Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: SvenMagnussen

Yes I am bowing out of this debate for now, sorry.

Originally it seemed to me (H) was evidence for Cruz. However I was reading part of that requirement wrong, I think?

A person born before, May 24, 1934.

Now I’m thinking that (H) doesn’t apply, because I don’t believe Cruz was born before May 24, 1934?

And I am frankly confused by (G).

So I’m going back to neutral on this for now.

Do however carry on.

As far as I’m concerned this just moves me back to the middle.

:D


138 posted on 07/21/2013 11:08:43 AM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies ]


To: Cringing Negativism Network
As far as I’m concerned this just moves me back to the middle.

For me the important thing is: What did the term mean in early America?

A lot of commenters in early America said you had to be "born in the United States" (note the lack of any mention at all of citizen parents) in order to be eligible.

I think this was just a bit sloppy, because they ignored those born US citizens abroad, who were also eligible.

And some other commenters noted specifically that such people were eligible, including James Bayard in his exposition of the Constitution.

Many commenters stated, more accurately, that you needed to be "born a citizen" or "a citizen by birth."

See the discussions in posts 199 and 226.

And for all of the important quotes on what our Founding Fathers and Framers actually said, including a mention of most or all of the very few people who thought otherwise, see this post.

239 posted on 07/21/2013 1:14:34 PM PDT by Jeff Winston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


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