Kramer is getting in his two cents.
Posted on 06/09/2016 6:35:42 AM PDT by cll
Puerto Ricans are American citizens and they have all the duties and rights of Americans.
Which is why their indebtedness is ours.
Its a commonwealth that is part of the United States.
Its like a state but not quite a state - more like an autonomous community within the USA.
Each state and territory is completely and independently responsible for its own debt and they cannot declare bankruptcy.
But they don’t have access to the federal laws of bankruptcy? They can’t make their own? This is weird........................
Everywhere else, American citizens are also natives of a state. I can understand the confusion. Thank Woodrow Wilson for that on. I wouldn’t be against making Puerto Rico a state but it’s like buying a car with a blown engine. It will take more money just to get it running right.
I don't think they ever taught that Puerto Ricans were US citizens in school. But I knew that anyway.
I reported to a VP once who insisted that Puerto Rico was a foreign country. She was raised in Brooklyn, you’d think of all people she’d know, but no.
I say independence. No vote. There is no cold war where the Castro’s would move in. They can show the rest of Latin America how it’s done. Island may be too crowded. Empty our jail cells of Puerto Ricans. Change our foreign policy to emphasize our hemisphere first-if Trump wins.
Wait a minute. It depends on WHEN you were born in Puerto Rico whether or not you would be a “natural born citizen”. I forget the details, but this was one, of many, exceptions to being born in a territory or possession of the United States and NOT being a “natural born citizen”.
That is why I always say that in order for there to be absolutely NO DOUBT of your being born on U.S. soil, you must be born in the contiguous 48 states.
Alaska and Hawaii are too new as states (a presidential candidate today could have been born there while they were still territories) and territories and possessions have many different rules and laws when it comes to citizenship. Not that you CAN’T be a “natural born citizen”, but you MIGHT NOT be one.
Don’t argue with me, LOOK IT UP, I did.
p.s. A “natural born citizen” is:
Born on United States “SOIL” to TWO citizen parents.
Not on a ship, not in an airplane, not in an embassy overseas, not to citizen parents overseas, not in Canada, not in Kenya.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States is “natural law”. It is not a law of Congress to be changed by Congress. It can only be changed by a constitutional amendment or as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States.
Until such time, the definition above STANDS. (in my not so humble opinion, which I believe was the will and belief of the founders and framers of this country).
No way they should be a state. Don’t give them the choice.
Do they have to pay personal federal income tax? I don’t think so. So no, their indebtedness is not ours.
Years ago, when they didn’t want to be a state we should have cut them loose.
My question is why don’t they want to be a state? They have benefits of being a state and yet don’t want to be one. Why should we provide them with benefits? Why are we obligated to them in any way? I have no problem with them not being a state- but then we should take away their status. This should have been settled long ago, be a state of the U.S. or be a country on their own.
Kramer is getting in his two cents.
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.