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

Skip to comments.

Cruz says he is a US citizen 'by birth' despite being born in Canada
FOXNEWS.com ^ | October 28, 2013 | unknown

Posted on 10/29/2013 9:02:51 AM PDT by txrangerette

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 1,001-1,042 next last
To: DustyMoment; CodeToad; onyx; Kansas58

I don’t really care if you claim to have voted for Ronald Reagan, the Holy Trinity, or Ferlon Husky and the Hushpuppies. Right now you’re being a concern troll and acting like a stealth democrat.

Stop it. He’s eligible. Despite all the trash the anti-cruzers have thrown at him, he’s a citizen by birth, and that equals natural born. And it’s been proven to many times. Go back and read all the previous threads.

Why attack him now when amnesty and obamacare are on the table again at the same time, front and center in the news?

Why now?


101 posted on 10/29/2013 11:20:14 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

His father has a very murky past and has floated several different versions of it, none of which bear up under scrutiny.


102 posted on 10/29/2013 11:22:01 AM PDT by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: helpfulresearcher

Can’t wait to start asking the left why they are being racists against latinos... don’t they want the diversity of a hispanic president? Why do they hate latinos...

So much fun to be had :)


103 posted on 10/29/2013 11:22:48 AM PDT by csivils
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: kabumpo; Venturer
His father has a very murky past and has floated several different versions of it, none of which bear up under scrutiny.

Only if you are a concern troll or somebody wanting to create dissension.
104 posted on 10/29/2013 11:27:17 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion

“Everybody has their opinion of what is meant by the term, but what we ALL need is a SCOTUS decision. BEFORE we spend our energy, money, and votes. That is not too much to ask, and the courts have abdicated their responsibility by refusing to give us that answer. Everybody agree?”

No. Your plan makes no sense. Someone has to have standing and be damaged by Cruz as somehow an illegal President before the suit could be filed. Cruz has not even formally announced he is running.

I say support Cruz. Born as a US citizen is good enough for me.


105 posted on 10/29/2013 11:28:50 AM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

How odd that anyone could ever, ever imagine that someone who allied himself with Fidel Castro could be thought of as a communist.
And please explain - without resorting to wikipedia - exactly what “fighting against Batista” means. Was there a war?


106 posted on 10/29/2013 11:29:09 AM PDT by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: William Tell

Exactly!!!!! Thank you.


107 posted on 10/29/2013 11:31:55 AM PDT by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

Cruz WAS a US citizen at birth. No controversy, except that ginned up by those who fear him. Bob


108 posted on 10/29/2013 11:33:24 AM PDT by alstewartfan ("Old admirals who feel the wind Are never put to sea." Al Stewart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
At least he acts like an American

Not to take anything away from Ted Cruz who I support and hope runs for President but next to Obama even Putin acts like an American.

109 posted on 10/29/2013 11:34:18 AM PDT by tsowellfan (www.cafenetamerica.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

I agree that Ted Cruz is wonderful. But he is flawed as a candidate because of his father.
Your statement about “ fighting Batista” is uninformed naive.


110 posted on 10/29/2013 11:36:33 AM PDT by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: xzins

The courts that gave us Obamacare will be the courts ruling on Cruz’s eligibility. The GOPe and Democrats practically own the courts.

It won’t help to look the other way when the natural born citizen argument comes. I dread the blindside we are going to get hit with if we invest in him just as our presidential candidate.

He’s a great man and we need him. How about Senate Majority Leader Cruz? He doesn’t have to be president to be effective. He may be even more effective there, and we avoid the sucker punch that is coming.


111 posted on 10/29/2013 11:38:12 AM PDT by helpfulresearcher (Socialism is just like any other form of corruption, except that it is perpetrated by a mob.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: kabumpo

Yes they do bear up....he was a TEEN-AGER.


112 posted on 10/29/2013 11:38:25 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

See #71


113 posted on 10/29/2013 11:39:18 AM PDT by LonelyCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon
Has there been a showing that this is the case for Cruz?

Yes, it's called "locking up any incriminating documents" like Obama did. That law is no longer valid (at least it's not until the current President is impeached and jailed for ignoring the law you posted. Until that happens the precedence has already been set.

Anyways, from what I hear, Ted Cruz' parents were visiting Canada when he was born. If true, he IS eligible even if Obama had not opened the doors for anybody (citizen or not) to run for POTUS.

114 posted on 10/29/2013 11:41:17 AM PDT by tsowellfan (www.cafenetamerica.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: helpfulresearcher

Why not worry about that when the time comes, and let’s have the “concerned” quit undercutting him when he’s smack in the middle of attacking amnesty and obamacare?

Other than that, he’s eligible.


115 posted on 10/29/2013 11:42:00 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: helpfulresearcher
The courts that gave us Obamacare will be the courts ruling on Cruz’s eligibility. The GOPe and Democrats practically own the courts.

If they rule against Ted Cruz being eligible it would be a win, win for the American people. Cruz would be able to remain in the US Senate where he can begin to dismantle any law that the disqualified pResident had signed during his whole illegitimate pResidency including ObamaCare.

If they rule FOR Ted Cruz (which I almost know they would) Obama's still not off the eligiblity hook. Ted Cruz is as eligible as John McCain is (regarding birth status).

116 posted on 10/29/2013 11:46:23 AM PDT by tsowellfan (www.cafenetamerica.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

I support Senator Cruz, the decision on eligibility is not mine to make, he’s on a ballot we’re voting for him. 2014 may be our last election if we have that.


117 posted on 10/29/2013 11:50:54 AM PDT by duffee (NO poll tax, NO tax on firearms, ammunition or gun safes. NO gun free zones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
CodeToad said: "Actually READ the law ..."

I gather then that you believe that it would be perfectly alright for Congress to pass a law which defines "Natural Born Citizen" to mean that a person is born to parents who are BOTH citizens"?

Would it be alright for Congress to define "Arms" in the Second Amendment to mean "clubs and knives, but not firearms"?

Here's a headline from a recent internet article:

Lesbian Couple, Gay Man Listed as Three Parents on Baby’s Birth Certificate

Is the child of this union eligible to be President? How many of this child's parents must be U.S. citizens for the child to be eligible?

118 posted on 10/29/2013 11:55:30 AM PDT by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

You argue against Madison and Hamilton, not me.

Minor v. Happersett, in context, ^did^ define NBC as born on US soil to both a man and a woman who were citizens at the time of birth (not just ONE parent, but both). The 14th then reset that to be both parents “in service to the US”, so that military and displaced patriots were included.

That is moot now that the electorate has lowered the bar to “whomever we elect” (post facto eligibility). Until and unless Obamugabe is impeached and removed on ineligiblity rules, Cruz is, most certainly, eligible...in an electoral manner.

WW, we have no continuing debate/argument regarding Cruz. We agree that he is eligible according to the electoral process and precedence previously provided.

Personally, I am disappointed that so many Americans are willing to ignore history for the sake of expediency.


119 posted on 10/29/2013 11:55:44 AM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations - The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

The people who attacked Obama Birthers for bringing up Obama Eligibility will be the same ones going after Cruz for being born in Canada...statement of fact

Fox News attacked Birthers....but will go after Cruz. You bet Karl Rove and the Fox Liberal PhonyCons will go after Cruz Eligibility

Cruz is eligible because the courts never allowed challenging Obama’s eligibility.....that is now legal precedent


120 posted on 10/29/2013 11:55:45 AM PDT by SeminoleCounty (Fact Is: GOPe want ObamaCare.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsowellfan; helpfulresearcher
If they rule against Ted Cruz being eligible it would be a win, win for the American people. Cruz would be able to remain in the US Senate where he can begin to dismantle any law that the disqualified pResident had signed during his whole illegitimate pResidency including ObamaCare.

Nope, that would be a win for the losers who brought the case only, probably a loser Democrat of some sort.

It would be a complete loss for the United States, and possibly signal an end to this Democratic Republic. The final nail in the coffin.

He is the only possible candidate fighting against Amnesty, the only possible candidate fighting against Obamacare.

Oh, it might, in your mind, prove you were right all along, but the real loser would be this experiment in Representative governance we call a constitutional government.
121 posted on 10/29/2013 11:57:22 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: DustyMoment
...,....could not possibly be a citizen of, and owe allegiance to, any other

Lemme adjust my flame shield. OK. That is precisely what makes me itchy about Cruz. He could possibly claim (or have claimed) to be a Canadian, or a Cuban.

Me? Well Ted, I think a NBC is a person both (that's 2) of whose parents are American Citizens. Got the same problem with Jindal. Rubio. And of course, The Mombasa MF.

Sorry. If I am wrong, I need the SCOTUS to tell me.

122 posted on 10/29/2013 12:00:30 PM PDT by Kenny Bunk (OK, Obama be bad. Now where's OUR Program, Plan, and Leader?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk

Problem is, we have had the SCOTUS tells us, we just re-imagine their words to mean something different.

That’s called “progressive”, my FRiend.


123 posted on 10/29/2013 12:03:12 PM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations - The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: kabumpo

“But he is flawed as a candidate because of his father.”

I see, typical liberal, can’t impeach Cruz so let’s go after his father. Well, stupid, his father isn’t running and no one impeached Zero for his father. In fact, I can’t think of any President impeached with a terrible father, yet, here you are trying to lob whatever grenade you can at Cruz.

You have outed yourself as an extreme left-wing liberal.


124 posted on 10/29/2013 12:06:16 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 110 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk

“Sorry. If I am wrong, I need the SCOTUS to tell me. “

You need 5 extreme left-wing liberals, 1 moderate, and 3 conservatives to do your thinking for you? You abdicate your citizenship and the responsibility for thinking to that group??


125 posted on 10/29/2013 12:07:44 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 122 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

“Maybe you should read the law more. Here, try reading this:

8 U.S.C. § 1401 : US Code - Section 1401: Nationals and citizens of United States at birth”

You are quoting the Immigration and Naturalization Act. Congress is Constitutionally mandated to devise a uniform rule of law and regulation for the process of being recognized as a U.S. Citizen. Congress does not have Constitutional authority to determine who is and who is not a natural born citizen.

It’s entirely possible and probable SCOTUS would hear a case brought by the Libs against Cruz because he is relying on a statute to prove his eligibility for POTUS where Congress is not Constitutionally mandated authority to legislate.

Natural born citizenship status is a subset of U.S. Citizen. Obama uses his birth certificate to infer he is a natural born citizen by the 14th Amendment. In fact, Obama uses the Privacy Act to conceal his Certificate of Naturalization from the public. Cruz relies on his Certificate of Citizenship, issued to him under the Immigration and Nationality to publicly claim citizenship.

A natural born citizen cannot rely on the Immigration and Nationality Act to proclaim eligibility because Congress does not have that Constitutional authority. Congress can only codify a process for becoming a citizen.


126 posted on 10/29/2013 12:09:27 PM PDT by SvenMagnussen (1983 ... the year Obama became a naturalized U.S. citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel

“Not according to Minor v. Happersett...”

Of which you have never read because if you did you wouldn’t have said that.


127 posted on 10/29/2013 12:09:41 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 86 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel

“Cruz is eligible because Obama was elected. Argument ends there. “

Maybe for you but no one else has said that. We have said he is a natural born citizen because he was a citizen at birth.


128 posted on 10/29/2013 12:11:12 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 86 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel
You argue against Madison and Hamilton, not me.

Neither defined natural born citizenship.

Search their writings all you want, they do not offer a definition.

Minor v. Happersett, in context, ^did^ define NBC as born on US soil to both a man and a woman who were citizens at the time of birth (not just ONE parent, but both).

It did not make a definition, either in its context or on an absolute basis.

It simply said that no definition of natural born could exclude Minor, since she would fit under even the narrowest conceivable definition.

The court did not say that unless one was precisely situated as Minor was one could not be a natural born citizen.

129 posted on 10/29/2013 12:11:44 PM PDT by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: SvenMagnussen

“Obama uses his birth certificate “
“Certificate of Naturalization”

What birth certificate? We have never seen such a thing. You haven’t either.

What “Certificate of Naturalization “? We have never seen such a thing. You haven’t either.

You know very little of law, yet, it is written in English. You even have a hard time understanding what the word ‘natural’ means. Not very bright, are you?


130 posted on 10/29/2013 12:18:01 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 126 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel

“v. Happersett, in context, ^did^ define NBC as born on US soil to both a man and a woman who were citizens at the time of birth (not just ONE parent, but both). “

I’ve already posted the part you leave out which is the court said that was one definition but not the only definition.

You still haven’t read that decision or else you wouldn’t have made such an ignorant and stupid claim as that.


131 posted on 10/29/2013 12:19:21 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: xzins

These liberal trolls attack Cruz because he is effective. They know he will stomp the guts out of Hillary and any one else the Demcraps put up.

Rush Limbaugh calls them “Seminar Callers”; people that attend seminars to learn how to say something conservative just enough to be included in a discussion but them make all kinds of underhanded liberals claims.


132 posted on 10/29/2013 12:20:47 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 101 | View Replies]

To: wideawake; CodeToad

Hey...it works for you.

Why should the rest of the US ask questions?

Again, we are not butting heads on this. Obama was elected and inaugurated. Cruz can be, too, outside of any SCOTUS decision to the contrary. If Cruz runs for POTUS, and if he wins the primary, I won’t mitigate against him.

I restate, I am disappointed that so many Americans can disregard the Constitution for expediency.

But, trust me, the communists will bring this up and MOST CERTAINLY will bring up any perceived hypocrisy in the conservative base regarding the BLATANT SIMILARITIES to Obamugabe’s bona-fides.


133 posted on 10/29/2013 12:21:45 PM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations - The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

“His father has a very murky past and has floated several different versions of it, none of which bear up under scrutiny.”

Here is where these trolls go once they cannot impeach Cruz’s birth right: They try to underhandedly bash his father as being an issue.


134 posted on 10/29/2013 12:21:49 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 102 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel

“Again, we are not butting heads on this.”

“I restate, I am disappointed that so many Americans can disregard the Constitution for expediency”

THAT IS butting heads, moron!


135 posted on 10/29/2013 12:22:45 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 133 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

I will take issue with you in that what I think is immaterial, at least to me, on this matter of eligibility. As a second grader in a parochial school I told my teacher what she had listed as careers on the blackboard did not include my goal. She asked what was my goal and I said POTUSA. The teacher was dumb founded but added POTUSA to the listing. Fast forward to after WWII when my brother was killed on Okinawa and I also served in the Pacific. I went to college on the G.I. Bill. It was at that time that I came to a conclusion that my second grade dream was not realizable. My father who died a few months before I was born and my mother were non citizens when my brother and I were born in the USA. I then became very interested in the constitutional aspects of eligibility and took a serious look at my second grade aspiration. I came away then and hold today that what was adopted by the Founders did indeed prohibit either my brother or myself from being eligible for POTUSA because eligibility was limited to having parentS who were citizens. This matter is material to me. With this said I believe Cruz is also a very good person as to my beliefs for the USA but I have to weigh what I have learned against what any other person says as to eligibility.


136 posted on 10/29/2013 12:27:18 PM PDT by noinfringers2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: xzins

It doesn’t matter what you think or what I think. If Cruz is elected President and Ruth BAder Ginsburg thinks he is dangerous to the country she still has the prerogative of saying Cruz can’t be POTUS. Not a good idea. And the Founders never intended the government to play legal “chicken” with the people.

We need SCOTUS to give us an answer BEFORE Cruz runs, so they can’t snap it away from him if he gets elected. Hillary would challenge Cruz’ eligibility, no courts would be threatened into claiming that she has no standing, and what do you want to bet that a compromised John Roberts would end up ruling against Cruz?

This is a set-up. You can see it a mile away. The only way to stop it is to have the SCOTUS commit to a legal ruling BEFORE any of this happens.


137 posted on 10/29/2013 12:29:49 PM PDT by butterdezillion (Free online faxing at http://faxzero.com/ Fax all your elected officials. Make DC listen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: xzins

It doesn’t matter what you think or what I think. If Cruz is elected President and Ruth BAder Ginsburg thinks he is dangerous to the country she still has the prerogative of saying Cruz can’t be POTUS. Not a good idea. And the Founders never intended the government to play legal “chicken” with the people.

We need SCOTUS to give us an answer BEFORE Cruz runs, so they can’t snap it away from him if he gets elected. Hillary would challenge Cruz’ eligibility, no courts would be threatened into claiming that she has no standing, and what do you want to bet that a compromised John Roberts would end up ruling against Cruz?

This is a set-up. You can see it a mile away. The only way to stop it is to have the SCOTUS commit to a legal ruling BEFORE any of this happens.


138 posted on 10/29/2013 12:29:50 PM PDT by butterdezillion (Free online faxing at http://faxzero.com/ Fax all your elected officials. Make DC listen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: xzins

It doesn’t matter what you think or what I think. If Cruz is elected President and Ruth BAder Ginsburg thinks he is dangerous to the country she still has the prerogative of saying Cruz can’t be POTUS. Not a good idea. And the Founders never intended the government to play legal “chicken” with the people.

We need SCOTUS to give us an answer BEFORE Cruz runs, so they can’t snap it away from him if he gets elected. Hillary would challenge Cruz’ eligibility, no courts would be threatened into claiming that she has no standing, and what do you want to bet that a compromised John Roberts would end up ruling against Cruz?

This is a set-up. You can see it a mile away. The only way to stop it is to have the SCOTUS commit to a legal ruling BEFORE any of this happens.


139 posted on 10/29/2013 12:29:51 PM PDT by butterdezillion (Free online faxing at http://faxzero.com/ Fax all your elected officials. Make DC listen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: plain talk

No, somebody has to have standing and show harm from OBAMA being President, so SCOTUS rules BEFORE Cruz ever runs. See the post I just got done posting to xzins. A trap is being laid and the order in which things come is critical. Think about it.


140 posted on 10/29/2013 12:31:18 PM PDT by butterdezillion (Free online faxing at http://faxzero.com/ Fax all your elected officials. Make DC listen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad; Admin Moderator

:: You still haven’t read that decision or else you wouldn’t have made such an ignorant and stupid claim as that. ::

I’m beginning to think that you, sir, are a progressive plant that looks to stir up emotions rather than discuss history and facts.

You question my understanding of M v. H without knowing me and then make ad hominem insults as to my overall knowledge. You say I haven’t read the decision - without evidence - and then proceed to beat that strawman with fever.

Sir, the US Constitution is not the intrepretive property of lawyers and certainly not left to modern barristers to decide outside of “history since FDR”.

What is your definition of “We The People”? Or do you need to consult a lawyer to answer that?


141 posted on 10/29/2013 12:31:35 PM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations - The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette
Until it is addressed in specifics by the SCOTUS then he is a 'citizen' by birth.
Thus eligible to be president should he run and be elected. He is a citizen by
birth and not naturalization.

Citizenship Through Parents

One parent is a U.S. citizen at the time of birth and the birthdate is before November 14, 1986 but after October 10, 1952

The parents are married at the time of birth and the U.S. citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. or its territories for a period of at least ten years at some time in his or her life prior to the birth, at least five of which were after his or her 14th birthday.

If the U.S. citizen parent spent time abroad in any of the following three capacities, this can also be counted towards the physical presence requirement:

  • Serving honorably in the U.S. Armed Forces;
  • Employed with the U.S. Government; or
  • Employed with certain international organizations. 

Additionally, time spent abroad by the U.S. citizen parent while the U.S. citizen parent was the unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person who meets any of the three conditions listed above can also be counted.

If the child was born out of wedlock, see N-600: FAQ.


142 posted on 10/29/2013 12:32:36 PM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel

Blow it out yer butt, liberal. All the fancy wording of your post suggests an arrogant prick looking to win a fight he himself chose and is losing.

We’ve pointed out your flaws yet you continue to say them and bash Cruz.


143 posted on 10/29/2013 12:33:02 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 141 | View Replies]

To: SeminoleCounty

No, it’s not legal precedent because the courts never granted anybody standing to get an actual legal decision on Obama’s eligibility. They left the door open for the issue to be brought up later by NOT setting a precedent. It’s a trap, people.

I like Cruz. I hope he’s eligible. I’ve heard arguments both ways. None of that matters. What matters is what a compromised SCOTUS would rule if they know it’s about Cruz, versus what they would rule if they knew it was about Obama.

If anybody here wants Cruz to be ruled eligible, then they better be lining up to sue over OBAMA’s ineligibility while they still can, and get a legal precedent when it’s OBAMA that the court thinks they’re helping. Because without that precedent the compromised court will do anything to get rid of Cruz who threatens everything about DC’s status quo, including the courts doing CYA for crooked politicians.


144 posted on 10/29/2013 12:36:06 PM PDT by butterdezillion (Free online faxing at http://faxzero.com/ Fax all your elected officials. Make DC listen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
They try to underhandedly bash his father as being an issue.

You mean like how we bash bammies father for being a commie, his grand parents his mother etc....

Stop being a hypocrite and calling FReepers names because they disagree with your definition of a term in the Constitution.

Cruz is so far doing a great job, he shows he is a man of conviction, but I learned a long time ago, men will let you down, so I simply observe and vote accordingly.

Time tells many things, Cruz has been in office for what, 10 months?

We'll see how this all pans out in time.

145 posted on 10/29/2013 12:39:17 PM PDT by Las Vegas Ron ("Medicine is the keystone in the arch of socialism" Vladimir Lenin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad; Admin Moderator

ummm....

wow!


146 posted on 10/29/2013 12:39:22 PM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations - The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: kabumpo

Take it elsewhere! Not interested in your slime!


147 posted on 10/29/2013 12:40:13 PM PDT by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

So...you don’t have a coherent answer?

Please, FR doesn’t need all that spittle on the screen.


148 posted on 10/29/2013 12:41:32 PM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations - The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad; Cletus.D.Yokel
Blow it out yer butt, liberal.

Nice.

Real convincing argument there.

You bring disgrace to FR and debate.

149 posted on 10/29/2013 12:42:26 PM PDT by Las Vegas Ron ("Medicine is the keystone in the arch of socialism" Vladimir Lenin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

“Cruz is eligible to be President because he is a natural born citizen of the United States.

His mother is a citizen.

That’s how it works.”


You’re correct on the result, but it’s a little more nuanced than that.

Cruz is a natural-born citizen because, pursuant to federal law at the time of his birth, Cruz is a U.S. citizen at birth. When Cruz was born, same as when Obama was born, a child born outside of the U.S. with one U.S. citizen parent and one non-citizen parent would be a U.S. citizen at birth if his U.S. citizen parent had resided in the U.S. for at least 10 years of his or her life, with at least 5 of those years coming after the age of 14. Cruz’s mother easily met such requirement, so Cruz, despite having been born in Canada, was a U.S. citizen at birth and thus a natural-born citizen.

The reason why it was so important for Obama to maintain that he had been born in Hawaii was because, had Obama been born in Kenya (as Obama seemed to have claimed earlier, and as his step-grandmother had indicated in an interview), he would *not* have been a U.S. citizen at birth, since his sole U.S. citizen parent had not resided in the U.S. for at least 5 years after turning 14 (something that would be incontrovertible, since his mother had not yet turned 19 when Obama was born, so she couldn’t have resided anywhere for 5 years after turning 14). Only by having been born in the U.S. (or by having a U.S. citizen for a father) could Obama be a U.S. citizen at birth and thus a natural-born citizen.

So Cruz is a natural-born citizen, even if Democrat claim that he was born in the Moon.


150 posted on 10/29/2013 12:43:15 PM PDT by AuH2ORepublican (If a politician won't protect innocent babies, what ma kes you think that he'll defend your rights?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 1,001-1,042 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