Posted on 01/30/2016 11:10:12 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
...
The first thought that comes to mind is that Trump keeps coming back to this attack against Cruz for a couple of reasons. The first is that he cannot make attacks on Cruz's record of standing up for conservative principles the centerpiece of his strategy because that leaves him open to greater scrutiny of his own liberal record...
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
Rafael shows up to college and gets a Social Security card from them while he is on green card status? He works his way thru college while on a student visa...that is a no no. We didn't really let people in back in the day who didn't have money enough for college and had to work, that would violate his visa.
Then he goes to Canada on Cuban citizenship status or by our green card? See some of the conflicting issues. I'm expecting the press to actually do their job and study this eventually.
You think it makes sense for a U.S. citizen traveling overseas who gives birth on vacation to have rights stripped from their children that they would’ve had if the child was born in the U.S.? That is absurd, anti-American, anti-freedom.
First, I've never seen that statute. Second, the only statute I've seen regarding mothers ability to pass on citizenship has been about age.
Even so, she had been a citizen for 12 years by the time her son reached the age of 14 as you specify....that's a lot of time.
Please cite your source.
Do you think a hooker who has a child from a US citizen that ‘their’ child can run for President or is a US citizen?
Natural born on foreign soil only if BOTH parents are citizens. And, it generally means on US protectorates, not a foreign country where you’re also an automatic citizen of that country with divided loyalties.
Avoiding divided loyalties was the whole point of the NBC claus.
Show me where in the Constitution it says otherwise.
Sorry, garbled facts here. That was if the mother was the only parent bestowing citizenship and if the baby was not born on American soil.
Here is why Trump is better than Cruz
1) Born in the USA and NOT Canada. No more foreigners for President.
2) Career politicians do not make good presidents.
3) Individuals with real-world experience, particularly in business management, make good presidents and NOT former College Professors.
4) Even better are candidates with good people & negotiating skills.
5) What candidates do is more important than what they say.
6) Sharp intelligence is a must. Many of our past Presidents, including the current went to Harvard or Yale and looking at the terrible condition of our country.
7) Attorneys do not make good presidents.
I think that is so, that Cruz will be hit with this repeatedly.
I think Trump gets hit with his NY values, Clinton donations, etc.
For 2 guys that were supposed to be anti-establishment, they sure campaign like the old “politics of personal destruction”.
Not picking on one, picking on both.
We will see how it all plays out.
I am, at this time, a Cruz 1, Trump 2, guy, for FWIW.
When Rafael Cruz had Ted Cruz in Canada, what was his Canadian status? Was he a permanent resident alien? Was he a temporary worker? Was he naturalized?
This is important, because if Rafael Cruz did not naturalize when baby Ted was born, wouldn't Rafael's Cuban citizenship descend to Ted? If Rafael had naturalized, did that automatically renounce his Cuban citizenship, leaving Ted just a dual citizen and not a triple citizen?
-PJ
That law that Ted Cruz was naturalized under only looks at the residency of the citizen parent. His fathers status is totally irrelevant for US citizenship. Relevant only for Ted’s Cuban citizenship at birth.
So you are standing firm on the legal inferiority of women under the Constitution? Good luck with that.
Or, to put it another way, if a person were born in British North America to an alien father in 1788, of what State would he be a citizen?
With fiends like these...
The only right that is stripped is the right to become President or Vice President. That is not anti-American; its the law for everyone.
The requirement was written into the Constitution by the Founders as a measure to make it more difficult for a person with foreign loyalties to have the supreme authority over America.
If you are worried about having the chance for your kid to become president, have the birth in America, this is no new rule and most people learned it in civics class. The risk to America is more important than the strawman argument of depriving someone who delivered unexpectedly.
LOL, does the Constitution have a hooker clause? If the child eventually lives in the U.S. for 14 years then of course it can be President. The founders didn’t add in a line that said the parent can’t be a hooker.
You are right...
Cruz on Natural Born Citizenship:
http://www.newswithviews.com/JBWilliams/williams300.htm
I think the statement that Cruz “did not know” he held Canadian citizenship is a lie, and is an easily-proven lie, at that.
I have opposed Cruz here for months, on the grounds that he cannot be elected. I’ve repeatedly praised his adherence to the constitution, his rhetorical skills, and his analytical mind.
But I think his responses to questions about his lifelong dual citizenship are a deliberate deception, and it makes me think less of him.
LOL, then why does a person only have to live in the U.S. for 14 years to be President? The requirements are not as strict as you would like to argue. Certainly the founders intent would never have been to rule out a baby born in another country to a citizen who then came here and lived the rest of his life here. That would be an absurd original intent. That’s why they used the phrase natural-born. In Britain, that phrase covered children born outside of the country to citizens.
First of all, Cruz was born to an alien father. If anybody cared about the actual PURPOSE of the NBC clause, that would be disqualifying. Second, Mrs. Cruz was not "on vacation" in Canada. Third, eligibility for the Presidency is no sort of right, it is a privilege bestowed on some but not all US citizens.
If Trump meant “Canadian” Anchor Baby, then he was technically correct.
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.