Posted on 11/01/2013 12:22:43 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
Actually it would be splitting the conservatives and letting mclame/christy win the nomination.
Thanks for the explanation. I will keep an eye on him for sure. Except for that, I like what he has done in Wisconsin. I don’t mind people immigrating here legally but the illegals must go!
Your original claim: "People that equate Cruz’s parentage and birth with Obama’s parentage and birth don’t understand the law. Birth location is not the issue. By law Cruz’s mother’s American citizenship transferred to Cruz. By law Obama’s mother’s citizenship did not."
There is your claim, that "birth location is not the issue" (that is whether or not he was born in the USA) that there is some law in effect at the time that prevented Obama for getting citizenship, despite being born in Hawaii.
My counter-claim is: that birth location is decisive in determining citizenship, regardless of parents nationality or age. So, if you want to claim that Obama did not have American citizenship at birth, as you do, you MUST begin that claim by asserting your belief that he was born outside the USA.
You then arrogantly and repeatedly tell me to read the law which is posted on this thread. "You’re not reading all the words. Birthplace has nothing to do with this. The fact that one parent was a foreigner changes how citizenship is conferred. The actual statue in place at the time of his birth is on this thread. Try reading it - all of it - in full.
OK, here is the first line of the law, which describes what the law concerns:
“a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States” before Nov. 14, 1986 ... etc.See, there it is! All those complicated rules about 5 years and 10 years apply for "a person born outside the geographical limits of the United State".
If you believe Obama's claim to Hawaiian birth then nothing that follows in that law has anything to do with him.
It' doesn't matter how long she lived in the USA continuously, etc.
And again, my counter example: All day every day woman fly, drive and walk into the USA at seven, eight and nine months pregnant to have their baby here SO THAT THEIR CHILD WILL BE A US CITIZEN!
You can't seriously believe that there is some weird combination of travel and foreign residence that an American citizen could undertake that would (somehow) result in their child, born in USA, not gaining citizenship while the woman in the room next to them who is a Mexican citizen who's been here for a month can somehow give citizenship to her kid. Nope. By virtue of the child being born in a hospital in the USA that child is a citizen.
You are the one who can't read, or comprehend, or apparently explain things or admit mistakes. Oh well.
There are still arguments to be made about whether mere citizenship at birth confers one with the "Natural Born Citizen" status that is a requirement of the Constitution for holding the office of POTUS. But that's not what you have been asserting. You have been asserting that even if Barry was born in Hawaii he's not a citizen.
That's a ridiculous claim and one that makes us all look foolish. Which is why I've spent too much time debunking it.
PS: I apologize for my multiple postings. I have that trouble posting from my smart-phone sometimes.
No apology necessary. Feel free to say what ever you feel the need to say.
I don’t respond to your assertions because they’re off subject.
And I am not “claiming” anything. I’m simply presenting the law as written the day Barack Obama was born. There’s no need to look any further than that very simple statute.
Barack Obama was not, and is not, a natural born citizen, no matter where he was birthed, because his mother’s citizenship did not confer. Had they picked an American father for him it wouldn’t be an issue, but they didn’t, so it is.
Again, the statue is on this thread, and again, don’t parse, read the whole thing. Slowly might help. It’s as clear as day.
I liked his tough stance on unions...
...but we can't have him going soft on illegal immigration.
As much as I would not mind a ticket with Cruz on it for 2016...
I have to say this...The republican party establishment will never allow this to occur...
Therefore, I propose an alternative, pleasse hear me out, and hold the applause, or rocks until I can run for effective cover from what I am about to say...
Here goes...
I believe we should consentrate of keeping the House, and gaining the majority in the Senate in 2014 and 2016...And accept the fact that the liberals and their ilk will do the same thing to the conservative movement in putting a bookend on the attacks from the republican party elites and their moderates in the next two election cycles...
I believe we have a better chance to wrestle control of the process if we consentrate on those tasks, than waste time and effort on the White House...
Sure, we should put someone on that ticket, but know that the last two times we have tried, the attacks have come from both sides of the political spectrum...And it will absolutely happen again...
I for one would not want to waste Ted Cruz on such a mission...He is way more effective at this point in the Senate, than throwing him to the backstabbing elitists, and have the liberals sit back and burn up what remains when they get into the fray...
Just my opinion...
The bullpen of conservatives who have national recognition and feduciary backing is extremely thin these days...And I am not sure I would want to waste any them as well on this task, in this political environment...
If we are to “Restore” our original, Constitutional Representative Republic, it is going to have to start at the states, and not try to bite off more than we can chew for the office of CEO...
Every single one of those quotes in the post I am replying to is extremely applicable to the road we very well may have to travel as I have suggested...
Hillary Clinton, or whatever is primaried to run against us for the top job in 2016, will be a lame duck from day one, and there will not be a damn thing they can do about it, which will give us almost a free ride into the White House when the liberals and their agenda is decimated by 2020...
We just cannot blick our eyes and hope for the best in a political climate like this, we have has too many examples of our side of the equation (republican party leadership, and its moderate funding mechanisms) screwing up over the last few election cycles...
I believe we are better served by getting control of our state houses, and sending people to D.C. riding upon those successes, than going for broke (again) trying to wrestle the White House from the liberals who have the advantage of the national media, and its minions of low-information voters...
Hit them where they least expect it...
Again, just my opinon...
“But his icy relationship with those party leaders might cause him problems if and when he decides to run for president.”
They will try the same thing they did to Barry Goldwater. Abandon him and let him twist in the wind.
Only in that neither had prior executive experience.
Does Ted Cruz want to run for president? Or are we pushing him?
Courts of law have ruled that Barack Obama is a natural born citizen due to his birth in Hawaii. His mother’s status would only have mattered if Obama was not born in the United States. She would have needed to be 19 years old in order to confer citizenship to a foreign born child and she was 18 and eight months when he was born. The state of Hawaii has confirmed Obama’s birth there and in accordance with Article Four, Section One of the Constitution, the Full Faith and Credit Clause, all other states and the federal government have accepted Hawaii’s verification of their vital record.
http://www.azcentral.com/12news/Obama-Verification.pdf
Here are a few of the many court rulings that have found Obama to qualify as a natural born citizen. No court has ruled that he does not qualify as natural born.
Rhodes v. MacDonald, U.S. District Court Judge Clay D. Land: “A spurious claim questioning the president’s constitutional legitimacy may be protected by the First Amendment, but a Court’s placement of its imprimatur upon a claim that is so lacking in factual support that it is frivolous would undoubtedly disserve the public interest.”—U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, September 16, 2009.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19809978/RHODES-v-MacDONALD-13-ORDER-denying-3-Motion-for-TRO-granting-8-Motion-to-Dismiss-Ordered-by-Judge-Clay-D-Land-on-09162009-CGC-Entered-0
Page 13 of the decision.
Ankeny v. Daniels, Indiana A three judge panel of the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled unanimously: “Based on the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the United States are ‘natural born citizens’ for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”—Indiana Court of Appeals, November 12, 2009
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11120903.ebb.pdf
Taitz v. Obama (Quo Warranto) “This is one of several such suits filed by Ms. Taitz in her quixotic attempt to prove that President Obama is not a natural born citizen, as is required by the Constitution. This Court is not willing to go tilting at windmills with her.”— Chief U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, April 14, 2010
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30040084/TAITZ-v-OBAMA-QW-23-MEMORANDUM-OPINION-dcd-04502943496-23-0
Tisdale v. Obama, U.S .District Court Judge John A. Gibney, Jr.: “It is well settled that those born within the United States are natural born citizens.”— U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of Virginia, January 23, 2012.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/82011399/Tisdale-v-Obama-EDVA-3-12-cv-00036-Doc-2-ORDER-23-Jan-2012
Swensson, Powell, Farrar and Welden v. Obama, Administrative Law Judge Michael Mahili, State of Georgia Administrative Hearings: “For the purposes of this analysis, the Court considered that Barack Obama was born in the United States. Therefore, as discussed in Ankeny, he became a citizen at birth and is a natural born citizen. Accordingly, President Barack Obama is eligible as a candidate for the presidential primary under O.C.G.A. under Section 21-2-5(b). February 3, 2012
http://www.scribd.com/doc/80424508/Swensson-Powell-Farrar-Welden-vs-Obama-Judge-Michael-Malihi-s-Final-Order-Georgia-Ballot-Access-Challenge-2-3-12
Allen v. Obama, Arizona Superior Court Judge Richard E. Gordon: “Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise.”—Pima County Superior Court, Tuscon, Arizona, March 7, 2012
http://www.scribd.com/doc/84531299/AZ-2012-03-07-Allen-v-Obama-C20121317-ORDER-Dismissing-Complaint
Purpura & Moran v. Obama: New Jersey Administrative Law Judge Jeff S. Masin: “No court, federal, state or administrative, has accepted the challengers’ position that Mr. Obama is not a “natural born citizen” due to the acknowledged fact that his father was born in Kenya and was a British citizen by virtue of the then applicable British Nationality Act. Nor has the fact that Obama had, or may have had, dual citizenship at the time of his birth and thereafter been held to deny him the status of natural born. It is unnecessary to reinvent the wheel here. … The petitioners’ legal position on this issue, however well intentioned, has no merit in law. Thus, accepting for the point of this issue that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a ‘natural born Citizen’ regardless of the status of his father.” April 10, 2012
http://www.scribd.com/doc/88936737/2012-04-10-NJ-Purpura-Moran-v-Obama-Initial-Decision-of-ALJ-Masin-Apuzzo
Voeltz v. Obama, Judge John C. Cooper, Leon County, Florida Circuit Court Judge: “In addition, to the extent that the complaint alleges that President Obama is not a “natural born citizen” even though born int he United States, the Court is in agreement with other courts that have considered this issue, namely, that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purpose, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”—September 6, 2012
http://judicial.clerk.leon.fl.us/image_orders.asp?caseid=77182640&jiscaseid=&defseq=&chargeseq=&dktid=57485906&dktsource=CRTV
Courts will rule the exact same way for Senator Cruz under the provisions of 8USC 1401 which delineates those who are “Nationals and Citizens of the United States at Birth.”
Palin/Cruz: 2016
The law in effect in 1961 was the 1952 Nationality and Immigration Act commonly called the McCarron - Walters Act.
http://library.uwb.edu/guides/usimmigration/66%20stat%20163.pdf
TTTLE III - NATIONALITY AND NATURALIZATION
CHAPTER 1 – NATIONALITY AT BIRTH AND BY COLLECTIVE NATURALIZATION
NATIONALS AND CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES AT BIRTH
Sec. 301 (a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(1) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
Sec. 301 (a) (7) A person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such a person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years;”
Obama born in Hawaii comes under Section 301 (a) (1).
Obama born in Kenya comes under Section 301 (a) (7).
Great post. You have skill and perception
Thank you very much.
Thank you for all of that hard work.
You’re right - Palin/Cruz is the Dream Team.
“...to sleep, perchance to dream, ay there’s the rub!”- William Shakespeare. ;-)
Palin/Cruz: 2016
Obama is the enemy, not Ted Cruz.
Birtherism ends on Jan 20th 2017 when Obama moves out of the White House and unfortunately Birthers will be the losers for failing to get the man impeached.
Ted Cruz is as eligible as John McCain so there has never been a reason for the eligibility issue to be wasted on Ted Cruz threads. It takes away from the real theme of the articles.
It's going to be a looong campaign if every Ted Cruz thread turns into Birther chat.
Personally, if Ted Cruz washed up on the beaches of Miami last week he'd still get my vote (Obama has already set the precedence). I think there are Cubans in Havana that are more pro-American than the man in the White House today.
But the fact is, Ted Cruz is as eligible as anybody before Obama.
That said, when you donate to Cruz, give it to him directly and NOT to the GOP. For all we know the GOPe may use your donations to fund a third party. I don't trust them.
Palin/Cruz 2016, 20, 24, 28, 32....
Yes, to dream. I firmly believe that had the GOP a clue of Reagan’s true nature they would have never allowed him the presidency. I believe voter fraud and rigging is as prevalent within the GOP Primary as in the general election. I do not believe either McCain nor Romney won the primaries. I do not trust the Republican primary process, and I will be amazed if they allow Cruz, Palin, West, or any other known conservative to run. I hope I’m wrong (but I don’t believe I am). The only way out of the mess may be to send the GOP the way of the Whigs.
I agree with you completely, and thank you for the advice.
The GOP gets nothing from me, and when they call for money I tell them exactly why they’ve been cut off.
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.