What’s hilarious is that our #1 Obot troll has been stating since he joined the site that one thing & one thing only is necessary: birth on American soil. So now you ask him a simple question about Cruz, and he tap dances like Astaire in a fast-motion, speeded-up comedy video. You’d think you were asking him for the Unified Field Theory. That’s how complicated he’s trying to make the question, and how irrationally he’s behaving about it.
No one is surprised. Two things liberals are not known for: honesty and courage.
Another of your false claims. I've many times cited to the statement by James Madison that mainly it's birth that is the criterion; but sometimes parentage. So birth on the soil is sufficient, but the English law from which ours was derived recognized birth to parents abroad. Your low watt bulb just can't seem to follow along.
The thing you seem not to get is that some insist that was the original rule, and based on that supposed rule it's claimed Cruz is not eligible. I am the one here opposing that rule. There was no "two citizen parent" requirement; so that is no obstacle to Cruz.
It's like Alice in Wonderland here. I'm stridently opposing the (false) rule which some conservatives claim makes Cruz ineligible, and the likes of you critique me for that.
So was the "two citizen parent" requirement adopted into Article II? Or not?
Let me help you out here: no, it was not.