Democrats react to McLachlan's 'birther' bill

The News-Times ^ | 02/02/2011 | Tony Webster

[FreeAtlanta]

State Senator Michael McLachlan. Photo: Michael Duffy / The News-Times | Buy This Photo DANBURY -- The bill is only one sentence long, but the reaction to it could fill a book.

A day after the media reported the proposed legislation, state and local Democrats wasted no time in criticizing state Sen. Michael McLachlan, R-Danbury, for his proposed bill requiring presidential and vice presidential candidates to show their birth certificates to get on the ballot in Connecticut. posted using frpa

[Emperor Palpatine]

An old bomber pilot, (my da), once told me that you get the most flak when you're right over the target.

[jamese777]

This law is not needed. Section three of the Twentieth amendment already instructs Congress to verify the eligibility of a President elect. Anyone (this includes state senators and representatives) who has taken the oath of office in Article six of the Constitution has the legal “standing” to go before a judge and demand to see proof that section three was, in fact, enforced. They are breaking their oath of office to “support this Constitution” if this issue is ignored.

---

On January 8, 2009, the President-Elect qualified under the 20th Amendment when his Electoral College votes were counted and certified by Vice President Cheney at a Joint Session of Congress and no two members of Congress (One Senator and One Representative) submitted to the President of the Senate any written objections to the certification of the Electoral College vote.
The certification allowed the final constitutional step to be taken, administering the Oath of Office on Inauguration Day.

[Balding_Eagle]

I think he’s saying the the Obama Presidency is legit.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

This law is not needed. Section three of the Twentieth amendment already instructs Congress to verify the eligibility of a President elect. Anyone (this includes state senators and representatives) who has taken the oath of office in Article six of the Constitution has the legal “standing” to go before a judge and demand to see proof that section three was, in fact, enforced. They are breaking their oath of office to “support this Constitution” if this issue is ignored.

You have a point - but since that isn't happening, this is an unexceptionable step.

[jamese777]

I think he’s saying the the Obama Presidency is legit.

---

I’m saying that the 20th Amendment is not the way to determine presidential legitimacy.

If you want to see ANY of Obama’s records, including his birth records, the way to do that is via a congressional committee of the House of Representatives, now that the Republicans are Chairs of all committees, issuing congressional subpoenas for those records is the way to go.

Under Hawaii law, a confidential birth record can be released without the permission of the person named on the record to (and I quote the law)”a person whose right to inspect or obtain a certified copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction.” In short, Obama’s birth certificate can be subpoenaed.

[Uncle Sham]

I don't care what he says. It's what the Constitution says that counts.

Twentieth Amendment, Section three...

”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.”

In addition to the Constitution, here is U.S. law...

U. S. Code, CITE: 3USC19

TITLE 3--THE PRESIDENT, CHAPTER 1- PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS AND VACANCIES

Sec. 19. Vacancy in offices of both President and Vice President; officers eligible to act

”(a)(1) If, by reason of death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify, there is neither a President nor Vice President to discharge the powers and duties of the office of President, then the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, upon his resignation as Speaker and as Representative in Congress, act as President.“

Once again, from the U. S. Constitution, Article Six Oath of Office for elected officials:

” The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

The portion in bold stating “or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify” in section three is particularly interesting in that it plainly seems to infer that a “qualification” of some sort must be made in order to serve as President. Certainly, one cannot argue that it does not require a qualification process for one to “qualify”. To infer that the lack of a “specified” qualification process means that stated eligibility “qualifications” for the office of president can be ignored is fallacious. The wording of this passage in the twentieth amendment clearly infers that a qualification is required, regardless of how this is done.

There is only one set of qualifications listed anywhere in the Constitution that are not health related and they are listed in Article two, section one.

” 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.”

To satisfy meeting the requirement of the twentieth amendment to “qualify”, a president elect must present evidence that he meets it’s requirements for eligibility to serve. This means that a proper birth certificate HAD to be presented by the president elect in order to serve as president. In fact, without establishing whether or not the President elect is "qualified", Congress would not know whether or not to step in and name a temporary replacement as the Amendment requires. Certainly, this means that the proof of "qualifications" must be presented to Congress.

If this was done, where is that certificate and to whom was it presented? If this was done, why would we not have the right to verify and inspect it under the freedom of information act?

If it was NOT done, then under the provisions of the twentieth amendment, Barrack Obama has “failed to qualify” and can not be serving as a legal president of the United States of America. Remember, the Constitution says in Article two, section one that "NO PERSON" who does not meet the eligibility requirements may serve as President. There is no wiggle room in this language.

Based upon the above, I conclude that:

1. We currently have a vacancy at President because no one has yet “qualified” as required in the Twentieth amendment. The terms "The President elect shall have failed to qualify" clearly places this burden upon the President elect and not on someone raising their hand in objection.

2. Anyone serving in Congress (see “Congress” in bold in Exhibit A), or anyone who is currently serving under the oath of office in Article six has "standing" and can DEMAND that their oaths be met by receiving proper “qualifying” documentation from Mr. Obama. This charade at the time of counting the Electoral College votes does not limit their ability to do so at any time they so choose. The very fact that they are duty-bound by oath to "support" the Constitution REQUIRES them to respond to any and all attacks against it. No judge can deny any of them the standing to do so. It would ask them to break the law in their effort to enforce the law.

3. We need to start pressing legal charges against all of our local representatives and senators covered by the oath of office in Article six for disobeying their oaths to support the Constitution as it pertains to the language of section three of the Twentieth amendment. Put PRESSURE on them to represent the document that gives them their authority in the first place.

[Ronin]

Never been to CT, but I am and will remain a birther until he shows his birth certificate.

I never cease to be amazed at the hypocrisy of the left. Every single moment of the life of GWB was scrutinized with a microscope and gone over with a fine-toothed comb, yet we know almost NOTHING about Obama.

[Cobra64]

It's too bad lazy "journalists" don't cite the bill's actual wording in their articles.

Connecticut Bill number 391:

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:

That title 9 of the general statutes be amended to require the Secretary of the State to be presented with an original birth certificate of any candidate for the federal office of president or vice-president that certifies that the certificate holder is a natural-born United States citizen, prior to certifying that the candidate is qualified to appear on the ballot.

[fightinJAG]

How in the world could anyone be against candidates having to prove they are at least American citizens?

[Fantasywriter]

Excellent post, US. Here’s the difference between you and our resident Obot. You sound like a patriotic conservative who loves his country and cares about the Constitution. The troll has never, even once, sounded like a conservative, and as for expressing a whit of concern about the damage this lying fraud, Soetoro, is wreaking on a daily basis, forget about it. Troll just posts the same tired BS over and over, and apparently doesn’t care or even realize that true patriots no longer give a flying fig what he thinks or says. He’s Not A Conservative.

[jamese777]

When did a president-elect die?

[dinodino]

Read it again.

[Red Steel]

What are they afraid of?..............we know..............

The rats know they are losers on the losing side.

[Red Badger]

If even ONE state passes such a law, and Zero fails to register for the ballot in that state, it’s game, set, match.......

[FreeAtlanta]

It shouldn’t be needed, but congress has been derelict in their duty. The states have to step in.

[American Constitutionalist]

( * It is amazing the reaction he got to a simple one sentence long bill. * )

" I think the reaction speaks volumes about their fear over this issue. What is the old saying about protesting too much? "


They are Sons of Cain.

God's Word Translation:

Jude I:

10. Whatever these people don’t understand, they insult. Like animals, which are creatures of instinct, they use whatever they know to destroy themselves.
11. How horrible it will be for them! They have followed the path of Cain. They have rushed into Balaam’s error to make a profit. They have rebelled like Korah and destroyed themselves.

12. These people are a disgrace at the special meals you share with other believers. They eat with you and don’t feel ashamed. They are shepherds who care only for themselves. They are dry clouds blown around by the winds. They are withered, uprooted trees without any fruit. As a result, they have died twice.
13. Their shame is like the foam on the wild waves of the sea. They are wandering stars for whom gloomy darkness is kept forever.

14. Furthermore, Enoch, from the seventh generation after Adam, prophesied about them. He said, “The Lord has come with countless thousands of his holy angels.
15. He has come to judge all these people. He has come to convict all these ungodly sinners for all the ungodly things they have done and all the harsh things they have said about him.”

16. These people complain, find fault, follow their own desires, say arrogant things, and flatter people in order to take advantage of them.

17. Dear friends, remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ told you to expect:
18. “In the last times people who ridicule God will appear. They will follow their own ungodly desires.”
19. These are the people who cause divisions. They are concerned about physical things, not spiritual things.

[American Constitutionalist]

" Funny how democrats think that showing ID for anything is a bad thing to do. "

They do not come to the light, or the truth because their deeds would be made manifested, revealed that what they do is in darkness.

[American Constitutionalist]

" this should be done by the Secret Service and the FBI "

It's called ( Dereliction of duty )
Dereliction of duty is a specific offense under United States Code Title 10,892. Article 92 and applies to all branches of the US military. A service member who is derelict has willfully refused to perform his duties

[American Constitutionalist]

Congress, the F.B.I., the Secret Service have neglected their duties.
If the US Military has a code for those who refuse to do their duty , then, they too should have some code to do their rightful duties.

Dereliction of duty is a specific offense under United States Code Title 10,892. Article 92 and applies to all branches of the US military. A service member who is derelict has willfully refused to perform his duties

[American Constitutionalist]

Dereliction of duty is a specific offense under United States Code Title 10,892. Article 92 and applies to all branches of the US military. A service member who is derelict has willfully refused to perform his duties