Monday, 16 March 2015

...And STILL The NBC Discussion Goes On...

(from the same Comments thread at Tea Party C.C. on ‘Legal duo says Cruz eligible to seek presidency’ - Mar. 13) 

Reply by Little Bright Feather 27 minutes ago (Mar. 16)

The Constitution states =


That is all the Constitution says - others have added all that other stuff to it.  Now why do you think it says "OR A CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES" ?!

Because  there are TWO ways given for eligibility  IN THE CONSTITUTION = a Natural Born or Naturalization.  It covers both. IT says nothing about the parents - others down through time added those things and redefined it. But the actual Constitution does not !

Now if a person can be a Naturalized Citizen and be eligible - that means the parents would NOT have been born here !

Everyone is going by someone's ADDED words and definition that is NOT in the Constitution - thus adding and changing the Constitution.

  • Reply
Permalink Reply by Stan Stanfield just now (Mar. 16)


Little Bright Feather, you left out the most crucial part of the wording of the contract, which explains what you just quoted:

"...or a Citizen of the United States AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THIS CONSTITUTION..."  Point being that there were many at that time who were NOT 'natural born' citizens, i.e., born of parents who were both from the colonies.  They were allowing for an exemption for their generation.  From "the time of the adoption of" the Constitution and from thenceforth, the 'natural born' citizen requirement kicked in.  As I have said before in this thread: for that particular office, and that particular office ONLY; so that the person ultimately occupying that office would have NO FOREIGN LOYALTIES OR ALLEGIANCES.  Like a naturalized citizen would be subject to.  And like a DUAL citizen would be subject to.  Like Obama.  And like Cruz.  (And Rubio.  And Jindal.)

The Constitution does not say that a non-natural born citizen who subsequently changes his dual-citizen nature can become eligible for that office.  That would be up to an amendment to the constitutional contract to bring about.  Only people who are trying - wittingly or unwittingly - to undercut the Constitution, and render it a dead letter - like those supporting the 'eligibility' of Obama - would think that 'oh, it doesn't matter'.  It does; terribly.  It matters, to the difference between our operating under the rule of law - i.e., the Constitution - and our operating under the rule of men.  Which is to say, under the rule of despotism.

Which is PRECISELY what the enemies of the Constitution, and the federal constitutional Republic of the United States of America, are trying to bring about.  DON'T BE A PARTY TO THE DISSOLUTION OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC.  Which someone would be, if they 'fudge' on this issue.  An active party.  Or a passive one.  The result would be the same.

Actions have consequences, folks.  Wake up.

No comments: