If they were really interested in just simply the questions about the constitution, then they'd be using Rubio and Jindal as examples.
Both make excellent examples for discussion, and using them as discussion starters instead of Cruz, doesn't harm Cruz's attacks on ObamaCare, Illegal Amnesty, and government overreach in general.
We're fairly certain, as well, that Rubio will test the presidential waters. So why not attack him instead. After all, it makes more sense to ruin the Gang of 8 bill by attacking Rubio's citizenship than it does to ruin Cruz's desire to stop ObamaCare and Illegal amnesty.
Then they could spout off to their heart's content and nobody would care. But, no...they want Cruz to be the target.
Wonder why?
“”In before the anti-Cruz birthers...
If they were really interested in just simply the questions about the constitution, then they’d be using Rubio and Jindal as examples.
Both make excellent examples for discussion, and using them as discussion starters instead of Cruz, doesn’t harm Cruz’s attacks on ObamaCare, Illegal Amnesty, and government overreach in general.
We’re fairly certain, as well, that Rubio will test the presidential waters. So why not attack him instead. After all, it makes more sense to ruin the Gang of 8 bill by attacking Rubio’s citizenship than it does to ruin Cruz’s desire to stop ObamaCare and Illegal amnesty.
Then they could spout off to their heart’s content and nobody would care. But, no...they want Cruz to be the target.
Wonder why? “”
Excellent points - I hope someone makes them every time the ‘dummies’ chime in.
Wonder why?
Because other people keep putting his name at the top of the thread. To respond to the thread means you are responding to their claims over which you have no control.
I would much prefer to discuss Rubio. He's screwed the pooch on that Amnesty bill where the Republicans decided to make him the Hood Ornament of their ugly Amnesty vehicle.
Rubio very likely cannot come back from this.
As for Jindal, to my knowledge he has done nothing for which I would object. I quite like him. I don't know if he's eligible or not because I don't think i've ever looked into it.
I find myself being in the uncomfortable position of supporting Cruz politically, but being goaded into arguing against his eligibility because OTHER PEOPLE keep making him the focus of a topic that I have been long discussing.
Yes, I would much rather we focus on someone else, but I can't make people stop referring to him.
I cannot believe I find myself defending birthers on FR after my adversarial history with them, but ... they have long questioned the eligibility of Rubio and Jindal. It is truly a constitutional question to them.