Breaking News and Confirmed: Arizona Senate Passes Presidential Eligibility Bill 21-9

[gekaap]

Sure look at all three two BC's say accepted by state registrar and one doesn't.

Two say "accepted" one says "filed." It's sheer stupidity to try to suggest that a state record keeping entity will "file" records that it has not "accepted." Your entire argument is "tomato/tomahto."

 

[gekaap]

really? where's the long form to prove either way?

None of your damn business, to be honest.

 

[gekaap]

Can you prove that I'm not Superman?

Could shoot you and watch you bleed. In any event, I think you're missing the point, which is that the birth certificate Obama already has is evidence to his citizenship, attested to by the state of Hawaii, and is a presentation of HI's vital records. Thus, the burden will fall on AZ when this law is challenged in court to show their own evidence that Obama, or any given person who might end up in his shoes, is not a citizen, or at least that his citizenship cannot be reasonably determined from that birth certificate.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

really? where's the long form to prove either way?

None of your damn business, to be honest.

I never knew a piece of paper would bring fear in most peoples lives. What are you scared of?

 

[gekaap]

Funny how doing the right thing makes you a crack up.

Pushing forth laws that violate the constitution is the "right" thing?

Obama is the worst president ever and a piss poor leader.

But he's still a natural born citizen.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Sure look at all three two BC's say accepted by state registrar and one doesn't.

Two say "accepted" one says "filed." It's sheer stupidity to try to suggest that a state record keeping entity will "file" records that it has not "accepted." Your entire argument is "tomato/tomahto."

well look at the other two again. You have to file somnething before it can get accepted.

 

[gekaap]

So far, Obama has released a document that the California DMV would reject in order to get a drivers license. (I know, I got an abstract for my eldest and had to go stand in line at the hall of records for a certified original copy.)

That's an outright lie. I just recently got a new license from my new state, and my BC has even less than Obama's has.

Arizona has simply stipulated that ALL candidates must produce proof of eligibility under the constitution of the United States to be on the Arizona ballot.

No, that's not all they've simply stipulated. They've gone further, and demanded that the records of other states been certain requirements. Arizona does not have the power to make such requirements. Each state sets for itself its own methods of presenting its records. Only Congress can make rules regarding how records of one state will be proven to another state. AZ does not have the power to adopt for itself rules on how another state will prove its records to AZ.

That you fight against this makes me wonder what it is you know, that we don't?

The constitution, apparently.

Shouldn't it be a simple matter for your Messiah® to comply?

Many states do not issue "long form" birth certificates. Many states specifically issue "Certificates of Live Birth." Thus, the AZ law would make it impossible for probably around half of the US citizenry to comply.

 

[gekaap]

And that document Hawaii has verified was never accepted by the state registrar of 1961. It's invalid. He needs to present the long form.

How can you be so stupid to say such a thing? Hawaii is now issuing invalid official documents? Really? That's amazing.

 

[gekaap]

Hawaii confirmed a document that was never accepted by the state registrar in 1961.

Who are you to tell Hawaii what its procedures need to be? They've confirmed and attested to his birth. Even if we lend this "accepted" issue any credence, you admit that the record was still filed in Hawaii. Take a look at the filing date. The whole thing takes you back to a decades long conspiracy that began when Obama was born. It's a pretty far fetched idea that Obama's mother gave birth in Kenya, and immediately flew half way across the world with her week old son, all in an effort to quickly launch a massive cover up, just in case little Barry Jr. one day wanted to run for President.

 

[gekaap]

I don't care who agrees with what. The document obama has was never accepted by the state registrar of 1961.

So what ya gonna do about it? Continue to throw this whiny little fit about how life isn't fair?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And that document Hawaii has verified was never accepted by the state registrar of 1961. It's invalid. He needs to present the long form.

How can you be so stupid to say such a thing? Hawaii is now issuing invalid official documents? Really? That's amazing.

Hawaii's controlled by democrats go figure.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Hawaii confirmed a document that was never accepted by the state registrar in 1961.

Who are you to tell Hawaii what its procedures need to be? They've confirmed and attested to his birth. Even if we lend this "accepted" issue any credence, you admit that the record was still filed in Hawaii. Take a look at the filing date. The whole thing takes you back to a decades long conspiracy that began when Obama was born. It's a pretty far fetched idea that Obama's mother gave birth in Kenya, and immediately flew half way across the world with her week old son, all in an effort to quickly launch a massive cover up, just in case little Barry Jr. one day wanted to run for President.

The conspiracy as you put it started in 2007. Not 1961

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I don't care who agrees with what. The document obama has was never accepted by the state registrar of 1961.

So what ya gonna do about it? Continue to throw this whiny little fit about how life isn't fair?

Whiny little fit? Not whining just stating facts.

 

[uscitizen]

Why is this thread not in the humor forum?

 

[gekaap]

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

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.

You keep trying to argue about the state's choosing of their electors as if it were relevant here. The AZ bill is not a statute that prescribes how the state shall choose its electors. There is already law establishing AZ will rely on a general election.

What the AZ bill does is provide a means to test the legal qualifications for a candidate to the Presidency. Its capacity to do so might itself be a question, but we may as well assume here that such a test is completely kosher. The legal qualifications for President of the United States include age requirements, residency requirements, and citizenship requirements. This bill specifically addresses the matter of citizenship. Any person born in the United States is a natural born citizen, and each state has its own methods of keeping and providing vital records which can be used to prove a person's citizenship.

Therefore, inasmuch as the bill in question tests the legal qualifications of a person to hold the office of President, and does not prescribe by what manner the state shall choose its electors, and inasmuch as the state of AZ's actual method of choosing its electors is not at all changed by the bill, the constitutionality of the bill rests on whether the state of AZ has the power set for itself rules by which the records of other states will be proved to AZ.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,[/B] a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

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.

You keep trying to argue about the state's choosing of their electors as if it were relevant here. The AZ bill is not a statute that prescribes how the state shall choose its electors. There is already law establishing AZ will rely on a general election.

What the AZ bill does is provide a means to test the legal qualifications for a candidate to the Presidency. Its capacity to do so might itself be a question, but we may as well assume here that such a test is completely kosher. The legal qualifications for President of the United States include age requirements, residency requirements, and citizenship requirements. This bill specifically addresses the matter of citizenship. Any person born in the United States is a natural born citizen, and each state has its own methods of keeping and providing vital records which can be used to prove a person's citizenship.

Therefore, inasmuch as the bill in question tests the legal qualifications of a person to hold the office of President, and does not prescribe by what manner the state shall choose its electors, and inasmuch as the state of AZ's actual method of choosing its electors is not at all changed by the bill, the constitutionality of the bill rests on whether the state of AZ has the power set for itself rules by which the records of other states will be proved to AZ.

Why do you fear this bill?

 

[gekaap]

It has everything to do with the electoral process. thats what this bill is about.This is Arizona's electorial process, obama doesn't have to run on the ballot in Arizona. No one will be forcing him to not run in that STATE. SO DEAL WITH THAT.

Arizona's method for choosing its electors has long been established by state law to be reliance on a general election. The bill in question does not change that process by any means. Instead, what it does it presents requirements to measure the legal qualifications of a given candidate to appear on the ballot. The method used to determine the electors from the state of AZ will remain the same method as has been used for many years. Thus, the bill in question is not about how the state will choose its electors. The constitutionality rests solely on whether the state of Arizona has the power to adopt for itself rules by which the records of another state can be proven to Arizona.

 

[gekaap]

According to the long form BC I posted filed does not mean accepted.

But you insist on ignoring the explanation that has been given by the state of Hawaii itself, explaining that any document "filed" has been "accepted"?

 

[RachelMadcow]

the modern day welfare state with open borders is an utter proven failure


See Europe for reference


Paris is on fire
Iceland, Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Spain are bankrupt
All of the EU has had stagnant growth and high double digit unemployment for decades



Socialism is a failure

Obama is a failure


Liberals are simply uneducated parasites that kill their host.

 

[gekaap]

I never knew a piece of paper would bring fear in most peoples lives. What are you scared of?

I'm scared of bees. I know it's silly. I can't help it, been scared of the damned things since as long as I can remember. I'm also scared of electrocution. Again, don't know why, it's just something that I'm scared of. But that's about it.