Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cruz, Natural Born Citizen Or Not? - Frankly, I am not sure that I care anymore
01/20/2016 | inpajamas

Posted on 01/20/2016 10:15:17 AM PST by inpajamas

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-130 next last
To: inpajamas

He is eligible, but the Trumpsters don’t really care about that, just care about harming a “rival”.


41 posted on 01/20/2016 11:00:24 AM PST by JSDude1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: inpajamas

Trump is willing to sell out my engine for Iowa corn votes. Screw him. Ethanol is the single stupidest thing this country has recently gotten into.


42 posted on 01/20/2016 11:01:59 AM PST by Excellence (Marine mom since April 11, 2014)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

The same Constitution that allows for the outlawing of bribery? Didn`t Trump all but admit he`s bribed officials to ‘...get things done.’?


43 posted on 01/20/2016 11:02:35 AM PST by nomad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
The NH Sec. of State has been sued to remove Cruz's name. The challenge is from a person who is also on the ballot. That person has standing.

Not saying a court will rule, but this is the first time an opponent on the ballot has sued.

Plus, the precedents and simple application of statutory / constitutional law say Cruz is naturalized. The only thing difficult about this case is none of the courts want to reveal it.

The Ankeny court in Indiana (in an challenge to Obama) did something that this (or any) court could do. Rule case dismissed (remedy requested, ballot adjustment, denied), then indulge in an analysis on the merits. SCOTUS did this in Marbury v. Madison. It said Marbury should win on the merits, but SCOTUS wasn't competent to hear the case based on jurisdiction.

44 posted on 01/20/2016 11:06:16 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: nomad

“Bribery” is nowhere defined in the constitution, so it’s all good.


45 posted on 01/20/2016 11:07:44 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Yep, I saw that, and I think that is going to be interesting to follow.

Personally, I do not want the court to punt. If congress is not going to act on clarifying this, some authority needs to.

Regardless of Cruz in particular, I want this matter settled.

I think if Cruz did argue that the court should not decide, that would disappoint me.

If you are eligible, then you are eligible, if you ain’t, then you ain’t.

I really don’t like the possibility of my vote being invalidated by this somewhere down the line.


46 posted on 01/20/2016 11:09:27 AM PST by chris37 (heartless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

He means like Roe vs Wade....or the courts’ take on gay marriage.....or Obamacare


47 posted on 01/20/2016 11:10:58 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: chris37

Don’t trust the press or pundits to report on this accurately. It’s all spin. If you care to know (for whatever that is worth, I’d say precious little), find the court filings and read them. Everything else, and I do mean literally everything, is BS.


48 posted on 01/20/2016 11:16:07 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: JSDude1

I’m not a trumpster. I want Cruz to win. I want my vote to count not be tossed aside. There is no proof he is eligible - no definition of NBC. I want that definition for this and future elections.


49 posted on 01/20/2016 11:16:58 AM PST by mouse1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: inpajamas
"There is no expediency justification when deliberately choosing a president."

Exactly. The "desperate times need desperate measures" argument only applies if there are no reasonable alternatives to the desperate measures. It's not like Cruz is the only available choice. Common sense dictates that the only indisputable definition of "natural-born citizen" has to be birth in the US to 2 US-citizen parents. All other definitions are open to endless BS about the "true meaning," "real intent", etc.

50 posted on 01/20/2016 11:17:35 AM PST by omniscient
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: inpajamas

Jefferson was discussing actions taken during war and a hypothetical case of “the unwritten laws of necessity, of self-preservation, and of the public safety” when there is no legal course of action.

That is not the case now. I hope this is not the argument Cruz premises his case on, it’s laughable.


51 posted on 01/20/2016 11:18:18 AM PST by Ray76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: inpajamas

Personally, I’ve become convinced that if it were ever to make it to a higher court, Ted would fail to meet the criteria for NBC if the spirit of our laws were to be maintained. Also, just something about having a President born in another country rubs me the wrong way. I see the tired argument made time and time again that the Founders weren’t US citizens, but that ignores the fact that they were all born in territories that joined the US at its formation. (I’m ignoring Obama birtherism here, since the charge that he was born in Kenya has gone largely unproved, and I never voted for him anyway and try not to make decisions or rationalizations based on what libs are doing.)

I like Ted and I think he has a useful purpose to serve in government, and I’ll vote for him if he gets the nod. But I would hate for the nominee to make it all the way through the convention and then be disqualified, so my Florida primary ballot will go to Trump.


52 posted on 01/20/2016 11:19:48 AM PST by 20yearsofinternet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Magnum44

That is a good question.

I have thought for sometime that the GOP depth chart is incredibly shallow.

But it goes beyond that. The country’s depth chart is incredibly shallow, at least in terms of producing leaders.

I think that it just boils down to the fact that people with innate leadership qualities are incredibly rare.

Regardless of trumps politics, he stands out because he can inspire people to follow him. Very few people can do this.

Compare Trump to someone like Jebra Bush. It is nothing short of RIDICULOUS that Jebra is running for president.

He brings nothing to the table, he is an utterly delusion complete moron.

Same with Graham. You think you are a leader, Lindsey? Are you insane!?

Same with Rand Paul. when I think of a leader in my mind, is there any chance at all that an image of Rand Pual will materialize? HELL NO.

I really do not get at all what makes some of these bums think they are going to be president.


53 posted on 01/20/2016 11:20:32 AM PST by chris37 (heartless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Very good advice.

And yes, unfortunately it seems like the motto of America has become “In Lies We Trust”.

I think this is at least one reason why I have come to love dogs as much as I do.

They are honest.


54 posted on 01/20/2016 11:23:17 AM PST by chris37 (heartless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Cboldt, which opponent is it? I haven’t heard this news yet. TIA.


55 posted on 01/20/2016 11:23:19 AM PST by zzeeman ("We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the consequences of evading reality.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Thank you, I was wondering what the context of that quote was.


56 posted on 01/20/2016 11:24:44 AM PST by zzeeman ("We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the consequences of evading reality.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: inpajamas

I don’t think he’s natural born, and therefore eligible.

But even if he were natural born and therefore eligible, I don’t think he’s the constitutionalist that his reputation suggests he is. And neither are his competitors in the GOP field. Personally, I think they’re all liberals.


57 posted on 01/20/2016 11:24:58 AM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zzeeman

I’m going to have to dig through my posting history to find that. It was an odd name. It may be that teh case was filed in a NH state court, which makes sense now that I think about it, That would be the first place to go (state court) to get an order against a state official as it pertains to ballot access. The state court can’t dismiss on standing. It has other ways to duck the question, but standing exists.


58 posted on 01/20/2016 11:26:50 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: chris37

Dogs rule. Mine is sleeping close by. Not too close. We are best friends.


59 posted on 01/20/2016 11:27:33 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: chris37

Well, they all get a lot more presidential once they get in there, but I take your point completely.


60 posted on 01/20/2016 11:29:15 AM PST by ichabod1 (Spriiingtime for islam, and tyranny. Winter for US and frieeends. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-130 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
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

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