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 . . .
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.
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).
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.
An administration that is refusing to release the birth certificate or any records from schools and colleges hiding something? How could that be?
If this is such a vital and important matter why is it that you’ve not brought it up in one of your ‘interviews’ with Duncan Hunter? Or have you and have just opted not to reveal his response?
It would be a hoot if on election night 2012 some states were shown as grey as they didn’t have Bammy’s name on the ballot.
Apparently, the author is saying no Democrat meets these few, reasonable requirements. Interesting.
0bamao has made a lot of effort, and spent a lot of money (some of it belonging to taxpayers) to hide something! If he is challenged by Arizona, or hopefully, several states, the truth may come out.
"Methinks he doth protest too much!"
He makes a good point...thus, no government should EVER ask for any paper documentation for anything. Let me know when they enact that rule.
bump
notice they have to say ‘birther’ they can’t say constitutionalist
It doesn’t matter if the car wouldn’t start or not. Papa wasn’t an American Citizen so Junior is NOT eligible. Period. The end. Finite.
An additional problem highlighted by all this is the amendment requiring direct election of the president by the people of the USA. My understanding of early America was that the people of a given congressional district elected the most president-like person in their electoral district to be their elector/presidential-stature candidate. These people then gathered in Washington and from the number of “electors” they themselves voted one of them (or another stellar American) to be president. If there was a tie, then the Congress broke the tie.
To prevent confusion, the 12th amendment required one vote for president and another vote for VP from each of the electors.
This system was destroyed by the advent of political parties and their concerns for their party rather than for the good of the nation.