Ping, eh.
http://running2016.com/html/canadian_ted.html
Did Ted’s mother give up her American citizenship for British? Sounds that way.
no you’re exactly right and I hadn’t thought of that one but it’s brilliant
if Ted Cruz was a natural born American citizen so was Winston Churchill.....
and was equally eligible to be president of the United States...
Apparently. Suits have been filed in blue state after blue state to keep him off the ballots. In all cases Cruz has been declared eligible.
Cruzers don’t care about the obvious. They must subconsciously approve of President Hussein, perhaps they might even be Obots.
There are residency rules for the American mother that affects the citizenship status of the child. It is not simply a matter of the mother being American, but where she has been a resident and for how what length of time prior to giving birth.
Quite a lot. For one, Churchill was born in 1874. The first law granting citizenship descended from the mother was the Cable act of 1924.
Prior to that, only the Male could pass on citizenship.
Secondly, an act of congress granting citizenship to people is just a form of naturalization, so even if Churchill had been born after 1924, he still wouldn't be a "natural" citizen, he would be a naturalized citizen.
Churchill was certainly English. But he played down his American mother because it would have been bad politics to put her in the limelight. The British were allied with the Americans in the war, but felt some resentment at the idea of giving them too much credit for winning it. If Churchill led the way to victory, then he had to be fully British.
As for Cruz, he is turning out to be—and evidently always was—a natural born crook.
Yes, your daily dose of Cruz Kool-Aid.
NBC means what "principled conservatives" want it to mean at the moment, not what the Constitution and legal precedent dictates that it means.
Maybe it is because England, with her famously sooty skies in that era, was more tolerant of cigar smoking.
Cruzers are arguing that if King George fathered a child with an American woman in Great Britain. The founders have considered that child a natural born citizen of the USA and eligible to serve as POTUS? Totally ridiculous contention, which the anti-American Marxist courts would no doubt uphold.
Natural Born Citizen = citizen father + citizen mother + born in US (military & diplomats & travelers excluded)
Then there’s Obama = foreign father + citizen mother + born in US (maybe)
Then there is Cruz = foreign father + citizen (maybe) mother + born on foreign soil
(c) A person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has resided in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to birth or such person.
(d) A person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who resided in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to birth or such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
In the case of (d) where only one parent was a citizen of the United States and the other was an alien, the the U.S. citizen parent had to have resided in the United States or its outlying possessions for 10 years, at least 5 of which were after attaining the age of 16 years in order to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.
see: http://www.americanlaw.com/citabrd.html
Because when Churchill was born the law stated that children born abroad were citizens only if the father was a U.S. citizen.