Posted on 04/21/2010 11:10:17 AM PDT by pissant
It is definitely the latter.
ping
Keep pushing AZ. Hopefully it passes and more states do this. These people are criminals. Rush was calling Obama a thug - he is correct.
My goodness - this story has more twists and turns than a John Grisham novel! Maybe somehow we can wake up and find it was all a terrible nightmare . . .
As other states have done previously for unqualified presidential candidates.
And the long shot is that the supporting documentation is simply affidavits from Obama's mother and maternal grandparents asserting that he was born in Hawaii at their home (maybe the car wouldn't start so she couldn't get to the hospital.) Again, that might well be the truth, but it might not be the "proof" some people are looking for.
Ping!!!
Obamafelators.
Pelosinursers.
Reidwipers (Barack!!?? I’mmm donne!!)
AmericaHaters
Instigators
Manipulators (with an emphasis on “man”)
Obamasombies
Hey, lefties: Does the word Constitution have too many syllables or are you still working on “new civics”?
Q: How do you know if a leftist is sincere about healthcare and womens rights?
a: They will stomp a woman into the ground breaking her leg in four places.
Yep. This isn't even a close call. It's well settled law that states control their own ballot access, not the feds. The states couldn't impose additional requirements for presidential eligibility, but they're certainly entitled to verify Constitutionally mandated eligibility criteria.
The electors appear on the ballot in North Dakota, along with the notification that they are committed to voting for Caligula, Nero, etc.
States manage who appears on their ballots, even for federal elections. Arizona is well within its power to require presidential candidates meet certain requirements first, so long as those requirements don't violate the U.S. Constitution.
Tricky. My belief is that it is the US Congress, under the 12th Amendment, that enforces the "natural born" requirement by accepting or rejecting the results of the Electoral College. I am sure a state could not impose its own eligibility requirements beyond those of the Constitution, but I am hazy as to whether a state would have some right to independently verify Constitutional eligibility to assure that their electors' votes are not being "wasted".
The measure controls access to the BALLOT, which is firmly within the purview of the various states. The assertion that the congress validates the eligibility by accepting the elctors' vote is directly contrary to the wording of the 10th amenment (I think that's the right amendment) - where a President-elect may have "failed to qualify".
There is no requirement that the electoral college determine eligibility - and hence, there is no authority (the electoral college is failry well regulated in purpose by the constitution itself).
If I am wrong, I would appreciate someone pointing out where it says that the EC is required to determine eligibility of the winning candidate. (Doesn't that seem a lot like locking the barn door after the barn is already burned to the ground).
Yep if they don’t qualify on the ballot they can’t recieve electorals votes either and can not be counted if someone fills in the name. Only qualified candidates can be counted as fill ins.
Every American, National and legal resident authorized to work must file Form SS-5, Application for Social Security Number when they start working.
The application will marked by a document examiner with the proof of US Citizenship (Natural born citizens will use a birth certificate, Naturalized and legal aliens use Form I-94) before a SSN is assigned.
SSA also keeps a record of residency if the candidate paid Social Security taxes prior to his candidacy.
Also, any citizen who renounces their US citizenship will have a Certificate of Loss of Nationality (CLN) issued with copies containing original signature and State Dept Seal sent to the FBI, IRS, USCIS, State Department, DHS and sometimes to the Secret Service.
A state is entirely within its power to require that a candidate show he is eligible for office before his name goes on the ballot.
Obviously, its the original birth certificate everyone wants to see, and not the computer generated stub which, until after O was elected not even the state of Hawaii accepted for every purpose.
Will I be satisfied at that point? No, not really. In a way its a side issue; the fact that his pop was not a US citizen is freely admitted by everyone, which means its already well known that O doesn’t meet the requirement to be president. And yet everyone looks the other way and pretends not to know what they know.
Beyond the “natural birth” issue, his own citizenship is still in question until after we know what passport he used when he traveled to Pakistan, and what citizenship he claimed in college. The guy is good at putting his enemies’ private information on page one as a way of damaging them, but he refuses to divulge his own.
“It’s not the people who vote that count; it’s the people who count the votes.” Joseph Stalin
An administration that is refusing to release the birth certificate or any records from schools and colleges hiding something? How could that be?
The AZ wording
~~~~~~~~~
Between lines 34 and 35, insert:
“B. The national political party committee for a candidate for president for a party that is entitled to continued representation on the ballot shall provide to the secretary of state written notice of that political party’s nomination of its candidates for president and vice president.
“Within ten days after submittal of the names of the candidates, the national political party committee shall submit an affidavit of the presidential candidate in which the presidential candidate states the candidate’s citizenship and age and shall append to the affidavit documents that prove that the candidate is a natural born citizen, prove the candidate’s age and prove that the candidate meets the residency requirements for President of the United States as prescribed in article II, section 1, Constitution of the United States.
C. The secretary of state shall review the affidavit and other documents submitted by the national political party committee and, if the secretary of state has reasonable cause to believe that the candidate does not meet the citizenship, age and residency requirements prescribed by law, the secretary of state shall not place that candidate’s name on the ballot.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2497556/posts?q=1&;page=1
________________________________________________________
Bysiewicz Takes the Stand; Says Running For AG Is Her Civil Right
###
*snip*
As for her eligibility, Bysiewicz said she believes it’s her civil right to run, but filed the lawsuit because significant questions about her eligibility remained.
Bysiewicz is hoping the court finds she’s eligible to run for attorney general, but in order to meet that requirement she must have practiced law for at least 10 years.
Bysiewicz has been a lawyer for 24 years, but she lacks the 10 years of active practice, if her time in elected office is not counted.
http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/ctnj.php/archives/entry/bysiewicz_takes_the_stand/
~ ~ ~
Final Arguments Heard In Bysiewicz AG Case - Bysiewicz’s Eligibility For AG Seat In Question
###
A lawyer for the Connecticut Republicans has told a judge that Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz has not proved that her legal experience meets the requirement to run for attorney general.
But a lawyer for Bysiewicz said the Democratic candidate has shown that she’s met the law by actively providing legal advice during her 12 years as secretary of the state.
http://www.wfsb.com/politics/23206817/detail.html
Yes, Correct.
The OP seems to want to suggest that this is just an unfounded witch hunt. That could not be farther from the truth. There is a reason this issue won’t go away and it’s real simple. The pile of evidence that Obama was born in Kenya to parents that at least one was clearly not a US citizen is overwhelming!
In the end it is extremely unlikely that Obama is eligible to hold the office of the presidency. The only thing undecided is what to do about Obama and how we resolve this issue with future candidates.
I believe you are referring to the 20th Amendment:
“Section 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.”
I thought ‘failed to qualify’ referred to not having enough Electoral College votes, but I don’t know that and can’t find any info quickly on it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.