Skip to comments.
5 Signs Sen. Ted Cruz Will Run for President in 2016
ABCNews.com ^
| Sep 7, 2013 10:06am
| Elizabeth Hartfield
Posted on 09/07/2013 12:03:25 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 121-140 next last
To: Ouderkirk
It's going to be up to us on the ground to beat back the establishment.
/johnny
To: Uncle Chip
If Cruz’s mother went to Canada to have an abortion, would she be aborting a Canadian or an American?
62
posted on
09/07/2013 2:12:25 PM PDT
by
txhurl
('The DOG ate my homework. That homework, too. ALL my homework. OK?' - POSHITUS)
To: JRandomFreeper
“A little birdie is telling me that the birthers who insist on hijacking every Cruz thread with this nonsense are going to start falling by the wayside. If FR is not their cup of tea they should start looking for a new home.” — Jim Robinson.
Hear! Hear! They need to go.
63
posted on
09/07/2013 2:13:02 PM PDT
by
TheThirdRuffian
(RINOS like Romney, McCain, Christie are sure losers. No more!)
To: RKBA Democrat
Not if the conservatives settle on a single candidate right out of the gate. I’m totally behind Cruz.
64
posted on
09/07/2013 2:17:53 PM PDT
by
Politicalmom
(Modern "Peace Officer" motto-"We have to go home at night, we don't care if you do.")
To: SoConPubbie
65
posted on
09/07/2013 2:19:37 PM PDT
by
peanu
To: txhurl
Neither —
Canadian citizenship is at birth
To: SoConPubbie
Can you provide the name of any dual citizenship US family before 1922???
To: Politicalmom
“Not if the conservatives settle on a single candidate right out of the gate. Im totally behind Cruz.”
With respect, I’m a Virginian. And as you might recall when our state affiliate of the uniparty decided that our ballot might be cluttered with too many gop candidates for president in 2012, they limited our choices to two.
68
posted on
09/07/2013 2:26:31 PM PDT
by
RKBA Democrat
(Power disintegrates when people withdraw their obedience and support)
To: fwdude
NOT ELIGIBLE!
**************
Unless and until those nine black robed Justices at the Supreme Court of the United States
issues a verdict so saying then if Cruz runs and is elected he’ll serve as President of the USA.
That’s the only path to fulfill your conclusion.
69
posted on
09/07/2013 2:30:09 PM PDT
by
deport
To: deport
Amen. In retrospect I’m glad nobody has ‘standing’.
70
posted on
09/07/2013 2:31:38 PM PDT
by
txhurl
('The DOG ate my homework. That homework, too. ALL my homework. OK?' - POSHITUS)
To: Uncle Chip
Oh you mean:
I think that is the future. Nobody knows what the future brings.So definitive. Plus his son is visiting Iowa and New Hampshire just for vacations.
Considering the many ridiculously stupid things you've said, it's not just your questions that aren't worth answering.........
71
posted on
09/07/2013 2:42:57 PM PDT
by
Lakeshark
(KILL THE BILL! CALL. FAX. WRITE.)
To: Lakeshark
We’ll get’em, one by one.
72
posted on
09/07/2013 2:47:40 PM PDT
by
txhurl
('The DOG ate my homework. That homework, too. ALL my homework. OK?' - POSHITUS)
To: Uncle Chip
Can you provide the name of any dual citizenship US family before 1922???
Don't care, the issue is currently settled.
Once again:
Please prove your point using the US Constitution and providing the relevant passages that clearly define "Natural Born" as requiring 2 citizen parents at birth.
Lacking that, please provide the relevant US Law(s), passed by Congress and signed by a US President that define "Natural Born" as requiring 2 citizen parents at birth.
Lacking that, please provide the relevant Supreme Court rulings that confirm your definition of "Natural Born" as requiring 2 citizen parents at birth.
You won't because there aren't any, so what we are left with is your opinion, which is absolutely worthless in determining the legality of your opinion.
As it now stands in US Law, constitutionally speaking, Ted Cruz is completely Eligible to be POTUS.
73
posted on
09/07/2013 2:48:54 PM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: txhurl
74
posted on
09/07/2013 2:51:01 PM PDT
by
deport
To: Viennacon
You should probably take that up with the CATO institute. Yeah, the Cato Institute, which threw its full support behind redefining marriage.
Excuse me if they've lost all credibility in my eyes and the eyes of all thinking people.
75
posted on
09/07/2013 2:52:42 PM PDT
by
fwdude
( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
To: fwdude; Viennacon
Yeah, the Cato Institute, which threw its full support behind redefining marriage.
Excuse me if they've lost all credibility in my eyes and the eyes of all thinking people.
So, even though that issue has nothing to do with the Citizenship issue, that invalidates the logic they applied to come to the conclusion that Senator Ted Cruz is ineligible to be POTUS?
So let me ask you, did you vote for Romney in the last election, even though he was supporting Abortion and the Gay Agenda?
76
posted on
09/07/2013 2:55:53 PM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: fwdude
I don’t rate the CATO institute as being some sort of eminent authority, but they do have a few legal scholars over there.
The question is ‘what is a natural born citizen’, and since one of the widely accepted definitions is one which Cruz falls under, is it really going to be an issue.
Honestly, do you think Cruz is going to be going to court to sort this out?
To: SoConPubbie
So let me ask you, did you vote for Romney in the last election, even though he was supporting Abortion and the Gay Agenda?No.
78
posted on
09/07/2013 2:58:14 PM PDT
by
fwdude
( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
To: SoConPubbie
Lacking that, please provide the relevant Supreme Court rulings that confirm your definition of "Natural Born" as requiring 2 citizen parents at birth. It is understood in the plain reading of anything on the subject since the wife upon marriage assumed the nationality of the husband, thus this Supreme Court definition:
The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of the parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. [Justice Waite -- Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 168.]
To: SoConPubbie
Well so far he has a whole 9 months of experience. Lord the country is in trouble!
80
posted on
09/07/2013 3:43:23 PM PDT
by
napscoordinator
( Santorum-Bachmann 2016 for the future of the Country!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 121-140 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson