Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Durbin

John Kasich is..

And if I have to pick between John and The Donald..

John might just get my vote.

However, The Donald and his birthers have not proven Cruz is not. So he gets my vote first.

Rubio however is an anchor baby.


78 posted on 02/22/2016 6:03:23 AM PST by cableguymn (We need a redneck in the white house....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]


To: cableguymn

“John Kasich is..”

All the Donald has to do is Tweet his suspicions and his supporters will fallow hook line and sinker.


79 posted on 02/22/2016 6:06:26 AM PST by Durbin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]

To: cableguymn
"However, The Donald and his birthers have not proven Cruz is not. So he gets my vote first."

Cruz was born in a foreign land to a foreign father. He is NOT even close to being a natural born Citizen.

Note the reference to Natural Law in the first sentence of our Declaration of Independence.

It is crystal clear that the Founding Fathers used the Natural Law definition of 'natural born Citizen' when they wrote Article II. By invoking "The Laws of Nature and Nature's God" the 56 signers of the Declaration incorporated a legal standard of freedom into the forms of government that would follow.

President John Quincy Adams, writing in 1839, looked back at the founding period and recognized the true meaning of the Declaration's reliance on the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." He observed that the American people's "charter was the Declaration of Independence. Their rights, the natural rights of mankind. Their government, such as should be instituted by the people, under the solemn mutual pledges of perpetual union, founded on the self-evident truth's proclaimed in the Declaration."

The Constitution, Vattel, and “Natural Born Citizen”: What Our Framers Knew

The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God: The True Foundation of American Law

The Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”.

MINOR V. HAPPERSETT IS BINDING PRECEDENT AS TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL DEFINITION OF A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

Neither the 14th Amendment nor Wong Kim Ark make one a Natural Born Citizen

The Harvard Law Review Article Taken Apart Piece by Piece and Utterly Destroyed

Citizenship Terms Used in the U.S. Constitution - The 5 Terms Defined & Some Legal Reference to Same

"The citizenship of no man could be previous to the declaration of independence, and, as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776."....David Ramsay, 1789.

A Dissertation on Manner of Acquiring Character & Privileges of Citizen of U.S.-by David Ramsay-1789

The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law (1758)

The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God: The True Foundation of American Law

Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, Volume 20 - Use of The Law of Nations by the Constitutional Convention

82 posted on 02/22/2016 6:07:58 AM PST by Godebert (CRUZ: Born in a foreign land to a foreign father.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]

To: cableguymn

“Rubio however is an anchor baby.”

I see an opportunity for a musical parody here, set to “Santa Baby”.


83 posted on 02/22/2016 6:08:25 AM PST by Suz in AZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson