By Craig Andresen on May 20, 2014 at 4:56 am

issues-1.jpg?width=273It’s high time to set the record straight about a few conservatives whose names are now in the 2016 mix as I have seen more and more anti-social media posts regarding them popping up, deriding them as either ineligible or being against liberty.

Allen West…Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio.

Such posts are utter nonsense and are being spread by those who simply haven’t done their homework or, in order to appear less radical to the left, they are trying to prove they’ll be as hard line against Republican candidates as they were on Obama regarding eligibility.

Let’s first take the eligibility concerns regarding Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz.

First of all, Rubio was born IN the United States much to the consternation of some who are posting otherwise on Facebook. Further, according to the 14th Amendment, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” While not ‘citizens” YET at the time of Marco Rubio’s birth, his parents paperwork WAS in the que and they DID BECOME citizens and WERE, at the time of his birth, ‘RESIDENT ALIENS’ of the United States meaning that they WERE “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” and thus considered citizens. Marco Rubio therefore, at birth, was considered a Natural Born Citizen like it or not.

POLL:  Should Congressional Caucuses be eliminated?

Now then…Ted Cruz who, as we know, was born in Canada but IS eligible under the ONLY definition of Natural Born EVER provided by our founders and framers…the Naturalization act of 1790 which stated, “the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens”. (Act to establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization, 1st Congress, 2nd session, March 26, 1790, 1 Stat.L. 103 at 104, 2 Laws of the U.S., ed. Bioren & Duane (1815) 82 at 83.)

Cruz’s Canadian citizenship came as the simple result of being born on Canadian soil and was a citizenship he was unaware of until last year. Upon the revelation OF it, Cruz quickly renounced his Canadian citizenship thus removing any dual citizenship from his record.

Okay…as for the stuff that some are posting regarding the definition of Natural Born being changed by the Naturalization Act of 1795…

READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE!!!

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

Comments

  • AMEN Michael.....

  • I am going to take the people who made comments that Cruz is eligible after my comment and I am going to show you people who have these emotional excuses and reasons why you are wrong. I mean seriously, Did you not read my post at all because it was too long for you to read? If you had read my post you would not hold the positions you do that Cruz OR Obama or Rubio is eligible because of the eligibility requirement
    And to the guy who said he gets a kick out of psuedo lawyers, It doesnt take a lawyer to see reality and do a correct lesson History. It wasnt my opinion i stated in my first post, It is the FACTS historically. There can be those who pull evidences from the past to try to prove their points but none of those points trump what the founders intention was. Finding that proof trumps all else. I know what I have posted is the intention of the founders.......


    First up----
    Comment by Victoria T. DeLacy 3 hours ago

    //Cruz is born of an American mother who was born here in Delaware//

    Means nothing because BOTH Parents must be Citizens. Not a Resident Alien who is soon to be or a parent who becomes a citizen after his or her birth. Must be the child of CITIZEN PARENTS who owe allegiance to NO OTHER COUNTRY. "What William Blackstone was saying in 1765 is that since 1350 it had always been TWO parents. However, because of Modern Statutes(at that time in 1765) all children, born out of hte king's legeance whose fathers were natural Born subjects are not natural born subjects!
    So, you see, that Statute did not do away with the BOTH parents Statute but allowed for children born to a Father WHO IS A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN ALSO makes them Natural Born!

    SO, what it is saying is if a father is a citizen and the mother is a citizen then the child born in a Natural born. But if the Father is a Natural Born Citizen then the mother is irrelevent and the child will be a Natural Born Citizen. Becaues back then lineage was considered by the Father. SO, becuase of this, do we now pretend that since women have equality we should allow the same for just a woman? NO! Because the purpose is that the Nation not fall into the hands of foriegn Influence it behooves us to aire on the side of caution and make equality BOTH parents again. Which John Bingham said in 1866 on the House floor.

    //and a father who became a naturalized American citizen after arriving in America//

    He became an American LONG after Ted CRuz birth which is irrelevant! The Statute is clear from past and even modern times and is only questioned in OBAMAS time that the Allegiance is "AT THE TIME OF THE CHILDS BIRTH"

    // and in that sense he is no different than were our Founders who came here from England to establish a new country in freedom.///

    Have you ever read the Founders words? Or the Constitution? 1. it is MUCH different then the founders and 2. Even if it were the same, the founders were the only ones exempt from the Natural Born Citizen clause. They made that clear in the Constitution.

    Next up......

    Comment by Antonio Urbizu 3 hours ago
    //I agree with the article.//
    Sadly you agree out of ignorance
    //I get a kick of all these pseudo-lawyers that interpret the law with out a degree.//
    Sadly you agree out of ignorance because you have this excuse to do so, insulting attacks on people instead of giving a justifiable reason why they are wrong.

    It is easy for someone to say, "Your wrong." But it is much more difficult to show someone why they are wrong. It is lazy to not show them.
    Your reasoning for why people are wrong is NOT any reason. It is just an ad hominem attack that they think they are lawyers. I expect more out of Conservatives.
    Liberals always insult and attempt witty discourse to discredit instead of showing people why they are wrong.
    Why?
    Because they don't know why the person is wrong. They just don't agree because of what they heard someone else say somewhere. The first thing a liberal is told about something is the truth and all other things that come after that are lies.

    You are making it that it isn't only Liberals who discredit by insult and attempts at wit.

    // I heard the same rhetoric that Cruz and Rubio are not citizen that they are anchor babies.//

    No one said they were ancor babies, I beleive you are making that up just to have something to say.
    Also, It isnt rhetoric, its the truth. They are not eligible by any sense of reality. However, I have realized in the past few years that people can have teh best intentions and something like teh cosntitution is born out of that. And then because of the selfishness of humanity they go and justify something.
    Example.... The very founders claimed all men are created equal by the Declaration of Independence and then declared with the Constitution that the government does not control the people but is controlled by the people and that not one single person in government will ever be exempt from the law. That those in government are equals with those who are not in government.
    THEN, because they already paid for them and they cost alot of for whatever reason, the very founders justified enslaving a race of people out of selfishness. They justified in their minds that Africans were animals and not really 100% human and therefore where not subject to the equality the Constitution gave ALL MEN!
    SO were their errors? YES by the people because of what they wanted they were able to justify anything. But that doesnt mean the Constitutioin wasnt perfection! There were so many people referencing so many people that it turned out perfect.

    People today still suffer from the same thing and still have no recognized it enough to put away their petty desires and go with the truth.
    Example in the example? You have petty desires that you like Cruz and Rubio and would like to see one of them be President next so you are willing to believe whatever it takes as long as others are believing it as well to make that happen.

    But what you dont see is the fall out because of the Precedent that will set for Future people to run for President.

    Once extremists groups see that the UNITED STATES is allowing people of 1 Citizen parent to run for Potus they will surely come over here and find a weak willed woman to pretend to love and take that woman back to their home country and raise a child there to hate the US with the intention to come back and harm this Country.

    // I say to them: blah, blah, blah. If you have a better candidate name it.//

    It really isnt about having a better candidate. It is about PROTECTING THIS NATION!
    So blah blah blah to your ignorance.

    // Just do not undermine someone that is trying to do good for the Republican party.//

    Doing good for the Republican Party does NOT trump doing good for FREEDOM FOR ALL. Defending the Constitution against all enemies foreign and Domestic IS Defense of this Country!

    //Amen.//

    Now Amen can be stated. 

  • Ted Cruz for president.  Obama for the firing squad or lifetime in jail.

  • I am just as desperate for a Constitutionally rooted President as anyone else here, but I wont allow that desperateness to blind me.

    My support would go towards a real Leader, one that is not afraid to speak his mind in truth, one who is strong ethically and morally, one that can reverse the damage, one that is inspiring, one that can reach the masses.

    Rubio - was for amnesty and in my book that's still part of the current establishment!

    West - in his recent interview as to whether he would run for President, gave a very weak response, when he said " on his ride across the country people asked him if he would run - Well I have to pray on it".

    My opinion is that, that was a perfect time for him to say ' people asked me questions concerning the unemployment rate, high corp. taxes, manufacturing here in the US' - and him using that platform to express himself and take a STAND!

    Don't get me wrong - I like Allen West and Ted Cruz and the rest of them.

    I'm just saying we need a real leader !

    Washington is a lot like Hollywood and visa versa - lots of drama and lots of commercial breaks!

  • Cruz was born in 1970, but his father wasn't naturalized until 2005.

    Rubio was born in 1970, but his father wasn't naturalized until 1975.

    A natural born citizen is a child of citizen parents.

    CRUZ AND RUBIO ARE NOT ELIGIBLE TO THE PRESIDENCY.

  • Count Rubio as a conservative at your own peril! He has a lot of proving to do to me since the amnesty B.S.
  • Cruze for President !!!!!!!!

  • I agree with the article. I get a kick of all these pseudo-lawyers that interpret the law with out a degree. I heard the same rhetoric that Cruz and Rubio are not citizen that they are anchor babies. I say to them: blah, blah, blah. If you have a better candidate name it. Just do not undermine someone that is trying to do good for the Republican party. Amen.

  • Cruz is born of an American mother who was born here in Delaware and a father who became a naturalized American citizen after arriving in America and in that sense he is no different than were our Founders who came here from England to establish a new country in freedom.  Cruz will be strongly against the tyranny represented  by Castro because of what his ancestors had gone through in escaping Cuba under duress when Castro took over and began the Communist oppression that continues in that country to this day.  UNlike Marxist commie Obama who embraced every other communist present at the Mandela funeral, Cruz would never have attended such a Communist gathering to begin with, much less would he ever embrace a despot like evil Castro.  After spending over 21 hours on the floor of the Senate speaking out against the socialized medicine bill currently poised to destroy both our system of health care and our economy,  Senator Cruz has my full support in running to become our first American President of Hispanic descent, to the saving of the American way of life after his election to that office in 2016.  Run, Ted, RUN!  Conservative patriots across this great land will gladly back your candidacy..all the way to the Oval Office!

  • Senator Cruz cannot win even though he would be great!

    Why?  Because MANY People will just not vote on Principle on the Conservative side if you run him because WE KNOW he isn't eligible and Congress saying otherwise and fooling people with the standard brainwashing to justify Obamas Presidency isn't going to fly.


    Read my very long( I KNOW) Comments below to find out that our Founders DID know what the NBC clause was when it was put in the Constitution and it had been defined in English Common Law all the way from 1350. It was common knowledge.
    Just because people are stupid today and don't learn a great deal, back then that is all they had to do was learn!!

    Ted Cruz and Obama are BOTH ineligible for the same reason! And it has not one thing to do with WHERE they were born!.....

This reply was deleted.