No. That’s not what I’m saying.
I actually think Obama is not a NBC for a number of reasons, imcluding that he wasn’t born in the US.
There is room for debate amongst constitutional scholars aboutthe meaning of NBC.
Since zero was elected to two terms and served as POTUS it is clear that the courts have essentially relegated the issue to being a “political question”.
I don’t agree with handling it that way, and I think SCOTUS should have intervened when Congress failed to do its job by factually determining his Article 2 qualifications.
But since they didn’t, I’m not going to play the games of the left where each party plays by two sets of rules. That is, we play by the strictest of rules that they promptly and repeatedly ignore, while we get stomped over and over again.
Plus I have heard several constitutional scholars who say Cruz is in fact a NBC.
The precedent is established that it is indeed a political question. If you didn’t go to law school (not that going to one makes a lawyera constitutional scholar by any means) then I suggest researching the types of issues that the courts have rendered as such over the years.
The idea is to prevent a constitutional crisis.
I like Ted Cruz and if he is likely a NBC even under the strictest of definitions.
If you don’t want to support him because if this go ahead.
That’s your right.
The idea is to prevent a constitutional crisis.
I like Ted Cruz and if he is likely a NBC even under the strictest of definitions.
PREVENT? We are in the fifth year of a constitutional crisis. I’ve read obsessively the eligibility threads and it’s crystal clear what the intent of the Constitution is, and the meaning of NBC. There is not one court decision that says an NBC is whatever any wants it to mean.
And the idea that Cruz is a NBC by a strict definion - Insanity! He was born in CA and lived there for 4 years and his father was a Cuban citizen.
That the courts have not ruled on this only proves they are either leftist commie scum or chickens***s.