DAMNED IF HE DOES AND DAMNED IF HE DOESNT...IF HE REFUSES TO SHOW PROOF OF NATURAL CITIZENSHIP...WE WILL KNOW HE IS LYING & IS INELIGIBLE FOR OFFICE... IF HE SHOWS PROOF OF HIS FATHERS CITIZENSHIP AT HIS BIRTH...WE WILL POSITIVELY KNOW HE IS INELIGIBLE TRUTH WILL BEAR OUT WHETHER CRUZ TRIES TO HIDE IT OR NOT.... ... Its been rumored that Marco Rubio and Bobby Jindal considered throwing their hats into the bid for the Republican presidential nomination. However, neither are considered natural born citizens as their parents were not naturalized before either was born. Their fathers were citizens of other countries – Jindal, India and Rubio, Cuba – at the time of birth. While these two are not considered favorites or outstanding among more prominent or establishment Republican candidates, one Republican has the merits to challenge the more prominent establishment Republicans – Ted Cruz. At the South Carolina Tea Party Coalition Convention, Cruz told Breitbart News that hes very, very seriously considering launching a presidential candidacy for 2016. According to Cruz, Democrats are likely to win in 2016 just as they did in the last two presidential elections unless a bold conservative wins the GOP nomination. While Cruz has garnered widespread support for his stance again certain unconstitutional issues, the real question centers around his eligibility. Is Ted Cruz a natural born citizen? The answer is he is not. Rafael Cruz, Teds father, did not become a naturalized American citizen until 2005. Ted Cruz was born in 1970 before his father became naturalized. Even though Cruzs mother was a US citizen at the time of his birth, his father was not meaning Cruz does not meet the definition of natural born citizen. While many conservatives and Republicans support Cruz, are conservatives and Republicans willing to back a candidate with a questionable eligibility, just as the Democrats and liberals did with Obama? Is Cruz, himself, willing to put himself in the position of violating the natural born citizen requirement to seek the office of president? His serious consideration on launching a presidential run would suggest that he is. America has been witness to the problems with a president who has questionable eligibility. Obama has certainly not demonstrated an allegiance to America – both where his citizenship and ideology are concerned. Are we to say that a questionable citizenship is palatable as long as the ideology is the same as ours? A citizen of the United States is not the same as a natural-born citizen and both are different from a naturalized citizen. To support the requirement of President be extended to include citizens would be to promote anchor babies to occupy the highest office in our nation, regardless of the citizenship condition of the parents at the time of the childs birth. Even if that anchor babys ideology is the same as a sect of the US population, do Americans really want to continue eating that can of worms the Democrats and liberals opened with Obama? Have we all not already been witness to individuals in government who slide on the Supreme Law of the Land from both sides of the aisle? Do we not rale against those who violate our Constitution regardless of party or ideology... Read more at freedomoutpost/2015/01/will-natural-born-citizen-requirements-president-haunt-gop-candidates-2016/#zvWO0QgmQvms8P6G.99
Posted on: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 03:25:26 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015