Replies

Divided loyalties (not that he has them, because I don’t see that he does) — that’s what the Founders were trying to prevent by insisting the President be a natural born citizen (born of two citizen parents on native soil, as it has been commonly understood for centuries), as opposed to just a [born] citizen.

Hello WXRGina,

I agree with you completely with regard to both your take on Cruz (so far, he seems 100 percent conservative and pro-American) and on the sad loss of the original Constitutional meaning of natural born Citizen. However, if he ends up on our presidential ticket, I most certainly will be voting for him.

But I worry (as apparently do many others on this forum) that his non-native birth and his father's foreign citizenship may be (hypocritically) used by the opposition to discredit him and derail his campaign. The absolute worst case nightmare scenario would be that they use his foreign birth status as a last minute weapon during the call for objections in the electoral college to undo a Cruz victory and weasel in their own candidate, even in spite of a landslide vote. They would argue that it was okay that Ted Cruz and aka obama were both born to only one citizen parent, but that, unlike aka obama (who ostensibly was born in Hawaii) Ted Cruz was born on foreign soil, does not meet the Article II requirement and thus sadly is disqualified from becoming president.

Is this scenario possible? Yes, I think it is.

Is this scenario likely? Probably not, but I wouldn't put anything past those who believe that their ends justify any and all means.

Ted Cruz has not declared. Perhaps a two-citizen-parent, native-born true conservative like Sarah Palin (my personal favorite) will end up as our standard bearer and the question will be completely moot.