Topic: Who truly represents Conservative Values and could run for president and win?

[oldcoastie6468]

The 2016 presidential election is more than three years away, but potential candidates and their supporters are already contemplating the next campaign. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas—now well-known for his role in the recent federal shutdown—and California’s celebrity former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger are among those whose names are circulating. But neither Cruz nor Schwarzenegger was born in the United States, and the Constitution provides that “[n]o person except a natural born citizen, or a Citizen at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

For Cruz, Schwarzenegger, and a number of other potential candidates, the Natural Born Citizenship Clause raises a critical question: Is anyone born outside the United States constitutionally eligible to serve as president?

Senator John McCain, who was born in the Panama Canal Zone, faced the same question with respect to his natural-born citizenship status in his 2008 presidential bid, and purported concerns about President Obama’s constitutional qualifications led “birthers” to file lawsuits challenging his natural-born credentials on the basis of a variety of far-fetched theories during the last several years. A new natural-born citizenship debate is already simmering, and it seems likely to heat up a great deal before the 2016 election takes place.

The Constitution does not define the term natural born citizen. Even so, Governor Schwarzenegger is clearly out of the running. Given that he was born in Austria to Austrian parents, there is no basis for arguing that he is a natural-born citizen of the United States.
For Senator Cruz—who was born in Calgary, Alberta, to an American mother and a Cuban father—the question is more complicated. There is a strong argument that anyone who acquires United States citizenship at birth, whether by virtue of the 14th Amendment or by operation of federal statute, qualifies as natural born. The Supreme Court, however, has never ruled on the meaning of the natural-born citizenship requirement. In the absence of a definitive Supreme Court ruling—or a constitutional amendment—the parameters of the clause remain uncertain.

For Senator Cruz—who was born in Calgary, Alberta, to an American mother and a Cuban father—the question is more complicated. There is a strong argument that anyone who acquires United States citizenship at birth, whether by virtue of the 14th Amendment or by operation of federal statute, qualifies as natural born. The Supreme Court, however, has never ruled on the meaning of the natural-born citizenship requirement. In the absence of a definitive Supreme Court ruling—or a constitutional amendment—the parameters of the clause remain uncertain.

{snip}

Challenges to presidential qualifications are not new. In 1964, for example, questions arose as to the natural-born credentials of Republican nominee Senator Barry Goldwater, because he was born in Arizona prior to statehood. In 1968, legal actions were threatened against former Michigan Governor George Romney, who was born to American parents in Mexico, when he sought the Republican nomination.

http://news.yahoo.com/ted-cruz-natural-born-citizen-eligible-serve-president-100207138--politics.html

The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;

(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;

(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;

(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;

{snip}

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401

[rustybayonet]

An American mother maybe grounds for a challenge, but at this time I think it would be futile do to this current 'things' 'non-history'.  In my 'night owl ' time last night another name came to mind - Marco Rubio senator from Florida.  Both of his parents were born in Cuba and immigrated in 1956/naturalized  as U. S. citizens in 1975, Rubio was born here in Miami in 1971,[and documented for many government offices - unlike somebody].
Besides a lot of the same charactoristics of Cruz - being of a 'minority' like Cruz, [Cuban] he would undoubtedly carry the Hispanic vote - as he did in Florida.  No filibuster, but he does speak his mine like Cruz and from what I've seen has good support of the Tea Party, plus having a large following in his state of Florida with their large voting and electoral college block. 
From the what it's worth category he may also stand a good chance.  Sadly a dirty trash can would be a better choice than what we have now, or the female dem. front runner the left is peeing their draws over.  But I digress.......

[Pandora]

An American mother maybe grounds for a challenge, but at this time I think it would be futile do to this current 'things' 'non-history'.  In my 'night owl ' time last night another name came to mind - Marco Rubio senator from Florida.  Both of his parents were born in Cuba and immigrated in 1956/naturalized  as U. S. citizens in 1975, Rubio was born here in Miami in 1971,[and documented for many government offices - unlike somebody].
Besides a lot of the same charactoristics of Cruz - being of a 'minority' like Cruz, [Cuban] he would undoubtedly carry the Hispanic vote - as he did in Florida.  No filibuster, but he does speak his mine like Cruz and from what I've seen has good support of the Tea Party, plus having a large following in his state of Florida with their large voting and electoral college block. 
From the what it's worth category he may also stand a good chance.  Sadly a dirty trash can would be a better choice than what we have now, or the female dem. front runner the left is peeing their draws over.  But I digress.......

Not just NO, but HELL NO!  Amnesty shill.  Lied about it to get elected.  Ask Floridians; he was for amnesty there before he was against it, then he was for it.  Any Republican that's willing to get in bed with Schmucky Schumer like Rubio did with amnesty?

SPIT.

And he does not speak his mind just like Cruz:  amnesty shill.  Lastly, neither of his parents were citizens here when he was born.

[Libertas]

Hey, Marco...to the corner...don't forget your hat!

[rustybayonet]

   Could that be more NO's - like I indicated just throwing out other names   

[Weisshaupt]

I have been telling my soon to be ex-wife that her lawyer and therapist are not interested in her, just that they can make more money off of her and with that mind set they are forcing additional litigation or therapy.  Just like these RINO's all they want from you or me is additional time to continue raping all of us for their own personal gain!!

Sorry to hear that Ben61.  For some reason women seem to be especially susceptible to that -especially during divorce hearings.
These women aren't paying for legal  advice- they want someone to listen ( and not solve)  their problems and validate their feelings, and will gladly fork over the  families life saving to hear what they want to hear.  I always tell the men I know to present their wives with papers splitting everything 60/40, providing a reasonable alimony payment, sharing custody, and agreeing   to pay for child expenses 50/50 via submitting receipts for the specific items required (room & boards not included-as both parents need to provide that 1/2 of the time  according to their fashion) , and to do it the day after she even SUGGESTS getting a divorce. You then pull them out each time she suggests it after that and say "sign if you want" - - I drew them up to give you more because I would rather  the money stay in the family, going to  you and the kids, rather than go to pay for Lawyers to bilk unsuspecting and hurting women by telling them what they want to hear.   ( and if you don't, you will still end up with a 60/40 payment, probably a larger alimony payment, and payment of a child stipend that she will use any damn way she pleases AND have lawyer bills on top of that. ) 

 But you are right its the same thing we see going on in politics.  The lawyer (lawmaker - blue team ) convinces one party  they have been victimized (Democrats and women, homos, blacks, criminals who cross the border)  so they ask for more than they deserve.  Those who are being taken advantage of then attempt to resist and hire a lawyer (lawmaker-red team)  but that lawyer  has no more incentive to end that fight than the first does.  They get more money if they convince both parties to engage in a long conflict that is never resolved. 

DEM-RED TEAM: "You need us so we can use the government to steal from and punish those who victimized you (okay really anyone who disagrees with our agenda) "

GOP-BLUE TEAM: "You need us or the RED TEAM WILL TAKE IT ALL!"

In the end 90% goes to the lawyers, 30% to your wife and you get a second job to make up that 20% ...
 

[Pandora]

  Could that be more NO's - like I indicated just throwing out other names   

Sorry, I wigged out there for a minute.  HotAir thrust Rubio forward again recently (allahpaininmyazz) and if I'd been registered there, my comment would've gotten me banned.  But manymanymany there think the same -- NO.

Oops, one more NO.

[rustybayonet]

No problem here - just throughing out names for other opinions.  The list is long as we all know, and I'm far from making up my feeble mind.

We all need this question answered;

"A Few Good Men" By Woody Wright/Wesley Pritchard/Guy Penrod/Reggie Smith/etc. (NYC 2001)

[rustybayonet]

And away from 'men' - two names especially if 'bill-ary' is' [damn I hope not] the dem choosen a** hole to run;

Two more repubs with some Tea Party support ;

Michelle Bachman
 

Jan Brewer

[Libertas]

Brewer?

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?!?!?!

[Glock32]

Yeah Brewer?  For a while she seemed to have some gumption, but they obviously "got" to her.

[Dan]

Probably wont see Bachman get outta the primaries again, IMO, but I'm with pan, never for Rubio.

[Pandora]

Probably wont see Bachman get outta the primaries again, IMO, but I'm with pan, never for Rubio.

Bachmann isn't running again.

No women for me either.