Comments by: 1 Dragon
First of all, I am not a Constitutional Lawyer and I don’t play one on TV but since Sen, Ted Cruz announced he was running for President, I have listened to the radio talk jocks and they have talked around the Natural Born Citizen (NBC) issue. Mike Gallagher stated yesterday that Ted Cruz is a NBC because of the Nationality Act of 1940.
We Mike may talk a good game and remember, I am not a Constitutional Lawyer but I find no where in the Nationality Act of 1940 that says anything about a Natural Born Citizen. It does talk about American citizenship and naturalization but not Natural Born Citizens.
After the past 6 years of lies, cover-up, corruption and tyranny from 0bama and his StormTroopers, the ONLY ONE I trust is God.
Many conservative Americans are probably celebrating today and enjoying an “in your face, Democrats” honeymoon phase. At midnight last night, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) officially announced he will seek the office of the President of the United States. This makes it official and from comments perused on various articles across the internet media, people are taking out their checkbooks to contribute to his campaign.
Before delving any further, a few things need to be made clear. I am not a Democrat nor a Republican. I have no party affiliation. I am an equal opportunity criticizer and a constitutional conservative Christian. My allegiance resides with the Supreme Law of the Land – the Constitution of the united States of America. Regardless of how popular, conservative or constitutional supporting a candidate or elected official claims, they reap criticism when they choose to deviate from their publicly acclaimed stance for any reason.
The issue at hand remains the eligibility of Ted Cruz to run for President under the “natural born citizen” requirement. Yes, Ted Cruz has released his birth certificate indicating he was born in Canada to a US citizen mother. His father, however, was not a US citizen at the time of his birth. Interestingly, claims emerged suggesting Cruz could have dual citizenship – Canadian and US. Cruz stated he would renounce his Canadian citizenship assuming he had dual citizenship.
So, once again, the US is thrown into a similar situation as Obama. This time it’s a Republican conservative candidate – a popular, well-liked one. Obama’s US citizenship is highly questionable and he certainly cannot claim being a “natural born” citizen. But, what about Ted Cruz? Are we really comfortable saying Cruz is eligible under the “natural born citizen” requirement? Is Ted Cruz comfortable in claiming “natural born citizen” status? Apparently so.
Well, I guess the mantra of “if you can’t beat them, join them” that has permeated the establishment GOP party has now infiltrated professed conservative, constitution supporting individuals. While doing the right thing is never easy, nor is standing up for what is right, as it can be a lonely road, some of us are not willing to jump off the bridge just because others are and have. Playing the “tit for tat” game never bodes well. One would think that lesson would have been learned by all early in life.
But, since many conservatives are boisterously supporting Cruz, those of us who contend he does not meet the “natural born citizen” requirement are destined to receive scathing criticism and personal attacks. So be it.
Sen. Cruz may believe the issue regarding his eligibility has been settled since the release of his birth certificate. However, it has not and the issue surrounding Cruz’s eligibility needs to be settled now that he has thrown his hat into the ring. Senator Cruz needs to tell all of the US how he meets that requirement according to Vattel’s Law of Nations, the Naturalization Act of 1790, and the understanding of the definition of “natural born citizen” by our founders. Good luck with that as Cruz has not even signed on with the Good Guys campaign initiated by American Again, despite proclaiming support for the Constitution.
Democrats pounced on questioning John McCain’s citizenship in the 2008 presidential election. Will they pounce this time on Cruz since his is questionable? If the Democrats don’t and Republicans play tit for tat, it should be very telling. It would mean opening up the office of the President to any individual who could produce a hint at US citizenship, totally dissembling the constitutional requirement of a president being “natural born” through fiat and precedent, without so much as an amendment being taken to the states. In other words, the Constitution would continue to be hijacked by both political parties with American citizens cheering it on.
It would mean Arnold Schwartzenegger could be president. A US citizen is a US citizen whether natural born, naturalized, born to one parent who is a citizen or an “anchor baby” whose parents are illegal aliens that never became naturalized citizens. Under Obamnesty, those who entered illegally and became US citizens would qualify to run for president. The leader of Hamas could enter illegally at this point, get Obamnesty and run for office in the future. That might be a little far-fetched, but is it really if voters relinquish “natural born citizen” and accept “citizen” as the third requirement for presidential eligibility. The first two are attainment of thirty-five (35) years of age and a resident within the US for fourteen (14) years. Take away the “natural born” requirement by precedent and acceptance of “citizen” candidates and it becomes a very real possibility.
But, if that is what citizens want and many conservatives have no issue with it, that is what will happen. The Constitution is already being ignored by Obama and conservatives complain loudly, as they should. Many conservatives though are willing to overlook a “violation” in the Constitutional requirement for president when it involves their “man.” The can of worms has been opened with Obama. The barn door is open. Either it gets closed now or we reap what we sow.
There is no way that I would ever claim to be a scholar of the Constitution. However, the ability to research, read, comprehend and open the mind leads me to question Cruz’s eligibility. According to Cruz’s own statement, “if you say you support the Constitution, show me where you stood and fought for it.” This should not only apply to candidates, but every American as well.
Here I am supporting the Constitution – standing up and fighting for it.
This has nothing to do with “disliking” Cruz. I am not attacking his morality, his person or his character. What I am asking is that Sen. Cruz put his money where his mouth is and do the same in standing and fighting for the Constitution. The first step is satisfying all three Constitutional requirements to be president.
You can interchange Ted Cruz with Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal and Rick Santorum. It makes no difference. If either of these individuals officially toss their hat toward a presidential run, they can expect the same request as has been made of Cruz and will be met with the same criticism. Just as I questioned Obama’s eligibility in 2008 on the “natural born citizen” requirement, I will continue to question any and all candidates on it, regardless.
We would all do well in taking on a “show me” state after witnessing the many lies, obfuscations and betrayals from both sides of the aisle. But, many are calling Cruz a “candidate for American patriots” and those questioning his eligibility as a “new breed of birthers.” Not only that, but anyone who “attacks” Cruz (which means challenging eligibility) will be dubbed “progressive,” “a Republican elitist,” or RINO by many in the conservative community.
Okay, then; let the fireworks begin.