is ted cruz eligible to run ??

[Syriusly]

There is no evidence he did not. Everything he points to is that he did either write it or say it.

Nope. Acton confirmed that almost none of the authors wrote their own bios

So you and Faun are quoting each other as the source of this claim or what?

Show where did Acton said:

1) Authors did not write their own bios
2) They did not provide input for the bios
3) They did not read their bios for accuracy

You, whose entire narrative is literally his imagination is demanding quotes from us?

Yep, you could do that. Or you could ask them and just verify what they say instead.l

And you are entitled to your conjecture, speculation and innuendo.

But it is nothing more than that- and your positive claims based upon your conjecture, speculation and innuendo are nothing more than than lies.

 

[Syriusly]

Um...I've never once said Miriam is part of a "conspiracy."

Oh, so now she *isn't* lying to cover up for Obama? Well that was easy.

Look up the definition of "conspiracy" moron. Yes, she lied, no, I am not claiming it was a "conspiracy." She lied to protect her ass from a vengeful liberal media

LOL- 'she lied' because you don't believe her- regardless of any evidence that she has actually lied.

There is a reason no one but Birthers- and you- believe this crap- because it is all based upon speculation, innuendo and lies.

 

[Syriusly]

You make up the claim that Obama wrote his bio- even though all of the actual evidence shows that he did not.
You make up the claim that that is what all authors do, even though the owner of the company said that most don't.

There is no evidence he did not. Everything he points to is that he did either write it or say it. ..

Virtually nothing points to the fantasy that you have created in your head.

The evidence is that Barack Obama never told Miriam that he was born in Kenya.

Everything else is just your usual collection of lies, speculation and innuendo.

Again how do you write a "bio" for an unknown author who has never written anything without talking to them?

Every time my background was checked they checked the resume I wrote. They never came up with anything I didn't write

Again- why do you demand others speculate and conjecture like you do?

Me? I rely upon the facts that we do know- rather than your conjecture, innuendo and outright lies.

Fact: in 1990 numerous articles described Barack Obama Jr. as being born in Hawaii.
Fact: in 1991 in an obscure brochure, Barack Obama Jr. is described as being born in Kenya.
Fact: in 1993 in another national newspaper Barack Obama Jr. is described as being born in Hawaii
Fact: In 1995, in his own autobiography, Barack Obama Jr. describes himself as being born in Hawaii.
Fact: I have found no record of any mention of that brochure prior to the 2012 discovery and release by Breitbart.
Fact: Birthers immediately took up Breitbarts discovery and ran with it- including WND which is Birther central.
Fact: The only person who has actual first hand knowledge of the brochure says that saying "Kenya" was her mistake- her error- and that Barack Obama Jr. never told her that he was born in Kenya.

Which of course leads you to speculate/conjecture/lie that Barack Obama Jr. told her that he was born in Kenya.

I will leave the speculation conjecture and lies to Birthers- and you.

Finally clicking I'm not a birther, that's what the thanks is for.

Why is speculation needed? Because Miriam, who clarified what happened didn't clarify anything.

The difference between you and a Birther is one little detail- otherwise you are peas in a pod with your Obama Derangement Syndrome.

You feel a need to speculate- to everyone but you and Birthers- Miriam clarified the issue just fine- she said it was her mistake and that Obama never told her he was born in Kenya.

Since every other published reference that we know of to Obama's birth before and after that refers to his place of Birth as Hawaii- a mistake explains the anomaly in this obscure brochure.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

And you are entitled to your conjecture, speculation and innuendo. But it is nothing more than that- and your positive claims based upon your conjecture, speculation and innuendo are nothing more than than lies.

Of course, as one would expect from perverse reason... the above cited reasoning, by definition, discredits itself... .

Brilliant!

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

You feel a need to speculate- to everyone ... that Obama ... told her he was born in Kenya. ...

She speculates...

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The Reader should recall that the Framer's set the eligibility for the UNIQUE Office of the President of the US, to the high and UNIQUE standard, which require the individual seeking office to be a citizen, who's citizenship is the natural consequence OF CITIZENSHIP... wherein the progenitors were One Male Citizen and One Female Citizen, who joined to produce: A CITIZEN!

This in order to preclude the extent possible, the President being subject to DIVIDED LOYALTIES which are intrinsic to those born to Foreign National.

 

[Pepkay]

He is as eligible as Obama...

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

He is as eligible as Obama...

The word you are looking for is 'ineligible'.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

He is as eligible as Obama...

Yup...

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

He is as eligible as Obama...

The word you are looking for is 'ineligible'.

It works both ways.

 

[mikegriffith1]

If your mother and/or father is an American citizen and you are born overseas, you are automatically entitled to American citizenship and are by right a "natural born citizen." Otherwise, every child born to American civilian and military personnel overseas would be ineligible to be president, an interpretation that the founders surely never intended.

That is why Cruz did not need to be naturalized. That is why McCain did not need to be naturalized.

Our youngest daughter was born overseas while I was in the military. The U.S. Embassy in the country issued her a certificate for the overseas birth of a U.S. citizen. She was a U.S. citizen at birth because both of her parents were American citizens. She would have received the same certificate if only one of us had been an American.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

If your mother and/or father is an American citizen and you are born overseas, you are automatically entitled to American citizenship and are by right a "natural born citizen." Otherwise, every child born to American civilian and military personnel overseas would be ineligible to be president, an interpretation that the founders surely never intended.

That is why Cruz did not need to be naturalized. That is why McCain did not need to be naturalized.

Our youngest daughter was born overseas while I was in the military. The U.S. Embassy in the country issued her a certificate for the overseas birth of a U.S. citizen. She was a U.S. citizen at birth because both of her parents were American citizens. She would have received the same certificate if only one of us had been an American.

Indeed and you are exactly correct, for the purpose of citizenship.

But if one of you were a Foreign National, while your children would be citizens, they would not be eligible for the Presidency, due to the divided loyalties intrinsic with the foreign ideas common to foreign parent.

Which, as we have seen in obama's case, can bring catastrophic consequences... and we have no even BEGUN to realize the depth of those consequences.

 

[kaz]

If your mother and/or father is an American citizen and you are born overseas, you are automatically entitled to American citizenship and are by right a "natural born citizen." Otherwise, every child born to American civilian and military personnel overseas would be ineligible to be president, an interpretation that the founders surely never intended.

That is why Cruz did not need to be naturalized. That is why McCain did not need to be naturalized.

Our youngest daughter was born overseas while I was in the military. The U.S. Embassy in the country issued her a certificate for the overseas birth of a U.S. citizen. She was a U.S. citizen at birth because both of her parents were American citizens. She would have received the same certificate if only one of us had been an American.

Indeed and you are exactly correct, for the purpose of citizenship.

But if one of you were a Foreign National, while your children would be citizens, they would not be eligible for the Presidency, due to the divided loyalties intrinsic with the foreign ideas common to foreign parent.

Which, as we have seen in obama's case, can bring catastrophic consequences... and we have no even BEGUN to realize the depth of those consequences.

While Obama is certainly as bad as you say, I don't think where he was physically born has anything to do with his issue

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

If your mother and/or father is an American citizen and you are born overseas, you are automatically entitled to American citizenship and are by right a "natural born citizen." Otherwise, every child born to American civilian and military personnel overseas would be ineligible to be president, an interpretation that the founders surely never intended.

That is why Cruz did not need to be naturalized. That is why McCain did not need to be naturalized.

Our youngest daughter was born overseas while I was in the military. The U.S. Embassy in the country issued her a certificate for the overseas birth of a U.S. citizen. She was a U.S. citizen at birth because both of her parents were American citizens. She would have received the same certificate if only one of us had been an American.

Indeed and you are exactly correct, for the purpose of citizenship.

But if one of you were a Foreign National, while your children would be citizens, they would not be eligible for the Presidency, due to the divided loyalties intrinsic with the foreign ideas common to foreign parent.

Which, as we have seen in obama's case, can bring catastrophic consequences... and we have no even BEGUN to realize the depth of those consequences.

While Obama is certainly as bad as you say, I don't think where he was physically born has anything to do with his issue

I couldn't agree more.

 

[Skylar]

4) How does someone write a bio about a no name author who hasn't written anything without input on the bio from that author?

I've already answered that question for you. You simply ignored the answer

Lame liberal dodges 101. Repeatedly ignore the question until it's been asked enough times then say you already answered it without showing the answer. And viola, you never have to answer it. I'd say nice try, but it isn't. Answer the question.

Already have. Check post 1232. Again, you can ignore whatever you'd like. The reason your conspiracy has no legs is because you can't anyone else ignore what you do.

Again, Kaz, you've got nothing. You have exactly jack shit backing any part of your silly conspiracy. You've got no evidence. You've got nothing but innuendo and speculation. You're explicitly contradicted by overwhelming evidence. And even when your questions have been answered, you ignore it.

So do have anything other than you citing yourself, offering us your assumptions as facts about a topic you have no direct knowledge of?

 

[Skylar]

There is no evidence he did not. Everything he points to is that he did either write it or say it.

Nope. Acton confirmed that almost none of the authors wrote their own bios

So you and Faun are quoting each other as the source of this claim or what?

Show where did Acton said:

1) Authors did not write their own bios
2) They did not provide input for the bios
3) They did not read their bios for accuracy

You, whose entire narrative is literally his imagination is demanding quotes from us?

I asked him to verify the quote he claimed existed, see the green.

And I asked you to back your story with evidence. You don't get to demand quotes or verification of anything while offering us nothing but baseless speculation, innuendo and story telling.

Who, for example, has claimed that Obama told them he was born in Kenya? With evidence please.

You claim that Miriam Goderich was told by Obama that he was born in Kenya. Prove it. With evidence. And once again, you making shit up and offering us baseless speculation isn't evidence. Its an excuse for it.

Then, and only then, will you be allowed to demand evidence and verification from anyone else.

So let's say you're writing a bio for an unknown author who has written nothing. Nope, don't need any information from them.

Already answered. Again, see post 1232. But as conspiracy theorists like yourself are prone to do, you ignore anything that doesn't ape what you want to believe.

When and if you're willing to read post 1232 and its direct answer to your question, feel free to reply.

Until then, keep running. As you have yet to offer us anything but you citing yourself to back up your batshit narrative. While I've got an eye witness who explicitly contradicts you.

 

[Skylar]

So rather than ask and author what their significant achievements were, they do random newspaper searches with no idea why those are the things to emphasize for the author, they hope they have the right one (I'm sure every author has a nice unique name like Barack Obama), and they have no idea what fact checking the articles they are quoting did.

Its a one paragraph bio blurb in an obscure pamphlet, not a doctrinal thesis. And you're incredulous and disbelieving that they would use well known and well respected papers like the NY Times, Chicago Tribune and LA Times sources?

Laughing....remain hopelessly confused. Virtually every piece of information they used about Obama is listed in those three publications. The very articles that were almost certainly what informed them of Obama's existence in the first place. And an elegantly, probable, utterly plausible explanation for your innuendo laden inquiry.

Ignore as you will. No one really gives a shit.

 

[Skylar]

If your mother and/or father is an American citizen and you are born overseas, you are automatically entitled to American citizenship and are by right a "natural born citizen." Otherwise, every child born to American civilian and military personnel overseas would be ineligible to be president, an interpretation that the founders surely never intended.

That is why Cruz did not need to be naturalized. That is why McCain did not need to be naturalized.

Our youngest daughter was born overseas while I was in the military. The U.S. Embassy in the country issued her a certificate for the overseas birth of a U.S. citizen. She was a U.S. citizen at birth because both of her parents were American citizens. She would have received the same certificate if only one of us had been an American.

I agree. If you're a citizen at birth, you're natural born. You're either natural born (citizen at birth) or naturalized (citizen after birth). There is no third type.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

If your mother and/or father is an American citizen and you are born overseas, you are automatically entitled to American citizenship and are by right a "natural born citizen." Otherwise, every child born to American civilian and military personnel overseas would be ineligible to be president, an interpretation that the founders surely never intended.

That is why Cruz did not need to be naturalized. That is why McCain did not need to be naturalized.

Our youngest daughter was born overseas while I was in the military. The U.S. Embassy in the country issued her a certificate for the overseas birth of a U.S. citizen. She was a U.S. citizen at birth because both of her parents were American citizens. She would have received the same certificate if only one of us had been an American.

I agree. If you're a citizen at birth, you're natural born. You're either natural born (citizen at birth) or naturalized (citizen after birth).

Wrong! Cruz is a statutory citizen born outside the jurisdiction of the United States. Remember people, a statutory citizen (bestowed by man's pen) can never be made into a natural born citizen (bestowed by God/nature).

 

[Skylar]

If your mother and/or father is an American citizen and you are born overseas, you are automatically entitled to American citizenship and are by right a "natural born citizen." Otherwise, every child born to American civilian and military personnel overseas would be ineligible to be president, an interpretation that the founders surely never intended.

That is why Cruz did not need to be naturalized. That is why McCain did not need to be naturalized.

Our youngest daughter was born overseas while I was in the military. The U.S. Embassy in the country issued her a certificate for the overseas birth of a U.S. citizen. She was a U.S. citizen at birth because both of her parents were American citizens. She would have received the same certificate if only one of us had been an American.

Indeed and you are exactly correct, for the purpose of citizenship.

But if one of you were a Foreign National, while your children would be citizens, they would not be eligible for the Presidency, due to the divided loyalties intrinsic with the foreign ideas common to foreign parent.

Which, as we have seen in obama's case, can bring catastrophic consequences... and we have no even BEGUN to realize the depth of those consequences.

Says you. The founders never said a thing about 'foreign ideas common to a foreign parent'. That's you citing yourself. And you're nobody.

English Common law, the only plausible source for the founders understanding of the term 'natural born' cites place of birth as defining natural born status.

The Supreme Court in Wong Kim Ark v. the US cites English Common law as the lens through which we can understand the meaning of constitutional terms. And the Supreme Court cites place of birth as defining natural born status.

Black's Law dictionary cites place of birth as defining natural born status. From edition 1 to edition 9.

The Dictionary cites place of birth as defining 'natural born'.

US historical precedent cites place of birth as defining natural born citizenship, with President Chester Arthur holding the office of president with an Irish Canadian father. Why? Because Arthur's own birth was in the United States....so his father's nationality was irrelevant to his eligibility to be president.

And the Naturalization Act of 1790 contradicts the 'citizenship follows parentage' explanation. As it EXTENDS natural born status to children born to US parents outside the US. If children born to US parents were the only way to gain natural born status, why would the founders have extended natural born status to them.

Your narrative doesn't make the slightest sense, Keyes.

If however PLACE of birth defines natural born status, then the only way children born outside the US to US parents could be natural born citizens is if congress extended natural born status to them. Exactly as they did in 1790, only 2 years after the constitution was ratified.

There's no part of your story that works, Keyes. You simply don't know what you're talking about.