Ariz. passes 'birther bill' aimed at Obama

PHOENIX - The Arizona Legislature gave final approval Thursday to a proposal that would require President Barack Obama and other presidential candidates to prove they are U.S. citizens before their names can appear on the state's ballot.

Arizona would become the first state to require such proof if Gov. Jan Brewer signs the measure into law.

ca.news.yahoo.com...

Wild. Never thought thought it'd get this far.

Who pays 2 million in lawyer fees to cover up a "non-issue"? lol.

I think this is more for future elections,

then Obama, the one that got away. . .

Great find S+F my friend

S&F for the find... Judging by quick google search, it seems as though other states are showing interest. States such as Montana, Texas, Georgia, Nebraska. Confirm?

I wish we could start moving birther discussions to the hoax forum. But, I feel that does them more justice than they deserve.

According to the Arizona legislature anyone with a birth certificate is eligible. Unless you're a Christian or a Jewish man, then you don't need a birth certificate at all.

If candidates don't have a copy of their birth certificates, they could meet the requirement by providing baptismal or circumcision certificates, hospital birth records and other documents.

Read more: www.foxnews.com...

Bless your heart Arizona... what if the candidate is a Jewish woman..?

Originally posted by CanadianDream420

PHOENIX - The Arizona Legislature gave final approval Thursday to a proposal that would require President Barack Obama and other presidential candidates to prove they are U.S. citizens before their names can appear on the state's ballot.

Arizona would become the first state to require such proof if Gov. Jan Brewer signs the measure into law.

ca.news.yahoo.com...

Wild. Never thought thought it'd get this far.

Who pays 2 million in lawyer fees to cover up a "non-issue"? lol.

No one as Obama did not pay a thing to cover anything up as there is nothing to cover up.

What is it, we get like 4 threads debunked and disproven back to back to back and yet someone other idiot comes forth trying to keep this fire going.

Originally posted by ThaLoccster
I wish we could start moving birther discussions to the hoax forum. But, I feel that does them more justice than they deserve.

I just started a thread in "Board business" forum asking if they can be transferred there as they've been disproven time and time again.

And just to add, nothing was "passed".

The house approved it. It now goes to the senate where it will be pointed and laughed at, then denied.

Originally posted by ThaLoccster
I wish we could start moving birther discussions to the hoax forum. But, I feel that does them more justice than they deserve.

I wish we could start deleting post that don't believe the birth certificate discussion is important but this would leave the trolls idle and as you know "idle trolls are the devils workshop...."

reply to post by CanadianDream420


Obama has essentially told Arizona to pound sand and overtly implied that the state is filled with racists. The feds have sued the state and Obama has been publically rude to the governor.

What goes around comes around. The states have the constitutional right to oversee federal elections within their jurisdiction. He'll provide the legitimate materials or he won't get on the ballot and there are 10 other states that will have similar laws by the time the election rolls around.

Its brilliant. What is he to do but comply? This "I don't want to" or "I've already done it" just ain't going to fly". If he does have the legitimate documentation, folks are just going to look at him like he's a total tool for dragging this business out when it could have been resolved and resolved to everyone's satisfaction in about 2 hours.

McCain’s likely nomination as the Republican candidate for president and the happenstance of his birth in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936 are reviving a musty debate that has surfaced periodically since the founders first set quill to parchment and declared that only a “natural-born citizen” can hold the nation’s highest office.

Remember this?
What about this then?
Not that I like McCain or Obama but this seems to be getting beyond what the original idea was for.

NYTimes

reply to post by CanadianDream420

Who cares who the president is any way?
The government isnt on our side.
We might do better with one from mexico anyway.

reply to post by Caji316


Since I believe its a non issue that is dividing the country and keeping people from focusing on the real issues.

Since I believe that the evidence has been brought forth that legitimately answers "birther" nonsense, I mean questions.

I guess I'm the troll you're referring to.

As well as all of Congress.

Originally posted by CanadianDream420

Wild. Never thought thought it'd get this far.

Who pays 2 million in lawyer fees to cover up a "non-issue"? lol.

I don't know ...who? The President didn't.

This is where you cite the WND article.

And this is where I point out the reality that the number they refer to is the amount the Obama campaign paid thier Campaign Attorneys over the two year election cycle...none of which went toward this silly issue.

As far as this waste of legislation...it is nothing more than a reach around by AZ pols for the far right. The bill includes a clause where if the "original" copy of the birth certificate is unavailable they can have a committe reveiw the documentation provided and certify it.

Originally posted by ThaLoccster
reply to post by Caji316

 

Since I believe its a non issue that is dividing the country and keeping people from focusing on the real issues.

Since I believe that the evidence has been brought forth that legitimately answers "birther" nonsense, I mean questions.

I guess I'm the troll you're referring to.

As well as all of Congress.

Oh yes, and Congress never engage in lying or cover ups....they always do their job scrupulously and never agree to Bills which they haven't even read..... I mean Congress aren't on the receiving end of handouts from the corporations, banks and puppeteers, are they? So one can really use Congress's integrity to back up one's argument.

reply to post by wcitizen


Actually I can use it.

Since the majority of birthers want Congress to do something about it, to launch investigations etc...

But since Congress has recognized him as being born in Hawaii thats counter productive to what birthers want.

So now Congress can't be trusted, so which is it. Either you want them to investigate, and you will accept their results.

Or you are a child, and you won't accept any answer that is given to you. No matter what is done there will always be a "well what about this then...."

Originally posted by ThaLoccster
And just to add, nothing was "passed".

The house approved it. It now goes to the senate where it will be pointed and laughed at, then denied.

The State Legislature passed it, now all that has to happen is Governor Brewer has to sign it. That equals State Law. Too easy....now if some other States jump on board Obama will be done!

Well, since I like to go to the source...here is the bill.
H.B. 2177

According to the bill, which has passed both Arizona State Senate and House, states the following:

(Caps are from the bill itself, sorry)

...SHALL SUBMIT AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE IN WHICH THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE STATES THE CANDIDATE'S CITIZENSHIP AND AGE AND SHALL APPEND TO THE AFFIDAVIT DOCUMENTS THAT PROVE THAT THE CANDIDATE IS A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, PROVE THE CANDIDATE'S AGE AND PROVE THAT THE CANDIDATE MEETS THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AS PRESCRIBED IN ARTICLE II, SECTION 1, CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.

First, we examine this section. This is basically just the setup to what the affidavit must include and how it pertains to the Constitution. They include all the requirements, so it is not just about where the person is born.

A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE'S LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE THAT INCLUDES AT LEAST THE DATE AND PLACE OF BIRTH, THE NAMES OF THE HOSPITAL AND THE ATTENDING PHYSICIAN, IF APPLICABLE, AND SIGNATURES OF ANY WITNESSES IN ATTENDANCE.

Here is the meat. It is the primary test that the Arizona Secretary of State uses to determine eligibility of the candidate. Really, it is what the Secretary should already be doing, this just puts it into law. But what if a person cannot obtain their long form birth certificate? Well, they have addressed that.

According to the bill, there are a number of different means to prove your citizenship, age and residency requirements. Your affidavit must include at least two of the following:

(a) EARLY BAPTISMAL OR CIRCUMCISION CERTIFICATE.
(b) HOSPITAL BIRTH RECORD.
(c) POSTPARTUM MEDICAL RECORD FOR THE MOTHER OR CHILD SIGNED BY THE DOCTOR OR MIDWIFE OR THE PERSON WHO DELIVERED OR EXAMINED THE CHILD AFTER BIRTH.
(d) EARLY CENSUS RECORD.

....A SWORN STATEMENT OR FORM THAT IDENTIFIES THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE'S PLACES OF RESIDENCE IN THE UNITED STATES FOR FOURTEEN YEARS. IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SUBSECTION B, THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE MAY ALSO SUBMIT A NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT FROM TWO OR MORE PERSONS WHO WITNESSED THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE'S BIRTH.

Pretty reasonable and even with the 'birther' movement, I am sure that the president will be able to meet those requirements. As he already has item #2, which he has given proof of his birth. I am sure there is a census record or even a medical record that will serve as the second, if President Obama cannot produce the long form.

If by chance the Arizona Secretary of State cannot verify with these additional documents, they are authorized to establish a committee to determine the validity and authenticity of such documents. I personally think if a state has such a bill, that it should not be left to just the Secretary of State and should involve a committee to begin with.

I find it amusing that people are honing in just one of the additional methods of proving age and birth place; that being the baptismal and/or circumcision certificates. I would be right there with you IF the additional information did not have to have at least two forms.

An example:

I am going to run for president. Now, I cannot for the life of me find nor obtain my long form birth certificate. Idaho, my place of birth is claiming they don't have it. From there, I would obtain my short form, which is my birth record and I would present my circumcision certificate. With those TWO pieces of evidence, I present them with sworn statements on their authenticity and present them to the Secretary of State.

I really don't see a problem with a state formalizing the process and giving some cover, especially since this has been some fascination with people. It would quiet probably a vast amount of people that may not be as intent as 'birthers', but have questions and it would give those who look at the 'birthers' as people just wanting to make an issue out of nothing ammo to shut the debate down.

1. I've posted before and I'll say it now that, opinions on his administration aside, I believe Obama to be a natural-born citizen. His mother was a citizen, which means even if he was born in Kenya, the U.S. considers him a citizen. That should be the end of it.

2. I think this bill is fine and dandy. It is Constitutional, it is just, and it is fair. It will treat all candidates equally, regardless of race, creed, gender, species, whatever. If you can prove you are a natural-born citizen, you can be on the ballot. If you can't, you can't.

Good job, Arizona! I just hope other states follow suit.

/TOA