Hawaii to pass the "Coverup" bill

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Freiwillige

Yea Gore would have been the better choice all things considered!

Go Green!

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

This must have been in reaction to the push in Arizona to have legislation that if any presidential candidate to appear on the state ballot they must have proof of citizenship.

Why that isnt already a requirement Ill never know.

Because it is up to the state election commission of the state of residence for the candidate to certify their eligibility. Once a state election commission has certified eligibility, I don't see why another state has to do it again.

Seems like a waste of state's money and time.

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Hmmmm...one thing I wonder: if Obama weren't named Obama, but, say, Harrington and his father was a white Kenyan of pure English descent (I'm pretty sure they exist) would there be such a focus on his birth certificate? The expected response would be "of course not." Sort of like the myth that the Tea Partiers come from all walks of life and are against all "unnecessary" government spending (yet only appeared after Obama got elected...and have no problem if their state takes in more federal dollars than it pays out, etc).

Also, I suspect there will NEVER be enough evidence to prove Obama was born in the U.S.A. for these people.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Because it is up to the state election commission of the state of residence for the candidate to certify their eligibility. Once a state election commission has certified eligibility, I don't see why another state has to do it again.

Seems like a waste of state's money and time.

Well evidently none of the states have the requirement on the books. Seems they all took it for granted that a candidate would qualify under the constitution.

[Fr8monkey]

I think the whole thing in Arizona and Hawaii is just pure racism that's all.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Fr8monkey

I think the whole thing in Arizona and Hawaii is just pure racism that's all.

Really? How so? Please explain it to me I guess I'm stupid.

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Really? How so? Please explain it to me I guess I'm stupid.

I think my post you're ignoring touches upon it.

[SteamWake]

Well I dident bring up the race issue you did so.....

[August]

Originally Posted by Torvald Von Mansee

Hmmmm...one thing I wonder: if Obama weren't named Obama, but, say, Harrington and his father was a white Kenyan of pure English descent (I'm pretty sure they exist) would there be such a focus on his birth certificate? The expected response would be "of course not." Sort of like the myth that the Tea Partiers come from all walks of life and are against all "unnecessary" government spending (yet only appeared after Obama got elected...and have no problem if their state takes in more federal dollars than it pays out, etc).

Also, I suspect there will NEVER be enough evidence to prove Obama was born in the U.S.A. for these people.

Well one thing *I* wonder is if you still wouldn't have a problem with Obamas true orgin if he had an (R) after his name, or whether you'd still hate the Tea Partiers if they were Democrats. Given your repeated posts like this I have to say the expected response would be yes to the former and no to the latter.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Fr8monkey

Bush didn't steal the election. He just had the Supreme Court rule in his favor instead of going to the Senate to decide as per Constitutional law.

Maybe you need to reread the Constitution. It's the House, not the Senate, who decides, and then only if none of the candidates recieves the required number of electoral votes.

And a quick history lesson: The Florida recounts went on forever, and the Democrats seemed to pick up a few votes with each recount. That said, Gore never came close to actually passing Bush, and there was the question of where those votes were coming from, especially since the counties in question were all Democrat-controlled.

The Florida Attorney General proclaimed that it was time for the counting to stop. Was she biased? Of course - she was a Republican and it was her guy who was leading. Was she wrong? Maybe. But according to Florida state law it was her call to make.

The Gore camp ran to the Florida State Supreme Court, which ruled that she must let the counting continue.

The Bush camp ran to the United States Supreme Court, which ruled that Florida law was law and the State Court didn't have the authority to overturn it.

Did the US Supreme Court "appoint" Bush to be president? You can argue it either way, but you are showing your bias if you don't also acknowledge that the Florida Court was trying to "appoint" Gore.