Posted on 08/29/2013 6:32:41 AM PDT by Lakeshark
Not at all. But "natural born citizen" being the same as "citizen at birth" still differs from the more generic "citizen" in that naturalized citizens qualify for the latter but not the former.
Also, it is somewhat off track of a good debate to have one person telling another that something is not personally relevant to that other person. Reminds me of thought police.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and I do not dispute that. But an opinion is irrelevant compared to fact in the sense that it cannot change the fact - I could have the opinion that no one should be allowed to be President who hasn't served in the military, but that opinion has absolutely no bearing on anyone's legal eligibility to be President. Similarly, people who are imposing an extra-legal and extra-Constitutional test to the Presidency are welcome to do so for themselves, but that doesn't affect the actual eligibility requirements.
Uh, gee....this is a bit shallow and too easy, but let me wade in. A: why can't they all prevail? B: maybe becasue he has chosen to live his entire life in one of them? C: maybe because he has declared allegiance to one of them? D: maybe because he has demonstrated allegiance to one of them? E: maybe because the intergalactic citizenship court has ruled in favor of America?
Oh, wait, E is what you apparently are waiting for. GEEZ DUDE
Are you suggesting that the US State department -- Hillary's and Kerry's State Department, the group that publishes the FAM's, -- is chock full of CONSERVATIVE Ted Cruz supporters, and these Tea Party Patriots are adding language favorable to him in State Department publications?
That is a really odd belief.
I assumed YOU did, since it's you who writes things like : "his genetic father was obviously"
Once upon a time, the paternity of Obama by Davis was a rousing discussion. I’m sure we could look it up on the web and maybe even on FR.
I think the “obvious” is in the same vein as Chelsea Hubble... er... Clinton.
Actually I need to apologize. I had my dates screwed up and apparently Ted Cruz’s parents were living in Canada at the time Ted Cruz had been conceived. However I am busy researching the motel records in Fargo to see if his parents had crossed the border for some midnight basketball in March of 1970. It is also possible that they were holed up in a Motel in Ft. Lauderdale with all the other Canuck Snow Birds.
I am also researching to determine if any of the cement under the foundation of the Cruz home in Calgary was imported from the Portland Cement factory in the US. I am certain that if the concrete under the Cruz bedroom was imported from the United States that a strong argument could be made that Cruz was conceived on US Soil.
At any rate regardless of where he was conceived he would still be a Natural Born Citizen because his mother was a US Citizen both at the time of conception and the time of birth.
It is interesting to note that the Naturalization Act of 1790, written by the same people who ratified the Constitution and signed into law by none other than George Washington, defined the children of American citizens born abroad as Natual Born Citizens. Clearly the founders, including George Washington, intended that Ted Cruz would be considered a Natural Born Citizen.
But I guess some people today know more about the NBC clause than the first Congress and George Washington.
Cest la vie
Thanks for your clarification. May you have a blessed day as well!
Tell me humble, do you have any doubts about the paternity of one Chelsea Clinton?
Does that make you Looney Tunes?
but the logic was irrefutable......
Of those who champion the eligibility question, he should be cut some slack on the matter.
I'm certain he will be one to cease and desist on the matter for now, one who will unite with us and Ted Cruz in the attempt to defund Bambi care.
My 2 cents.
I've never given it any thought because I don't give a rip.
:-)
I will trust your long time judgement on exit82 - and cut some slack. This particular argument he posed however......no hold water.....
The Founding Fathers gave themselves immunity from the Natural Born Clause,the country was brand new and they were the founders so that is understandable.With the condition of the country now,a lawless President,a feckless Congress,an out of control Judiciary,I think it’s time to start all over again,I nominate Ted Cruz as a new Founding Father,therefore he is exempt from the Natural Born requirements.
My brother and I who were born in the USA and were in military service in WWII were always considered plain ‘citizens’ or citizens at birth using your term. Our parents were not naturalized immigrants. However, contrary to your statement we were not the same as/identical to a ‘natural born’ citizen. I can agree that a ‘natural born’ citizen is a ‘citizen’ when born but not that a ‘naturalized’ citizen is a ‘natural born’ citizen. I recall an old adage that goes something like ‘facts are facts just don’t confuse me with your opinions’ and it seems we are at this point in our discussion.
Progress is being made, the argument is being won on several fronts. I'm trying to be patient and hold fire.
Yep, and it’s not where Obama was born that irks me...because I cannot know for sure to begin with. It’s where his beliefs were born, and those we know, are UN American - and it’s those beliefs, put into policy, that are destroying America. Not the physical location of his birth.
With Cruz, we also know where his beliefs were born....and they are ALL AMERICAN.
Signs of the times.
To me, that's been the crux of the matter from the beginning.
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.