JUST HOW STUPID CAN I GET? ASSUMING THIS WAS ALWAYS DONE!!!

[PAT MCCORMICK "GO OEAF"]

Georgia state Rep. Mark HatfieldAnother state has begun considering a law like an Arizona plan approved by the state House there that would require presidential candidates to document their eligibility before being allowed on the election ballot.Georgia Rep. Mark Hatfield, part of a coalition in his state supporting new election requirements, says it's really the responsibility of members of Congress to make sure a foreign-born individual or dual citizen isn't installed in the White House.But he said without the leadership in Washington necessary to do that, it is up to states to tackle the issue. Arizona's plan is closest to adoption, awaiting only approval from the state Senate.According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, Oklahoma also has pending in a legislative committee a referendum that could be put before voters.The organization says during 2009, various plans to require documentation from presidential candidates were considered in Maine, Oklahoma, Missouri and Montana but were not adopted.See the movie Obama does not want you to see: Own the DVD that probes this unprecedented presidential eligibility mystery!But that track record is not at all unusual for controversial issues such as a requirement for documentation for a presidential candidate's eligibility.The NCSL records also show that other election proposals were considered that were much more vague about whether they would apply to presidential candidates or not."If Congress was being responsible about this, Congress would step in and enact reasonable requirements," Hatfield said today in an interview on the G. Gordon Liddy show, where WorldNetDaily CEO Joseph Farah was filling in behind the microphone."In the absence of action by Congress states have a duty to step up," he said.Listen to an interview with Rep. Mark Hatfield:Hatfield has introduced into his legislature House Bill 1516, which, he said, recognizes the need "for some sort of enforcement mechanism with regard to Article 2, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution."The Constitution states: "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.""The bill is basically a bill that would provide some teeth to the Article 2, Section 1 by requiring presidential candidates in the future to submit an affidavit showing their citizenship and age, and their residency, and appending to that documents that would prove citizenship, age and residency," Hatfield said.He said he used as a model the legislation that now is nearing approval in Arizona.Members of the Arizona House of Representatives have approved 31-29 a requirement for presidential candidates to produce their documentation if they want their name of the Arizona ballot in 2012.The issue arose with the candidacy of then-Sen. Barack Obama, who has written that he was born in Hawaii of an American mother and a Kenyan national father. Lawsuits erupted over the issue before his election and have been continuing to this date. Some claim he was not born in Hawaii, since he only has released a computer-generated image of a "Certification of Live Birth," documents which were accessible to non-native children at the time he was born, and others allege the Founders of the U.S. excluded dual citizens from the presidency."No citizen of the United States should ever have any doubts about the qualifications of the individual who occupies the highest office in the land," Hatfield said on the Liddy show.A recent CBS-New York Times poll revealed that only 58 percent of Americans even "think" that Obama was born in this country.The poll result, Hatfield said, is "eye-popping information" and calls for states to act "to make sure our Constitution is complied with."He said his plan has seven sponsors, but since the legislative session is approaching closure, it probably will be taken up in the next session.Hatfield said the longer the questions about Obama remain unanswered, "the longer this issue will remain around."According to the NCSL database, a New Hampshire proposal was pending concerning "inserting the presidential qualifications contained in the U.S. Constitution."In New York, a proposal by a freedom of information organization to state lawmakers would have provided "an individual seeking placement on the New York State's election ballot(s) for the office of president or vice president of the United States must present proof of eligibility, as per requirements that are stated in Article 2, section 1, paragraph 5 of the U.S. Constitution."In South Carolina, there was discussion over a plan to prohibit the name of a candidate on a ballot "unless that person shows conclusive evidence that he is a legal citizen of the United States."Questions also remain about the wording of various proposals. In Obama's situation, the question specifically refers to his status as a "natural born citizen" as required by the Constitution, not any status as a "citizen" or even "native born citizen."The proposals essentially are moving the same direction as a federal measure proposed by Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla.Posey's H.R. 1503 states:"To 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."

[2pkolocb5zjdh]

"natural born Citizen"- - - - - Which is the most Likely Definition when the Constitution was written. (What our Founding Fathers meant by it.)
1) Person born of two Citizens of the United States on U.S. soil.
2) Person born of one Citizen of the United States on U.S. soil. (Even if the second parent was of an Enemy Country.)
3) Person born on U.S. soil.
4) Any Tom, Dick or Harry that comes down the pike. (Or a Sally.)
.
What say you???
(And why do we need a Law to follow the Constitution! Shouldn't that be automatic?)

[John Kalena]

You will know a tree by its fruit. Our Congress is failing us as well as everything else. Just the same as illegals just waltzing across the border, some imposter posing as president, and all these other problems. To me it's no surprise everything is failing. We have "Insane people in government that keep allowing bad things to happen and get turned into law. By the way this is the definition of insanity: To continue to keep doing the same thing over and over and expect different results. It's obvious to me that's what congress keeps doing.BUT, everyone keeps making excuses for all this non-since and allowing it to continue.