Citizens Dedicated To Preserving Our Constitutional Republic
A peanut gallery was, in the days of vaudeville, a nickname for the cheapest (and ostensibly rowdiest) seats in the theater, the occupants of which were often known to heckle. The least expensive snack served at the theater would often be peanuts, which the patrons would sometimes throw at the performers on stage to show their disapproval.
Answer if you wish ignore if you like and expect incoming peanut shells thrown very accurately for BS.
So without further delay;
Trump
Is some form of BFYTW still his leading selling point?
Frankly he is not that impressive, face it only a seriously devoted moron couldn't see the simple solutions that he offered on immigration/invasion (depending on ones view) are absolutely required if this land is retain any legitimacy. So he is not stupid... Trump he aint stupid... hmmm. Outside of that he isnt actively attempting to subvert the land, yeah the bar is set pretty damn low nowadays.
Cruz
Exactly in what view is this man even considered qualified according to the text of the Constitution?
If a person is take an oath to protect and defend the document then they MUST be qualified by same. I can read and I know the term "natural born" was not defined expressly (such was the halfarsedness of the framers in such cases) but apparently THEY KNEW, so the writing of era is key and not one gives any credence to Cruz. In your own words please.
The rest of the gang dont matter any longer.
General:
Is the federal government in any way still a legitimate authority given it obviously operates FAR outside its legitimacy establishing document?
You get to think on that one with no prompting from me.
Think on this one a bit, knee jerks are easily spotted.
Does the Tea Party, as it was founded by mass participation, even exist any longer?
Add your own questions if you like there are far more but my time is at an end for now.
Tags:
McCain was born of citizen parents under jurisdiction and in the service of the US, that one is and always was just infantile.
Remember one cannot and indeed MUST NOT assign modern definition to terms of the Framers period, what they have written is the end of the matter. Why we must not is clearly found in the second amendment debate, people of the time clearly understood the wording and wrote of it. That is why the matter of the seocnd is so clear to clear thinking people.
A person born of citizen parents under US jurisdiction is an unquestionable natural born citizen. One born under US jurisdiction by one citizen parent is justifiably natural born. One born of citizen parents in the jurisdiction of a foreign power is debatable to be natural born, it has a good case.
I can find nothing written by the Framers to justify an argument that born of one citizen in a foreign jurisdiction is natural born. That is the entire reason the exception is present to "grandfather in" citizens at the time of ratification.
"This stuff aint that hard... dont make it so." Jefferson's ghost
As to other laws see my next to last question in the OP.
so your saying that if my children were born while I was in canada they would not be natural born and able to be POTUS...dont know but that cant be right...
still gonna go with the experts on this but thanks for your time
Not enough information given to say but it must be cautioned never to bend laws to suite one's own very personal interests. Bend it too far and it all breaks, then your children have nothing to be President of...
so you are saying that a child born outside of country by americans are not natural born and can not be POTUS????
Im not saying it Im just reporting what written at the time and prove intent.
Under US jurisdiction on a base or under orders, no of course they are nb.
Born outside of it, there is an good case for it and it did come up but nothing definitive.
If said child lived it's entire life under foreign jurisdiction are you saying he could just come over and win office?
See not clear cut is it.
Ted Cruz's situation isnt even on the chart. That makes me sad for a lot of reasons.
I think your adding words into it that are not there....why would you do that????
''Under US jurisdiction on a base or under orders,'' did you add these ..''on a base or under orders''... cause I dont see them anywhere ....and what exactly is cruz's situation because the example you gave is not the same as his..
I'm gonna go with your wrong on your assessment based on the case you make
Then where exactly does the line draw B?
Why did the framers even use the term natural born citizen? Ever wonder? No of course you dont.
For those who do please at least read the following as sort of good cliffs notes to the matter:
http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/01/what-our-framers-knew-the-constit...
Words mean things.
Was Ted`s father a citizen when Ted was born, Or just his mom, And does that make a difference.
Incidentally, this isn’t the first time the qualifications of a candidate have come into question. George Romney, the father of Mitt Romney who ran for president as a Republican in 1968, was born in Mexico. Barry Goldwater, the 1964 GOP presidential nominee, was born in Arizona before it was a state. Neither candidate’s campaign was derailed by citizenship challenges.
Legislative News
Congressional Quarterly
C-SPAN
Roll Call
Stateline.org
The Hill
Washington Post
Politics Section
Boston Globe
Dallas News
Denver Post
Los Angeles Times
Minneapolis Star Tribune
Stop Island Park Wildlife Overpasses
Seattle Times
NY Times
Washington Post
Washington Times
USA Today
Beltway Buzz
CQ Politics
First Read
The Hotline
The Note
The Page
Washington Wire
Mike Allen's Playbook
Politico
Roll Call
The Hill
CNN Political Ticker
The Swamp
The Fix
Washington Whispers
Fish Bowl DC
Online Political Sites
Alternative Press Index
Capitol Hill Blue
CommonDreams.org
Digg.com Politics
Drudge Report
Political Insider
Political Wire
Politico
PopPolitics
Real Clear Politics
Salon.com
Slate
Stateline.org
TCOT Report
TomPaine.com
US Politics Guide
© 2025 Created by WTPUSA. Powered by