Not at all — you keep parroting some immigration case law as if you have proof of presidential qualifications vis-a-vis citizenship and you lack the basic understanding of case law to realize you have *NOTHING* until:
A) a balloted presidential candidate’s qualifications are challeged
*and*
B) one or more of your immigration cases are used to either validate or invalidate the candidate.
Until then (which seems bloody unlikely), you have *nothing* pertinent to add to the debate.
LOL! And you - the man ranting & waving (ahem) “facts” that amount to an “unloaded toy gun” when debating presidential qualifications - dares to challenge anyone else’s debate skills? HA!!
You sure seem determined to undermine Cruz — a decent conservative candidate. And yet you think I’m the DNC operative? What’s left in your feeble, dusty bag of tricks? Will your faux conservatism slip and you’ll call me a racist next? Don’t look now Huff-Post-Boy, your slip is showing...
I’m guessing you want Cruz out of the way of your preferred candidate, which I’ll guess is Sanders? Clinton? Or do you prefer light-in-the-loafers GOPe candidates like Swishy-Lindsey Graham?
So *AGAIN*, what are you going to do about it? I’ll tell you what you are going to do: Not.A.Darned.Thing. except - sulk, fume and ignorantly wave your (to date) *useless* immigration cases like you’ve found a pot of gold and to no avail.
Meanwhile, reasonable and prudent folks will do what I am doing: looking at the candidates on the ballot (be that Cruz or someone else) and voting for the candidate we like most without regret.
Your amateur opinion don’t figure into it. Like I said, you don’t have to like it. But you may want to find some way to live with it, otherwise all that unrequited self-righteousness is going to burn you up.