Ted Cruz, so whaddya think?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Well, I don't understand the meaning of Natural Born to make any of the exclusions you seem to suggest.

Don't you think Natural Born Citizens are a subset of citizens? So if blacks aren't citizens they can't be natural born citizens.

Perhaps the meaning as defined in the Law of Nations would not be the popular
choice with today's population, but there is no other unless someone pull one out of no where. My take is that an amendment should be made to clarify just what the requirement is for President.

Or a supreme court ruling would work.

barfo
 
This is really looking like another election where I vote against somebody instead of for somebody. If you don't vote though, you lose the right to complain. If you can't vote for a candidate, vote against the worst candidate at least and complain away
 
Don't you think Natural Born Citizens are a subset of citizens? So if blacks aren't citizens they can't be natural born citizens.



Or a supreme court ruling would work.

barfo

Natural born citizens are those not naturalized.

Black people were citizens all along - 3/5th to be exact.
 
Natural born citizens are those not naturalized.

Black people were citizens all along - 3/5th to be exact.

Not exactly... they were counted for certain purposes as 3/5ths of a free man, but, being as they were slaves, they definitely did not have the rights of citizens.

And the Dred Scott decision made it explicit that blacks were not citizens - until the 14th amendment.

barfo
 
Not exactly... they were counted for certain purposes as 3/5ths of a free man, but, being as they were slaves, they definitely did not have the rights of citizens.

And the Dred Scott decision made it explicit that blacks were not citizens - until the 14th amendment.

barfo

Wrong.

Women weren't slaves, but couldn't vote either. I don't think Indians could, either.

They were all represented in congress.

We had different kinds of citizens is all.
 
Don't you think Natural Born Citizens are a subset of citizens?

You are barfing under the wrong tree, trying to find the meaning. Why not read the Law of Nations and what is meant by the term before
you disagree?
 
I always look to the original intent of our cherished Founding Fathers. Is Ted Cruz a raving right-wing pig? Then he's qualified to be the Republican candidate. Is he white? Then the South will vote for him. Is he handsome? No, he has the face of a fat pasty milquetoast, even less athletic than fatty Jeb Bush. He has no chance. The Framers wouldn't pick Ted Cruz.
 
Reading all this makes me realize that I should be King of the United State.
 
You can't spell your own country. Where are you really from?
 
Wrong.

Women weren't slaves, but couldn't vote either. I don't think Indians could, either.

They were all represented in congress.

We had different kinds of citizens is all.

I'm not sure why you say 'wrong', and then mention a bunch of things that don't disagree with anything I said.

Ability to vote isn't identical to citizenship. Neither is representation in congress.

Dred Scott says you are wrong about different kinds of citizens.

barfo
 
You are barfing under the wrong tree, trying to find the meaning. Why not read the Law of Nations and what is meant by the term before
you disagree?

Why not just answer my question? Do you think you can be a natural born citizen and at the same time not be a citizen?

barfo
 
I'm not sure why you say 'wrong', and then mention a bunch of things that don't disagree with anything I said.

Ability to vote isn't identical to citizenship. Neither is representation in congress.

Dred Scott says you are wrong about different kinds of citizens.

barfo

Like I said, there were different classes of citizenship.

Even free black people didn't have the same rights as other citizens.

Dred Scott was the law of the land for 4 years, much later than the time of the founders.
 
Hillary is very lucky. She used to look decent, but now she's running on old looks. Her luck is that Republicans have even uglier candidates, like Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush.

They got nobody, nobody who can beat Hillary on looks. I'm serious. That makes her the next President. If I ran as a Republican, I could save the party.
Boehner's their best looker. With that permanent tan, he could run as an Hispanic. Where is the sunny spot in Washington, D.C. he has found to lounge in the winter? He doesn't oil his skin in the shower, does he?
 
Like I said, there were different classes of citizenship.

Even free black people didn't have the same rights as other citizens.

Dred Scott was the law of the land for 4 years, much later than the time of the founders.

It wasn't a case of 'judicial activism', however. It affirmed the intent of the founding fathers - after the tides had turned against that intent.
Indeed, it was the epitome of conservative jurisprudence - an attempt to drag the country back into the previous century.

barfo
 
Cruz is the Richard Nixon of our era - pandering to the right to get votes, an attention monger to jump to the front of the line, smart and savvy, cunning.

I can't stand him, but I have to admit he's dumb like a fox. Very calculated.
 
Cruz is the Richard Nixon of our era - pandering to the right to get votes, an attention monger to jump to the front of the line, smart and savvy, cunning.

I can't stand him, but I have to admit he's dumb like a fox. Very calculated.

He is quite bright. I'm looking forward to him tearing the other republican candidates to shreds in the debates, if they have any.

He's also possibly the most unlikeable presidential candidate in the past 40 years. Americans voted for W. because they wanted to have a beer with him. Will they vote for Cruz because they want to punch him in the face?

barfo
 
can be a natural born citizen and at the same time not be a citizen

Aw geez, why must you ask what you should read?

Well, let me put it this way, everyone is a citizen of some where, a natural born one also. As I recall, citizenship can be revoked by a country but it can not be revoked by the county where you are a Natural born citizen.

So your question poses an invalid circumstance.
 
It wasn't a case of 'judicial activism', however. It affirmed the intent of the founding fathers - after the tides had turned against that intent.
Indeed, it was the epitome of conservative jurisprudence - an attempt to drag the country back into the previous century.

barfo

It wasn't codified until 75 years after the founding of the nation. The founders were dead. The founders' intent was to do away with slavery.
 
Hillary is very lucky. She used to look decent, but now she's running on old looks. Her luck is that Republicans have even uglier candidates, like Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush.

They got nobody, nobody who can beat Hillary on looks. I'm serious. That makes her the next President. If I ran as a Republican, I could save the party.
Boehner's their best looker. With that permanent tan, he could run as an Hispanic. Where is the sunny spot in Washington, D.C. he has found to lounge in the winter? He doesn't oil his skin in the shower, does he?

Ludicrous
 
It wasn't codified until 75 years after the founding of the nation. The founders were dead. The founders' intent was to do away with slavery.

They are still dead, and the prospects for reanimation are dim. So maybe we should give up on this 'founder's intent' nonsense.

barfo
 
The founding father intended for 13 colonies, not 50. We have 37 states of dead weight.
 
The Framers framed us just right. I may not agree with what they say, but I will defend to their deaths their right to speak.
 
They are still dead, and the prospects for reanimation are dim. So maybe we should give up on this 'founder's intent' nonsense.

barfo

The nation isn't dead, though you and your kind are trying.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top