snopes.com

snopes.com (http://message.snopes.com/index.php)
-   Soapbox Derby (http://message.snopes.com/forumdisplay.php?f=43)
-   -   Birther Hypocrisy - Right Wing Has No Problem with Ted Cruz Running for President (http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=84884)

snopes 01 April 2013 10:23 PM

Birther Hypocrisy - Right Wing Has No Problem with Ted Cruz Running for President
 
Ironically, there can be little doubt that among those who expressed their support for a Ted Cruz presidency at CPAC were attendees who continue to question the current presidentís constitutional right to hold the office.

I say it is ironic because, while so many on the Right invested heavily in making the argument that Barack Obama lacked constitutional qualification to be our Commander In Chief due to his alleged foreign birth in Kenya, it turns out that Tea Party hero Cruz finds himself in precisely the same circumstance ó except that Cruzís foreign point of origin is openly acknowledged.

Ted Cruz was born in Calgary, Canada, the son of an American mother and a Cuban father.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickunga...for-president/

JoeBentley 01 April 2013 10:28 PM

And McCain was born in Panama. I think there's another prominent example recently that I'm blanking on.

Does any one really think the Birther movement was anything other then either thinly disguised racism or at best a simple desperation smear move?

GenYus234 01 April 2013 10:29 PM

Yeah, but he looks white.

ETA:
Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeBentley (Post 1725873)
And McCain was born in Panama. I think there's another prominent example recently that I'm blanking on.

Mitt Romney's father was born in Mexico, a country which dares to be foreign. That seemed to be important when it was Barack Obama's father that was the topic of discussion.

ETA2: Wasn't one of the potential (or talked about) candidates for 2012 born at Ramstein AFB?

Mateus 01 April 2013 11:06 PM

This is interesting to me because I'm in the same boat as Cruz (American mother, Canadian father, born in Toronto). When I applied for my American passport, I had to submit an affidavit from my mother detailing where she lived prior to my birth, with dates.

ULTRAGOTHA 01 April 2013 11:11 PM

The Birther movement appears to have two different arguments about why Obama isn't a Natural Born Citizen. I don't know what percentage of the Birther Movement subscribe to which of these arguments.

1) Obama cannot be a Natural Born Citizen because even if he was born on US soil of an American Citizen parent, his other parent was a British subject and so the President was the citizen of two different countries at birth. A Natural Born Citizen must both be born on US soil and both parents must be United States Citizens at birth.

2) If Obama was born in Kenya, he wouldn't be a Natural Born Citizen because at the time the President was born, his mother was not yet 19 years old. She had therefore not lived in the United States for five years after the age of 14, as required by the law at the time.

2) is crap because he was born in Hawaii so it doesn't matter how old his mother was or how many years she'd lived in the US.

1) is ridiculous also and would invalidate Ted Cruz. This seems to be the argument many Birthers turned to when it became obvious Obama was born in Hawaii. I have no idea how many Birthers who cling to argument 1 also support Cruz. Maybe they argue that Cruz wasn't a Cuban and an American when he was born? But that won't help as birth on Canadian soil grants citizenship just as birth on US soil does. His father was working in the oil industry, they weren't there as diplomats. So Cruz has (or had) dual citizenship also. So yes, hypocrisy.

Wintermute 01 April 2013 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeBentley (Post 1725873)
And McCain was born in Panama. I think there's another prominent example recently that I'm blanking on.

Does any one really think the Birther movement was anything other then either thinly disguised racism or at best a simple desperation smear move?

How is it racisit? People tried to disqualify McCain and he's white.

snopes 01 April 2013 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wintermute (Post 1725906)
How is it raciist? People tried to disqualify McCain and he's white.

What, like three or four people, maybe?

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

Steve 01 April 2013 11:53 PM

Also, they tried to disqualify him based on where he was actually born. They didn't just claim that with his last name he must've been born in Edinburgh.

Auburn Red 02 April 2013 12:02 AM

The thing was they DIDN'T try to disqualify McCain and keep going on about it. Birther movements WEREN'T created insisting that McCain's birth certificates didn't count or that they were forgeries. They only behaved that way for a candidate later President who was half-black and had a Muslim sounding name. Heck I'm sure the Birther ULs alone could keep Snopes and Barbara employed for years! (well those and George Soros ones as well. :D)
I will always insist that the whole thing was racially and politically motivated.

It will be entertaining though to see if Birther movements come up for Cruz. ;) GOP hypocrisy amuses me somehow.

E. Q. Taft 04 April 2013 01:01 AM

Apparently there was some controversy in 1964 as to whether Barry Goldwater qualified as a natural-born citizen, since at the time he was born, Arizona was still a territory rather than a state. Personally, I think that qualifies, but it implies that someone born in Puerto Rico or American Samoa could qualify, too, which I suspect might not sit well with a lot of people.

lord_feldon 04 April 2013 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by E. Q. Taft (Post 1726476)
Apparently there was some controversy in 1964 as to whether Barry Goldwater qualified as a natural-born citizen, since at the time he was born, Arizona was still a territory rather than a state. Personally, I think that qualifies, but it implies that someone born in Puerto Rico or American Samoa could qualify, too, which I suspect might not sit well with a lot of people.

Arizona was a different type of territory through. It was "incorporated" at the time he was born, so anyone born there had a 14th Amendment right to citizenship. Puerto Rico and American Samoa are unincorporated, which means they're outside of the US and the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment doesn't apply. (Congress has passed laws that effectively make it work the same way in Puerto Rico and most other territories anyways, but American Samoans generally aren't US citizens, let alone natural born citizens.)

E. Q. Taft 04 April 2013 01:21 AM

Ah, I was not aware of that distinction. Thanks for educating!

ganzfeld 04 April 2013 01:28 AM

The constitutionality of that distinction is currently being challenged. (The status of citizens in Puerto Rico and other territories is only confirmed/clarified by federal law. It doesn't mean that they are denied it by default.)

Simply Madeline 04 April 2013 02:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeBentley (Post 1725873)
And McCain was born in Panama. I think there's another prominent example recently that I'm blanking on.

A while back, there was a lot of talk in Republican circles about amending the constitution so that Arnold Schwarzenegger could run for president. I think there was even an amendment introduced and voted on in the Senate (or maybe just in committee).

Gibbie 04 April 2013 04:56 AM

There were proposals to let naturalized citizens be president, but not aimed at Schwarzenegger, in fact, the proposed amendment would exclude him. (There were some time limitations, that I'm not completely remembering, like how long you had to be a citizen or something). The goal of the amendments were to open the door for children adopted overseas. Those children become American citizens the moment they enter the US, but since they are naturalized, can not become president, despite having lived in the US their entire lives and being citizens at 2 or 3 months of age.

Gibbie

lord_feldon 04 April 2013 05:09 AM

The amendment introduced by Orrin Hatch in 2003 would have applied to Arnold, although it was never even voted on in committee.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gibbie (Post 1726530)
Those children become American citizens the moment they enter the US, but since they are naturalized, can not become president, despite having lived in the US their entire lives and being citizens at 2 or 3 months of age.

But surely they're less deserving of such an amendment. They just got citizenship handed to them before they could even understand the concept of nationality. They didn't have to pass any background checks or take any tests to get their citizenship.

If we're ranking peoples' citizenship, wouldn't the people who sought it out and worked to get it be at the top rather than the bottom?

fitz1980 04 April 2013 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenYus234 (Post 1725874)
ETA2: Wasn't one of the potential (or talked about) candidates for 2012 born at Ramstein AFB?

There is a fairly common UL among military kids who were born over seas that having been born in Germany/Japan/ect would disqualify them from being POTUS. McCain's legal team roundly debunked that one back in 2008.

ganzfeld 04 April 2013 08:33 AM

McCain's team made an argument. In what way did they debunk anything? Cite? No one really knows the answer to these questions because no one even knows who would have standing to bring such a case. (Yes, I'm aware of your opinion and interest in the matter, Ramblin' Dave. I personally agree with you. The problem as regards the Presidency has not been resolved in law, IMO.)

Don't forget to read the referenced material as well:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/mccain/citizen.asp

Ramblin' Dave 04 April 2013 09:26 AM

I kind of figured I didn't need to comment on it yet again. :)

gopher 04 April 2013 11:49 AM

When you get down to it Mr Cruz isn't an uppity n****r and that is all a lot of the right are worried about.


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:37 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.