Close
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 35
  1. #1
    Iceman sniper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    16,987

    Default "birther" bill in arizona gets vetoed.

    http://www.aolnews.com/2011/04/18/ar.../?ncid=webmail

    PHOENIX -- Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer on Monday vetoed a bill that would have required President Barack Obama and other presidential candidates to prove their U.S. citizenship before their names could appear on the state's ballot.

    The bill would have made Arizona the first state to pass such a requirement. Opponents had warned the bill would give another black eye to Arizona after last year's controversy over the state's illegal immigration enforcement law.

    Brewer said in her veto letter that she was troubled that the bill empowered Arizona's secretary of state to judge the qualifications of all candidates when they file to run for office.

    "I do not support designating one person as the gatekeeper to the ballot for a candidate, which could lead to arbitrary or politically motivated decisions," said Brewer, who was secretary of state until she became governor in 2009.


    Susan Walsh, AP
    Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer said, "I do not support designating one person as the gatekeeper to the ballot for a candidate, which could lead to arbitrary or politically motivated decisions."

    "In addition, I never imagined being presented with a bill that could require candidates for president of the greatest and most powerful nation on Earth to submit their 'early baptismal circumcision certificates' among other records to the Arizona secretary of state," she said. "This is a bridge too far."

    The certificates were among the documents a candidate could have submitted under the bill in place of a birth certificate.

    So-called "birthers" claim there's no proof Obama was born in the United States, and he is therefore ineligible to be president. But Hawaii officials have certified Obama was born in that state.

    The U.S. Constitution requires that presidential candidates be "natural-born" U.S. citizens, be at least 35 years old, and be a resident of the United States for at least 14 years. Opponents questioned whether Arizona's bill would have added additional requirements.

    The measure would have required that political parties and presidential candidates hand in affidavits stating a candidate's citizenship and age. It also would have required the candidate's birth certificate and a sworn statement saying where the candidate has lived for 14 years.

    If candidates didn'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.

    If it couldn't be determined whether candidates who provided documents in place of their birth certificates were eligible to appear on the ballot, the secretary of state would have been able to set up a committee to help determine whether the requirements were met. The names of candidates could be kept off the ballot if the secretary of state didn't believe the candidates met the citizenship requirement.

    The bill didn't explicitly provide an appeals process for a candidate whose name was kept off the ballot.

    The bill's sponsor, Republican Rep. Carl Seel of Phoenix, declined immediate comment on Monday's veto. But he previously said that the president's birth record wouldn't satisfy the requirements of his proposal and that Obama would have to provide other records, such as baptismal certificates and hospital records.

    The measure, however, wasn't intended as a swipe against the president -- it was meant to maintain the integrity of elections, Seel said.
    All I have in this world is my balls and my word and I don't break em for no one.

    My Feedback

  2. #2
    QUITTER Irving's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    46,527
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Weird that this happened.
    "There are no finger prints under water."

  3. #3
    Fallen Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Smyrna, GA
    Posts
    6,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sniper7 View Post
    Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer said, "I do not support designating one person as the gatekeeper to the ballot for a candidate, which could lead to arbitrary or politically motivated decisions."
    Yeah, lets not call into question the laws of this nation and we sure as shit wouldnt want to embarrass anyone by making them prov that they are eligible under lawe to attain the office for which they are running!

    Fuck we would also have to oust current politicians that are harboring known criminals!

  4. #4
    Iceman sniper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    16,987

    Default

    After reading her viewpoint I kind of agree with her. While I think proof should be given one of it was in excess and it needs to be at the federal level before they can even try to run.
    All I have in this world is my balls and my word and I don't break em for no one.

    My Feedback

  5. #5
    Fallen Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Smyrna, GA
    Posts
    6,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sniper7 View Post
    After reading her viewpoint I kind of agree with her. While I think proof should be given one of it was in excess and it needs to be at the federal level before they can even try to run.

    I Completely agree.
    Lets sit and wait for the Federal Government to fix it!















  6. #6
    65 yard Hail Mary
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Parker CO
    Posts
    2,981

    Default

    Maybe I'm missing something here, but why the fawk do we have to pass legislation about things that our Constitution already makes pretty damn clear?

    Quote Originally Posted by United States Constitution
    No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President

  7. #7
    Fallen Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Smyrna, GA
    Posts
    6,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mcantar18c View Post
    Maybe I'm missing something here, but why the fawk do we have to pass legislation about things that our Constitution already makes pretty damn clear?

    because no one is paying attention at the Federal Level
    Much Like the "immigration reform" that the Feds are suing AZ over that basically reiterates the Federal Law.

  8. #8
    Guest
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Parker
    Posts
    103

    Default

    Somebody got to her. Made her an offer she couldn't refuse.

  9. #9
    Iceman sniper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    16,987

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FL410 View Post
    Somebody got to her. Made her an offer she couldn't refuse.
    Or as I was thinking of last night someone told her it would be political and possibly real life suicide. I wonder the same thing about the birth certificate issue in hawaii.
    All I have in this world is my balls and my word and I don't break em for no one.

    My Feedback

  10. #10
    Iceman sniper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    16,987

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Byte Stryke View Post
    Yeah, lets not call into question the laws of this nation and we sure as shit wouldnt want to embarrass anyone by making them prov that they are eligible under lawe to attain the office for which they are running!

    Fuck we would also have to oust current politicians that are harboring known criminals!
    Most of the politicians are criminals themselves. How many if obamas elected were tax evaders? I remember at least 3!
    All I have in this world is my balls and my word and I don't break em for no one.

    My Feedback

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •