It seems likely that no state legislature this year will pass a bill, requiring presidential candidate birth certificates as a condition of ballot access. The Missouri bill that had contained such a provision, SB 282, passed the legislature today, but a few days ago a conference committee deleted the “birth certificate” part of the bill.
The Oklahoma bill, SB 91, has passed both houses, but the two versions differ. The version in one house accepts a certified copy of the birth certificate, but the version in the other house demands an original. The Conference Committee members were named on May 5, but they have not met, and it is likely the Oklahoma legislature will only be in session for another week.
As reported previously, the only state legislature that passed one of these bills had been Arizona, but the Governor had vetoed it. It seems somewhat plausible that when President Obama produced his birth certificate earlier this month, that took some of the interest away from these bills.
Hawaii did have a good idea about something that might appeal to Vermonters.
I sent out an e-mail to a bunch of Vermonters and none responded so far, so whatever…
Here it is: in Hawaii, a native Hawaiian who is 50% Hawaiian blood can receive a HOMESTEAD LAND LEASE FOR ONE DOLLAR ($1.) A YEAR.
Now, wouldn’t that be good for Vermonters who are being forced out by high property taxes?
For example, in Ludlow, Vermont, 80% of the homes are owned by out-of-state rich people.
Vermonters are supposed to be eligible for income sensitive property tax help, but Governor (Democrat) Peter Shumlin tortured low income Vermonters this year with an assault that was mind-boggling – a letter to poor Vermonters demanding a copy of their federal income tax (what right in holy hell does the State of Vermont Tax Department have to DEMAND a copy of your federal tax filing?, and an audit form that was outrageous and not like any previously known audit form – asking them how often they eat out at a restraunt – and other offensively worded questions.
At any rate, since (Democrat) Governor Peter Shumlin is out to get rid of low income Vermonters and he is so incredibly hateful towards them,
it is time to hurry up and talk about this Hawaiian program to lease homestead land for one dollar a year to natives,
and to define
“native Vermonter”.
http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl
WHAT IS INTERESTING, IS THAT THE HAWAIIAN PROGRAM EXPLAINS HOW YOU CAN QUALIFY AS A NATIVE HAWAIIAN EVEN WITHOUT ANY PROOF – READ IT!
Physical place of birth – means ZERO.
Nation-State status of father controls — regardless of JUNK paper birth certificates.
Who was your daddy and what was his nation-state status when you were born — whereever you were born ???
Too many LAW morons to count — esp. SCOTUS morons.
Demo,
Place of birth DOES NOT mean “zero.”
1) The U.S. Constitution refers to Emerich de Vattel’s “Law of Nations” (1758) in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 10. Thus it is implied as a source of understanding.
2) Book 1, Chapter 19 (XIX), Section 212 of “The Law of Nations” defines a natural born citizen as BOTH being born in country and of parents who were citizens at birth. It goes on the make it even more clear that natural citizenship stems from only the father’s citizenship.
So, A) There is no question that Obama’s father was born in Kenya and a recognized Kenyan citizen with either that or British nationality, not American, so Barack is not eligible for U.S. President, and
B) John McCain was BORN IN Colon, Republic of Panama (“Republic of Panama” is used on both Teddy Roosevelt and Jimmy Carter signed treaties), which was NOT a U.S. possession (as is commonly misunderstood), and NOT a military base (this was 1936). So John McCain wasn’t qualified either, regardless of his father’s honorable naval service.
How many Brit kids got born on foreign ships going to America in 1607-1776 — a long circa 10-12 weeks very dangerous trip ???
See Blackstone’s Commentaries about British subjects — i.e. look for *allegiance* at birth.
*naturalization* = change in allegiance after birth.
See the 1607-1776 Brit Acts of Parliament regarding Brit subjects born overseas — i.e. after the Brits got into the colony business bigtime.
Even take a look at the later charters for the Brit colony folks.
Big deal in the bad old monarchy days — allegiance to some lunatic/killer monarchs and their oligarchy gangs.
minor correction/addition – see the Acts of Parliament about allegiance even with the English-French wars in the Middle Age — 100 years War, etc.
i.e. English subjects born in parts of occupied *France* — claimed to be owned by various English monarchs.
Gee when was France dropped from the English monarchy claims and monarch titles ???
exceptionally good material, warm regards