It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why I love Arizona! Presidential eligibility requirements

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Game-changer! Arizona to pass 2012 eligibility law


Obama will have to produce birth certificate to run again ________________________________________ Posted: January 25, 2011 7:42 pm Eastern By Bob Unruh © 2011 WorldNetDaily It could be a game-changer. A plan in Arizona to require presidential candidates to prove their eligibility to occupy the Oval Office is approaching critical mass, even though it has just been introduced. The proposal from state Rep. Judy Burges, who carried a similar plan that fell short last year only because of political maneuvering, was introduced yesterday with 16 members of the state Senate as co-sponsors. It needs only 16 votes in the Senate to pass. In the House, there are 25 co-sponsors, with the need for only 31 votes for passage, and Burges told WND that there were several chamber members who confirmed they support the plan and will vote for it, but simply didn't wish to be listed as co-sponsors.

www.wnd.com...


You have to hand it to the state of Arizona. No one will be able to say that Arizona did not do it’s part in trying to enforce the Constitution of the United States, and in reasserting State’s rights under the 10th amendment.

The States are where the battle with the federal government will be fought. It is only through them that enough pressure can be applied to challenge the over reach of the federal government.

I can’t wait to see how this plays out in 2012 if it and other similar measures being investigated in other states passes.

edit on 1/25/2011 by Phedreus because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 08:02 PM
link   
Birthers should get a central line of communication. Maybe having 10 threads on the same topic is helping you all stay confused?
abovetopsecret.com



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 08:21 PM
link   
So birthers think that Arizona is going to vet obamas eligibility? What happened in 2008 when your own senator, John McCain, let him slide into the presidency without a fight about this birther nonsense.

First he's spending millions to hide his LFBC, which birthers claim doesn't exist.
Then his "grandmother" in Kenya claims he was born there, along with a newspaper In Kenya. Granted
those same people who believe this tripe would never trust a Kenyan newspaper for anything else, nor could they even point out Kenya on a map.

This is all just silliness and detracts from obamas goofy policies.

I'll be honest, I don't know where he was born because I wasn't there. But I'll take his word for it because I'm not looking for a conspiracy in everything the man says/does. If he wasn't born in Hawaii then there is a bigger problem then a "foreigner" being president. Mainly the conspiracy of those involved not to vet him properly and let him actually become president.
edit on 25-1-2011 by GeechQuestInfo because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-1-2011 by GeechQuestInfo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by GeechQuestInfo
 


Exactly! That is the crux of the question. Just who did vet him, and if they did know he was not a viable candidate did they conspire to hide that from the American public.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Phedreus
 


Could it just be that he IS a citizen? Do you really think that someone would want all that egg on their face by not properly vetting him? We can all agree that conspiracies are everywhere,
but do you truly believe this is one?

I think this is one of the most unfounded, illogical, down right silly conspiracies I have ever heard.

IMO There is more evidence that aliens are visiting than Obama being an illegal.
edit on 25-1-2011 by GeechQuestInfo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 09:02 PM
link   

First he's spending millions to hide his LFBC, which birthers claim doesn't exist...


How do you know that he's spent millions in lawyer fees?

Before even hearing this it's been extremely obvious to me that he is an illegal, just based on three key points: 1. His constant support of illegals, even as his citizens fight against it (and in doing so he is ignoring the laws of 'his' own country) 2. His aunt is an illegal. 3. His refusal to ever show his birth certificate.

If he must show his BC before running again, I guess he won't be.
edit on 25-1-2011 by Neurolanis because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-1-2011 by Neurolanis because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Neurolanis
 


Your kidding right? He's illegal becuause he supports illegals??? This is a joke. Is everybody who "supports illegals" an illegal themselves? No!

His aunt is illegal so he is? My aunt was born In Germany. Would you believe that I've never even left the USA? Or would I have to show you my BC too?

His refusal to ever show his BC? I've never heard one person In our congress...you know, the one we elected, ask him to show it. I'm guessing because they would be laughed out of office. The only people who ask are the Internet wizards.

While your points are completely illogical, at least they made me laugh. I think I like the original birther points of "he's black", "he's hiding something he doesn't have" "I saw this YouTube video that was just audio of his 'grandma' saying he's from Kenya" rather than your "intelligent" commentary.

And for the record I don't know he's spent millions in legal fees. I don't get those emails. I've just read it on this site enough that it must be true.
edit on 25-1-2011 by GeechQuestInfo because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-1-2011 by GeechQuestInfo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 08:52 PM
link   
reply to post by GeechQuestInfo
 




Your kidding right? He's illegal becuause he supports illegals??? This is a joke. Is everybody who "supports illegals" an illegal themselves? No!


Perhaps you have a reading disability. If you read above you'll see that I pointed out two other very important clues in my decision. It seems extremely obvious to me as an outsider, looking in with a clear mind (without a political bias.)




His aunt is illegal so he is? My aunt was born In Germany. Would you believe that I've never even left the USA? Or would I have to show you my BC too?


No, I have two other important points.




His refusal to ever show his BC? I've never heard one person In our congress...you know, the one we elected, ask him to show it. I'm guessing because they would be laughed out of office. The only people who ask are the Internet wizards.


As he has faced so much criticism over this issue and as he must be an American citizen to be president, then of course his refusing to show it is highly suspicious to say the least. He should have had to have proven his citizenship anyway. If not, since it is law, it would only make sense.

I find your post very strange, as by pointing out that he has (or may have) spent millions in lawyers’ fees would make it look even more obvious. You suggest this point (which you say that you just assumed) and then get defensive of my opinion that he is an illegal. Strange.

No one knows for sure where he was born. All we know is his refusal to prove that he is American. How could you deny that this is highly suspicious? Again, from a clear outside perspective this just looks obvious. That's all I was saying; I never said that I had proof of anything. It's my opinion.
edit on 27-1-2011 by Neurolanis because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Phedreus
 


This will not stick as he is the incumbent which guarantees him on the 2012 ballot and any state who tries to usurp Federal law in this regard can get their Federal aide and funding cut off. The 10th in this case is null and void and is baseless.

How many times must this be said , I'll even use caps so that it can be understood,

OBAMA WAS BORN IN HAWAII IN AUG 1961 MAKING HIM A LEGAL, UNITED STATES CITIZEN BY BIRTHRIGHT THUS ENABLING HIM TO BE THE 44TH POTUS.

IT IS TRUE THAT HE DID LIVE IN KENYA AND INDONESIA BUT AS CERTAIN RULES STATE HIS MOTHER (HIS LEGAL GUARDIAN AND PARENT) NEVER RELINQUISHED EITHER HIS OR HER LEGAL CITIZENSHIP STATUS AS YOU CAN LIVE OUTSIDE OF THE NATION FOR 25 YEARS BUT AS LONG AS YOU DO NOT FILE SOMETHING CALLED A "CITIZENSHIP RELINQUISHMENT" FORM VIA THE US STATE DEPT. YOU RETAIN YOUR LEGAL CITIZENSHIP.

TROLL ALERT, TROLL ALERT, TROLL ALERT. GO AWAY BIRTHER!

edit on 27-1-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Neurolanis
 


Sarah palin spent more than Obama in legal fees during her tome as the Alaskan governor. So is she an illegal as well? How do legal fees and not being a citizen correlate? I guess that's where I'm confused. I'm also confused at the people who claim he uses his defense fees to hide his BC from the public, when those same people claim he doesn't have a BC in the first place. It's all just confusing to me.

I also don't understand How has Obama refused to show his birth certificate to the American populace? The people who speak for us, ie congres, have never asked him to show it. I'm assuming it's because if he was an illegal, this would have been brought up both pre and post election. He would have never been sworn in.

If the president spent his time answering to every single individual and their own loony thoughts nothing would
ever get done, good or bad.

I personally have no answer that will suffice for the birthers. At this point if he ever released it birthers would claim it's a fake. If a video surfaced of him being born with the delivery doctor saying "aloha" to him as they cut the embilical cord, the birthers would say it's fake.

I will say if it does turn out that he's not a citizen, which it won't, bit if it did you can blame:

a) Hilary Clinton and her staff for not telling the public during the primary.
B) John McCain and his staff for not telling the public during the election.

I'd be much more receptive to the birther idea if they would display some sort of evidence rather than just "I can tell he's illegal because he black". Remember, in court, lack of evidence is not evidence. Just because you can't google obamas birth certificate does not mean he doesn't have one. Try googling your own BC and tell me if you can find it posted on the interwebs. I'll give you a hint, you can't do it!
edit on 27-1-2011 by GeechQuestInfo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by GeechQuestInfo
 


You just said you would take his word for it? really? A politicians word at that? Like if he was not born here he would admit it.
haha.

I think the whole BC thing has more than meets they eye to it, I dont really think its about where he was born, but what he is hiding(maybe both).

You dont spend that much money to fight something that is mandated by the Constitution if you werent lying about it in the first place.


You know, if some of you people fight corruption as much as you fight birthers,issues would get solved, and this world might actually be a better place.
...Just a thought.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:29 AM
link   
Here we go, it's World Net Daily again.


Originally posted by Phedreus
You have to hand it to the state of Arizona. No one will be able to say that Arizona did not do it’s part in trying to enforce the Constitution of the United States,


And what was that? As far as I understand:

Eligibility of the president is left up to congress:
www.usconstitution.net...

We have the Full faith and Credit clause from Article IV, Section 1 of the constitution. This Arizona law, hypothetically if it passed, would conflict.

In addition to the fact that the consitution mentions nothing about original birth certificates.


I can’t wait to see how this plays out in 2012


Buddy don't set yourself up.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:44 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Easy answer. Obama was elected without Arizona's 10 electoral votes in 2008. Odds are that he could get by without them again. Could he simply decide not be on Arizona's ballot and proclaim it is a personal decision due to the his dislike of Arizona's laws on illegal immigrants that takes Federal jurisdiction in its own hands that is unresolved?

Politics is the art of telling believable lies after all. The rest of the world is still convinced that Obamacare is UHC and not the mandatory purchase of insurance policies.



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Phedreus
 


Obama has had the same level of vetting any other president has faced.

Why is this only a question for Obama?



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 07:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Common Good
 


You're right I'll take his word. Not only his word, but the word of all those involved. That would also include his opposition in 2008, because they didn't drab on about this.

And where is your proof he spent money defending this other than the emails you recieve? Someone got his legal defense fees and twisted it to say he's hiding his BC. Guess what? Every single politician, or anyone in the public eye, has defense council because there are nuts out there that file baseless lawsuits against them daily.

Fight corruption? How many city council meetings have you been to? I go to the austin city council at least once a month, usually more. I've also been to two legislative sessions this year. Guess how many people were there? 15. Fighting corruption is not done on the Internet.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by GeechQuestInfo
 


It depends on what he was paying his lawyers to do with him. I don't know. I was hoping that this question could be established.

A lof of people have been asking him to prove that he is American. It's been a big issue, if you haven't noticed.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Neurolanis
reply to post by GeechQuestInfo
 


It depends on what he was paying his lawyers to do with him. I don't know. I was hoping that this question could be established.


Heres a clue, of the 73 birther lawsuits, there was only a representitive for Obama present in 3 of them. What's more Obama is not constitutionally nor lawfully obligated to release further documents, so what would he need to spend money on if he is not required?


A lof of people have been asking him to prove that he is American. It's been a big issue,


It is not a big issue, hence only 0.13% of the population signed that WND petition.
edit on 28-1-2011 by Southern Guardian because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join