Well Ted is announcing tomorrow..... :thumbsup:
And the leftist lemmings are already having heart attacks.....
http://news.yahoo.com/can-ted-cruz-go-from-obstructionist-in-chief-to-commander-in-chief-212751655.html (http://news.yahoo.com/can-ted-cruz-go-from-obstructionist-in-chief-to-commander-in-chief-212751655.html)
Quote from: Billy's bayonet on March 22, 2015, 06:37:39 PM
Well Ted is announcing tomorrow..... :thumbsup:
And the leftist lemmings are already having heart attacks.....
http://news.yahoo.com/can-ted-cruz-go-from-obstructionist-in-chief-to-commander-in-chief-212751655.html (http://news.yahoo.com/can-ted-cruz-go-from-obstructionist-in-chief-to-commander-in-chief-212751655.html)
I don't think Cruz really has much of a chance but you got to love the way the left is panicking!! :lol: :lol:
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/US-GOP-2016-Cruz-Glance/2015/03/22/id/631770/ (http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/US-GOP-2016-Cruz-Glance/2015/03/22/id/631770/)
Quote from: Billy's bayonet on March 22, 2015, 06:37:39 PM
Well Ted is announcing tomorrow..... :thumbsup:
And the leftist lemmings are already having heart attacks.....
http://news.yahoo.com/can-ted-cruz-go-from-obstructionist-in-chief-to-commander-in-chief-212751655.html (http://news.yahoo.com/can-ted-cruz-go-from-obstructionist-in-chief-to-commander-in-chief-212751655.html)
I just love how "ojective" the title is!
:rolleyes:
I wish Ted Cruz wasnt part of the warmonger wing of the party because i support him in everything else.
Quote from: dashvinny on March 22, 2015, 07:40:03 PM
I wish Ted Cruz wasnt part of the warmonger wing of the party because i support him in everything else.
This from the guy that supports ISIS :rolleyes:
Quote from: The Boo Man... on March 22, 2015, 07:47:43 PM
This from the guy that supports ISIS :rolleyes:
Wrong. I support them over Iran.
Quote from: dashvinny on March 22, 2015, 07:56:53 PM
Wrong. I support them over Iran.
Right you admit you'd support blood thirsty animals and then call those that want to stop these animals warmongers.
Quote from: dashvinny on March 22, 2015, 07:56:53 PM
Wrong. I support them over Iran.
How can you support either one of them is be on me! Both are murdering scum of the earth! :sad: :sad:
I was listening to this on the radio today. They were making such a big deal about how it's only ten months before the Iowa Caucuses. And that got me thinking.
With these caucases, is it really worth it to even vote in the primary's if you happen to reside in a State such as Ohio which has such a "late" primary by comparison?
I mean take Mit Romney's bid for example, by the time the primary rolled around here, it did not matter if you voted for someone else in our Primary, it was already clear ol Rino Mitt was the candidate.
Quote from: daidalos on March 22, 2015, 08:51:35 PM
I was listening to this on the radio today. They were making such a big deal about how it's only ten months before the Iowa Caucuses. And that got me thinking.
With these caucases, is it really worth it to even vote in the primary's if you happen to reside in a State such as Ohio which has such a "late" primary by comparison?
I mean take Mit Romney's bid for example, by the time the primary rolled around here, it did not matter if you voted for someone else in our Primary, it was already clear ol Rino Mitt was the candidate.
In a close race to the end yours could be the one that puts the candidate over the top where the first to vote really don't mean much except to put someone in the contention! I really hope to see our line up of candidates to get down to 4 or so before the real primary starts. The real question is will everyone self destruct with bickering and slime politics! Remember Ronnie's 11th commandment. You don't slim a fellow republican! :popcorn: :popcorn:
Quote from: dashvinny on March 22, 2015, 07:56:53 PM
Wrong. I support them over Iran.
Then your either misinformed and wrong, or are not misinformed and just plain wrong so which is it? To put things bluntly, support of ISIS,
is support of those who are far more radical than Iran ever was. And
is support of those, who while they thank you for the support. Would also behead you in a n.y. second as a kaffir with a big ol knife at that. Not something fast and quick like a guillotine Tell me vinny are you aware that for four minutes after you are beheaded, your still alive, and aware? Did ya know that in your support of Isis? Do you know what actually happens when they burn you alive, after you've "supported" their rise to power? I am betting no, you don't really know just how horrible, painful, slow, and in humane an "execution" such as that is. :ttoung:
Quote from: Billy's bayonet on March 22, 2015, 06:37:39 PM
Well Ted is announcing tomorrow..... :thumbsup:
And the leftist lemmings are already having heart attacks.....
http://news.yahoo.com/can-ted-cruz-go-from-obstructionist-in-chief-to-commander-in-chief-212751655.html (http://news.yahoo.com/can-ted-cruz-go-from-obstructionist-in-chief-to-commander-in-chief-212751655.html)
He must be a threat, libs heads are popping like zits on a teen girls face all over the web.
Run Ted, Run! :thumbsup:
Quote from: Solar on March 22, 2015, 09:04:08 PM
He must be a threat, libs heads are popping like zits on a teen girls face all over the web.
Run Ted, Run! :thumbsup:
Libs all over the place are losing there heads over Ted announcement tomorrow.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.noisewiki.com%2Fwiki%2Fimages%2F9%2F99%2FExplodingHead.GIF&hash=280287baecc9353def0798ff70f6fdd74079847d)
Quote from: walkstall on March 22, 2015, 09:31:43 PM
Libs all over the place are losing there heads over Ted announcement tomorrow.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.noisewiki.com%2Fwiki%2Fimages%2F9%2F99%2FExplodingHead.GIF&hash=280287baecc9353def0798ff70f6fdd74079847d)
It shouldn't be long before the MSM manages to link him to a dead hooker or a live boy.
Hillary Clinton, lesbian favorite, hasnt announced yet. Another example of media bias. You will see many examples of the media saying, Ted Cruz, tea party favorite, but you wont see them identify clinton.
Quote from: Solar on March 22, 2015, 09:04:08 PM
He must be a threat, libs heads are popping like zits on a teen girls face all over the web.
Run Ted, Run! :thumbsup:
I agree. I'm puzzled as to why a few here object to him. I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion.
Quote from: Dubinsky on March 23, 2015, 07:10:32 AM
I agree. I'm puzzled as to why a few here object to him. I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion.
No objection here! What this means is that I won't have to vote 3rd party - at least not in the Primary, anyway!
:thumbup:
I just heard his speech and official announcement to run for President.
I haven't paid much attention to him, but he did a good job. :smile:
It will be a long year until the Primaries. :sad: Mine isn't until June 2016.
I thought his speech was outstanding and it certainly aligned with my beliefs. It is refreshing to hear a politician talking in a positive manner about what we can accomplish in this country. The MSM will come all out after him. Rush has made some good observations today about Cruz and his speech.
Quote from: MACMan on March 23, 2015, 02:27:14 AM
It shouldn't be long before the MSM manages to link him to a dead hooker or a live boy.
That's fine, as long as they aren't associated with any Dems...
Quote from: Dubinsky on March 23, 2015, 07:10:32 AM
I agree. I'm puzzled as to why a few here object to him. I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion.
There are a few that are running I like. Cruz is on of them but his negatives are way to high. He has a lot to overcome.
I don't like the fact that he was born in Canada. Not because I think it disqualifies him but that it is going to be a major distraction from the issues. I already see the libs bringing up the Birthers campaign against Obama! Anyone that doesn't believe me go check the kids site! Or for that matter and left leaning site. The worse thing about it is they have a point! Anyone that has had any part of questioning Obamas eligibility would be hypocritical to support Cruz! We don't need this distraction no matter how good he is! :confused: :confused: :confused:
Quote from: redbeard on March 23, 2015, 01:02:34 PM
There are a few that are running I like. Cruz is on of them but his negatives are way to high. He has a lot to overcome.
I don't like the fact that he was born in Canada. Not because I think it disqualifies him but that it is going to be a major distraction from the issues. I already see the libs bringing up the Birthers campaign against Obama! Anyone that doesn't believe me go check the kids site! Or for that matter and left leaning site. The worse thing about it is they have a point! Anyone that has had any part of questioning Obamas eligibility would be hypocritical to support Cruz! We don't need this distraction no matter how good he is! :confused: :confused: :confused:
Redbeard, it's a good thing that the liberal and RINO establishment doesn't like him.
Quote from: taxed on March 23, 2015, 01:32:09 PM
Redbeard, it's a good thing that the liberal and RINO establishment doesn't like him.
Beat me to it. The only polls being done so far are paid for by the establishment, which is the only reason Bush shows an inkling of a chance, they're all skewed.
Does anyone here actually think Bush has a prayer, and that Cruz's negatives are in any high amongst the base?
Quote from: Solar on March 23, 2015, 01:54:21 PM
Beat me to it. The only polls being done so far are paid for by the establishment, which is the only reason Bush shows an inkling of a chance, they're all skewed.
Does anyone here actually think Bush has a prayer, and that Cruz's negatives are in any high amongst the base?
The establishment will go all out for Bush so that will keep him in. However, I am trusting the conservatives will not sit this one out and we will find a true conservative. Cruz made an excellent point that 1/2 of evangelicals sat out 2012. If our true conservative candidates can get that vote out we will prevail.
Quote from: Dubinsky on March 23, 2015, 07:10:32 AM
I agree. I'm puzzled as to why a few here object to him. I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion.
WORD!
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.trevorloudon.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F10%2Fblacklistedandlovingittour.jpg&hash=c02fe23097e57f5953d051e43e56e431bf1d499e)
I gotta tell ya I LOVE THIS, when I head he was throwing his hat in the ring I let out a shout, I'm re energized, finally somebody who will HIT back at the left and call them out.
I particularly Love the fact he chose Lynchburg Va almost in my back yard. This wasn't done lightly, Lynchburg is Falwell ville, and LIBERTY UNIVERSITY has to be the only college named thus the very name must piss off the Marxists. its a beautiful campus in a beautiful historic city, which I think exemplifies small town CONSERVATIVE America, beleive it or not it is one of the wealthiest cities in the USA & has been since the civil war.
Little crime, no reports of corruption by city Fathers, low unemployment (Thanks to Liberty U and other colleges) and the fact its a railway center. The anthisiss of all the left hates.
Quote from: Billy's bayonet on March 23, 2015, 04:54:49 PM
I gotta tell ya I LOVE THIS, when I head he was throwing his hat in the ring I let out a shout, I'm re energized, finally somebody who will HIT back at the left and call them out.
I particularly Love the fact he chose Lynchburg Va almost in my back yard. This wasn't done lightly, Lynchburg is Falwell ville, and LIBERTY UNIVERSITY has to be the only college named thus the very name must piss off the Marxists. its a beautiful campus in a beautiful historic city, which I think exemplifies small town CONSERVATIVE America, beleive it or not it is one of the wealthiest cities in the USA & has been since the civil war.
Little crime, no reports of corruption by city Fathers, low unemployment (Thanks to Liberty U and other colleges) and the fact its a railway center. The anthisiss of all the left hates.
Sorry personally I prefer Hillsdale, where they don't allow liberals to teach, and they still teach our youngsters, about our founding documents such as the Declaration of Independence, (not a founding document I know) and the Federalist papers (I know not a founding document per se) and of course the Constitution, why we have it, why we have the bill of rights, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY why the rights enumerated therein are enumerated there.
Quote from: redbeard on March 23, 2015, 01:02:34 PM
There are a few that are running I like. Cruz is on of them but his negatives are way to high. He has a lot to overcome.
I don't like the fact that he was born in Canada. Not because I think it disqualifies him but that it is going to be a major distraction from the issues. I already see the libs bringing up the Birthers campaign against Obama! Anyone that doesn't believe me go check the kids site! Or for that matter and left leaning site. The worse thing about it is they have a point! Anyone that has had any part of questioning Obamas eligibility would be hypocritical to support Cruz! We don't need this distraction no matter how good he is! :confused: :confused: :confused:
The opposition will find or create dirt even on candidates that are supposedly vetted such as Walker. They will paint him as being against everything that he is actually for. It's called dirty politics and the Democrats play that game the best. When you find the "perfect" candidate, let us know.
Quote from: Dubinsky on March 24, 2015, 03:05:31 AM
The opposition will find or create dirt even on candidates that are supposedly vetted such as Walker. They will paint him as being against everything that he is actually for. It's called dirty politics and the Democrats play that game the best. When you find the "perfect" candidate, let us know.
Opposition including rino, who willing work with leftists to bring down quality people, think Herman Cain, Allan West etc.
Though I do believe people are sick of the circle jerk the GOP, Dims and their media play every election, and that scares the shit out of the establishment, they know the jig is up and are losing control over the ignorant masses.
Quote from: Solar on March 24, 2015, 06:31:49 AM
Opposition including rino, who willing work with leftists to bring down quality people, think Herman Cain, Allan West etc.
Though I do believe people are sick of the circle jerk the GOP, Dims and their media play every election, and that scares the shit out of the establishment, they know the jig is up and are losing control over the ignorant masses.
I think you're right. People are fed up with the establishment RINOs and are finally waking up.
Quote from: Dubinsky on March 24, 2015, 03:05:31 AM
The opposition will find or create dirt even on candidates that are supposedly vetted such as Walker. They will paint him as being against everything that he is actually for. It's called dirty politics and the Democrats play that game the best. When you find the "perfect" candidate, let us know.
The question about Ted Cruz's ligitimacy to be elected POTUS is going to have to be subjected to a national debate, just as the Kenyan born (former) candidate ought to have been. Unlike Obama, Ted Cruz is not trying to hide from who and what he is. This makes him even more appealing (to me and all of us).
Don't get me wrong! I think Ted Cruz would make an excellant POTUS and is hands down, my first choice. However, I can not be one of those who was for what it says in the COnstitution, before I was against it!
The issue of whether Ted Cruz meets the definition of "a natural born citizen" is going to have to be dealt with. We ignore our COnstitution at our own peril. This is what creates RINOS; Republicans look the other way on what our guys do (or attempt to do) that may be unconstitutional just because that's what the other side does! Either we stand for something or we stand for nothing! The COnstitution has been utterly disregarded by members of both parties for way too long. Isn't this a basic principle of the TEA movement?
I feel that I can support Ted Cruz as my first choice, but I recognize that this one issue could be his fatal flaw. I (we) need to have other choices wating in the wings, so if this (or another one) implodes, we still can take our country back!
Here's just one of the many (not made up) stories that is going to make 'our guy's' birth and qualifications a major issue to deal with. Are you preparred to say that anyone can come here from anywhere on earth and become an American citizen and then become our President. Our Founders had the good sense to know that is not a good idea for the f
uture of our country! It's not about Cruz (or even Obama), it's about some future foreign usurper thaking over 'the American thrown'!
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2015/03/23/394713013/is-ted-cruz-allowed-to-run-since-he-was-born-in-canada (http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2015/03/23/394713013/is-ted-cruz-allowed-to-run-since-he-was-born-in-canada)
If Cruz can handle it and get past it, I'm all in for him. If it creates a firestorm of contravercy, it may become the distraction that prevents us from taking the Whitehouse. The stakes are too high, to allow this to happen.
Texas Senator Ted Cruz versus Washington, Incorporated. Sounds like a cage match.
Hillary will supply a constant source of material. Cruz is making the most of it, skewering
the Arkansas Wonder Woman at every opportunity.
I was listening to Hillary on C-SPAN. Her big point was that the most important issue facing
Americans today is "social mobility." She quotes a couple of studies by Harvard sociology.
She is appealing to people who "feel trapped" where they are. Then she proceeds, sociologist
that she is, to compare two cities "of comparable affluence," Atlanta and Seattle. That's when
I clicked the remote, but I'm just sayin'. Go Ted!
Quote from: wally on March 24, 2015, 08:50:58 AM
The question about Ted Cruz's ligitimacy to be elected POTUS is going to have to be subjected to a national debate, just as the Kenyan born (former) candidate ought to have been. Unlike Obama, Ted Cruz is not trying to hide from who and what he is. This makes him even more appealing (to me and all of us).
Don't get me wrong! I think Ted Cruz would make an excellant POTUS and is hands down, my first choice. However, I can not be one of those who was for what it says in the COnstitution, before I was against it!
The issue of whether Ted Cruz meets the definition of "a natural born citizen" is going to have to be dealt with. We ignore our COnstitution at our own peril. This is what creates RINOS; Republicans look the other way on what our guys do (or attempt to do) that may be unconstitutional just because that's what the other side does! Either we stand for something or we stand for nothing! The COnstitution has been utterly disregarded by members of both parties for way too long. Isn't this a basic principle of the TEA movement?
I feel that I can support Ted Cruz as my first choice, but I recognize that this one issue could be his fatal flaw. I (we) need to have other choices wating in the wings, so if this (or another one) implodes, we still can take our country back!
Here's just one of the many (not made up) stories that is going to make 'our guy's' birth and qualifications a major issue to deal with. Are you preparred to say that anyone can come here from anywhere on earth and become an American citizen and then become our President. Our Founders had the good sense to know that is not a good idea for the f
uture of our country! It's not about Cruz (or even Obama), it's about some future foreign usurper thaking over 'the American thrown'!
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2015/03/23/394713013/is-ted-cruz-allowed-to-run-since-he-was-born-in-canada (http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2015/03/23/394713013/is-ted-cruz-allowed-to-run-since-he-was-born-in-canada)
If Cruz can handle it and get past it, I'm all in for him. If it creates a firestorm of contravercy, it may become the distraction that prevents us from taking the Whitehouse. The stakes are too high, to allow this to happen.
Lets work backwards. Show where "Natural Born" was defined in the Constitution.
Quote from: Solar on March 24, 2015, 10:27:55 AM
Lets work backwards. Show where "Natural Born" was defined in the Constitution.
It's not the definition of "natural" or "born", it is the fact that all of the Founders didn't want some future immigrant form England coming over and together with the fifth column former Tories, undoing all they had done. You may recall the War of 1812 was an attampt to regain what they had lost in 1776. It wasn't until 1789 that the COntinental Congress gave way to the establishment of the Constitutional Republic, we have today. A little more than twenty years later, the British crown tried to take it all back (burning the Capital and occupying Washington DC). It's pretty clear that the Founders only wanted our future Presidents being Americans who had been born as Americans. Could you imagine what the outcome could have been in 1812, if the POTUS had been a British (spy) naturalized citizen. The Founders, wisely, exempted only themselves from this requirement.
One could argue that "times have changed" and this provision is outdated, but then one begins to climb the slippery slope towards Obama's way of thinking; that the Constitution is a flawed, outdated and fluid document, with provisons that can be ignored by simple rationalization and contectual thinking.
It is a problem for Cruz and the only way it is not is if the American people declare that it is not! There are many things that I would not oppose ammending in our COnstitution, but the COnstitution itself provides for how this is to be done. It's very difficult and intended to be so. Discretion may be the better part of valor in this instance.
Having say that, I like Ted Cruz and I'll eagarly await greater minds than my own making the case for why this part of the COnstitution does not apply in Ted Cruz's case (as it therevfore ought not to applied in Barry Obama's...)
Both Mommies were Americans married to foreigners who gave birth to babies in foreign counties...what's different about the underlying constituional issue?
The time to have argued Obama's citizenship has past. The powers that be, wouldn't allow it. Do you suppose the issue of Cruz's citizenship is going to be ignored, like they did Obama's. Even the RINO's will join with the Marxists in taking this to court>
We can't afford to back the wrong candidate and just when we're about to pull the trigger have it blow up in our face!
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi258.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fhh280%2Fwallyguy100%2Fimage004.jpg&hash=bdb9e1a4fd5f5d3aee9c11b31bcdd623d9ea3654) (http://s258.photobucket.com/user/wallyguy100/media/image004.jpg.html)
Because of Ted Cruz's citizenship his candidacy may be a rather Hot Load!
Quote from: wally on March 24, 2015, 11:57:59 AM
It's not the definition of "natural" or "born", it is the fact that all of the Founders didn't want some future immigrant form England coming over and together with the fifth column former Tories, undoing all they had done. You may recall the War of 1812 was an attampt to regain what they had lost in 1776. It wasn't until 1789 that the COntinental Congress gave way to the establishment of the Constitutional Republic, we have today. A little more than twenty years later, the British crown tried to take it all back (burning the Capital and occupying Washington DC). It's pretty clear that the Founders only wanted our future Presidents being Americans who had been born as Americans. Could you imagine what the outcome could have been in 1812, if the POTUS had been a British (spy) naturalized citizen. The Founders, wisely, exempted only themselves from this requirement.
One could argue that "times have changed" and this provision is outdated, but then one begins to climb the slippery slope towards Obama's way of thinking; that the Constitution is a flawed, outdated and fluid document, with provisons that can be ignored by simple rationalization and contectual thinking.
It is a problem for Cruz and the only way it is not is if the American people declare that it is not! There are many things that I would not oppose ammending in our COnstitution, but the COnstitution itself provides for how this is to be done. It's very difficult and intended to be so. Discretion may be the better part of valor in this instance.
Having say that, I like Ted Cruz and I'll eagarly await greater minds than my own making the case for why this part of the COnstitution does not apply in Ted Cruz's case (as it therevfore ought not to applied in Barry Obama's...)
Both Mommies were Americans married to foreigners who gave birth to babies in foreign counties...what's different about the underlying constituional issue?
The time to have argued Obama's citizenship has past. The powers that be, wouldn't allow it. Do you suppose the issue of Cruz's citizenship is going to be ignored, like they did Obama's. Even the RINO's will join with the Marxists in taking this to court>
We can't afford to back the wrong candidate and just when we're about to pull the trigger have it blow up in our face!
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi258.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fhh280%2Fwallyguy100%2Fimage004.jpg&hash=bdb9e1a4fd5f5d3aee9c11b31bcdd623d9ea3654) (http://s258.photobucket.com/user/wallyguy100/media/image004.jpg.html)
Because of Ted Cruz's citizenship his candidacy may be a rather Hot Load!
Now, if you're done beating around the bush, show me where Congress delineated "Natural Born".
Let me help you out, they didn't and for good reason, they didn't want to, they wanted to leave it up to the people to decide.
Quote from: Solar on March 24, 2015, 12:32:35 PM
Now, if you're done beating around the bush, show me where Congress delineated "Natural Born".
Let me help you out, they didn't and for good reason, they didn't want to, they wanted to leave it up to the people to decide.
Just as I said, the Founders exempted themselves, so they didn't have to wait a generation for a President, but clearly stated their intention.... I guess a lawyer could argue what the meaning of is..is...
Article II; Section 1
" 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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States. "
This is going to be a problem with Cruz as a candidate. Maybe we should fight the good fight for him...but the stakes are so high (we may never have a meaningful election in this country if we don't win), the Socratic method requires that you know your opponant's position well enough that one can win his argument; then you overcome their arguments with reasoned debate.
Just as we, reserched this issue about Barak Hussain's birth (but got nowhere with the media, COngress, the Courts or the RINOS), THEY are going to 'discover' this about Ted Cruz and make a real big stink over it at the most opportune time! We better be damned sure it's not going to blow up!
If we arbitraily and capriciously ignore this part of the Law, how long do you suppose it may be before one of thes illegal aliens, who have no alliance to our country, might run be elieible to run for POTUS. I'm sure groups like ACORN and the SEIU (and others) will have all the power they need to get one of theirs elected.
Quote from: Solar on March 24, 2015, 10:27:55 AM
Lets work backwards. Show where "Natural Born" was defined in the Constitution.
Did his mother not deliver him? If she did that is a natural birth. This subject should go into the distraction thread.
Quote from: wally on March 24, 2015, 12:42:53 PM
Just as I said, the Founders exempted themselves, so they didn't have to wait a generation for a President, but clearly stated their intention.... I guess a lawyer could argue what the meaning of is..is...
Article II; Section 1
" 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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States. "
And the courts have defined being born to an American citizen constitutes the child being American, regardless of place of birth.
Until Congress or SCOTUS defines "Natural Born" further, the current holds standing, which means Cruz is an American citizen.
His mother and father went to Canada, which recognizes dual citizenship.
America does not. She never renounced American citizenship.
That was about getting Mr. Cruz legal.
Quote from: wally on March 24, 2015, 08:50:58 AM
The question about Ted Cruz's ligitimacy to be elected POTUS is going to have to be subjected to a national debate, just as the Kenyan born (former) candidate ought to have been. Unlike Obama, Ted Cruz is not trying to hide from who and what he is. This makes him even more appealing (to me and all of us).
Don't get me wrong! I think Ted Cruz would make an excellant POTUS and is hands down, my first choice. However, I can not be one of those who was for what it says in the COnstitution, before I was against it!
The issue of whether Ted Cruz meets the definition of "a natural born citizen" is going to have to be dealt with. We ignore our COnstitution at our own peril. This is what creates RINOS; Republicans look the other way on what our guys do (or attempt to do) that may be unconstitutional just because that's what the other side does! Either we stand for something or we stand for nothing! The COnstitution has been utterly disregarded by members of both parties for way too long. Isn't this a basic principle of the TEA movement?
I feel that I can support Ted Cruz as my first choice, but I recognize that this one issue could be his fatal flaw. I (we) need to have other choices wating in the wings, so if this (or another one) implodes, we still can take our country back!
Here's just one of the many (not made up) stories that is going to make 'our guy's' birth and qualifications a major issue to deal with. Are you preparred to say that anyone can come here from anywhere on earth and become an American citizen and then become our President. Our Founders had the good sense to know that is not a good idea for the f
uture of our country! It's not about Cruz (or even Obama), it's about some future foreign usurper thaking over 'the American thrown'!
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2015/03/23/394713013/is-ted-cruz-allowed-to-run-since-he-was-born-in-canada (http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2015/03/23/394713013/is-ted-cruz-allowed-to-run-since-he-was-born-in-canada)
If Cruz can handle it and get past it, I'm all in for him. If it creates a firestorm of contravercy, it may become the distraction that prevents us from taking the Whitehouse. The stakes are too high, to allow this to happen.
Huh?
He is eligible, per the Constitution. What are you talking about?
Quote from: Solar on March 24, 2015, 10:27:55 AM
Lets work backwards. Show where "Natural Born" was defined in the Constitution.
Natural born, as it was understood at the time of the writing of the Constitution was clearly meant to mean, "born within the sovereign borders of the United States". This is why "natural born" status is given to children of Americans born at say an embassy, or military base or for example a territory of the United States. That said, where was Senator Cruz born at? In most states you can't be a Representative or a Senator if not a natural born citizen too. Unless that's also something the Federal Government has told the States they can't "regulate" too. Like it did with the States who tried to impose term limits. :thumbdown:
Quote from: daidalos on March 24, 2015, 07:04:30 PM
Natural born, as it was understood at the time of the writing of the Constitution was clearly meant to mean, "born within the sovereign borders of the United States". This is why "natural born" status is given to children of Americans born at say an embassy, or military base or for example a territory of the United States. That said, where was Senator Cruz born at? In most states you can't be a Representative or a Senator if not a natural born citizen too. Unless that's also something the Federal Government has told the States they can't "regulate" too. Like it did with the States who tried to impose term limits. :thumbdown:
Link?
Quote from: daidalos on March 24, 2015, 07:04:30 PM
Natural born, as it was understood at the time of the writing of the Constitution was clearly meant to mean, "born within the sovereign borders of the United States". This is why "natural born" status is given to children of Americans born at say an embassy, or military base or for example a territory of the United States. That said, where was Senator Cruz born at? In most states you can't be a Representative or a Senator if not a natural born citizen too. Unless that's also something the Federal Government has told the States they can't "regulate" too. Like it did with the States who tried to impose term limits. :thumbdown:
That's the beauty of law, simply implying, is not legal language, which is exactly why the Founders never established parameters for it's actual meaning, had they done so, you'd be able to find it, but you can't, therefore, a child born to an American anywhere in the world, is considered an American citizen..
They left it to future generations to deal with.
Quote from: Solar on March 24, 2015, 12:46:52 PM
And the courts have defined being born to an American citizen constitutes the child being American, regardless of place of birth.
Until Congress or SCOTUS defines "Natural Born" further, the current holds standing, which means Cruz is an American citizen.
Do you have a link to that? Even McCain natural born status was brought up but the court determent he was born on a military base and therefore American territory But I remember the arguments back then!
I'm with Wally, Cruz is a great conservative I could fully support but I'm afraid that this is going to become and is a major distraction! I also believe it is to soon to get fully attached to any candidate. Cruz has time to clean this up (if it can be ) and I fully welcome him and his conviction into this primary but we can't lose sight of the ball witch is supporting the best person to win in the general! It might be Cruz but if this turns into a drag on him I hope he has the integrity to step aside and help us remove ant chance of a democrat win and the same goes for anyone else running! :popcorn: :popcorn:
Quote from: redbeard on March 24, 2015, 07:31:31 PM
Do you have a link to that? Even McCain natural born status was brought up but the court determent he was born on a military base and therefore American territory But I remember the arguments back then!
I'm with Wally, Cruz is a great conservative I could fully support but I'm afraid that this is going to become and is a major distraction! I also believe it is to soon to get fully attached to any candidate. Cruz has time to clean this up (if it can be ) and I fully welcome him and his conviction into this primary but we can't lose sight of the ball witch is supporting the best person to win in the general! It might be Cruz but if this turns into a drag on him I hope he has the integrity to step aside and help us remove ant chance of a democrat win and the same goes for anyone else running! :popcorn: :popcorn:
https://americansabroad.org/files/3013/3478/0295/18-04-2012_1318_971.pdf
Canada does not recognize anchor babies. That's some b------t the Democrats
came up with to harvest illegal votes. Some are not even sure that law is really
a law at all, just a regulation.
Quote from: taxed on March 24, 2015, 07:35:33 PM
https://americansabroad.org/files/3013/3478/0295/18-04-2012_1318_971.pdf
Nailed it!!!
This is what Levin was talking about regarding Cruz legal status, and called anyone that said he isn't an American, are complete idiots.
From your link.
1934 THE "CITIZENSHIP ACT OF 1934": On 24 May, Congress makes a major change to the
"citizenship law" to now enable U.S. citizen mothers to also transmit U.S. citizenship at birth
abroad. But for the first time the law now also creates a new burden by imposing a
mandatory "subsequent five year residence requirement" in the United States, prior to
reaching age eighteen, and an "oath of allegiance requirement" within six months of the
child's twenty-first birthday, for any child born abroad to parents, one of whom is an alien.
The new law states:
· "Any child hereafter born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States,
whose father or mother or both at the time of birth of such child is a citizen of the
United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States: but the rights of
citizenship shall not descend to any such child unless the citizen father or citizen
mother, as the case may be, has resided in the United States previous to the birth
of such child. In cases where one of the parents is an alien, the right of citizenship
shall not descend unless the child comes to the United States and resides therein
for at least five years continuously immediately previous to his eighteenth birthday,
and unless, within six months after the child's twenty-first birthday, he or she shall
take an oath of allegiance to the United States of America as prescribed by the
Bureau of Naturalization." (Section 1, 48 Stat. 797.)
Quote from: Solar on March 24, 2015, 07:46:30 PM
Nailed it!!!
This is what Levin was talking about regarding Cruz legal status, and called anyone that said he isn't an American, are complete idiots.
From your link.
1934 THE "CITIZENSHIP ACT OF 1934": On 24 May, Congress makes a major change to the
"citizenship law" to now enable U.S. citizen mothers to also transmit U.S. citizenship at birth
abroad. But for the first time the law now also creates a new burden by imposing a
mandatory "subsequent five year residence requirement" in the United States, prior to
reaching age eighteen, and an "oath of allegiance requirement" within six months of the
child's twenty-first birthday, for any child born abroad to parents, one of whom is an alien.
The new law states:
· "Any child hereafter born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States,
whose father or mother or both at the time of birth of such child is a citizen of the
United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States: but the rights of
citizenship shall not descend to any such child unless the citizen father or citizen
mother, as the case may be, has resided in the United States previous to the birth
of such child. In cases where one of the parents is an alien, the right of citizenship
shall not descend unless the child comes to the United States and resides therein
for at least five years continuously immediately previous to his eighteenth birthday,
and unless, within six months after the child's twenty-first birthday, he or she shall
take an oath of allegiance to the United States of America as prescribed by the
Bureau of Naturalization." (Section 1, 48 Stat. 797.)
This isn't even a debate. If it was a debate, fine, then that's one thing, but this isn't even close to being a gray area.
Quote from: taxed on March 24, 2015, 07:48:46 PM
This isn't even a debate. If it was a debate, fine, then that's one thing, but this isn't even close to being a gray area.
Exactly! Levin spent an entire show going through the law with a fine toothed comb and explained in extreme detail as to why he was legal. There is no doubt that he is illegible to be President.
I'll search for the podcast.
Quote from: Solar on March 24, 2015, 07:54:01 PM
Exactly! Levin spent an entire show going through the law with a fine toothed comb and explained in extreme detail as to why he was legal. There is no doubt that he is illegible to be President.
I'll search for the podcast.
Why Solar, why are RINOs so stupid?
Quote from: taxed on March 24, 2015, 07:35:33 PM
https://americansabroad.org/files/3013/3478/0295/18-04-2012_1318_971.pdf
It doesn't change the fact that the left will look at it as pay back time and as long as everyone is busy defending if he should or should not run because of this issue we will be distracted from the real issues in the campaign! I hope he can get past it :popcorn: :popcorn:
Quote from: redbeard on March 24, 2015, 07:55:13 PM
It doesn't change the fact that the left will look at it as pay back time and as long as everyone is busy defending if he should or should not run because of this issue we will be distracted from the real issues in the campaign! I hope he can get past it :popcorn: :popcorn:
We're already past it, it's a non issue if you understand the law.
Quote from: redbeard on March 24, 2015, 07:55:13 PM
It doesn't change the fact that the left will look at it as pay back time and as long as everyone is busy defending if he should or should not run because of this issue we will be distracted from the real issues in the campaign! I hope he can get past it :popcorn: :popcorn:
What left?
(https://treeofmamre.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/2014-election-map.jpg)
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/02/msnbc-suffers-lowest-ratings-in-a-decade-202135.html (http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/02/msnbc-suffers-lowest-ratings-in-a-decade-202135.html)