Ted Cruz drops bombshell: Senate Democrats to ‘repeal the First Amendment’ this year

originally posted by: Leonidas

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Leonidas
a reply to: Aazadan

Ted Cruz CANT be President. He was not born in America.

His mother is a US citizen.


a reply to: Aazadan
Under US law a person must choose which citizenship they want to go with since the US does not recognize dual citizenship for our own citizens.

The Walter - McCarran Act and the Immigration reforms completed in the 1950's set the criteria.

No one is saying he is not a US citizen. He is not born in the United States as is one of the requirements to become President.

"Natural Born Citizen" is not defined in the Constitution, but it's legal meaning is settled.

If a person is eligible, at birth, to be a U.S. citizen, then that person is a "natural born citizen" and passes the test of the Article 2 requirements.

So, you're not gonna get away from a President Cruz that easily.

Harte

a reply to: Harte

Natural born citizen, like high crimes and misdemeanors, is defined by Congress per the Constitution.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Harte
Natural born citizen, like high crimes and misdemeanors, is defined by Congress per the Constitution.

That is correct, and it is defined exactly as I stated in my earlier post.

Harte

a reply to: Aazadan

Actually it is as we saw with john McCain, who was born in Panama. As long as one parent is a US citizen, US citizenship is a nationality option.

a reply to: Harte

Uhm ok.. your post

"Natural Born Citizen" is not defined in the Constitution, but it's legal meaning is settled.

is what I was responding to.

I don't think they'd even try to do it out in the open. Why? They don't have to. They'll do it with the boiling frog technique. They don't care how long it takes. And they know for sure the ignorant people will buy their excuses.

Guess what? If they wanted to hide the corporate money so you wouldn't even know it was happening, they could do that. They're TRYING to piss people off. They're doing it on purpose.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Didn't the Senate pass a bill that specifically said John McCain is a natural born citizen? They've never defined exactly what natural born means.

Here it is actually
www.govtrack.us...

a reply to: Aazadan

A non binding senate only "statement" as to their opinion on McCain. The weird part was who it was drafted by (top Democrats including Clinton) and the fact a second one was not done for Obama.

Ted Cruz is a massive piece of scum. Republicans are nothing but whipping boys for the corporate elite....Democrats not much better.

The greatest thing of all, of all the pro soldier talk that comes from these scumbags....they continuously vote to deny improving HEALTH BENEFITS AND HEALTH CARE FOR OUR VETERANS. I am sick and tired of it.

Republicans will probably win across the board this year in elections. Why? Because the rural white population is completely brainwashed. I see it every day.

Why doesn't the poor Conservative voter see that corporations have total control? They hate government...but then defend the billionaire corporate pieces of garbage THAT CORRUPT IT!!! It makes no sense!!!!

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Aazadan

A non binding senate only "statement" as to their opinion on McCain. The weird part was who it was drafted by (top Democrats including Clinton) and the fact a second one was not done for Obama.

Right, and they did that because they have no definition of natural born citizen. Ted Cruz pushes the envelope a little bit more than Obama or McCain but in the end I don't see why it's important.

My opinion is to let him run, he's a US citizen and meets all other requirements. The tea party people will be happy (and prove they're hypocrites... again). It's not like the process of selecting the best person improves by excluding people.

a reply to: olaru12

It used to be California was known for its nuts, but Texas sure seems to grow bumper crops. Here’s another variety. Kesha Rogers, who campaigned as a Democrat, was disavowed by the Texas Democratic Party pdf. Why? Because she’s a LaRouchie, an extreme left group.

Years ago the national Democratic Party disavowed this extreme group. Whereas the D’s refused to take in extreme left fringe groups, after their own extremists, the Dixie-Crats, left to back Republicans, the GOP courted, welcomed, and nurtured right wing extremists as their “base”. Reactionaries found national political legitimacy in that fertile soil. The conservative Koch brothers’ money helped expand their libertarian and John Birch Society notions into the mainstream. These were the extreme groups that other Republicans warned their party about back in the 1960s. Too bad the GOP didn’t heed their prophets’ warnings.

Part of Nelson Rockefeller‘s 1968 address to the Republican convention: "The Republican party is in real danger of subversion by a radical, well-financed and highly disciplined minority... wholly alien to the sound and honest conservatism that has firmly based the Republican party in the best of a century's traditions, wholly alien to the sound and honest Republican liberalism that has kept the party abreast of human needs in a changing world, wholly alien to the broad middle course that accommodates the mainstream of Republican principles."

a reply to: thisguyrighthere

Unfortunately, I believe you hit the nail on the head. If we let our "leaders" (left or right) determine our course without opposition the common man, liberty, freedom and common sense suffers.

Ted Cruz and Nancy Pelosi are flip sides of the same coin... they both are known to spout ridiculous nonsense playing to their base. I am sick of both of them.

I hate seeing another election season coming... I have not seen a decent candidate toss their hat into the ring in many years. For virtually any position in DC.

a reply to: desert

If you remove the Tea Party from the Repubs what you, in effect, have left are the Dems of the 60s... seriously.

a reply to: Aazadan

they did that to remove questions about his citizenship..

Something they failed to do for Obama...

makes one wonder.

a reply to: Xcathdra

My assumption is that Hillary wanted to face McCain believing she could beat him but not potentially someone else (and if she knew about Palin who would blame her?). On the other hand the Democrat party as a whole really wanted Hillary. Say what you want about Obama but the guy challenged the consensus candidate who was supposed to treat the primary as nothing but an informal coronation and he won. The Republicans probably wanted ammunition against him if he won, and Hillary likely also wanted ammunition.

It's just typical party politics.

a reply to: Pixiefyre

umm...No

The first amendment prevents congress from making a law abridging said rights, not from amending them. That is a different process.

a reply to: olaru12

the US is starting to become a classical dictatorship.

Better have exit plan people.

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman
a reply to: olaru12

the US is starting to become a classical dictatorship.

Better have exit plan people.

We do.. Its called the Gateway Arch in St. Louis MO.

Its the gateway to the West and an emergency exit to the east.