors of President and Vice President of the United States, the Secretary of State shall notify each candidate for elector of his or her nomination by the party. The Secretary of State shall cause the names of the candidates for President and Vice President of the several political parties to be placed upon the ballot for the ensuing general election."

California Elections Code

But hey, maybe I'm making that up too. I'm sure you can set us straight and quote from the applicable section.

Obama, meanwhile, has refused to document his U.S. citizenship and, therefore, his eligibility to be president under the Constitution's requirement for a "natural born" citizen, his challengers say.

His supporters say he has. His detractors say he has not. What proves one side right and the other wrong? Can you identify the process?

It is my observation coupled with what you said on this thread that you are now juts having fun.

Very much so. Watching people post nonsense with such seriousness is most amusing.

On this issue you are just flat out wrong, as the examples indicate.

And as I said, if I am "flat out wrong" then you will have no problem pointing to the California law that shows it. Surely you can do that, can't you?

Class is over again.

Comedy Central, you mean.

296 posted on 09/15/2009 7:54:52 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson