Posted on 04/10/2016 7:35:25 PM PDT by Strac6
At the outset, let me assure all the Trump supporters, the Cruz supporters, the Kasich supporters and anyone else interested in the outcome of the Republican presidential primary that this article is not written with the intent to help or hurt any candidate. It is simply a dose of reality in an often confused political knife fight.
In trying to advance the case that Sen. Cruz is not eligible to be President of the United States because he was born in Canada, the Trump forces are on what is undoubtably a fool’s errand. I’m not going to take the time here explaining the legalities of United States Code 1401 and related statutes, nor the difference between a “natural born citizen” and a “native born citizen,” or how some Supreme Court decision of 114 years ago is not applicable today or any of the other legal arguments some Trump supporters try to advance…. AND THAT IS NOT WHAT THIS ARTICLE IS ABOUT!
The reality is that the “citizenship’ issue may be a well-laid Cruz trap.
The problem with all these “Sen. Cruz is ineligible” arguments is that none of them have advanced in the courts. On every question of when a presidential candidate was not a native born citizen, but was a natural born citizen under the law, the courts have always decided in favor of the candidate. As an example, Sen. McCain was born in Panama while his father served there in the Navy, George Romney was born in Mexico to American citizen Mormon missionaries, and other presidential candidates have not been native born.
If there was any validity to these arguments, three things would be happening. First, well-founded and well-funded law teams PAID FOR BY OTHER CANDIDATES would be advancing the matter through the courts. Secondly, other candidates than Trump would be screaming the issue from the rooftops, finally, and most importantly, the serious money donors that contribute heavily to the presidential campaigns would’ve abandoned Cruz a long time ago.
Reality check: Even Trump rarely mentions the issue any longer.
But there is a real danger to the Trump supporters in trying to concentrate on the citizenship issue, regardless if it is real or not. By concentrating their efforts on this, they are wasting time and effort they could spend in other ways to advance Mr. Trump. Ted Cruz is far from the perfect presidential candidate, but by devoting time and energy to the citizenship issue, Trump supporters are missing dozens of opportunities to attack him on other issues.
More importantly, I’m sure some senior Cruz supporters are glad Trump supporters are concentrating on the citizenship issue, because there is a natural tendency among voters, that when one line of attack is proved to be false or foolish, the candidates other lines of attack tend to go down with it.
The classic example of this was the 2004 George W. Bush reelection campaign. You’ll remember that CBS News, in the persona of Dan Rather, highlighted a supposedly huge story that then-Air Force reservist Bush had used his father’s political influence to avoid service in Vietnam. It was a huge story when it ran on CBS, and in fact, it totally overshadowed anything else for days.
But the Bush people were very smart. They knew the story was totally false and they led CBS and Kerry into a huge ambush over it.
You may remember that CBS called the White House asking for a comment or a denial. The WH quietly said, “we’ll get back to you.” The WH didn’t, and the story ran with much hoopla that night.. and for nights afterward.
Bush polls were down.
But simply put, CBS and Dan Rather had put all their eggs in that BS story’s basket.
Various entities around the country, FR leading them, soon started poking holes in the CBS story.
Rather, or more correctly, Rather’s ego led him further down the primrose path of journalistic destruction.
When the story was proved false, Bush ratings went higher than they were before the "story" broke. Bush had "stood up" to Rather... and Bush won.
I won’t go into all the history, but in the end, it cost Rather his job, his reputation even among the liberals, and it cost CBS any semblance of respect that had going into the story.
Bottom line. If you are against Cruz and for Trump, don’t waste your time on this Flat Earth argument. It hurts very badly when the door gets slammed shut on what you thought were facts, and you find you have wasted all your effort on a false hope.
Just ask Dan Rather.
“Sheesh, clutching at straws, or what?”
Oops! I forgot to mention that I was not speaking in legal terms.
Got it now. I doubt if more than a sliver of people care about a candidate’s wife’s place of birth.
“I doubt if more than a sliver of people care about a candidate’s wife’s place of birth.”
That is exactly why I brought up the issue.....because no one else has mentioned it. ;-) Maybe it will make people start to think about it, one way or the other. Dismiss it or decide against him. Just food for thought, nothing more.
Understood Onyx
I’m definitely a little trigger happy lately and firing at anything that moves. Straco don’t think mine were very harsh - but I did treat your post as ‘more of the same anti-Trump robot output’ with sarcastic replies...so my bad if I applied that label incorrectly.
A more reasoned response would have been that ... I don’t see that Trump’s been overplaying the Canadian angle for a while now, nor that it’s taken up much time here except as inclusion in an insult here and there. I would agree that it would be a loser of a political issue with the public if in fact it is being played hard.
Happy Evening -
If there ever were a non issue, the place of birth of the potential first lady would certainly be it. Perhaps that is why, as you’ve noted, no one other than you has mentioned it.
“as you’ve noted, no one other than you has mentioned it.”
Maybe because I am a deeper thinker than the Trumpbots? ;-)
Homework assignment. Tell us the first Foreign born First lady’s name. There was at least one already...
You sure do think highly of yourself. How very elitist of you. Hope that works out well for you. BTW, I took no offense even though my wife of 12 years is foreign born and my two children are bilingual. Let that sink in, #DeepThinker.
“Homework assignment. Tell us the first Foreign born First lady’s name. There was at least one already...”
And your point would be what, exactly?
“You sure do think highly of yourself. How very elitist of you. Hope that works out well for you. BTW, I took no offense even though my wife of 12 years is foreign born and my two children are bilingual. Let that sink in, #DeepThinker.”
ROFL
Huh? Deep-thinking is somehow superior? Maybe I should have said, “Think differently”? ;-)
My wife was born in a foreign country but has lived in this country longer than you have been alive! Oh, and my wife and I are both bilingual. Her two children are both bilingual. Well, actually, if you want to count Cajun French then I am trilingual. ;-)
It is obvious that you have not read my original comment about foreign-born President’s wives.
You took no offense but yet you lash out? Tsk, tsk tsk! ;-)
My old FR name was Lazamataz.
I've been here since 1999.
You, on the other hand, are a retread.
Yeah, you won’t last here.
You seem like a very angry man. Why is that?
Retread?
Trackhead, yes, 1/11 ACR, Vietnam, but retread?
PS, if it’s important, my name has always been Kenneth, or Ken to friends.
The only people I ever knew referred to “retreads” were WWII vets who were involuntarily recalled for Korea. Met a few who had then, after Korea, had 7 or 8 years of active military service, so stayed in to retire after 20 and as a result were also in Vietnam.
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.