ted cruz

[IGotWorms 4,060]

 

It was a Congressional ruling on people born outside the US in which only one parent was a US citizen, in effect from December 23,1952 to November 13,1986. It is completely relevant to the matter at hand, because the matter at hand is whether the "birthers" are being hypocrites by not complaining about Cruz's eligibility. The "birthers" argument was that if Obama had been born in Kenya, he would not have citizenship at birth because of this Congressional ruling. I'm really surprised you are acting like you just heard about this, as this was the whole point about the birth certificate flap right from the beginning.

 

 

I can't find a link right now, but I read that Cruz's mother met the eligibility under this rule, that's why his citizenship isn't in question.

 

 

Yikes. I'm not sure where to start on this.

 

First off, your source, "Western Journalism," has a rather open and obvious bias which should have caused you some concern before taking their "analysis" as gospel.

 

Western Journalism actually cites to "another website" (yes that's their wording) for this congressional rule change you are relying on. You can't even access the "other website."

 

So I did a Google search of the quoted text of the congressional rule change and it relates to the law of nationalization. This is not the same as whether a person is a natural born citizen for the purposes of qualifications for the presidency in Article II, as the US department of state explicitly says here:

 

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86757.pdf

 

That link also recognizes what I have already told you and linked to Cornell Law (maybe youve heard of it?) for: there is no definition of who is a natural born citizen for purposes of qualification to hold the office of the presidency under Article II.

 

Conflating the two may not seem like a big deal to you but it is actually quite significant from a legal perspective. Perhaps if you chose to get your information from better sources in the future you would not be so easily led astray.

[Thornton Melon 639]

Yikes. I'm not sure where to start on this.

 

First off, your source, "Western Journalism," has a rather open and obvious bias which should have caused you some concern before taking their "analysis" as gospel.

 

Western Journalism actually cites to "another website" (yes that's their wording) for this congressional rule change you are relying on. You can't even access the "other website."

 

So I did a Google search of the quoted text of the congressional rule change and it relates to the law of nationalization. This is not the same as whether a person is a natural born citizen for the purposes of qualifications for the presidency in Article II, as the US department of state explicitly says here:

 

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86757.pdf

 

That link also recognizes what I have already told you and linked to Cornell Law (maybe youve heard of it?) for: there is no definition of who is a natural born citizen for purposes of qualification to hold the office of the presidency under Article II.

 

Conflating the two may not seem like a big deal to you but it is actually quite significant from a legal perspective. Perhaps if you chose to get your information from better sources in the future you would not be so easily led astray.

 

So your referring to this part, right?:

 

 

7 FAM 1131.2 Prerequisites for Transmitting U.S. Citizenship (TL:CON-68; 04-01-1998) Since 1790, there have been two prerequisites for transmitting U.S. citizenship to children born abroad: (1) At least one natural parent must have been a U.S. citizen when the child was born. The only exception is for a posthumous child. (2) The U.S. citizen parent(s) must have resided or been physically present in the United States for the time required by the law in effect when the child was born.

 

I bolded #2, as this is what the whole birth certificate flap was about.

[drobeski 3,061]

ted is a much much much better American than barry, then again he wasn't raised to hate the country, like barry was.

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

ted is a much much much better American than barry, then again he wasn't raised to hate the country, like barry was.

 

 

He was just raised to hate people I guess.

[Thornton Melon 639]

By the way, Worms, this Congressional ruling isn't something I'm pulling out my ass - it was common knowledge at the height of the flap. Snopes isn't questioning its existence. I'm not sure why those links don't work, but the bottom line is that if the ruling was in effect at the time of Obama's birth, he'd be ineligible had he been born abroad, as he wouldn't have been conferred citizenship upon his birth.

[MDC 7,648]

It was a Congressional ruling on people born outside the US in which only one parent was a US citizen

 

Since Obummer was born in the US this doesn't seem to matter.

[Thornton Melon 639]

Since Obummer was born in the US this doesn't seem to matter.

 

I know that...

[MDC 7,648]

 

I know that...

So what does this rule have to do with birthtardism when the entire birthtard movement was based on a lie?

 

I think there was an obvious racial angle to birthers insisting the first black president was born in Kenya despite all evidence to the contrary.

[Thornton Melon 639]

So what does this rule have to do with birthtardism when the entire birthtard movement was based on a lie?

 

I think there was an obvious racial angle to birthers insisting the first black president was born in Kenya despite all evidence to the contrary.

 

The rule was the entire reason the movement started. I'm sure there may have been a racial angle for a small minority of them

[MDC 7,648]

 

The rule was the entire reason the movement started. I'm sure there may have been a racial angle for a small minority of them

I've been reading about the birther movement here for years and this is the first I heard about this rule.

 

Anyway, we can all agree now that the birthtards are focking idiots who got rolled.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

 

So your referring to this part, right?:

 

 

 

I bolded #2, as this is what the whole birth certificate flap was about.

*Sigh*

 

I can't teach you the law on an Internet forearm. But maybe someone can at least teach you to read:

 

7 FAM 1131.6-2 Eligibility for Presidency

(TL:CON-68; 04-01-1998)

a. It has never been determined definitively by a court whether a person who acquired U.S. citizenship by birth abroad to U.S. citizens is a natural-born citizen within the meaning of Article II of the Constitution and, therefore, b. Section 1, Article II, of the Constitution states, in relevant part that No Person except a natural born Citizen...shall be eligible for the Office of President.

c. The Constitution does not define "natural born". The Act to establish an Uniform Rule of Naturalization, enacted March 26, 1790, (1 Stat. 103,104) provided that, ...the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born ... out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States.

d. This statute is no longer operative, however, and its formula is not included in modern nationality statutes. In any event, the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

I've been reading about the birther movement here for years and this is the first I heard about this rule.

 

Anyway, we can all agree now that the birthtards are focking idiots who got rolled.

The "rule" has nothing to do with anything. Just a last-ditch effort by Thornton and other birthers to salvage some legitimacy for their sad little "movement"

[cbfalcon 827]

:eyeroll:

 

The Birther Movement wasn't based on any damn congressional ruling about 16 year olds.

I live in Texas. So I automatically know 50 birthers. Some are really stupid, and some manage large companies. Not one of them knows anything about a congressional ruling.

 

That whole thing was based on 3 things. There are a lot of dumbass racist types that didn't want a black dude with a Muslim name as president. The Hannity types know their audience. Groupthink is a common problem.

 

And the reason birthers aren't questioning Ted Cruz is because they don't even know he wasn't born here. Why? The same 3 reasons. Cruz may as well be Smith here. The Hannity types dont care because he is a Rebublican. Groupthink is a common problem.

 

To pretend it's about anything intelligent is to act as though you've never been around a Birther or even seen one on TV.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

:eyeroll:

 

The Birther Movement wasn't based on any damn congressional ruling about 16 year olds.

I live in Texas. So I automatically know 50 birthers. Some are really stupid, and some manage large companies. Not one of them knows anything about a congressional ruling.

 

That whole thing was based on 3 things. There are a lot of dumbass racist types that didn't want a black dude with a Muslim name as president. The Hannity types know their audience. Groupthink is a common problem.

 

And the reason birthers aren't questioning Ted Cruz is because they don't even know he wasn't born here. Why? The same 3 reasons. Cruz may as well be Smith here. The Hannity types dont care because he is a Rebublican. Groupthink is a common problem.

 

To pretend it's about anything intelligent is to act as though you've never been around a Birther or even seen one on TV.

Do not get taken in. This "congressional ruling" has nothing to do with anything anyway - I assure you. It is from a completely different context.

 

Smart birthers (probably an oxymoron) know this but are being disingenuous.

 

Stupid birthers (aka 99% of 'em) have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.

[Voltaire 5,387]

Actually TM gave a decent answer. If it's true that in the early 60s, 18 y/os could not pass on citizenship to children born abroad due to the 'five years present in the US after their 14th birthday' rule (and -I just looked it up- since Obummer's mother was three months shy of her 19th birthday at the time of his birth), then it becomes mandatory that Obummer was born in the US.

 

Presumably Cruz's mother did meet the 'five years after fourteen' rule.

[cbfalcon 827]

Actually TM gave a decent answer. If it's true that in the early 60s, 18 y/os could not pass on citizenship to children born abroad due to the 'five years present in the US after their 14th birthday' rule (and Obummer's mother had not reached her 19th birthday at the time of his birth), then it becomes mandatory that Obummer was born in the US.

 

Presumably Cruz's mother did meet the five year rule.

Sounds like something that someone was wise to check on.

 

But it doesn't have anything to do with the cause or sustained energy of the Birther movement....at all.

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

Cruz said he started listening to country music because he didn't like the way classic rock responded after 9/11. This guy is just pandering, assuring himself a steady stream of income. He is not a serious candidate, and the republicans would be wise to run him out of town before he does for them what Santorim did for them. The Cruz backer will actually be more likely to not vote, feeling the Rep. Candidate won't be conservative enough compared to him

[Thornton Melon 639]

*Sigh*

 

I can't teach you the law on an Internet forearm. But maybe someone can at least teach you to read:

 

 

Yeah, I read that, especially this part:

 

 

d. This statute is no longer operative, however, and its formula is not included in modern nationality statutes. In any event, the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

Actually TM gave a decent answer. If it's true that in the early 60s, 18 y/os could not pass on citizenship to children born abroad due to the 'five years present in the US after their 14th birthday' rule (and -I just looked it up- since Obummer's mother was three months shy of her 19th birthday at the time of his birth), then it becomes mandatory that Obummer was born in the US.

 

Presumably Cruz's mother did meet the 'five years after fourteen' rule.

Not a good answer.

 

Question is what does Article II of the Constitution mean.

 

A congressional rule adopted in the twentieth century obviously could not inform what the framers meant when they wrote the natural-born cirizen requirement into the constitution.

 

Not to mention the congressional rule does not even purport to establish requirements for the office of the presidency. It is an entirely separate law.

[HenryHill9323 65]

The "rule" has nothing to do with anything. Just a last-ditch effort by Thornton and other birthers to salvage some legitimacy for their sad little "movement"

Link to him saying he is a birther? In fact, he has said he knows Obama was born in the US.

 

He is just trying to explain why the birther dimwits wanted to see a birth certificate. Jeebus, you are dumb.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

 

Yeah, I read that, especially this part:

 

Apparently you read that part but did not understand what it meant

 

Let me help you by putting in plain English what the state department says.

 

There is NO definition of "natural born citizen" for purposes of qualification to hold the office of the presidency. None. Nada. Zilch. The constitution didn't define it and no court has ever said what it means.

 

The Cornell law link I gave you said that too. Do you think you know more about the law than they do?

 

Got it yet?

[MDC 7,648]

Link to him saying he is a birther? In fact, he has said he knows Obama was born in the US.

 

He is just trying to explain why the birther dimwits wanted to see a birth certificate. Jeebus, you are dumb.

Birther tard:

 

 

If you look at the two forms one thing comes to mind. Obama's looks unusually modern. The other is obviously done on a typewriter. Letters are at different heights, different ink densities, etc...........

 

Obama's looks like it came off an inkjet printer. Do we have another Dan Rather forgery here? http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/public/style_emoticons/#EMO_DIR#/red_bandana.gif

[Sho Nuff 720]

But he had a question mark MDC...there is his out to claim he was not buying into it.

[HenryHill9323 65]

Birther tard:

 

 

 

Wrong again, PeenieDC. I have always mocked birthers, and the entire subject. Here is some more from the thread you spent so much time looking up on a Saturday morning. Thanks for the link.

 

 

You've got me mixed up with someone who gives a ratsass about this subject.

 

 

 

Entertainment purposes, Bubbles.

 

 

 

I'm entertained, how 'bout you Bubbles?

 

 

Everyone relax, I have it figured out.

 

Obama isn't refusing to release his birth certificate because he wasn't born in the USA.

 

Obama isn't refusing to release his birth certificate because he is a mooslim.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's because he is a girl, Man!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I rest my case.

 

 

 

For once Worms is right. Saying Obama was foreign born is a personal attack.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Obama us nothing more than a U. S. born Muslim plant sent here to destroy America and freedom.

[MDC 7,648]

Wrong again, PeenieDC. I have always mocked birthers, and the entire subject. Here is some more from the thread you spent so much time looking up on a Saturday morning. Thanks for the link.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MDC

 

I

I

I

I

I

I

J

 

Recliner Peenie

[HenryHill9323 65]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand PeenieDC throws the gun.

[HenryHill9323 65]

But he had a question mark MDC...there is his out to claim he was not buying into it.

I didn't have a serious post in that entire thread, Hackzilla.

 

I'm shocked that went over your head.........shocked I tells ya.

[MDC 7,648]

Were you serious about living on Rusty's street?

[Sho Nuff 720]

MDC

 

I

I

I

I

I

I

J

 

Recliner Peenie

 

Did he just whine that you looked up a link this morning and he posted things from it?

How many did he post to show you that you wasted time looking up one link?

[HenryHill9323 65]

 

Did he just whine that you looked up a link this morning and he posted things from it?

How many did he post to show you that you wasted time looking up one link?

Jeebus dude, you aren't fooling anyone.

[Thornton Melon 639]

Apparently you read that part but did not understand what it meant

 

Let me help you by putting in plain English what the state department says.

 

There is NO definition of "natural born citizen" for purposes of qualification to hold the office of the presidency. None. Nada. Zilch. The constitution didn't define it and no court has ever said what it means.

 

The Cornell law link I gave you said that too. Do you think you know more about the law than they do?

 

Got it yet?

 

Yeah, I got it. I’m well aware that the Supreme Court hasn’t ruled on the eligibility issue. It was front and center during the whole eligibility flap. The case would obviously be sent thru the courts and virtually certainly the Supreme Court to be decided. I was arguing the merits of my hypothetical case, and what I would expect the outcome to be, and also arguing against that your claim Obama would have the same claim to being natural born as Cruz, had Obama been born abroad. Looking back at the thread, I probably should’ve addressed the “natural born” clause, but I’ll state my point by restating my position, and what I would argue before the Court in this hypothetical case:

 

If Barack Obama had been born in Kenya, and the Rules of Naturalization at the time of his birth precluded his mother from conferring her citizenship to him upon his birth, then Barack Obama would have had to be naturalized as a citizen, and thus could not be considered a “Natural Born Citizen” for purposes of the Presidency.

 

The Supreme Court would then deliberate and render their decision, but I don’t know how any sane adult would think that someone who wasn’t a citizen upon birth could possibly be considered a “Natural Born Citizen”.

 

Is that good enough for you, son?

[MDC 7,648]

But Obummer wasn't born in Kenya. He was born in Hawaii, as evidenced by his short form birth certificate and birth announcement.

 

And later, after the birthtards had completely clowned themselves, his long form.

[Thornton Melon 639]

But Obummer wasn't born in Kenya. He was born in Hawaii, as evidenced by his short form birth certificate and birth announcement.

 

And later, after the birthtards had completely clowned themselves, his long form.

 

Yeah, and I still know that....we gonna do this a third time? Lemme know....

[MDC 7,648]

 

Yeah, and I still know that....we gonna do this third time? Lemme know....

So why do you keep talking about IF he was born there? If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.

[Thornton Melon 639]

So why do you keep talking about IF he was born there? If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.

 

Reread the focking thread and figure it out, dipsh!t

[MDC 7,648]

 

Reread the focking thread and figure it out, dipsh!t

Typical thin skinned birthtard.

[Thornton Melon 639]

Typical thin skinned birthtard.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

 

Yeah, I got it. Im well aware that the Supreme Court hasnt ruled on the eligibility issue. It was front and center during the whole eligibility flap. The case would obviously be sent thru the courts and virtually certainly the Supreme Court to be decided. I was arguing the merits of my hypothetical case, and what I would expect the outcome to be, and also arguing against that your claim Obama would have the same claim to being natural born as Cruz, had Obama been born abroad. Looking back at the thread, I probably shouldve addressed the natural born clause, but Ill state my point by restating my position, and what I would argue before the Court in this hypothetical case:

 

If Barack Obama had been born in Kenya, and the Rules of Naturalization at the time of his birth precluded his mother from conferring her citizenship to him upon his birth, then Barack Obama would have had to be naturalized as a citizen, and thus could not be considered a Natural Born Citizen for purposes of the Presidency.

 

The Supreme Court would then deliberate and render their decision, but I dont know how any sane adult would think that someone who wasnt a citizen upon birth could possibly be considered a Natural Born Citizen.

 

Is that good enough for you, son?

Who is a citizen upon birth changes over the years. Isn't that your entire b.s. argument about how the Cruz and Obama thing are different? (Assuming Obama was born in Kenya, which is dumb.)

 

So how could the Constitution's meaning of a "natural born cirizen" change along with whatever law Congress passed? That's nonsensical. If Congress wants to amend the Constitution there's a whole 'nother process for that.

 

Now do you see the fallacy of your "hypothetical" argument? The phrase "natural born citizen" meant whatever the founders intended it to mean in 1787 and it hasn't changed since.

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

Worms wouldn't want Barrack Obama to date his daughter

[Thornton Melon 639]

Who is a citizen upon birth changes over the years. Isn't that your entire b.s. argument about how the Cruz and Obama thing are different? (Assuming Obama was born in Kenya, which is dumb.)

 

So how could the Constitution's meaning of a "natural born cirizen" change along with whatever law Congress passed? That's nonsensical. If Congress wants to amend the Constitution there's a whole 'nother process for that.

 

Now do you see the fallacy of your "hypothetical" argument? The phrase "natural born citizen" meant whatever the founders intended it to mean in 1787 and it hasn't changed since.

 

Yes, who is a citizen changes over the years. The argument about how the "birthers" were consistent in their treatment of Cruz compared to Obama isn't BS, it's applying the same criteria to both (with the caveat of the hypothetical before you freak out again) using the citizenship test, and expecting a definitive ruling on "Natural Born" by the SC on the resultant lawsuit.

 

So now you're a liberal, and an originalist? Must quite a dilemma for you justifying the tons of gubmint laws, regulations, departments, and programs for which the Founders did not grant power.

 

And there is much argument over what the Founders meant about "Natural Born", correct? Can we ever be positive what that is? There's a lot of differing opinions, and there are quite a few people who think it means someone born in the US to 2 citizen parents, which would disqualify both Obama and Cruz, and if I remember right, a couple of actual past presidents. Do you think if the issue were ever decided by the Court, it might rule that way? I don't. I guess I'm considering the Constitution a "living document" in this regard, lacking any concrete proof of what they meant 225+ years ago. Geez, I guess I'm more liberal than you on this matter, then. How 'bout that?