Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cruz Will Renounce Canadian Citizenship
The Washington Post ^ | Monday, August 19, 2013 | Aaron Blake

Posted on 08/19/2013 6:17:17 PM PDT by kristinn

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) announced Monday evening that he will renounce his Canadian citizenship, less than 24 hours after a newspaper pointed out that the Canadian-born senator likely maintains dual citizenship.

“Now the Dallas Morning News says that I may technically have dual citizenship,” Cruz said in a statement. “Assuming that is true, then sure, I will renounce any Canadian citizenship. Nothing against Canada, but I’m an American by birth and as a U.S. senator; I believe I should be only an American.”

SNIP

“Because I was a U.S. citizen at birth, because I left Calgary when I was 4 and have lived my entire life since then in the U.S., and because I have never taken affirmative steps to claim Canadian citizenship, I assumed that was the end of the matter,” Cruz said.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Canada; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Kentucky; US: New Jersey; US: Texas; US: Wisconsin
KEYWORDS: borncanadian; canada; citizenship; cruz; kentucky; naturalborncitizen; naturalborncuban; naturalbornsubject; newjersey; randsconcerntrolls; tedcruz; wisconsin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460461-480481-500 ... 521-536 next last
To: Ray76

If the red underlined “and” in subsection (3) is or should be construed as “or” then the question is: were his parents admitted for “permanent residence”? If yes then Cruz is in law a “natural born citizen” of Canada. If no then he is not a “natural born citizen” of Canada, although he may be a citizen under a different provision.


461 posted on 08/21/2013 3:18:45 PM PDT by Ray76 (Common sense immigration reform: Enforce Existing Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 459 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

GRANDPARENTS??? Sheesh, how far back do you want to go?

I was born in the U.S. To a father who was (and is) a non-citizen. Although he is a U.S. Army veteran. I’m a U.S. Air Force Veteran myself. And if it was up to you I wouldn’t be eligible to be POTUS?


462 posted on 08/21/2013 4:31:22 PM PDT by bigdaddy45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: bigdaddy45
I of course want you to become President! You are a FRiend after all. I guess my point is that we are already picking people that weren't even born on American soil. Why? McCain, Obama, and now Cruz. We have over 300 million people in this world and we keep picking foreigners (in my opinion). Yes McCain was born in Panama because his father was serving, but you know what? I think this ONE thing should be a disqualified. I am sorry that he would be ripped off but can we at least have SOMEONE who was born in the country????
463 posted on 08/21/2013 5:52:31 PM PDT by napscoordinator ( Santorum-Bachmann 2016 for the future of the Country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 462 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

‘and’ is correct!

The section is addressing diplomats children. So the negation applies if you are the child of a diplomat (normal stuff) AND your parents HAVE NOT applied for permanent Canadian citizenship. This is reversed from who it reads in the statute. But it hopefully is clearer. It only applies to children of diplomats.

I guess it is possible to have parents who are still diplomats but also have applied to become Canadians.


464 posted on 08/21/2013 6:27:35 PM PDT by bluecat6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 461 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

So a child of military parents should be punished just because they happened to be serving their country overseas?? I think thats wrong and anti-military (and i say this as no fan of McCain’s)


465 posted on 08/21/2013 7:36:28 PM PDT by bigdaddy45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 463 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Winston

Here is the way this works Jeff, You are entitled to your opinion, no matter how stupid it is. Now, do you really think you will change my mind?


466 posted on 08/22/2013 12:01:17 AM PDT by itsahoot (It is not so much that history repeats, but that human nature does not change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 417 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
can we at least have SOMEONE who was born in the country????

Do you remember being born in this country? Does said memory, in the highly unlikely event it actually exists, have the slightest influence on your political attitudes?

467 posted on 08/22/2013 12:08:01 AM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 463 | View Replies]

To: cynwoody

Yieks! That is a good point.


468 posted on 08/22/2013 2:23:26 AM PDT by napscoordinator ( Santorum-Bachmann 2016 for the future of the Country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 467 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
Yup, and look how well we've done with 44 of those 45 people actually coming from the ranks of real, natural-born citizens...

Wilson FDR Kennedy LBJ Nixon Carter Bush, HW Clinton

And, those are just the biggest loser/a-holes from the 20th century.

We need to face the fact that for the most part, our presidents suck. No offense, but I'm more concerned about that than I am about where a person's parents or grand-parents were born.

469 posted on 08/22/2013 5:33:51 AM PDT by WayneS (Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

...and we KNOW what that has gotten us in the past...


470 posted on 08/22/2013 5:35:40 AM PDT by WayneS (Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Constitution 123
And now, a new candidate who is likely not eligible but should according to you be given a pass because precedent is established that the rule of law is okay to be ignored?

No, I believe that the voters and the electors they choose will be required to select a candidate who is a "natural born citizen." As in all of our prior elections, they will be obligated by the Constitution to apply that same standard.

And, they will. ;-)

471 posted on 08/22/2013 7:55:37 AM PDT by Tau Food (Never give a sword to a man who can't dance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 432 | View Replies]

To: Ray76
If the red underlined “and” in subsection (3) is or should be construed as “or” ...

Who are you, Bill Clinton?

"And" means "and" in the law, and always has since the dawn of Law itself. If "and" might not mean "and," then what meaning does any part of the law have anywhere in the world?

472 posted on 08/22/2013 10:01:27 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 461 | View Replies]

To: JCBreckenridge
I do not want someone born outside of America as my president, even if it is Cruz.

Neither DID I.

Why open the door?

"Why open the door?" - Are you kidding? The door has been open for 5 years now. Only way to close the door now is to remove the fraud from the WH before his term ends and prosecute. Short of that, even George Soros qualifies in this post President "Obama" nation.

473 posted on 08/22/2013 11:15:39 AM PDT by tsowellfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: tsowellfan

The only way to close the door is to elect a Republican, who’s an American, born in America. Not jam the door even further open.


474 posted on 08/22/2013 11:49:20 AM PDT by JCBreckenridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 473 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

“McCain was born in Panama”

McCain was born in the United States.


475 posted on 08/22/2013 11:50:26 AM PDT by JCBreckenridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 463 | View Replies]

To: mvpel

I agree. The passage is worded a bit awkwardly, in my opinion. I was closing off any argument that Cruz is not a citizen of Canada.


476 posted on 08/22/2013 11:51:45 AM PDT by Ray76 (Common sense immigration reform: Enforce Existing Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 472 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

Fantastic.


477 posted on 08/22/2013 11:52:08 AM PDT by JCBreckenridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 459 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food

Voters do not decide eligibility, the law does.


478 posted on 08/22/2013 11:52:50 AM PDT by Ray76 (Common sense immigration reform: Enforce Existing Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 471 | View Replies]

To: Ray76
Voters do not decide eligibility, the law does.

Electors are empowered by our Constitution to choose our presidents, but our Constitution obligates them to choose an eligible person. I believe that voters are also obligated to vote only for candidates that they deem to be eligible under the Constitution.

That's the way it has always worked and I see no need to change now.

Ted Cruz - 2016

479 posted on 08/22/2013 12:01:20 PM PDT by Tau Food (Never give a sword to a man who can't dance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 478 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food
What you propose is a change.

Our government is not a democracy, matters of law are not determined by plebiscite, eligibility is a matter of law - not popular whim.

480 posted on 08/22/2013 12:11:33 PM PDT by Ray76 (Common sense immigration reform: Enforce Existing Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 479 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460461-480481-500 ... 521-536 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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