Jan Brewer vetoes Arizona’s “Birther bill”

posted at 10:02 pm on April 18, 2011 by Allahpundit

Not the only veto she issued tonight, either. She also rejected a bill that would have allowed people to carry guns on state college campuses on grounds that it was “poorly written.” Not a total surprise given the political climate in the state after Gabby Giffords’s shooting, but a mild surprise given the grassroots conservative cred Brewer built for herself by championing Arizona’s immigration law.

This one’s a genuine surprise, though.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer on Monday vetoed a bill to require President Barack Obama and other presidential candidates to prove their U.S. citizenship before their names can appear on the state’s ballot…

“I do not support designating one person [i.e. the secretary of state] 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.

“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.”

I’m guessing there’s some local political angle that explains this, but I can’t figure out what it is and some furious googling reveals nothing. Any Arizonans willing and able to explain? She just started her new term so electoral politics is immaterial. Is there some core agenda item that she needs Democratic help to pass? Or is she trying to build goodwill with Obama for better cooperation on immigration? Or, just maybe, did she genuinely believe that the bill was stupid and embarrassing to Arizona? All theories welcome.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Not so fast. If “standing” works to prevent anyone from challenging man-child’s eligibility, standing will also work to limit who can challenge the law. Since that would be Obama, he would have to face the political danger of challenging it, (Making people wonder why he refuses to show the document to the secretary of the state who’s discretion could be counted on if it is a question of “embarrassing” information on it) and the legal danger that the Judge would demand to see his original.

All the Governor had to do was set these events in motion. For some peculiar reason (and her stated reasons are stone cold idiocy) she decided not to do the right thing.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 9:03 AM

You’re missing the salient point that these judges are nothing but political hacks. They do whatever they want (see Sumi). By the time the case got appealed Obama will have already assumed orifice and the press will be coming down hard on the appeals courts.

fossten on April 19, 2011 at 9:08 AM

This is absolutely insane. Why the *#$%&* would anyone in their right mind without some hidden agenda not support this? dave_ross on April 19, 2011 at 7:55 AM

Why? Because the GOP has learned to like bending over.

Shay on April 19, 2011 at 9:12 AM

This proud Arizonan (and Tucsonan) didn’t support Jan Brewer early in the Primary. Mainly because she supported (and got) a 1% sales tax increase to help balance the budget. However, she did such a great job defending the state from attacks after SB1070 passed, you can’t help but love her.

Still, as we are seeing here, her Conservative credentials can definitely be questioned. Vetoing the so called “birther bill” isn’t as bad as vetoing allowing guns on college campuses. How badly written could it be? If you have a college campus as a gun free zone, only the criminals will have them.

Jan Brewer is a great person and defends Arizona well on Fox News, but some of her decisions have me somewhat frustrated.

Ordinary1 on April 19, 2011 at 9:14 AM

Arizona WILL accept the CORRECT document from Hawaii. One that HAS NOT BEEN AMENDED.

An Amended document is proof of nothing.

The ONLY possible way to know that a document HAS NOT BEEN AMENDED is to see the original, with the signature of the witness to the birth.

Hawaii HAS such a document. The Candidate can present it, or he can refuse to present it.

There is no full faith and credit violation, there is only an instance of one little @sshole playing everyone for chumps by producing a document that cannot prove anything.

If Arizona HAD passed the bill, and IF the little man-child @sshole decided to fight it, I bet the defense could get the judge to order the original be brought forth.

Obama would lose this fight no matter how it went down.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 8:59 AM

While I appreciate your passion, you are wrong on the law, sorry. HI Law is clear the COLB is the instrument designated by state law to demonstrate certification of birth. From a government perspective is makes perfect sense, the relevant information is contained within the COLB. You not liking their law or the political implications is irrelevant.

I’m trying to think of how to get you to understand… Article IV, Section 1 It says each state will respect the other states claims “out” not apply your own standards to their certifications.

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 9:15 AM

It is obvious the governor has been shown the error of her ways by someone and has “gotten her mind right” as the camp warden in the movie Cool Hand Luke was fond of saying.

devolvingtowardsidiocracy on April 19, 2011 at 9:16 AM

Section 1 – Each State to Honor all others

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

I think that not all states recognize marriage between first cousins as valid, although a few do (or used to). And a friend of mine learned first hand that a child custody degree issued by one state did not always hold up in other states – which required sometime in the 80′s or 90′s the federal passage of a uniform child custody act – but I believe there are still some states that haven’t agreed to it. FF&C seems to have its limits.

Shay on April 19, 2011 at 9:25 AM

I really wish the right would drop this bullsh!t. We have a million other, more advantageous angles of attack with which to hit this president, and we wanna go blabbing on about him being a super secret fake citizen from Kenya.

blatantblue on April 19, 2011 at 9:30 AM

I’m surprised no one at HotAir has accused him of being a Super Sekret Mooselimb, lately.

blatantblue on April 19, 2011 at 9:35 AM

So Jan blinked.

The question is what deal Jan Brewer is attempting to make with the Obama administration regarding their current legality impasse.

maverick muse on April 19, 2011 at 8:28 AM

Did you read the Bill? Do you think it is a good one? I wonder. So one more time…The bill does not make the long form or any form of birth certificate the only accepted proof. It allows for all kinds of so-called documents to be used. And yes it is important not to allow one person to make the final decision. Would you be happy if the SOS were a far Left Dem? This bill really doesn’t do much at all.

AND ATTACHMENT OF ALL OF THE FOLLOWING, WHICH SHALL BE From the bill…SWORN TO UNDER
22 PENALTY OF PERJURY:
23 1. A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE’S LONG FORM BIRTH
24 CERTIFICATE THAT INCLUDES AT LEAST THE DATE AND PLACE OF BIRTH, THE NAMES OF
25 THE HOSPITAL AND THE ATTENDING PHYSICIAN, IF APPLICABLE, AND SIGNATURES OF
26 ANY WITNESSES IN ATTENDANCE. IF THE CANDIDATE DOES NOT POSSESS A LONG FORM
27 BIRTH CERTIFICATE AS REQUIRED BY THIS PARAGRAPH, THE CANDIDATE MAY ATTACH TWO
28 OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS THAT SHALL TAKE THE PLACE OF THE LONG FORM
29 BIRTH CERTIFICATE
IF THE CANDIDATE SWEARS TO THEIR AUTHENTICITY AND VALIDITY30 AND THE DOCUMENTS CONTAIN ENOUGH INFORMATION FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE TO
31 DETERMINE IF THE CANDIDATE MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS PRESCRIBED IN ARTICLE II,
32 SECTION 1, CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES:
33 (a) EARLY BAPTISMAL OR CIRCUMCISION CERTIFICATE.
34 (b) HOSPITAL BIRTH RECORD.
35 (c) POSTPARTUM MEDICAL RECORD FOR THE MOTHER OR CHILD SIGNED BY THE
36 DOCTOR OR MIDWIFE OR THE PERSON WHO DELIVERED OR EXAMINED THE CHILD AFTER
37 BIRTH.
38 (d) EARLY CENSUS RECORD.
39 2. A SWORN STATEMENT OR FORM THAT IDENTIFIES THE PRESIDENTIAL
40 CANDIDATE’S PLACES OF RESIDENCE IN THE UNITED STATES FOR FOURTEEN YEARS.
41 C. IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SUBSECTION B, THE PRESIDENTIAL
42 CANDIDATE MAY ALSO SUBMIT A NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT FROM TWO OR MORE PERSONS WHO
43 WITNESSED THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE’S BIRTH.

Deanna on April 18, 2011 at 11:46 PM

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 9:36 AM

I really wish the right would drop this bullsh!t.

This is what you call adhering to the Constitution and wanting to have a legal way to kick out this usurper immediately?

theaddora on April 19, 2011 at 9:36 AM

Oh well, strike AZ off the list of sensible-leaning states.

Besides Texas, who is left, I need options here, people.

Bishop on April 19, 2011 at 9:37 AM

Maybe she doesn’t want Obama reelected. Besides being able to point at the GOP birthers and saying you don’t want those paranoid idiots to control the government, what else can Obama run on? His economy and foreign policy are disasters. What remains to him is demonizing the GOP. I’m appalled at the idiots who are handing him his re-election.

thuja on April 19, 2011 at 9:02 AM

If you’re making up excuses, one is as good as another. I personally think her reasons have more to do with the social circles she hangs out in than anything else. Among the “upper crust” Rockefeller wing of the Republican party, anything such as verifying the eligibility of a High Social Status “Haavad” graduate is simply too boorish to contemplate.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 9:37 AM

Sorry forgot to copy the link…http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/50leg/1r/bills/hb2177s.pdf
Read the darn bill folks. It’s worthless if you want the long form birth certificate as the only form acceptable. A complete waste of time!

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 9:39 AM

Oh well, strike AZ off the list of sensible-leaning states.

Besides Texas, who is left, I need options here, people.

Bishop on April 19, 2011 at 9:37 AM

Did you read the bill?

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 9:40 AM

Suffice it to say OBAMA and his re-election team are not likely to be happy with this decision. They would like nothing better than to make his birth certificate the key issue of 2012.

But for conservatives/GOP to have a good chance of unseating him, the only issue front and center should be his dismal 4-year record and horrendous policies.

TheRightMan on April 19, 2011 at 9:46 AM

Shay on April 19, 2011 at 9:25 AM

I’m sure you are right, there are some limits/exceptions to FF&C. I would not claim to know every permutation of those exceptions.

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 9:46 AM

I really wish the right would drop this bullsh!t. We have a million other, more advantageous angles of attack with which to hit this president, and we wanna go blabbing on about him being a super secret fake citizen from Kenya.

blatantblue on April 19, 2011 at 9:30 AM

But we have no candidate with even an apparently sure shot at beating him.

fossten on April 19, 2011 at 9:50 AM

Suffice it to say OBAMA and his re-election team are not likely to be happy with this decision. They would like nothing better than to make his birth certificate the key issue of 2012.

But for conservatives/GOP to have a good chance of unseating him, the only issue front and center should be his dismal 4-year record and horrendous policies.

TheRightMan on April 19, 2011 at 9:46 AM

We have been played by Obama and compnay on this bill. The bill Brewer vetoed was changed into this worthless piece of paper in committee. The Left knew Brewer would veto it because it is worthless. And the Obama fans counted on us all being too lazy to read the actual bill. They hoped we would just accept the MSM headlines and criticize Brewer. Unfortunaely it appears they were right…we were played by the Dems…again.

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 9:54 AM

We have been played by Obama and compnay on this bill. The bill Brewer vetoed was changed into this worthless piece of paper in committee. The Left knew Brewer would veto it because it is worthless. And the Obama fans counted on us all being too lazy to read the actual bill. They hoped we would just accept the MSM headlines and criticize Brewer. Unfortunaely it appears they were right…we were played by the Dems…again.

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 9:54 AM

You had me until the last line.

There are some lazy people on the right, who will accept talking points when they are given, but this is their own fault. The Dems have nothing to do with it. And the truth always comes out.

fossten on April 19, 2011 at 9:58 AM

But for conservatives/GOP to have a good chance of unseating him, the only issue front and center should be his dismal 4-year record and horrendous policies.

TheRightMan on April 19, 2011 at 9:46 AM

I disagree completely. The issue that SHOULD have been a crossing the Rubicon moment in 2008, is STILL the issue that needs to be addressed.

We are either A Constitutional Republic or we are not. If we are not, then I don’t care to hide the fact.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 10:04 AM

But we have no candidate with even an apparently sure shot at beating him.

fossten on April 19, 2011 at 9:50 AM

ANY candidate that is eligible beats ANY candidate that is not.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 10:05 AM

Agreed that the full faith and credit clause means that a state has to accept the validity of a document but does that mean that each state gets to decide what documents to share? If Hawaii has a “long form” then Arizona must respect it, on that we all agree. If Hawaii refuses to share the document that it has or declines to share the records available then why should Arizona have to accept an inferior substitute? If this was a murder trial and Arizona requested that a suspect be delivered by extradition for trial would it be sufficient for Hawaii to deliver a letter stating that they had examined the subject and determined the innocence of the party?

I am not a Birther and think that there are more likely grounds to challenge Obama’s status as a natural born citizen based on his possibly having traveled on a foreign passport after his 18th birthday or having claimed foreign nationality on his school applications or financial aid forms.

We have now identified a serious hole in our constitutional system that will be exploited in the future even if Obama had not done anything wrong. My suggestion is that 120 days prior to the meeting of the Electoral College each state submit a list of 5 names for each office, President and Vice President, with supporting documentation as they deem sufficient, to the Supreme Court. If there are any questions the Chief Justice may request additional documentation. The Chief Justice should no later than 60 days before the Electoral College assembles send a certification to the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate (the current VP) listing all qualified candidates and noting those who had been disqualified and the grounds for such action. The Congress should then promulgate that list, and may restore names to it if they so choose, in time for the State Legislatures to consult with the will of the people and then select the Electors.

Remember that the popular vote is only an opinion poll and all that is needed is to ensure that certified candidates names appear. The vote for the Electors happens within the State Legislatures.

LifeofTheMind on April 19, 2011 at 10:06 AM

We have been played by Obama and compnay on this bill. The bill Brewer vetoed was changed into this worthless piece of paper in committee. The Left knew Brewer would veto it because it is worthless. And the Obama fans counted on us all being too lazy to read the actual bill. They hoped we would just accept the MSM headlines and criticize Brewer. Unfortunaely it appears they were right…we were played by the Dems…again.

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 9:54 AM

On another thread it was stated that the Arizona language complies with Federal language for security clearance. The strategy of including such language was the belief that a Judge could not issue a blanket dismissal of the language without affecting all the Federal agencies which currently use it.

In other words, the idea was to make dismissal so costly and produce such an uproar that a judge would be hesitant to do so.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 10:08 AM

…Same as if a state decided to just give drivers licenses to anyone just asking for one, without any tests or confirmation of identification.

Rebar on April 19, 2011 at 12:44 AM

I have a friend who got his drivers license by sending $5.00 to the DMV of South Dakota. This would have been about 1960. The test for a drivers license was the presence of $5.

Dasher on April 19, 2011 at 10:10 AM

Jindal says he will sign a bill if it reaches his desk.

DanaSmiles on April 19, 2011 at 10:17 AM

DanaSmiles on April 19, 2011 at 10:17 AM

Birth certificates are manadatory for T-ball and Little League, but for the highest office? Nah

Bevan on April 19, 2011 at 10:18 AM

In other words, the idea was to make dismissal so costly and produce such an uproar that a judge would be hesitant to do so.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 10:08 AM

So the federal language includes the acceptance of such things as baptismal records or statements from midwives in place of birth certificates? Interesting…

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 10:28 AM

So the federal language includes the acceptance of such things as baptismal records or statements from midwives in place of birth certificates? Interesting…

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 10:28 AM

Perhaps they’ve been on the books a long time. Some really old people might have had problems producing a real long form. Barry Goldwater (for example) was born in Arizona territory before it became a state. My Grandfather was born in Oklahoma “Indian territory” as was his mother.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 10:33 AM

Birth certificates are manadatory for T-ball and Little League, but for the highest office? Nah

Bevan on April 19, 2011 at 10:18 AM

And in AZ that would a short form Certificate…..

You might want to check…

In Arizona…

People born in 1997 and subsequent years do not have long-form certificates; their records are available as electronic certified copies, also known as “short form.”

You gotta admit..it’s kinda funny.

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 10:33 AM

You gotta admit..it’s kinda funny.

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 10:33 AM

What? Bureaucracy being stupid? I don’t find that amusing anymore.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 10:48 AM

A letter one constituent sent to them states in part: “The governor says ‘one person’ should not have power over the ballot – well, she has just single-handedly vetoed a 2/3 vote of the Legislature and the will of those of us who voted you into office. I don’t understand how she can veto a veto-proof vote!

Read more: Arizona could override eligibility veto http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=288845#ixzz1JyuIsb85

DanaSmiles on April 19, 2011 at 11:00 AM

The reality is that Brewer did the right thing with the birther bill. It is useless, it gives too much power to the SOS (and lately, specially in her own state, this has been counterproductive) and it only affects the credibility of all her positions and Arizona’s.

She was spot on with the anti illegal immigration bill, and I haven’t read the gun bill to determine if it was indeed a poor one, but the birther issue is one that plays just into the hands of Obama and company. He is riding this wave. He is a US citizen but has part of the opposition discussing this instead of the real issues such as his extreme policies, overreach, terrible economic policies, O-care, and his overall ineptitude as Commander in Chief.

Obama is very vulnerable when you debate him on facts and figures, but no so much when the debate is framed around a “conspiracy” that paints to part of the independent base WE NEED to win back the WH as “extreme” and “out of touch”. Obama and co. would rather have people challenge him on the birth certificate than the looong list of bad policies he has issued. Even I-Want-More-Fifteen-Minutes-Of-Fame Trump submitted the same form he did, and reason why the WH won’t rush to submit any other form.

We are almost into O’s 3rd year in office and starting with the race for the presidency. Obama is at his lowest approval, his policies have all but failed, and we have him by the you know what on the debt ceiling and deficit spending (if the GOP plays the cards right). Does anyone really want to challenge him on something trivial instead of his actual work performance? Not even Hillary used it against him back in the primaries of 08′, and that (if it was really an issue) would have guaranteed her to win.

Brewer did the right thing- rejecting this bill was smart. There are bigger bills and the fight over SB1070 continues. She needs the majority of people on board. Alienating part of that support for a silly bill that would give the Dems a host set of ammo against her and the GOP and target their credibility when important bills need to be fought for is not the best approach. (And, btw, statistically Republicans are the group least complaining about the birth certificate compared to independents and even Democrats).

Everyone should just get off this silly issue and start dealing with the policies. That would freak O and the WH out and you know that not even the teleprompter would save him.

Again, the focus is on getting Obama out of office. His ineptitude and radicalism alone have given us more than enough to achieve this if we pick a good candidate (and oh God, please, I hope people are not really taking Trump seriously). Let’s not fall into the trap his campaign wants us to fall about discussing his place of birth or his religion as this is flipped to be an issue about “race” (or any other stupidity Dems come up with) and affects the major point: Obama is an incompetent president that doesn’t represent the best interest or the best hope for an American resurgence.

ptcamn on April 19, 2011 at 11:18 AM

The constitution also states that Senators and Representatives be a certain minimum age. How is that determined to be true? Self declared?

Most amendments to the constitution have this clause added at the end;

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Obviously that clause is needed for the rest of the constitution as well.

Dasher on April 19, 2011 at 11:19 AM

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 9:36 AM

Your list of documents does show the thing to be a joke in the end. So I guess Jan knew what she was doing.

It is really surprising that someone can turn from hero to villian so very quickly. What did someone say up there? A country club Republican? Arizona is full of golf courses! Golf is a major industry in AZ!

I am surprised they didn’t want to see his utility bill.

When I registered my kids for school in AZ I had to bring in a utility bill. I remember because I forgot the first try and they would not register them. They needed proof I lived in the district. And then, even though I had other kids in the district… when I registered my daughter for kindergarten… I had to go home and get a utility bill!

So candidates should bring one, just in case.

petunia on April 19, 2011 at 11:19 AM

See the moon sink down in the sky
Every dream is a lie
Life is cold
And the game is old
Just see how dreaming repays you
You turn and someone betrays you

For we all are caught in the middle
Of one long dangerous riddle
And we’re all alone in this hell
And we all have deals and secrets to sell
And there comes a day when we sell our souls away!

Here’s the one sweet lesson of history
Every soul is a mystery
Faces change
What you knew grows strange
And we all have so many faces
The real self erases
With all those lies dancing in our eyes!

Oh, every Judas once loved a Jesus
But oh betrayal will seize us
We all are caught in the middle
Of one long dangerous riddle
Of who trusts who
Maybe I’ll trust you
But can you trust me?

Heckle on April 19, 2011 at 11:31 AM

I love watching the so-called “conservatives” around here twisting and bending to make sure no one is stupid enough to actually defend the Constitutional right to ignore provisions of the Constitution.

Oh, it looks so horrible if we actually, you know, insist that Osama Obama play by rules set and adhered to for more than two centuries.

Goldwater and McCain produced their birth certificates — not online copies which may or may not be legitimate. Dubya practically had to have a prime-time colonoscopy to prove himself worthy of the presidency.

But not Osama Obama. Why? Because the “optics” are all bad!

The AZ law — and others not yet shot down by squishy governors or courts — apply to all. But since the Traitor-in-Chief started the ball rolling by burying his entire past so deep that no one can or will search for it, anyone from anywhere can run for president and, by concealing relevant information, nullify the Constitution.

Good going, hacks.

MrScribbler on April 19, 2011 at 11:35 AM

petunia on April 19, 2011 at 11:19 AM

I did have to show birth certificates – and immunization records – for mine. A few year later and I could have told them we were ‘undocumented’ I guess. No hablo Ingles and all that…

sloopy on April 19, 2011 at 11:40 AM

MrScribbler on April 19, 2011 at 11:35 AM

The Supreme Court has thrown out the challenge to Obama’s birth certificate.

If facts won’t convince you the American Psychology Association has a friend for you.

NickDeringer on April 19, 2011 at 11:41 AM

McCain produced their birth certificates — not online copies which may or may not be legitimate. Dubya practically had to have a prime-time colonoscopy to prove himself worthy of the presidency.

MrScribbler on April 19, 2011 at 11:35 AM

The HI legislature has removed the any doubt, the may or may not sentiment is an emotional one not a legal question.

Full Faith & Credit…it’s simple, once HI lent the COLB standing for it’s citizens, it carries that weight with all states. Just because you don’t like HI’s certificate, it’s no less considered the document of standing in that state irregardless Obama.

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Show me the educational records. That’s what he’s really hiding.

Little Boomer on April 19, 2011 at 11:49 AM

Obama is holding this back for his October surprise in 2012. If the Republican candidate is drawn into asking for the birth certificate, he/she will be made to look foolish when it is unveiled with a week or two to go in the campaign.

Slam dunk, Obama get re-elected. Be careful what you ask for!!

magsvt on April 19, 2011 at 11:51 AM

The HI legislature has removed the any doubt, the may or may not sentiment is an emotional one not a legal question.

Full Faith & Credit…it’s simple, once HI lent the COLB standing for it’s citizens, it carries that weight with all states. Just because you don’t like HI’s certificate, it’s no less considered the document of standing in that state irregardless Obama.

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Troll.

Hawaii’s official documents are acceptable. Provided they are ORIGINAL non amended documents. Nobody gives a crap about their recently created “pretend” documents.

Your argument is basically the fallacy of false choice.

http://www.cambridgestudycenter.com/artilces/Wilson1.htm

(Mixed with other fallacies.)

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 12:05 PM

I disagree completely. The issue that SHOULD have been a crossing the Rubicon moment in 2008, is STILL the issue that needs to be addressed.

We are either A Constitutional Republic or we are not. If we are not, then I don’t care to hide the fact.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 10:04 AM

DiogenesLamp, I understand you perfectly.

Infact, it really irks me when people (conservatives/liberals) seek to label those with valid concerns about Obama’s birth certificate as kooks – coining a name for them “Birthers”. But as one poster said above:

And the truth always comes out.

fossten on April 19, 2011 at 9:58 AM

My concern is that after a disastrous first term, Obama will try to use this birth certificate issue to win re-election by spinning this valid concern into something it is not. How? You ask? Obama wishes to use this issue to divide America further along racial lines. What better way to do this than raise this issue as something that has been brought up because he is black – you think he wouldn’t do it?

Recall that some months back, Obama himself renewed the birth certificate issue in an interview – I forget which one, unfortunately. But know that everything he is doing now is calculated to drive up massive turnout among his base. Another issue he is raising this year is IMMIGRATION. Why? To rally the open borders crowd to his side.

Hence my submission that we not play into his set traps but focus on exposing his weaknesses! Unfortunately the GOP squishes led by Boehner and McConnell are not helping matters at all – wishing we had a Walker/Christie/Palin as Speaker right now. Because conservatives are dying for a fight that will illustrate the difference between the parties – alas the “Ruling Party” comprised of both GOP and Dems is still in charge.

TheRightMan on April 19, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Full Faith & Credit…

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Both Hawaii and Arizona now call their long form birth certificates “genealogy records”, and both will provide certified copies of same.

Your argument holds no water.

Rebar on April 19, 2011 at 12:16 PM

I forgot to add this:

The only way to force the birth certificate issue is through the courts. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has tossed it out over and over again. And Obama has the backing of the state that he was born in (or claims to be born in) – so in essence as things stand now, the case is going nowhere.

TheRightMan on April 19, 2011 at 12:21 PM

TheRightMan on April 19, 2011 at 12:21 PM

I don’t understand what your point is. If a state requires full documentation for ballot access, including long form birth certificates, how is that connected to any other court case?

Rebar on April 19, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Hawaii’s official documents are acceptable. Provided they are ORIGINAL non amended documents. Nobody gives a crap about their recently created “pretend” documents.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 12:05 PM

Wishing really…really hard does not change facts. These states would not be CHANGING their laws if it wasn’t obvious his documentation meets current law.

Worse AZ was proposing a change to the law that would make the very form they use for Birth Certificates invalid in their own state. /boggle

Please continue your ~ Don Quixote meets, Fringe, meets Manchurian Candidate~ Quest

The rest of us will move on to reality based arguments that require some proof in this universe rather than in an alternate reality.

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 12:25 PM

Please continue your ~ Don Quixote meets, Fringe, meets Manchurian Candidate~ Quest

OH Shyte! You mean there could be a “FauxObama” out there somewhere.
Would that necessarily make him an anti-Leninist?

OkieDoc on April 19, 2011 at 12:34 PM

The AZ law — and others not yet shot down by squishy governors or courts — apply to all. But since the Traitor-in-Chief started the ball rolling by burying his entire past so deep that no one can or will search for it, anyone from anywhere can run for president and, by concealing relevant information, nullify the Constitution.

Good going, hacks.

MrScribbler on April 19, 2011 at 11:35 AM

So you think the Arizona law that Brewer vetoed is a good one?

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 12:37 PM

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 12:25 PM

Arizona is likely to override this veto. Oklahoma and Louisiana are right behind with their bills, then Texas and a bunch of other states.

That’s reality, right there. And no court is going to buy your ridiculous argument over FF&C when the document in question is freely available.

Rebar on April 19, 2011 at 12:37 PM

OH Shyte! You mean there could be a “FauxObama” out there somewhere.
Would that necessarily make him an anti-Leninist?

OkieDoc on April 19, 2011 at 12:34 PM

Ok, I feel better, your post means I’m not the only one who watches the show…. Don’t try to deny it now..you are exposed with me!

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 12:37 PM

Read more: Arizona could override eligibility veto http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=288845#ixzz1JyuIsb85

DanaSmiles on April 19, 2011 at 11:00 AM

So you think a bill that allows baptismal records, midwife statements, friends who witnessed the birth, etc. are acceptable proof if a candidate does not have a birth certificate? You did read the bill, right?

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 12:39 PM

Arizona is likely to override this veto. Oklahoma and Louisiana are right behind with their bills, then Texas and a bunch of other states.

That’s reality, right there. And no court is going to buy your ridiculous argument over FF&C when the document in question is freely available.

Rebar on April 19, 2011 at 12:37 PM

You think this is a good bill?

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 12:40 PM

You think this is a good bill?

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 12:40 PM

I would have preferred a “cleaner” bill without the baptismal records etc.

But since those are only valid if there is no long form birth certificate available, and that situation has about a zero chance of happening, I find it satisfactory.

Rebar on April 19, 2011 at 12:44 PM

So you think a bill that allows baptismal records, midwife statements, friends who witnessed the birth, etc. are acceptable proof if a candidate does not have a birth certificate? You did read the bill, right?

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 12:39 PM

I would ask why we haven’t heard anything from Brewer before this. Its not as if she wouldn’t have known what was in the bill before it crossed her desk.

Why didn’t she contact the Arizona legislators with her concerns if they were of a magnitude that she feels she has to veto the bill?

sharrukin on April 19, 2011 at 12:46 PM

Arizona is likely to override this veto. Oklahoma and Louisiana are right behind with their bills, then Texas and a bunch of other states.

That’s reality, right there. And no court is going to buy your ridiculous argument over FF&C when the document in question is freely available.

Rebar on April 19, 2011 at 12:37 PM

Ok let’s take your unlikely assessment to conclusion. Arizona, Oklahoma, Louisiana and Texas create a law that excludes Obama from the ballot and we find out all he has is the COLB.

Now what, how does that play out long term for the GOP? Does it change the outcome of the elections in any way?

It’s a silly waste of time because the states with legislators who can risk this kind of move are states that would never vote for Obama anyway. I’m sure excluding your state from the presidential elections will go over great!!

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 12:46 PM

I can’t believe half of what I have read today. Don’t ask a candiadate to prove they meet the job position requirements? Let’s not make the Left mad at us. BLAH BLAH BLAH.

For my job as an EVIL mortgage banker I had to go through an extentsive background check to be able to keep my job. Credit credit, FBI criminal background check, fingerprinting, where I lived and worked for the last 10 years! I’m just a lowly mortgage banker with 15+ years of experience versus the honcho with the nuclear codes.

If I have to jump though all these hoops to be able to keep my job then the person looking to be the POTUS needs to go through a qualification process as well.

VikingGoneWild on April 19, 2011 at 12:46 PM

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 12:46 PM

If all he has is a COLB, then he wasn’t born in Hawaii.

He would be excluding himself, in that case, and he would certainly lose since swing voters in swing states will naturally doubt he is in fact eligible.

Rebar on April 19, 2011 at 12:49 PM

I don’t understand what your point is. If a state requires full documentation for ballot access, including long form birth certificates, how is that connected to any other court case?

Rebar on April 19, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Because any such state law will end up at the Supreme Court. Or you think Obama and his team of lawyers will just fold up and close shop? And you know something else? They are likely to win at the Supreme Court because in whatever form, they have the backing of the state that he claims to have been born in.

As others have mentioned on this forum, it is difficult to make a successful case when the state (Hawaii) is not expressing any doubt whatsoever about his having been born there.

So Obama will drag this to the Supreme Court and make fools out of states that have passed these bills and energize his base in time for the 2012 election.

TheRightMan on April 19, 2011 at 12:51 PM

TheRightMan on April 19, 2011 at 12:51 PM

The burden of eligibility is on the candidate, not the state. And it is well within a states power to ask full documentation for ballot access in their state.

In fact I doubt the supreme court will hear a case based on eligibility, unless it is to determine once and for all what “natural born citizen” really means.

Rebar on April 19, 2011 at 12:56 PM

I would ask why we haven’t heard anything from Brewer before this. Its not as if she wouldn’t have known what was in the bill before it crossed her desk.

Why didn’t she contact the Arizona legislators with her concerns if they were of a magnitude that she feels she has to veto the bill?

sharrukin on April 19, 2011 at 12:46 PM

Well she never claimed to support it. She always said she would read it first. Novel idea there I guess. And I also read somewhere that it was changed in committe. And how do we know she didn’t voice her concerns to the legislators? Because the MSM didn’t tell us? I just hate seeing us possibly being played by RINOs and Dems behind the scenes on this deal. They may have added all those addendums knowing Brewer would veto it just to make her look bad and to keep the RINOs happy. The bill really has no teeth and is a bit too open for interpretation. This part bothers me..

D. IF THE SECRETARY OF STATE RECEIVES ANY DOCUMENTS IN PLACE OF A LONG
2 FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION B, PARAGRAPH 1 AND CANNOT
3 DETERMINE IF THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS PRESCRIBED IN
4 ARTICLE II, SECTION 1, CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES, THE SECRETARY OF
5 STATE MAY ESTABLISH A COMMITTEE TO ASSIST IN THE DETERMINATION OR HOLD
6 HEARINGS AND SUBMIT ANY DOCUMENTS FOR FORENSIC EXAMINATION.

Sounds like a boondoggle in the making to me.

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 12:59 PM

If I am violating HotAir policy on reprinting, please let me know!

Here’s today’s New Orleans Times-Picayune article (from the link upthread):
—————

Gov. Jindal will sign ‘birther’ bill if it reaches his desk
Published: Tuesday, April 19, 2011, 6:52 AM Updated: Tuesday, April 19, 2011, 10:06 AM
Jan Moller, The Times-Picayune By Jan Moller, The Times-Picayune The Times-Picayune

BATON ROUGE — Gov. Bobby Jindal would sign a bill requiring presidential candidates to provide a copy of their birth certificate to qualify for the Louisiana ballot if it reaches his desk, a spokesman said Monday.
Bobby JindalTed Jackson/The Times-PicayuneA spokesman says Gov. Bobby Jindal will sign a bill to require presidential candidates to provide a birth certificate as proof of citizenship.

“It’s not part of our package, but if the Legislature passes it we’ll sign it,” press secretary Kyle Plotkin said.

House Bill 561 was filed last week by two Republican lawmakers. President Barack Obama’s citizenship has been challenged by some groups, derisively called “birthers,” despite numerous independent investigations finding that documents and contemporary news reports show that Obama was born in Hawaii.

The bill by state Rep. Alan Seabaugh, R-Shreveport, and Sen. A.G. Crowe, R-Slidell, would require federal candidates who want to appear on Louisiana ballots to file an affidavit attesting to their citizenship, which would have to be accompanied by an “original or certified copy” of their birth certificate.

The requirement also would apply to candidates for U.S. Senate or the House of Representatives.

A similar bill was recently passed by the Arizona legislature.

Seabaugh, an attorney, said his bill was motivated by the numerous lawsuits that have been filed over Obama’s citizenship. “Not one of them has ever been decided on the merits,” Seabaugh said. “As an attorney, that’s offensive to me.”

He said he has no reason to doubt Obama’s citizenship. “I don’t purport to be a ‘birther,’” Seabaugh said. “This is from the standpoint of cleaning up an area of the law where there appears to be a gap.”

Obama’s citizenship has recently been aggressively questioned by construction mogul Donald Trump, who says he has sent a team of investigators to Hawaii to look at the issue.

Plotkin said Jindal believes Obama is a citizen.

© 2011 NOLA.com. All rights reserved.

cane_loader on April 19, 2011 at 1:02 PM

sharrukin…Sorry I can’t stay and discuss this. I hope this works out for the best but I am skeptical this bill is the definitive answer, we’ll see. Got to go, just got called in to work. Have a good one.

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 1:03 PM

So Obama will drag this to the Supreme Court and make fools out of states that have passed these bills and energize his base in time for the 2012 election.

TheRightMan on April 19, 2011 at 12:51 PM

I have always had a hard time believing that this is an actual plot to withhold info for 4 years so as to embarrass people in 2012. That would have required giving up a lot of votes from independent voters (like myself) up front, in return for a questionable payoff 4 years down the road.

Sure, on the one hand, 0bama could try to portray Republicans as “birthers” and racists. On the other hand, he could lose the bet, as when you add the image to the president fighting to the bitter end to avoid showing a simple birth certificate, and going to all that time and expense, the hiding might add to his failing stewardship of the nation and end up a draw or a net negative for him.

I just think he’s been hiding something all along that brings his eligibility into serious question, and has been, and will continue, to brazen it out. That seems like the simplest answer to me.

cane_loader on April 19, 2011 at 1:09 PM

sharrukin on April 19, 2011 at 12:46 PM

This. Why do I get the feeling she would have vetoed it regardless?

DanaSmiles on April 19, 2011 at 1:19 PM

VikingGoneWild on April 19, 2011 at 12:46 PM

I had a more extensive background check for a job just because I handled cash. Frustrating, huh?

DanaSmiles on April 19, 2011 at 1:22 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5hyE3FUm6w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Czk8Lqs7yNM

Above are links to my film of Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal’s speech in Lafayette, La. last July, strongly protesting the “arbitrary and capricious” way in which 0bama high-handedly quashed the Louisiana economy with an unjustified drilling moratorium after we were already devastated by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

We were doing alright down here until 0bama shut off a huge chunk of our domestic oil supply, lying about the recommendations of his own oil-spill commission.

The rest of the nation sees the skyrocketing gas prices, yet the news never links it to the way 0bama screwed Louisiana.

My girlfriend lost her house. For-Sale signs popped up everywhere. My girl
s best friend had to move to Brasil with her husband and two-year-old son, because his job was forced to move there.

Remember how frustrated Jindal was with 0bama? “We don’t want an unemployment check – let us go back to work! Let us go back to work! Let us go back to work!”

0bama blocked assistance from other countries. He blocked Jindal from building barrier islands. He stole Louisiana jobs. He really took a huge dump on our red state.

Now Jindal gets a chance for payback, and man we Louisianans are pissed because his moratorium screwed up our state big-time. Yes, the blacks here still support 0bama nearly 100%, but I have yet to meet one white who thinks 0bama isn’t an incompetent a-hole.

Time for me to ramp up the letters to my representative. Down here in Louisiana, we do our own thing. I bet Jindal signs it, and wouldn’t that be sweet….

cane_loader on April 19, 2011 at 1:23 PM

The part of this that so offensive and unfair, to me, is that:

Say we surrender and give 0bama a complete pass on 2008, even if he is from Venus.

He still wants a complete whole new campaign and be allowed to defy identifying himself for 2012, a year and a half before the election. He doesn’t want half a loaf – he wants the whole damn po’-boy.

This far out, with this many questions about him, won’t ONE state declare that due to this corrosive controversy, he must open his records before potentially being illegally elected a second time? More importantly, won’t the American people demand it?

Arrrgh :-/

cane_loader on April 19, 2011 at 1:27 PM

Regular Session, 2011
HOUSE BILL NO. 561
BY REPRESENTATIVE SEABAUGH AND SENATOR CROWE
Prefiled pursuant to Article III, Section 2(A)(4)(b)(i) of the Constitution of Louisiana.
ELECTIONS/CANDIDATES: Requires the submission of certain documents by candidates
for U.S. senator or representative, vice president, and president

E.(1) Any person filing a notice of candidacy or nominating petition
20 pursuant to this Section shall at the same time file an affidavit of the presidential
21 candidate and vice presidential candidate in which each candidate states his
22 citizenship, age, and residence. Each affidavit shall include references to and
23 attachment of documents that prove that the candidate meets the requirements for
24 president of the United States prescribed in Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution
25 of the United States of America, including the following:
26 (a) An original or certified copy of the candidate’s birth certificate that
27 includes the date and place of birth, the names of the hospital and the attending physician, and signatures of the witnesses in attendance.
(b) A sworn statement or form that identifies the candidate’s places of
2 residence for the preceding fourteen years.
3 (2) Failure to satisfy the requirements of this Subsection shall constitute
4 grounds for an objection to the candidacy of the slate of electors pursuant to Subpart
5 D of Part IV of Chapter 5 of this Title.
E. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Section, if the provisions of
15 R.S. 18:1253(F) and 1254(E) are not satisfied, the names of the candidates for
16 president and vice president shall not be included on the ballot nor shall the names
17 of the presidential electors nominated in support of the nominees for president and
18 vice president of that party or political principal be included on the ballot. A
19 registered voter may bring an action to enforce the provisions of this Subsection
20 within the time permitted for a person to bring an action objecting to candidacy
21 pursuant to R.S. 18:493.

cane_loader on April 19, 2011 at 1:37 PM

cane_loader on April 19, 2011 at 1:27 PM

My estimation is, between 6-8 states will have “enhanced” eligibility requirements before the 2012 primary season.

Moreover, the laws will force secretary of states to require full documentation – there is no legal bar for one to demand full documentation on his own authority in states without a law.

Rebar on April 19, 2011 at 1:37 PM

This just appeared on Jan Brewer’s Facebook page:

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.

I believe the bill created significant new problems for our elections and granted too much power to either a state or local election official who could arbitrarily prohibit anyone from appearing on the ballot in any federal, state or local election.

As Governor of Arizona, I do not have line-item veto authority for non-appropriation bills, such as this bill. Although many of you may be disappointed in my decision, it was the right thing to do based on the consequences of the entire bill.

What horse manure. I’m disappointed in her for this.

JannyMae on April 19, 2011 at 1:44 PM

Rebar on April 19, 2011 at 1:37 PM

What makes me so furious is the blackmail that he has to be allowed to go for a second term once we KNOW there’s a question about his eligibility.

The people who waved 0bama through with the wink knew that, once in the door, he was guaranteed two terms. Because if we vet him for 2012 and find him wanting, then all the laws from 2008-2012 are void, and chaos erupts in America.

Here, we have ample reason to check 0bama more carefully than other candidates, but everyone from the Supreme Court on down is so starkly terrified of what they may find, that now they willfully close their eyes and betray the constitution.

Fool me once… fool me twice….

What a total disgrace. Before this hole in the enforcement of the Natural-Born clause is fixed, the Supreme Court wants to wait until no sitting president would be affected by their decision. Meanwhile 0bama is allowed to insult the Court to their face and dismantle the country at full speed.

cane_loader on April 19, 2011 at 1:50 PM

Recall that some months back, Obama himself renewed the birth certificate issue in an interview – I forget which one, unfortunately. But know that everything he is doing now is calculated to drive up massive turnout among his base. Another issue he is raising this year is IMMIGRATION. Why? To rally the open borders crowd to his side.

Hence my submission that we not play into his set traps but focus on exposing his weaknesses! Unfortunately the GOP squishes led by Boehner and McConnell are not helping matters at all – wishing we had a Walker/Christie/Palin as Speaker right now. Because conservatives are dying for a fight that will illustrate the difference between the parties – alas the “Ruling Party” comprised of both GOP and Dems is still in charge.

TheRightMan on April 19, 2011 at 12:16 PM

This theory would require Obama to be a tactical political genius. Every bit of evidence indicates he is dumb as a post. The only talent he has is “jive” talking.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 1:52 PM

More importantly, won’t the American people demand it?

Arrrgh :-/

cane_loader on April 19, 2011 at 1:27 PM

You won’t like the answer.

Absent a shred of evidence to prove otherwise, most have accepted the COLB and accompanying newspaper articles as reasonable proof. (See Occam’s Razor) If someone could provide anything other than conspiracy, rumor or innuendo that might change but absent proof the issue limited to the remaining birthers.

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 1:55 PM

From Gov. Brewer’s Facebook page (thanks, Janny Mae – I don’t have Facebook):

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.

Problematic how? How is it problematic that I might be required to submit various records (like a SS card or a birth certificate) for my I-9 when applying for the U.S. Forest Service?

I believe the bill created significant new problems for our elections and granted too much power to either a state or local election official who could arbitrarily prohibit anyone from appearing on the ballot in any federal, state or local election.

What is arbitrary about “show two from this list of documents”? Nothing arbitrary about it. The candidate either shows them or not.

What utter hogwash from Gov. Brewer. This puerile defense makes her look a lot worse than if she just said nothing.

cane_loader on April 19, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Wishing really…really hard does not change facts. These states would not be CHANGING their laws if it wasn’t obvious his documentation meets current law.

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 12:25 PM

Try this on for size. The duty of the State Election officials to verify eligibility was ALWAYS a requirement. In the last election 50 Lazy and Ignorant State Election offices were incompetent because they did not do the job they were already mandated to do.

You see, the requirements would not be CHANGED. The effort is to make sure those officials are AWARE of what information is already required.

Why people such as yourself keep trying to pass off that phoney baloney computer print-out as proof of anything is more a testimony to either your lack of comprehension or your lack of honesty. You are either too stupid to understand that state officials can put false information on it, or you DO understand this but you don’t mind the fact that it contains false information.

Why do you want to hide legitimate information from the American People? Why are you arguing against the light of scrutiny?

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 2:03 PM

Well, the Louisiana bill looks as clean as they come. See above. And Bobby Jindal has no love lost for 0bama.

We Cajuns aren’t as easily rolled, when you mess with our livelihoods.

cane_loader on April 19, 2011 at 2:04 PM

cane_loader on April 19, 2011 at 1:50 PM

Elections have consequences.

The Nov. 2010 midterm wave of teaparty conservatives which swept over state governments will have severe consequences to the Soetoro regime.

I figure 6-8 states will change their laws, but really it most likely will be over ten states will be demanding full documentation for eligibility. Soetoro taking ten states to court, not only will he lose, but even if he didn’t, the fact that 20% of the states being sued because he won’t release a simple birth certificate? The attack ads write themselves.

There is no way that I can see, where Soetoro wins here. He’s already polling poorly with whites, if he goes full retard with the race card, forget them and the election. If he forfeits those states, swing voters will certainly think he’s ineligible and he loses those votes. If he goes to court to force ballot access, he’ll lose and look that much worse. If he waits to the last minute and then pulls out a valid long form birth certificate, he looks like a douchebag, and has to explain why he sent people to jail because he held onto it.

I don’t see any rabbit hee can pull from a hat that can spin this.

Rebar on April 19, 2011 at 2:04 PM

So you think a bill that allows baptismal records, midwife statements, friends who witnessed the birth, etc. are acceptable proof if a candidate does not have a birth certificate? You did read the bill, right?

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 12:39 PM

How does that matter when EVERYONE is saying Obama DOES have a real birth certificate? Can you imagine the uproar if Obama tries to trot out baptismal records or midwife statements? (I’m not sure the “Omen” candidate would be baptized anyway. :) )

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 2:07 PM

You think this is a good bill?

Deanna on April 19, 2011 at 12:40 PM

Maybe not, there is “good” and there is “good enough.”

IN conjunction with other state’s bills, I think it would fall into the “good enough” category.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 2:08 PM

Why didn’t she contact the Arizona legislators with her concerns if they were of a magnitude that she feels she has to veto the bill?

sharrukin on April 19, 2011 at 12:46 PM

Agree. If she had concerns she should have voiced them previously. Letting the legislature vote on the bill with no prior complaint from the Governor, then telling everyone that it’s not good enough is a sh*tty thing to do to your fellow Republicans. As far as i’m concerned it’s a “back stab.”

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 2:11 PM

Try this on for size. The duty of the State Election officials to verify eligibility was ALWAYS a requirement. In the last election 50 Lazy and Ignorant State Election offices were incompetent because they did not do the job they were already mandated to do.

You see, the requirements would not be CHANGED. The effort is to make sure those officials are AWARE of what information is already required.

Why people such as yourself keep trying to pass off that phoney baloney computer print-out as proof of anything is more a testimony to either your lack of comprehension or your lack of honesty. You are either too stupid to understand that state officials can put false information on it, or you DO understand this but you don’t mind the fact that it contains false information.

Why do you want to hide legitimate information from the American People? Why are you arguing against the light of scrutiny?

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 2:03 PM

Or on a place called earth, most everyone who has had to get a copy of their Birth Certificate in the last 15 years has got the same thing, unless they had need for more ie. for the purposes of a genealogical search. You see, the very type of document you rail against is what anyone living in or born in AZ (and most other states)would get today. You are welcome to ignore that fact, but it’s no less the fact.

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 2:16 PM

unless they had need for more ie. for the purposes of a genealogical search.

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 2:16 PM

What you don’t understand, is that states are demanding long form birth certificates for the exact purpose of genealogical research, not to establish identity.

And on this planet called earth, anyone who is going to run for president will have the wherewithall to have theirs. This idea that Soetoro doesn’t have his locked away somewhere is ludicrous, as is this idea that people cannot get theirs if they want/need them.

Once again, your arguments don’t hold water.

Rebar on April 19, 2011 at 2:26 PM

cane_loader on April 19, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Yes, I agree that it’s utter hogwash.

Arbitrarily? Sole control? You produce the document or documents required by the law, you get on the ballot. Period. If the requirements aren’t specific enough, then rewrite the requirements. This is a very lame EXCUSE for vetoing this bill from Brewer.

JannyMae on April 19, 2011 at 2:44 PM

Because any such state law will end up at the Supreme Court. Or you think Obama and his team of lawyers will just fold up and close shop? And you know something else? They are likely to win at the Supreme Court because in whatever form, they have the backing of the state that he claims to have been born in.

As others have mentioned on this forum, it is difficult to make a successful case when the state (Hawaii) is not expressing any doubt whatsoever about his having been born there.

So Obama will drag this to the Supreme Court and make fools out of states that have passed these bills and energize his base in time for the 2012 election.

TheRightMan on April 19, 2011 at 12:51 PM

I WANT to see them TRY! The act of FIGHTING it will cost them the election! NOBODY will understand why anyone would fight this qualification requirement.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 3:35 PM

Or on a place called earth, most everyone who has had to get a copy of their Birth Certificate in the last 15 years has got the same thing, unless they had need for more ie. for the purposes of a genealogical search. You see, the very type of document you rail against is what anyone living in or born in AZ (and most other states)would get today. You are welcome to ignore that fact, but it’s no less the fact.

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 2:16 PM

If Obama was only 15 years old (He ACTS like a 15 year old.) you would have a valid argument, and he would have a DIFFERENT sort of eligibility problem. (too young.)

In 20 more years what you are asserting MIGHT be a problem. Right now? Not so much.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 3:39 PM

What a lame excuse she gives! How disgusting. IMO too many conservative Politicians just don’t have the spine to hang tough. That’s the problem with our country and the West. The West needs really tough guys but the public tends to be afraid of them. They would rather vote for wimps pretending to be thoughtful & sensitive.

Chessplayer on April 19, 2011 at 3:48 PM

What horse manure. I’m disappointed in her for this.

JannyMae on April 19, 2011 at 1:44 PM

I agree. The ONLY authority certifying Obama as eligible is FUKINO. How’s THAT for one person determining eligibility?

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 3:53 PM

Absent a shred of evidence to prove otherwise, most have accepted the COLB and accompanying newspaper articles as reasonable proof. (See Occam’s Razor) If someone could provide anything other than conspiracy, rumor or innuendo that might change but absent proof the issue limited to the remaining birthers.

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 1:55 PM

This is only proof that the media and liberal controlled education has made the populace so ignorant and stupid that they no longer have the ability to govern themselves.

Real minds that THINK know better than to believe the clap trap that people such as you and the media keep shoving into the public discussion.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 3:56 PM

There is no way that I can see, where Soetoro wins here. He’s already polling poorly with whites, if he goes full retard with the race card, forget them and the election. If he forfeits those states, swing voters will certainly think he’s ineligible and he loses those votes. If he goes to court to force ballot access, he’ll lose and look that much worse. If he waits to the last minute and then pulls out a valid long form birth certificate, he looks like a douchebag, and has to explain why he sent people to jail because he held onto it.

I don’t see any rabbit hee can pull from a hat that can spin this.

Rebar on April 19, 2011 at 2:04 PM

My analysis as well. It only requires people to set these events in motion. Jan Brewer screwed up, or she has gone over to the other side.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 3:58 PM

Jan Brewer is screwed because any idiot can see what Obama will do next:

He will call her to a news conference, a la Paul Ryan, finally grant some window-dressing border enforcement, loudly trumpeted in her name, to make her look like a sell-out to her base, and to make her more evil in the eyes of her Dem La Raza opponents. He won’t be concerned about any backlash upon himself, because he knows the MSM has his back.

What she’s going to get as payback for this is lose her next election.

cane_loader on April 19, 2011 at 4:13 PM

Actual Arizonan here, Allah. You asked why she vetoed it…she vetoed this ‘Birther’ bill because it was idiotic. Very simple. And, those questioning her GOP cred now-look to another state for moronic extremist legislation-Arizona ain’t it. I’m Republican and so are most of my close friends and family and of, oh, lets say 25 of us, exactly one supported this nonsense while the rest(including some hard core conservatives)thought it absurd.

kit9 on April 19, 2011 at 4:40 PM

Actual Arizonan here, Allah. You asked why she vetoed it…she vetoed this ‘Birther’ bill because it was idiotic. Very simple. And, those questioning her GOP cred now-look to another state for moronic extremist legislation-Arizona ain’t it. I’m Republican and so are most of my close friends and family and of, oh, lets say 25 of us, exactly one supported this nonsense while the rest(including some hard core conservatives)thought it absurd.

kit9 on April 19, 2011 at 4:40 PM

You sound like a “concern” troll. I for one don’t believe you.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 4:44 PM

This is only proof that the media and liberal controlled education has made the populace so ignorant and stupid that they no longer have the ability to govern themselves.

Real minds that THINK know better than to believe the clap trap that people such as you and the media keep shoving into the public discussion.

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 3:56 PM

Ok, since his COLB, 2 newspaper reports from 50 years ago in conformation using information provided by the state, a passport are not proof…you must have proof to the contrary, right?

What is your proof? Since your profess such a high level of intellect, you must have something other than rumor and innuendo right?

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 4:48 PM

Agree. If she had concerns she should have voiced them previously. Letting the legislature vote on the bill with no prior complaint from the Governor, then telling everyone that it’s not good enough is a sh*tty thing to do to your fellow Republicans. As far as i’m concerned it’s a “back stab.”

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 2:11 PM

I think a lot more is going on here than we yet know.

I think we may be seeing the GOP and the Democrats lining up to block the tea party, Trump, Palin, and the so-called ‘birthers’ because the two parties share a common concern that business as usual might be interrupted. Some of them may not like what Obama is doing but they see him as one of their own far more than they identify with the fringe 60% of Americans.

sharrukin on April 19, 2011 at 4:49 PM

What is your proof? Since your profess such a high level of intellect, you must have something other than rumor and innuendo right?

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 4:48 PM

It isn’t up to some guy on the Internet to prove Obama’s eligibility.

That is up to Obama.

sharrukin on April 19, 2011 at 4:51 PM

Our internet went down Sunday eve. and is FINALLY back up. Yea!
Now, ya’ll know how I feel about birthers so…Good. On. Jan. Brewer.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 19, 2011 at 4:56 PM

Ok, since his COLB, 2 newspaper reports from 50 years ago in conformation using information provided by the state, a passport are not proof…you must have proof to the contrary, right?

What is your proof? Since your profess such a high level of intellect, you must have something other than rumor and innuendo right?

NextGen on April 19, 2011 at 4:48 PM

My proof is the fact that he won’t release HIS proof. What he shows is NOT proof, and anyone who knows about Amended birth certificates fully well KNOWS that no document presented by the state without a “witness” signature can be regarded as proof.

cn6, rukiddingme, New_Jersey_Buckeye, have now all admitted that Birth certificates can be modified. Are YOU aware of this fact?

A simply question. Are YOU aware that birth certificates can be modified?

DiogenesLamp on April 19, 2011 at 4:59 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4