Arizona Secretary Of State: Obama Might Not Appear On November Ballot

The Arizona Secretary of State is apparently a birther:

Arizona’s top election official said in a radio interview Thursday that it’s “possible” President Obama may not make the state’s November ballot due to unanswered questions about his birth certificate.

Ken Bennett, a Republican who is eyeing a bid to succeed Gov. Jan Brewer (R) in 2014, told conservative radio host Mike Broomhead that he is “not playing to the birthers.”

“I’m not a birther,” Bennett said in the interview on KFYI. “I believe that the president was born in Hawaii – or at least, I hope he was.”

But he added: “My responsibility as secretary of state is to make sure that the ballots in Arizona are correct and that those people whose names are on the ballot have met the qualifications of the office they are seeking.”

Obama, saying he was frustrated with “this silliness,” publicly released the long form of his birth certificate more than a year ago.

The radio interview followed a Phoenix New Times report that Bennett had corresponded with WorldNetDaily’s Jerome Corsi regarding the birth certificate issue.

According to the text of an e-mail from Bennett to Corsi and confirmed by the secretary of state’s office to the Phoenix New Times, Bennett had written that “if Hawaii can’t or won’t provide verification of the president’s birth certificate, I will not put his name on the ballot.”

Corsi, along with Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, has been among the leading voices pushing the conspiracy theory that Obama was not born in the United States.

The insanity of these people quite obviously knows no bounds.

FILED UNDER: Barack Obama, Campaign 2012, Politicians, Quick Takes, US Politics
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010. Before joining OTB, he wrote at Below The BeltwayThe Liberty Papers, and United Liberty Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. Chad S says:

    Coming to a Federal Court near you.

  2. michael reynolds says:

    What the hell is in the water down there?

  3. Eric says:

    Is it just Arizona or something? Do they have the water over contaminated over there?

  4. Hey Norm says:

    Arizona is simply the home of fully developed Republicans…Contemporary Republicanism in full bloom.
    Republicans in the rest of the country are still struggling to catch up.
    It won’t be long.
    Didn’t Palin buy a house in Scottsdale.
    I rest my case.

  5. The source of crazy in Arizona is the same as the source of crazy in Florida that led to the 2000 election debacle: too many retired seniors moving into the state.

  6. PD Shaw says:

    The downside to the completely legally-defensible position that all of those lawsuits were late and brought by people without standing. It was all going to come back around in four years. I assume the Secretary of State is completely within her right to not put someone on the ballot who can’t offer proof they are a naturally born citizen. But she has no right to reject the standard form Hawaii issues.

  7. sam says:

    @michael reynolds:

    What the hell is in the water down there?

    Check with Drew. I believe he’s moving there.

  8. @PD Shaw:

    I assume the Secretary of State is completely within her right to not put someone on the ballot who can’t offer proof they are a naturally born citizen.

    Have they required such proof of all the other candidates? I don’t think you can just pick and choose who you want to investigate, particularly when it appears to be motivated by blatant partisanship, as in this case.

  9. Ian says:

    Arizona is the meth laboratory of democracy.

  10. PD Shaw says:

    @Stormy Dragon: I’m not positive about Arizona, but IIRC some states have increased their requirements of proof to get on the ballot since 2008. One of those stories might have been posted here at OTB. I think the issue is that (a) states might have some right to make sure qualified people are on the ballot, (b) states cannot increase the qualifications beyond those of federal law, and (c) some of the states were requiring proof beyond what I think is permissible under the Full Faith & Credit Clause.

  11. bk says:

    @PD Shaw: 1. Ken Bennett is a female? 2. “Legally defensible”? Has “HE” asked for Romney to show proof?

  12. PD Shaw says:

    @bk: Yeah, I messed up the gender, but what was “legally defensible” was for Obama (and McCain) to defend against these birther lawsuits by pointing out all of the procedural defects in order to dismiss the cases at the outset. I’m just saying that the non-substantive resolutions meant that the issues were likely to reappear later, if and when, the procedural problems were surmounted.

  13. PD,

    The lawsuits that were filed all lacked legal merit, it would have been irresponsible for an attorney to not seek to have them dismissed forthwith. It is no mistake that crazy Orly Taitz was fined $20,000 by a Federal District Court Judge for filing one of her idiotic lawsuits.

    And the fact that these idiots continue with their nonsense even after Obama has release two different certified copies of his birth records demonstrates the fact that pandering to them would have been a mistake. They are idiots and fools and deserve to be treated as such.

  14. Ex nihilo says:

    And the fact that these idiots continue with their nonsense even after Obama has release two different certified copies of his birth records demonstrates the fact that pandering to them would have been a mistake.

    Products of evolution need no evidence!

  15. anjin-san says:

    They are idiots and fools today’s GOP

    FTFY

  16. Tsar Nicholas says:

    Obviously this Bennett character has spent way too many hours exposed to the desert heat.

  17. Ron Beasley says:

    Obama will be on the ballot. This is simply a guy who wants to be governor throwing red meat to the base. I suspect if it goes on too long it could hurt Romney if he doesn’t forcefully condemn it.

  18. Groty says:

    Let’s see if I have this right. Arizona enacts an immigration law that makes liberals heads explode. The DOJ sees an opening so they file suit against AZ. While being argued before the Supreme Court, the Obama appointed Justice who self describes herself as a “wise Latina” tells the Solicitor General he’s got a “hard sell”. After the oral arguments, most pundits proclaimed the DOJ would lose its case and SCOTUS would uphold the AZ law. The honest pundits have said they think the entire case against AZ was intended to pander to hispanics who are disappointed that Obama failed to honor his promise to hispanics that he’d get immigration reform passed in his first year in office.

    Then Obama’s DOJ has been perpetually investigating and harassing “Sheriff Joe”.

    So now let’s all be outraged and surprised when somebody in authority in AZ decides he is sick of being used as a political pawn so Obama and Holder can gin up the far left base of the Democrat Party. In other words, the AZ Sec of State is now using “the system” in exactly the same way that Obama and Holder have used it to gin up their grass roots.

    Anybody who genuinely thinks the Sec of State will keep Obama off the ballot in November is being played for a naive fool.

  19. @Ron Beasley: Why should Romney have to condemn the place of birth truth movement? Certainly there are plenty of folks fully willing to condemn these demanders of truth.

  20. Gold Star for Robot Boy says:

    @Groty:

    So now let’s all be outraged and surprised when somebody in authority in AZ decides he is sick of being used as a political pawn so Obama and Holder can gin up the far left base of the Democrat Party. In other words, the AZ Sec of State is now using “the system” in exactly the same way that Obama and Holder have used it to gin up their grass roots.

    As a resident of Maricopa County, I take great joy in telling you to GFY. This bullshit, especially Arpiao’s, was going on long before Obama was elected.

  21. Tsar Nicholas says:

    @Groty: You’re completely missing the point. Conservatives for decades have thrown away elections to liberal Democrats, thereby defeating their own causes, using the precise “logic” you’ve just displayed. Obviously nobody believes Obama won’t be on the ballot. Neither Bennett nor any other elected official in AZ possibly could be that stupid. Which is the whole point. The point that you’re missing.

    The fact Bennett even suggested this is an amazingly dumb move. All it does is help Democrats portray the local GOP as nutters and by extention to tarnish in general the GOP brand. Reflexively itching for a brawl is not a way to win a fight. Not being hit is more important than how often you punch.

    People on Main Street don’t share your concerns about the perpetual double standards. They don’t even care too much about immigration laws. Some care about them nary a lick.

    Mostly the folks who decide elections care about their jobs and their job prospects. Paying for school. Saving for retirement. Healthcare. Taxes.

    Tit-for-tat pissing matches with Democrats accomplish nothing other than electing more Democrats. For this year’s election it’s the stupidity, economy. Nothing else matters.

  22. al-Ameda says:

    You can’t make anything up anymore.

    Honestly, did the Obama Campaign pay Ken Bennett or other Arizona officials to get this story out there? It can only help the efforts to re-elect Obama.

    It reinforces the notion that much of the opposition to Obama is energized by unhinged morons.

  23. Ron Beasley says:

    @Thane Eichenauer: Romney must condemn it for political reasons – if he doesn’t it is defacto approval. I personally hope he doesn’t.

  24. mantis says:

    @Groty:

    Anybody who genuinely thinks the Sec of State will keep Obama off the ballot in November is being played for a naive fool.

    In other words, birthers, or a not insignificant portion of Republicans.

  25. swearyanthony says:

    @Ian: I want to take this comment out for dinner and a show.

  26. jukeboxgrad says:

    Have they required such proof of all the other candidates?

    I’m pretty sure that the number of major POTUS candidates who have ever shown their birth certificate (other than Obama, of course) is zero.

    I would like to see Mitt’s. His daddy was born south of the border, which I think makes Mitt some kind of anchor baby.

  27. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Ian:

    @swearyanthony:

    That comment gave me a stiffy.

  28. Phillip says:

    What the hell is in the water down there?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLCF7vPanrY
    Take a few minutes to watch, it’s starting to make me wonder….

  29. Jeremy R says:

    @Thane Eichenauer:

    Why should Romney have to condemn the place of birth truth movement?

    Well, he doesn’t have to do anything, but you’d think he’d want to discourage something that could massively damage any mandate he’d get if he manages to win the presidency. Having your party toss the incumbent president off the ballot so that you run unopposed would obviously put a huge asterisk next to your victory.

  30. swbarnes2 says:

    “Insane” is just like “bizzare”. That’s not what this is, and it’s simply dishonest to keep labeling as such.

    Why couldn’t you have written your last sentence honestly?

    “The bald racism of these people quite obviously knows no bounds”.

  31. J-Dub says:

    @michael reynolds: They don’t have any water, or at least what they have they use to water the golf courses. Try going a few days without water and you’ll start hallucinating too.