Georgia Now Looks To Duplicate Arizona "Birther" Law

Republican behind Georgia ‘birther’ bill denies he’s a birther

Republican legislators in Georgia are following their counterparts' lead in Arizona and proposing a law that would force President Obama and all other future presidential candidates to prove their citizenship before being registered to run in the state.

But in a strange twist, state Rep. Mark Hatfield, the lead sponsor of the bill, says he's not a a believer in the "birther" theory even though he believes -- contrary to available evidence -- that the public has never been provided with proper documentation of the president's place of birth.

Under Hatfield's legislation, each presidential candidate running in Georgia to file an affidavit swearing that the candidate is a natural born citizen of the United States, reports Jim Galloway at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

...when asked by channel 11 if he considered himself a birther, Hatfield said, "No, I wouldn't say that at all. I'm simply a citizen who is concerned, to make sure that the Constitution is upheld and enforced."
"So you don't know one way or the other whether he is a citizen of the United States?" reporter John Shirek asked. "Well, of course not," Hatfield replied. "I have not been given any sort of proof, one way or the other."

rawstory.com...

I do not consider myself a "birther" either, but this just will not die. Either the Republicans are really grasping at straws or maybe there really is something to this....


[edit on 22-4-2010 by webpirate]

reply to post by webpirate


Excellent find! S&F!
To have such prominent people, intellectuals, and successful business people, to continue this effort, would indicate to me that there much more here to be revealed, than what has been disclosed.

I'm not a fan of Obama, but I'm not a birther either.

I think that this law can have some positive outcome for the future. I think if this type of situation arises in the future.. "birther" claims will be even more outrageous if there are checkpoints in the states too.

he is probably qualified to be pres, but there are things in his records and past that NO ONE wants to come out now.

reply to post by webpirate


So essentially it will be the same bill that it will require the Arizonan secretary state to verify a birth certificate from another state?

And tell me, will this bill be as flawed as the Arizonan one in which is does not disinguish the difference between the long form and short form birth certificates that birthers continue to argue about? You do know that with the Arizonan birther bill, the presidents current birth certificate he presented would be accepted? If say the president presented his short form in Arizona and it was 'accepted' would birthers put up and shut up? Same for Georgia? I dont think so, which leads me to believe the bill is another waste of money and time, and another benefit to pandering politicians over the matter.

In anycase from the constitution the eligibility of the president is left to the Electoral college, congress and the house speaker on December 15th confirmation day. The states have no constitutional authority to dictate the eligibility of the president unless these bills are somehow ammended into the constitution.

So from the above, the entire birther bill fiasco is a waste. The again the southern state politicians benefit from this this well don't they? Just pretend as if you give a damn, pass a bill that panders to birthers even though its a complete waste, as there you have it! More votes for the 2010 state by state elections!

reply to post by Southern Guardian


SG, what are your thoughts on this: should the citizens of these states have a say as to whether their state should jump on this silly bandwagon? Should state citizens be able to vote on this?

Im not a birther but look to this as a good way to shut everybody up finally. The guy produced a birth cert and hawaii verified it, plain and simple. Personally tho, there should have been checkpoints like these laws in place way long ago when the requirements were made for a president to be president. I dont like the guy one bit and think that he is just using the "birther" arguement to his advantage like the ole look here while i smack you upside the head with the other hand thing lol.

I think that this is another issue of states responding to the inaction of the federal government in areas that the Constitution prescribes as the authority & responsibility of the federal government.

States right now have no say in the federal Government because their voice (the 2 senators every state has that was until the 1920s(?)was appointed by the state legislature) was taken away when they made Senators directly elected by the people.

Pass a federal law that requires the states to fund it? Not a problem when the states can't say "no" because they have no vote.

Its sad to say but I think State's Rights issues are coming to the forefront again. Last time that happened, we had the bloodiest and most deadly war in America. (That's the Civil War under 30ers).

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

SG, what are your thoughts on this: should the citizens of these states have a say as to whether their state should jump on this silly bandwagon? Should state citizens be able to vote on this?

Obviously not. Aside from the constitution specifically leaving that job to the electors and Congress, the idea is not pratically. Essentially 50 states to verify the presidents eligibility. Essentially you'll be getting states to verify other states birth certifications, you'll open this up to 'politics' as usual. I can't imagine the amount of conservative or liberal states blocking off confirmation of the president over some silly eligibility suit when most states confirm.

In anycase states do have the opportunity to confirm the eligibility of the president through the part convention confirmation and the presidential confirmations.

reply to post by indianajoe77


Whats so sad about state's right coming to the forefront? I believe in states rights to the fullest. Somebody from Arizona or California or New York even cant tell me how to live and vice versa yet those people are the ones that make the rules now a days and they supercede the states whether those states like them or not. Its a classic case of somebody thinkin they know better then I do about what I want and need and it really needs to stop.

To me, the federal government is only trully usefull to protect us from foreign nations. I cant really name another use for the federal government in all honesty when the state can make their own rules. Why do we have to have 2 masters?

Originally posted by indianajoe77

Its sad to say but I think State's Rights issues are coming to the forefront again. Last time that happened, we had the bloodiest and most deadly war in America. (That's the Civil War under 30ers).

I don't think it's anywhere close to that. Realistically, if McCain had won these states wouldn't care about the birth certificates. It's basically pandering to a group of Republican voters whom are upset over the person in the White House, not over state rights. More or less, the angry white conservative males.

This is so simple. If the Constitution requires a President to be a natural born citizen, and be at least 35 years old, the States should make sure any candidate appearing on their ballot meet those qualifications.

The founding fathers knew one day a foreigner would try to ruin this country from the inside. That foreigner is Barack Hussein Obama.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Thanks for the reply. I'm aware the process is completed upon qualifying to run for the Presidency, and results should be acceptable to states.

On second thought, the majority in those states would likely agree with this action by their state governments even it was put to a vote. Oh well.
Just a thought.

reply to post by Kaploink


But see, there are other issues involving states rights that are coming up, not just this.

An example is another Arizona law on immigration. They passed it mainly because the Federal Government has not lived up to their responsibility of protecting the border.

There are also unfunded Government madated programs that the States are forced to pay for whether they like it or not.

How dare those Peanut eaters do something before us Orange Suckers do it. where is the pride in being Third.
2nd line

We don't need any new laws to deal with this situation. We have existing laws that are not being enforced or allowed to be investigated properly. Obama's two million dollar attempt to keep secrets from the American public is how important it is to Obama to keep the secrets, secret.

We have all the laws we need to deal with this issue. What we don't have is anyone willing to do so because of course who wants to fight a dragon with broom when a Hellfire missile is needed? No one of a normal mind wants to confront the Obama regime in a legal manner that forces the issue.

Those that have are already attempted such a move have been demonized and labeled birthers. Calling people names and using executive orders to hide the truth is in affect an obstruction of justice.

As I stated earlier, we already have the laws to confront this Obama dilemma, but if no one has the courage or the means to fight the Obama regime, then as we have seen, nothing will happen.

The States that are imposing such stupid laws ignore the existing laws and only confuse the public with all the lies and deception because if we already have the laws we don't need any new laws to do what is needed to find out the truth of Obama and what he is hiding that is so important for him to hide. We only need someone to enforce the laws for the benefit of Americans that deserve the truth of the matter.

Thanks for the posting.