{"id":1111,"date":"2011-03-06T16:37:00","date_gmt":"2011-03-06T22:37:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/?p=1111"},"modified":"2011-03-06T16:37:00","modified_gmt":"2011-03-06T22:37:00","slug":"hope-and-change-at-last","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/?p=1111","title":{"rendered":"Hope and Change… At Last"},"content":{"rendered":"

Question: What do 3,408\u00bd Democratic Party convention delegates, 365 Democratic members of the 2008 U.S. Electoral College, and 535 members of the 111th<\/sup> Congress have in common?<\/p>\n

Answer: They are all cowards, Democrats and Republicans alike, who had an opportunity to question Barack Obama\u2019s eligibility to serve as President of the United States, but did not.<\/p>\n

Now, as political activists, members of the media, and potential candidates begin to jockey for position ahead of the 2012 presidential campaign, the question of Obama\u2019s eligibility once again takes center stage.\u00a0 Was Obama eligible to run in 2008?\u00a0 No, he failed to meet the \u201cnatural born citizen\u201d standard required under Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Knowing in his own mind that he was ineligible to serve, did that knowledge in any way deter him from running?\u00a0 No, the Obama narcissism is such that he actually believed he was capable of leading the world\u2019s only remaining superpower.\u00a0 Finally, did his ineligibility in any way deter those who purchased the office for him?\u00a0 No, those who supported his candidacy were so anxious to place control of our government into the hands of a totally inexperienced and totally incompetent puppet that the only thing that concerned them was his ability to read flawlessly from a teleprompter.<\/p>\n

But now, under the old adage, \u201cFool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me,\u201d members of Congress and the state legislatures are taking steps to erect insurmountable roadblocks to an Obama rerun.\u00a0 During the 111th<\/sup> Congress, Representative Bill Posey (R-FL) introduced HR 1503, as follows:<\/p>\n

\u201cTo amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of President to include with the committee’s statement of organization a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution.”<\/em><\/p>\n

With Democrats in control of both houses of Congress, HR1503 had little chance of receiving serious consideration.\u00a0 The bill was assigned to the House Administration Committee where it was allowed to die a quiet death.\u00a0 However, with Republicans now in control of the House, it is expected that a similar bill will pass the House and move on to the Senate where Harry Reid and other Democrats will have to explain to the American people why they oppose the idea of the president and vice president having to show that they are, in fact, eligible to serve.<\/p>\n

However, if Democrats are able to block passage of the bill in Congress, Obama will have an even tougher hurdle to cross.\u00a0 At least ten states are considering legislation requiring candidates for president and vice president to prove their qualifications in order to have their names appear on the Primary and\/or General Election ballots.\u00a0 The most interesting of these are Arizona HB2544 and Nebraska LB654.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Arizona HB2544, Section A, in addition to requiring the national political parties to provide the Arizona Secretary of State with written notice of the names of their candidates for president and vice president, would require the candidates themselves, within ten days, to submit an affidavit stating their age and citizenship, along with documents proving: a) their status as natural born citizens, b) their age, and c) their 14-year U.S. residency requirement.<\/p>\n

Under Section B, the Arizona bill would require candidates to submit: a) an original long form birth certificate that includes the date and place of birth, the name of the hospital, the attending physician, and signatures of the witnesses in attendance, b) a sworn statement attesting that the candidate has not held dual or multiple citizenship and that the candidate’s allegiance is solely to the United States of America, and c) a sworn statement that identifies the candidate’s places of residence in the United States for at least fourteen years.<\/p>\n

Finally, under Section C, the Arizona bill provides that, \u201cIf both the candidate and the national political party committee for that candidate fail to submit and swear to the documents prescribed in this section, the secretary of state shall not place that presidential candidate’s name on the ballot in this state.\u201d<\/p>\n

Nebraska LB654 would require candidates for president and vice president to provide: a) a certified copy of the candidate\u2019s birth certificate, showing that the candidate was born within a state or territory of the United States and that the candidate will be at least 35 years of age prior to the inauguration date, and b) documentary proof, as required by the Nebraska secretary of state, showing that the candidate meets the residency requirements for the office as prescribed by the United States Constitution.\u00a0 In addition, Nebraska law would require candidates to execute a sworn affidavit, reading substantially as follows: \u201cI was born a citizen of the United States of America and was subject exclusively to the jurisdiction of the United States of America, owing allegiance to no other country at the time of my birth. \u00a0On the day I was born, both my birth mother and birth father were citizens of the United States of America.\u201d \u00a0<\/p>\n

Other legislative proposals\u2026 Connecticut SB391, Georgia HB37, Indiana SB114, Maine LD34, Montana HB205, Oklahoma SB91and SB384, Texas HB295 and HB529\u2026 are similar in nature.<\/p>\n

They require candidates for president and vice president to provide proof of age and natural born citizenship in the form of a certified long form birth certificate, as well as proof of at least fourteen years U.S. residency.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

Indiana SB114 also places a responsibility on the state chairmen of the major political parties, requiring that the party chairmen certify that each nominee of his\/her party for president and vice president meets the constitutional qualifications, and that a certified copy of each nominee’s birth certificate, including any other documentation necessary to establish that the nominee meets the qualifications, accompany the state chairman\u2019s certification.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Georgia HB37, in addition to requiring proof of age, 14-year U.S. residency, and natural born citizenship, provides Georgia citizens with statutory \u201cstanding\u201d to challenge the documentation. \u00a0HB37 provides that, \u201cAny citizen of this state shall have the right to challenge the qualifications of any such candidate within two weeks following the publication of the names of such candidates by\u00a0the Secretary of State\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

A third Oklahoma bill, SB540 additionally invests all registered Oklahoma voters with standing to sue a presidential or vice presidential candidate, requiring proof of citizenship.<\/p>\n

The weakest of the thirteen legislative proposals is Missouri HB283.\u00a0 Current law provides that, \u201cNot later than the twelfth Tuesday prior to each presidential election\u2026 within seven working days after choosing its nominees for president and vice president of the United States, whichever is later, the state committee of each established political party shall certify in writing to the secretary of state the names of its nominees for president and vice president of the United States.\u201d\u00a0 HB283 would add the words: \u201cSuch certification shall include proof of identity and proof of United States citizenship for each nominee.\u201d<\/p>\n

Under the revised Missouri statute, requiring that candidates provide only \u201cproof of United States citizenship,\u201d Obama could qualify as a candidate for president if he can provide proof of either naturalized or \u201cnative born\u201d citizenship.\u00a0 Inasmuch as his father was not a U.S. citizen he would still be unable to prove \u201cnatural born\u201d citizenship, as required by the U.S. Constitution.<\/p>\n

Texas HB295 prohibits the Texas Secretary of State from certifying a candidate for president or vice president unless the candidate has provided an original long form birth certificate indicating that the candidate is a natural born U.S. citizen.\u00a0 Texas HB529 prohibits the Secretary of State from certifying the name of a candidate for president or vice-president unless the candidate has presented: (1) the candidate’s original birth certificate indicating the name of the hospital and the physician of record, or (2) for a candidate whose birth was not documented in the manner required by Subdivision (1), a document certifying the candidate’s birth in the United States.<\/p>\n

Taken together, the ten states will control 112 electoral votes in 2012, thirty-eight votes in the State of Texas alone.\u00a0 Of the ten, Obama carried only Connecticut, Indiana, and Maine in 2008 with a combined total of 22 electoral votes\u2026 not enough, under normal circumstances, to cause him to lose reelection in 2012.\u00a0 However, with one or more of those ten states standing in his way, causing him to reveal once and for all who he is and his citizenship status, the chances of his reelection would be almost nil.\u00a0 The American people would finally learn exactly what is so important about his background that would cause him to spend some $2 million keeping it from them.<\/p>\n

Obama will finally have brought us the \u201chope and change\u201d he promised in 2008\u2026 \u201chope\u201d that the final two years of his bogus presidency will pass quickly, and sufficient \u201cchange\u201d in our state laws to prevent a total fraud from ever again ascending to the Presidency of the United States.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Question: What do 3,408\u00bd Democratic Party convention delegates, 365 Democratic members of the 2008 U.S. Electoral College, and 535 members of the 111th Congress have in common? Answer: They are all cowards, Democrats and Republicans alike, who had an opportunity … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[4],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1111"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1111"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1111\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1112,"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1111\/revisions\/1112"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1111"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1111"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1111"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}