Yes They had foresight and the very reason they designed it that way - was because of what we have now. O is not loyal to America/The Constitution. Once unwilling to follow it, it is always easier to never followed what they layout for us. And the results are - obamacare, illegal immigration, o not adhering to Congress and Congress doesn’t give a flip. One big circle downwards and we are reaping what liberals/commies/low level Americans sowed for us. Not enough voice and commitment from the good to overcome this evil that is allowed. I’m a believer in rules are rules and you don’t break them for ‘convenience’. Only pieces of s*** try to break them.
Yes, they would.
“From beginning to end, the debate over Senator Ted Cruz and his birth certificate has been silly. Like the “birtherism” debate surrounding Barack Obama,”
I don’t believe in double standards. It seems this author doesn’t either. Bravo. Then again, he seems to think that one verdict fits all. I believe in evaluating each case on its merits. The topic of eligibility is not silly, IMO.
The eligibility standards should be applied uniformly to everyone, including George Romney, McCain, Cruz, and Obama. That does not mean that all these men were, or are, eligible.
“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible ...”
This is not the easiest text to evaluate. The Heritage Guide to the Constitution discusses several positions on “natural born.” They seem to favor the inclusive view that either being born here, or being born of US parents, makes you “natural born.”
It is possible (likely?) that the birth certificate that Obama has posted is fake? Was he ever a US citizen? Was he born in Kenya of a Kenyan father? Was (is) he a citizen of Kenya? If Obama is a US citizen, did he lose his citizenship while in Indonesia? It is OK to ask these questions. I don’t know the answers.
I’d like to know the truth on these matters. Still, I see little impact either way. Let’s say that the Democrats stole the 1960 Presidential election. To me, the lesson is that we should not let this happen again. But JFK was, and Obama is, President. The bell can not be unrung.
On the other hand there is nothing wrong with tarnishing JFK’s and BHO’s reputations. There is nothing wrong with tarnishing the reputation of the Democratic party. If that party feels entitled to steal elections, the American people should know. If that party only has a selective interest in eligibility, the American people should know. Unfortunately, the US gets tarnished also. Well that is OK, if that is what is required to get the Republic back on track.
The Founding States made the Constitution amendable as evidenced by the Constituton’s Article V. So if patriots want Cruz to be president then they can quit sitting on their hands and make an amendment to repeal the relevant wording in 2.1.5.
See what I mean? New Thread, and who’s it about?
A comment which overlooks the fact that anyone made a citizen by an act of law are themselves "naturalized citizens."
Yes, of course they would care.
Why did the founders add the natural born citizen requirement only for presidential candidates? That question is well worth the time it takes to discover the answer.
Representative - No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States
Senator - No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States,
President - No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
Natural born doesn’t refer to the candidate’s place of birth; natural born refers to the place of birth of both of the candidate’s parents.
The reference appears to ignore that the Founders were actually aware/thinking of the present and the future. I believe that in that day and age the possibility of an overseas birth was not out of the minds of the Founders who themselves were of and had ‘old country’ connections. I am also inclined to think/believe that they were wary of anyone born in a foreign country as to enduring allegiances. As such the Founders thought that the qualification ‘natural born’ would suffice. In today’s political world the qualification is take to mean to apply to any person of choice, especially Obama.