Arizona bill seeks citizenship proof from all candidates [Obama not singled out, author says]

PHOENIX | The state of Arizona has moved onto contentious political territory once again with the legislative passage of a bill requiring President Obama and other presidential candidates to prove their U.S. citizenship before their names can appear on the state’s ballot.

Opponents say Arizona’s bill, approved late last week, gives the state another black eye after lawmakers approved a controversial immigration enforcement law last year.

Gov. Jan Brewer, who has until the end of business Thursday to act on the proposal, declined to say whether she would sign the measure, which would make Arizona the first state to enact such a requirement.

“That bill is an interesting piece of legislation. I certainly have not given it a whole lot of thought with everything that’s been on my plate,” said Mrs. Brewer, a social conservative who has vetoed four bills and signed more than 100 others since the legislative session began in January.

It seems reasonable and logical to me that it should be left up to each state---not the federal government---to require a presidential candidate to provide some type of legal document that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the presidential candidate is at least 35 years old and that he was born in the United States as required by the Constitution.

1. Right now, it seems that all a presidential candidate has to do to get on a political party primary ballot and on the presidential ballot in Nov. 2012 is to (1) raise his hand and swear before a witness or witnesses that he is eligible, and (2) sign an affidavit that he is at least 35 years old and that he was born in the United States as required by the Constitution. That is it.

2. No wonder Obama was able to sneak on each state's election ballot without any state officials challenging his birth and citizenship.

3. However, there doesn't seem to be any law in any state that says that the Secretary of State has to make a strong effort to make sure that the candidate is not lying about his past.

4. To me, that is wrong, because state officials should be required to be positively sure, beyone a shadow of a doubt, that the presidential candidate is not lying about his birth and citizenship.

5. So it seems to me that it is most reasonable and logical that the Secretary of State in each state should be able to legally require a presidential candidate to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is who he says is by providing a legal document---like a certified birth certificate from the state of his birth--- to the Secretary of State in each state.

6. And to make sure that the candidate has not tampered with his birth certificate, the birth certificate must come directly from the candidate's birth state with the state's seal and not from the candidate himself or from the candidate's campaign headquarters.

7. To me, the Arizona presidential eligibility law is a fair one, and it will insure that presidential candidates will provide legal proof that they are who they say they are for many presidential elections to come and long after Obama has gone.

mirse: “1. Right now, it seems that all a presidential candidate has to do to get on a political party primary ballot and on the presidential ballot in Nov. 2012 is to (1) raise his hand and swear before a witness or witnesses that he is eligible, and (2) sign an affidavit that he is at least 35 years old and that he was born in the United States as required by the Constitution. That is it. “

And the interesting thing abount swearing you are eligible - it may be that Obama actually BELIEVES he is elgible to run. Perhaps he has lied so many times that he actually believes the lie himself. Or perhaps his mother and grandparents always told him he was born in HI even though it may not have been true. It’s not like he could actully remember the birth himself.

NO ONE can personally testify to their place/time of birth - it is ALWAYS determined by secondary information. For this reason alone, it should be necessary to have some supporting documentation that can prove Obamas claim.

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.