Posted on 04/16/2011 8:01:13 AM PDT by loucon
A pair of Republican state lawmakers have filed legislation to require future presidential candidates to prove their U.S. citizenship by providing "an original or certified copy" of their birth certificate in order to qualify for the Louisiana ballot.
(Excerpt) Read more at nola.com ...
I would love to see Wisconsin pass this too!
No offensive. Who believes the BS from Obama nutter Turley or the crazies on MSDNC tv ?
His statements are meant to spread misinformation in order to stop more states from being pressured to require the same basic identication .
Turley is a fraud and spits off anything tweeted to him from Axelrod or Pfoulle or Soros .
(Born on US soil, of US citizen parents)...
IMO, these proposed laws should compel candidates to provide the state AG with special powers of attorney (duly signed and notarized in the style required by that state) which would then be used BY THE STATE to obtain certified copies of birth certificates directly. None of this "provided by the campaign staff" baloney.
Basically, the states should be seeking a way to verify eligibility directly from the state offices where the candidates' vital records are recorded. That's about as clean a system as I think it possible to obtain.
“Original or Certified by WHOM??” Would that phony piece Hussein posted on the web a couple of years ago suffice? If so, the law would be meaningless.
This bill has some teeth, but so did the Arizona bill in its original form.
http://legis.state.la.us/billdata/streamdocument.asp?did=742268
Can it be changed or amended?
We shall see. Meanwhile - this is interesting:
The irony is that, in the end, it really doesn’t matter.
First of all, several judges have already rejected cases involving the matter - undoubtedly in part on the unspoken grounds that determining that Obama was not entitled to be president would tear the country apart as never before, especially when the argument is based on something as shaky as his whereabouts during a stage of life when he couldn’t even pee in a toilet, let along speak the mother tongue.
Second, there is quite an interesting history of public figures being challenged and an equally interesting history of nothing much happening as a result. A few cases citied in Wikipedia:
- Chester A. Arthur (1829–1886), 21st president of the United States, was rumored to have been born in Canada. This was never demonstrated by his Democratic opponents, although Arthur Hinman, an attorney who had investigated Arthur’s family history, raised the objection during his vice-presidential campaign and after the end of his Presidency. . .
- The eligibility of Charles Evans Hughes (1862–1948) was questioned in an article written by Breckinridge Long, and published in the Chicago Legal News during the U.S. presidential election of 1916, in which Hughes was narrowly defeated by Woodrow Wilson. Long claimed that Hughes was ineligible because his father had not yet naturalized at the time of his birth and was still a British citizen. Observing that Hughes, although born in the United States, was also a British subject and therefore “enjoy[ed] a dual nationality and owe[d] a double allegiance”, Long argued that a native born citizen was not natural born without a unity of U.S. citizenship and allegiance.
* George Romney (1907–1995), who ran for the Republican party nomination in 1968, was born in Mexico to U.S. parents. Romney’s grandfather had emigrated to Mexico in 1886 with his three wives and children after Utah outlawed polygamy. Romney’s monogamous parents retained their U.S. citizenship and returned to the United States with him in 1912. Romney never received Mexican citizenship. George Romney therefore had no allegiance to a foreign country.
* Barry Goldwater (1909–1998) was born in Phoenix, in what was then the incorporated Arizona Territory of the United States. During his presidential campaign in 1964, there was a minor controversy over Goldwater’s having been born in Arizona when it was not yet a state.
* Lowell Weicker (born 1931), the former Connecticut Senator, Representative, and Governor, entered the race for the Republican party nomination of 1980 but dropped out before voting in the primaries began. He was born in Paris, France to parents who were U.S. citizens. His father was an executive for E. R. Squibb & Sons and his mother was the Indian-born daughter of a British general.
* Róger Calero (born 1969) was born in Nicaragua and ran as the Socialist Worker’s Party presidential candidate in 2004 and 2008. In 2008, Calero appeared on the ballot in Delaware, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York and Vermont.
* John McCain (born 1936), who ran for the Republican party nomination in 2000 and was the Republican nominee in 2008, was born at Coco Solo Naval Air Station in the Panama Canal Zone. McCain never released his birth certificate to the press or independent fact checking organizations, but did show it to Washington Post reporter Michael Dobbs: “A senior official of the McCain campaign showed a reporter Dobbs a copy of the senator’s birth certificate issued by Canal Zone health authorities, recording his birth in the Coco Solo “family hospital.”
There are other reasons not to get too worked up about all this, a key one being that even if Obama’s birth was contrary to the Constitution, it would rank of one of the mildest violations of said document over the past few decades under both Republican and Democratic presidents (including Obama). Far better to tend to things like the First, Fourth and Tenth Amendments that are in serious trouble.
Driving this cause appears to be much of the same myopic miasma that allows the right to fixate on the sanctity of life still in the womb and then to become ideologically indifferent to it forever thereafter. Given their obsession, we should be grateful that they are not demanding videographic proof that Obama was conceived in Hawaii.
Finally, perhaps the best reason not to worry about this issue is that the definition of a “natural born citizen” has been a topic of a heated debate throughout our history. It wasn’t well defined at the time of the Constitution was drafted and it hasn’t been since.
The lawyers in the house can enjoy it all by reading this brief history
Or they might want to study Charles Gordon’s paper in the Fall 1968 Maryland Law Review entitled “Who Can Be President Of The United States: The Unresolved Enigma.”
Little did he know how prescient he was.
A few passages give the feel:
From today’s vantage point in history, 180 years after the Constitution was adopted, several aspects of this formulation are puzzling. In the first place, the Framers here and at other points in the Constitution referred to citizens of the United States, but nowhere specified who were to be regarded as citizens.’
In any event, as originally adopted, the Constitution’s only oblique and inconclusive reference to the acquisition of citizenship was its grant of authority to Congress “to establish an uniform rule of naturalization.” This omission to define citizenship persevered until 1868, when the fourteenth amendment was adopted. . .
A second puzzling aspect of the constitutional prescription is its naked, again undefined, reference to the “natural-born.” The presidential qualification clause is the sole instance of this term’s appearance in the Constitution.’ The only explanation for the use of this term is the apparent belief of the Framers that its connotation was clear. With the passage of the years this has proved a mistaken assumption. . .
A third puzzling element of the constitutional declaration is its specification that the presidential aspirant must have “been fourteen years a resident of the United States.” If the Framers were speaking only of the native-born, this limitation would hardly have been necessary. It can doubtless be urged that this residence qualification was intended to relate only to the portion of the qualification clause dealing with citizens of the United States at the time the Constitution was adopted. But while the language of the qualification clause obviously includes this group, it is not in context limited to them. Indeed, it seems consistent with a supposition that the “natural-born” qualification was intended to include those who had acquired United States citizenship at birth abroad. . .
http://www.counterpunch.org/smith01252011.html
A pair of Republican state lawmakers have filed legislation to require future presidential candidates to prove their U.S. citizenship by providing "an original or certified copy" of their birth certificate in order to qualify for the Louisiana ballot.
Even if this is watered down, things are moving.
My optimism is based on the comparison between the taboos that nobody DARES to talk about and legislating "something that attempts" to convey the message of We The People’s awakened mistrust in the usurper.
IMO, it's a hell of an improvement. Dontcha think?
More vote buying. I tell you we are in deep trouble and King Obama is setting up for another term. He loves parties, vacations, world travel, and golf.
I think that is up to the states as to when they accept nominations to place them on the ballot. Obama doesn’t even have his party’s nomination yet.
Main steam media will do anything and everything to keep Hussein Obama from producing an original LFBC. They will brand the authors of legislation racists, Governor’s who sign such legislation racists, and they will be proactive on helping in whatever way they may, to see that these pieces of legislation are in the courts during the 2011 and 2012 campaigns. The Lame Stream Media is nothing but SCUM!!
Good points on the constitutional questions, but there are also political questions that will be brought up as these states continue to pass legislation requiring proof.
If Obama challenges these state laws, it will again bring the spotlight of public attention upon the very issue he wants to avoid, the fact that he refuses to meet a simple requirement to produce his long form birth certificate. As it gets closer and closer to the 2012 election, how much political damage will be done in the public’s mind that Obama is indeed hiding something.
Maybe enough to sway 3-5% of the voting public, and that could turn out to be devastating for Obama.
Absolutely it's a no-brainer. I've had stricter requirements in getting a job myself than the President of the United States. There's something VERY wrong with that. With the outcry for Obama's BC or myriad other documents he's locked away, there is something sinister that politicians, media, judges and more cannot demand this President comply IMMEDIATELY to put aside all question thereabout. If he has it, he should provide it. This controversy (justified actually had he been properly vetted) is a gigantic mistrust of the population concerning its leader.
Don’t forget, John Edwards may be facing prison. The last I heard he said he’d commit suicide before going to jail.
I say this because the Birth Certificate is only one issue that actually connects to something much bigger. Possible ID theft and fraud.
Originally I was more naive about the birth certificate. As I read more about it my suspicions grew more. I had arrived to the point where I thought maybe his father was foreign born and that’s why he’s hiding it.
Then I hear that he may have had to attend a meeting in Hawaii with the state election board who could not confirm his eligibility. Nancy Pelosi nearly had a fit. Obama had grown so popular she just knew Obama was the one that could beat McCain so without verifying anything Nancy Pelosi signed two documents confirming Obama as eligible.
Now I hear private investigators have found out that Obama has mulitple social security numbers. One he had gotten in the late 1970s that was issued a few years before to an elderly women (born 1890)in order to get medical benefits. The elderly were especially targeted for SSNs because it’s expected they will not live much longer and they will not notice activity on the SSN by anybody else.
1) Why would a legal citizen of the US need not one but several stolen Social Security Numbers? (and yes there were affidavits done on this - up to now the courts have paid no attention)
2) How is it the first President without an Anglo name, known to have grandparents in another country to, is also the first President unable to locate the longform birth certificate thus unable to have documented proof of his birth. I mean, without a longform birth certificate... how does one get ONE social security card (let alone several), and yet this same President who cannot prove his citizenship has been found to be carrying other people’s social security numbers.
I am not in AZ, but I believe Gov. Brewer could refuse to sign it and return it with a note pointing out, in essence, that its language could lead to a result that was inconsistent with Art II, Sec 1. (non-NBC candidate, anchor baby, fraudulent home birth, etc.).
The Legislature’s option would be to try to override her veto - or - remove the silly language and fill in the holes. Or, demonstrate what they are made of by doing nothing.
IMO, it is in the nation’s best interest for a Republican-controlled state to insert clear NBC language in such a bill and put the burden on those who would try to redefine NBC; i.e. invite the lawsuit that would get the issue to the USSC if it was necessary to go that far.
To say nothing of the fact that such state(s) would be acting as responsible leaders and role models.
Whatever it takes to make sure he isn’t re-elected works for me.
GOOD! let no more politicians —no matter what race or party they are, get the Obama slide. Let them all show their BCs.
The fact that Obama’s alleged mother worked for Tim Geithner’s father raises even more red flags. Who knows who this guy really is?
I just don’t see any downside to having these states pass this legislation, but if Obama challenges them in court, he will cause a media problem for himself.
We win either way.
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.