What do you think about a DeSantis/Cruz ticket?

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Well Obama definitely changed the rules about being a Natural Born citizen.
A Kenyan Father, an American Communist Mother, no record of his birth in America exists except a fake Birth Certificate from Hawaii confirmed by a woman who was the only one to die in a plane crash.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
How rude & completely bigoted...
But we don't expect any better from you...
My Latino friends consider it a grave insult. But it's Hemi.

In any event, I've found several news sources all confirming the same thing - yes, he is. WaPo, HuffPo, Vox - you know, those right wing sources -
all agree on the same thing - if one of your parents is an American citizen, you are one, too. It doesn't matter where you are born.

From the Harvard Law Review by two former Solicitor Generals - https://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/

There are plenty of serious issues to debate in the upcoming presidential election cycle. The less time spent dealing with specious objections to candidate eligibility, the better. Fortunately, the Constitution is refreshingly clear on these eligibility issues. To serve, an individual must be at least thirty-five years old and a “natural born Citizen.” Thirty-four and a half is not enough and, for better or worse, a naturalized citizen cannot serve. But as Congress has recognized since the Founding, a person born abroad to a U.S. citizen parent is generally a U.S. citizen from birth with no need for naturalization. And the phrase “natural born Citizen” in the Constitution encompasses all such citizens from birth. Thus, an individual born to a U.S. citizen parent — whether in California or Canada or the Canal Zone — is a U.S. citizen from birth and is fully eligible to serve as President if the people so choose.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
There is no litmus test. There is only adjudication by a court, the Supreme Court. That didn't happen for McCain, nor has it happened for Cruz.


And when the news of his dual citizenship surfaced last year, thanks to a Dallas Morning News piece, some began to question his eligibility to become president. (In truth, that was never in jeopardy. Most legal experts said Cruz qualifies as a “natural born citizen,” a requirement for the White House job, as stated in the Constitution.)

"The Candidate is a natural born citizen by virtue of being born in Canada to his mother who was a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth," the board said, reasoning that Cruz met the criteria because he "did not have to take any steps or go through a naturalization process at some point after birth."


Texas Sen. Ted Cruz secured two major victories Monday, winning the Republican Iowa caucuses and also receiving a favorable decision from the Illinois Board of Elections, which confirmed his U.S. citizenship met the state's primary ballot requirements.

Feel free to **** off any time.
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
For your consideration ...

My Latino friends consider it a grave insult. But it's Hemi.

In any event, I've found several news sources all confirming the same thing - yes, he is. WaPo, HuffPo, Vox - you know, those right wing sources -
all agree on the same thing - if one of your parents is an American citizen, you are one, too. It doesn't matter where you are born.

From the Harvard Law Review by two former Solicitor Generals - https://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/

There are plenty of serious issues to debate in the upcoming presidential election cycle. The less time spent dealing with specious objections to candidate eligibility, the better. Fortunately, the Constitution is refreshingly clear on these eligibility issues. To serve, an individual must be at least thirty-five years old and a “natural born Citizen.” Thirty-four and a half is not enough and, for better or worse, a naturalized citizen cannot serve. But as Congress has recognized since the Founding, a person born abroad to a U.S. citizen parent is generally a U.S. citizen from birth with no need for naturalization. And the phrase “natural born Citizen” in the Constitution encompasses all such citizens from birth. Thus, an individual born to a U.S. citizen parent — whether in California or Canada or the Canal Zone — is a U.S. citizen from birth and is fully eligible to serve as President if the people so choose.

I'm a gonna go with the original intent of the writing of the Constitution when it was written. "Natural born" meaning physically born and present on US soil at the time of birth. I'm not down with the re-defining and re-written meaning of the Constitution. It reads plainly to all those that can read. No further explanation is required. Because we all know that the time, when the Constitution was written, that only a natural born citizen, one without any ties to a foreign allegiance, should be president/vice president. Harvard peeps can go pound sand, since most that go to that "institution of higher learning" and those that are employed there, hold duel citizenship anyway. They could care less of the issues and damage their opinions could cause.
 

HemiHauler

Well-Known Member








Feel free to **** off any time.
Just when I thought you couldn’t get any dumber, there you go!
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
For your consideration ...



I'm a gonna go with the original intent of the writing of the Constitution when it was written. "Natural born" meaning physically born and present on US soil at the time of birth. I'm not down with the re-defining and re-written meaning of the Constitution. It reads plainly to all those that can read. No further explanation is required. Because we all know that the time, when the Constitution was written, that only a natural born citizen, one without any ties to a foreign allegiance, should be president/vice president. Harvard peeps can go pound sand, since most that go to that "institution of higher learning" and those that are employed there, hold duel citizenship anyway. They could care less of the issues and damage their opinions could cause.

Pop quiz:

Who was the first US President born in the United States of America?
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
For your consideration ...

"The Candidate is a natural born citizen by virtue of being born in Canada to his mother who was a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth," the board said, reasoning that Cruz met the criteria because he "did not have to take any steps or go through a naturalization process at some point after birth."

Their statement is not true. The primary and most fundamental step that must be taken is any person born outside of the US must apply at a US Consulate in the country they were born for a "Consular Report of Birth Abroad", or their parents.

No matter how many may wish it, it just isn't true. Just like the 2nd doesn't apply only muskets. And the 1st that doesn't only apply to "acceptable" speech.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
For your consideration ...



Their statement is not true. The primary and most fundamental step that must be taken is any person born outside of the US must apply at a US Consulate in the country they were born for a "Consular Report of Birth Abroad", or their parents.

No matter how many may wish it, it just isn't true. Just like the 2nd doesn't apply only muskets. And the 1st that doesn't only apply to "acceptable" speech.

Well you would certainly know more than all those Constitutional scholars. I'll absolutely take your word over theirs.
 

HemiHauler

Well-Known Member
Well you would certainly know more than all those Constitutional scholars. I'll absolutely take your word over theirs.

Please.

You give zero deference to anything Constitutional scholars — or anyone with an education for that matter says. UNLESS it serves you.

But noting you posted actually serves your position. You’re just too stupid to realize it.
 

Tech

Well-Known Member
My Latino friends consider it a grave insult. But it's Hemi.

In any event, I've found several news sources all confirming the same thing - yes, he is. WaPo, HuffPo, Vox - you know, those right wing sources -
all agree on the same thing - if one of your parents is an American citizen, you are one, too. It doesn't matter where you are born.

From the Harvard Law Review by two former Solicitor Generals - https://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/

There are plenty of serious issues to debate in the upcoming presidential election cycle. The less time spent dealing with specious objections to candidate eligibility, the better. Fortunately, the Constitution is refreshingly clear on these eligibility issues. To serve, an individual must be at least thirty-five years old and a “natural born Citizen.” Thirty-four and a half is not enough and, for better or worse, a naturalized citizen cannot serve. But as Congress has recognized since the Founding, a person born abroad to a U.S. citizen parent is generally a U.S. citizen from birth with no need for naturalization. And the phrase “natural born Citizen” in the Constitution encompasses all such citizens from birth. Thus, an individual born to a U.S. citizen parent — whether in California or Canada or the Canal Zone — is a U.S. citizen from birth and is fully eligible to serve as President if the people so choose.
There are residency requirements on the American parent and if the father, the parents must be married.
 

HemiHauler

Well-Known Member








Feel free to **** off any time.
Hey Pookie? If I were to post a gaggle of “Constitutional Scholars ” whose writings laid out the many reasons how your cult leader, Donald J. Trump AKA The Fat Guy, committed multiple felonies, would you pay it any mind?

Didn’t think so.

So go **** yourself, you over fed sow
 
Last edited:

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
There are residency requirements on the American parent and if the father, the parents must be married.
Without going too far into the weeds - (I do kind of like that expression, very visual) - this has all been hashed about before, and it was widely agreed that yes, Cruz qualifies. Even liberal rags agreed. WHY? Because it was Trump who was disputing it, and they were gunning for him.

To my mind, this has long been settled. To my recollection, some court - Illinois? - said, yeah, he's good, stop getting your panties in a wad.

Frankly, I don't see Cruz getting into it again - I think he'd rather go for SCOTUS. I'm more concerned that DeSantis, if nominated, will choose someone MUCH WORSE - like a Lindsay Graham or Nikki Haley - who'd just be more of the same when it comes to the GOP.

I generally like him, which is odd, because - like Newt - I didn't, at first. His voice, for one thing. But like some Senators, he cuts to the chase and doesn't waffle on stuff, at least when it comes to issues.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Hey Pookie? If I were to post a gaggle of “Constitutional Scholars ” whose writings laid out the many reasons how your cult leader, Donald J. Trump AKA The Fat Guy, committed multiple felonies, would you pay it any mind?

Didn’t think so.

So go **** yourself, you over fed sow

Alllll....him's all mad and stomping him li'l feetsies :huggy:


:roflmao:
 
Top