Posted on 05/30/2015 6:06:11 PM PDT by rickmichaels
I see this ad as nothing but trash. I see Paul’s supporters the same.
~~Cruz, OR LOSE~~ Ted Cruz is the only true Conservative in this race.
Wait ‘til Ted gives Rander a roundhouse kick, during the debates...Rander won’t be laughing, then.
"Repeat a lie often enough...", one of the pillars of successful propaganda.
The phrase, dear Dudley Doright, is ...natural born citizen, EH?
Got that?
Even the U.S. supereducated founding fathers didn't know the difference between that and "naturalized??"
Really?
Uh to be fair, 8 of the first 9 presidents technically were naturalized citizens as opposed to natural born citizens because the United States didn’t exist when they were born.
Bookmark
They weren’t naturalized citizens, they were plankholders.
More coffee!
NO, HE’S NOT “TECHNICALLY” A NATURALIZED CITIZEN. THAT IS A LYING STATEMENT.
When a child is born to American parents (his mother was a natural born citizen); that automatically entitles the child to the same status.
Cruz was also automatically entitled to Canadian citizenship, because his mother was working in Canada when he was born. He has since renounced his Canadian Citizenship, and is now JUST AN AMERICAN CITIZEN.
Whoever is spreading this garbage needs to stop.
Since when can a “naturalized citizen” run for president ..?? I’ve never heard of that.
President and Vice President must be natural born citizens .. of which TED CRUZ is one.
Anybody who says different has an agenda .. to keep people from voting for him. Disgusting. But, it proves whatever candidate you’re supporting .. they must be a loser.
I agree Cruz is a natural born citizen, though a few years ago an awful lot of freepers Obama wasn’t, and Obama meets more of the criteria proposed then than Cruz does.
The comment that a naturalized citizen can run for president was a bit of a joke, as in you could run a campaign to elect a chicken or a 2x4 president. The Constitution has nothing to say about who can run, only about who is eligible to serve if elected. As I said, an attempt at a joke.
In 1872 Victoria Woodhull ran for President, despite the fact that at the time no women could vote for president. The first female votes in a presidential election were cast in WY in 1892. To be fair, the Constitution does not say the EC can’t elect a woman as president.
There are three possible criteria for NBC, though others have been suggested.
1. Either parent a citizen. This equates NBC with citizen at birth.
2. Both parents must be citizens.
3. Born in USA.
Some believe 2 and 3 must both apply. Personally I believe #1.
Obama meets 1 and 3, unless you go for the to my mind bizarre claim that he was born in Kenya or Canada or somewhere, in which case his position is (almost) identical to that of Cruz. McCain, BTW, apparently meets #2.
Cruz meets only #1, so he meets fewer of the NBC criteria than Obama. Personally I think he would make a much better president than Obama, but that makes no difference in whether he’s constitutionally eligible or not.
I’d be fine with an amendment to redefine who is eligible, perhaps by changing it to anyone who’s been a citizen for 25 years. The notion that NBCs will be inherently more patriotic seems to be comprehensively disproven by the huge numbers of indisputably anti-American NBCs we see around us. I contend a pro-American naturalized citizen is immensely preferable as president to an anti-American NBC.
The author is in all probability an idiot, not a liar.
Actually Caesarian section got its name because of JC, not the other way around. The Caesars were an ancient Roman patrician family.
Given that Cruz isn’t currently polling in the top 5, I suspect it’s going to be “lose.”
The premise of this attack is that Ted Cruz is a “capitulating Canadian.” And that’s just plain wrong.
Ted Cruz isn’t Canadian.
Uh no, they were British subjects until we won the revolution.
Same tactics Paul Sr. ran against Newt, if you re-call Senator Paul lied to get on Hannitty about “breaking news” so he could read an anti Gingrich editorial he had written for a Des Moines newspaper.
Correct, UNTIL we won. Then, when that new nation was ‘commissioned’ they were plankowners—first crew.
Does the Constitution have anything to say about this issue. I’ve been looking, but I can’t find any.
Actually, WHAT DOES THE LAW SAY regarding this issue ..??? THAT is the only answer.
The word Caesar seems to derive from the verb caedere, caedo, cecidi, caesus, -a, -um meaning to cut, to hew to pieces, to strike, to kill, or to cut out.
I would say they ceased to be British subjects when Congress voted for independence on July 2, 1776, not when the Revolutionary War was over. Some of the colonists would have said they ceased to be subjects of King George even earlier, when he removed them from his protection and made war against them (using foreign mercenaries).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.