To be honest with you, if Senator Cruz decides to run, I don’t care about his NBC status.
As the article spells out this issue, for some unknown reason, was never sufficiently spelled out in law, either by the Constitution, or settled case law as far as I (as a novice) can tell, while many here on FreeRepublic will dig deep into the minutia of issue to (probably accuratel) show the article incorrect.
IF I, as politically attuned as I try to be, cannot see a clear path to a definitely legal and lawful definition, how do you expect this issue to rise to the level of importance to actually be enforced? Especially with the traitors and cowards in both of the major political parties.
If Ted Cruz runs, I’m all in, NBC status or not.
Out of all possible candidates, with the exception of Sarah Palin, he is the real deal.
The rest are posers, cowards, and some down-right traitors to conservatism. And I do include Rand Paul with his Amnesty in this group.
I am with you 100%
So his violating the Constitution would be a plus for you?
Invalidating the very document that establishes the office of the presidency isn't a deal breaker?
Out of all possible candidates, with the exception of Sarah Palin, he is the real deal.
I tend to agree. If the other side refuses to play by the rules, I don't see why we should bother with the rules either. This has become a dirty war. Any means to win is now fair in my opinion.
But I will say this. I don't believe Ted Cruz qualifies under the 1787 meaning of "natural born citizen" and if the supreme court decides otherwise it will have to reverse itself on a previous case.