Posted on 01/19/2011 10:24:51 AM PST by butterdezillion
Those who are interested in seeing state Presidential eligibility laws, we need to know what states we're dealing with because the deadlines are fast approaching.
I found out last night that today is the last day for bills to be introduced in Nebraska's unicameral. Contacted a Senator and he said they have to request any bills to be drafted, and the deadline for that was last Friday. GRRR.
I'm linking to a page which gives states' deadlines for introducing bills, but there may be other hidden deadlines as well. We can't let this slip away.
Ping to as many concerned people as possible. Anybody who is willing to ask their state legislator to introduce an eligibility bill, please post or Freepmail so we know what states we have covered and can help figure out deadlines and procedures. This is crunch time.
Ping. Urgent help needed. Thanks!
I’m sure they have some kind of “emergency” process that is much faster.
http://www.statenet.com/resources/sessum.htm
The process can be difficult in most states, which is why it is important to become involved early with folks who know how to prepare (written and otherwise) legislation, get it into and out of committee, and then work it through both chambers.
Even a best case, fast-tracked, unopposed effort can be time consuming.
See Kansas, for instance.
2-11-2011 is the last day for committees, EXCEPT House Appropriations, Calendar and Printing and Taxation, House and Senate Federal and State Affairs, Senate Ways and Means, or other select committees, when authorized, to introduce bills.
As usual, we wish you good luck with your efforts.
Denial?
You only need one state to change its requirements.
Right. But to get one state to do so, we have to have it introduced in at least one state.
I asked the Senator in my state if there is a way I can try to get a committee or the governor to recommend a bill, in which case it can be introduced after the deadline. We’ll see how he responds. Unless I can do that, Nebraska is out.
I don’t know if I as an individual can try to get other states to consider a bill. That’s why I need help. This isn’t time for us to sleep or give up - which may well be what the AZ media agenda was all about. It’s not time for us to get caught in interpersonal conflicts.
The time is right now. It makes no difference who we work so hard to elect if that doesn’t translate into legislation. If we won’t stand together when push comes to shove, it is WE who are killing this country. Not SCOTUS. Not the politicians. We. None of us wants to kill this country. We’re all tired; the sandbagging and gaslighting are geared towards tiring us out so we falter when we need to run. We know that, and have to decide whether we’re going to let them win.
I vote no. I vote we find the strength to get up and keep on keepin’ on.
Yes, that’s definitely helpful. I wish I would have checked this all out 2 weeks ago. Sigh.
The next 2-3 weeks are critical.
Maryland has been infiltrated by the commies already, but I had thought they already had a requirement for the President to Constitutionally qualify already?
What do you think about asking:
John D. Hemenway
D.C. Bar #379663
Counsel for Appellants
4816 Rodman Street, NW
Washington DC 20016
(202) 244-4819
(202) 538-0005
johndhemenway@comcast.net
What could someone with no money, no time, and low IQ do? (likeme)
1) There is no legal mechanism for you to prove your case.
2) Is there something you think you can do that would cause Obama to step down?
3) There is a serious Obama agenda that needs defeating and pretending “this” is the mechanism to accomplish that is the pinnacle of ignorance.
“You’re a kid in corner throwing a fit of no consequence.
1) There is no legal mechanism for you to prove your case.”
Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5. No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution
There were no natural born Citizens until the Constitution.
And we have proof of what that phrase means to everyone that passed Civics 101.
It’s a put on!
Ah....I see....
What kind of reception has your claim received to date?
Anyone here from Missouri? I sent the following email to my State Senator. You may want to do the same. Or send this to your Missouri friends and relatives. I’m still waiting for a reply…………
I looked at the Missouri 2008 Elected Officials Qualifications.
http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2008primary/2008offices.asp
It lists the qualifications for U.S. Representative through Township or Ward Committeemen and Committeewomen.
ALL Elected Officials had to meet certain qualifications EXCEPT for PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES. Isn’t it is puzzling why 2008 presidential candidates in Missouri were not required to meet eligibility qualifications, as stated in the U. S. Constitution?
“No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States”.
It seems logical that the Missouri 2012 election qualifications should require that all presidential candidates provide proof to the Secretary of State that they are at least 35 years old , a resident within the U.S. for fourteen years and that they were born in the U.S.
Most people assume that Barack Obama had been vetted before he was able to run for President. Guess what?
A congressional document posted on the Internet confirms no one – not Congress, not the states and not election officials – bothered to check Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president, and that status remains undocumented to this day.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=225561
And since the Federal government failed to vet Obama, maybe the states should do the government’s job for them.
Contact my state rep...Leo Berman Tyler Texas.
The point isn’t to remove the fraudster, but to prevent him from running in 2012. We are stuck with him for another 2 years. He will still do a lot more damage, but at least we can stop him and limit him.
Berman seems to have a spine. Gotta love Texas. =)
I think it’s pretty much supposed to be people within the state who contact the state legislators, though, which is why we need to rally the troops for action.
IIRC, Berman has introduced a bill which would require a birth certificate to be shown. I don’t know if he would be willing to amend that bill to include some of these other measures. I do believe the additional measures are necessary because...
1. There has already been demonstrated tampering of records by all the actual government bureaucracies that have (or claim to have) records for Obama, so just receiving records doesn’t guarantee lawfulness or accuracy for Obama or anybody else the bureaucracy is willing to cheat for. And bureaucrats have been caught in multiple places accepting bribes to manufacture or falsify vital records, which contaminates the whole pool. A fake BC can be used to get what appears to be a legitimate passport, for instance, and the only way to know which records are contaminated is to examine all the records for a person, including the transaction logs which would reveal tampering. We can’t do that for everybody, but we can at least do it for the person who holds the nuclear football.
And again, it must be reiterated that we already know that Obama’s selective service registration, social security number, and passport all have documented anomalies which strongly suggest tampering by the bureaucrats in those agencies. And the Hawaii DOH has indirectly confirmed through official communications that they have no legally-valid BC for Obama, even though they’ve made public statements implying the exact opposite. So we’re not dreaming up trouble; trouble has already been revealed in Obama’s case, by the very government agencies involved.
2. We don’t have a definition for “natural born citizen”, and unless the courts rule on that definition, the Constitution will be interpreted inconsistently by secretaries rather than by the only people the Constitution allows to interpret it.
3. Even in states where a SOS is required to “verify Constitutional eligibility” there is no mechanism to hold the SOS accountable to obey that, and never can be until there is a binding definition of “natural born citizen”. Even with a binding definition, the only people who the courts would allow to sue over eligibility are people who can be easily shut down politically if they DO sue. So there needs to be a politically-neutral process for holding an SOS accountable to determine eligibility truthfully.
We were just visiting the Tyler, TX area in late December. Nice people down there. Good, salt of the earth people.
Maybe you or somebody you know could contact Berman and see if he is willing to hear some suggestions for how the bill could be improved. If he is then you could put him in contact with me and I could let him know my concerns. Or anybody could share the concerns with him. I am willing and eager to do anything I can to help out.
The states choose the electors so they do have the responsibility to make sure their electors know who they can Constitutionally vote for.
In Nebraska we say they can vote for anybody who has the OK from the DNC or RNC. But Pelosi almost certainly perjured herself by saying that Obama was eligible when she had not checked the documentation and the Hawaii Democratic Party had indicated there could be a problem, by refusing to certify his eligibility as they had always done in the past.
The political parties cannot be trusted to obey the law. We’ve seen the lawlessness in the way the politicians behave and legislate, and now we’ve seen that it includes committing perjury since they know no state is going to even check out whether they perjured themselves.
The states need to realize that the DNC has perpetrated election fraud on them and they need to protect themselves from this ever happening again.
Democrats who balk at this need to be reminded that the RNC could just as easily perpetrate fraud as well, so the states need to have a way to do their OWN checking, and not rely on partisan statements for which there is no mechanism for legal accountability.
And for the states to do that they need to know the criteria they are checking for - which is something only the judiciary can determine, because it depends on the interpretation of the US Constitution.
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.