On April 17, Arthur B. Culvahouse, Jr., a well-known attorney who has done work for the Republican Party, spoke to a Republican lawyers group. The talk was broadcast on C-SPAN.
The attorney said that John McCain was legally barred from nominating Senator Joseph Lieberman for vice-president, since Lieberman was a registered Democrat. The attorney said that West Virginia law made it legally impossible for Lieberman to appear on the November ballot in that state as the Republican nominee for vice-president.
It is true that West Virginia law, section 3-5-7(6), says that someone running in a primary election, or someone petitioning for the November election, must sign a form that says the candidate is “a member of and affiliated with that political party, as is evidenced by the candidate’s current registration as a voter affiliated with that party, and that the candidate has not been registered as a voter affiliated with any other political party for a period of 60 days before the date of filing the announcement.” However, that West Virginia law has never been interpreted to apply to presidential or vice-presidential candidates running in November. There are 4 separate reasons for that:
(1) If West Virginia did apply that law to candidates for president or vice-president running in the general election, it would be unconstitutional. The U.S. Supreme Court said in Tashjian v Republican Party of Connecticut, 479 US 208 (1986), on page 215, “Were the state by statute to…provide that only Party members might be selected as the Party’s chosen nominees for public office, such a prohibition would clearly infringe upon the rights of the party’s members under the First Amendment to organize with like-minded citizens in support of common political goals.”
(2) West Virginia has never applied this law (which has existed unchanged since 1991) to presidential or vice-presidential candidates in the past. For example, Ralph Nader was listed as the Green Party’s presidential candidate in West Virginia in 2000, yet he has always been a registered independent, his entire life. Also, in 2008, the Mountain Party was permitted to nominate both a presidential and a vice-presidential candidate who were registered as members of the Green Party. And in 2000 and 2004 the Republican Party was permitted to nominate George W. Bush, who was not a registered Republican because Texas registration forms do not ask about party membership. Also, the Democratic Party in 2000 was able to nominate Al Gore for president, and he was not a registered Democrat since Tennessee also does not ask for party affiliation on voter registration forms.
(3) Section 3-5-7 only applies to candidates seeking to run in a party primary anyway, or to candidates who are not the nominees of a qualified party. Neither West Virginia nor any other state requires the presidential or vice-presidential candidates of any qualified party to fill out any declaration of candidacy in order to appear on the November ballot. There would have been no occasion for any West Virginia elections official to expect a declaration of candidacy form from Lieberman. West Virginia would have no official knowledge of how Lieberman was registered, and no occasion to ask him about it.
(4) The true candidates in November of presidential election years are the candidates for presidential elector. Presidential and vice-presidential candidates appear on the ballot in their capacity as labels for competing slates of presidential electors, not as candidates themselves. If the candidates for presidential elector meet the qualifications to hold the elector job, the state has no authority to censor their statement of whom they will vote for in December in the electoral college. As the U.S. District Court said in Robinson v Bowen, 567 F Supp 2d 1144 (2008), “Arguments concerning qualifications or lack thereof (of presidential and vice-presidential candidates) can be laid before the voting public and, once the election is over, can be raised as objections as the electoral votes are counted in Congress…Therefore, this order holds that the challenge presented by plaintiff is committed under the Constitution to the electors (the voters) and the legislative branch (Congress).” Thanks to Matt from DemConWatch for the news.
The Mountain Party affiliated with the Green Party in 2007 and sent delegates to the 2008 Green Party convention. Thus, there was no issue between the Green Party and the Mountain Party. Cynthia McKinney is and was a registered Green in California; I have no knowledge whether New York is keeping track of Green registrations at this time.
Everything you say is true. Nevertheless, the literal language of the law (which is an absolutely absurd law when applied to presidential elections) would have disallowed the Mountain Party registrations.
New York does still keep track of Green Party registrations.
Only proving that McCain was and is a party hack MORON when it involves important stuff.
The qualifications for a VP are the same as for a Prez.
12th Amdt, last sentence.
NO mention of any party hack connection in Art. II or in the 12th Amdt.
Abraham Lincoln’s vice president, Andrew Johnson of Tennessee, elected in 1864, was a Democrat. McCain probably didn’t know that either.
McCain’s real problem was he was born at the Colon
Hospital on 29 August 1936 in the Republic of Panama. On 4 August 1937, Congress passed an Act
on collective naturalization for certain persons born in the Republic of Panama to an American (or former American) parent, viz., 8 USCA 5e. He did
not meet the requirements of that Act, because his
mother Roberta McCain nee Wright was never married to John S. McCain II in Baja California [location claimed by John S. McCain in his book Faith of My
Fathers]. The Act of August 4, 1937 required certain employment by her at the time of birth,
viz., employment by the United States Government or
the Panama Railroad Company which was something she
did not have.
Bottom line the event in a bar in TJ between Roberta Wright and John S. McCain II was not a
valid marriage under the laws of Baja California.
Because of being born out of wedlock, John S. McCain is just an other undocumented alien on his on his arrival in the United States in December, 1936.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American
Independent Party.
Mark: Have you broken the news to Senator McCain? How about the Vietnamese? I bet they feel foolish having held him as a POW all those years when they weren’t even at war with Panama.
#5 Sooooo — who is challenging McCain’s qualification to be a U.S.A. Senator ???
Const Art. I, Sec. 3, cl. 3
No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.
@5 and @7: The “law” only applies to the little people, not the political classes. See: http://marcstevens.net (I especially recommend “Delusions”, and Marc’s book “Adventures in Legal Land”)
McCain is an obedient parasite at the highest level. There is virtually no chance that he will ever be held accountable for any of his actions, or inconvenienced by the contradictions in any law. (Unless by random chance he encounters an Arizona lynch mob, during the coming inflationary crash.) long before then, I expect he will have escaped the flaming mess he helped to make of our country, or insulated himself from its effects.
Thanks though, for pointing out one more hypocrisy on top of McCain’s (and the Republican Party’s) existing mountain of hypocrisy.
@6 BTW: Getting tortured in a prison doesn’t make someone right about anything. In the case of John McCain, it didn’t even teach him anything. I recommend Matt Welch’s book on the subject “Myth of a Maverick”. It’s 100% correct. McCain is slime. (Especially because he was a POW: Any POW that supports the US prison industry the way McCain does certainly lacks any form of integrity.)
In the 2000 and 2008 presidential primaries, McCain never carried the Republican vote in a GOP primary until after he had clinched the 2008 nomination.
TO: Get Over Yourselves
Reply to comment #6. First, John S. McCain may not
be a citizen, because I have no information that he
was not naturalized, but I can find no record of it. At birth he was a natural born citizen of the Republic of Panama. The person at the time of his birth that Roberta McCain nee Wright (McCain mom)
listed as her first son’s father on the birth certificate was the John S. McCain II. When John
McCain III retired from the US Navy he submitted
a copy of his birth certificate showing his birth at the Colon Hospital (which is not located in the
Panama Canal Zone, but directly in the Republic of
Panama). That birth in the Republic of Panama has
never cause any concern to the US Navy or to the
Secretaries of State of Arizona, since McCain first
ran for the House of Representative. The real issue is John S. McCain III may not lawfully be in
the United States Senate or ever was a commissioned
officer in the United States Navy, because his mom
did not get married at the Office of the Civil Registry in TJ of Baja California.
As for the Vietnamese, they should not look beyond
his US Navy Uniform under international law. I do
not know what relationship the Communist North of
Vietnam had with the Republic of Panama during the
time McCain was held prisoner there. If anyone
has information on the status of Panama and the
Communist North of Vietnam please post here.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party
To Richard Winger
Your point of presidential electors raises two additional problems in California. One relates
to Norma Torres introduction of AB 1326. Her
bill will open the way for aliens (non United
States Citizens) to be elected as members of the
county central committees of the Democratic Party.
I thought the several state governments in these United States progressed from aliens electorial rights (ending circa 1924) to limiting the electorial process to citizens only. Once the
last of the Indians of America got citizenship status there was no need to allow aliens to enter
the process.
In Keyes v. Bowen the issue of Ms. Huber came to light. The congressional nominees did not comply
with the California Election Code by submitting the
names of the selected electors to the Sectretary of
State and the SOS put the listed names sent in by
Mr. Myers (employee of the Democratic Party)who admitted he made errors on several of the names
submitted in his e-mail to the Election Division.
With no checking if the 55 names were registered
to vote or if they were registered in the Democratic Party prior to the primary, Secretary
of State Bowen placed the names on the ballot
(document that could be viewed at the poles on election day). Therefore electors voted who voted
Democratic elected a MS. Huber. The only person
by that name on the voters roles in California was
dead for several years (on the roles in Humboldt
County).
Looking back to last November, no more than two of
the total 55 presidential electors should have been
on the ballot (since only the State Chairman may have followed the California Election Code on notice to Secretary of State Bowen, but that is even a question). If two were the only electors
the other 53 should have been elected by them on
election day out of a pool of electors present.
That did not happen. Secretary of State Bowen at
the suggestion of an employee of the Democratic
Party took a so called corrected filing of Presidental Electors after the November election
was over. Therefore, how the electors voted in this state is of little to no concern to the Secretary of State, because she allowed a person not elected by the electors of California to sit and vote as if she was a presidential elector.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American
Independent Party.
I hate to burst all of your bubbles, but:
“(a) Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States. ”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1403.html
The law in plain text. McCain is a citizen.
To Matt
First thank you for posting the link to the above section of the United States Code. However, the
subsection of the code you need to read is not subsection 1403a, but subsection 1403b (also in the
link at the above post # 13. This is the third edition of that enactment. In the first edition
the effective date was different, viz., August 4,
1937 (25 days before John S. McCain turned one year
of age). The code section that was effective for
John S. McCain III was 8 USCA 5e (found in the pocket part in the volume covering title 8 & 9 in
either the 1938, 1939, or 1940 printings.
Again the Colon Hospital where Roberta McCain nee
Wright gave birth to John S. McCain III out of wedlock on August 29, 1936, was located in the
Republic of Panama and not in the Canal Zone.
Roberta Wright did not marry John S. McCain II at a bar in TJ, Baja California as stated in Mr. McCain’s book Faith Of My Fathers, because all
marriages in Baja California must take place in
an office of the Civil Registry. Since, there
was no lawful marriage between Roberta Wright
and John S. McCain II prior to the birth on
August 29, 1936 of John S. McCain III, under the
terms of the 1930 Convention on Nationality, which
became effective as United States Law early in 1937, only citizenship rights can flow from his
mother. Robert McCain nee Wright was not employed
by either the United States Government nor the Panama Railroad Company. Therefore, John S. McCain III was not covered by that Collective
Naturalization Act of August 4, 1937. He was
an alien who was not admitted on his arrival in
the United States circa December, 1936. Therefore,
he is not a citizen of the United States.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American
Independent Party.
To Mark
I fail to see anything in your post that contradicts Matt’s post.
His mother was a US citizen. If you were born in the Canal zone in 1936 to a US citizen mother, you too are a US citizen no matter the marital status of your mother.
Mark Seidenberg keeps trying to get across the point that John McCain wasn’t born in the Canal Zone. Colon was never in the Canal Zone. Although Colon sits right on the Canal at the Atlantic end, the boundary was always drawn to exclude Colon from the zone.
To John G.
richard is correct in the above point. Also the
Collective Naturalization Act of August 4, 1937
provided form children born in the Canal Zone under
one subsection and children born in the Republic of
Panama including the City of Colon in another subsection. John Sidney McCain was born in the
Republic of Panama out of wedlock, therefore he could not be a United States Citizen under that
act even though his mother was a United States
Citizen, because she was not employed by either
the United States Government nor the Panama Railroad Company at the time which John S. McCain III was born on August 29, 1936.
John S. McCain is not a citizen of the United States, he was never naturialized. In circa
December, 1936 when he arrived in the United
States he was not admitted. Therefore he is an
undocumented alien.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American
Independent Party