Once again, re Cruz eligibility: Ted Cruz is fully eligible. Read Ark vs U.S. 1898, which addresses the children of aliens born within the U.S. Ark is something I hope you read and study, as it needs to be settled, as the question may well arise, should Sarah Palin be the nominee and Ted Cruz her VP, or vice versa: I had the chance to get to know Ted Cruz, and his father, Rafael, while attending 5 of the TP Express rallies in TX during his TX Primary Campaign for Senate, setting up the Texas is Palin Country table. Bush did not support Cruz for Senate. Bush and Rove supported his opponent, Dewhurst. Ted Cruz actually memorized the U.S. Constitution at age nine. Two years later he had led 3 of his classmates to do the same, as a demonstration at an early age, of the leadership qualities that were entirely to be expected, being the child of his father, Rafael. Just to make this clear, that this story was genuine, and not some myth, before about 30 reporters at a campaign stop in Denton TX, during the Q&A, I asked Mr. Cruz to recite for us the 10th Amendment. Cruz delivered. It was the same 10th Amendment, that was Point One in Sarah Palins Five Point Plan to restore America, unveiled at Indianola. Ted Cruz, and his father Rafael are the real deal. All of Ted Cruzs life is a Record of defending and fighting for the U.S. Constitution, including his thesis at Harvard, being on the mirror relationships of the 9th and 10th Amendments. When Sarah Palin UNRESERVEDLY endorsed Ted Cruz for the U.S. Senate, it was perhaps because Ted Cruzs whole career was probably most in line with her own beliefs, perhaps more so than that of any politician on the U.S. stage. Re being eligible to be President, I sincerely suggest you read U.S. vs. Ark, 1898, which takes a look at what it means to be naturally born. Where someone is born is not important, if they are born to a U.S. citizen. Cruzs mother was a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth in Canada. John McCain was born to U.S. citizen parents in Panama. I hope you actually read the entire opinion, which sorts out and clarifies the issues. osah.ga.gov/…/Cite-US%20v.%20Wong%20Kim%20Ark.pdf and not just the title page but the opinion, which is a bit to digest, and followup application discussions. You might find it useful to read this by searching for key phrases, also, such as naturally born. When I first read it about 4 years ago, I wrote: Ark may well have provided clarification of the natural born status of the child of aliens who are hostile to the U.S., vs. the child of aliens that are not hostile to the U.S. Thus Ark would have followed the founders original intent, at least in this regard. Being the child of aliens NOT AT WAR with the U.S. distinguishes that child from a child whose parents were, for example, a Colonist woman and a Red Coat soldier. The child whose father was from a country AT WAR with the U.S., and whose mother was a U.S. citizen, was the specific child the founders had in mind, that the founders intended to exclude from being eligible for the Presidency. Yes, that child might well have divided loyalties. A lot of folks that have read the U.S. Constitution and limited commentary, might well believe that naturally born implies 2 citizen parents and the precious U.S. soil. As is developed in Ark, in England 2 aliens who were in England, not citizens in England, but just 2 aliens, who gave birth to a child while in England, AND, whose alien parents were NOT from a country at war with England, and were NOT diplomats from another country, that child would be naturally born. This was part of the definition of being naturally born, which is developed in Ark, as SETTLED LAW, in 1898. Aliens, who found themselves in England during the 1700s and early 1800s, who were NOT from countries AT WAR with England, or who were NOT diplomats, or the children of diplomats, were subject to the Protection of the Crown. They were also subject to be conscripted into the Royal Navy and Army. WHERE one is born matters not, provided they are born to at least one U.S. Citizen parent, and the other is from a country NOT at war with the U.S., or is NOT a diplomat from a foreign country, The Dims tried to bring up McCains citizenship, not because it was seriously being challenged, but because it was politically expedient to do so. McCain was born, while his U.S. citizen parents were in Panama. McCain is fully eligible. So would a child born on the moon to a U.S. astronaut citizen. Ted Cruz born to a U.S. Citizen mother, and a refugee from Cuba living in Canada, has formally renounced Canadian citizenship. Canada has not been at war since the late 1700s and early 1800s. Teds father Rafael Cruz has become a naturalized U.S. citizen. If you believe incorrectly that it takes 2 U.S. citizens, consider just for the moment, the case of a mother that does not know who the father is. But a birth on English soil, the country, from which the definition of naturally born arose, did not require either parent, let alone ONE parent to be a citizen, for the child of those parents to be naturally born, with the provisos of 1) not at war, and 2) not diplomats. About 2 years ago, Ark became the subject of the following article in the hopelessly liberal Houston Chronicle re Ted Cruz being eligible to be President, about the same time as Ted Cruz was going to be at the Iowa State Fair: blog.chron/…/birtherism-2-0-is-canada-born-ted-…/ I was interested in hearing what Ted Cruz, a true Constitutional Scholar, had to say about this. In Iowa, Ted Cruz was asked whether he was eligible, and he said yes, but refused to engage, here being interviewed by George Stephanopolos for ABC News: abcnews.go/…/ted-cruz-dismisses-talk-of-2016-pr…/ Having read Ark, I found the relevant distinction, for Ted Cruz, re the quaint and historical application of the phrase, naturally born, was that Ted Cruz was the child of a U.S. citizen, whose citizen parent, was not a diplomat, and was from a country not at war with the U.S. About 3 months ago, I brought up the subject with Rafael Cruz. Rafael Cruzs personal testimony is powerful. It was because of Rafael, that young Ted memorized the U.S. Constitution word perfect at age nine. Ponder that if you will. What nine year old kid do you know that has memorized the U.S. Constitution? And it was because of Rafael, that Ted led 3 of his classmates by age 11, to also memorize word perfect, the U.S. Constitution. What 9 to 11 year old kid do you know that has demonstrated that kind of leadership skills? Rafaels answer, Of course hes eligible. Those very words were also Alan Dershowitzs, Of course hes eligible. Alan Dershowitz, who claimed Ted Cruz perhaps the sharpest of some 10,000 students he taught at Harvard Law, is worth listening to because he speaks to Ted Cruzs principles from an early age: https://video.search.yahoo/…/play;_ylt=A2KLqIThsjZUjDwA… These facts separate Cruz from Obama re his eligibility, and also, in ALL WAYS, fulfill the historical meaning of being naturally born, as it was used in the language of the founders, being brought over from its meaning and use in England in the 1600s and 1700s. But read the opinion, yourself, to sort it out. Ark is significant, because, it is upon Ark, that Ted Cruz, if he does run for President, or is selected by Sarah Palin to run as her VP, or vice versa, will inevitably defer, to establish his eligibility. Ted does not have to defend his eligibility. Others have and will. It was settled back in 1898. It is my own opinion, that Ted Cruz is running in 2016. These kinds of articles are coming out more frequently: nydailynews/…/m-tracey-president-article-1.1… Just talking with his father a year ago, I came away understanding Teds running was inevitable. Its my own opinion, that if Ted were to run, Sarah Palin would defer to him. I have that much trust in Sarah Palin, that she would be extremely satisfied with his Candidacy, and support him and campaign with him. Splitting the Conservative block of Primary voters was a problem, that was very dear to Sarah Palin during 2012. I too, would like to see a Palin Presidency. I would stop everything, and go to work 24/7 to see it happen. I just dont see Sarah Palin doing anything to split Conservative voters, or take away from a Cruz Candidacy. This is just my own opinion. But who knows hows this is going to play out? It is a very good thing, that Conservatives have a deep bench to draw from with Palin, Cruz, and Sessions. osah.ga.gov OSAH.GA.GOV
Posted on: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 05:29:24 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015