Posted on 01/10/2016 5:48:46 PM PST by randita
“Trump is a pathetic and petty egotist...and NOTHING MORE.”
No, I think that Donald Trump is very intelligent and has lots of first-rate ideas. Trump reminds me somewhat of Patton; brilliant but not fully trustworthy. President Cruz will need to find the right job for Donald Trump — maybe US Trade Negotiator?
Why not? Someone said it best up thread. The Battle Royal is Supreme Court nominations. We wait with bated breath every June to see what our judicial overlords have decreed for us. A presidential election has become nothing more than the under card bout. So let's not pretend that the Constitution is of any consequence. Even amongst ourselves. It's the difference between what ought to be and what is.
Absolutely!
Since when has it been conservative to even entertain the idea of voting for a sleazy that started a strip club, with a men’s and women’s side. Trump is a sicko.
Got news for ya... a President Cruz if he were to occur doesn’t mean anyone is “called to repentance.”
We aren’t in the Old Testament. The priests in the temple don’t offer our sacrifice and need to be holy for that, and Washington cannot atone for our own sins. We believe directly on Jesus Christ who has already made the requisite provision for us.
I have been watching keen evangelization activity going on below the MSM radar. Something is afoot with the Spirit, methinks. It is something personal with We The People and the Lord that would bespeak any repentance — not what they do next November in a secular election. Electing Christ in the heart is needed. Not electing some reportedly devoted Christian to a secular office.
Thank you, ripnbang. Seems lots of folks commenting on this thread know more than Harvard Professor Lawrence Tribe (who taught both Obama and Cruz) . . the Prof says the ‘natural birth citizenship question has never been settled.’
How fortunate that Trump was able to address a group of constitutional scholars!
I won’t support him under any circumstances.
Yep, they’ve openly made their choice, and will still be calling themselves conservative.
And wiser people will say that being branded a conservative doesn’t count a hill of beans in the end. Something transcending labels is needed.
There indeed is more than one way to argue on this, and it hasn’t ever gone to a court for an answer.
I am okay with a loose view of this, but the ever hypocritical Democrats who are supposedly so loose will try to get tighter than a drum over it, and when they mean mean they mean it. Cruz to them might as well be their Satan.
Abe lincoln said something about dogs once. “How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? It has four. Calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it one.”
What I don’t understand is why so many people bitterly cling to calling themselves conservatives. They don’t vote that way a lot of the time. Just be honest about being a moderate. They want some conservatism and they are fine accepting some random liberalism.
Just stand up and be who and what you are. Why pretend to be what words and actions show you arent? I’d much rather deal with on open moderate than a closeted one. At least both people in the conversation are honest.
This is why I don’t trust Trump fully. Can he be this stupid?That's odd because I was thinking exactly the same thing about Cruz on this very subject.
Aside form everything else stupid about Cruz. Why would a self-proclaimed conservative constitutionalist hold dual citizenship as a US Senator?
No, they’re voters.
That’s how Hussein got elected. Idiots that think all they needed was a change...
Faux conservatives are ready to vote for a faux conservative because he acts like a loud mouth jerk.
You may get your wish, and realize soon thereafter you elected an arrogant leftist - a white Obama.
“Palin is done and out of the game. Now it looks like it’s Ted’s turn.”
Palin is done because of her own lack of strength of character and determination. Who forced her to quit as Alaska governor? Who stopped her from running for President in 2012?
Ted Cruz and his wife Heidi aren’t going away so easily. Heidi Cruz took an unpaid leave of absence from her Goldman Sachs Managing Director job to back her husband’s campaign, and she doesn’t have a track record of making losing investments.
Be very careful, Catherine. You might get schlonged by Trump.
There is more to life than having a “conservative” label.
Consider that it has taken on a mountain of implications that it would not have had a century ago.
The only real way out is the ever UNCHANGING God.
I don’t think this is a smear. This is a serious constitutional question, and now is the time to bring it up. A smear, on the other hand, is a personal attack, particularly something untrue, suggesting that the candidate is a person of low character. Trump is not questioning Cruz’ citizenship — or his character — what Trump is questioning is Cruz’ eligibility for the presidency. If we are to take the constitution at face value, indeed Cruz is not eligible to run for president; he has only one citizen parent and he was born in another country. And you can be sure the democrats are going to make hay with this! And they won’t mind throwing Obama under the bus if need be as Obama is no longer an asset for the democrats.No. I don't agree that this is a serious constitutional question. This is Birtherism II. Just about every legal expert and liberal/conservative rag out there has said the same. If that's not good enough for you, try reading the Naturalization Act of 1790 and 1795, drafted by those wise old guys called the founders (and who would know original intent because it was they who originated it).
Naturalization Act of 1790:
And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.Naturalization act of 1795:
and the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as citizens of the United States: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons, whose fathers have never been resident of the United States: Provided also, That no person heretofore proscribed by any state, or who has been legally convicted of having joined the army of Great Britain during the late war, shall be admitted a citizen as foresaid, without the consent of the legislature of the state, in which such person was proscribed.
Now I'm no lawyer, but the plain English of the Act's seem cut and dry.
What I can say - with absolute certainty - is that this issue is going nowhere. If I had a winning Powerball ticket, I would gladly bet it. This is nothing more than sleazy tactic - generally employed by leftist and generally decried by the right - to muck up the works.
Ted is another mound of money to be made, to her? I hope you had a higher view.
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.