Posted on 04/13/2011 12:39:01 PM PDT by Smokeyblue
The Arizona Senate approved the so-called ‘birther’ bill requiring 2012 presidential candidates to prove they were born in the U.S. and are thus eligible to run for president.
The measure, House Bill 2177, is aimed at President Barack Obama and those on the political right who want him to produce a birth certificate proving he was born in Hawaii and not Kenya, where his father if from.
The Arizona Legislature passed the bill 20-8 on a party-line vote in the State Senate with Republicans backing and Democrats opposing.
The measure includes some changes that allow for other documents beside birth certificates to be produced by presidential contenders. It now goes back to the Arizona House of Representatives for another vote. The House previously approved the birther bill without new Senate changes.
(Excerpt) Read more at bizjournals.com ...
I have an appointment to speak with him. Was supposed to be yesterday but the secretary had forgotten that their afternoon session was scheduled to go longer. That’s why my heart sank when I saw the bill had already been acted upon without amendments that are increasingly being shown as critical. But hopefully it can be amended in the House.
I’m not clear what they have standing to do, though. If it’s just to make sure that the law is followed procedurally - that the documents are required and that the SOS made a decision - that wouldn’t do much.
If it is standing to challenge in court whether a candidate is a “natural born citizen”, then we might be getting somewhere. It would be much better if the law stated that expressly, and if it stated that the SOS and/or any challenging registered voter has standing to subpoena any and all birth and citizenship records and audit their veracity.
Allow me to eat my words! For once, it will be a pleasure.
Miracle of miracles, this bill has some teeth to it!
I wish they had mentioned natural born, but this is a good step in the right direction. Besides I don’t believe that obama was born in Hawaii. This alone would disqualify him.
RIGHT ON SISTAH!
If you need any help prepping let me know. Not that I think you do, you have got all the details already combed out and organized.
YOU ROCK BUTTER!!
One is all you need to end this game.
“4.If you are a citizen of the great State of Arizona, you will specifically have standing in terms of being able to enforce this legislation. This, of course, is a pretty big deal, and could, in theory, lead to a class-action status of a multitude of citizens standing up against a given candidate if they do not feel that candidate’s background is sufficiently substantial;”
These are similar to the kind of documents that could be provided in lieu of a birth certificate to get a passport.
Exactly.
>No, it doesn’t.
The article specifically states that it does
“The measure includes some changes that allow for other documents beside birth certificates to be produced by presidential contenders.”
In Obama's case we don't need to worry about this one since he is Muslim.
Fukino, according to Isikoff (hearsay, not a quote) said:
“She found the original birth record, properly numbered, half typed and half handwritten, and signed by the doctor who delivered Obama, located in the files. She then put out a public statement asserting to the document's validity.’
It will be much harder to forge a fake “half-handwritten” document which would obviously seem NOT to be a standard long form!!!
That big a handwriting sample could also be compared to samples from the person who allegedly did the writing.
I suspect the “record” is some sort of account from a witness to the birth and the doctor who signed was not the delivery MD, as Isikoff helpfully and deniably puts in Fukino’s mouth, but an MD who examined the baby after an unattended birth (after returning from Kenya?) to complete the birth registration process.
As others have noted, I don't see any way that an HI long form could be “half-handwritten." And this description from an HI DOH official!
(proposed requirements regarding identification)
5. Requires the affidavit of the presidential candidate include references to and attachment of the following, which shall be sworn to under penalty of perjury:
a) a sworn statement or form that identifies the presidential candidate’s places of residence in the U.S. for the preceding fourteen years; and
b) a certified birth certificate that includes:
i. the date and place of birth,
ii. the names of the hospital and the attending physician, and
iii. signatures of any witnesses in attendance if applicable.
Read my post 156 for the details of what is required.
What are the other forms of proof? I am suspicious. I wonder if Certificate of Birth (COLBs) or news paper announcements are sufficient?
Right any Obongo long form will need to be verified. Forensic experts brought in to examine the actual document filed at Hawaii vital records. I doubt any state will demand this. But Arizona is going in the right direction and may many more states follow
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.