Replies

The founders (and many who followed them, including SCOTUS, see Kawakita) saw two potential pitfalls. One is that the president might have affection for his home country (be that by birth or upbringing), the other being that his home country has, in fact, a bona fide claim on the person.

Both valid points

Cruz was four years old when his family moved to America...I don't think four year old have developed an affection for their country of birth...Cruz has been here for 40 years, a Texan, Texas Solicitor General, and Senator.

Cruz dropped his dual citizenship so Canada would have no claim on him...

The potential pitfalls should be taken in context on who is running and why...

As an example:
I see far more dangerous pitfalls in a Hillary / Sanders Presidential victory than any pitfall that might be made against Cruz or Rubio...

My suspicion is the whole Cruz birther issue on FR is more of trying to knock out a potential Trump challenger than any REAL concern about where his loyalties lie...

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but it seems almost all of the posters pushing this issue are ardent Trump supporters..

My suspicion is the whole Cruz birther issue on FR is more of trying to knock out a potential Trump challenger than any REAL concern about where his loyalties lie...

My suspicion is that a whole bunch of freepers bought into Cruz's churchy BS and sent him money and now they don't want to admit that they were suckers throwing good money down the drain so they have convinced themselves that it's OK to support him despite his ineligibility and we're all supposed to just go along with it.

I wouldn't be supporting Trump either if he wasn't a NBC btw.

Cruz's parents could have taken him to Cuba, and he'd be as much a Cuban there as he is an American here.

If loyalty is to be the test, then those naturalized citizens who made a choice, as adults, to become US citizens are superior to those who are natural born.