Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is Ted Cruz a natural-born citizen eligible to serve as president? [Yes! And I support him! JimRob]
YAHOO NEWS ^ | 10-29-13 | Sarah Helene Duggin | National Constitution Center

Posted on 10/28/2013 7:19:34 AM PDT by Paul46360

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-283 next last
To: Jim Robinson
RE: I will support him to the hilt if he does.

Hooah!!

101 posted on 10/28/2013 10:12:48 AM PDT by big'ol_freeper ("Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid" ~ Ronald Wilson Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: kabumpo
that there can even be a conversation about it - is in of itself enough reason for him not to run.

Horsecrap. He should run. I expect he will run.

But you do expose your reason for wanting to flog this issue.

/johnny

102 posted on 10/28/2013 10:13:02 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

“It’s too bad the framers did not take an extra paragraph in the Constitution to explain “Natural born citizen”.”

They couldn’t foresee that there would be people retarded enough not to know what the word “natural” meant and would try to distort it to mean things never intended. Cruz is a natural born citizen by all definitions of law.

If a person is a citizen by birth they are a natural born citizen. Instead of that definition, we get all kinds of creepy conspiracy theorists types thinking they are great legal minds and want to claim all kinds of crap the founding fathers did not intend. Hells Bells, if they meant a person would only be considered natural born if any only if two parents were married, present in the US all their lives, with multiple generations of previous citizenships, and the birth was in a US hospital, and, and, and, they would have said so.

Our LAWS say a person has citizenship at birth under certain conditions and Cruz meets those conditions. Any idiot that cannot understand that is an idiot that wants to re-write law. Hopefully they never serve on a jury as they are too stupid to understand plain English.

These same idiots that claim anyone born in another country must be a citizen of that country and only of that country are therefore supporting anchor babies born here in the US and that isn’t even law. The child must meet certain criteria and is not a natural born citizen because the child is not granted US citizenship automatically because they are born here.

These idiots claim if a pregnant woman is visiting another country, even for a day, and goes into labor the child loses their US citizenship. Who are they to say pregnant women must stay in country? Who are they say a child loses it citizenship because mom stepped into another country? A baby that has had 8 months and 30 days of pregnancy in the US has its citizenship destroyed by being a single day in another country when mom gives birth? Mom visits Niagara Falls, goes into labor, nearest hospital is in Canada, oops, baby is without a country because these pinheads think the baby is not a US citizen and Canada does not recognize her as legal to give birth to a Canadian. How retarded is that?

A US citizen working in another country is still a US citizen, and that other country may consider any child she has a US citizen and not recognize the birth or give the child citizenship. What then? A baby without a country, because these pinheads claim the child is not a US citizen either, so the child is without a country. Stupid. Absolutely stupid.

Not a single one of these idiots knows how to read the law. It is written in English and they don’t have the basic civics skills to find it and read it: Title 8 Section 1401. Yet, they couldn’t find it any more than they can find their ass with both hands. That section defines who is and who is not a US citizen at birth, a natural born citizen, yet, they argue as though they know everything. Dunces. Put a pointy hat on them and stand them in the corner.


103 posted on 10/28/2013 10:17:31 AM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: kabumpo

“The fact that there is “murkiness” and that Cruz for any reason can be tainted by it - that there can even be a conversation about it - is in of itself enough reason for him not to run.”

You liberals ran Obama with massive taint on his record. So, we’ll run our guy and FU if you don’t like it.


104 posted on 10/28/2013 10:18:40 AM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: kabumpo

“it’s about the law.”

Of which you have never read, so don’t give us that crap.


105 posted on 10/28/2013 10:19:45 AM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
The real reason some here on FR are flogging the issue is that they don't want a real conservative to win the White House.

/johnny

106 posted on 10/28/2013 10:19:50 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Absolutely. We have a number of liberal trolls here.

I listened to Rush years back and got a lesson about these types. Rush had the goods on them when they would call, claim to be conservative, hold their noses and say something conservative, but then try to sow seeds of FUD, fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Rush calls them “Seminar Callers” as they attend seminars to learn how to call into the Rush show and sow FUD.

We have dozens of them on FR right now.


107 posted on 10/28/2013 10:24:46 AM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: kabumpo
... it's about the law.

Nah,you're stuck on your interpretation of the 'law'.

Be not afraid of the Left. They'd be the laughingstock of the nation if they would ever think of going "Birther" on Ted Cruz.

108 posted on 10/28/2013 10:40:34 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

Barry was born in Kenya and I am going to stick with that.


109 posted on 10/28/2013 10:49:13 AM PDT by American Constitutionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross
They'd be the laughingstock of the nation if they would ever think of going "Birther" on Ted Cruz.

They won't need to. There are enough on the right who are doing that for them.

110 posted on 10/28/2013 10:51:21 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: TheRhinelander
" In Obama’s case it was his mother. "

Barry's mother did not confer citizenship to him because of her age and the amount of time they allowed for residing in the USA.
111 posted on 10/28/2013 10:51:42 AM PDT by American Constitutionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
“communication”? Is that what you call attacking Cruz? “Communication”? Typical liberal left-wing propaganda.

I refuse to let you stuff something in my mouth that I didn't say. It's pretty dishonest of you to imply that I'm defending attacks on Ted Cruz, when I've said the exact opposite on this thread.

For the record, I'm a Texan who voted for Ted Cruz in the general and the run-off election last year. I couldn't be happier with his service to the people so far.

My position is that freedom includes the right to discuss any subject, no matter how unpalatable. What position one takes on a subject is a different matter, and yes, some opinions are unwanted (and even verboten) on this site.

I've been here a long time, and those who know me, know that I'm fully in accord with FR's mission. I don't agree with the left, and take every opportunity to express that here, and elsewhere.

See my post 75 for further explanation of where I'm coming from.

112 posted on 10/28/2013 10:52:00 AM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross; Windflier
Be not afraid of the Left. They'd be the laughingstock of the nation if they would ever think of going "Birther" on Ted Cruz.

No they won't, the left is never disparaged by the left....aka MSM.......they have signaled their intent to use this issue, they want to try to seed doubt among the conservative base, making inroads through the birthers. they want to dispirit us any way they can, this is one of the ways.

I like wf's take at post 75, it's the road most of the sane conservative birthers take.

113 posted on 10/28/2013 10:55:30 AM PDT by Lakeshark (Mr Reid, tear down this law!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

Did Mark Levin go into why Cruz is a natural born citizen and why Obama is not ?


114 posted on 10/28/2013 10:56:45 AM PDT by American Constitutionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: rrrod

Cruz...yes..Arnold no

Yep Arnold had zero parents that were American citizens!! Besides that he isn’t very smart and a Liberal RINO to boot!!!


115 posted on 10/28/2013 10:56:47 AM PDT by tallyhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: latina4dubya
Cruz and Arnold are not in the same position birth-wise... Arnold is not eligible... Ted Cruz is... just as John McCain was/is...

Exactly!

116 posted on 10/28/2013 11:06:14 AM PDT by tsowellfan (www.cafenetamerica.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark; Windflier
I like wf's take at post 75, it's the road most of the sane conservative birthers take.

I like Windflier's post as well. What burns my chaps is the FR posters who would then accuse wf of 'betrayal', 'treason' and being an 'apostate' of the Constitution for not agreeing with their interpretation of it.

117 posted on 10/28/2013 11:06:52 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross; Windflier
I've seen many freepers take that position, I may have been one of the first to articulate it concerning the rationale for the "natural born" citizenship clause in some of our discussions, although wf said it better in his post than I ever have.

C Edmund said it best when he said the intransigent ones who didn't understand that the framers were most concerned about someone holding the office that was under foreign influence (ideas, and worse), that those that did not understand that fact were niggling (racist?) pharisees. In my mind, and on that basis, the entire democrat party and some of our RINOs are unfit for the office

118 posted on 10/28/2013 11:13:48 AM PDT by Lakeshark (Mr Reid, tear down this law!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

Comment #119 Removed by Moderator

To: Paul46360

You people should be asking yourself. Why is it that all the choices you get for president are people who were not born in the US to Two US parents. What are the chances of that? You are all being pawned and you don’t even realize it.


120 posted on 10/28/2013 11:27:39 AM PDT by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: helpfulresearcher

I have followed the nbc issue since I came here. What seems obvious by the ussc refusing to rule on ob they have left a situation in which the law may not have been followed

I would vote for Cruz, dement and maybe 1 or two others, but I sure like to get a court ruling sooner than later


121 posted on 10/28/2013 11:28:15 AM PDT by morphing libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

“This question has been settled on FR. Several freepers have been zotted over the subject. Cruz is eligible.”

You sound so German.


122 posted on 10/28/2013 11:29:25 AM PDT by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Revel
Is that supposed to be an insult?

You can read earlier in the thread where Jim stated his position. It is settled on FR. Freepers have been zotted over pushing the issue. Those are facts.

/johnny

123 posted on 10/28/2013 11:35:52 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeTex

Having one American parent would be enough if the parent lived here a certain number of years and the baby was born overseas. The problem in Obama’s case if he was born overseas would be that his mother only lived here 4 years after age 14 when it needed to be 5. She was only 18 at his birth. This requirement was lowered to 2 years at some point after his birth.

But even if Obama was determined ineligible, since we can’t retroactively undo his presidency, the Supreme Court should give us one exception to the rule of our own to balance things out in the interest of equal protection. But let’s not push the case since that would open the door for RINO Arnie...


124 posted on 10/28/2013 11:39:48 AM PDT by JediJones (The #1 Must-see Filibuster of the Year: TEXAS TED AND THE CONSERVATIVE CRUZ-ADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

I wonder what that Second Swear-in-Ceremony was really about?


125 posted on 10/28/2013 11:40:28 AM PDT by machogirl (First they came for my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Paul46360

yes and the heavy DUTY!


126 posted on 10/28/2013 11:43:19 AM PDT by no-to-illegals (Scrutinize our government and Secure the Blessing of Freedom and Justice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul46360

It will be amusing to see if Cruz runs, the leftists suddenly become birthers (again....remember they are the ones who brought up the whole issue with McCain).

Ohh, what a complex web we weave....


127 posted on 10/28/2013 11:44:26 AM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: machogirl
I wonder what that Second Swear-in-Ceremony was really about?

I thought it was about Roberts not thinking to write down the presidential oath before he got on camera and forgot it?

128 posted on 10/28/2013 11:44:36 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

With this bunch, you never know.


129 posted on 10/28/2013 11:51:25 AM PDT by machogirl (First they came for my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

I’m not a liberal, quite the opposite, and your low grade attempt at character assasination is exactly what a Dem would do. You should be ashamed.


130 posted on 10/28/2013 11:53:50 AM PDT by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

You have no way of knowing what I have or have not read - so why do you post such wannabe belligerent nonsense.


131 posted on 10/28/2013 11:55:59 AM PDT by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

I have, at length. Try reading.


132 posted on 10/28/2013 11:57:06 AM PDT by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross

newsflash: they already are.


133 posted on 10/28/2013 11:57:58 AM PDT by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER

We may all know what it means but we all may have different definitions of what it means. Even Freepers can’t agree on what it means. I personally think no one except a fringe even care what it means and the fringe disagree amongst themselves on the rules / definitions.

Thus I hope Cruz runs and will gladly support him.


134 posted on 10/28/2013 11:58:02 AM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: kabumpo

“wannabe belligerent nonsense.”

That’s been your whole posting history so we know you have not read the law. It’s been just a bunch of ignorant nonsense from you.


135 posted on 10/28/2013 11:58:45 AM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

You are the one that summed up people saying Cruz is not fit to run as “communication”. That’s BS propaganda to attempt to categorize such attempts at FUD against Cruz as “communication”. Hell, everything is communications.


136 posted on 10/28/2013 12:00:14 PM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: kabumpo

“You should be ashamed.”

I am never ashamed to support our Constitution, our laws, and Cruz. You, however, haven’t supported any of it. You come here simply to bash Cruz. You liberals run scared of the man. “Seminar Callers”, nothing more.


137 posted on 10/28/2013 12:01:18 PM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Paul46360

Ted Cruz was an American citizen *at birth*. THere is no problem. Bob


138 posted on 10/28/2013 12:03:26 PM PDT by alstewartfan ("Old admirals who feel the wind Are never put to sea." Al Stewart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: helpfulresearcher

Vattel doesn’t write our laws. Never did. We rejected the Law of Nations and adopted our own. Vattel can kiss my ass as can anyone attempting to utilize a foreign document to control these united States.


139 posted on 10/28/2013 12:04:28 PM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

Thank you, I feel the same way - that we should be able to discuss and dissent. I like Cruz, but the hysterical defensiveness about him on FR is troubling to me. It’s how the Dems function.
My position is that our presidential candidate needs to be strong politically and have absolutely no murkyness in his background - it shouldn’t be possible to even have a conversation about his origins, etc because there should be nothing that could provoke a question.


140 posted on 10/28/2013 12:05:48 PM PDT by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: JohnnyP
The best solution would be to amend the Constitution, as many legislators on both sides of the aisle have proposed over the years.

Actually, I'd be fine with an amendment that changed eligibility to anyone who has been a citizen (and not a dual-citizen of any other country) for at least 35 years. Essentially, it makes the minimum age for President 35 + your age at citizenship, which would be 0 for Cruz, but a fair bit more for someone like Schwarzenegger.

141 posted on 10/28/2013 12:13:36 PM PDT by kevkrom (It's not "immigration reform", it's an "amnesty bill". Take back the language!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

Comment #142 Removed by Moderator

Comment #143 Removed by Moderator

To: CodeToad
Thousands upon thousands of US citizens are around the world because of the interpretation of citizenship.

Post WWII babies sired in Europe from visiting US soldiers; birth creates US citizens in Germany, Japan, etc.

Hookers and girlfriends have babies from US men in their third world country are magic US citizen babies. Wonderful.

Passing on citizenship via birth and location is old fashioned. Viva anchor babies!

144 posted on 10/28/2013 12:33:03 PM PDT by Theoria
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

You know what this thread needs?

A heaping dose of Parsifal.

And more cowbell.

Pan_Yan, who misses some of the long gone FReepers.


145 posted on 10/28/2013 12:38:10 PM PDT by Pan_Yan (Who told you that you were naked? Genesis 3:11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #146 Removed by Moderator

To: American Constitutionalist
Mark Levin on Ted Cruz
147 posted on 10/28/2013 12:47:29 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: TxSynthMan

“Is that why George W (Washington, that is) kept a copy of Vattel on his desk while he was president?”

Use whatever personal reference you want but that doesn’t make it something the rest of us must use. I have a copy of Bloom County on my desk, suppose we use that?

I suppose if a judge in court said, “Well, let’s look at the Law of Nations to figure this trial out”, you would agree?


148 posted on 10/28/2013 12:57:02 PM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Paul46360
I know it is early but I'm 100% behind Ted Cruz.

I pray that we can primary out McShame. And here is my prediction, if we successfully primary out McShame, he will pull a Charlie Crist and jump on the Dem bandwagon.

149 posted on 10/28/2013 12:59:56 PM PDT by hockeyfan44 (No more RINOS!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theoria

“Hookers and girlfriends have babies from US men in their third world country are magic US citizen babies.”

I think you’re reading a bit too much urban legend. A hooker in Vietnam having a baby from a US soldier did not give birth to a US citizen. many were granted a visa, but not citizenship.


150 posted on 10/28/2013 1:00:11 PM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-283 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson