[bigheadfred]

But he’ll never beat out barry.

[bimboeruption]

Dershowitz wouldn’t say this if it wasn’t true.
He’s a FLAMING lib after all.

[ObligedFriend]

Canadian and Cuban citizen Rafael Edward Cruz.

[Windflier]

"...the Canada-born Texan can run for president in 2016."

He shouldn't, as he wasn't actually born in this country, but who cares what the Framers said anyway?

And no, I don't want to argue about it. I'm blue in the face from the last four years of that.

[chicagolady]

IT’S Called “HAVING A BACKBONE”

[sickoflibs]

That’s the thing I noticed.

The GOP has plenty of:
sellouts
closet Dems
Windbags,
idiots

But Cruz is a conservative who attacks brilliant. He doesn’t just make noise, he goes for the libs jugular. He is their worst nightmare. He is what I been asking for in my comments here for a long time, a very smart and tough fighter to make my day (better)

[plain talk]

actually a pragmatic libertarian would not be a bad choice for the pubs in the next election. I have trashed them as much as anyone but only because of the rules-based dogma espoused by people like Ron Paul on foreign policy & 9/11. I could accept a libertarian with rational foreign policy views.

[madison10]

Unlike the current President whom I doubt could pass anything without cheating, lying, or changing the books.

[TigersEye]

Not the least bit surprising. Ted Cruz is as sharp as a scalpel.

[2ndDivisionVet]

[NonValueAdded]

adding that the Canada-born Texan can run for president in 2016

Once upon a time that would have been a non- sequitur. But that was back when we followed the Constitution.

[Amendment10]

Has anybody heard Sen. Cruz mention Congress’s Section 8, Article I-limited powers, Article V or the 10th Amendment? I haven’t. And as evidenced by “in-depth” discussions on Obama guard Fx News, if you ignore these division of federal and state government power-related statutes in federal public policy discussions, then yes, you get all kinds of interesting, never-ending debates.

[DiogenesLamp]

Oh, so he's smart? Well of course that makes him a "natural born citizen."

[wardaddy]

Dershowitz loves Dershowitz

I always think of the Sean Penn character in Carlitos Way

[Andy from Chapel Hill]

The Obama gang wants Cruz to run and for the House and Senate to vote to say he is eligible. Once that happens, Obama is legitimized, regardless of the phony BC.

The SCOTUS will only look at the matter if a Federal case works its way to them. As we have seen, the Judiciary wants no part of this decision and does not want to touch the definition of NBC.

If a case comes forward, the SCOTUS will likely not take it and take the position that BHO was elected twice and was not impeached, therefore the definition of NBC has been set at “born of at least one US citizen” and there is no issue to resolve.

Also, IMHO, I do not believe any conservative will not vote for Cruz for POTUS because they believe the definition of NBC is different than the SCOTUS and Congress have set. Too much is at stake and once Cruz is on the ballot, and the SCOTUS does not object, it becomes effective law and will not be subject to an Amendment drive due to lack of desire on the part of Congress.

[MMaschin]

It seems that a great many people seem to incorrectly equate 'Natural Born Citizen' to 'Born a Citizen'.

The problem with that, is that it's impossible, under the rules of Constitutional Construction.

Verba intelligi ut aliquid operantur debent.

"None of the words are without force and effect, except those superseded by amendments, unless such amendments are repealed. Except for the statement of purpose in the preamble, every word was intended by the Framers to be legally normative, and not just advisory, declaratory, aspirational, or exhortatory. Verba intelligi ut aliquid operantur debent. Words should be interpreted to give them some effect.". http://www.constitution.org/cons/prin_cons.htm

What that means is that you can't simply ignore the word 'Natural' when construing the term of art 'Natural Born Citizen'. It must have a purpose.

So, without any question, it is clear that 'Natural Born Citizen' CAN NOT mean 'Citizen at Birth', because it would be ignoring the word 'Natural'.

So, what does 'Natural' mean? IMHO, it means simply that, Born a Citizen according to the laws of Nature. I believe the Supreme Court has already construed it as such, will they review that? Possibly. But I know one thing for certain, they would have to completely change the rules for Constitutional Construction to rule that NBC means Citizen at Birth.