Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Mr Rogers

“Within seventy-two hours after the close of filing the secretary of state shall certify to the officer in charge of elections the names of the candidates who are qualified for the presidential preference election ballot.”

This is going to be a pissing contest between AZ and HI. The AZ SoS already certified Obama as “qualified” for the primary election.


104 posted on 05/19/2012 12:45:25 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Man is not free unless government is limited. ~Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]


To: BuckeyeTexan

That was before Sheriff Joe revealed he was going forward with a criminal investigation into Obama’s forged long-form and the fraud of having that presented as if genuine. That calls into question whether Obama perjured himself to get on the primary ballot. Which changes everything.


119 posted on 05/19/2012 1:31:29 PM PDT by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies ]

To: BuckeyeTexan; butterdezillion

“Does it give him the authority to decide who to put on the ballot?”

Not exactly. The following is why Gov Brewer supposedly vetoed the bill requiring a birth certificate (although it didn’t really):

“I vetoed HB2177 yesterday and I would like to take a moment to explain why I made that decision.

The bill would have granted sole power to the secretary of state, a county recorder or a city clerk to arbitrarily remove any candidate from the ballot in any federal, state or local election. As a former secretary of state, I do not support designating one person, at their own discretion, as the gatekeeper to determine who can and cannot appear on the ballot, which could lead to arbitrary or politically-motivated decisions in future elections.

Also, the bill would require candidates for President - regardless of gender - to submit various records, including baptismal or circumcision records. I hope that it’s obvious why these type of requirements could be problematic.”

http://www.facebook.com/notes/governor-jan-brewer/why-i-vetoed-hb2177-qualifications-for-federal-state-and-local-elections/10150168321758540

The ARS says, if I have the correct one:

“D. All persons desiring to become a candidate shall file with the nomination paper provided for in subsection A an affidavit which shall be printed in a form prescribed by the secretary of state. The affidavit shall include facts sufficient to show that, other than the residency requirement provided in subsection A, the candidate will be qualified at the time of election to hold the office the person seeks.”

http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/16/00311.htm&Title=16&DocType=ARS

So as I read it, the party or candidate vets themselves, and presents an affidavit with information like birth date & location, etc. I don’t see any sign that primary documents, such as a birth certificate, are required.

I strongly believe they SHOULD be required, but the law doesn’t say that now. It amazes me that I need to show more documentation to get a driver’s license than a candidate for President has to show to get on the ballot...


139 posted on 05/19/2012 2:39:11 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (A conservative can't please a liberal unless he jumps in front of a bus or off of a cliff)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson