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

Skip to comments.

Why Ted Cruz Could Win in 2016
The American Conservative ^ | September 30, 2014 | Michael Tracey

Posted on 09/30/2014 7:45:10 AM PDT by SoConPubbie

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-124 last
To: OneWingedShark
Your instincts serve you well.

Nationalism causes control problems for the PTBs, gives them headaches like succession movements and such, so nationalism is to be stamped out whenever possible and wherever found in the new world order being created.

Constitutionally requiring that the POTUS be a 100% pure American, that is, born to American parents on American soil, is very nationalistic and that's bad.

Far better to have a more multinational president, a more UN approved president with diluted nationality, rather than someone with a purely American pedigree, an heir to a purely American inheritance.

Far, far less nationalistic the multinational way.

(If you can't attack someone directly, attack their symbols. Better yet, get them to do it to themselves!)

121 posted on 10/01/2014 8:36:55 AM PDT by GBA (The melting pot has been overturned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Well, the Rats seem to have no trouble finding people who are fully NBC-compliant and who are absolute poison for our country and our rapidly disappearing freedoms.

I don’t see that the widened pool you fear would make any real difference in the long run.

I’m just not ready to toss Cruz aside over what is, at worst, a technicality.

There are much more important battles to be fought, and right now I don’t see anyone better suited than Cruz to be fighting those battles.


122 posted on 10/01/2014 1:17:15 PM PDT by Fresh Wind (The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: csivils
One thing is crystal clear to all.

The term "natural born Citizen" is a requirement for the Presidency (& Vice-President) post grandfather era.

What does that term mean to you and why would the framers (& other founders) have made that requirement for those that came after them, changing it from "Citizen" initially to "natural born Citizen" during the federal convention after receiving Jays letter?

123 posted on 10/02/2014 4:06:42 PM PDT by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

To differentiate from naturalized citizens.


124 posted on 10/02/2014 5:39:28 PM PDT by csivils
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-124 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