Iowa Republican presidential caucuses winner Ted Cruz was born in Canada. His mother was an American, having been born in the United States, who had never renounced her American citizenship. His father was born in Cuba.
Donald Trump, loser in Iowa (but winner in New Hampshire and leading the polls in South Carolina prior to Saturday’s pivotal primary), began trumpeting his latest justification for his election before he lost in Iowa: Ted Cruz was born in Canada. Democrats will take Cruz to court, so vote for The Donald.
The evidence that Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii was always clear to most given the birth announcement in a Honolulu newspaper, but even had the 44th president been born in Kenya, he would still have likely been deemed eligible for the Chief Executive’s office.
Article 3, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution provides that:
No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.
The U.S. Supreme Court has never been ruled upon the meaning of the phrase “natural born” (which occurs no where else in the founding document) and in most conceivable lawsuit-challenge contexts would likely deem the issue a “political question” and defer the issue to the Electoral College and/or the Congress when they approve or disapprove electoral votes after receipt from the states.
But, what if a state executive official empowered to approve or disapprove candidates for inclusion on primary, caucus or general election ballots were to rule Ted Cruz as not natural born and thus ineligible to serve as President of the United States? In that instance, the nation’s highest court may have to interject itself, much as in the 2000 Florida recount.
Constitutional attorney Andrew McCarthy provides needed insight including from a 2015 Harvard Law Review article, “On the Meaning of ‘Natural Born Citizen,” [by] Neal Katyal and Paul Clement (former Solicitors-General in, respectively, the Obama and George W. Bush admininistrations), [in which they] explain that:
British law explicitly used the term “natural born” to describe children born outside the British empire to parents who were subjects of the Crown. Such children were deemed British by birth, “Subjects … to all Intents, Constructions and Purposes whatsoever.” The Constitution’s invocation of “natural born citizen” incorporates this principle of citizenship derived from parentage. That this is the original meaning is obvious from the Naturalization Act of 1790. It was enacted by the first Congress, which included several of the framers, and signed into law by President George Washington, who had presided over the constitutional convention. The Act provided that children born outside the United States to American citizens were “natural born” U.S. citizens at birth, “Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States.”
It is likely, given 14th Amendment Equal Protection clause jurisprudence that residency would be applied to either parent, but in the case of Ted Cruz, his father has resided in the United States for many years.
Birthers also mistakenly cite Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to restrict the definition of “natural born” and “citizenship” even though the clause never mention the former and doesn’t purport to restrict the latter:
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.
There was no question at the time of the ratification of the Constitution nor of any of the amendments that the children of Americans born abroad were also American citizens at birth. What the post-Civil War 14th Amendment sought to make clear was that former slaves born in United States were citizens equal to non-slave citizens.
So maybe Donald Trump would do better to return to the issues of building of a border security wall that would save us so much in money now spent to house, educate and medicate illegal aliens that Mexico would in effect “pay for it” and ending the cheap labor/Chamber of Commerce Free trade absolutism policy? We think so.
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
A new city was born after last year’s referendum in the Peach State and it will elect its first mayor and city council this coming March. Since before the War Between the States, the area roughly 15 miles east of Atlanta has been known as Tucker. It was developed by a Scottish entrepreneur who settled there after fighting in the Indian wars in the West.
Now, 200 years later comes an entrepreneur from the West, Kansas to be specific, to Tucker with that same entrepreneurial spirit, who is running for a seat on the first city council for the new City of Tucker, Georgia.
Susan Wood, after starring in high school sports, matriculating at Kansas State University including serving on the Student Senate, and working in the real estate industry in Atlanta, found her way to Tucker during the depths of the post-2008 Housing Bust to manage and later become a partner/owner of the Comeback Bar & Grill. First named Barlows, it took over where even a Taco Mac (the famously successful Atlanta chain) had failed. Flanigans and other Tucker staples failed.
But thanks to Wood’s meticulous attention to product and the needs and wants of her customers and employees, Comeback weathered the economic storms. Now she wants to bring that same frugality and attention to service to the first city government in her adopted home of Tucker, specifically, District 2, Post 2.
Her platform is to first do no harm to the existing business environment in Tucker by raising taxes or other costs of doing business via regulation and fees. Her vision is for Tucker to be the best environment for business in DeKalb County, Atlanta Metro and the state of Georgia.
We think her lack of prior political experience, especially in this political year, should be an asset as she brings a fresh approach from the private sector where she and others struggled to make ends meet while creating jobs. She has succeeded with her conservative approach to business and we think her enthusiasm and history of success could convince voters to elect her to look after their interests in the new city government.
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
DeVine Law Gamecock’s oracle alter ego remains on sabbatical on Portugal’s offshore islands where he has resided since retiring from political predictions after the 2012 debacle. He refuses to engage in imagining the electoral machinations of a people that would re-hire an epic economic and national security failure. Cockstradamus also continues to leave paranoid schizophrenics to medical doctors. Yours truly remains roosted atop Stone Mountain of Georgia and together we share our plans for the new Leap Year aka the latest chance to not put a Democrat in the Oval Office.
Our number one resolution is to never apologize for the fact that Donald Trump leads GOP presidential nomination polls until the Democratic Party apologizes for ever nominating Barack Obama for president. He and his party have decimated the military; prevented all but bankers, the 1%, their cronies, and Mexican drug mules from bailing themselves out since the Housing Bust; persecuted Christians and conservatives via Lois Lerner’s IRS; appeased the Terror State of Iran that Jimmy carter created; and fundamentally transformed the only nation in the history of the world that didn’t need to be so transformed.
Number two, reject the notion that there is any silent conservative majority in the United States or even in the Republican Party.
Three, work to make sure that the most electable non-Democrat is elected president and hope that he or she has the courage to fix a few things Democrats and their enablers in the establishment GOP and wrecked, e.g. job-killing Obamacare etc.
Four, continue watching less TV, no liberal political TV I know what they are going to say before they say it), no commercials, no political arguing, and less PC ESPN non-live game programs.
Five, tip my bartenders more.
Six, remind Democrats to vote on Wednesday.
Seven, make no more resolutions until 2017.
Joint (lest Cockstradamus be further emasculated) predictions: Carolina Panthers win their first Super Bowl, Clemson wins the CFP, Lebron James leads Cleveland Cavaliers to their first NBA championship, Atlanta Braves win 60+ games, Little E wins Sprint Cup, and Ted Cruz is elected President of the United States.
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
First, let me say that I don’t have a favorite among those left. I don’t like any of them much at all. However, I have noticed a tendency in voters to forgive some character flaws over others.
Newt Gingrich comes with a lot of baggage. Everybody knows it. It has been aired for a number of years. Yet, people can’t forgive him even when he asks for forgiveness. The thing they can’t seem to forgive is his multiple marraiges. That’s okay, but it’s not the only character flaw that determines if a person will stay true to his word in other matters.
Mitt Romney has a lot of baggage; more than people realize along with a ruthlessness about how he deals with competition that looks like it might win over him. Not mention his perpetual campaign that began in 2007 and has not ceased since. In addition to that ruthlessness, he can’t seem to stay on one side of an issue; any issue. Some call him the Flipper but it’s worse than that. He often reminds me of those blow bop dolls that kids like to punch. The doll reels backward, forward, and to the sides before it finally rights itself, ready for the next punch only to repeat the cycle. Once we can finally sort out where he actually stands on an issue, there is still his ruthlessness against his opponents to consider. Remember Fred Thompson? Here’s what the Romney camp for 08 did to Fred Thompson, in Thompson’s own words:
[…] Days after I got into the presidential race in 2007, I was greeted with a website, “PhoneyFred.org,” described in the media at the time as an “anti Fred Thompson smear site.” You couldn’t really tell who was behind it, but we learned of it from the Democratic National Committee, which made ample use of it. We assumed that they had created it. However, a reporter at the Washington Post (of all people) decided to find out who was behind the site. After a lot of effort, she traced it to an executive of TTS Strategies, a South Carolina consulting firm run by J. Warren Tompkins, one of the most notorious hardball political operatives in the country.
Politicians of opposing campaigns were known to get the “Warren Treatment.” He ran Bush’s 1980 campaign, in which anonymous flyers and telephone calls accused John McCain of fathering an illegitimate black child.
In 2007, he was running Mitt Romney’s campaign in South Carolina, where Mitt was behind the rest of us in the polls. Of course, when confronted, both Tompkins and Mitt were “shocked” to learn that a rogue employee (who ran Tompkins’s office) was running such a website (out of the office), and the site was taken down immediately. One of the more benign and amusing things the site accused me of was being a “flip flopper.” I kid you not. […]
Do read the rest of the article. The part quoted is near the end of the article which is mainly about Herman Cain. Like Fred, I don’t know if Romney’s campaign was behind the torpedoing of Cain(whom I did support) but it does remind one of what Romney is capable of. Now that Gingrich has somewhat burst Romney’s bubble of inevitablitiy, it will be interesting going forward.
By the way, Santorum has a lot of baggage, too. Google Santorum scandals and you’ll see. I won’t spend a lot of time on him because he doesn’t seem to be getting much traction after Iowa. So does Ron Paul. Google him, too.
It does remind one of the old cliche about living in glass houses and throwing stones.
But character flaws should be expected. These men are only human, after all. There is no perfect human being save one who died for our sins and sins we still commit. Depending on our worldview some sins are worse than others, though God nor Christ ever differentiated between one or another.
Fred’s article about Cain does make one wonder about things when Romney chose the very same firm that torpedoed Fred to manage his campaign again this time around (emphasis mine).
[…]”We knew coming here that Romney would have a bull’s-eye on his back but now it’s the size of the Target sign,” said J. Warren Tompkins, a South Carolina GOP strategist advising Romney’s campaign. “You’ve got to worry about that. We’ve got to survive here, but if you do the probability of getting the nomination is pretty good.” […]
I’m not exactly advocating for either Gingrich, Paul, or Santorum over Romney but neither am I discounting them just because the media wants Romney. Given that the ‘inevitability bubble’ has burst, this primary season could get real interesting if we stop this selective forgiveness some their transgressions while beating up others for theirs. Hopefully, if we can manage to do that, we can have the least of the leasser evils that have been foisted upon us.
[A big thank you to Richard Hornsby for the photo]
This past Wednesday through Saturday, The American Conservative Union sponsored the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC. CPAC was open to all conservative activists who wanted to attend. This year, I had the honor of being a credentialed blogger for CPAC, and, thus, was able to sit in the bloggers’ lounge that was sponsored by Freedom Works. Tabitha Hale, the brains behind the bloggers’ row who put the whole thing together, really outdid herself. (All attendees should participate in a quiet “golf clap” for Tabitha.)
Folks, I had a blast this past week. Seriously, if any of you ever get the opportunity to attend CPAC, I highly suggest going. In fact, there are three very good reasons to attend CPAC next year (or any similar national conservative activist conference in the future). So, without much fanfare and ado, let’s get right to it.
For some odd reason, Sarah Palin causes liberal elites to rabidly foam at the mouth. Professor William Jacobson of the blog Legal Insurrection wrote an insightful piece about how conservatives seem to reflexively defend Palin, because liberals seem to be perpetually attacking her. Furthermore, not only do liberals seem to revel in finding weird reasons to attack Sarah Palin, but they also seem to only be happy when they are attacking her family as well (probably because they see them as little “spawns of Sarah”). Now, why is this? I haven’t a clue. However, I can state beyond a reasonable doubt that it’s not helping them.
[The above photo is of me and Tim Scott.]
[The above picture is of me and two of Tim Scott’s aides (Brandon Rowland on the left in the white shirt and Dan Asdot on the right in the blue shirt).]
As many of you are aware, Tim Scott has been campaigning hard for many months to become the US congressman to represent South Carolina’s 1st Congressional District. Mr. Scott has recently endured a grueling primary battle in order to win the Republican nomination; however, there is a lot more to this man than just politics.
Mr. Scott has a very inspirational life story and has had to overcome a lot of hurdles in his life. He grew up in the projects of North Charleston and was raised by a single mother who worked two jobs to keep him and his brother off of welfare. Scott was failing out of high school until he found a mentor by the name of John Moniz (a local Chick-fil-A owner who told Tim that, “You can think your way out of poverty”). He then went on to become a successful businessman, a thirteen year member of the Charleston County Council, and a member of the SC State Legislature–all before finally running for congress in 2010.
It’s become apparent as of late that the Left has a new obsession. Christine O’Donnell’s dabbling in witchcraft in high school and her 1995 stance against masturbation (when she was a conservative activist) have truly captivated her critics. Whether it’s Bill Maher, Maureen Dowd, Richard Cohen, or Frank Rich, all the Left can talk about is witchcraft and masturbation.
However, as I have noted, all of this creepy talk from the Left is actually a sign of weakness. Why? Because there is no way on earth they would be talking incessantly about witchcraft and masturbation if unemployment wasn’t so high and their poll numbers weren’t so low. If you read the tea leaves properly by really taking a look at popular culture–and even the so-called liberal media–it is painfully obvious that victory just isn’t in the cards for the Democrats this November and a few of them are slowly starting to realize it.
So, without much fanfare and ado, I would like to share with you five bad omens for the Left’s prospects in November.