You see no difference in putting in place a POTUS whose first loyalty is to Africa & Kenya and electing one loyal to the USA alone. As you are no doubt aware, as a condition of belonging to Jeremiah Wright’s church, Obama had to pledge his primary fealty to the continent of Africa. Except that it was different in Obama’s case, because he was actually pledging his allegiance to the country to which he’d already declared himself loyal: the country of his father. You claim that not only do you see no risk here, but neither did the Framers.
That, Jeff Winston, is called thinking like a liberal.
Bump!
No, in fact YOUR thinking, in MY view, is thinking like a liberal.
You believe that the Founding Fathers ought to have set up a nanny state in which they absolutely forbade the People from ever choosing any patriot, such as Ted Cruz, whose parents gratefully came to this country because our nation was far better than the one they left.
That's kind of a nanny-state government, at least in that particular provision. And that's what you and other birthers have been demanding. Nanny-statism, when it comes to natural born citizen. But only if it's the definition of natural born citizen that you think will protect us from foreign influence.
So you like the nanny state, if it does what you want. You don't like it if it doesn't do what you want.
And no, I was not aware of the pledge at Wright's church.
These kinds of things should disqualify a person, not legally, but practically, from ever being elected. If we had a media who would actually report such things, they probably would.
But I certainly haven't been hiding in the woods, away from the news. And this is the first I've ever even heard of such a pledge.