To: SoConPubbie
Easy to see why so many of us love this guy!
However, are we being hypocrites after discussing birther issues and wishing for a guy who was born in Canada?
I’m asking sincerely, I love this guy, however, he was born in Canada ..... can or should he be a future president?
14 posted on
02/01/2015 8:48:27 AM PST by
teppe
(... for my God ... for my Family ... for my Country ....)
To: teppe
Im asking sincerely, I love this guy, however, he was born in Canada ..... can or should he be a future president? Damn right! It's not an issue.
No hypocrisy involved. If Obama was born in Hawaii, he's a U.S. citizen, eligible to serve as the President. And there hasn't been any evidence to the contrary.
However, if Obama had been born out of the country, his mother was too young -- under the citizenship laws then prevailing -- to confer U.S. citizenship. That is the only situation under which his citizenship can be questioned.
Cruz' mother, however, was old enough to confer citizenship. Accordingly, despite being born in Canada, Cruz was a US citizen-at-birth and his eligibility is unquestioned.
18 posted on
02/01/2015 9:02:01 AM PST by
okie01
(THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
To: teppe; All
CRUZ WAS BORN TO AN AMERICAN CITIZEN MOTHER .. IT WOULDN’T HAVE MATTERED IF HE WAS BORN IN CHINA .. HE WOULD STILL BE AN AMERICAN CITIZEN.
FOR YEARS HE HELD DUAL-CITIZENSHIP WITH CANADA. HE HAS SINCE RENOUNCED THAT CANADIAN CITIZENSHIP.
STOP SPREADING RUMORS THAT HE’S A CANADIAN .. HE’S NOT.
26 posted on
02/01/2015 9:11:58 AM PST by
CyberAnt
("The hope and changey stuff did not work, even a smidgen.")
To: teppe
However, are we being hypocrites after discussing birther issues and wishing for a guy who was born in Canada?
Im asking sincerely, I love this guy, however, he was born in Canada ..... can or should he be a future president?
So????
Show me in the constitution where being born in another country to a US Citizen disqualifies you for being President?
Please provide the relevant sections of the U.S. Constitution that clearly and unambiguously define "Natural Born" as requiring two U.S. Citizens at birth.
Lacking that, Please provide the relevant sections of U.S. Federal Law that clearly and unambiguously define "Natural Born" as requiring two U.S. Citizens at birth.
Lacking that, Please provide the relevant rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court that clearly and unambiguously define "Natural Born" as requiring two U.S. Citizens at birth.
You can't because they don't exist anywhere except in your mind/opinion and in sources that are not legal or constitutional in nature.
The Constitution, it's amendments, US Laws, and SCOTUS rulings decide what is constitutional and what is not. Not sources that exist outside that framework like Black's Law or some vague understanding of what it meant to most, but not all, of people alive at that time.
61 posted on
02/01/2015 1:07:32 PM PST by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson