States advance eligibility laws- Find out status of 13 legislatures' demands for presidential candi

States advance eligibility laws - Find out status of 13 legislatures' demands for presidential candidates

States advance eligibility laws Find out status of 13 legislatures' demands

Lawmakers in two states quickly are advancing proposals that could be used to require future presidential candidates to document – with birth certificates or other forms of proof – their eligibility under the U.S. Constitution's requirement that they are at least 35, have lived 14 years in the U.S. and are a "natural born Citizen."...

This is the latest update by Bob Unruh on the status of legislation in 13 stated for presidential candidates to prove their eligibility.

When this issue was raised in an earlier thread on ATS, some people correctly pointed out that the specific language used in this legislation is an issue, and as this update indicates, the states are still working on that specific language.

The states really shouldn't have to be put in the position of determining the eligibility of candidates for federal offices like president, this is a shame that this action is considered necessary. But there is a precedent. In 1984, the state of California removed Peace and Freedom Party candidate Larry Holmes from the ballot after determining the candidate was ineligible based on age.

Perhaps what is needed is for Congress to appoint an independent panel, not affiliated with any party and perhaps composed of people from multiple parties to qualify federal candidates so the situation California faced will not recur, and states won't have to enact legislation to qualify candidates.

Of course the driving force behind this legislation is the question of Obama's eligibility. Personally, I think he was probably born in Hawaii, but I don't see the harm in producing the long form birth certificate which Okubo offered to provide back in 2008:

the.honoluluadvertiser.com...

Okubo said, "If someone from Obama's campaign gave us permission in person and presented some kind of verification that he or she was Obama's designee, we could release the vital record."

It occurs to me that if the Obama campaign had taken Okubo up on the offer and showed us that instead of the short form, we might not have the legislatures of 13 states working on federal office eligibility legislation when they probably have more pressing concerns, like maybe balancing their budgets.

I also wonder what people think of the following theory. Don't shoot me, it's not my theory and I don't have any proof, I think it's speculative but it might explain some things if it's true which I have no idea if it is:

Eye View Investigation Puts Obama Birth Certificate Issue To Rest

Eye View Investigation has determined

* Obama was indeed born in Hawaii in 1961

* Obama was indeed adopted by Lolo Soetoro in the 1970s

* Obama’s name was indeed changed to Barry Soetoro in the 1970s

* Obama’s birth certificate was altered per Hawaiian law to reflect his new name in the 1970s

* Obama never changed his name back to “Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.” — most likely because he used “Barry Soetoro” on all of his student aid applications for college, and probably received foreign student grants and admissions assistance playing off his years living in Indonesia

* All the records, transcripts, documents, and paperwork Obama continues to hide from the public is all hidden because it lists his name as “Barry Soetoro” on all of it.

* Obama will not allow his birth certificate to be released because it lists the “wrong” name on it: Barry Soetoro

I really haven't seen any proof that theory is true, and that source doesn't really provide proof for those claims so I'm still skeptical. Really the only fact we have is that Obama apparently never accepted Okubo's offer to provide the vital record so I'm left wondering why he didn't take her up on that when I now see 13 legislatures working on this eligibility legislation.

One thing I do find odd, is I read that investigators didn't find any year book photos of Obama under the name of either Obama or Soetoro at the time he was supposedly at Columbia. So if the Soetoro name claim was true, why wouldn't he have shown up in the Columbia yearbook under that name? And why didn't he show up in a Columbia yearbook under any name? Some have suggested CIA involvement but I don't know about that.

Thoughts?

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Interesting point about the yearbooks...maybe moneybag Trump should ask to pay a reward if someone has a yearbook with the president's mug in it...

I say Eye View Investigation are liars....My word is just as credible as theirs....any body's is.....Proof is what we want, not words of deception....for an Soetoro water carrier...

Natural Born Citizens, what a tag.

reply to post by Caji316
I agree about needing proof. The only proof I've seen is that Obama did move to Indonesia to live with the Soetoro family and that he did register at the local school there by the name of Soetoro.

But that doesn't prove the name change was "official" and it doesn't prove adoption. On the other hand, I'm not sure if the lack of proof automatically means the adoption never happened. The most I can say right now is, "I don't know".

Originally posted by chrismarco
Interesting point about the yearbooks...maybe moneybag Trump should ask to pay a reward if someone has a yearbook with the president's mug in it...

There were some pretty big rewards offered for anyone providing proof Obama is a natural born citizen:

$100,000 Reward for Proof of Obama's "natural born citizen" status.

I, Jason Hommel, promise that I will give $100,000 to the first person who can prove to my satisfaction that Barack Obama, acting as president of the United States, is a "natural born" citizen of the USA, which is a qualification to hold the office as indicated in the U.S. Constitution.

But I think the only reason they offered those was because they seemed pretty sure Obama couldn't produce a birth certificate.

I doubt we'll see an offer that big for the yearbook photo because he may yet turn up in a yearbook somewhere. They only looked at the school Obama said he went to, Columbia. They didn't look anywhere else that I know of.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


The one part I take exception to, and have major issues with, is the birth certificate being changed to reflect a new name. This is not done and is not proper procedure.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
The one part I take exception to, and have major issues with, is the birth certificate being changed to reflect a new name. This is not done and is not proper procedure.

Actually I've done some research on this. The procedures aren't consistent from locality to locality. Part of it is semantics. Take this article, for example:

How to Change Names on Birth Certificates for Adopted Children in Illinois
They talk about changing the name on the birth certificate. But in reality they actually place the original birth certificate in a sealed file that can't be accessed without a court order. This means the birth certificate the state has on file will show the adopted name if the adoption involves a name change.

So anyone requesting the birth certificate after this will get the different name giving the appearance of a name change. But in actuality a sealed record is supposed to be on file somewhere, if it hasn't been lost. And this may vary by state or locality.

What did you think the proper procedure was?

I went to college and did not opt to have my picture in the yearbook. So?

reply to post by MaryStillToe
You probably didn't run for president of the United States.

It occurs to me that being president is perhaps the most public position one can have, so with that kind of visibility in office, it seems a little inconsistent for a future presidential candidate to opt out of having a yearbook photo, though it's certainly possible he opted out, and there's nothing wrong with you opting out.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
reply to post by MaryStillToe

 

You probably didn't run for president of the United States.

It occurs to me that being president is perhaps the most public position one can have, so with that kind of visibility in office, it seems a little inconsistent for a future presidential candidate to opt out of having a yearbook photo, though it's certainly possible he opted out, and there's nothing wrong with you opting out.

Do you think that at the time he was graduating from college he knew that he would run for president decades in the future?

reply to post by MaryStillToe

I don't know, but I was referring more to his personality type than his specific aspirations. Most people classify Obama as an extrovert rather than an introvert, the latter typically wanting less publicity like a yearbook photo or public office, though there are exceptions.